Emperor1956
Posts: 2370
Joined: 11/7/2005
Status: offline
|
quote:
Aine: Fast Reply to noone in particular.
I've been offered manual labor jobs in construction. I can't do it because of a bad back. (snip)
Thing is, we've agreed that once I get my Doctorate in Pharmacy, I will support him when he gets out of the navy and goes back to school himself.
Granted it's not a career that is physically demanding, aside from being on your feet up to 12 hours a day, which is effin hell on the back (which I've experienced seeing as I'm a pharmaceutical technician), this is a career that is still in many eyes held as a MALE dominated profession. Yes, it's not manual labor, but you have to be damned smart to be a successful and good pharmacist. I work with older male pharmacists that make no qualms about making it clear what they think about women working in this field. It just drives me even more to do better and show them that I'm not just some dumb blonde kid.
So to the OP
Blame your father for your twisted and backwards way of thinking.
FR to Aine, off topic (or is it, still):
Oh, aine...traditional retail pharmacy is hell on the back. I'm the son of a (male) pharmacist, the grandson of a (male) pharmacist, and the nephew of two (one male, one female--licensed in the early 1950s when it was really rare). Can you tell what my father's family did for a living? I wish you luck, but I have to say that if you are gonna do the traditional route, its pretty physically tiring.
About it being a male-dominated profession? I would have agreed with you c. 1960, but pharmacy today is one of the classic examples of a profession that has been commoditized, so that the "professional" aspects have been greatly diminished. Pharmacy has suffered over the past 50 years in rankings in salary, prestige, "desirability" as measured by surveys of incoming college students, etc. All of this is symptomatic of the commoditization of a profession. And with that commoditization (some would say in part because of it) has been an influx of women into the field. I am not saying that women becoming part of a profession or workforce reduces the attractiveness of the profession (tho there are sociologists and work-theorists who do say that). But the presence of women does appear to indicate a decrease in perceived value of a profession. Historically we've seen it happen with high-school level teachers (which was a male-dominated profession until the 1930s in the USA) and with department store clerks (a profession that was exclusively male until the early 20th C). In those instances, and in pharmacy, we see a great increase in the number of women in a relatively short time. Women who sometimes then work part time (often because they are mothers) and women who enter the profession young, work a few years, leave and then return after childrearing years. This leads to the creation of what is commonly called a "pink collar ghetto". (note, none of these ideas are entirely my own -- any competent student of work would have run into this in college if not earlier).
By the way, pharmacy is not the only profession that is being scrutinized as a possible "pink collar ghetto". Two fascinating other recent thoughts are that law, with the 51% of current law students being women (up from effectively 0% 70 years ago and 8% just 40 years ago) might become "pink collarized" and that the high-tech industry, notably machismo and geek-driven, saves a place for "the girls" when it comes to PR, because PR requires lady-like skills.
_____________________________
"When you wake up, Pooh," said Piglet, "what's the first thing you say?"
"What's for breakfast? What do you say, Piglet?"
"I say, I wonder what's going to happen exciting today?"
Pooh nodded thoughtfully.
"It's the same thing," he said.
|
RE: gender roles and $$$ - 
Profile
). 
RE: gender roles and $$$ - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread