A little less than a month ago, I wrote a blog post, How About A Stimulus Package For Women’s “Human Capital” Jobs?

I was inspired by a NYTimes.com piece, Where Are the New Jobs for Women? , in which Linda R. Hirshman examines the Obama administration’s proposed stimulus package and women’s place in it, saying :

“BARACK OBAMA has announced a plan to stimulate the economy by creating 2.5 million jobs over the next two years…but there are almost no women on this road to recovery.

The bulk of the stimulus program will provide jobs for men, because building projects generate jobs in construction, where women make up only 9 percent of the work force.

It turns out that green jobs are almost entirely male as well, especially in the alternative energy area.”

She goes on to suggest that the stimulus package include infusions of funds for workers, like teachers, who build our human capital.

Now, about an hour ago, Katherine Franke, has come along with an article,  Stimulating Gender Equality, posted on the Feminist Law Professors ,cross-posted from Columbia Law School’s Gender & Sexuality Law Blog, which takes Linda Hirshman to task for her position, stating that “the solution to gender-bias in the federal bailout isn’t to reinforce other gender asymmetries in the wage labor market. Sure, schools and hospitals should get ample amounts of funding in the stimulus package, but not because women work there, rather because our schools and hospitals are crumbling.”

She adds:

“The hard work we need to do RIGHT NOW is make it clear to the Obama Administration that a serious commitment to gender equality requires that they tie the funding of road construction, school rebuilding, development of green technologies – and even the financial services industry – to non-discrimination on the basis of sex and race, but also to data collection and reporting on who is getting the money. Who owns the companies that get stimulus funding, who gets hired by those companies, and what work they’re doing. Affirmative action has become a dirty word, but there are plenty of other means by which the work traditionally done by white men can be transformed into work that does not have a proper gender and racial identity. New apprenticeship programs for women and people of color who have been closed out of certain industries will be needed – particularly for those who are retooling themselves after having been laid off.”

Look, I agree with that, too. I say, why can’t we do both?  Fund the workplaces where women are now….because they are vital to our future…..and move more women into the construction trades…. because there are good jobs there which will accomplish vital goals, as well.

Starting years ago, as part of the mission of AdvancingWomen.com to level the playing field,  I was comparing wages and how fast you could rise in some of the non-traditional jobs compared to many types of low to mid-level white collar jobs.  I used to travel to colleges, particularly community colleges, presenting on the relative ease of entry, better pay scales and opportunity to rise rapidly, in jobs like fork lift operator and helicopter pilot.  I brought with me real women holding these jobs as living, breathing examples that this was a viable alternative to dead-end or low paying work.

Part of the change we need, at this moment, may be the stimulus package.  But another part of it is that women must educate themselves and understand the opportunities out there.  I guarantee that a master carpenter or a helicopter pilot will make more than most teachers. Not that they should, but they do. And this is reality we’re dealing with.

Let’s put Victorian, yesteryear thinking behind us, pull on those overalls, strap on our tool belt or our goggles and helmet and start making more money.  Having more resources can be an integral part of having a greater say over our future, which is what, I think, most of us want.