Cynical: Female Economists are somewhat less likely to have been bought lock stock and barrel by conservative interests. Because, being conservative, the people corrupting the entire discipline of economics tend to snub, overlook, belittle, and otherwise just flat out antagonize professional women.
Keynes, and earlier, Marx had a much greater effect on the economic policies of the governments of the world than any politician could ever dream to attain. This was eventually noticed by the moneyed interests who are affected by said policies (IE: All of them), and the unfortunate fact is that endowing university chairs is much cheaper than buying elections. Which means that economics, as a discipline, has become a branch of political rhetoric far more than a science.
Cynical: Female Economists are somewhat less likely to have been bought lock stock and barrel by conservative interests. Because, being conservative, the people corrupting the entire discipline of economics tend to snub, overlook, belittle, and otherwise just flat out antagonize professional women.
Economists are not conservative.
In this study, 47 percent of the students classified themselves as liberal, 24 percent as moderate, 16 percent as conservative and 6 percent as radical. (Six percent stated that politics were unimportant to them.)
-David Colander, The Making of an Economist, Redux
.. Attempt this point of view shift: If you are a professional political rhetorian tasked with promoting the interests of the plutocracy, and you are asked about your political stance, which answer would increase your effectiveness at your job the most?
Now, I do not actually think most economists are that self aware. Such overt corruption is not needed to utterly wreck the discipline.
It is merely the case that economists that have theories and viewpoints aligned with the interests of the plutocracy mysteriously have far more funding to promote them, and far better job security. It is not necessary to be conservative to hold such views—you can, for example, be pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, and so on and so forth and believe in lower taxes on the rich in all circumstances with absolutely no cognitive dissonance arising.
The difference between male and female economists would then arise from the fact that the actors dispensing this flow of patronage are in fact overtly conservative, and sexist. So less of it reaches women.
Cynical: Female Economists are somewhat less likely to have been bought lock stock and barrel by conservative interests. Because, being conservative, the people corrupting the entire discipline of economics tend to snub, overlook, belittle, and otherwise just flat out antagonize professional women.
Keynes, and earlier, Marx had a much greater effect on the economic policies of the governments of the world than any politician could ever dream to attain. This was eventually noticed by the moneyed interests who are affected by said policies (IE: All of them), and the unfortunate fact is that endowing university chairs is much cheaper than buying elections. Which means that economics, as a discipline, has become a branch of political rhetoric far more than a science.
Economists are not conservative.
-David Colander, The Making of an Economist, Redux
.. Attempt this point of view shift: If you are a professional political rhetorian tasked with promoting the interests of the plutocracy, and you are asked about your political stance, which answer would increase your effectiveness at your job the most?
Now, I do not actually think most economists are that self aware. Such overt corruption is not needed to utterly wreck the discipline.
It is merely the case that economists that have theories and viewpoints aligned with the interests of the plutocracy mysteriously have far more funding to promote them, and far better job security. It is not necessary to be conservative to hold such views—you can, for example, be pro-abortion, pro-gay rights, and so on and so forth and believe in lower taxes on the rich in all circumstances with absolutely no cognitive dissonance arising.
The difference between male and female economists would then arise from the fact that the actors dispensing this flow of patronage are in fact overtly conservative, and sexist. So less of it reaches women.
Cynical, but dumb. Conspiracies get harder with size. One including most male economists would be a very large one indeed.