gessman Loc: Colorado

I hear you and you have my ear but when women started indicating they wanted in the workforce the jobs they wanted are already presumably filled by a qualified man with a line of men under him who also wouldn't mind being in his place. Profitable companies aren't often going to hire anyone to immediately take the place of someone who is profitably running companies and replace them with females just because a group of females want those jobs. It would be idiocy to think that's ever going to happen no matter how much squeeling takes place. I would wager that it would be likewise if the gender roles were reversed.

Do you know what was actually behind that push to hire black females? It wasn't solely for "affirmative action," as you implied. It was .gov's offering companies tax breaks for each new job created within a company structure. You know when the President announces that so many "jobs were created last quarter, etc.?" Well, the incentive program was to give those tax breaks to companies for creating jobs and hiring a certain class of person to fill it to push an impetus toward a more integrated workforce in response to all the protesting about the makeup of the workforce be females and minorities. Firms got incentives for hiring females first and a double hit for hiring a minority female. Well, in order to get a performance bonus some company CEOs and wiley personnel directories took it to another level unanticipated by .gov. They took many of the less critical full-time positions and broke them into 2, 3, and even 4 part time jobs which eliminated the necessity for and expense of extending benefits like paid vacations, medical coverage, and retirement because the laws made no mandatory provisions for those benefits being extended for part time employes.

So, .gov was happy because of the newly created jobs the Prestdent could point to as he "stuck in his, thumb, pulled out a plum, and said, what a good..." The next move was the most devastating of all - got an even better incentive if they hired a minority female who was on welfare. My youngest son, 15 at the time, applied for a "parttime job" at Pizza Hut, which was owned by Pepsi, and would have been hired but only if I completed an affidavit amounting to a declaration of family poverty. It wasn't about hiring females or minorities or people in poverty, but rather it was about creating jobs for the Prez to boast about, how many tax breaks a company could get to pad the bottom line, and bonuses for Human Services department heads and CEOs and it wrecked our workforce and let the big boys off from extending humane benefits hard won by employer/employee negotiations established beginning just after the "Great Depression" with the breakup of the sweatshops using even children in what amounted to slavery conditions. It certainly wasn't you they were after, scillian. By now, those practices have spread to almost every job in the U.S. and there are more 36 hour a week jobs since up to that level a person is still classified as parttime and gets no benefits until they put in a 40 hour workweek and I will ask the original poster's forgiveness for hijacking the thread even though my posts are indirectly pertinent.

Horseart Loc: Alabama

To me, it has always looked like there are far more men on this forum than women. The few women I do see here are good photographers. I too would have thought most photographers were men.. but what do I know?

d2b2 Loc: Catonsville, Maryland, USA

no12mo

Dan5000 Loc: New Hampshire

[quote=burkphoto]What are the other 4.2 percent? Dead?

Interesting analogy

Picture Taker Loc: Michigan Thumb

Today the market is open and I see more women getting interested. I see more women joining our club, which is a group of pros to beginners. The women are holding their own with quality and knowledge. Just elected a new board and the majority are women.
The world to day in America is open to all and is a level playing field controlled by capability.

spaceytracey Loc: East Glacier Park, MT

When I started out, I found it difficult to compete w/the male photographers. Your mention of the "good ole boys" struck a chord w/me, as did the statement that women should "stay in their lane". This is exactly what I experienced. Thankfully I had a great mentor who helped me forge ahead despite the obstacles.

anotherview Loc: California

Thanks for your history on the transition from analog to digital photography and the involvement of females in this shift.

We used to call men who could not or refused to enlarge their skill-set to fit the computer age "dinosaurs." Some executives viewed keyboarding as "woman's work." Ha,ha. Some of these guys compromised by using their index fingers to type on the keyboard.

I took thank the stars that when younger I saw the necessity of learning to type.

Youngsters now learn to work the computer and its keyboard as part of growing up. They take the computer as a fixture of society and business.

bobfitz Loc: Kendall-Miami, Florida

Amen!!!

srt101fan

Wow! Quite an analysis, gessman. Not sure I quite understand it all but it's certainly thought-provoking.

cbtsam Loc: Monkton, MD

It doesn't show the publication date, but reading the site shows that the data range up to and including 2018, so is presumably published after 2018. It also says that the missing are just that ... missing.

Rokko Loc: Minneapolis

What are the other 4.2 percent? Dead?

Maybe the other 4.2% are dead, or maybe they are "other" or did not answer the question.

Mate Loc: Pahrump, Nevada

Phil,

Listening is everything! Thank you for posting a reply.

pithydoug Loc: Catskill Mountains, NY

Spot on, especially women being more trainable and not just in photography.

Alafoto Loc: Montgomery, AL

Undecided.