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

421–430 of 748 posts

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#421

Post by PeterisP »

gowld wrote: post #355
MrFantastic wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Men are hardwired to ascend to the top of the hierachy so they can access all the women. That's why male billonaires will risk their fortune to make another billion. Women are not rewarded biologically for being the top 2% in their industry. It's almost as if the higher women climb career wise the fewer dating options they have because women tend to want men that are even higher on the totem pole. Outside of a score…

How does your theory account for the 98% of men who are not top 2%?

Well, it probably assumes that the 98% are eager to throw themselves in the rat race in trying to become that top 2% or at least closer to them; the fact that they won't get there doesn't mean that there isn't a drive to optimize your career to try.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#422

Post by sethammons »

downerending wrote: post #202
henrikschroder wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and make room for Mothers to take care of their own children. Whoa, 50's regression much? Why not make room for fathers to take care of their own children? > in the care of poorly paid strangers Or you could leave your children in the care of educated professionals in child development, who will ensure your children gets age- and stage-appropriate stimulation, as well as socialization with other children in a safe…

> you could leave your children in the care of educated professionals in child development... That sounds wonderful, but it's economically impossible, except for the rich. The cost would be near or exceed what most people clear working a job.

Yup. My wife and I were faced with the option of her contributing financially to the home and we pay for child care, or her being an at home mom. If she went to work, she would net $20 a week after paying for child care. Yeah, nope.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#423

Post by henrikschroder »

gowld wrote: post #370
henrikschroder wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and make room for Mothers to take care of their own children. Whoa, 50's regression much? Why not make room for fathers to take care of their own children? > in the care of poorly paid strangers Or you could leave your children in the care of educated professionals in child development, who will ensure your children gets age- and stage-appropriate stimulation, as well as socialization with other children in a safe…

It's incredibly offensive and dumb to say that women don't know how to raise children, considering the millennia long track record.

That millennia long track record contains very high numbers of infant death, and the only thing pushing those numbers down is our ever-expanding collective knowledge of best practices regarding child-rearing.

Women aren't born with innate genetic knowledge of how to prevent SIDS, it's taken generations of studies to figure out causes and develop working practices to counter it.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#424

Post by [deleted] »

daotoad wrote: post #263

My only quibble with this article is that the fact that there is a wall related to child bearing and rearing IS institutional sexism. It's just a different form of it than the "my coworkers constantly stare at my tits and don't take what I say seriously" variety. We've put women largely in charge of child rearing duties. Obviously, men aren't able to get pregnant and bear children. We are, however, perfectly capable…

[deleted]

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#425

Post by alexithym »

epicgiga wrote: post #416

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 e…

This was an unnecessarily aggressive comment, and the tone with which it was made detracts greatly from the intended message.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#426

Post by sethammons »

chadcmulligan wrote: post #376
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…

I became the primary care giver for my daughter for a number of years (My wife died - some years ago). My experience is that there is no flexibility in IT jobs - if you want to work not 9-5 5 days a week then tough luck, when you have a kid to look after, pick up from after school etc this just isn't possible. I envied doctors at the time, they could just name their hours, some other professions can - but not STEM fi…

That does not sounds like IT jobs, it sounds like most jobs. In every sector, I'm sure you can find employers who are more flexible than others. I work at a software company and there are single parents leaving early or coming in late or both due to raising their kids. Consider finding a better employer.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#427

Post by Tade0 »

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…

I think it's still a form of sexism to assume women are the ones who need to care for a child.

They're definitely the only ones who can breastfeed(at any practical rate anyway).

One may, of course, elect not to do that, but it does make a difference for the child.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#428

Post by maire »

detoxdetox wrote: post #79
entee wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree with this and the subtlety of the OP’s argument. There is clearly a problem, there are clearly many contributors, I have personally seen The OP situation play out with my female friends/colleagues in STEM (and other “high power” sectors). This does NOT discount that sexism still is a problem nor that there may be cultural/societal norms that influence the family planning issue. It’s a complicated issue, it ne…

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.…

Non-working mothers is a modern anomaly. It used to be a sign of wealth for a man to have a non-working wife. That is why the newly affluent men of the mid-20th century wanted it so much. They came out of the great depression, fought a great war, and wanted a wife at home. You should not judge all of history by this one era.

The work of child care used to fall on the entire extended family. The nuclear family reduced the flexibility in raising children. It was further reduced by a lack of work-life balance for both fathers and mothers. When women started working (again) the lack of flexibility fell on the mothers to fix.

In my own life - I worked, my mother worked, my grandmothers worked, and my great grandmothers worked. I had flexibility through daycare, my awesome husband, my awesome mother, and my awesome employers. I know they are all awesome because when my daughter (a software engineer) faced the same issues, her employer was not at all flexible. She quit work to stay at home with her three boys. I have a bunch of engineering friends who faced the same issues as my daughter. I originally thought they left the workforce out of choice and now I know they did not.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#429

Post by CydeWeys »

ivalm wrote: post #159
fizwhiz wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> STEM fields rarely pay even close to what consulting, law and medicine pay. Peers of equivalent talent in those 3 professions are generally making double to triple (if not more) by the time STEM graduates reach the same moment in their personal lives. These statements couldn't be further from the truth. You don't need to hang out on HN for long to figure out that FAANG SWEs comfortably make upwards of 400k in their…

SWE at FAANG is only a minor, frankly irrelevant, portion of STEM. Most people in STEM cannot transition to being a FAANG SWE. In fact, the OP article of this thread is about progression in an academic career, which doesn't pay well unless you become a full professor at a research uni. First time you break low 6 figures in this career is when you become assistant prof in early/mid 30s.

Surgeons, McKinsey management consultants, partners at big law firms, etc., are all tiny slices of much larger, lower-compensated workforces too.

And considering how many tens of thousands of engineers the big tech companies have each, the top slice in our industry isn't that small.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#430

Post by CydeWeys »

pb7 wrote: post #244
thereisnospork wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

SWE's are a tiny slice of 'STEM' and by far the most profitable. How much do you think the average phd in biology makes? maybe 30k/y till 27, then 45k/y till 30, then followed by 75-90?

Doctors are also a tiny slice of medicine. Nurses make a fraction of what doctors make, and other roles like Clinical Laboratory Technologist and Radiology Technician that make healthcare possible make even less. Law exhibits a bimodal distribution in compensation as well. Paralegals make even less than poorly compensated lawyers.

Also, the super well compensated doctors are a small slice of doctors overall. Most doctors end up doing family practice, which isn't super lucrative. Once you factor in the hundreds of thousands in loans, there are many non-doctor career paths that have better outcomes than that.
Post reply on HN