Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Bob Russell — Fri, 12 Sep 2014 12:19:50 GMT

I admit I did not consider the income as a major feature but in the late 70's vets were making a reasonable living even if starting pay was not great. I knew I would never get rich doing the job but would not be on the bread line.

Not so sure the same can be said for new graduates today. Poorer pay but slightly more sensible hours and less likelihood of gaining a partnership which was where the good income started.

I suspect many are more streetwise than they were especially knowing they will have £9000 a year to pay back.

I would be looking elsewhere for a career if I was planning university now!

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Thomas Johnson — Fri, 12 Sep 2014 11:29:56 GMT

[quote user="Malcolm Ness"]

[quote user="Hannah Wynne Richards"] Micheal It could be a gay man is only thinking of either supporting himself, or being an equal half of a partnership. A hetero man is still (despite equal pay legislation for nearly 30 years) thinking of being the main breadwinner, and supporting children.[/quote]

I can't speak for the gay community but I can remember the time as a hetero 18 year-old applying for Vet school. I can assure you that I was more interested in current beer-winning than future bead-winning and that any thoughts I might have had about supporting children were focussed exclusively on avoiding the scenario.

[/quote]

I would agree, I went to vet school because I wanted to be a vet, I knew I would make enough money to live on and that was about as far as my thoughts on income went, I don't remember comparing salaries of different jobs.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Malcolm Ness — Thu, 11 Sep 2014 12:36:08 GMT

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Hannah Wynne Richards — Thu, 11 Sep 2014 09:19:27 GMT

Micheal It could be a gay man is only thinking of either supporting himself, or being an equal half of a partnership. A hetero man is still (despite equal pay legislation for nearly 30 years) thinking of being the main breadwinner, and supporting children.

Wynne

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Anthony Dennison — Wed, 10 Sep 2014 18:43:22 GMT

[quote user="Michael Woodhouse"]The universities do say that their intake reflects the sex split of applicants so there must be other factors at play? Something is putting males off from applying. Is it the money? The hours?[/quote]

One thing I heard being bandied about on this topic is that with the same grades to get in to vet school, you could do medicine or dentistry and get better pay and working conditions, so schoolboys were aiming for this.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Joyce Whitehead — Sun, 07 Sep 2014 21:32:53 GMT

I researched a bit a few years ago for a talk I was doing about being a vet (and female) and found a RCVS statistic saying that actually applicants in 1949 were 70% female. I know, of course, that this would be affected by the war, but it does show that the profession has always been attractive to women. In fact, in 1949 they admitted 12% "by agreement". I know we are now above those levels but I think it has always been a profession attractive to women. I certainly agree that just increasing the grades required is not the answer as academic results are not the only requirement to be a good vet (in fact I feel in some cases it can be better to be less academic with more common sense!). Sorry for the lack of paragraphs, I'm on an ipad.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Michael Woodhouse — Sun, 07 Sep 2014 13:36:45 GMT

[quote user="SilverstarDJ"]I am not sure where the correct answer lies, but apparently I hear that statistically girls do better at A levels and are more academic - even since I've applied the grades are creeping up slowly and I have still not graduated yet - will they be asking for 3A*s in 20 years time?? Or perhaps girls perform better at interview who may now be looking for softer skills that girls may be naturally better at e.g. showing empathy more overtly? [/quote]

Insight from a current student is useful. I think you are partly right - your average 17 year old girl is more mature than your average 17 year old boy and is bound to have an advantage at interview. The universities do say that their intake reflects the sex split of applicants so there must be other factors at play? Something is putting males off from applying. Is it the money? The hours? The way the profession has shifted from hard physical farm work to fluffy bunny hugging?

The other thing not often mentioned is the number of males on the course who are gay. The percentage is much, much higher than the average - there was enough of them when I was at college to have their own society. Does a gay man's way of thinking match closer to that of the ladies? I honestly don't know the answer. Are they just keeping their heads down at 17 and concentrating on their studies and work experience?

I was also surprised how few ethnic minorities we had on the vet course.

There's a Phd in this for someone.....

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

james herriot lied — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 18:46:51 GMT

[quote user="katja wagner"]

I am a women and not offened by Martin,Anthony or Michaels comments ,but my glove size is 7.5,bloody hell!

[/quote]

Don't despair, Katja: a few years ago I was dealing with a patient along with one of the nurses (also one of my wife's friends), when I happened to notice her hands.

'Bl**dy hell' I said, 'Those are like shovels...'

She's now known to family, friends, many clients and the whole of Facebook as 'Shovel'. While she seems to be quite happy about it, my conscience never really recovered.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Mark Hedberg — Sat, 06 Sep 2014 09:08:40 GMT

[quote user="Clare Tapsfield-Wright"] Vets are like a box of chocolates, some are sweet , some are soft centred and there's a few nuts in there too .

[/quote]

This has been a week for profound insights, another winner! :D

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

No Name — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 22:39:24 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Not interested in the silly arguments but does anyone actually know why things are as they are now compared to my day when it was 50:50?

[/quote]

I actually got asked this as an interview question when I was applying to Liverpool! If my memory serves me correctly I was shown a graph showing that small animal work is more common than farm jobs (ie they asked me if I felt women were perhaps more attracted to smallies than farm etc - maybe this could be true?? ).

I am not sure where the correct answer lies, but apparently I hear that statistically girls do better at A levels and are more academic - even since I've applied the grades are creeping up slowly and I have still not graduated yet - will they be asking for 3A*s in 20 years time?? Or perhaps girls perform better at interview who may now be looking for softer skills that girls may be naturally better at e.g. showing empathy more overtly?

I suspect in the olden days there might have been a stigma attached to being a women and becoming a vet. Some of older folk have indeed asked me why on earth would I want to do a physical job that also involves rectaling cows - vet work is seen as more glamourous these days I think so I don't feel there is a stigma at all for either gender. I've also heard that in the past unis could discriminate against women and did so (though I assume that must have been a very long time ago).

It's probably a combination of factors & and interesting point to ponder.

-------------

[quote user="Bob Russell"]

Is it because more women expect to leave the profession at an early stage?

Do men choose other courses because they will not accept the pay and conditions?

[/quote]

From my female peers I don't think any of us are anticipating leaving the profession so far, I don't think that is a great factor; I doubt it is something most 18 year olds would consider. I don't think you set your heart on something and then decide to drop it early on.

Equally regarding pay and conditions, perhaps this is more concerning for women who wish to have a family but find it hard to fit in childcare with unsociable working hours?

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 19:45:18 GMT

[quote user="Clare Tapsfield-Wright"]Vets are like a box of chocolates, some are sweet , some are soft centred and there's a few nuts in there too .[/quote]

Now there's a starter for a whole new thread.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Clare Tapsfield-Wright — Fri, 05 Sep 2014 19:43:12 GMT

I'm female , been a vet for 36 years , have children , was a practice owner, five months maternity leave for each son, worked nights and weekends . It's hard work but it's rewarding and it's possible but it's a personal choice . I think the benefits and rewards of practice ownership are not that obvious to young vets now .one of my greatest pleasures was telling Rottweiler clients that my practice didn't dock tails on principle and it was my practice and my choice . Employment benefits are so much better now that the attraction of owning a practice and the honour of being invited to become a partner seem less important now. Things have changed , some for the better , some for worse . Vets are like a box of chocolates, some are sweet , some are soft centred and there's a few nuts in there too .

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Anthony Todd — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 18:18:41 GMT

Martin, my old combatant, retire gracefully, you are just getting yourself deeper and deeper into the doo-doo.

And blokes, in these circumstances, don't help, they either go and watch Arsenal getting thrashed or to the pub; they won't help you mate.....

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:49:44 GMT

Don't be ridiculous Martin

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:45:53 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]You aren't doing the school run because you're better at [/quote]Now we're getting a good sexist argument. I did the school run and I can categorically say that then and now when the yummy mummies in their Chelsea tractors still wreak havoc on the roads and I take my life in my hands as I cycle to work that I was better at it! Even my elder daughter says that she is being a traitor to her sex but men are generally better drivers than women. Mind you I did teach her to drive!

Takes cover from brickbats

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:22:58 GMT

Liz....your domestic arrangements are due to reasons of your own, but NOT due to your sex. You aren't doing the school run because you're better at it, and I assume your husband isn't better at his job than you are at yours. Your choices are due to lifestyle, finance, type of job etc. They are NOT due to your gender. If you had chosen not to get married or have kids, your current situation would likely to have been very different. I accept that lifestyle choices will influence our skill set and our choice of job. I do not accept that my ovaries prevent me being as good at my job (or indeed better at it.)

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:08:59 GMT

[quote user="Bob Russell"]Men and women are equally bright, make equally good (and bad) vets IMO so it is nothing to do with skills. [/quote] Where have you been living for the past 30 years Bob? Things changed when James Herriot popularised and glamorised the veterinary profession and the numbers applying to university for vet school multiplied exponentially. Whether it is true that men and women are equally bright is another argument but statistically girls are brighter at the critical point at which they are taking their A levels. Boys have caught up and even overtaken by the time they are taking their degrees but by then it is too late as the courses are all filled with girls who achieved 4 A*s.

Your day was obviously after mine because then it was 4:1 boys to girls and I got in with A,B,D.

As for the other points I think they are lot more debatable and largely already covered in this thread.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Liz w — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:05:39 GMT

Besides, everyone knows that all men are useless at childcare and housework...

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Liz w — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 17:03:07 GMT

Gillian, You have mentioned in the past that you and Ian have shared time off looking after the kids, but that's because you are both vets and both the employers. In other professions it isn't that simple. I'm not being a 1950s housewife by taking on the majority of the childcare. It's just that if I didn't, my husband wouldn't be able to do his job, and his paid more than mine.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Martin Atkinson — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:55:37 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]What year is this again[/quote]It doesn't matter whether it is the first day mankind climbed out of the trees or the last day of humanity on earth the fact is that we have evolved to live in a society in which women bore and raised children and performed domestic chores around the cave while men were making spears to go out hunting woolly mammoths and fight the local tribe. Civilisation is too recent for the basic physiology to have changed however much you would like to think it has although it might have fine tuned things a little. Accept the fact that however politically correct and androgenistic you are this is irrefutable. Women are better at some things men better at others.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Bob Russell — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:47:15 GMT

As the thread has changed to men v's women does anyone actually know why the gender balance for the veterinary course is so female oriented?

Men and women are equally bright, make equally good (and bad) vets IMO so it is nothing to do with skills.

Is it because more women expect to leave the profession at an early stage?

Do men choose other courses because they will not accept the pay and conditions?

Both suggest the battle of the sexes is raging as much as ever. Expectations of the male as the breadwinner still rules/

Not interested in the silly arguments but does anyone actually know why things are as they are now compared to my day when it was 50:50?

Bob (Hand size 8)

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Evelyn Barbour-Hill — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:42:57 GMT

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]

[quote user="Evelyn Barbour-Hill"]

Ah, that would be why so few women are musicians or artists.

[/quote]Hmm....I'm trying to think up an answer for this one but the best I can come up with is that playing musical instruments is a different type of motor skill which doesn't require hand-eye coordination and most famous artists are in fact men (although admittedly that might be more to do with prejudice than physiology).

[/quote]

Well, of course most needlework has always been done by men.

[quote user="Martin Atkinson"]Anyway why are you are the girls side? [/quote]

Bus shelter graffito:

"I like grils"

Next day:

"You mean girls stupid"

Next day:

"Hey what about us grils?"

O, the old ones are still the best

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Hannah Wynne Richards — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:42:19 GMT

Where Prime Ministers are concerned, one could say "quality over quantity."

Wynne

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Gillian Mostyn — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:38:44 GMT

Michael.... We have only had one female Prime Minister. The USA has never had a female President. I guess men make better leaders then.

Just because a job is dominated by one sex doesn't mean they are automatically better at it.

Re: Article in Dogs Today Magazine

Thomas Johnson — Wed, 20 Aug 2014 16:36:32 GMT

[quote user="Gillian Mostyn"]

Stunned. Just stunned. I can't believe what I'm reading. 'Women are more careful than men'. 'Men have better motor skills'. 'Women struggle to work cos they have to do the school run'. 'Women are more caring'.

Really????? What year is this again????

[/quote]

I agree, it does make for very odd reading, there's a nice review here:

http://www.apa.org/research/action/difference.aspx