Why are Feminists pushing for 'STEMs Women' (Science, Tech, Engineering, Math), when Gender Studies profs make more money?

You whining about supply and demand capitalism again, you commie!

Love it or Leave, hippie!

what is the 5k PR of all the professors involved in the study?

I guess they're operating under the assumption that women can do more than teach.

Makes perfect sense to me.

Upper class women (Gender Studies Full Professors) encourage young middle-class women to be virtual slaves in low -paying "STEMs" jobs, this is totally typical of any system (not just Feminism) for the Establishment to exploit the newbies for their own ends.

el hombre wrote:

I guess they're operating under the assumption that women can do more than teach.

The typical STEMs woman spends an absurd time (like 80%+) on "mentoring" young STEMs women, rather than actually work. Or at least the ones that are profiled by the media tend to be that way.

Because, in there eyes everything has to be "equal". Not realizing that males and females on average have different interest. The square root of the leftist ideology is egalitarianism. But, the problem is, is that people are naturally different i.e. this will make people unequal in outcome. Take for example the Olympics, most people no matter how hard they train will never make it to the Olympics. Even the 0.01% of athletes that do make it to the Olympics only the top 0.01% of that will win any medals. I.e. the Pareto principle. So, the leftist will fight against nature in a futile attempt to make everyone equal. And, if the egalitarians do get there way to try to make everyone equal you'll end up with what happened in the USSR; with there gulags and mass executions.

Selection bias here: not all schools have Cultural and Gender Studies professors; the ones that do tend to be the more elite schools.

You know, sometimes the world just "is" and it's not a liberal or conservative talking point

not all schools have Cultural and Gender Studies professors; the ones that do tend to be the more elite schools.

More like: tend to be the one's with overinflated tuition/fees.

With the endgame that funding is by student loans that Bernie wants to absolve via big-gov wand.

STEM women in private industry with 5+ years of experience will vastly exceed the average gender studies prof, and the gap grows even more as they move into executive roles.

Worth their weight in gold wrote:

STEM women in private industry with 5+ years of experience will vastly exceed the average gender studies prof, and the gap grows even more as they move into executive roles.

So why is academia undervaluing STEM relative to GenStud? Is it anti-science bias?

The market is flooded with STEM PhDs and there are relatively fewer gender studies PhDs. Therefore the gender studies PhDs are more valued and can demand a higher salary when they are hired and throughout their tenure

an educated guess wrote:

The market is flooded with STEM PhDs and there are relatively fewer gender studies PhDs. Therefore the gender studies PhDs are more valued and can demand a higher salary when they are hired and throughout their tenure

Gender studies PhDs also chair diversity committees and hold administrative positions (associate dean etc) which pays more.

Just because something makes more money doesn’t mean it is a worthwhile career. All the money slaves on this board wasting their lives working in life draining jobs is sad. If your decision making tree starts with how much money will I make you are just another slave to the system.

As has already been pointed out, and as you should have realized it if you spent even a minute thinking about it, this is simply selection bias. Area, Ethinic, Cultural, Gender, and Group studies departments only really exist at top universities, the great majority of which are located in coastal high cost of living areas and which tend to pay higher salaries to professors across the board. Meanwhile, every college from 2 year community colleges to Harvard has a Math and Biology department.

Please spend a few minutes at least attempting to critically analyze the things you read before posting your culture wars clickbait.

Maybe there are more of those professors who have been around longer. Maybe even after receiving a full professorship an engineering or science person will bail for the private sector? Older profs make more than younger profs (except for the first year or two when a new hire might make more than the person hired the year before or even 2 years before).

Exactly, this was fairly obvious to me as well. OP troll level 0/10

OP goes home DEVASTATED

an educated guess wrote:

The market is flooded with STEM PhDs and there are relatively fewer gender studies PhDs. Therefore the gender studies PhDs are more valued and can demand a higher salary when they are hired and throughout their tenure

This couldn't be more accurate. I am currently in STEM academia with a graduate degree. Each year large institutions open maybe on average 1-2 positions per field of interest. Meanwhile 5-6 students graduate from that same institution with those interest. There is saturation of the market and full tenure is nearly impossible to reach. There is simply no way an academic STEM professional can make money. My advice would be go into whatever makes you happiest and the most money. It is not an issue of liberalism or conservatism, it's supply and demand. But that's why this message board blows and I seldomly view it.

Wise master. wrote:

an educated guess wrote:

The market is flooded with STEM PhDs and there are relatively fewer gender studies PhDs. Therefore the gender studies PhDs are more valued and can demand a higher salary when they are hired and throughout their tenure

Gender studies PhDs also chair diversity committees and hold administrative positions (associate dean etc) which pays more.