This argument has come up several times here as though it is an obvious possibility, but I have significant reason to doubt it.
In politics, it is known that women end up being given statistically riskier elections to defend - i.e. those that are the most critical ones for a political party, while also offering individuals less secure career prospects.
Why, then, is it assumed that the exact opposite must be true in medicine?
This argument has come up several times here as though it is an obvious possibility, but I have significant reason to doubt it.
In politics, it is known that women end up being given statistically riskier elections to defend - i.e. those that are the most critical ones for a political party, while also offering individuals less secure career prospects.
Why, then, is it assumed that the exact opposite must be true in medicine?