Women secretly run the world, no one cares
Originally published in the Park University Stylus, Oct. 2012.
By Andi Enns
Editor
In every swing state where men outnumber women, even by 1 percent, divorce rates are high; college education is low - in some places, less than 20 percent; household incomes are low; and disability is high. More houses are foreclosed, more families are headed by a single parent, and unemployment is almost double the national average.
In contrast, states with more women than men are doing better than equally proportioned states. College graduation rates approach half of the adult population, more families are headed by two adults, household incomes double even with one worker, and unemployment is mainly a problem for teenagers and childless young adults.
The contrast is so high, some refer to this recession as a “mancession” - an economic downturn mainly affecting men without college educations. Men’s unemployment rate is 11 percent, according to the Daily Beast, whereas women’s unemployment is 7.8 percent. It’s the largest unemployment gap since the troops returned from World War II.
It’s easy to see why states with more women are doing better. Women are less likely to engage in violence leading to death, according to the US Department of Health And Human Services Urban Institute. Workplace deaths are also 90 percent men, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics 2009 report on workplace fatalities. It’s safe to presume, then, that life expectancies are longer in women-dominated states.
Forbes Magazine reports colleges have 60 percent female students, even though more male babies were born between 1985 and 1995 than female babies. In fact, the only state with an equal gender ratio in college is Utah, and New York Times reported Utah universities lowering admissions standards for men to equalize the ratios. Time Magazine reports valedictorians at high schools and colleges are women three-quarters of the time.
Not only do they hold more degrees and higher GPAs, 75 percent of non-elected government positions worldwide are held by women, and women own 70 percent of the world’s small businesses, according to the United Nations. Two-thirds of American households currently have female breadwinners or co-breadwinners, according to Influence by Maddy Dychtwald, and 83 percent of consumer money spent in America comes from a woman’s wallet.
These aren’t just American trends. The Clinton Global Initiative reports the same thing in developing nations -- the more effort invested in female youth, the better off the countries are as a whole. In the bestselling book Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson, the author says improving educational opportunities for women in the Middle East - even just allowing them to finish high school - transforms the community. Investing in women is really investing in everyone, because women teach their friends and their families what they learn, whereas men tend to keep their knowledge to themselves, according to Mortenson. Additionally, the Women’s Learning Partnership estimates a country’s wages rise by 20 percent for every year beyond fourth grade which the average girl attends school.
With all of these facts, it becomes increasingly disturbing that the presidential candidates have waited until the eleventh hour - only two weeks before the election - to begin talking about issues specific to women.
Until this point, the candidates have been primarily talking about the “mancession.” They’ve been targeting swing states with a male majority, seducing them with promises of economic recovery and more jobs without a college education requirement.
They haven’t been talking about equal wages for women - despite years of activism, women’s wages are still 33 percent less than their male peers in similar jobs, according to the census. They haven’t talked about the discrimination mothers face in the workplace - employers are twice as likely to hire fathers than mothers, according to Forbes magazine, because they assume a woman will have to take more sick days for her kids. They haven’t talked about the idea that women can manage their own bodies just like they can successfully manage their careers and educations, our government, and their households.
And why? You can’t argue that women don’t care about these issues. If you want economic recovery and more consumer dollars spent, give women the wages we deserve. Reward us for the years spent in college to better ourselves, our families, and our country by creating more equality in the workplace, and especially in the boardroom. Give us the right to decide for ourselves if we want birth control and abortions -- I assure you, women who are against those things won’t be using them.
It’s down to the line for the presidential candidates. We are 51 percent of the nation, and we are voting. It’s time for the candidates to remember us.
By Andi Enns
Editor
In every swing state where men outnumber women, even by 1 percent, divorce rates are high; college education is low - in some places, less than 20 percent; household incomes are low; and disability is high. More houses are foreclosed, more families are headed by a single parent, and unemployment is almost double the national average.
In contrast, states with more women than men are doing better than equally proportioned states. College graduation rates approach half of the adult population, more families are headed by two adults, household incomes double even with one worker, and unemployment is mainly a problem for teenagers and childless young adults.
The contrast is so high, some refer to this recession as a “mancession” - an economic downturn mainly affecting men without college educations. Men’s unemployment rate is 11 percent, according to the Daily Beast, whereas women’s unemployment is 7.8 percent. It’s the largest unemployment gap since the troops returned from World War II.
It’s easy to see why states with more women are doing better. Women are less likely to engage in violence leading to death, according to the US Department of Health And Human Services Urban Institute. Workplace deaths are also 90 percent men, according to the US Bureau of Labor Statistics 2009 report on workplace fatalities. It’s safe to presume, then, that life expectancies are longer in women-dominated states.
Forbes Magazine reports colleges have 60 percent female students, even though more male babies were born between 1985 and 1995 than female babies. In fact, the only state with an equal gender ratio in college is Utah, and New York Times reported Utah universities lowering admissions standards for men to equalize the ratios. Time Magazine reports valedictorians at high schools and colleges are women three-quarters of the time.
Not only do they hold more degrees and higher GPAs, 75 percent of non-elected government positions worldwide are held by women, and women own 70 percent of the world’s small businesses, according to the United Nations. Two-thirds of American households currently have female breadwinners or co-breadwinners, according to Influence by Maddy Dychtwald, and 83 percent of consumer money spent in America comes from a woman’s wallet.
These aren’t just American trends. The Clinton Global Initiative reports the same thing in developing nations -- the more effort invested in female youth, the better off the countries are as a whole. In the bestselling book Three Cups of Tea by Greg Mortenson, the author says improving educational opportunities for women in the Middle East - even just allowing them to finish high school - transforms the community. Investing in women is really investing in everyone, because women teach their friends and their families what they learn, whereas men tend to keep their knowledge to themselves, according to Mortenson. Additionally, the Women’s Learning Partnership estimates a country’s wages rise by 20 percent for every year beyond fourth grade which the average girl attends school.
With all of these facts, it becomes increasingly disturbing that the presidential candidates have waited until the eleventh hour - only two weeks before the election - to begin talking about issues specific to women.
Until this point, the candidates have been primarily talking about the “mancession.” They’ve been targeting swing states with a male majority, seducing them with promises of economic recovery and more jobs without a college education requirement.
They haven’t been talking about equal wages for women - despite years of activism, women’s wages are still 33 percent less than their male peers in similar jobs, according to the census. They haven’t talked about the discrimination mothers face in the workplace - employers are twice as likely to hire fathers than mothers, according to Forbes magazine, because they assume a woman will have to take more sick days for her kids. They haven’t talked about the idea that women can manage their own bodies just like they can successfully manage their careers and educations, our government, and their households.
And why? You can’t argue that women don’t care about these issues. If you want economic recovery and more consumer dollars spent, give women the wages we deserve. Reward us for the years spent in college to better ourselves, our families, and our country by creating more equality in the workplace, and especially in the boardroom. Give us the right to decide for ourselves if we want birth control and abortions -- I assure you, women who are against those things won’t be using them.
It’s down to the line for the presidential candidates. We are 51 percent of the nation, and we are voting. It’s time for the candidates to remember us.