|
|
|
|
|
| | Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?Page 4 of 10 (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10) |
And the child-rearing thing? What has that got to do with being in mathematics? I think if you stay home with the kids for three years it affects your promotions (and it should), but not your interests.
I was originally responding to Scorpio, who was retelling the results of a study he read years ago that said that women turn down promotions because it would make it difficult to take time off to have a family. His statement did not relate to any field, but if scientific careers are more demanding than, say, a regular office job, then, yes, it does relate to why some women might not choose a career in science. I didn't mean that women don't continue to have an interest in a particular field because they choose to have children, but simply that they make career decisions based on their home life.
Someone else mentioned that academe lends itself well to families. Not always; from what I know research departments are heavy into bureaucracy. Grant applications are a real pain in the ass, since fewer and fewer grants are being distributed by the agencies. Doctorates end up with grad students to mentor, which means watching over their experiments and reports, they teach, they do their own research, they write articles reporting their research, and they peer-review the work of others. In addition to that, people in science tend to travel, as they sit on numerous committees, make presentations at conferences and do fieldwork. Everyone I know in research is a very high performer. Some are women, and, yes, it does mean that they are busier than other moms.
But math is not boring to me. I especially loved algebra and problem solving in highschool. I still remember in grade 9 competing with one of the guys to see who could get the highest mark in the class. It was always between the two of us, and I'm proud to say that by the end of the year I beat him. Now I love to use spreadsheets to cost out projects and create reports with embedded equations.
Science is so broad that you can hate some disciplines and be passionate about others. So to say science is boring is probably more an indicator that you haven't been exposed to all there is out there
Enough babble for tonight | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/9/2009 6:34:37 PM | | I haven't read the whole thread, but I will offer a reply to the original question. My youngest daughter considered research science. Her research into the field revealed that as a woman, she would likely never head her own projects. She couldn't see herself being someone's assistant forever. She opted to explore her interest in history instead. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 1:15:24 PM | Hey kids. Holy crap. What I can offer is my observation from college. I met a lot of women who had decided they "weren't good" at math and/or science (largely math). And yes this is a cultural problem (or phenomenon however you want to look at it). And yes I use the word decided, or it might be better to say mistakenly believed. A lot of these women were clearly intelligent and fully capable and had either never been encouraged in these areas, believed for religious reasons that they really didn't need to or shouldn't strive to accomplish themselves intellectually - Or- Were in class with me, with my 28 year old insecure misogynistic idiot of a physics professor who quite literally spoke to every woman in the class like she was an idiot, was harsh in correcting any errors in answers volunteered by women whilst being much more encouraging with the boys. This guy was an idiot and so much so that it was almost endearing (although definitely upsetting to hear some women in the class say they didn't understand and they felt like they would never get it because they didn't have enough confidence! to realize they were being manipulated), he obviously had his own personal issue, my response to the situation was to patronize him as much as humanly possible and at every possible opportunity I had to speak with him which he found quite confusing and I found to be absolutely hilarious.
Bottom line: There are a lot of cultural reasons why women aren't involved. There are a lot of ape/mammal/animal biological reasons why they are not involved (aka they want to have kids and let go of their career for it).
There may be some difference in the mental processes of women and men. To make that into a blanket statement that women can't do math or are less mathematically inclined or don't pursue math because they can't do it makes you a MORON. As a scientist, from a scientific point of view, why are you such a freakin idiot. Flat out. To say that *some* women may have to take 10 extra seconds to think about it to answer question #5 on their calc II exam sounds a bit more rational to me. When you are speaking about a group of people not pursuing a field, you are speaking about culture. Don't be so stupid. When you are testing someone for their IQ or any facet of it, you *can* *not* remove cultural barriers, cultural pressures or a lack thereof, the persons personal beliefs about his or her capabilities (regardless or his or her capabilities) or his or her motivation to do well on that test. The only way to answer this question is to raise 50 men and 50 women from birth, raise them with the exact same praise, encourage them in the same fashion, get them each excited about math in the same fashion, provide the same *fun* educational opportunities and create a confidence within each of them about their own abilities to excel in any intellectual pursuit they see fit, remove any oppressive religious barriers and create a culture in which women are encouraged (or even expected) to pursue careers as well as having children and given them resources with which to do it. I would bet large quantities of money that the results from that experiment would be drastically different than the ones you are speaking about. You would *potentially* see differences in timing. In the time it takes to answer a question, not in the ability to answer the question. You would see a lot more women working in the fields of math and science.
As a side note and not entirely related: Give us ladies a break. The next time you meet a girl who acts like she's stupid/ditsy/or airheaded actually listen to the way she speaks. Find out if she was a science major in college or if her dad or brother is an electrical engineer or a professor. If that's the case, you are most likely speaking to a very intelligent woman who either does not realize she is intelligent or does not care to present herself in that fashion, and who most likely, due to *laziness* would do quite poorly on an exam that tests for a persons mathematical capabilities. | |
|
| |
| |
| |
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 3:29:16 PM | I completely agree with Nautilusexplorer.
I got my degrees abroad (Europe) as a Chemical Engineer and I also spent some time teaching post-graduate lectures. My personal experience is that women were consistently obtaining the best grades despite being a minority in my class (either my classmates or later on my students). They were not only more thorough they also grasped abstract concepts a lot faster.
The sad downside is that unfortunately most of these bright women haven't achieved the same high positions than their male counterparts, but that doesn't mean that they are less capable than any male. It means that in some cases the decisions are not based on how capable is the person to discharge their responsibilities but on things like not knowing how to deal with a woman in a position of power, an outdated role model or other unfounded prejudices. Perhaps this is more rampant in the case of women but such kind of decision making based on prejudices is also quite clear in the case of minorities. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 5:30:12 PM |
Grant applications are a real pain in the ass, since fewer and fewer grants are being distributed by the agencies. Doctorates end up with grad students to mentor, which means watching over their experiments and reports, they teach, they do their own research, they write articles reporting their research, and they peer-review the work of others. In addition to that, people in science tend to travel, as they sit on numerous committees, make presentations at conferences and do fieldwork. Everyone I know in research is a very high performer.
That misses the point. Most of those things do not depend on going into the office to do them. Much of the work doesn't depend on being anywhere in particular, so things like day care, picking kids up from school and other family things can be more easily arranged than with other careers. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 7:24:57 PM | | ^^^So what's your theory then? I'm proposing that one reason women don't climb up the academic ladder in sciences is because of the large number of hours of work required. If you think it's so conducive to a family lifestyle, then just why aren't more women doing it? | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 8:11:49 PM | I don't think that women's minds are unequipped for math and science. Emmy Noether was possibly the finest mathematician of all time. Of course, we all know that the only person to win a Nobel prize twice was female. Lots of significant advances have been made by women.
I think they don't tend to go into the hard sciences and math because it's a crap lifestyle. I was a research scientist for 13 years. First of all, the pay is terrible. When I left academia to go into industry, my first job paid 2.5 times what I was being paid as a scientist for far less work. The hours are long: I worked 80 hours per week at a time. The politics are harsh, and the rewards are so tiny. Worst of all, you have to spend about half of your time or more just grubbing for funding.
Funding is a particular problem of the "hard" sciences, because you need to buy stuff that costs a lot of money. I know that those in the "soft" sciences (which in many ways are harder to do) is not so much of a problem. I know that because we had seminars with the folks at the "other side of campus," and not only were they unaware of how much work, say, physicists had to do to buy a new hoojimongle, they were aghast to the point of incredulity. Perhaps this is why women are more attracted to the "soft" sciences. They tend to have a desire to go home in the evening.
Also, the "hard" sciences, like physics, don't offer a lot of opportunity to do what some women even in this thread have demonstrated that they like to do, which is, to talk about how oppressed women are and how they have been denied education and so forth and so on. You can do this in psychology and anthropology and sociology, and it is sometimes a useful thing to do. However, in physics, the electron hits the screen or doesn't or shows an interference path due to sum over histories, but it simply doesn't care if you have a penis or a vagina. Attempts to make it so from the other side of campus have had a tendency to be rather risible. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/11/2009 9:48:37 PM | | I would like to add a disclaimer about my post because I realize that it comes off quite negatively aggressive and actually I meant it more in a somewhat [jovial?] argumentative and fairly annoyed fashion (Conan O'brien type phrasing). Not blatantly mean nor to insult anyone. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 4:26:09 AM | I haven't read this thread entirely, but I had to jump in. When I was in school, girls were discouraged from having an inerest in science/math. I happen to enjoy math, so I took a lot of classes. I think things have chaged but not nearly enough.
I was attending college in the late 60's. I made top grades in caculus and physics courses that I took. I was ridiculed in class for getting high grades by the instructors! Both of these male teachers told me that women weren't wanted in "their math departments." I was told by one that, even though I was the only student acing his class, I should be "at home barefoot and pregant." My physics proffessor held "class" for the males after regular class. Females were not allowed. It was very difficult to stay interested for the three semesters of class. I definitely think it is our society's attittudes that turn women away, not the subject matter. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 2:28:37 PM | So what's your theory then?
I don't need a theory to state a fact that I know from direct experience. I've been in academia. There are very few rules beyond getting done what needs to get done, especially once one is granted tenure.
I'm proposing that one reason women don't climb up the academic ladder in sciences is because of the large number of hours of work required.
Whatever applies to women, applies equally to men, so that isn't even relavent to the question at hand.
If you think it's so conducive to a family lifestyle, then just why aren't more women doing it?
Probably because, for whatever reason, females of any age are less likely to flout social norms than guys are. Geeks are no more popular today than they were when I grew up (playing computer games is not being a geek - writing programs when you're 12 instead of playing computer games is.) If you're around little kids, you should have a pretty good idea of whether boys or girls are more likely to do things they aren't supposed to do. Boys tend to get into trouble more often than girls because boys are more likely to act on their curiosity. (Do you expect boys or girls to be more likely to break something by taking it apart?) Boys are more likely to take risks than girls. (Look at the accident statistics and remember that taking risks applies to more things than those which can get you killed). I don't think those things are particularly controversial. If you disagreed with that, you need to explain the idea of ``bad boys'' that seems so pervasive in the forums, but doesn't seem to have a female counterpart to the extent of giving those women a similar lablel. And yes, scientists tend to do a lot of things you probably would find surprising. Kary Mullis is a good example. He's more outspoken than most and happens to be famous.
However, I do think those things explain the difference. Figure out why that difference exists and you'll have your answer. Doing science at the research level (at least in the hard sciences) is inherently about proving that others are wrong. It's inherently confrontational. So, it's a social effect, but not the ones being given here.
My youngest daughter considered research science. Her research into the field revealed that as a woman, she would likely never head her own projects. She couldn't see herself being someone's assistant forever. She opted to explore her interest in history instead.
That would be contradicted by the fact that there are women doing scientific research who are principle investigators. In fact, one becomes a principle investigator (and hence what she would do is by definition hers) once one becomes a faculty member. But, the odds of ever doing that as a male in physics are extremely small, so it's not a gender thing. Perhaps she didn't like the odds overall in her field and just chose to blame it on gender. I can certainly name women in physics who are principle investigators and also who are well known and highly respected.
Actually, you need look no further than this forum to see that despite the relatively large number of women who participate in the forums overall, that the participation of women in this forum and especially in any thread related to the hard sciences is very small relative to the male participants.
| |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 3:55:59 PM |
females of any age are less likely to flout social norms than guys are.
Ha ha good one. I feel it's actually the opposite--men seem more culturally constrained (can't cry in public unless their team loses in OT in the SuperBowl; can't wear dresses or flowered hats; men who live with their parents are losers, while women who live with their parents are good daughters; etc.
that the participation of women in this forum and especially in any thread related to the hard sciences is very small relative to the male participants.
True. I never have anything to say about computers (or whatever you think a hard science is). No interest. No knowledge, either. Ditto sports, though, too, so take your opinion with a bit of salt. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 4:53:45 PM | RE Msg: 89 by CassaGo:
females of any age are less likely to flout social norms than guys are. Ha ha good one. I feel it's actually the opposite--men seem more culturally constrained (can't cry in public unless their team loses in OT in the SuperBowl; can't wear dresses or flowered hats; men who live with their parents are losers, while women who live with their parents are good daughters; etc.
However, women do tend to take this sort of thing a lot more seriously. They often question if a guy they like is worth even going on a first date with, if he has been seen to cry in public, or is a cross-dresser, or lives with his parents. This even happens if other guys say this about him, and isn't really true, because women often never even bother to find out. This can happen even if they don't know the circumstances, such as if he's wearing a dress to raise funds for charity, or if he owns the house, and his parents live with him.
Men tend to not want to admit to women that they have done these sorts of things in the past, because they know it is sooo easy to put a woman off.
True. I never have anything to say about computers (or whatever you think a hard science is). No interest. No knowledge, either. Ditto sports, though, too, so take your opinion with a bit of salt. I worked with quite a few women who are into computers, and in many jobs, it was about 1/2 men and 1/2 women, and lots of women who knew tons about politics, and philosophy. But I've noticed it too, that most threads in these sorts of subjects, aren't 1/2 and 1/2, unlike the dating forums. Maybe it's because women are outnumbered here, and very few men want to talk about dating, so really, women only seem outnumbered here, and only seem equally represented in the dating forums. Or, maybe it's because women like to do and know about these things, but don't like talking about them in public, at least, not in Western arenas. Personally, I think it's both. Western men don't like to talk about dating, but would rather get on with it. Western women don't like to talk about sciency stuff, but would also rather get on with it. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 5:17:51 PM | | nautilus, bs. you meant it exactly how you said it. women are going into medical fields and social service in ever-expanding nos. these fields are where the jobs are being created and these jobs are easier with fewer demands and far more flexible schedules. every woman that goes into these fields isn't working in engineering and theoretical science(grade school arithmatic). no matter how good women have it, there's always a woman complaining that women are being discriminated against. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/12/2009 11:36:20 PM | Ha ha good one. I feel it's actually the opposite--men seem more culturally constrained (can't cry in public unless their team loses in OT in the SuperBowl; can't wear dresses or flowered hats; men who live with their parents are losers, while women who live with their parents are good daughters; etc.
That is nothing like what I'm talking about. That is just silliness that I would expect rather dull people to participate in. I mean flout social norms as in being different ALL the time - you know - like a kid who would rather spend hours trying to build a radio than go to a birthday party or play with others. I can't define it, but I know it when I see it in someone. Note also that most crackpots are also males. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/13/2009 4:13:47 AM |
Boys are more likely to take risks than girls. (Look at the accident statistics and remember that taking risks applies to more things than those which can get you killed). I don't think those things are particularly controversial. If you disagreed with that, you need to explain the idea of ``bad boys'' that seems so pervasive in the forums, but doesn't seem to have a female counterpart to the extent of giving those women a similar lablel. And yes, scientists tend to do a lot of things you probably would find surprising. Kary Mullis is a good example. He's more outspoken than most and happens to be famous.
However, I do think those things explain the difference. Figure out why that difference exists and you'll have your answer. Doing science at the research level (at least in the hard sciences) is inherently about proving that others are wrong. It's inherently confrontational. So, it's a social effect, but not the ones being given here.
While I agree that, in general, boys like to take risks more than girls (probably because males were the hunters and women were the nurturers for millenia), I disagree that science research is comparable in its degree of taking risks. Research resolves around an accumulation of facts and discovery of new knowledge. While true that researchers can be proving peers incorrect, they often work in groups, whose project does have a common goal. It would seem to me that that would be conducive to how women work.
The other point I disagree with is women not wanting to prove others wrong. We do it all the time. We complain about our husbands, our best friends, our best friends' kids, our kids, our parents. It's constant really. And, if we don't like to prove others wrong, why are fields like proofreading or copy editing, where the goal is to find errors made by someone else, female-dominated fields?
Perhaps I haven't practised research, because I didn't get a phD, but I do know and work with researchers, and female researchers. And, yes, it is difficult to juggle family life with academia, especially when you don't have spousal support to work the long hours necessary. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/13/2009 7:15:47 AM |
Research resolves around an accumulation of facts and discovery of new knowledge.
You've been watching too much TV. I'm a nuclear physicist. I've done scientific research in nuclear physics, published papers and given talks. I've met hundreds of other physicists. I know what the mindset is like and what researchers do all day long. 95% of it is NOT collecting facts and discovering new anything.
While true that researchers can be proving peers incorrect, they often work in groups, whose project does have a common goal. It would seem to me that that would be conducive to how women work.
Not really. I've done that. I know what it's like. The fact that you even admit there is a way women work is enough to make my case.
The other point I disagree with is women not wanting to prove others wrong. We do it all the time. We complain about our husbands, our best friends, our best friends' kids, our kids, our parents.
Complaining is not proving. I wasn't planning to go there, but if you want to open that can of worms for an argument, I'll be more than happy to go along with it.
And, yes, it is difficult to juggle family life with academia, especially when you don't have spousal support to work the long hours necessary.
You need to read what I write before continuing to repeat something which is inapplicable. (1) Whatever is true for women is also true for men with regard to juggling a family; (2) The working conditions allow for a lot of flexibility in when and where you work. | |
|
| |
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/13/2009 9:11:02 AM | You know what i notice, aside from this thread, I don't see much contribution in any of the other threads in this category from women, just the ocassional one.
That's unfortunate. I think women have a lot of fantastic, insightful feedback on so many ideas. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 7/13/2009 4:53:37 PM | Albein
You seem to think that I think that men and women are not socially different. I did not say that; in fact, I believe strongly that we are different for both biological and social reasons. However, I don't think the reason that you are citing (that women aren't confrontational) is the reason women don't follow through with a science career. Sure, your research might prove another researcher is wrong, but that would not bother a woman more than a man. We like to be right as much as men. If you've ever been in a relationship with a woman, you must know that to be true. Take me, for example, I would love to prove you wrong on your point, and this is hardly a subject worthy of excitement.
Many women are now going into science and math in university, but fewer are advancing in science. I maintain that it's because women still are the primary nurturers in a family and that draw keeps them from taking on responsibilities outside the home that will keep them away from their kids. (Note that by "outside the home", I'm not referring to whether they can fill out a grant application in their home office, but the fact that filling out the application is unrelated to their family life.)
I see it all the time; bright, young women who are competitive and want to move up the corporate ladder because they believe they are smarter than everyone else in the company. They're competitive and work incredibly long hours. All of a sudden, they have a family and their priorities switch on a dime. They stay home on extended leave and when they do come back to work, they have no drive to get to the top.
What I'm arguing is that increased work hours and time away from family do have a bearing on a woman's decision to pursue a career. And if you have a PhD and are part of that world, you are expected to perform at a high level. If you have a doctorate, you are normally in a demanding career.
You might have misunderstood what I meant about science being an accumulation of data. I was referring to the scientific literature. Hopefully every researcher contributes to the literature at some point in their life....Anyway, that's an aside, and not the focus of the argument. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 8/19/2009 3:18:14 AM | | It is cultural. Here in America there are certain things females view and take to heart you may not. First of all, the emphasis on the female body and the perfect looks and clothes and etc etc is consuming enough. If you expect to have a society were females feel that they are not just manicans then you should stop treating them like manicans. I actually think if people were natural and not vain, life would balance alot more. I personally love Biology and math I enjoy but mostly formulas. I think sex is pushed into the image of women more than it should be and if women became as aggresive towards men, sexually, as men are towards women , men may realize how ridiculous thier idoltary of "sexy women" is. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 8/19/2009 3:32:38 AM | You need to read what I write before continuing to repeat something which is inapplicable. (1) Whatever is true for women is also true for men with regard to juggling a family; (2) The working conditions allow for a lot of flexibility in when and where you work.
Speaking of family. Women do like to have babies, most do anyway. We view things as cute and adorable much more often then men, because we become emotionally connected to things sometimes without fully knowing or stopping to know why. We are often also prone to take care of our children very closely when our children are young. For optimun health breast milk is proven to be best and breast milk does not fall from the sky, so we need to be there to at least pump the milk. Also we have a cycle we work on, we have periods, hormone fluxuations, retain water....so we pay possible more attention to our bodies or self then men do, we are more introverted when it comes to our bodies and personal sexual things, that may have at one point in time been taboo. Basically we are not promoted as scientist, or mathmaticians we are promoted to be sex objects, sales objects, and baby makers.
Women if not preoccupied with a mans emotional needs or a childs can be quite amazingly brillant! There are many female inventors and scientist and doctors so we are equal but, at the same time different. | |
|
yna6
| | Joined: 1/21/2007
Msg: 100 | |
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 8/19/2009 9:05:51 AM | Watche d ashow last night about UFO's and some guy mentioned an equation that supports the theory of extraterrestrial life. I turned to knobette, and told her I had a copy of that formula, and she turns to me and calls me a "geek"! I come home with eggos with Star Trek pictures on them and she calls me a "geek". I fish a busted computer out of a garbage can to "take a look at it" and she calls me a "geek".
Ok...go to any sci-fi convention or such...compare the numbers of guys to girls. Then compare the number of couples to singles. Big differences from the "norm" of an average group of people on the streets.
Guys are mor elikely to run with maths and sciences because they are supposed to provide the family income, whereas a woman is not really expected to.
I figure either one is capable, therefore it would depend on who can bring in more money...leaving one parent at home to raise the kids...doesn't matter what gender.
A lot of people don't undertsand that whole concept...one parent at home actually raising the kids and the other working. Equality also comes with responsibilities...a lot of women forget that...and it is a shocker when they get theor eyes opened! | |
|
|
|
Home
login 
