Women Outnumber Men in the US Workforce–What Does it Mean?

Katherine Moos discusses December’s employment data, which shows that for the second time in history women outnumber men in the U.S. workforce. The first time was during the Great Depression. Women still earn less than men, so by hiring more women employers are saving on payroll expenses.

Director/Video Editor: Taylor Hebden
Audio Engineer: Will Arenas
Research: Shir Hever
Chase Producer: Genevieve Montinar

Subscribe to our page and support our work at https://therealnews.com/donate.

** (Disclaimer: This video content is intended for educational and informational purposes only) **

The Real News is a viewer-supported media network bringing you the stories from the frontlines of the fight for a better world.

Author: phillyfinest369


49 thoughts on “Women Outnumber Men in the US Workforce–What Does it Mean?

  1. So many people are unhappy with this as the comment section say. I love this. I love women that work hard. They are my sheros. A lot of love and respect <3 <3

  2. Because most jobs are low paying, more women are having to take a job while kids are in school just to meet monthly expenses not covered by their husband's job. The alternative is losing everything.

  3. How does this video have so many dislikes? This reminds me of this garbage CNN puts out. If you tell me which employers pay women 73 cent for every dollar a man earns for the same job then please let me know. I have never been paid more than a woman in my life for the same job.

  4. What a bunch of BS by the real news Network. If retailers hires a cashier, they will get paid the same. I would like to get paid more than the women I worked with. Never seen it. The reason behind this is that industries have changed. Healthcare, preschool programs and therapy services have been adding jobs and they are mostly filled by women. Men often work in the free market and many jobs there have been lost.

  5. More slaves, more taxes. No one apart from the slave-owners win. Children are the biggest losers as being a mother is looked down upon and given up to the rulers to be brainwashed that reality is what those in power tell them and not what they see in front of them.

  6. "Women outnumber men in the US workforce" alongside "women now represent 50% of the entire population of people who are employed [aka "the workforce"] – For men to make up LESS than 50% of the workforce, so that the first phrase is true, would mean what's missing would be child labor, which isn't being considered as either male or female, and/or a category of "decline to state" when it comes to gender.
    Women at 50% + Men at (50% minus X) + X = 100%, where X is the group not categorized as man or woman (those under 18 and those of ambiguous gender)

  7. I was blown away last election when shillary was telling women to study STEM when they lay off engineers and computer programmers in favor of experts in India. I'm spending my golden years living on the street in western WA wiping my a$$ with my physics degree and decades of aerospace experience. They've been dragging 20somethings and their families here on revolving h1b visas for 20 years. Housing crisis now don't ya know? I thought it surely would end as the different parties took control but, no, every last one of them is treasonous and conquering the country from within for Israel. Lots of evidence for that. I pity the poor fools taking out student loans (which alone is evidence they are up to no good) to be hotshot engineers. I did everything right. Never In a million years would I have thought a couple orchestrated crashes and a treasonous government would steal my life's accomplishments and make me unemployable. A lot of highly educated stupid people live in WA state. But then,half if them aren't citizens so why should they care? Yes, they want woman to undercut India, they want foreigners next door so people can't organize and if you check out who's in the soup lines, its white people, mostly men. Wake up.

  8. That’s because women wanna be men and men wanna be women 🙄. Come to think of it I wouldn’t mind having a house-husband. 🥴I want my dinner on the table when I get home, my kids raised, my house cleaned, all the shopping done, the bills paid and he better not get performance anxiety! Now hang on women had to do all that AND work too…🧐. Nah a man couldn’t do it all.

  9. I enjoyed this analysis, thank you TRNN and professor Moos. I really like the solution she posed at the end of the video. We need more collective bargaining and it would be a definite advantage to the potential employee not to divulge previous work salaries.

  10. Increased financialization is to blame for unlivable wages in the USA, both male and female alike.

    Women are historically paid about 23% lower than men doing the same job.

    Gee, I wonder why women outnumber men in the us slave (labor) force?

  11. There is no wage gap. Women are privileged in America; that is why they are now outnumbering men in the work force. Women are now more educated, have more job oppotunities, yet still we have to hear this nonsense. If a woman is paid less than a man because of her sex, the company responsible is liable for a lawsuit, as it is illegal to do this.
    Women are basically worshipped in America, yet it's never enough.

  12. We've never heard anyone discuss the economic consequences of women joining the labor force en masse in the 1970s, almost doubling the amount of job applicants to employers which suppressed wages while corporations responded by immediately doubling the price of almost everything (housing, cars, appliances, clothes, etc.) knowing that there would now be two wage earners in every household. This has nothing to do with gender politics and everything to do with the basic economics of employee supply and demand.  More importantly, children are now being raised in households where both parents are absent during most of their waking hours with all the well documented negative consequences implicit in that circumstance.

    Presidential candidate Senator Bernie Sanders recently quoted studies (there are many) showing that the first four years of a child's life are the most critical in their development in terms of their physical and emotional health, sense of self-worth, and later success in relationships as well as in the labor force.  Does anyone actually believe that a nanny or a daycare center can replace the depth of love and nuanced care and support by a biological parent that children desperately need?

    Some economists remark that "women were pushed back into a subordinate position in the household after WWII" during which European and Asian manufacturing facilities were destroyed and the US became the manufacturer to the world. Wages were high due to strong employee demand in conjunction with powerful labor unions.  However, the US is now primarily a low-wages non-union service economy.

    This raises a question: since when is raising your own children a "low value" or "subordinate" job? How many working class jobs are more interesting, intellectually challenging, and more valuable than raising your own children and imbuing them with the values of empathy, compassion, social justice, and independent thinking that the left also espouses?

    To be clear, we are people who’ve strongly supported equal rights for women all our lives.  That stated, it's now clear that US corporations–not women–were the chief beneficiaries of the 70's feminist movement which encouraged virtually all women to join the labor force.  Their mistake was believing (and creating a feminist dogma that became institutionalized worldwide) that men live more "fulfilling" lives working in factories doing boring, repetitive, and often dangerous tasks, building homes, hospitals, schools, infrastructure, etc., than women were experiencing raising their children at home.  This may be true for the top 1% of male wage earners, but certainly not for the vast majority of men.

    To surmise, as a result of radical feminist dogma (as opposed to equal rights for women in every sphere of society including the labor force which we strongly support), the supply of workers increased, the demand for labor decreased, and this has benefited corporate America more than any other social and economic phenomenon.

    The cost to families (for-profit child care), communities (people relocating in large cities for work resulting in decreased tax revenues for towns, etc.) both qualitatively and financially has created a defacto caste system where class mobility has sharply declined.  Two generations of children have been raised with their parents being largely absent during most of their waking hours.  It’s worth noting that the rate of divorce increased significantly during that period exacerbating the negative effect on the children involved in fatherless homes.

    Unfortunately, the economic paradigm of the two wage earner family has become institutionalized and is now almost impossible to reverse. We realize our remarks are likely to be misunderstood or deliberately taken out of context by many, but we also believe that this is an extremely important issue worthy of discussion by women who wish to have children-and even more important for the children they wish to have.

  13. Q1: How is this phenomenon victimizing women – Take 1?
    A1: This is happening because traditional male jobs have been shipped off overseas?

    Q2: But how are women victimized- Take 2
    A2: The need for traditional women professions is increasing.

    Q3: But surely women must be exploited victims – Take 3
    A3: It’s not that simple

    Q4: But women are exploited – Take 4 … if you want to be interviewed again
    A4: Yes there is this average where 10 men make more than 4billion-10 men and 4billion women. Definitely the UN backs this, we should do something about it … and please invite me for another interview.

  14. It just means that corporations see women as more Vulnerable & "COMPLIANT" , and easier to intimidate, coerce and manipulate on the job. (Not to mention paying them 20% less with even more responsibility and time demands). And the other plus is that women are less likely to punch abusive & threatening managers in the nose. Corporations have moved since 2001 to eliminate the male energy in the workplace. It's ok on the management side, that's their theme these days. They also know that the elites own social engineering programs has given men less to lose by standing their ground because of divorce. After a man has lost what is most precious to him(family) there is not much left to threaten him with!(not to mention that 90% of the people "Going POSTAL" are MEN!)

    Whereas in the case of women, they understand that the same social engineering has saddled them with raising kids alone with the extra expenses therein, making the female labour force less likely to challenge management or jeopardize their jobs because they have to take care of their kids. And any man in the same position is also less likely to resist their demands. These are just delay tactics by corporations, The Real intent is that men where the first to be replaced by robotics and automation. So they press women into higher rolls, usually a cluster of rolls that were previously handled by multiple individuals, with even greater demands on their time(off hours as well~and because they are salaried workers, they get ZERO overtime pay and zero compensation beyond 37.5 hrs a week as well)! … That is until automation reaches the sophistication and costs lower than it takes to pay human labor that will allow corporations to dispense with human workers at all!
    This is known as DIVIDE & CONQUER! Dividings Families to conquer the Individuals…. Playing women against men leaving them to point fingers at each other, all the while, management moves ever forward to automate 100%… Sorry ladies! But you thought you were superior employees, when in reality you are just being used by corporations as a means to an end…

  15. No family nor kids are in the scope of their interest anymore. Plenty of time to earn bread and butter.
    Eat,sleep,visit toilet twice a day – that is the life!

  16. I ask you could this be part of the visible reality that women far out number men and that this is part of a over arching design? If we apply a small amount of thought towards this we noticed how justice is portrayed as a blindfolded woman balancing scales. There is another supposed goddess that rules over America named lady liberty. This is not unnoticed and no coincidence in my opinion.

  17. They can start paying for dinner

    Maybe they can be considered the aggressors in relationships

    Maybe they can start paying for alimony

    custody can go to man because women work too much

    Lol just joking this will never happen woman dont like equality they want it all….. at the cost of her child an country ( how did rome fall )….. answer men left…..

    Roma fell do too w welfare hand outside an growth
    Woman an men where working but woman want more too help out with family a children so growth started slowing down do to money going to take care of society more woman work more money gone to help family's …… with that hard workers coal steel building gradage messy jobs started to slow down less men working…… this cause grate number of men to leave to find work….. an the pookie an Chad's to stay an well do what they do best nothing but sleep around …..
    So no money coming in to the city an more money coming out of the city the dollar drop an there was nothing for no one woman left to fallow the men that where hard working……an guess what started the same shit over again

    Move out of western country if you want a family western woman about self an not the hole I have a video about this

  18. Women need to start the "Worker's PARTY> as a political block when the reps only rep the corporations. The Worker Party wouldn't need a union that doesn't do anything anymore but get in bed with their corporate golfing buddies. They've back-slapped their last WAGE.

  19. The idea that no one should have to choose between caregiving and work is plainly counter to the clearly stated U.N. agenda to move women into the work place as a means of reducing global population growth. Women who work have fewer kids. That's why they want women to work. I didn't get it until I learned that was their stated goal.

  20. Corporations know the women have to work to recieve benefits from social services and they also know they can pay them like a waitress/the very minimum with NO benefits. A TICK IN THE SIDE OF THE SAFETY NETS WHEN THEY DON'T PROVIDE FOR THE WORKERS THEY BREAK.

  21. Men are figuring out that if you have twice as much workforce, you cheapen the value of said workforce. Men are also realizing the dangers of 4th wave feminism, unconstitutional family/divorce courts and are simply walking away. With a woman's hypergamous nature, she only sees value in men who make more than her. (The 80/20 rule in economics applied to female nature, the dating app data comfirms this.) Very interesting to see a total 180 degree shift- You wanted equality, now eat that poop sandwich. We men are opting out of a raw deal.

    MGTOW for life.

Comments are closed.