My colleague Garett Jones mentioned he’d just written on how to get more women in economics, just after I’d noticed a recent Science article, "Igniting Girls’ Interest in Science." Both of which raise the question: Do those who want more women in science, economics, politics, etc. understand that more women in some places requires fewer women elsewhere? If so, why don’t they tell us where exactly they want fewer women – and explain why the world is better with fewer women there? Without this, they sound like people pushing more state education spending without saying whose taxes should be raised to pay for it.
Sure, one could favor more skilled and productive women, which implies fewer women in lower skilled jobs. But if this is the issue the question should be where can women be the most productive, not how to get more women in science. And then why not listen to economists’ long-neglected advice on how most everyone could be more productive?
"Hey, I’m just saying …"