# Women in the trades. **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [January 17, 2009, 2:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686 "2009-01-17T02:06:31Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 11\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Glazer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a88e57/32.png) [@Glazer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Glazer)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 4:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/61 "2009-01-20T04:51:47Z")
In 12 years as a glazier, I’ve known only 2 women, and neither lasted more than a year. The one thing that stopped both of them was fear of being cut. Of course that’s what stops most guys that can’t cut it as well. The last girl I worked with was resentful that we wouldn’t let her lift large glass, until she saw that we wouldn’t let the new guy handle big glass either. When work picks back up if a woman applies I’ll hire her, because only one out of four men last more than a year. ---
**Author:** ![Sleel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/73ab20/32.png) [@Sleel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sleel)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 4:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/62 "2009-01-20T04:56:22Z")
Actually, where I live right now that kind of social group would be completely foreign to the society. There aren’t big parties and family gatherings. Kids are socially ignored in a group of adults, to a greater extent than in North America. My niece simply wasn’t around other kids until she started going to a nursery school a couple of times a week, and she mainly interacted with adults on the periphery. She spent about 80% of her time alone with her parents or her grandmother. She still had very definite preferences from a very early age, way before she spent any significant time with other adults, much less other children. Peer groups are much more influential for children than adults or even parents are in shaping social behavior. I’m not saying that the reactions of adults don’t matter, but they are much less important. Ask any parent who has tried to potty train a kid or discourage thumb-sucking — and failed. It’s pretty common for the kid to suddenly stop doing those things when exposed to a nursery school group. There has been a lot of sociological research done with a vested interest in finding that gender roles do matter, since most of that work was done by behaviorists who look at everything from the viewpoint that biology is secondary to training. As far as I know, the most favorable findings in that camp were inconclusive at best, and most were downright discouraging to their ideology. The greater recognition of transgender people is due in part to the growing amount of evidence that the roles society might try to impose on individuals sometimes don’t even fit the body they were born in. So you can give boys Barbies all you want, but unless he actually has the innate desire to play with it, it ain’t gonna happen. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 5:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/63 "2009-01-20T05:04:49Z")
> [@ZipperJJ](#): > > With regards to skilled trades at factories: My dad was skilled trade at Ford (having worked his way up from meager button pusher)… and while there were tons of regulations in place that let even the feeblest of old men do their jobs, the way my dad describes it is that the skilled trades were a ruthless boy’s club. I couldn’t imagine any woman wanting to work with those jerks - it was demeaning enough for any normal, somewhat sensitive male. I think they’re still getting over the idea of black people being able to get into the skilled trades, let alone women. Part of any traditional skilled trade is an apprenticeship that is not only prolonged, but much longer than necessary and involving tests other than skill. There really is a lot of ritual and pecking order involved, and that sort of thing always attracts fewer women than men. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 5:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/64 "2009-01-20T05:18:18Z")
> [@Sleel](#): > > **Queen Tonya** , the flip side of that is that the kids themselves often don’t show interest in the other gender’s toys and activities. The argument that environment determines behavior has not fared well in psychology. The only place it still seems to carry much credence is in gender studies, where it really shouldn’t. > > Some parents have tried promoting non-traditional gender roles with their kids. All of the children reject opposite-gender behavior, toys, and clothing at some point. Societal pressure is probably a factor later on, but as just about any parent can attest even pre-verbal toddlers who have almost no exposure to other kids have their own very definite opinions about what they like. I do agree with this, certainly. I guess I didn’t make my point as clear as I should have: the US, at the moment, is experiencing an era of pointed gender division, much more so than it did during the seventies and eighties when women’s representation in the trades was growing. If (and I see no reason to argue) there are fewer women going into trades today, it may be simply one more symptom of this widening, strengthening gender divide. My examples of toys and clothes were examples of the gender divide being greater now than it was 30 years ago, not meant as causation, but another symptom. The 70s had a great push for not simply equality, but identicality. It wasn’t enough to say that girls could do anything boys could do, suddenly it because important to say that boys and girls were exactly the same. The 80s continued this to some degree, with bigger hair. The 90s marked when we started questioning the idea that gender divisions were merely nurturance, and when we started affirming publicly what we’d noticed privately but were afraid to say for 20 years: our daughters \*did \*seem to play more with the dolls and our sons more with the trucks, even when all of them had access to all the toys. Now we’re trying to figure out what that means, exactly, and which gender divisions are nature, which nurture, and what we should do with that information once we’ve got it. So it makes sense to me that the 70s and 80s saw in increase in women in the trades, as they grew up being told that they were just like the boys and could - nay, should - do anything the boys could do. Children for the last 18 years are not sent the same message. They’re told that girls have very different interests and talents than boys, from a very, very young age. ---
**Author:** ![Beware\_of\_Doug](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/278dde/32.png) [@Beware\_of\_Doug](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Beware_of_Doug)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/65 "2009-01-20T05:22:10Z")
> [@WhyNot](#): > > The 70s had a great push for not simply equality, but identicality. It wasn’t enough to say that girls could do anything boys could do, suddenly it because important to say that boys and girls were exactly the same. The 80s continued this to some degree, with bigger hair. The 90s marked when we started questioning the idea that gender divisions were merely nurturance, and when we started affirming publicly what we’d noticed privately but were afraid to say for 20 years: our daughters \*did \*seem to play more with the dolls and our sons more with the trucks, even when all of them had access to all the toys. Now we’re trying to figure out what that means, exactly, and which gender divisions are nature, which nurture, and what we should do with that information once we’ve got it. I agree with what you said except for the last sentence. Those who pay the closest attention to gender divisions - outside of a few academic theorists - mostly do so without serious questioning, because they want to rely on them as a means of social control. ---
**Author:** ![WhyNot](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/c77e96/32.png) [@WhyNot](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WhyNot)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/66 "2009-01-20T05:27:11Z")
> [@Beware\_of\_Doug](#): > > I agree with what you said except for the last sentence. Those who pay the closest attention to gender divisions - outside of a few academic theorists - mostly do so without serious questioning, because they want to rely on them as a means of social control. Perhaps. The ones I see actually trying to figure out what to do with that information are teachers. Should the controversial fact that boys are (as a group) slightly better than girls at science as taught in the American schools mean that we should gender divide classes for science, change our teaching strategies or have after school science clubs for girls only? What will it mean for the boys if the girls are given extra science help? What will it mean for the girls’ self-esteem if they’re singled out for extra science help? Is it even important that they be on equal footing at all? No one seems to have answers yet, but the questions are being asked in teachers lounges and education classes now. Ten years ago, you’d have been tarred and feathered for bringing it up. ---
**Author:** ![kimera](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/f0a364/32.png) [@kimera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kimera)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 5:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/67 "2009-01-20T05:40:46Z")
While I don’t deny that men have the potential to have more body strength than women, in a good deal of traditional societies, women carry far more on a regular basis. I’ve read of multiple societies where women are used as the pack mules rather than men. From an article by Jared Diamond (1997) called 'Worst mistake in the history of the human race" mentioned in my econ anthro class > [@](#): > > In New guinea farming communities today, I often see women staggering under loads of vegetables and firewood while the men walk empty-handed. Once while on a field trip there studying birds, I offered to pay some villagers to carry supplies from an airstrip to my mountain camp. The heaviest item was a 110-pound bag of rice, which I lashed to a pole and assigned a team of four men to shoulder together. When I eventually caught up with the villagers, the men were carrying light loads, while one small woman weighing less than the bag of rice was bent under it, supporting its weight by a cord across her temples. ‘Modern’, industrial women are expected to be and are treated as if they are so much weaker than women are in many societies (and probably were in the past). I see no reason why American women can’t do more hard, strength-based work if they were trained to do so from a young age. ---
**Author:** ![Quercus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/7ab992/32.png) [@Quercus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quercus)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 6:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/68 "2009-01-20T18:12:50Z")
I’m not in the trades, and not a woman, but I do hear a lot about women in the large construction (bridges, skyscrapers) mostly unionized trades. So my comments don’t apply to say residential construction or residential plumbing. A sociologist who’s actually, you know, studied and gathered data, might be better situated to answer why there hasn’t been more growth in women in the trades, but here’s what I’ve gotten second-hand about current conditions: I don’t think physical strength matter all that much on big construction sites: that’s what cranes, back-hoes, come-alongs, and power tools are for, after all. I mean, nobody’s lifting an I-beam by hand. At least on union sites, to move even a 30-pound plate, you’ll likely get a strap under it and have the crane or back-hoe move it (sure, everybody wants to be macho, but nobody wants to destroy their back just to save 15 minutes off of the contractor’s schedule. And one thing that industrial unions are pretty good at is protecting the worker’s rights to do things the slightly slower, but safer way.) It can be a real strain on the body, just constantly moving, lifting medium-weight things, bending, crouching in the mud, etc. (Guys feel it too of course). But if you were pregnant, you’d have to stop working a lot sooner than, say, a teacher. And the schedule is much less family friendly – you can’t re-arrange your schedule to pick up your kid like many office workers, and at any moment the crew might go to six-days-a-week or 12 hours a day for a big push, and if you say you can’t work Saturdays, you’re not going to be the first one called for the next job. There’s a moderate amount of overt sexism, and I think it varies on an individual level, and even on the dynamics of who makes up a particular group. On some crews, a woman will never be accepted. No real physical threats, but just mild to severe social ostracism and getting assigned all the crap jobs. But on other crews a decent worker will be fine and one of the crew socially and on the site, no matter their gender. It’s not impossible, but there’s enough negativity that it takes a certain kind of person to put up with it. But beyond the direct sexism, there is definitely an old-boys network: the easiest way to get into the union is to have your father in the union, and that’s the easiest way to get called first for a job. And women generally don’t have those connections, so they face bigger barriers to getting in, and getting called to the next job. Remember, in construction, a given job will usually only be a few months to a year, so the politics of getting hired come into play all the time, not just a few times per career. (Queen Tonya’s remarks sound about right to me, plus the comment about how lots of tradesmen still haven’t really accepted that blacks should be in the union, much less women). In some few places, government contracts will require a certain percentage of workers to be minority/women (and sometimes local residents). In even fewer places, these requirements are actually enforced. So sometimes jobs/unions do try to recruit/retain women, but in the real world, only after trying to take care of the old-boys. ---
**Author:** ![Cat\_Fight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/90ced4/32.png) [@Cat\_Fight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cat_Fight)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/69 "2009-01-20T19:15:35Z")
While I don’t know the actual numbers, I have noticed more women riding the backs of garbage trucks and doing general city work in the past few years (at least in New York). Have discussed it with friends and we all agreed it was just generally cool and made one major difference – while we might normally cross the street to avoid catcalls from a construction site or brace ourselves when we pass, seeing a woman on site makes us a lot more comfortable. ---
**Author:** ![GargoyleWB](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/gargoylewb/32/199_2.png) [@GargoyleWB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/GargoyleWB)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 7:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/70 "2009-01-20T19:36:33Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > As a relatively small woman, I would be able to “help” with a lot of that type of work, but I don’t think I could ever be a full-grown tradesperson. Where **Broomstick** can lift a 100 lb roll of roofing material, I’m certain I would have an extremely difficult time with half that. Hell, I’m a relatively small _man_ and I worked construction for a spell and quit because I simply couldn’t pull my own weight compared to what would be expected. Easy tasks (walking up a ladder with a panel of sheetrock balanced on your shoulder) were not easy for me, and I was too physically destroyed at the end of a day instead of joining my coworkers for beer when the shift ended. There were women I worked with that easily outmuscled and outworked me on the site. The one thing they were never good at was spitting, though. Even in construction, I’ve never met a women who could cycle a snot rocket convincingly, and that was ultimately what coworker respect was based on. ---
**Author:** ![mangeorge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mangeorge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mangeorge)\ **Post date:** [January 20, 2009, 9:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686/71 "2009-01-20T21:14:35Z")
> [@GargoyleWB](#): > > The one thing they were never good at was spitting, though. Even in construction, I’ve never met a women who could cycle a snot rocket convincingly, and that was ultimately what coworker respect was based on. Hell, I can hock a loogie right to the white line. Any day. BTW; “women” is plural. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/women-in-the-trades/481686.md?page=3)