Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 630 posts

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#81

Post by reroute1 »

pj_mukh wrote: post #35

Coming from one of these countries to America, the answer seems obvious. STEM jobs have a HUGE differential in stability and status in those countries, so women put up up with much more patriarchal BS at the workplace to hold on to them. My sister was a STEM worker in India. When she moved to America, she looked around to see writers with relatively safe, high-status job and switched out immediately. Yes, women in Am…

You mean Ask People? What does any of that have to do with being a woman? Just blanket 'patriarchy bs'?

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#82

Post by masteranza »

pj_mukh wrote: post #35

Coming from one of these countries to America, the answer seems obvious. STEM jobs have a HUGE differential in stability and status in those countries, so women put up up with much more patriarchal BS at the workplace to hold on to them. My sister was a STEM worker in India. When she moved to America, she looked around to see writers with relatively safe, high-status job and switched out immediately. Yes, women in Am…

You're right about one thing "patriarchal BS". The theory that there should be more women at some particular job sector has now reached a tipping point where it no longer makes sense because it is non-disprovable. Really, is there any kind of evidence that can hope for that would disprove this bad idea? Or will you always try to come up with some excuses?

Preferential treatment (positive discrimination) in hard science not only makes the mistake of treating women as handicapped (they're surely not), but also makes the situation worse by skewing meritocracy.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#83

Post by danbolt »

throwaway8548 wrote: post #70
iamsb wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely does. I know many men in India who would rather do something else than do engineering. Look at the background of most standup comedians in India for example. Most of them come from engineering/stem background and use that to fulfill their side hustle to be a comic and then become full time comics if successful. I was personally far more interested in studying classic Sanskrit literature, but was talked…

I should rephrase. Why does it affect men disproportionately less?

My gut take is that our society is socialized to value men that have some sort of "breadwinner" status.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#84

Post by jakelazaroff »

throwaway8548 wrote: post #70
iamsb wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It absolutely does. I know many men in India who would rather do something else than do engineering. Look at the background of most standup comedians in India for example. Most of them come from engineering/stem background and use that to fulfill their side hustle to be a comic and then become full time comics if successful. I was personally far more interested in studying classic Sanskrit literature, but was talked…

I should rephrase. Why does it affect men disproportionately less?

The hypothesis is that when economics are less of a factor, people tend towards work they find more enjoyable. Men control most of STEM, so it sucks less for them, which is why you see women disproportionately leaving.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#85

Post by zarkov99 »

pj_mukh wrote: post #35

Coming from one of these countries to America, the answer seems obvious. STEM jobs have a HUGE differential in stability and status in those countries, so women put up up with much more patriarchal BS at the workplace to hold on to them. My sister was a STEM worker in India. When she moved to America, she looked around to see writers with relatively safe, high-status job and switched out immediately. Yes, women in Am…

Here is a theory, perhaps you could comment on how if fits your experience: Women are less inclined than men to choose STEM Fields, for biological reasons, that is they tend to be more interested in people than things. Because of this STEM fields are dominated by men, who, because of sheer numbers alone, end up shaping the culture to be more masculine. This makes STEM even less appealing for the relatively rare women who do have some degree of passion for STEM. If we were to accept this theory, how would we go about improving matters for society?

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#86

Post by reroute1 »

maxnoe wrote: post #54
nervousvarun wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not necessarily disagreeing or commenting on your point, but doesn't medicine typically fall under STEM?

NOOO. Science, Technics, Engineering, Math. The M is not for Medicine

Let's think liberally and not confine this concept to a strict acronym that seems overly narrow

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#87

Post by TimTheTinker »

tathougies wrote: post #19
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #9

This! I have said this so many times and all my girl friends hate me for it! I also believe in gender segregated schools(after HS and at university level). I am not advocating gender segregation but just gender segregated education. This is only a BS theory of mine..and so I am trying to work it into my hobby fiction writing. Please allow me to test it here for opinions. I think that in formative years, children shou…

As a man, I'll say I absolutely agree. I went to an all-boys high school, and teenage boys simply do better without girls around. Boys are more likely to engage in not traditionally masculine activities when girls are not around because there is no need to impress. Furthermore, girls often mature faster than boys, and this leads to unnecessary stress for both girls and boys at this stage. Furthermore, a lot of what d…

> Without the need to compete with boys, the girls developed their own leadership and competitive structures that they excelled at.

I think there are several arenas where girls and women benefit when men are excluded; secondary education isn't the only one. A few others to mention:

- Sports and physical competition. Excluding men enables women to compete on their own plane, set world records, etc.

- Restrooms, locker rooms, and the like. Excluding men protects women from unwanted advances, privacy invasions, etc. I know this isn't a popular opinion, but the primary benefit of segregated restrooms is that women do not have to be afraid to go to the bathroom. Besides sanitation, this is one of the greatest benefits to society of having restrooms in the first place. (In areas with no restrooms, such as rural India, women often have to risk being molested when trying to relieve themselves.)

Another unpopular opinion: desegregation efforts in the above areas (including those motivated by wanting to achieve "gender equality" or allow transgender women into areas designated for women only) will result in harm to women.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#88

Post by blunte »

malandrew wrote: post #61
blunte wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is exactly the point. Freedom to direct your energies toward your personal passion _without artificial restraints_ is equality.

> _without artificial restraints_ What constitutes an artificial restraint? For classical liberals, that means being free from the constraint imposed by other individuals. Today the definition of "restraints" is being expanded beyond the artificial to the point where everything is being declared a "human right" without any consideration for the fact that some of those things can only be provided by taking from someon…

An artificial constraint is one that exists outside of your personal capability.

If you are capable of solving the toughest scientific or technical challenges, but you are prevented from doing so because of some attribute of your circumstance (your color, your gender, your age, your wealth level, your current job title, etc.), then you are being artificially restrained.

If you can solve the toughest challenge, but you choose not to because you would rather throw clay on a pottery wheel, then you are also free from constraints. (There are plenty of people that are practically forced into careers because they are technically capable, and because their elders believe that if one can, one should.)

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#89

Post by masteranza »

rayiner wrote: post #72
DuskStar wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I always have with this argument is "Why not medicine? Why not Law?" Why is it that two professions that you'd naively expect to be just as sexist, if not far more sexist than STEM (Higher status, more of an "old boys club", established hierarchy that has positions like nurses for women, etc) have achieved gender parity, while STEM hasn't?

The legal profession is far ahead of STEM in addressing sexism. Many law firms have adopted the Mansfield Rule, which requires the pools of promotion candidates to comprise 30-50% women or other underrepresented groups: https://www.law.com/dailyreportonline/2019/09/06/more-firms-... . Major clients are imposing diversity criteria on outside counsel hired for their matters. Many major firms have 20% or more women in t…

From quite long time ago women are accepted to universities. Yet to prove your point about "law being fixed long time ago" you refer to news from few months ago.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#90

Post by jelliclesfarm »

dev_by_day wrote: post #34
jelliclesfarm wrote: post #9

This! I have said this so many times and all my girl friends hate me for it! I also believe in gender segregated schools(after HS and at university level). I am not advocating gender segregation but just gender segregated education. This is only a BS theory of mine..and so I am trying to work it into my hobby fiction writing. Please allow me to test it here for opinions. I think that in formative years, children shou…

Work places discriminating based on gender would be terrible. There shouldn't be "male only" work places just like there shouldn't be "female only" work places. This would be a regression to the dark ages of grouping and separating people based on biological identity, not a good idea and honestly not helpful. There is zero evidence that shows these ideas actually make students or working environments healthier and mo…

I disagree. I think pay scale disparities would also disappear if women had gender segregated work spaces. It would be a more supportive environment and less conflict. I suspect efficiency would also improve at work places. Throw a picnic or party or twice a week meeting or something for everyone to meet up...but having equal strength and equally compensated and mirror hierarchies of gender segregated work places would be a good experiment.

I don’t know how non binary people would feel about this and would like to hear more from them.

Post reply on HN