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

291–300 of 630 posts

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

#291

Post by b0rsuk »

b0rsuk wrote: post #283

I know it's not a popular opinion, but consider a company analogy. People who leave because they're not competent have a tendency to badmouth the company. I'm not saying all of them do, and all that badmouth were incompetent. But there is a tendency to rationalize and lash out. What if women were calling those environments toxic because they had a hard time doing well in there? There are absolutely toxic, hermetic, u…

If you rule out an idea without verification and forbid studies in the area, that's just a variant of "la la la la I can't hear you". It's childish, and taboo.

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

#292

Post by eindiran »

cortesoft wrote: post #242
a1369209993 wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it isn't; Biology is a part of science. Medicine is, as DuskStar put it, "[Science/]STEM adjacent".

How is it not a part of science? What does a field need to have to be included in STEM? Just because there are other skills needed besides science based ones doesn't mean it isn't a science field.

It's obviously not a 'basic' science though and other applied sciences that are uncontroversially included in STEM get their own letter (engineering and technology).

People differ in whether they think medicine and the other applied sciences fall under the 'science' umbrella or not. Try searching around and you'll see a lot of mixed opinions on the subject.

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

#293

Post by foldr »

zarkov99 wrote: post #287
foldr wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually, a lot of people are saying that sexism is the cause of disparity in those cases. It's a commonplace observation that sexism harms men as well as women. Historically, the professions you're alluding to have been closed to women by men . So for example, the reason that women couldn't serve in the military until relatively recently is not that women used their power and influence within society to get a pass o…

Really? Below is a list of the top 8 most dangerous jobs in the US. Which ones do you think would have equal gender representation if there was no sexism? 1 - Logging workers 2 - Fishers and fishing workers 3 - Aircraft pilots and flight engineers 4 - Roofers 5 - Refuse and recyclable material collectors 6 - Structural iron and steel workers 7 - Truck drivers 8 - Farmers, ranchers and agricultural managers

That list is obviously a bit whack (how can being a pilot possibly be the third most dangerous job in the US?)

But yeah, many of those jobs have a skewed gender distribution in significant part due to sexist stereotypes.

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

#294

Post by zarkov99 »

foldr wrote: post #286
grimjack00 wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And now that women can serve in the military, it's time to update the Select Service law so it requires both men _and_ women to register on their 18th birthday.

Sure. Do you think that there are many people who both (a) agree with the registration requirement in the first place and (b) think that it should apply to men only?

Yes.

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

#295

Post by foldr »

zarkov99 wrote: post #294
foldr wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. Do you think that there are many people who both (a) agree with the registration requirement in the first place and (b) think that it should apply to men only?

Yes.

Who? This is an obscure issue. I should think that very few Americans are even aware of the disparity.

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

#296

Post by zarkov99 »

foldr wrote: post #293
zarkov99 wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Really? Below is a list of the top 8 most dangerous jobs in the US. Which ones do you think would have equal gender representation if there was no sexism? 1 - Logging workers 2 - Fishers and fishing workers 3 - Aircraft pilots and flight engineers 4 - Roofers 5 - Refuse and recyclable material collectors 6 - Structural iron and steel workers 7 - Truck drivers 8 - Farmers, ranchers and agricultural managers

That list is obviously a bit whack (how can being a pilot possibly be the third most dangerous job in the US?) But yeah, many of those jobs have a skewed gender distribution in significant part due to sexist stereotypes.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/04/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-f...

I ignored the "for men" qualifier as it seems obvious that these are the most dangerous jobs period.

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

#297

Post by TurkishPoptart »

foldr wrote: post #270
TulliusCicero wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could it not imply it? That's when women started entering those fields en masse and really increasing their numbers. Going by the "the problem is men being sexist" reasoning, that they were able to do this successfully implies that the lawyers and doctors in charge then were less sexist than engineers today.

It does not imply this, because it's likely to be relative rather than absolute levels of sexism that are relevant.

I don't think the field is sexist. I think fewer women choose to study and excel at it. The field is open to whomever wants to have a go at it. Due to "corporate diversity policy" I think (as a man) have less of a chance of actually breaking into software engineering than, say, 10 years ago.

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

#298

Post by mistrial9 »

foldr wrote: post #216
TulliusCicero wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As to the men being jerks/toxic etc argument. Are there times when that is true? Absolutely. But, men do not have a monopoly on being jerks I'd say the bigger point against the idea that women aren't in CS purely* because of men being sexist, is that this implies that male doctors and lawyers in the 60's and 70's were less sexist than male engineers of today. Does anyone actually believe this? * of course, it may s…

>this implies that male doctors and lawyers in the 60's and 70's were less sexist than male engineers of today. I don't see how it implies this. The more relevant question is whether STEM has higher levels of sexism than other similarly attractive fields.

the highest levels of sexism I have personally seen are in Finance, followed by construction workers; the highest levels of complaining I have personally seen are in FOSS UnConferences and PhD level academia.

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

#299

Post by foldr »

zarkov99 wrote: post #296
foldr wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That list is obviously a bit whack (how can being a pilot possibly be the third most dangerous job in the US?) But yeah, many of those jobs have a skewed gender distribution in significant part due to sexist stereotypes.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/04/the-10-most-dangerous-jobs-f... I ignored the "for men" qualifier as it seems obvious that these are the most dangerous jobs period.

Fair enough. I believe those stats are skewed by a small number of pilots doing relatively dangerous kinds of flying. In any case, yes, more women would be doing these jobs if sexism were eliminated.

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

#300

Post by WalterBright »

throwaway09851 wrote: post #271
lgleason wrote: post #130

It all comes down to equality of opportunity vs equality of outcome. When there is equality of opportunity women choose different fields...often (but not always) because of different interests. Equality of outcome forces people to do things that they may not have an interest in. And that is before you get into interests vs natural talent and how that does or does not affect ones success in a field. On a fundamental l…

I am a woman, and this pervasive opinion that women are leaving STEM fields because of toxic behavior feels more sexist to me than anything else. It seems to me that if you have a genuine passion for STEM stuff, it takes a lot more than a bad environment to completely redirect your career path. Every woman I know with a genuine and deep interest in STEM subjects has had to deal with some level of toxic/sexist/whateve…

> Every woman I know with a genuine and deep interest in STEM subjects has had to deal with some level of toxic/sexist/whatever stuff in their life, and they persevered and dealt with it because they weren't going to let it get in the way of their passion.

I grew up in an era when kids interested in STEM were "nerds" and were harassed, denigrated, and had lower social status. This changed when Bill Gates made his first billion. Suddenly, people realized that STEM was a ticket to the good life.

The title of the documentary "Triumph of the Nerds" was no accident.

A Seattle local comedy show "Almost Live" regularly ran skits about Microsoft engineers being socially inept and unable to get dates. (Of course, the joke turned out to be on Almost Live, as the super wealthy Microsoft engineers transformed the city.)

I suppose my point is that men who liked STEM had persevered in spite of the negative image of it.

Post reply on HN