I know. I've seen their equality-index methodology. But I'll be fair. The people making these things don't believe them. They know they are lying.
But a whole lot of people either don't have the time and energy to dig into these things or just don't have the capacity to understand what they are seeing. They may not believe that it's equality when women are privileged, but they don't see this privilege because it's hidden behind an asterisk and fontsize 3 under the point methodology.
So, even though women dominate teaching numerically, they cluster heavily at the lower grade levels, ie they're glorified babysitters who struggle to teach adult level subjects.
It's only inequality if there's less women than men.
Unironically, they believe this.
I know. I've seen their equality-index methodology. But I'll be fair. The people making these things don't believe them. They know they are lying.
But a whole lot of people either don't have the time and energy to dig into these things or just don't have the capacity to understand what they are seeing. They may not believe that it's equality when women are privileged, but they don't see this privilege because it's hidden behind an asterisk and fontsize 3 under the point methodology.
Imp, why are you capable of noticing statistical patterns involving people groups but only when it specifically involves women?
If you see a fat, female teacher, odds a good she works at the elementary level.
We won’t have full diversity until 100% of teachers are women.
So, even though women dominate teaching numerically, they cluster heavily at the lower grade levels, ie they're glorified babysitters who struggle to teach adult level subjects.
They really get em young. Gotta indoctrinate them early.