No, the money part is pretty accurate historically. Almost every field with high income historically attracted far more men than women once it became public knowledge. Job status and money are very disproportionately more important to men.
Men behavior is at least partially shaped by dating dynamics. Women tend to prefer partners with higher social and economic status than themselves. Men care less. Search term hypergamy
Actually it seems that the evidence is against you.
In the most unequal societies (Russia[0], India[1]) the tech industry is much closer to gender parity than in the west.
Sweden has gone further than any other nation on earth to be equitable across gendered lines yet remains extremely unequal in the actual working model. (In my former employer 14% of applicants were women, yet they constitute 20% of employed staff due to excessive D&I initiatives).
I should be self interested, we’re talking about competition for work. It would be death to roll over. Jobs are absolutely zero sum-
However my argument is backed by statistics, so I think you need to face the reality in front of you.
Sibling already pointed some things out. Specifically for doctors, go ahead and look up what specializations men go into primarily and what specializations women go into primarily. The only high paying one I noticed being particularly female-dominated is dermatology, and it's not that much of a difference. The male-dominated specialties tend to have far more high earning specializations, and the ratios are far more skewed too.
As for lawyers, I can't speak except for the fact lawyers work more akin to salesmen and make a lot of money based on performance, and once again, historically speaking, men have always dominated on anything performance-based. Law is an exception, and it's an extremely poor one at that.
As for both, both medicine / biomedical sciences and law pale in comparison to every other field known to both pay well and do so with high security still being largely in favor of men, whereas fields with low pays and low security tend to be dominated by women. Most STEM fields women dominate aren't known for paying well compared to the ones men dominate. Comparing those fields to social sciences is a no-brainer. All of this still excludes entrepreneurship and high-paying blue collar work still being dominated by men.
None of this exempts the fact historically, women have never chased money through career nearly as much as men, and have always placed far higher value on a man's status than vice versa. There are cultural reasons why this has changed, and none of those reasons are necessarily pointing towards improvements. We can open this entire can of worms if you so desire, but it will go far too off-topic for this.
Oh please, do yourself a favor and perform a very simple litmus test. Ask how many men are willing to date homeless women and vice versa.
What's fascinating is how people are trying to avoid talking about the obvious motivator for men not present in women, and how the slow death of that motivator is affecting things.
Take a look in the mirror before trying to subtly call someone ignorant, would you?
I'm trying to see the charitable way of interpreting this but all I can see is an intent to emotionally wound someone else. there's absolutely nothing in what you just said that can be considered constructive.
the parent was at least trying to make a reasoned point, even if you don't agree with him.
This is Hacker News not Prime Ministers Questions. We're here for intellectual curiosity, some measure of vulnerability and open discussion.
Calling people bigoted or old fashioned isn't swaying anyone, if anything it will push people away because as soon as someone says "they've got a point there" and there's backlash instead of a rebuttal: you've lost another person.
No, the money part is pretty accurate historically. Almost every field with high income historically attracted far more men than women once it became public knowledge. Job status and money are very disproportionately more important to men.