[throwaway160303]

Chill out. AnthonyMouse makes a perfectly valid and well-expressed point. Pulling a "wow" at someone else's "naive little worldview" is neither convincing nor constructive.

I don't know about a 94%/6% breakdown, but I know that if truck drivers are paid as described, by-the-mile, the workforce must skew heavily male, since pay will be higher for physically stronger individuals. It is not that women are not physically strong enough - it is that stronger people are paid more for doing this job, and therefore the people most incentivized to pick truck driving will be those who are strongest, and the upper echelons of that measure are exclusively male. Not the entire top 3.5 million that it would take to fill every truck driver job in the US, and of course some strong people will choose to do other things, and some less-physically-gifted individuals of both sexes will choose to do it despite not being compensated as well as others with the same job.

So. If 94/6 doesn't seem reasonable to you, what does?

[clevernickname]

>Pulling a "wow" at someone else's "naive little worldview" is neither convincing nor constructive.

When some people have no reasonable argument left to make, their last ditch effort is to shame the person they are arguing with for the opinions they hold.