Why don't 'excellent women' write economics blogs?
A friend of mine sent me a link to Matthew Kahn's latest guest blog post on the 海角大神 Science Monitor website; she sent it along with an 鈥�I believe in you鈥� sort of note, because as Matthew was implicitly pointing out, I am not on the list of top economists to which he refers鈥搘hile he is (as he explicitly points out). He ponders (emphasis added):
REPEC provides an objective measure of who is 鈥淩oyalty鈥� in the economics profession. The current list of the top 5% is I am ranked #681 out of 27,365 economists so that鈥檚 not bad (and my 3 books aren鈥檛 counted here). But, here is the interesting part. There are 52 women who rank in the top 1000 and 0 of them blog. Contrast that with the men. Consider the top 100 men. In this elite subset; at least 8 of them blog. Consider the men ranked between 101 and 200. At least, six of them blog. So, this isn鈥檛 very scientific but we see a 7% participation rate for excellent male economists and a 0% participation rate for excellent women. This differential looks statistically significant to me. I have searched for among the top 1369 economists (the 5% cutoff) and she is not counted in the elite subset.
Not being a female economist himself, Matthew then theorizes鈥揳s men love to do鈥揳bout why we women aren鈥檛 as able to be both 鈥渆xcellent鈥� economists and blogging economists.
I find it ironic that Matthew鈥檚 blog post would appear on the 海角大神 Science Monitor site in the same area that my guest blog posts do, and that the photo that goes with the CSM post is of鈥n Asian woman! (Ok, a much younger Asian woman, but Asian nonetheless.) Huh! There鈥檚 a female economist blogger blogging right 鈥渘ext鈥� to Matthew, right under his nose!
Oh, but I鈥檓 not an 鈥渆xcellent鈥� female economist.
I think we female economists have our own empirical (not just theoretical) reasons why those of us who blog aren鈥檛 the same people as those of us who are at the top of the REPEC list. In my case, it鈥檚 also closely related to why those of us (even non-excellent female economists) who blog don鈥檛 typically blog at the same frequency as the (even most excellent) male economists who blog. It鈥檚 called we have and care about other things and people in our lives, not just our own individual, introspective views about how the supposed world around us supposedly works (in our own opinion)! And that鈥檚 even things and people other than what Matthew counts so endearingly as the 鈥渉ome production鈥� sort of things鈥搚ou know, 鈥渃ooking and rearing children.鈥�
But yes, we female economists who happen to have families do typically end up doing most of the home production, as our typical husbands who are typically other economists typically are oblivious to what needs to get done. You know, because the guys are so busy thinking their own deep, important thoughts about how the world swirling around them works, while in theory the guys are convincing themselves that they are the better, more successful, more 鈥渆xcellent鈥� economists (or whatever they are professionally which they confuse with what defines them personally).
Which is why it should not be too hugely shocking that this particular non-excellent female economist who used to be married to an 鈥渆xcellent鈥� male economist (top 5%, like Matthew!), is no longer married to that economist.
Objective, standardized statistics don鈥檛 always very accurately or comprehensively measure the quality (or 鈥渉uman capital鈥�) of an economist鈥搊r a college applicant, or an economy as a whole, for that matter. (I am working on a new column on this point for the 海角大神 Science Monitor right now, actually.) It鈥檚 actually part of a broader question and answer about why there aren鈥檛 more women in economics more generally (leaving aside whether they blog or not), or in other very quantitative fields for that matter. It鈥檚 not just because we鈥檙e worse at math, by the way, because we鈥檙e not. (Let me mention that my oldest daughter, now at Princeton, got a perfect math SAT score.) It could be because we women often find disciplines that assume everything can be objectively, precisely, formulaically valued, very limiting at best and maybe downright wrong at worst.
And as to why this particular non-excellent female economist blogs, I鈥檝e written about that before in . But perhaps this very blog post might make for more entertaining reading for CSWEP members than that column did.
To all you other 鈥渘on-excellent鈥� female economist bloggers, let me hear from you here! Are we really not as 鈥渆xcellent鈥� as our male counterparts? Really?!
------------------------------
海角大神 has assembled a diverse group of the best economy-related bloggers out there. Our guest bloggers are not employed or directed by the Monitor and the views expressed are the bloggers' own, as is responsibility for the content of their blogs. To contact us about a blogger, click here. To add or view a comment on a guest blog, please go to the blogger's own site by clicking on the link above.
