{"word_count": 2529, "character_count": 16270}
We begin our series of notes on the Atlas démographique de la profession vétérinaire with the question of the feminisation of the veterinary profession. An age pyramid is a useful starting point for the analysis of the profession's sociodemographic dynamics. Not only can we see that women represent almost half of French veterinarians (48,6%), but they also represent the vast majority of newcomers to the profession: more than 75% of veterinarians under the age of 30 and 67% of those under 40.The feminisation of the profession is thus shown to be both a state (almost half of the members of the professional Order) and a current dynamic. This is nevertheless a recent phenomenon. Let us take a closer look at this evolution and its consequences.1/ The feminization dynamicNewly registered veterinarians by sexThis diagram shows new veterinarians registered with the Order since 1985, by sex. It is clear that female vets (in yellow) have been in the majority since the beginning of the 2000’s and that the proportion of women joining the profession has continued to grow. This dynamic is even more remarkable in that the veterinary profession has long appeared to be an exception among self-employed professions in France, as R. Hubscher has pointed out: “in 1975, women represented 52.4% of pharmacists, 29.2% of dentists, 27.2% of medical professionals and just 5.6% of veterinarians” (Hubscher, 1999, page 347). Despite significant growth in numbers in the 1970’s, women only represented a quarter of veterinary school intake in 1980, and half during the 1990’s. Since the beginning of the 2000’s the percentage of female vets has continued to increase, with women making up between 2/3 and 3/4 of veterinary school graduates.Very similar evolutions can be found in other western countries. In 1970 in the USA, 8% of veterinarians were women, rising to 50% in 2008. Just like in France, the majority of students in veterinary schools are now female: 80% women and 20% men in 2008 (Irvine and Vermilya, 2010). M. Surdez’ article on the case in Switzerland notes that while women represented 31% of veterinarians in 2000, this proportion stood at 40% in 2006 (and at 80% for vets under the age of 30) (Surdez, 2010). The feminisation of the veterinary profession would thus appear to be a huge and rapid phenomenon that is not confined to France alone.Analyses of this evolution also agree. Concerning France, R. Hubscher highlights the reluctance of both the rural world and the profession itself to accept women. Up until the 1990’s, farmers and veterinarians put forward the argument of women being physically weak and too fragile for a job that was essentially rural and which focused on large animals. The historian also underlines the misogyny of the professional elite, who for a long time refused to accept women into unions, professional bodies or teaching organisations, even as late as the 1970-80’s. For example, he mentions a 1979 article which recommends that women who had graduated from ENV’s (French national veterinary schools) should look after the secretarial side of their veterinarian husband’s business. Concerning the USA, L. Irvine and J. Vermilya describe very similar phenomena. They point out that for a long time, veterinary schools constituted barriers to entry into the profession. For various reasons female students were discouraged from undertaking this type of study: the belief that women were unsuited to scientific studies; the inappropriate nature of some aspects of the profession (certain surgical acts in particular, such as castration); and finally, the defiant attitude of farmers’ representatives and former students on veterinary schools’ boards of directors. For a very long time, school directors explained that it was reasonable to limit the number of female students because women would leave the profession for family reasons, whereas men would remain.The conclusions drawn by the French historian and by north-American sociologists explain why, even now, female veterinarians often have to justify themselves in relation to a masculine representation of the profession. The veterinary theses from our sample take account of these debates, listing the opinions (often negative) that veterinarians themselves have of this phenomenon. In 2004, for example, H. Charles raised fears concerning part-time work (issue of service continuity), the development of the salaried workforce (vs self-employed practice), women’s refusal to accept on-call duties (due to their domestic responsibilities) and, implicitly, the imbalance of retirement funds due to part-time women not making the same level of contributions as full-time male veterinarians. D. Henrio discusses two classic ideas relating to the phenomenon of feminisation: on the one hand the risk of there being a shortage of veterinarians due to more women than men supposedly leaving the profession in order to concentrate on family life ((for example, data from the Atlas shows that in 2015, 115 women aged between 30 and 39 left the profession, compared to 57 men. In percentage terms however, this means 3.1% of women as opposed to 2.7% of men from this generation of veterinarians. The gender variable does not therefore explain these early departures)); on the other hand, the imbalance in specialisations in favour of small animal practice which is more often than not chosen by women, due to their preference for caring for pets.By comparing them with the social science literature mentioned above, these theses can thus be seen as young professional women’s responses to the recurrent criticisms surrounding the phenomenon of feminisation, which are themselves rooted in the profession’s history. Nowadays, female vets often find themselves having to deconstruct the discourses that blame them for the transformation of the historical professional and economic model (i.e. that of self-employed practice) and for the disappearance of rural medicine due to the so-called “woman’s nature” which attempts to confine them to small animal practice. This note will now examine these two evolutions and discuss their (possible) relationship with feminisation.2/ Feminisation or generational effect? The issue of self-employment.63.5% of veterinarians are self-employed / Average age: 42.4 years / Average age: 49.51 yearsIn a profession where self-employment accounts for 63.5% of all veterinarians registered with the Order, thus constituting the preferred way of practising, one might wonder why so few women have chosen this option – 48% of women as opposed to 78% of their male counterparts. And whilst this difference is smaller among the higher age brackets (74% versus 87% among the over 50’s), it remains significant among young veterinarians (42% compared to 67% for the 30 to 39 year-olds) ((Percentages calculated using the absolute values provided in the Atlas)).To explain this phenomenon, we need to make a more detailed analysis, as suggested in certain medical theses in the sample, which highlight three characteristics:1/ women who become self-employed do so at a later age than men (on average around the age of 36, as opposed to 31 for men, according to H. Charles, 2004 who quotes this figure for 1999);2/ they set up their practices under conditions that differ from those of their male counterparts, less often as sole practitioners; according to H. Charles, 31% of the women in his study practise alone (2004, p. 85), as against approximately 50% for the profession as a whole in 2016 (Atlas data);3/ finally, one may witness an adjustment effect with regard to the relatively low population of female self-employed veterinarians, since just as many women as men from younger generations now become self-employed. We also find that young men are looking to better reconcile career/family life, a strategy for which the status of employee or partner is often deemed preferable (Paulet, 2011).These are all interesting avenues of research that deserve to be examined in greater depth, with data that is more representative and homogenous throughout France.In order to to explain these differences, authors often combine different analyses. Firstly, both future veterinarians and social scientists examine the issue of reconciling professional life and family life. For example, the questionnaires developed as part of their medical theses by young future veterinarians systematically include questions about household employees, who are considered to be vital to the harmonious articulation of home life and professional life. M. Surdez discusses the history of veterinary practices in Switzerland and points out that they were often based on a family business model, involving the entire family, with a large amount of “invisible work” by women. The vet’s wife put her career on hold and performed various tasks for her husband – greeting clients, manning the phone, accounting, organising home life and the children’s education. She believes that when female veterinarians open their own surgeries they need the same sort of help, but that they rarely receive it from their partners; this leads them to set up a partnership or to take on staff, thus mechanically increasing the size of their practices. Unfortunately, the Atlas data does not allow us to verify these hypotheses; in order to do so we would need data on the personnel working in the practices and on the sex of the partners; we would also have to do a more in-depth study of female veterinarians who own practices. Having talked to women vets who have set up practices, L. Irvine and J. Vermilya agree with M. Surdez’s analysis. But they also put forward the idea that women self-limit in their professional projects: they negotiate lower salaries, often predict administrative and financial difficulties relating to set-up, and tend to charge less for their services than men, thus making their surgeries more fragile and less profitable. Furthermore, women who have chosen to be self-employed often present their career paths as exceptions to the rule, due to their specific interest in questions relating to the creation of a business or to strong family models (parental in particular).Having completed this panorama, there is a feeling that more remains to be done. We would like to know far more about the career paths of women who have set up practices and those who have not, at different points in time. None of the above-mentioned research examines professional career paths or considers differences in the trajectories of veterinarians from different generations. H. Bueno’s thesis (2011), with a questionnaire of open-ended questions which led to responses in the form of delightful anecdotes, is nevertheless proof that there is room for more in-depth research in this area.3/ The "feminine nature" of small animal practice, or the specialization issueThe feminisation of the profession is also linked to an evolution in veterinary specialisation and in particular to the increase in the proportion of practices focusing on pets, at the expense of providing care for farm animals.Data from the Atlas highlights this phenomenon.Species treated / No species treated / Mixed EQ (equine) / Mixed RA (rural animals) / Mixed P (pets) / EQ / RA / P / *No species treated: missing data and practice other than animal careAt first glance, the link between female veterinarians and small animal practice would appear straightforward: 61% of female vets have practices which are exclusively small animal, compared to just 41% of men, for an average of 50.7% for the profession as a whole. Yet once again the data must be examined with care.If we add the age variable to these data, we get more nuanced results: in age-category percentage terms, whilst women always have a greater propensity for small animal practice (&#62;85%), a large majority of men in the younger age categories also work with small animals: 85% of the 20-29 year-olds and 78% of the 30-39 year-olds.Age category% of an age category working with small animals% of an age category working with farm animalsFHFH20-298785294930-398678295240-498573235150-598671224860-6981663153Global86732650These results need to be compared with a classic result of the sociology of professions: newcomers to a profession always set themselves up in its most dynamic segment. For veterinarians, this means that pets represent the most buoyant market for young professionals. Once again, this idea is coherent with an exogenous factor, that of the constant rise in the number of pets in France since the mid-1960’s. ((On this matter, the available data are essentially estimates based on statistical projections. However, if we exclude fish – which are the most common “pets” in France, but which require little in the way of veterinary care – we observe the following evolution:Date (Source)Dogs (in millions)Cats (in millions)1965 (R. Hubscher, 1999)6,57,51993 (R. Hubscher, 1999)7,68,32005 (Facco / TNS Sofrès)8,5102015 (Facco / TNS Sofrès)7,312,7We might hypothesise that this regular rise in the number of pets has led to an increasing demand for pet care, thus orienting the profession towards this developing market)).The place of female veterinarians within this global reconfiguration is particularly delicate, especially given that feminisation is sometimes deemed to be the cause of this evolution. The interviews carried out in M. Surdez’s, L. Irvine’s and J. Vermilya’s research show that female vets continue to define themselves in terms of the traditional image of the veterinarian, i.e. a man practising in a rural context. They thus question the idea that a woman’s nature is better suited to looking after pets – either accepting this notion by putting forward their inherent gentleness, or refusing it by developing the argument whereby an attraction for biology and science is more important than a love for animals. Similarly, they are obliged to justify their capacity for rural practice by explaining that purely medical qualities (diagnostic, therapeutic, etc.) are more important than physical strength – for which it is possible to seek assistance from the farmers.It would nevertheless be too hasty to conclude that the phenomenon of feminisation and the development of small animal medicine are the automatic cause of the decline in rural activity. This evolution is also due to changes in the way farm animals are cared for, especially caused by the reconfiguration of the livestock sectors (concentration of and reduction in the number of farms, in particular, and the transformation of the veterinarian’s role on the farms). So additional research is required to examine the links between the various dynamics that are currently affecting the veterinary profession. Whatever the case may be, it seems clear that the profession is undergoing huge changes, both in the way it is practised, its activity and the type of expertise it involves, and with regard to its utility and social legitimacy (because historically veterinary medicine developed as rural medicine, as a guarantor of public health policies, particularly in terms of the management of infectious diseases and of food safety). Through the issue of feminisation, the sociologists in our bibliography thus highlight and examine these wide-ranging changes.Translation by Christopher HintonReferencesCharles, Hélène (2004), Impact de la féminisation sur le statut social du vétérinaire, Thèse vétérinaire, Faculté de médecine de Créteil.Henrio, Delphine (2004), Féminisation de la profession vétérinaire : enquête auprès des diplômées de l’ENVN depuis sa création, Thèse vétérinaire, Faculté de médecine de Nantes.Irvine, Leslie, et Jenny R. Vermilya (2010), « Gender Work in a Feminized Profession The Case of Veterinary Medicine », Gender &#38; Society, 24, no 1 : 56‑82.Paulet, Valentine (2011), La féminisation de la profession vétérinaire en France : analyse de son impact à partir d’une enquête auprès des praticiens libéraux, Thèse vétérinaire, Université Paul Sabatier.Surdez, Muriel (2009), « Les bouleversements de la profession vétérinaire. Lorsque la recherche d’une nouvelle légitimité sociale coïncide avec l’arrivée des femmes », Revue d’Études en Agriculture et Environnement, 90, no 4 : 473‑98.&#160;[cite]&#160;