An alternative argument for why women leave STEM • Hacker News Board

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#321

Post by Fomite » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:44 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #286

tharne wrote: post #60

I think the author buried the lede here. My biggest takeaway from the article is that you'd have to be an absolute sucker to work in academia given how poorly you'll be treated. Each person that puts up with this only makes the problem worse, giving at least tacit approval to the status quo. If folks were to start opting out of academia in larger numbers for jobs in private industry, schools would be forced to improv…

You should also add to this that increasingly, large tech companies have access to much better data for nearly any area that is interesting for research. Further, companies can go from research to product that ostensibly makes a difference at scale with a speed that absolutely no University could. I'm really not seeing any reason to stay in academia whatsoever if you want to do the most exciting applied research toda…

I work in the health sector and honestly, it comes down to a couple things:

1) They have more data. It's not clear that it's better.

2) That difference is, to the eyes of many of us, showing up, making things worse, and then "pivoting".

3) I get to decide what I want to do. I want to add a project on X? I go work on it.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#322

Post by choeger » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:45 PM UTC

As a male that dropped out of the academic career path I can absolutely confirm that the author has a point. I made the conscious decision not to attempt to become a professor because it would be nearly impossible for my wife to have a qualified career at the same time due to the required flexibility. Add children to the mix and you are pretty much confined to a single-career family. Which would be arguable if it wasn't for the extremely high risk if that particular career path.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#323

Post by entee » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:45 PM UTC

codingmess wrote: post #283

entee wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I follow. Given two mothers (gonna leave aside some of the baggage here, fathers can do child care, not all women/people are straight or fit in the conventional framework): Amanda wants to have kids but also wants to be a Supreme Court litigator. Jane wants kids and wants to stay at home to raise them. Why is giving Amanda the option hurting Jane’s ability to chose her preferred outcome? Should we force Aman…

It's hurting in some ways, for example in increased prices for housing. If families with two income earners compete with families with one income earner, the outlook is bleak for one earner families. Prices simply rise to what the two earner households can afford. In fact many families can not afford the single earner model anymore. There are also changed expectation, although presumably those can be managed. But onc…

The two income trap you mention was the subject of an Elizabeth Warren book sometime in the early 2000s. It’s a real issue, I’m not sure how to solve it, but it seems like a different larger scale issue. Also at this point its a little late. That societal evolution has already created facts on the ground such that in most larger cities it’s impossible to afford a good middle class lifestyle without two incomes.

Given that, what’s a simple thing that we could do to make life better? Make it easier for people to cope with that. Good, easy childcare is one clear way to do it.

It’s also wrong to suggest this is a rich people problem. If anything the lack of childcare is an even more acute strain at the lower end of the wage scale.

Completely free childcare for everyone may be unworkable or undesirable for a variety of reasons, but it seems clear we can do a whole lot more, and we would benefit in the aggregate. Not the least of which because more people from different backgrounds in the workplace is a great way to build empathy and creativity.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#324

Post by jacobwilliamroy » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:47 PM UTC

My dad spent almost all of my waking childhood at work and I still feel really sad and hurt about that. I suspect everyone has similar repressed resentment towards their providers, and professionals should really consider that when they're planning their families.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#325

Post by analbumcover » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:48 PM UTC

AndrewKemendo wrote: post #286

tharne wrote: post #60

I think the author buried the lede here. My biggest takeaway from the article is that you'd have to be an absolute sucker to work in academia given how poorly you'll be treated. Each person that puts up with this only makes the problem worse, giving at least tacit approval to the status quo. If folks were to start opting out of academia in larger numbers for jobs in private industry, schools would be forced to improv…

You should also add to this that increasingly, large tech companies have access to much better data for nearly any area that is interesting for research. Further, companies can go from research to product that ostensibly makes a difference at scale with a speed that absolutely no University could. I'm really not seeing any reason to stay in academia whatsoever if you want to do the most exciting applied research toda…

> companies can go from research to product that ostensibly makes a difference at scale with a speed that absolutely no University could.

Isn't that the point of being an academic? That you don't have much, if any, interest in generating a product?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#326

Post by naasking » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:48 PM UTC

tylermenezes wrote: post #272

I think it's still a form of sexism to assume women are the ones who need to care for a child. That's something that very few diversity-in-STEM folks are really thinking about. Many years ago an ex-girlfriend, who works in STEM academia (and is otherwise a liberal, progressive feminist), expressed concerns similar to the author about having kids. When I brought up that it wasn't written in stone that she would need t…

A woman would still need almost a year of special work consideration for the pregnancy, appointments, and post-birth recovery, even if they're not a primary care giver afterwards.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#327

Post by pencilcode » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:50 PM UTC

I remember seeing, I think in Netflix’s Explained series, that the salary differences between men and women were the same as the differences between women with children and women within children, making raising children the primary cause for the average salary disparities. This article rings true with that.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#328

Post by toohotatopic » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:51 PM UTC

How about the variance difference: men and women are equally intelligent on average. However, the variance is different so that there are more stupid men but also more intelligent men.

Could the drop-out rate simply reflect the higher share of men who are able to fulfill the functions that are required at those higher positions?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#329

Post by AlexCoventry » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:52 PM UTC

throwaway894345 wrote: post #163

> Heck, let’s spend 99% — $1.485 billion (in the states alone) on better support. That should put a dent in the support bill, and I’d sure pick up $15 million if I saw it lying around. Wouldn’t you? According to PEW ( https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2018/01/09/diversity-in-the-... ) there were 17M STEM employees in 2016, so this leaves less than $1000 per employee for childcare. According to Fortune ( https://fortune…

> I suspect that would be difficult under current US discrimination law

What statutes do you believe would stand in the way of an organization offering excellent daycare services to its employees, as suggested in the OP?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#330

Post by epicureanideal » Fri, Jan 17, 2020, 10:53 PM UTC

chadlavi wrote: post #180

So... it's not sexism, it's the structurally sexist way that child-rearing is handled? I mean, it's a more actionable level of detail, but it's still sexism, no? Just maybe more structural rather than at the level of individual hiring or advancing decisions?

I think a larger percentage of society would be willing to call this "structural gender-based inequality" rather than sexism, because most people including myself use the word "sexism" to refer to a belief that one sex is less capable or somehow worse than the other.

Similarly, men live fewer years than women, and so receive less retirement benefits. This is a structural gender-correlated inequality (maybe gender-correlated is even better than gender-based) but I don't think many people would call it "sexism against men". They would just say "oh, yeah, that's odd... maybe we should adjust that now that you've brought it to our attention".