| |
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/5/2009 8:33:27 PM |
...you haven't met enough men...lol
I assure that is not true!
1/4 women whose partner informs them that they do not want children believes, "I know him better, he wants children," and will deceive them into parenthood.
How many men will do this? There are some, I know that, but my education guess is more like 10/100 at most. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 10:41:52 AM | females of any age are less likely to flout social norms than guys are.
Women haven't flouted social norms? Then what was\is the women's emancipation movement then?
Maybe you are confusing being a testosterone driven egotistical antagonist troublemaker with being assertive. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 10:53:58 AM |
I don't go around arguing that I can have babies, and woman are about as good at math as I am at getting pregnant.
So are you saying that we are equally valuable after all? Wow. Never thought I'd hear that from you lol.
Actually I don't think algebra is nearly as important as giving life. After all, every single mathematician and beneficiary of math was birthed first by a woman but hey that's just a side issue right? | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 11:15:28 AM | Again, do your own study. Look at how many women post in the science/philosophy forum as compared to men.
You are disproving your own point tbuddah.
If you want to be rational and scientific you don't ignore evidence. It's very obvious though that you ignore all the posts answering the question of WHY women are not proportionately represented or recognised in science.
If there are so few women in the sciences obviously there are not as many with the education to come here and say anything.
Nobody is disputing that there are less women in sciences. The question was WHY??
Saying that they are not here and that proves they are no good at science is very poor rationale. That's like saying that the reason so few men are admin assistants is because they are no good at it. Perhaps they aren't that organized, cooperative, able to communicate or good at multitasking - all requirements for a good admin assistant. Hmm. Something to think about.
We all know they won't accept the low pay and glass ceiling that comes with admin jobs either but that's another topic. | |
|
| |
| |
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 11:49:25 AM |
I've never met a woman with the math/logic/problem solving skills of me or my colleagues. I'm sure there are plenty of women better than a lot of men at math, but the brightest female is still not going to be as proficient as the brightest man, nor is the average female as good at math as the average man.
You are assuming that the brightest female math student in class is the brightest of all women. I think it could easily be said that she also has to be WILLING TO TAKE YOUR SHIT ON A DAILY BASIS. But you knew that didn't you.
I am absolutely certain you know you are wrong and that's why you are so angry. It tickles me to see you flail around so desperately trying to prove you are superior and so scared in being proven you are not. That's how I see you and I bet that's how most here see you too. You are making a FOOL out of yourself but please carry on - for entertainment purposes there is always a thread CLOWN ........who is a legend in his own mind.
You also know and hope, as all abusers do, that it works in your favor that the brilliant women mathematicians are smart enough to know they would have to deal with you and your colleagues spewing male superiority agendas and degrading venom at them. They are smart enough to know what an up hill battle it would be to be treated decently and don't want to deal with constant irritation that you would enjoy foisting on them. It's sport to you. That is the truth isn't it. You enjoy harassing people while pretending you are just stating facts. You're not fooling anyone by not being up front.
They are smart enough to think it's not worth the hassle and there are other more healthy environments to work in but more and more are heading up in all fields including yours and I think it scares you to be outwitted by women. It humiliates you. That's what you fear the most. Because you believe we should be proven to be inferior and therefore if we are smarter than you how low does that make you feel overall. Boo hoo.
I admire the women who persist in dealing with this shit though. They have awfully strong constitutions to put up with your nonsense. However I bet they often get the last laugh don't they and increasingly so as society changes. Again, cry me a river. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 1:47:44 PM | An article about boys being short-changed in school showed up in our local newspaper. I found a Web site written by the researcher whose work they based the article on. Basically, she's saying that girls have been closing the gap in terms of performance in math and science but are still slightly behind boys. However, the larger gap is in communications (reading and writing), where girls are quite a bit ahead of boys.
Here's an excerpt:
On standardized achievement tests, females typically surpass males in writing ability, reading achievement, and certain other verbal skills while males surpass females in science and mathematics. In the general population of males and females, however, sex differences in achievement tests are typically small---except for the big female advantage in writing.
And the Web site: http://www.uaf.edu/northern/schools/myth.html | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 2:08:08 PM |
An article about boys being short-changed in school
You interpreted GIRLS OUTCOMPETING BOYS ACADEMICALLY as somehow proof that boys are being..... cheated....... as in short changed.
Where did it say that?
There's nothing in that article that positively confirms that boys are being short changed or cheated. In fact there are no STUDIES yet that have proven this that I'm aware of although quite a few have tried. Some that presuppose but NONE that PROVE.
Is anyone seriously so convinced of male intellectual superiority that they assume (ass-u-me) conclude that if girls are outcompeting boys academically it has to be because the boys are being short changed? There are absolutely no irrefutable neurological studies that prove mens brains are superior to womens so ....this is simply GENDER PREJUDICE.
Can it not be possible that GIRLS and WOMEN are simply EARNING their ACCOMPLISHMENTS?
Maybe they are simply putting the effort now that they are NO LONGER successfully BRAINWASHED to believe they are NOT CAPABLE.
(getting bored - just having a bit of fun with the caps lol) | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 2:21:54 PM | The study you quote says this (and a lot of other things)
Data from a wide variety of sources and educational settings show that females in all ethnic groups tend to
earn higher grades in school than do males, across different ages and eras, and across different subject
matter disciplines.
This doesn't prove the girls are unfairly advantaged and that the boys are short changed. She only vaguely quotes one study where the students said teachers like girls more. Well maybe that's the boys fault because they are difficult to manage.
She also said boys have more learning disabilities, poorer attendance, slower maturity in language (brain development) and are not as good at focus and concentration.
These are all valid reasons for boys to be outcompeted by girls. This is not shortchanging of boys.
This is girls simply being better at academics than boys. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 3:28:11 PM | Sorry, the "short-changed" term came from the newspaper article, not the Web page I cited. I wasn't stating my opinion in that regard by the way. My son has ADHD and with the exception of one horrible teacher, the school system has served him well and kept him on track.
I don't think it's fair to say, though, that boys are getting what they deserve when teachers treat them harshly for being disruptive. So many boys are disruptive that you have to ask yourself why. My guess is that there are not enough breaks for just plain running around. You have to tire out the little suckers so that they can concentrate on learning.
What I found interesting in the article was the fact that in standardized testing, the point spread is not large between boys and girls for science (boys being slightly ahead of girls), but that it is markedly much more pronounced in reading and writing (where girls score much higher than boys). So to the guy who really didn't believe that women are good at math, I ask, "Why aren't you more concerned that men are incapable of communicating?" Myself, I can have babies, understand math and science, and communicate. You can do math....Well good for you; you score 1 out of 4
 | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 5:25:05 PM | No need to apologize. Sorry if I seemed to jump all over your post but I think now that girls are showing what they are capable of, they are threatening some peoples conviction that men are intellectually superior. To defend against this threat is the false accusation that boys are disadvantaged when in fact they are not. They just used to seem superior because they were privileged and it was easier when they only had to compete against half the populations brains.
Lets face it, until recently girls were strongly discouraged from showing they were as smart or smarter than boys and even if they did get a degree they often opted out of their career right after college to marry their college sweetheart and have kids - killing their career so that their husbands could be free to make advances in theirs. It's still pretty common for this pattern to exist.
However I don't think college profs are giving men lower grades because of lack of play breaks either. Again, clutching at excuses to explain why girls can "think" after all.
And perhaps if some boys\men are so physical that they can't concentrate on anything intellectual it's appropriate that they do physical jobs like construction instead of trying to get an education and be a professional. That's fine, their spots in college will be filled with women who deserve them more. That's fine, it takes all sorts to make the world go around. Maybe lots of professions that have been dominated by men such are not that suited to them in general. Such as those that require very advanced people skills, communication, cooperation, collaboration, teamwork etc rather than high energy, physical types of work. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 5:56:19 PM |
And perhaps if some boys\men are so physical that they can't concentrate on anything intellectual it's appropriate that they do physical jobs like construction instead of trying to get an education and be a professional. That's fine, their spots in college will be filled with women who deserve them more. That's fine, it takes all sorts to make the world go around. Maybe lots of professions that have been dominated by men such are not that suited to them in general. Such as those that require very advanced people skills, communication, cooperation, collaboration, teamwork etc rather than high energy, physical types of work.
While I certainly appreciate the sentiment of your words, whatever happened to the encouragement and utilization of individuated skills and talents, regardless of gender?
Just a thought.
But then again, that might be what you are trying to convey... | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 6:11:44 PM | whatever happened to the encouragement and utilization of individuated skills and talents, regardless of gender?
Just a thought.
But then again, that might be what you are trying to convey...
Yes that was EXACTLY my point.
Men held positions that they were not that suited for because they had less competition so it was easier to get a place in college and well paid jobs....... while women who were better suited to a college education and smarter than lots of those men were DISCOURAGED.
Never mind. Women are doing very well in college now so it's a moot point - history pretty much. Perhaps science and math are the last bastions but they won't last much longer.
I expect an even proportion of men and women in all intellectual fields in a very short time, therefore dispelling the myth that women are not as smart as men....... | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 10:19:19 PM |
I've never met a woman with the math/logic/problem solving skills of me or my colleagues. I'm sure there are plenty of women better than a lot of men at math, but the brightest female is still not going to be as proficient as the brightest man, nor is the average female as good at math as the average man.
You interpreted GIRLS OUTCOMPETING BOYS ACADEMICALLY as somehow proof that boys are being..... cheated....... as in short changed.
These are all valid reasons for boys to be outcompeted by girls. This is not shortchanging of boys.
There seems to be some irony in comparing these 2 quotes. It almost seems like the genders have been flipped. And the over-the-top emotions seem evident in each case. It's a shame castraphe left. She seemed to have some good points presented in a very constructive way and we didn't get an opportunity to explore her ideas with her.
I don't think an in-your-face approach is particularly constructive when progress is being made using less combative approaches. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 10:20:08 PM |
This doesn't prove the girls are unfairly advantaged and that the boys are short changed. She only vaguely quotes one study where the students said teachers like girls more. Well maybe that's the boys fault because they are difficult to manage.
She also said boys have more learning disabilities, poorer attendance, slower maturity in language (brain development) and are not as good at focus and concentration.
These are all valid reasons for boys to be outcompeted by girls. This is not shortchanging of boys.
This is girls simply being better at academics than boys.
Ouch. I have to say I think you're now swinging too far the other way. You really can't claim the reason women have not done as well in some things is societal, and then say then the reason men do things badly is biological, that isn't fair. There might easily be social reasons why men are worse with language. My experience does reflect this - I was in a French program and by the time I graduated hardly any boys were left in our classes. I agree that boys generally seem to misbehave - but why should everyone have to sit there and "be good' anyway? It might just be that girls are better at "being good" and studying hard.
In proving that men are not more intelligent than women, you don't have to expound that women are MORE intelligent, or we'll get nowhere. There could easily be something in our culture (maybe not even the education system) that is making it more difficult. Girls tend to socialize with girls where focus is on communication, boys socialize in a system that doesn't allow them the same intricacy of communication. One could even argue the reason there are more men in maths and sciences is because there isn't the pressure to communicate emotively, and so numbers are easier - and being able to sit around and talk about numbers. Maybe boys need less time in front of the video games and more time actually talking and listening. Maybe the quantity of sugar and additives in food today affects boys more? Who knows, but the question needs further study. I also wonder what the numbers are in different cultures. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/6/2009 11:22:32 PM | Oh calm down.
I SAID ..............the author of the paper attached to the link above said that boys suffer more learning disabilities, have poorer communication, poorer concentration and cooperation etc etc etc from the numerous studies she researched. Go read the paper yourself. She also said girls are no longer discouraged in school and I took it to be quite encouraging. If you can find some hard evidence that she quoted where it is proven boys are unfairly disadvantaged PLEASE COPY AND PASTE IT HERE. I didn't see it at all.
<div class='quote'> You really can't claim the reason women have not done as well in some things is societal,
I can and I did and so have many more learned people than you.
<div class='quote'> and then say then the reason men do things badly is biological,
where did I say that.....although for some it is
<div class='quote'>that isn't fair
have you never heard of the truth being called UNKIND........suck it up princess
Don't shoot the messenger ok? I simply was repeating what she and many others have researched as quoted in her paper.
Also I did not ever say women are broadly more intelligent than men, ever. I have never once said women are overall superior to men. I firmly believe we are different, have different strengths in general and of course as individuals. You jump to conclusions I have not said and do not believe.
I said some women who more deserved places in academia and professions were kept out and their places were taken by lesser men. That's just common sense based on our society in the past. I'm sorry you are so uncomfortable with that obvious fact that you will dispute it in the face of insurmountable evidence.
Also, about your comments on communication and men and women.
There have recently (10 yrs) been neurological and sociological as well as psychological studies which have strongly suggested that the female brain is much better at translating thoughts and feelings into words. Of course these have been hotly contested by indignant male scientists. This has been posited as being due to the larger size of the corpus colossum in women (spelling - can't be bothered to look it up).
It makes sense since the survival of babies depends on a mothers ability to communicate with a child that cannot say what is wrong or what they need. Therefore babies born to women of greater intuition and communication skills would have better chances of survival. Duh.
It's no different than the claim that men have better spacial recognition skills than women due to hunting........ so what's the big deal.
 | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 12:16:36 AM | Actually I am pretty calm. I just picked one quote of yours from several posts where you were basically repeating yourself (not that I don't repeat myself - my point is that I didn't know which slice to take from all of it to comment on). Did you really call me princess? Wow I don't think I've ever been called that in my life. And how on earth do you know how learned I am?
Is anyone seriously so convinced of male intellectual superiority that they assume (ass-u-me) conclude that if girls are outcompeting boys academically it has to be because the boys are being short changed? There are absolutely no irrefutable neurological studies that prove mens brains are superior to womens so ....this is simply GENDER PREJUDICE.
Why so angry with the idea that there is a cultural/social reason why boys are perhaps losing in this game? You simply have no reason to reject this notion outright, as I don't believe there is enough evidence to show why this is happening.
I don't believe all behaviour can be explained using anatomical physical proof. These kinds of hypotheses crop up and get modified or rejected regularly. Your arguments have the same condescending tone as men of past ages who put women in their place, using "logical, rational" statements. There can be no neurological studies showing ANY kind of superiority with ANY kind of behaviour. I prefer to allow that the truth of the matter will always be more complex than our current understanding.
And perhaps if some boys\men are so physical that they can't concentrate on anything intellectual it's appropriate that they do physical jobs like construction instead of trying to get an education and be a professional. That's fine, their spots in college will be filled with women who deserve them more. That's fine,
Umm I don't know how you can't see the condescending tone in this. You seem to gloat, as though this is a war, and finally women have triumphed.
If you want to discuss this then try using your
very advanced people skills, communication, cooperation, collaboration, teamwork etc Please avoid name calling and projection as we don't need a female version of tbuddha on here. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 2:59:47 AM |
Also I did not ever say women are broadly more intelligent than men, ever. I have never once said women are overall superior to men.
No, you haven't. I have noted this. But you have insinuated it.
suck it up princess
The only time I have heard a person say this, is when a man says this to a woman, and he is desperately trying to get the woman to abide by what he is saying or doing.
How refreshing it is to see it spoken from one woman to another.
It almost makes me agree with what heterotic said earlier, although it has not been within my experience.
It's no different than the claim that men have better spacial recognition skills than women due to hunting........ so what's the big deal.
You are absolutely right. There isn't a difference. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 3:28:45 AM | Holy smokes! people will argue till they're blue in the face about anything!
Shouldn't the question be: why aren't there more PEOPLE involved in math and science?
We're notorious in the US for our dearth of science type folk, heck... just look at our memes on global warming and evolution!
I don't know about Canada though, people here keep telling me you're actually the 51st thru 54th states :P | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 9:59:23 AM | You might be better served checking government statistics. I have been in the science field for most of my life and ever since I can remember the numbers of women have risen steadily and the last 7 years or so the statistics showed a higher number of women than men. If I can find a government website that shows these statistcs, I will post it. Having been in academia for a long while now, we get these things given to us so frequently that I do not always keep references. I know in classrooms females out number the males in great porportion.
SS | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 10:27:36 AM | Yeah I think the line of questioning had to do with the "hard sciences" maths, and those things that were in the more abstract realm of science. Maths are used in all science but it is the question of why women don't seem to pursue the pure math stream was what I thought was being asked.
I'm not particularly fond of quoting any "men are better at spatial skills" either because it is only an average. SOME men are very good, and likely the overlap is quite large. There are very few things that men and women ALWAYS do better than each other. Apparently, the Y chromosome comprises 0.38% of the DNA in humans - not a lot. The differences between individuals always outweighs the differences between the 2 groups, not even considering the true hermaphrodites and chromosomal anomalies. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 10:27:51 AM | SS-
Message 108 on page 5. A link to the National Science Foundation statistics along with a summary - http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd.
Nomad pointed the interesting point that the numbers of both sexes for Science and Technology are a small proportion of the total. | |
|
| Why aren't there more women involved in math and science?
Posted: 9/7/2009 11:03:20 AM | Please avoid name calling and projection as we don't need a female version of tbuddha on here.
Namecalling?????? You? You are hallucinating. I went back and checked.
As for learning.....are you suggesting you are more learned than all the studies that were quoted in that paper?????????? No, but you insinuate lol.
Isn't projection exactly what you do when you misquote and twist words to provoke rather than debate and accuse me of being anything like a man who insists women are inferior intellectually to men. Wow, and this from a woman. Sigh.
BTW I didn't even notice you were a woman when I told you to suck it up and honestly why should it make a difference.
Your insistence on misinterpreting meaning has spoiled the debate and anyway, I'm satisfied I stated myself clearly so....you're going to have to go pick a row based on twisting others words to fit your assumptions with someone else. | |
|
Home
login 
