So what are you suggesting then? If you had a million dollars to spend on whatever project you want, that should further women’s opportunities in the work place, what would that be?
A large part of your argument appears to rest on the premise that future work will require more emotional intelligence, which is something at which women supposedly have an inherent advantage, so we shouldn’t push them towards STEM subjects, because it’s a futile endeavor anyway.
The first fault I take with this assumption is that calling the demise of software engineering is a tall order in itself. But maybe I am not qualified to judge that, so let’s just assume it is true.
But what would prevent men from claiming these new and emerging jobs then? You can’t believe that thousands of years of (white) male dominance would suddenly crumble because the world realizes that woman are better at jobs that require more emotional intelligence.
Sure, in a perfect world we’d push women towards the “jobs of tomorrow”. But we don’t know what these jobs will be. If we promote e.g., HR-related jobs and that whole idea of programming being done by machines doesn’t work out, we’ll have solidified the perception that women should stick with subjects that cater to their strengths and, at the same time, pushed them towards jobs that are still not considered cream of the crop. Is that a risk we’re willing to take?
I’d rather break up the perception that certain fields of work are not suited for women (e.g., STEM subjects). It is my hope that this can show humanity that any job can be fulfilled by any gender.
On an unrelated note, I think articles like this would really benefit from data. It’s apparent that you do not believe that the situation of women in the work place has improved significantly. That our efforts so far were either misguided or plainly ineffective. I would be really interested in a couple of studies that either support or scrutinize this. An extremely cursory search shows e.g.: http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/statistical-overview-women-workforce or http://www.economist.com/node/15174418
Wouldn’t more women in mid management indicate that we’re on a good trajectory and that it simply takes more time for them to enter the highest paid jobs?