How will the feminist plan of limiting men going into STEMs help women?

[Common Sense]

Limit males or not, women are now free to go into STEMs. I don't see how limiting males will create more opportunities for females.

If feminists want more women to go into these fields, why don't they limit their efforts to encouraging more young women to go into these fields. Why are they so hell bent on limiting opportunities for males?

If we cut the number of males to be proportional to females and all of a sudden there are only 1/3 the number of U.S. students taking STEM courses, what will the results be? Will this affect the market place? If males are not allowed to take the courses they wish to pursue, will this lower even more the number of males going onto college?
Feminists are pushing for a proportionality rule much like we see with sports to be placed on colleges. As with sports and the recent sexual assault change, a college not complying would be a title ix violation.

http://alfin2100.blogspot.com/2012/07/ob...to-us.html

http://www.eagleforum.org/publications/e...ience.html

Funny how feminists and feminist supporters argue so hard for such policies, and then deny it.

[708]

It will ensure the establishment of a feminist welfare state a substitution of patriarchy with feminist matriarchy...

Here is a link on the concept of a feminist welfare state:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toward_a_Fe..._the_State
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminist_ma...th_century

To conclude their biggest mistake is to base the push to increase women on numbers rather than on individual merit...had they gone for individual merit and guaranteeing equal opportunities regardless of distinctions ...they would have no opposition today.

In any case this cannot stand for long ...as governments and politicians come and go and so do social reformist movements...

EDIT : LEO ...you are entitled to your opinion and so am I without the utilization of insulting epithets of course....and if you want to put across your point then substantiate it with credible links rather than mere frustration....

[marcus]

This specific plan, by a specific (I assume, I'd need a link to see who you're actually talking about, as I have no idea where you're getting this) group is rubbish, clearly.

Ascribing it to 'feminists' as though every single feminist everywhere supports it is also rubbish. 'They' are not hellbent on limiting opportunities for males, because there is no monolithic group of feminists coming up with these initiatives.

Efforts are being made to encourage young women to go into these fields (see source). I agree with you this is the proper way to accomplish this goal.

ADD: thank you for the link - it would have been helpful to include it at the start. I note the blog entries date from 2012 - has there been any progress on actually implementing these proposals in the intervening 2 years, or has - shock, horror - a politician said something and then largely ignored it? Again, I note you say 'feminists' instead of actually naming a group or individual who wants this proposal to be taken up. That remains an unhelpful and misleading impression.

[Resistevil]

False premise based, probably, on some stereotypic manufactured illusions about feminism. Advertising works.
FYI, feminism is about achieving as much equality as possible between genders. It is NOT about limiting males.

[Elana]

It will somewhat increase the relative salaries of women overall to men overall.

It will also, I suppose, make sure there are more female engineers developing products for female users.

Of course, it will also shift the number of men graduating from college from 40% to probably under 30%. The inevitable increase in social unrest is unknowable at this point. All those undereducated unemployable highly armed buckets of testosterone bring visions of the Middle East.

Since the women will be less qualified then the men they are replacing, presumably engineering will take a small hit, though I have to think that increasing the variation of engineering work forces generally will be a win for everybody other than the actual talent.

The line of reasoning, however, is appalling - why are we giving women handouts when they are already 60+% of the college graduating community. Will they not stop until they are 100%?