donderdag 17 december 2009

Bryan Caplan zijn 'Laboreconomics'klas

Hier vind je een overzicht van alle lessen.

Mijn oog viel op de les 'Economics of the family'.

Why the Standard History of Gender is Wrong

A. My take on the standard history of gender: Throughout human history, males arbitrarily forced women into a subordinate role. At long last, feminist thinkers began "raising awareness" of the plight of women. Through great struggle, women are at last - like men - able to pursue their dreams and ambitions, though of course full equality is still a long way off.

B. Why it's wrong:

1. The dating and marriage market has always been competitive. The only historical change involves ownership: Does a women own herself, or does her father own her?

2. The traditional family structure was technologically necessary for most of human history assuming women wanted to have children. An overwhelming majority did.

3. Family structure changed because technology reduced the burden of household production, and because families decided to reduce their number of children.

4. Technology also narrowed the male-female ability gap by de-emphasizing physical strength.

5. This for the first time made it feasible for women to have both careers and children.

6. Women broke into the business world quite rapidly considering the size of the change. Supposed "discrimination" reflected and continues to reflect real group differences.

7. Except for women who forego child-bearing, differences will persist until reproductive technology radically changes.

8. Women probably do face some statistical discrimination, but in the absence of regulatory burdens, women could contract around these. For example - penalty clauses for pregnancy enable women focused 100% on work to show how serious they are.

9. Feminist norms function as price controls in the marriage and dating market. "Raising awareness" has often been counter-productive insofar as it matters at all.

Ik zie niet echt problemen met 1 van deze visies. Jullie?

Geen opmerkingen: