Two female Associate professors of Economics at the University of Michigan (UM) have published a new paper alleging that more men than women are interested in the field of economics because economics textbooks apparently portray more men than women.
Both fictional characters used for illustrative purposes and actual economists throughout history are routinely depicted as being male rather than female, which is highly triggering to feminists. Overall, they say, male economists outnumber female ones by a factor of 12 to 1 – and in one textbook case, not a single female economist was mentioned.
Stevenson and Zlotnick expressed further upset about what they claim are decision biases in many economics textbooks. While men are often depicted as “making a decision,” women, they say, are often illustrated as “[having] a decision made for them.”
“This fact both makes it likely that economics textbooks are male-dominated and suggests that concrete steps need to be taken to understand why economics is not attracting female students,” the feminist duo wrote, adding that “one part of the answer may be that women do not see themselves, their interests, and their lives described in economics textbooks.”
This type of feminist insanity is rampant on many college campuses today. To keep up with the latest news on this front, be sure to visit CampusInsanity.com.
What’s ironic about this latest episode of feminist triggering on a college campus is the fact that, when you really take a look at the numbers, what Stevenson and Zlotnick think they’re seeing in their field’s curriculum isn’t actually representative of what’s actually taking place in academia as a whole.
As explained by Breitbart, most of academia is actually female-dominated, with women being the majority of all medical school students, law students, as well as candidates for both bachelors and doctorate degrees.
The citation for this inconvenient fact comes from the American Enterprise Institute (AEI), which has published a plethora of data to suggest that females are actually over-represented throughout academia, and that men are systematically being pushed out of the learning environment.
“If America’s diversity worshipers see any female under-representation as a problem and possibly even as proof of gender discrimination, what do they propose should be done about female over-representation in higher education at every level and in 7 out of 11 graduate fields?” writes Mark J. Perry from AEI.
“After all, to be logically consistent, aren’t female over-representation and female under-representation simply different sides of gender injustice?”
So what’s actually happening is that women are being recruited more than men are to learn, graduate, and enter the workforce as highly skilled individuals. It doesn’t at all match the narrative being peddled by the likes of Stevenson and Zlotnick, but it’s the truth that too few people in the modern age are willing to confront.
It’s also a fact that men and women tend to have different interests, with men typically being more geared to the sciences and numbers, and women being more geared towards the humanities, social sciences, and other less-technical fields (or they demand to have the sciences recreated into their own personal liking). This is just the way it is, and it doesn’t necessarily mean anything as far as discrimination or bias.
“People should choose the [career] fields they want to be in,” Professor Lee Jussim from Rutgers University told Campus Reform. “Everything does not have to be perfectly equal all the time.”
See more examples of insane left-wing cultism at LeftCult.com.
Sources for this article include: