Re: [AGA-mcm] Women in the hobby.

["S. Hieber" <shieber@yahoo.com>]

IF you mean something simple to gater opinions, I think
that'sa good idea. If we asked female members why they
haven't come to any AGA conventions, we might find some
answers in large numbers that point to things we can do
soemthing about. We could put the question to all members
and see what the females answer.

A full blown, statistically significant survey would be
very arduous and expensive, requiring about 1,000
participants randomly (in the literal sense) selected from
the population of interest. 

The real kicker, I think is this. Why women in the hobby
got into it is probably as much or as often by circumstance
as it is for most folks. The real question is, imo, is one
directed at woman not in the hobby, "How come you aren't
interested in aquatic hobbies?".

This latter question is probably harder to answer than why
didn't woman do as well on the Law School Appitude Test in
the 70s -- because they included questions, not especially
relevent to studying or practicing law, that historically
showed lesser performance by woman than men.  (Of course,
they dropped those questions in the 80s.)

Lucikly, there are no entrance requirements nor weighted
test scores applicable for aquatic hobbies -- they even let
me in. But it makes it harder to see why them that ain't
here ain't here. 

sh
--- Paul Krombholz <pkrombholz@bellsouth.net> wrote:

> 
> I wonder if the reasons why the women in the hobby got
> into it are 
> the same, statistically, as the reasons why the men got
> into it. 
> Perhaps a survey could be done.
> 
> -- 
> Paul Krombholz in sunny, mild, central Mississippi
> _______________________________________________
> AGA-mcm mailing list
> AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
> http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm
> 

_______________________________________________
AGA-mcm mailing list
AGA-mcm@thekrib.com
http://lists.thekrib.com/mailman/listinfo/aga-mcm