Lizzy Burke
Opinions Editor
I’m sorry to say it ladies, but it’s time to face the truth. Throughout history, women have been viewed as the subordinates. Not only were their mortality rates much higher due to the extremely laborious (lol) task of childbirth, but for their relatively short lives they spent most of it toiling away on behalf of the family.
For example, in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, women’s primary objective was to get married and raise a successful family. In the Bennet family of Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice, Mrs. Bennet is solely concerned with finding her 5 daughters their perfect husbands. Her daughter, Elizabeth, was the first to show some defiance when she contested the roles of traditional marriage and the role of women – an abomination! The age of the Industrial Revolution in Europe marked the introduction of the “cult of domesticity,” the application of the idea that a woman’s chief purpose is in the household. Women had previously been banished to the domestic sphere, but with the turn of the century and many domestic inventions, like the dishwasher, it became clear that society’s feelings grew in that females were not to occupy the same positions as men. Females didn’t even have the right to vote until the 19th Amendment came along in 1919!
There’s no contesting that women have been suppressed in history, but what are the long-lasting impacts of this subordination? Just recently, on January 28 President Obama stated in his State of the Union address that women only make ¢ 77 for every dollar a man makes. However, Obama also highlighted the strength of women in today’s society. With great strides in the economy such as major companies naming females their CEOs, like General Motors and Yahoo.
There are several arguments for the degree of gender equality in modern society; according to Forbes, more women are enrolling in higher education institutions than men; but on the flip side, men occupy more high-up corporate positions than women by a landslide. Let’s think about this gender division in our own school.
There is clear gender segregation in many classes here at NCHS. In the AP English course, out of 114 people, there are only 36 boys. Additionally, in my AP Euro class, there are 7 boys and 18 girls. In the entire roster of advanced Child Development class, UCONN Individual & Family Development, there are 28 girls in 2 sections. Females dominate the majority of these aforementioned classes. Traditionally, females dominate AP classes in general. How is it possible that women have been banished to their cult of domesticity, and men still occupy the majority of positions of power in our economy, yet females dominate the higher level classes and dominate college enrollment?
Perhaps it’s because men mature later, a classic cliche excusing the behavior of teenage boys. Or maybe it’s because the AP level classes aren’t of interest to the guys. There are a few exceptions to the statement that the ladies overpower the men in terms of more advanced classes. For example, in my AP Microeconomics course, there are only 3 girls enrolled, in comparison to the 18 boys. In the AP US Government & Politics course, the gap is significantly smaller. Of 95 students, 63 are female and 32 are male. Roughly a 2:1 ratio, much closer than the split in other courses such as Economics and Child Development. What is it about these classes that attract boys in the same way, if not more, than they attract girls?
Interestingly enough, I find that these statistics actually reinforce the stereotype that men are meant to work whereas women are meant to support the man; working only in the domestic sphere. Although we occupy the higher academic positions at this age, the content of these courses is important. The US Government is dominated by males. A realistic job aspiration for many high school boys, incentivizing them to take the US Government & Politics class. Economic positions are also predominantly controlled by males, such as the CEO positions of large corporations. This provides a reasonable explanation for why boys would study the advanced Economics course – to get a headstart on their intended careers.
So what does this mean for us? It would be wrong to make the generalization that women are smarter than men based on the ratio in AP classes. The wide gender gap in classes here at NCHS as well as in college education can be attributed to several things. At the high school level, perhaps it is the courses offered that have pushed the boys towards regular level classes, or maybe they have not developed enough academic interest to pursue the more challenging courses, even if they are “smart” enough to handle it. In college, perhaps the gap can be attributed to the greater number of men in the workforce, insinuating that more men opt for the job than the degree. However, it’s important to note that the gap is not impermeable. The differences in number are not so staggering as to suggest that women are more successful than men, rather, they indicate a trend in women and education.
In short, it’s important to recognize the changing position of women. The so-called “cult of domesticity” has presented many challenges for women trying to break this stereotype. Is it a woman’s obligation to stay at home and raise the family instead of pursuing a career of her own? Additionally, on the more local level, is it a student’s obligation to take classes that apply to their stereotyped professions, encouraging the gender gap in higher education? Women have broken the mold of being subjected to the domestic sphere, and taken huge steps towards total equality in society. We even have a possible female candidate for president. Do you think the framers of the Constitution could have ever predicted this?
