'Reporting on Gender Inequality and the Recession: There's Nothing More Manly Than a Pink Slip'

Article here. Excerpt:

'Upon further scrutiny, the balancing scales on the front page just seem silly. By applying some basic business logic, one finds this story is about detriment in several ways. First, employers are more likely to lay off the top earners at their companies because they'll save more money that way. When women are doing the same job as men for less, that means women get the honor of sticking around in tough times (and often picking up the slack). Stay-at-home moms also tend to pick up the slack when their husbands lose high-powered positions, often because of their perceived willingness to take on a part-time job that might be below their pay scale.
...
Those industries that are creating new jobs just happen to be the few that are dominated by women. I'm not sure what that will mean for the post-recession job market in such industries. Perhaps men will tire of changing catheters and being abused by other peoples' children and go back to architecture and the like. Maybe they'll rise up in the ranks and become hospital administrators and superintendents. Or maybe, if we're lucky, an increased male presence will raise the perceived cultural importance of such nurturing positions, so that pay will be more commensurate with the grueling (but rewarding) work of hospice workers, paraprofessionals and the like.'