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

91–100 of 630 posts

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

#91

Post by viggity »

omarhaneef wrote: post #52

"Just 18 percent of American computer-science college degrees go to women.... Meanwhile, in Algeria, 41 percent of college graduates in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and math—or “stem,” as it’s known—are female." Wait, so they're comparing computer science with all of STEM? That might obfuscate the picture. It should be STEM:STEM. Edit: Perhaps I am not being clear but computer science is a subset o…

"STEM" was this thing that was invented to drum up interest in fields that were in high demand. Unfortunately, there is no shortage of scientists, engineers, or mathematicians. The shortage is in technology.

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

#92

Post by bluGill »

throwaway8548 wrote: post #63
allovernow wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>It's about equal rights, equal treatment, it does not mean that men and women are the same, it's not a mathematical equality. Sure, perhaps in theory. In practice, the kind of differences in performance and achievement that would be explained by psychological and physiological differences between men and women are immediately blamed on discrimination and the like. There is an implicit assumption that men and women a…

> the kind of differences in performance and achievement that would be explained by psychological and physiological differences between men and women That's a bit of circular reasoning though. - Look how men and women behave differently! - But why do they behave differently? - Because they're different. - How do you know that? - Because they behave differently. It's not logically consistent and doesn't answer anythin…

The opposite claim - that men and women are equal has the same problem. As far as I can tell we don't know how men and women are different other than a few physical factors related to breeding or hormones. Worse it is a controversial subject that you probably shouldn't study because when your results are other than what someone wants to believe true they will make your life difficult. Either you find a difference or you don't - either way you confirm the bias of one group and contradict the bias of the other.

I think there are real differences, other than the two I mentioned, but there is probably a lot of overlaps where you can find plenty of exceptions.

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

#93

Post by SolaceQuantum »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #66
SolaceQuantum wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How does this apply to nonbinary people? Not trying to poke holes just genuinely curious.

I don’t know. I have a few non binary friends. I find them more artistically inclined rather than STEM inclined. I feel like creative pursuits tend be more collaborative and thrives better when there is more inter personal energy. Study(for me at least) is solitary. Artists and creative people flourish when there is a lot of back and forth of energies and they birth something from those interactions. Within my circle…

And I'm just kind of confused on, if there are specific gender-specific education, what happens to people who are agender, third gender, etc. Do they get to choose their own education, or is it assigned to them? How would they even know before self-actualization is fully realized in the brain for them to explore their own identities?

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

#95

Post by zarkov99 »

jelliclesfarm wrote: post #78
zarkov99 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you are probably right, though you could have left your diatribe about the men who work for you out. One could easily come up with equally typical scenarios to ridicule neurotic, shallow and emotionally unstable women. Each gender has its set of typical pathologies. But somehow we made it work, together, as a species, so there is some magic in the balancing the two.

Why is it a ‘diatribe’? It is my life. It is my work. That each gender has its own set of pathologies is exactly my point. When they don’t complement each other, why not create an environment where each of us can be our best?

I am with you. I was just triggered by your unflattering, though probably accurate enough, characterization of the male psyche.

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

#96

Post by bluGill »

calibas wrote: post #79
throwaway8548 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kind of differences in performance and achievement that would be explained by psychological and physiological differences between men and women That's a bit of circular reasoning though. - Look how men and women behave differently! - But why do they behave differently? - Because they're different. - How do you know that? - Because they behave differently. It's not logically consistent and doesn't answer anythin…

Are observable differences not the basis of empirical science?

Which differences. There is the genitalia that nobody argues with. Likewise testosterone differences.

Pretty much everything else isn't as clear cut. We know that more men than women go into STEM - but we don't know if it is because men fundamentally like those jobs better, or if it is because our culture makes it less acceptable for women to go into STEM. Often culture things are subtle and people will say things that do not match their actions.

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

#97

Post by jelliclesfarm »

Hitton wrote: post #50
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…

>This is not just in an intellectual setting. Last week I had a voice quivering, temple throbbing, blue vein screaming episode at a guy I hired to do some work. I just lost it. >It’s a constant battle of wits dealing with men that it’s exhausting. It’s even worse than in an office environment because men think the tasks that involve physical prowess is their domain. They simply will NOT take orders from a woman. And…

Curious: have you asked female managers if they have any grievances? How do you know that they don’t face ‘these problems’?

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

#98

Post by commandlinefan »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #80
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?

In case of medicine - because it's a large field full of career paths that are very different from each other. The daily realities of being a pediatrician, a surgeon, a psychiatrist or a radiologist have very little in common. There's this hypothesis that men statistically tend to pick jobs involving working with and treating patients as things, and women tend to pick jobs involving people and socializing. Medicine a…

> There's this hypothesis that men statistically tend to pick jobs involving working with and treating patients as things, and women tend to pick jobs involving people and socializing.

Data to support this hypothesis here: https://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagge...

ObGyns are 85% female, Pediatrics 75%, while radiology is 72% male and anesthesiology 63%.

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

#99

Post by cortesoft »

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

I would think medicine falls under the science category.

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

#100

Post by cortesoft »

eindiran wrote: post #60
nervousvarun wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

It depends who you ask, but typically not. STEM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Math (ie the 'M' isn't 'medicine', which is what a lot of people think).

Right, but medicine is part of science.... would you argue that a Physics major isn't in STEM because P is not one of the letters of STEM?
Post reply on HN