Women who have received a superior education are more likely
to leave the work force to stay home with their children.
Charles Murray reports on a study conducted by Joni Hersch.
Comparing women who went to the top institutions of higher learning, tier 1
schools to those who went to lesser schools, Hersch discovered that:
women
from tier 1 schools are significantly more likely to be home with the kids than
the others — 68% of mothers from the tier 1 schools were employed, compared to
76% of those from the other schools.
One would think, Murray continues, that the opposite would
be true:
These
numbers shouldn’t make sense. Who gets into tier 1 schools? Not just highly
able women, but also women who are ambitious enough to want to be in those
schools. It is plausible that they would be more likely, not less, to continue their careers after they
have children than women who, on average, are surely less intellectually able
and probably less intensely ambitious than the tier 1 women.
More reflection yields a cogent explanation:
Hersch
also documents that women from tier 1 schools are more likely than other women
graduates to have parents with college educations and to be married to men
holding jobs that require a college education. Add to that some other
characteristics of women who have graduated from elite schools that Hersch does
not address but are established by other sources: Those with children are
almost always married. They are not only married to men with college
educations, they are likely to be married to men who have also graduated from
elite schools. Their family incomes are likely to be high. They tend to live in
places with the best schools (or send their children to the best schools).
Women who chose to stay at home with their children
are the ones who are most likely to have a choice. They have the most stable family lives; they
are married to the men most likely to be able to support a family.
Thus,the “ruling class” interbreeds and offers advantages
that are not available to the rest of the population.
Murray reports:
So
Professor Hersch has established that the next generation of children who have
everything from genes to family structure to money going for them are also more
likely to have a stay-at-home mom — and not just any mom, but one who has been
sifted through the micron-fine mesh of the admissions process at elite schools
and been judged to have both the IQ and other sterling qualities that gained
her entrance, and who is devoting that package of exceptional abilities to the
upbringing of her children. Lucky kids. And a new upper class polished to an
ever-shinier gloss.
Talking about admission process. http://www.avoiceformen.com/georgetown-university-and-men/georgetown-university-in-a-cover-up/
ReplyDeleteThe modern feminist at work. And one wonders why there are far more women in colleges and universities not withstanding the battle field that boys and young men face from public schools where the vast majority of teachers are female who are avowed feminists.
I know this same thing happened at a well known AF base in the Midwest. A minority woman tossed away the vast majority of male applicants resumes. I knew the Black male who sued them. I don't remember how that worked out. A lot of this happened to VietNam veterans. It was why Congress passed the VRA. Lord help you if you were a disabled veteran. I know personally about this type of discrimination.
It stands to reason that those who have the wherewithal to be stay at home mothers will because they can. Feminism has create a situation where the vast majority of other women have NO choice in order to survive. I suspect this was part of the plan to impoverish, morally as well, enough people that there would be no other choices and create the one thing this country did not have, the proletariat.