Rep. Jan Schakowsky (D-IL) raised eyebrows on Wednesday when she offered an unusual explanation for why fewer women pursue careers in manufacturing.

During a House Commerce, Manufacturing, and Trade subcommittee hearing titled “AI in Manufacturing: Securing American Leadership in Manufacturing and the Next Generation of Technologies,” Schakowsky suggested that the word “manufacturing” itself may discourage women from entering the field.

Schakowsky recounted a recent meeting with a manufacturing company that works to increase young people’s participation in the industry.

She inquired about the number of female students showing interest in manufacturing careers and was told that the figure was around 13%.

“You had mentioned trying to engage more women in manufacturing,” Schakowsky said during the hearing. “I’m just wondering if just the name ‘manufacturing’ sounds like a guy.”

Do you support President Trump removing illegal violent criminals from the U.S.?

By completing the poll, you agree to receive emails from Official Sean Parnell, occasional offers from our partners and that you've read and agree to our privacy policy and legal statement.

Her remarks quickly gained attention online, with many users questioning whether the terminology of the field has any actual impact on career decisions.

The statement was widely shared across social media platforms, prompting both criticism and amusement from commentators who found the assertion unusual.

While workforce participation in manufacturing has traditionally skewed male, many industry leaders cite factors such as education, career interest, and job training as primary influences—rather than the wording of the job title itself.

The manufacturing sector has long been working to increase female participation, with organizations implementing initiatives to attract and train women for careers in the industry.

According to the National Association of Manufacturers, women currently make up about 29% of the manufacturing workforce, though efforts are ongoing to increase that number through targeted outreach programs.

Schakowsky’s comments add to ongoing discussions about gender representation in STEM and technical fields, but whether the terminology itself is a deterrent remains up for debate.

The opinions expressed by contributors and/or content partners are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of Sean Parnell. Contact us for guidelines on submitting your own commentary.