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

An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 748 posts

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#411

Post by astura »

maximente wrote: post #212
kalenx wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

After pregancy and the very first months of life, I fail to see any "obvious biological reasons".

WHO recommends breast feeding until age of 2, so that's at least one thing that seems not readily changeable across sexes.

That's not what they recommend

https://www.who.int/topics/breastfeeding/en/

>Exclusive breastfeeding is recommended up to 6 months of age, with continued breastfeeding along with appropriate complementary foods up to two years of age or beyond.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#412

Post by ByzantineO6 »

gfodor wrote: post #154
detoxdetox wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lost in the modern rush for status and money, "obscenely convenient high quality daycare" used to be called "Motherhood" and was supplied by Mothers themselves. Some would argue, the most valuable contribution to society, even if not directly monetized. To sustain a healthy population, we used to need 10 children per fertile woman, which made "stay at home Mother" an obvious necessity for the vast majority of women.…

I've re-read your comment a few times now, and I don't see anywhere you've written something that implies you think women ought to become mothers due to some moral standard you have. So I don't think the downvotes are warranted. It sounds like you are highlighting the contradiction between the fact that women are now increasingly expected and needed to do the job of full-time motherhood while also somehow, miraculous…

Children, well-reared and thriving, were once an (imperfect) investment in prepaid,loving elder care.

Bismarck's Social Security and its successors replaced this intergenerational dynamic. Like so much else Progressive, the net is that value once added inside a family is now done by taxpaying strangers. And increases GDP, yay! It's a big win for the State! Not so much for people.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#413

Post by the_gipsy »

hyperdunc wrote: post #338
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…

Women are more likely to want to be the primary caregiver to something that actually came out of them. It's biological and there's nothing sexist about it.

It is sexist because you are dismissing women being treated as lesser beings with some armchair analysis.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#414

Post by deyouz »

allovernow wrote: post #143
ixtli wrote: post #105

> When you ask women why they left, the number one reason they cite is balancing work/life responsibilities — which as far as I can tell is a euphemism for family concerns. At least in america women are, in this way, almost always asked to choose between their career and having children. This is asymmetrical with men's experience because whether or not they are comfortable with it, its considered normal for them to s…

>It's a systemic sexism that has deep roots in how we organize the aesthetics of our society Or it's a systematic sexism that has deep roots in human biology and thousands of generations of sexually dimorphic specialization, and I can't believe we've successfully convinced multiple generations of westerners now to pretend that men and women are equally suited for all roles, including child rearing. Now we need an art…

>Or it's a systematic sexism that has deep roots in human biology and thousands of generations of sexually dimorphic specialization

Are you saying women are naturally more nurturing than men? And more inclined towards childcare?

Because I vehemently disagree.

>I'm relieved to see a take that questions the tired, pervasive assumption that STEM is simply not welcoming to women because old white men are sexist.

It can definitely be a factor. And even a more important factor is the fact that women can feel unwelcome in tech. At Oxford only 10% of the undergraduates accepted to study computer science were women. Now imagine being a woman in that class. You might feel like you don't belong, although you might be friends with your predominantly male classmates. Some of them will make jokes at the expense of your gender, others will hit on you, and the list goes on. Obviously not all of them will treat you differently, but some of them will, and that's enough to feel unwelcomed. And thus, you might be more inclined to leave tech for a field with more women, like biology.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#415

Post by uncle_j »

YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #408
uncle_j wrote: post #391

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is almost never mentioned but most men won't respect other men who are stay at home parent. So there is also an expectation on the man to be the bread winner. Also many women tend not to want men who earn less then them: https://www.marketwatch.com/story/rich-women-like-rich-men-a...

>> It is almost never mentioned but most men won't respect other men who are stay at home parent. So there is also an expectation on the man to be the bread winner. That too, is sexism, of course. Sexism also harms men.

I don't agree it is sexism. It is the simple fact that our species is sexually dimorphic. This guarantees that there will be asymmetry between the genders regardless of the social engineering that is attempted.

There is about 4 billion years of evolution and the thinking that it can be socially engineered away is a folly.

> Sexism also harms men.

Yes it does. But this is not one of those circumstances. However that is a completely different conversation.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#416

Post by epicgiga »

Maybe they're just not as into it?

Does anyone ever stop to consider that? Maybe women are doing what's best for themselves, sticking to things they like, and screw your arrogant western leftist ideas of what YOU think they should do?

Let's just pretend women like shoes and handbags more and men like engines and guns more just for purely random reasons. Despite global perpetuity. Everywhere ever.

Let's just pretend engineers and nurses is inflicted, not chosen, despite what ultra high gender equality Scandinavia says.

Let's all pretend that only the North Koreans are brainwashed and that only they care little for facts and human flourishing.

Let's all just slosh in wierd western religious fervour. Or actually, how about no, and hop on a plane to the civilised world.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#417

Post by jariel »

The fundamental differentiator between early and late stage in those graphs is that there are far fewer positions as time moves on, in the 'higher' cohorts.

It's not people just graduate along the path from A to Z - it's viciously competitive.

Issues of maternity et. al. I think are just one important artefact of the nature of competition which for whatever reason I think is still going to favour men. Risk taking, hubris, aggression, physical endurance, combativeness, a certain kind if confidence, social expectations, possibly even the acceptance of those things by others - these things mean a lot at those later stages.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#418

Post by deyouz »

commandlinefan wrote: post #216
40acres wrote: post #119

This seems like a really long argument just to end up at the main point being: "It really is sexism". The light bulb moment here is that it's not necessarily sexism on an individual level but on an institutional one. I believe there is an obvious difference men and women which, on a general level, incites women to weigh family responsibilities over career prospects. However, industrialized nations exacerbate that dif…

> more robust programs And by “more robust programs”, you mean more related confiscatory taxation. Meaning that, again, men must surrender even more, and accept even less, to accommodate women.

>again

When did men surrendered something to accommodate women? From what I remember women were the ones who accommodated men for thousand of years.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#419

Post by PeterisP »

jacobwilliamroy wrote: post #296
proc0 wrote: post #267

Why do we care that there are equal women and men again? Why does representation actually matter again? I would find it more exciting to see a field with no representation because I could make a greater impact! This whole ideology of having representation everywhere is very dumb and conformist.

Because countries where women are dominated by men both legally and culturally, have higher rates of birth, crime, poverty, etc., than countries where women have a level of social mobility similar to men.

Current patriarchal, near-totalitarian societies have huge percentages of women going into STEM because for an ambitious, smart, strong woman in that environment it's one of the few paths to independence and status obtained through a well paying STEM job.

Countries that are more egalitarian and have more social mobility have STEM percentages that are decreasing as the same society becomes more egalitarian over time because the women have other options, and they choose to take them.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#420

Post by jariel »

proc0 wrote: post #267

Why do we care that there are equal women and men again? Why does representation actually matter again? I would find it more exciting to see a field with no representation because I could make a greater impact! This whole ideology of having representation everywhere is very dumb and conformist.

'Equal opportunity' I think is a fairly non-controversial concept, much less so than 'equal outcomes'.

To the extent there are factors which systematically work against opportunity, there's both a moral issue, and a pragmatic issue (i.e. losing good talent) at play, before we get into the more controversial issues of representation and equality of outcomes.

Post reply on HN