Yes

“Graduate men missing out on the jobs.” “Male arts students may never recoup.” “Men with poor arts degrees are worse off after graduating.” These are just a few headlines from recent national newspapers illustrating the extensive media attention surrounding the worrying new research on men and the “negative effects” of an arts degree. Last week The Student reported on the surprising study by Lancaster and Kent Universities, which found that young men who took an Arts degree and failing to gain at least a 2:1 were less likely to find a job than boys who neglected higher education.

So are the arts degrees now plainly regarded as a “female thing”? Student Chris Young is currently enjoying a four-year course in English Literature and Creative Writing. “I get to write my own stories and learn about popular culture. I’m doing a degree that in a subject that I am passionate about, yet when asked at a party or at a job interview, I do notice strange looks when stating my course. My flatmates tease me for doing a girls’ degree and yes my class is about 80 per cent women.”

So apparently this stigma is transcending from the classroom to graduate employment. Bahram Bekradnia, director of HEPI, agrees that “the gap that was already evident between boys and girls at school and university is continuing into the jobs market.” He pointed to forecasts that women will dominate the professions within 15 years. This plainly demonstrates that men face a more difficult entry into the professional world.

This knowledge also suggests that subject choice is more crucial for male students, an obvious assertion of sexism. Professor Ian Walker from Lancaster University supports this argument, saying that “the subjects that offer high returns [in earnings] - law, economics and management for men and all for women will continue to do so. [Whereas] social sciences, arts and humanities for men will continue to offer poor returns.”

Yu Zhu, who conducted the research at Kent University, sympathises “younger, overqualified male graduates earn no more than they would if they hadn’t gone to University." Sorry boys, doesn't look like it's a man's world anymore.

No

Heard the phrase “feminism is dead”? That men and women are equal now? In fact, male students now have it tougher than their female counterparts, according to a news story run by The Student on Tuesday 26th October. But in the search for clarity in the murky waters of gender inequality, we should question how far this is actually true. Is it a case of skewing the stats to make feminism look like matriarchy on the rampage? If one delves a bit deeper into the issues surrounding the headline “men with bad arts degrees earn less than school-leavers”, it becomes clear that women are not on top. It is rather more complicated than the headline initially suggests. It appears that men are being tarnished by the patriarchal brush that renders those with a “woman’s degree” as under-valued and, consequently, under-paid.

It may be true that male students who gain less than a 2:1 in Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences fail to earn more than their counterparts who finish school with only A-levels. I am certainly not disputing the study, by the Universities of Kent and Leicester, which researched the incomes and careers of 80,000 young people leaving college and university between 1997-2007. But to make the sweeping statement that was published in The Student: “Female Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences graduates earning up to £25,000 a year more than men, regardless of their degree level or specific subject” is a gigantic distortion of the statistics.

Male graduates continue to be paid on average 11 percent more than females, across all degree subjects. That is, male university-leavers are earning an average of £20,000 per year,  whereas their female counterparts earn only £18,000. Why such a big pay gap, you may well ask, considering the implementation of the Equal Pay Act half a decade ago? Are men better than women? Dr Robert McHenry, occupational psychologist at the University of Oxford, explains that this is not the case: “at the top end men take more chances - pull off the odd flash of brilliance - and at the bottom end they are more lazy. Women tend to be more hard-working, more conscientious.”
Catherine McGloin, a fourth year History student, explains how her degree is “more like a full time job. I’m down at the library early and back late, normally around seven or eight. I never return feeling like I’ve done enough.” As well as hammering out her full-time hours in the library, Catherine has been involved in Bedlam and The Student, and is currently editor of Retrospect, the History Society Journal. Meanwhile, her male counter-part, Alexander Lewis, spends little time in the library but rather is busy doing “army stuff”.

Evidently, the gender pay gap is not linked to how hard one works. However, the pay gap may reflect the types of work women go into; 75 per cent of women work in low-paid and under-valued sectors like childcare, cleaning, and clerical work, for example, whilst male-dominated jobs like banking and construction are paid over the odds. However, it is not just an oversight when women join the career ladder. In fact, this pay gap widens to 17 per cent - a difference of £4,000 a year - three years after graduation. Which sex has it worse, may I ask?

It seems that female students are not outclassing male students to the best jobs and being paid more for it. Quite the opposite. Male students who graduate with a poor degree in Arts, Humanities, and Social Sciences are stigmatised by society’s attitude towards “valueless” female-dominated degree subjects. It comes as no surprise, then, that these male students are earning less than male students who finish school with just A-levels. It seems that this is not a success story for feminism, but rather just another example of patriarchy, exercising its iron fist to punish what is considered the “female” and reinstate the masculine/superior, feminine/inferior dichotomy.