I'm always on the lookout for cleverly coined terms, and today my scouring of the Internet did not disappoint. Ladies and gentleman, I give you:
man-cession.
This term has been popping up all over the place since the beginning of the month, when
USA Today reported that women represent 49.8 percent of the nation's workforce (as of June) and may become the outright majority by the end of the year. Male-populated jobs like construction and manufacturing have been hit hardest by the recession; according to the article, men have lost 4.75 million of the recession's 6.4 million terminated jobs. Additionally, the few fields that are growing—education, health care, and government—are dominated by women.
The article noted that men will likely make up some of their losses, as the workers from construction and other industries move to more profitable fields. Also, even if they are nearly half of the workforce, women still tend to earn less money then men; they're also more likely to work shorter hours or hold part time jobs, and less likely to hold executive positions.
I discovered
man-cession while reading
this op-ed The Washington Post. Although the
USA Today article has provoked a lot of squabbling about workplace equality, the
Post writer believes that the man-cession's long-term effect will be political (then again, he is writing in their PostPartison section on politics). Last year, Obama secured 49 percent of the man-vote over McCain's 48 percent, making him the first Democrat candidate since Clinton to win among males. Jimmy Carter is the only president in since 1972 to do better; in '76, Carter won with 50 percent of men on his side.
The
Post columnist worries how the millions of unemployed men will affected Obama's standing. Carter inherited a souring economy, and he was only able to secure 36 percent of male voters during his 1980 loss to Ronald Reagan.
Are you surprised to see women representing nearly 50 percent of the workplace? What long term effects do you see for the man-session
Comments (6)
It makes sense that the recession would be claiming many more men than women. This time the advantages that men have enjoyed such as higher wages, are now working against them as companies are targeting their higher salaried employees.
High male unemployment is a bad thing by any standard. As the saying goes, idle hands are a devils workshop. Countries that suffer from huge unemployment start seeing more civil unrest and demonstrations.
Long term effects politically will be who men blame the recession on. I don't think the Republicans will be seen as a potential savior since the economy was going down hill fast on their watch. If the Dems screw up, we could see the rise of Independents as a major party as people reject the two party system.
By the way, you are a posting machine!
I am not surprised if women represent more than 50%. Recession is taking advantage of women if it involves with offering lesser pay. Desperate time surface the other side of humanity. There’s no doubt considering the economy we’re in. Nothing to rejoice about.
"the few fields that are growing—education, health care, and government—are dominated by women."
that's nothing new or something to be surprised about. after all, it's so obvious that it's dominated by women and even more obvious that these are women's concerns/things by standard--education, health care, and government related jobs that seem fit for women and is generally accepted as women's potential workplace. There’s no doubt because typically, who do you see at the government’s reception or lobby? WOMEN. The same goes for doctor’s offices and you name it …
@SoullFire@xanga - That would be an upside of the recession, if it helped turn people away from the two-party system. That being said, I do like Obama...
Hehe thanks. All in a day's work (:
http://www.strategicbookpublishing.com/Management-TidbitsForTheNewMillenium.html
My name is Maxwell Pinto. I write books on leadership, ethics, teamwork, motivation and women in the workforce. Women can contribute far more to the corporate world, if given a fair chance.
Some of my books on leadership and ethics trace the developement of women in the workforce and the role of male ego, which contributes to denying many women a fair chance in the corporate world. Despite this, many men consider themselves to be ethical leaders. My question: is “ethical leadership” an oxymoron?
With all the layed off men, strip clubs have been booming across the country, as well as the adult video industry. That is what accounts for most of the new female jobs.
oh, let's not forget the women working the streets. there are a lot of women working out there to put food on the table. single moms, army moms, octomoms, sisters, grandmothers, daughters, etc. i'm not surprised at all.