Lexi, a typically fatuous response, citing the apex fallacy. "Some men are on top, therefore what happens to men not on top isn't important". A typical shallow feminist response given without thinking.

Pelican, begging the question. 50% of the population, more or less, are men, yet when it comes to uni, 60% of that gender get to attend and just 40% of men - a gap in access of 50%. In the 70s, when the gap in the other direction was less than half that, it was cause to introduce policies to encourage women's participation. Those policies continue today, even though women are in the majority.

I suspect that if the positions were reversed, you'd be quite exercised about it, no doubt waxing lyrical about the lost opportunities for those women who don't get to go to uni. Of course, the boys are just boys, they're not missing out on anything, after all, some men are in charge of some things...

If the trend in higher ed continues, within a few years universities will be man-free zones, by and large. I can't see why anybody would think that's a good thing, but i guess that's why I don't understand feminists.

Ah well, I've tried to get some decent conversations happening, but you lot only want to talk in circles about religious issues. Come to think of it, that's the same way you look at feminism.

God be with you, but I'm not going to bother any more. GrahamY, please remove my log in, I won't be back. There's simply no one worth talking to here.

Grahen y just in case you missed antiseptics plea for help, it said please remove my log in, there is no one here worth talking to.

Dear Anti,

Oh Dear. I'm sorry that my remark has upset you so greatly
however it was intended merely as a question to broaden
the topic of your thread and try to view things from a
broader perspective. I found your point of view rather
a narrow way of looking at things only from a very limited
point of view. You can't expect on a public forum such as this
one that people are not going to challenge what you say. And
you should not continue to blame everything on "feminism."
That's not logical. It would be just as silly if we were to
blame everything on male chauvenism. Labelling people does
not make for good discussions. As for why - there are more
females than males pursuing higher education today - there
could be a variety of reasons. You'd have to do more of
a breakdown of the stats. For example - Faculty by faculty.
Are there more females in science, engineering, medicine -
would be a good place to start. Also, on the whole, a
higher education credential means higher earnings. Our society
now encourages the gender roles to be more flexible - and
gives both sexes wider choices - and the reasons for people's
choices vary.

Anyway, I hope that you will re-think your decision to quit
this forum. If you don't, I wish you well and hope that you
will find someone who you can find "worth talking to,"
somewhere out there in the real world. But remember, in order
to have a conversation, it has to be more than just the sound
of your own voice. You actually have to be prepared to hear
what the other person is also saying and respect their point
of view. They may not always agree with what you have to say.

I think the whole thing is governed by the universities, & their business model.

They have moved to a different place today. Rather than science, engineering & other heavy stuff, they are moving more into the froth & bubble subjects. There has been a huge explosion in the numbers of feely touchy subjects & students.

These are the cheaper subjects to teach, & obviously the easier to pass, so it suits both participants, student & institution.

Subjects that are worth while, such as nursing, even if it is doubtful it belongs in a uni, are spun to take years longer than they should, to keep the money rolling in, & probably the kids off the street.

Thus we get lots of "social work" type stuff, cheap to teach, easy to pass, & with nice government jobs waiting. It is about as hard as many high school graduates can handle any way.

Boys won't touch the stuff, & the things they do want are hard, so many squib out.

Even at the other end, the same goes. The 17 year old labourer sticking up plasterboard in that new house, over the electrical wiring job done by a 17 year old apprentice, is being paid 4 times the apprentice wage, & no hard work studying.

I doubt if even 25% of uni graduates could handle the math in an electrical apprenticeship, particularly the ladies, & that includes many that have a "science" qualification.

Higher education has become a voracious beast, consuming billions, & giving back very little in return.

Come on Anti, no good throwing tantrums get ya pen out and start scribbling. We want to hear from you.

How come my post didn't get any backing, some kids are forced to keep going with education, You do not need that sort of information to go into trades. I was apprenticed at 16 and never worked outside of my trade in my whole working life. When you are apprenticed your schooling part, is relevant to what you need for that particular trade. I would not fancy starting an apprenticeship at 20.
The higher education of old blue, remember that song. He ended up smarter than his master. He could read the financial times, smoked a pipe, played the stock market.