Question:
In another thread, M.. S.. remarked on the lack of named
female fatalities in coal mining disasters. While the small
percentage of female miners and the decreasing number of fatalities
in recent years make it possible that no women died simply on
the basis of probability, I was motivated to do a bit of research
on the gender of coal mine fatalities.
Answer:
I suspect that Nella, Guiseppa, and Andrea are the names of women, but
I'm not sure.
The memorial at http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Plains/4987/memorial.html
lists the name of Mary K. 'Kat' Counts, who died in 1983. That's the most
recent name I've discovered.
If you really want to investigate the history of women in coal mining,
you need to visit http://cass.etsu.edu/ARCHIVES/AFINDAID/a355.html
If you're really curious about the role of women in coal mining,
try googling 'coal employment project'. Incidentally, the CEP closed
shop in 1999---a lack of membership due to declining jobs in the
coal mining field was cited as the reason for the demise of the
organization:
http://www.umwa.org/journal/VOL110NO4/julycep.shtml
My conclusion is that the scarcity of fatalities among female coal miners
is a result of the small numbers of female miners and declining fatalities
in mining operations. As recent mining employment declines, the percentage
of women has probably declined also---particularly as many of the women
miners had less job seniority than their male co-workers.
I suspect you are mistaken. Not 100 percent sure about Nella, but it
seems those three are men's names in Italian. I think the visor of your
shining armor is blocking your vision of reality.
I suspect that the vast majority of so called women "miners" avoid the
most grueling, risky jobs. What is your guess, Mark?
Consider the following:
Women as a group are significantly physically weaker than men in many
ways.
Women as a group have less of a need to take on dangerous work in
order to get by in life (they can find a man to wholly or partially
provide for them in exchange for providing him a family). This point
is supported by men's vastly greater work related death rate in
almost all occupations and by men's unnaturally shorter life span.
Mining is an occupation that requires strength, endurance and the
willingness to put one's life at risk. In the face of their greater
options, why should women be as motivated as men to do so?
In fact, as evident by the their highly disproportionate participation
rate, very few women are capable of the physically demanding work of
mining and even less are willing to do it.
http://www.themilitant.com/1996/6028/6028_28.html (from Mr. F. Le Mur)
"As a result of a sex discrimination complaint that affected 153
coal companies, women miners went from being virtually nonexistent
to 4 percent of the workforce by the late 1980s. Today this figure
has dropped to less than 1 percent."
In light of these facts and the fact that women miners come from the
very narrow tail of the bell curve of all women, it is reasonable to
suppose that most of those who make it over the bar into the mining
industry do so just barely and disproportionately seek out the least
physically demanding and risky jobs within those falling under the
classification of "miner". Hence, a far greater proportion of women
than men would tend to be miners in name only (the "so called" miners).
In spite of what feminist such as Kavking would have us believe, men
and women are far from interchangeable in so many ways - even when
they are both classified as miners.
The comparative death rates to men would be a true indication of actual
relative risks born by women "miners". Now, show me the comparative
death rates. -- analog
