Young men in their 20s in the UK are now earning less on average than their female counterparts, reversing a historical pay gap. This shift is largely attributed to women's increased university attendance and graduation rates, particularly in higher-paying fields, while men's educational attainment has stagnated. The decline in traditionally male-dominated industries, coupled with the rise of sectors favoring higher education, has left many young men without the qualifications needed for well-paying jobs. This trend is most pronounced in London, and raises concerns about the long-term economic prospects for this generation of men.
Analysis of ancient genomes from burials in Germany dating to the Iron Age revealed a surprising social structure. High-status graves consistently contained women who were not biologically related to lower-status individuals buried nearby, suggesting that women married into the community from elsewhere. Conversely, men buried in lower-status graves were genetically related to each other, indicating they remained in their birthplace. This pattern suggests a patrilocal society where social standing and inheritance were passed down through the female line, indicating women held a prominent role in community leadership and power.
HN commenters discuss the methodology and conclusions of the study regarding an Iron Age society seemingly centered on women. Several express skepticism about the claim, questioning whether the burial practices necessarily reflect social power structures, suggesting alternative explanations like differential preservation of remains or ritual significance. Some also point out the small sample size and potential biases. Others highlight the importance of challenging traditional historical narratives and the possibility of diverse social structures in the past, while acknowledging the need for further research to confirm these findings. The discussion touches on matrilineality versus matriarchy and the frequent conflation of the two. Some also note the sensationalized title and urge caution in interpreting the results.
Summary of Comments ( 30 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43231694
Hacker News commenters discuss potential reasons for the pay gap described in the article, including occupational choices, risk tolerance, and work-life balance prioritization. Some dispute the premise, arguing that comparing all men to all women is misleading and suggest controlling for factors like career choice would yield a different result. Others highlight societal pressures and expectations influencing men's and women's career paths. The role of education, particularly the higher proportion of women in university, is also debated, with some suggesting this contributes to women's higher earning potential early in their careers. Several commenters point to the lack of support systems for men and boys, particularly in education, as a contributing factor to their lagging behind. The overall sentiment appears to be a mix of skepticism towards the article's conclusions and genuine concern about the underlying issues raised.
The Hacker News comments section for the Times article "The lost boys: how a generation of young men fell behind women on pay" contains a robust discussion with various perspectives on the presented data and its implications. Several commenters challenge the article's premise and methodology.
One recurring theme is the critique of comparing median earnings across all fields instead of focusing on like-for-like roles. Commenters argue that comparing median earnings across genders without accounting for career choices, hours worked, and other relevant factors can lead to skewed results. They suggest that if women are disproportionately represented in lower-paying fields, the overall median earnings for women will naturally appear lower. A compelling comment elaborates on this by suggesting that the article would be more insightful if it compared median earnings within specific professions, controlling for experience, education, and hours worked.
Several commenters also discuss the potential impact of societal expectations and gender roles on career choices. Some suggest that men may face pressure to be the primary breadwinners, pushing them towards higher-paying but more demanding careers, while women may prioritize work-life balance or choose careers traditionally associated with caring professions. A thought-provoking comment raises the question of whether these choices are freely made or influenced by societal pressures and ingrained gender roles.
Another line of discussion centers around the potential impact of education and the increasing number of women graduating from university. Some commenters hypothesize that this could contribute to the observed trend, with more educated women entering the workforce and potentially out-earning men with lower educational attainment.
Several commenters express skepticism about the article's conclusions, viewing it as potentially biased or promoting a specific narrative. They call for a more nuanced and data-driven approach to understanding the complexities of the gender pay gap. Some even point to alternative data or studies suggesting different conclusions.
Finally, some comments focus on the broader societal implications of these trends, such as the potential consequences for family formation and the changing dynamics of relationships. They raise concerns about the impact on men's mental health and well-being if they feel unable to fulfill traditional societal expectations.
Overall, the Hacker News discussion offers a critical and multifaceted perspective on the article's claims, highlighting the importance of considering various factors and avoiding simplistic explanations when analyzing complex societal trends. The comments encourage a deeper examination of the data and its implications, urging readers to consider the potential limitations of the presented analysis.