News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺
(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures
(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)
Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee
Large difference in employment rates between men and women!
If you compare the employment rates in EU regions, you will notice that the female employment rates still lag behind the male rates in most of the regions.
The EU has set a policy target in this area of halving the gender employment gap from 11.7% in 2019 to 5.8% by 2030.
The green regions shown here are those that have already attained the target.
Source: Eurostat
Interesting that in Germany the East-West divide is very much visible, with the progressive womens role in the former GDR still resulting in good employment rates for women today, whereas countries like Poland with a strong ressurgence of catholicism fare much worse.
all the green areas in Germany have lower GDP than the yellow parts same with the green part in the Rheinland. And Berlin has a much higher GDP than the surrounding areas and is yellow. I don’t think it’s solely an effect of socialism.
Why would a lower GDP be indicative of more people working? wouldnt it be the other way round.
Also the social infrastructure in many areas of western Germany is terrible. Many friends of me said that it was simply impossible to get a daycare for the children, or daycare was only until 1 pm and no lunch so the mother had to be at home cooking and could only work part time.
Maybe lower GDP could also cause that the salaries are lower and thus families can’t afford to live on one salary.
This is the difference, not the employment rate. So maybe they're more equally unemployed. Maybe men have a higher unemployment rate generally there, bringing them down to meet the women's rate.
True but what is the connection between higher GDP and women not working? Also what green part in Rheinland? Berlin could be explained by higher ratio of immigrants and their different family structures.
I question the assumption behind this map, which is the idea that men and women must have work at the same rate and anything else is an aberration that needs to be addressed. The issue is more subtle than that.
I'll speak from the perspective of a father who quit his job to raise his small children, knowing that it is complete career suicide (I worked in tech).
In my view a problem occurs when somebody wants to work and is unable to, as well as when somebody wants to quit working and is also unable to do so. And while there are some general trends where for example women often quit (paid) work for a few years to raise their families, that is only a problem when they would rather not, but this simplistic map (and narrative) doesn't shed any light on that.
Likewise, how many fathers out there would love to raise their small kids but don't because they know they will be destroying their careers to a degree that their female peers will not? This map does capture this issue, but the simplistic narrative that women sacrifice their careers to raise their children does not, when in practice the damage to their career is much less than a man doing the same thing.
Want a useful map? Poll people to find out why they are working instead of quitting, rather than having preconceived simplistic assumptions about what "is right".
Even if I just accept your claim about men taking a worse career hit for leaving the workforce to raise their children…
Why are men taking a worse hit? Sounds like some kind of social injustice.
“You woman will take less of a career hit than I, so you should be the one to stay home and I’ll continue my career”
Why are men taking a worse hit? Sounds like some kind of social injustice.
I obviously agree, since it affects me personally. But the prevalent narrative around the employment gap is centered about how it affects women, ignoring how it affects men as well, and I'm trying to offer a more complete view.
Jup, it's pretty bad for all who do not conform to the social expectation.
When a woman has a five year employment gap she is normal. If a man has a five year employment gap it's suspicious. Saying "I raised my kids" should ideally be enough to justify it, but nevertheless that's five years of experience other men have.
(This is incidentally also the largest factor of the gender payment gap. Both sexes are paid almost the same until children get into the picture. Most likely the woman will stay home and lose years of experience that their partner will get.)
Are you nuts? Women take a massive hit to their careers just for having the potential to take time to have babies.
Let's make a different assumption. Let's assume equal rates of desire for taking time to be with family among men and women. You would then see equal rates of employment between men and women. This map shows that's not true and so if my assumption is true then there's a problem for both genders.
Just fuck colorblind people in particular.
i mean. Who the fuck has thought:" yes thats a perfect contrast for the two sides of the scale"
Sorry for your blindness but green to red are very standard range colors for numerous things. Weather, heatmaps, elevation... What do you do for those?
What do you do for those?
I complain about them.
We are living in the year 2023.
Colorblind friendly palettes are not non existend.
https://davidmathlogic.com/colorblind/
Eurostat is an agency doing plots as their business. Professionals should think about coloring.
Sorry for your gender gap but it is very standard for numerous things: employment, academic success, life expectancy... What do you do for those?
Talk about it so that people are aware of the problem and do something about it.
Thumbs up. Thanks for the reminder.
Just curious, but do the filters found in accessibility on most phones work at all to visualize this type of graphics?
Based on my experience...
No.
I dont really know why. But the thing is those filters tend to "stretch" the colorspace to make the blind colors visible.
However what would really be necessary is to create contrary contrasts.
Is this EVERYONE who is unemployed, or everyone who is seeking employment but is currently unemployed?
According to the subtitle, this map shows total employment rates irrespective of any other factors.
So, a very misleading map. Why calculate "gender employment gap" based on "how many people are working" without factoring in anything else?
Because it is a good way of measuring gender equality. Basicly it shows how many women stay at home as housewives. Also it takes age into account, so women just living longer and therefore being a majority of pensioners is not an issue.
How does it measure equality though? Like, what does being a housewife have to do with equality? Are you assuming that the majority of housewives in Europe actually want to be something else?
The majority of nurses are women for example. But is this because men are being discriminated against, or that men simply don't study nursing as often as women? Coming to equality arguments via a single statistic paints wrong pictures.
When you are a housewife you do not earn your own money and are depandend on your husband. That is also true for pensions, which often are paid out to the person, who actually did earn money. So if the relationship is in trouble, housewifes have a much harder time leaving their husbands then women who work. That means the relationship is naturally unequal with the husbands being in the stronger position.
Basicly you have to reason for that. One is outside forces. If men have an easier time finding jobs, then you have this situation. On the other hand it is how traditional a country is and well that only has indirect consequences on gender equality.
But I still find it fair to say that men do love their children, actually want to spend time with them and are perfectly capable of doing housework. No reason to presume husbands should be less willing to stay at home then women all other things being equal.
So if the relationship is in trouble, housewifes have a much harder time leaving their husbands then women who work. That means the relationship is naturally unequal with the husbands being in the stronger position.
Is that true? In developed countries parents who are the primary caregivers of children do not only get 50% of the assets in a divorce, but they also obtain alimony and financial support for their children, all paid for by the other parent. Even when both parents are working, the majority of judges give child custody to the mother.
In addition to that, there are women's shelters to cater specifically to women. Can you find even a single men-only shelter in your town, or a governmental agency that caters specifically to men in similar situations?
In other words, on average it is less difficult for a mother to divorce than for a father.
In the dark green areas are there more women employed than men?
Yes.
the female employment rates still lag behind the male rates
I hope this is not seen as "women do not work as much as men" or it ignores unpaid care work:
Countries that do not have enough childcare facilities, such as kindergartens and schools that do not end in the middle of the day, rely on women not working full time. The same goes for care for the elderly and disabled, and then there is unpaid community work. On top of cultures that still think men should not do any care work or household chores.
Green countries do a lot to enable women to go to work full time, but still rely way too much on women accepting more of unpaid care work on top, than men. COVID was overcome a lot by putting even more unpaid work on women's shoulders, when childcare facilities and schools closed, it also showed how many families were relying on grandparents to take care of the children when these had to be protected and could not do this care work anymore.
Germany ist still divided, because in the East the women were very much needed as workers, so the DDR provided close by, free childcare facilities for every child, school was the whole day and they gave women one day of the month free from work because they realized they did more care work than the men and needed time for that too (it was a dictatorship and childcare was also used to indoctrinate the children, not painting the DDR in good light here, just looking to explain the divide), women also had good chances on the career ladder ...
In the West in the long years of the CDU being in the government, there was still the idea of you being a bad mother if you do not stay at home, childcare wasn't made available as much as needed and school ended mid day for most schools, not to mention not enough done to give woman equality in the work environment, but given a lot of incentive for women to be stay at home mums. Now the same party wants more women to work full time because our industry suffers and of course there is no word about their part in it being the way it is.
But why is women’s employment the variable here? Why are women supposed to take the role of unpaid care workers.
They aren't "supposed" to do it, but currently are doing it and I do not see it changing. I am 57 years old and it has barely changed over the last 50 years. So I want to make sure that the situation as it is is seen when looking at this map. I am all for equal care work for all genders, I always was, but most of the time it is only about "how do we get more women in full time jobs" and not equally about "how do we get men to do equal amounts of care work".
Fair. While the focus hasn’t been on getting men to do more care work, I think that area has improved quite a bit… seemingly due to the push for higher female employment.
On the other hand, there’s the issue of general life affordability. Most families in the US require both parents to work to get by. This has been touted as a great social progress, but it’s also a great economic step back. I don’t think everyone’s idea of eutopia is 100% employment….
I’m not really sure that we should be inferring much based on the results on this map. It seems reasonable to me to make an argument that locations with a higher degree of religiosity tend to have less women in their workforce. Is that a problem for those people? I don’t know, I’m not them.
My personal beliefs about the workforce have jack-shit to do with what’s going on in highly religious countries.
It’s not a problem if it’s a choice, but the question becomes whether it really is a choice.
Is it a choice if financial support means it is not possible to be equal without personal sacrifice. Is it a choice if there is societal pressure to conform. Is it a choice if male salaries are higher in general, and then self perpetuating. Is it a choice if there is no access to affordable or free childcare. Is it a choice if the father has no right to take parental leave?
Is it a choice if women are not allowed to drive, like in Saudi Arabia? Is it a choice to wear the burqa or niqab, like in Iran?
We shouldn’t confuse choices made under the guise of religion with personal choices people would make if religion wasn’t imposed in them. Sure, some would choose either way, but a more equitable society is a more free society. Some more religious countries used to have no divorce, so domestic violence persisted. People “chose” to stay with their abuser. When separation and divorce was legal, many chose to leave.
Does it account for maternal leave? What about part time employment?
Interesting, that Tyrol is the best state in Austria, even tho it's the most catholic and conservative one
A bit of number play:
Assuming men work continuously between the ages 20 and 64, and all women do so as well, except for a short time where they do not work at all, then 5% of unemployment means 26.4 months of not working. That's just over two years of difference in working time in this age range. A reasonable time to stay at home due to pregnancy and baby care in my opinion.
You're still employed for those times though you are just on leave from work.
Why are you assuming it should only be women who take time off work due to child care? Sensible countries have equal parental leaves for both parents.
Personally I think the solution is obvious. We need to provide care workers with income because it's a fucking job (and a half)