141–150 of 359 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No, he is saying that they have worse "nutrition" and less "butts in school", which increased the population's IQ in the past century. So if they predominate (and developed countries diminish) the general IQ might go down too.
Isnt malnutrition a pretty huge problem in Russia?
I don't think so.
It's because Russia isn't a particularly nice place to live. From the article: > Most of the girls we talked to from other countries had a slightly playful approach to Stem, whereas in Russia, even the very youngest were extremely focused on the fact that their future employment opportunities were more likely to be rooted in Stem subjects. They do tech because it provides a way of getting a good life. In the West, wh…
> They do tech because it provides a way of getting a good life. In the West, where conditions are less harsh, women don't feel the need to go into tech to get a good life. But does it now? All of 'the West' isn't Silicon Valley. I live in 'the west', Western Europe to be exact, and while I probably make more than a plumber or a shoe salesperson, I'd say someone with a medicine, law or business degree tends to make a…
What do you do, that's in worse conditions than those fields?
my guess: a cultural and social value placed on STEM subjects. My personal theory is that young women in the West are less likely to get into tech because they are seen as stuffy, the domain of greybeards and model train enthusiasts. Don't forget that people generally pick up their core interest in subjects at a young age where social value and coolness are some of the most important personal objectives (early teen y…
> less keen to get into tech because they are seen as stuffy, the domain of greybeards and model train enthusiasts I find this kind of justification a pretty sexist view against women that they'd pick their entire career path on such frivolous details.
This seems like a decent survey of the topic (major selection by incoming students), with some references to a few studies at the end.
https://dus.psu.edu/mentor/2013/06/disconnect-choosing-major...
'In contrast with the evidence that first-year students are most likely making uninformed choices when determining a major, the common four-year curriculum path colleges and universities use assumes that students enter college prepared to make a decision regarding major and, ultimately, career path. Unfortunately, the reality is that students are most likely not developmentally prepared to do so.'
There's nothing unique to women here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
$100k - $200k long term (ages 30 - 67). STEM has initial high pay, but tops out by middle age. Late middle age, or 55+, and you are a target for elimination. My coworkers daughter and her husband are both accountants. In their mid 30's they are doing much better than any STEM majors. They will both be firm partners by 40. +200k salaries for two people over 27 years (not that they'd work to 67 anyway). I know of a mec…
Most accountants will never make partner. You are taking two exceptions and comparing them to the whole population. You should be comparing them to people who become CTOs. Besides that most people will never even make half of your lower end salary during their whole career.
Women or Men, most people I know who go into non-STEM fields sooner or later have to negotiate with the fact there is nothing special going to happen in their lives forever.
Here in India some people even believe its rather better to be a plumber or an electrician than do non-STEM degrees. Former helps you develop some skills. Compared to getting a degree in commerce and finding your whole education could be replaced by spread sheet macros.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Since molecular biology has something like a 54/46 distribution and tech has something like a 19/81 distribution I'd probably tell anyone who told me I should focus on the injustices of molecular biology to shove it up their ass.
What about registered nurses? It's a 91/9 spit.
Hint - it has to do with getting in the medical school.
I've seen it argued that, paradoxically, the richer and more egalitarian a society is, the more the differences are magnified in the kinds choices individuals of both genders make. So Russia being a poorer nation with less paths to success would lead more women to make career choices based around economics, while in Sweden, a richer welfare state, economic factors may be a lower driver.
It is possible you see better representation of both genders in a society where people choose their career based on potential ROI. Fewer societies allow its people to truly choose their career based on interest or passion alone, which might be where you see larger differences in gender representation. However, that brings up the politically incorrect argument that men are more interested in Tech than women, which see…
The world would be a drastically different place if people were rational.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> some STEM fields, like molecular biology, have better than 50% representation of women. I hope those fields have scholarships and campaigns to get underrepresented men into those fields. Your downvotes only serve to highlight your hypocrisy. If balance is the goal, then that needs to occur for all groups in all fields or none at all. Otherwise it's obvious you're just pushing an agenda.
Balance isn't the goal. Equal opportunity is the goal. If the imbalance is due to a lack of interest in a field by one gender or another that's perhaps regrettable but not a moral issue. If the imbalance is due to obstacles or prejudices faced by one gender over another then would you agree that is a moral issue that is more important for society to rectify?
Not to mention the conflation of equality of opportunity with equality of achievement.
In our society it has become a taboo to even consider that stratification by gender and/or race of achievement could possibly be related to group wide differences in behavior or ability. This is, ironically, causing immense bias in modern culture; but it seems bias is OK when its the en vogue kind.
I've seen it argued that, paradoxically, the richer and more egalitarian a society is, the more the differences are magnified in the kinds choices individuals of both genders make. So Russia being a poorer nation with less paths to success would lead more women to make career choices based around economics, while in Sweden, a richer welfare state, economic factors may be a lower driver.
> I've seen it argued that, paradoxically, the richer and more egalitarian a society is, The former-Communist East-European country I lived in as a kid was a lot more egalitarian than most of present-day Western countries and the women were treated pretty much the same as men were when it came to work. I remember as a kid that I regarded my mother going each morning to work and returning in the evening as a very norm…
That really depends on how you measure gender equality and general freedom though.
> to this day I still think that a stay-at-home parent is a lazy human being
You're just being too judgemental though. If a family is wanting for nothing and they agree that one parent should stay at home to spend more time looking after the family, why not?
Russia has a very low birth rate for native Russians. Here in the US, having kids and working in engineering is difficult. My wife took 5 years off and it has definitely affected her pay and advancement. Low pay and little vacation maybe have something to do with it too. Both the wife and I are engineers. Our daughter shows no interest in tech. She does like to mix stuff, so maybe Chem E. Though I'm not going to prod…
Why did your wife take 5 years off "because kids"?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Tech people want to believe that the gender disparity in their field is shared among all the STEM fields" It's convenient for both women's studies departments and tech recruiters to pretend other fields don't exist. It is taboo to talk about it, to the point that I haven't come across any serious piece of writing that dared to seriously contemplate the question of "what are the girls choosing to do instead?", but I…
> what are the girls choosing to do instead? https://nsf.gov/statistics/2016/nsb20161/uploads/1/6/at03-12...