I don’t completely agree with the premise of the opening post.
Some thoughts:
1. I don’t accept that STEM subjects are always inherently harder than non-STEM subjects. Academic difficulty is largely relative to the individual. I find traditional academic things like science, maths, history, languages, law (my subject) fairly easy to learn, but I would struggle with something like fine art, music or dance.
2. If you want to advance your education, just study whatever you want to study. Education has a value in its own right, independent of any immediate job or career opportunities/economic benefits it might bring. College/university can also be hell if you are studying a subject you don’t want to. Why put yourself through that? For what purpose? You’re not here to prove anything. You’re here for you.
3. In my opinion, telling people to study STEM subjects to improve their job prospects is bad advice. You are more likely to create a good impression on future employers if you have excelled at a subject you enjoy and are good at, even if it isn’t very rigorous or challenging or even particularly relevant to the job or career you have applied for. Employers generally don’t like candidates who have struggled to an average performance in a subject, even if it was more difficult and challenging. Is this fair? Not always, but put yourself in the employer’s shoes – they have to sift through candidates and make a decision. Don’t take subjects out of some misguided sense of obligation to prove you are ‘clever’ or a ‘manly man’ or other nonsense. That’s stupid. Just study what you want. That way, you will do well and opportunities will present themselves.
4. Personally, when I went to university, I took a difficult, career-relevant subject as that benefited me, however I think subject choice should depend on what your aspirations are and what suits you. I would have enjoyed history better, but I lacked anybody to give me guidance about university and what happens there and the opportunities for history graduates. I also lacked personal confidence. In hindsight, I can now see there were and are lots of solid jobs/careers relevant to a liberal arts education (i.e. history, languages, politics, area studies). For many of these jobs, a STEM degree would be less relevant, maybe even disadvantageous.
5. I also don’t accept that a STEM degree is necessary for a STEM-related career. A history graduate can be as good at computer programming or mechanical engineering as a computer science or engineering graduate, and might have better skills. I remember when I was younger, most of the top companies would recruit for technical positions based on the prestige of the university and the grades attained, regardless of subject. So a history graduate from a top university would often be preferred for a computer programming job over a computer science graduate of a mediocre institution. That might not be so much the case now, but I do think that a liberal arts degree has the advantage of keeping your options open. With the benefits of a liberal/classical education behind you, it’s always possible to then learn a STEM or trade career while working in it and maybe taking part-time courses. Your liberal arts degree will still be useful as it can be mentioned on your CV if and when you apply for management posts or want to switch into a different field.
6. Also, if MGTOW want to make things better for men generally, then we should be encouraging men who have the aptitude to go into liberal arts subjects – especially the social sciences – and enter academic posts and other influential positions, as it is these subjects that influence policy, which will in turn help shape things in the future in a way that benefits men. We shouldn’t just leave these fields open to women. That would be a mistake.
Anonymous 3 years, 6 months ago.
