There are specific factors, such as the age of a company, the experience distribution/requirements, standard working arrangements (hours, overtime expectation, on-call) which are correlated with deviations from the mean.
No, people tend to be only interested in professions that are "hip" enough. Nobody is going to glamorize plumbers (even though they certainly should!).
Twice as many women were suggested they could take up a trade as wished that they were offered that opportunity .. but the article spins that as 24% weren't suggested to take up a trade.
I live in UK and was never given any career guidance, I wish a trade had been offered to me too; I'm not sure that's a difference based on sex though.
I hate the common form "these women weren't given X, it's horribly sexist" without comparison to show it was even different for men at all.
Anything to make the sale.
It's almost as if your own individual experiences are not indicative of population-level trends at large
For example:
"It's almost as if you don't understand that rudeness is about the tone instead of the content".
Or:
"It looks like you're trying to move the goalposts; would you like some help with that?"
Or:
"> 'It's not patronizing - it's pointing out a basic statistical fact' Interesting how you think the two are mutually exclusive."
Etc.
yes... yes it has :)
You could, but might face liability. Also, perhaps not a full time job but also not easy to schedule. So you'd be paying someone to sit around 90% of the time.
Even still, with all the "let's get more women in tech" stuff I read, are there initiatives to get women in the other jobs even further to the left on that graph? (largely physical labor jobs)