Men who work with kids

[Me Myself]

I remember there being some segment on tv here a while back that said young men were hesitant about going into such fields because of the stigma associated not just with it being a womans job but not wanting to be accused of anything. I have only ever seen 1 male childcare worker in my time which I think is sad. I hope there will be an even balance one day.

It would be really nice. Right now I understand the bast majority of teachers are female for some reason.

I think it'd be nice men were able to take more nurturing roles as their main roles without any stigma or insult to their manhood, or even worst, suspiciousness as the ones from the OP.

I dont know how prevalent that kind of thought is, but I wouldnt be surprised if it was very prevalent, but non spoken about.

I thhink i remember time ago Mystic was talking how some peoplle asked her if she made background checks to her male employees because they were working with little girls in the dancing stuff implying men need more background checks than women in this stuff.

It is truly unfortunate. I really dont know how prevalent it s, but I do ink it would change a lot depending on culture.

 

[Alceste]

Its irelevant because we are discussing men issues and you are comparing them with woman's issues. This is not a who is e bigger victim war.

We are talking about unecessary stereotyping and problems that arise when men take jobs unstereotypical to them. You dont seem to be talking about e problems nor the solutions, so I dont see how any of what you are saying is of any relevance to the OP honestly.

I was replying to another post in the post you quoted. If you wish to stick to the OP, my response to the OP is still sitting there, unaddressed. If straying off topic bothers you, I simply can't imagine why you picked the off-topic post to latch onto.

 

[Curious George]

Actually, that's because we have fought like hell to have access to those jobs. Then, when we finally managed to kick down those doors, we fought like hell to be free from sexual harassment in the workplace. And it's not over. When I got a job in a male dominated field in the 90s, I was sexually harassed constantly and then blacklisted by the union - IOW, I was prohibited from working on Union shows. The only reason they ever gave me was "some of the guys are saying you're a tease".

If a man wants to be a teacher or a nurse, all he has to do is get the prerequisite qualifications and start applying for a job. That's it. There are no legal or administrative barriers whatsoever.

Not like the barriers women faced when they wanted to start working with heavy machinery, or in mines, or on fishing boats, etc. It was ILLEGAL for women to do that kind of work. And it was also LEGAL for Unions to prohibit membership of women in order to protect unionized jobs for men alone. The admission policies of most universities specified that certain professions MUST be reserved for men only. Marie Curie, for example - the ONLY person ever to have won a Nobel Peace Prize in multiple sciences - was not permitted to study at an accredited university in Poland, on account of not having a penis.

Just saying, you simply can't compare the experiences of men who want to be nurses with the experiences of women who want jobs in male dominated fields. The WORST that is going to happen to a male nurse or kindergarten teacher is somebody might snicker at his job choice and he'll feel sad. BIG FREAKING DEAL. Boo hoo!

(Scuze me, kind of touched a nerve there... )

I agree that the limited fields where men do face discrimination are no comparison to the amount of discrimination that women have overcame, or still continue to face.

I do not agree however that a male faces no administrative barriers whatsoever. Let me explain with an example. Let us imagine that we have a female contractor. This female contractor. If part of the public feels that a man will do a better job, she is likely to receive less potential clients than she would were she a man. Now, let us say we have a worker instead of a contractor. If some contractors feel the same way they are less likely to hire her. Now, let us assume that she is a worker and while the contractor knows she can do as good of job as any male in his hiring pool, but knows that either fellow workers or potential clients will raise more of a fuss, then he is still less likely to hire her.

I would assert that the same is true for males in a few fields. My evidence- The sexist comments made by another user.

Further, I knew a home daycare provider. In a conversation, she explained that while she wanted to hire another employee and had selected a male applicant, her insurance company told her that they would raise the rates, so she hired a female instead of the male that she wanted.

My point - that we can point to equal employment opportunities and laws etc. But the simple truth is: Until we change the perception of the people implementing policies, barriers continue to exist.

That said, I do believe there are many employers who seek diversity and would love to hire males into female dominated fields. I also believe there are many parents who would be ecstatic to get a male teacher for their son or daughter. I further believe that the number of males who pursue careers in these fields more factually represents the hiring disparity. Yet, that is another barrier. Why are females encouraged to work with children while males not? why are females encouraged to act nurturing while males less so? There are currently no policies preventing women from the science fields, yet a disparity still continues to exist there. Is this a "boo-hoo" facet? I would suggest that women face a very similar bias in many fields today as men do in a few. This is a problem that necessitates changing opinion. But, how do we do that?

 

[Curious George]

I was replying to another post in the post you quoted. If you wish to stick to the OP, my response to the OP is still sitting there, unaddressed. If straying off topic bothers you, I simply can't imagine why you picked the off-topic post to latch onto.

While I do not think measuring contests are necessary--

I would say that including discussions of workplace discrimination against females can be very productive in this matter. Women had to overcome and still strive to overcome many negative stereotypes. That process offers invaluable insight and relevance to the discussion. I do not consider anything under that umbrella straying from my original post.

 

[Riverwolf]

I can only hope so.

Sadly though, I can see problems when it comes to wanting to be a stay-at-home Dad, since it earns you no money,

Not with what I have in mind. ^_^

 

[Me Myself]

I was replying to another post in the post you quoted. If you wish to stick to the OP, my response to the OP is still sitting there, unaddressed. If straying off topic bothers you, I simply can't imagine why you picked the off-topic post to latch onto.

I picked the last one. Also the one who was more developed. One was just an observation yours was more developed, so I picked the developed one.

Then for some reason you tried to justify how it was relevant to the OP.

Also the post you were replng to wasnt trng to undermine the issues being discussed. At least not with "boo hoo" s.

It honestly smells like bullying to me, so I guess at is my nerve struck. I ve never been terribly macho and I ve had a fair share of boo hooos at me for it and for defending friends too. I just wouldnt expect em in this DIR of any place.

 

[Aquitaine]

Not with what I have in mind. ^_^

Go on..... :yes:

 

[Riverwolf]

Go on..... :yes:

Indie game development. Stay at home by nature, but will bring in cash.

 

[Curious George]

I picked the last one. Also the one who was more developed. One was just an observation yours was more developed, so I picked the developed one.

Then for some reason you tried to justify how it was relevant to the OP.

Also the post you were replng to wasnt trng to undermine the issues being discussed. At least not with "boo hoo" s.

It honestly smells like bullying to me, so I guess at is my nerve struck. I ve never been terribly macho and I ve had a fair share of boo hooos at me for it and for defending friends too. I just wouldnt expect em in this DIR of any place.

I understand why you felt frustration. But, since you have seen and discussed threads which clearly demonstrate the volatility (for lack of a better word) in gender issues, I would hope that you can see why the comment to which Alceste had replied could be taken as sarcastic and bringing up the measuring contest argument again. I do not think that offense was meant.

 

[The Boogeyman]

Hell no. I am a scary Dentist to!

 

[Me Myself]

I understand why you felt frustration. But, since you have seen and discussed threads which clearly demonstrate the volatility (for lack of a better word) in gender issues, I would hope that you can see why the comment to which Alceste had replied could be taken as sarcastic and bringing up the measuring contest argument again. I do not think that offense was meant.

Which is why I just asked to drop the unnecessary side of the discussion and that's that.

Offense meant or not, I find the attitude to be a problem of diminishment to be a problem and an obstacle for discussing this issues.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Anywhoos...
As someone who has worked as a primary teacher, and left the industry I would say I was on the receiving end of some discrimination.

However, it was NOT debilitating in any sense, and some of it was sort of...l dunno...positive discrimination? Not positive as in 'good' but on a very small number of occasions my gender was a clear benefit.

I also have stories of negative discrimination. But nothing that was particularly distressing. Annoying and mildly frustrating for the most part.

 

[Alceste]

Anywhoos...
As someone who has worked as a primary teacher, and left the industry I would say I was on the receiving end of some discrimination.

However, it was NOT debilitating in any sense, and some of it was sort of...l dunno...positive discrimination? Not positive as in 'good' but on a very small number of occasions my gender was a clear benefit.

I also have stories of negative discrimination. But nothing that was particularly distressing. Annoying and mildly frustrating for the most part.

Yeah, my nurse friend says that male nurses always seem to get people saying, "Oh GOOD FOR YOU! What a DIFFICULT JOB!" while she sits there thinking, Hey, that's the exact same job I'm doing and nobody ever pats me on the back for it. She also says male nurses get promoted faster.

When I was in elementary school, I didn't have ANY male teachers - but I had a male principle and vice principle.

 

[lewisnotmiller]

Yeah, my nurse friend says that male nurses always seem to get people saying, "Oh GOOD FOR YOU! What a DIFFICULT JOB!" while she sits there thinking, Hey, that's the exact same job I'm doing and nobody ever pats me on the back for it. She also says male nurses get promoted faster.

When I was in elementary school, I didn't have ANY male teachers - but I had a male principle and vice principle.

Well...I got more pedophile jokes than pats for being a teacher. And myself and another male were taken aside as first year Student teachers on walking into a school for the first time and given 'the Talk' (don't hug the Kids back, etc), whilst the female teachers weren't.

But schools need men to go on school camps, and being a man certainly didn't hurt when it came to promotion at least at some schools. Plus I reckon half the parents liked their kids having a male teacher. When men are 10% of the teaching population, that helps your popularity.

 

[Me Myself]

Well...I got more pedophile jokes than pats for being a teacher. And myself and another male were taken aside as first year Student teachers on walking into a school for the first time and given 'the Talk' (don't hug the Kids back, etc), whilst the female teachers weren't.

But schools need men to go on school camps, and being a man certainly didn't hurt when it came to promotion at least at some schools. Plus I reckon half the parents liked their kids having a male teacher. When men are 10% of the teaching population, that helps your popularity.

Absolutely. Its good to know you have both.

 

[Karl R]

Most people who choose to work with children are decent people.

However, child molesters (whether male or female) will seek jobs which give them access to children. Therefore, people who work with children should be given higher scrutiny.

Among pedophiles/child molesters, men greatly outnumber women. I've seen no explanation why, but there seems to be overwhelming evidence that these tendencies/behaviors are more common among men. Therefore, it seems reasonable to scrutinize men more then women. However, women should also be scrutinized.

 

[Me Myself]

I don't think that's a significant reason men are not pursuing ECE careers, personally. I'm not completely closed to the idea, but I would need to see some evidence that this is the case, if indeed it is the case.

I think men are not pursuing ECE careers for the same reason they're not pursuing careers as housekeepers, nurses, dental assistants, secretaries, receptionists, etc. There is a social stigma that doing what is generally considered a "woman's job" makes a man less of a man.

Even the guy who brought this consideration up in the first place was originally talking about how no man in his right mind would want a job "wiping bums", wasn't he? The molestation stuff only came up later, after the "wiping bums" misconception was corrected.

Id say its both.

The thing is people are way less upfront to say "why you want that job, ar eyou a molester?" They feel far more comfortable saying "isnt that a womans job?" Than saying "but you are a man, dont you worry people wold think you are amolester?" Or "why would a man want that job? (To be a molester?)"

 

[Revoltingest]

Most people who choose to work with children are decent people.

However, child molesters (whether male or female) will seek jobs which give them access to children. Therefore, people who work with children should be given higher scrutiny.

Among pedophiles/child molesters, men greatly outnumber women. I've seen no explanation why, but there seems to be overwhelming evidence that these tendencies/behaviors are more common among men. Therefore, it seems reasonable to scrutinize men more then women. However, women should also be scrutinized.

Why not scrutinize them equally?
If women pose a risk too, it serves no one to vet them to a lesser extent.
A formal policy of differential vetting would simply add to the stigma,
essentially saying to the male applicants, "You're likely to be a child molester.".
This would even violate employment law (as gender based discrimination).

 

[vaguelyhumanoid]

Anyone who answers "yes" to the OP's question has a rancid worldview that's exceedingly sexist, demeaning and hostile to both men and women.