Reddit reviews Risky Business: Genetic Testing and Exclusionary Practices in the Hazardous Workplace (Cambridge Studies in Philosophy and Public Policy)

The point I was making about software is that it had previously been perceived as woman's work, but as demand for those skills rose and became more prestigious, it quickly became a men's field. This happens in fields as well.

Schoolteacher and nurse are not lower skill jobs. Teacher need a decent working understanding of basic child psychology, as well as learning theory, not to mention the subject they are teaching. The learn as you teach model is completely inefficient, but that is largely ignored by administration who seem to think if you know how to teach one subject you can teach any subject.
As for nurses, true there are different levels, but many have as much training and education as doctors, it's just in a different area of medicine.

And, believe it or not this last point is also something that the sex positive feminists are concerned about. Men spending less time with their families only further pushes women out of the workforce. Also the stereotyping of jobs is also problematic. For example a man wanting to be a teacher for lower grades often gets suspicion thrown his way (despite the fact men are just as capable to work with children), which pushes women teachers to younger grades. I know many who were trained in high school education, but ended up in lower grades.

As for workplace safety, not much feminist can do about that. That's more a place for AI and robotics. and just to avoid the accusation that feminists are anti-robots because of the whole sex doll thing, that's largely the 'lesbian' feminists. Sex-positives are more like, dude, there are male dolls too. chill.

There's an interesting book I'm reading called Risky Business. It goes through different areas of workplace safety and shows how certain industries use improper data about biology, classifying certain jobs (paint or chemicals) as high risk for women or minorities and then stating because they don't have high risk workers then don't need worker safety regulation, which only puts men further at risk, despite that health concerns for low risk workers was relative and they are actually in high risk jobs. I know that description sound eye rolly, but it's actually quite interesting, although dated. If you see it a library, it's a decent read. It's bioethics more than feminism. https://www.amazon.ca/Risky-Business-Exclusionary-Practices-Hazardous/dp/0521422485