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

461–470 of 748 posts

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#461

Post by wilg »

uncle_j wrote: post #458
wilg wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're suggesting we should arrange society a specific way because of some connection to "biology". I am saying that the arrangements you seem to be for are no more rooted in biology than the arrangements you seem to be against.

> You're suggesting we should arrange society a specific way because of some connection to "biology". Nope. I didn't say that. > There is about 4 billion years of evolution and the thinking that it can be socially engineered away is a folly. I didn't make any statement on how to arrange society. I simply stated that I believe they would all eventually fail.

You called the expectation of men to be breadwinners a natural consequence of sexual dimorphism, and said it was folly to "engineer" it away. That is a statement about how you think society should be arranged and why.

Also, if you believe _all_ arrangements of society will eventually fall, then wouldn't that make any arrangement acceptable to you? Including the one you were dismissing?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#462

Post by celticmusic »

chongli wrote: post #277
celticmusic wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you can bottle feed breast milk.

But that means the mother needs time and a discreet place to pump at work. If it’s a job where she’s on her feet all day, that may not be possible.

Short of some form of difficult manual labor, I've never experienced a workplace that doesn't allow a woman to pump.

This is certainly not going to be the norm.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#463

Post by danans »

detoxdetox wrote: post #384
ck425 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's worth noting that the amount of time parents (more so mothers) spend with each child has increased vastly, with relatively little evidence to suggest much increase in attainment. Most studies show that it's quality of time, not quantity, with parents that really matters. The evidence suggests we don't actually need to parent so much. Personally I see absolutely nothing wrong with sending kids to day care. We sho…

Good point. A bit of nuance: Young children are information sponges. Think about how easy a 2-3 year old picks up language. It is not that hard to believe that 2-3 year olds also pick up behavioral patterns from their surroundings. For life. Do we want Mothers to shape their young children's behavioral patterns, or low paid child care workers with no skin in the game? 8 year olds? Send them to school with a key aroun…

> 2-3 kids, spaced 2 years, up to 3-4 years old = a career break of 5-8 years. That ought become social norm and be encouraged.

This is what a lot of wealthy people already do, because they can afford it due to one spouse's very high income, so the other spouse has a sort of vanity job (i.e. serving on the board of a charity).

But for the working and middle class, this is a bit of a pipe dream. Two people working are needed to pay the mortgage for the house that gets you the "good" public school.

Universal extended paid family leave and health care are a good way to encourage people to take time off to raise their young children. Many European countries do exactly that. I have friends in such countries who continued their academic careers part time while raising their children. It didn't hurt that they never worried about health care coverage for their families. It is a reason why European academics move back to their home countries after stints in the United States.

But things like that that will require raising taxes, and well, are we actually ready for that conversation?

Solving this by regressing to a society that discourages women from doing jobs outside the home is backward. Instead, change the system so that working parents have more freedom to make that choice to stay home with kids if they want to without imposing unreasonable struggle and risk upon their families, just like the wealthy have that option today.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#464

Post by kendallpark »

amb23 wrote: post #34

Mothers--the vast majority of mothers, not the aristocracic ones we model our current family structures off of--have always worked. They'd strap the baby on their back and go to the fields to plow or gather the harvest or cook or weave or chop firewood. Motherhood as as a full-time job is a modern invention; historically, it was a side gig. I'd love to see a startup tackle this problem: think a benefits platform that…

Yup. Back in the day, women in traditional housewife roles were major contributors to their household finances [1]. They used their own unpaid labor to transform raw materials into goods that saved their family from having to purchase them on the market. They also performed services that would have been prohibitive to hire out. But thanks to mass production and household appliances, household production doesn't contribute as much to household finances as it once did. 1950's suburbia was that awkward transition period before middle class families realized that they could have dual incomes--it was never going to last.

[1] https://fbe.unimelb.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/80599...

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#465

Post by Faark »

uncle_j wrote: post #450
wilg wrote: post #435

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Bad take! There's no distinction between "biology" and "social engineering". Our biology underpins us having these discussions. Our biology underpins our society. Our biology underpins our thinking that things can be better. Our biology encourages us to improve our own quality of life and that of others in ever larger social groups. Everything we do is true to our biology.

There is an obvious distinction between people trying to socially arrange society and our biology. Pretending otherwise is ridiculous.

Woman give birth, men cannot breastfeed. That are indeed biology. Kids being picked up from school predominately by woman is a social arrangement, the kind we hopefully at least try to change if we consider there to be better options.

But yes, many kinds of social arrangements come up naturally and woman taking care of house and kids seems to be one of them. Another one is "the powerful rule over the weak"... something we nowadays generally think should be kept in check to the benefit of society and thus spend effort doing so. But spending effort to keep pre-defined gender roles in check must be somehow bad?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#466

Post by deyouz »

tylermenezes wrote: post #349
hyperdunc wrote: post #338

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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's biological "It's biology" has a long history of being used to justify everything from sexism to racism to genocide. Please provide a source for your claim (and for the implied claim that men do not have the same drive).

And of course you were downvoted, while the one claiming "biology!" based on no arguments wasn't.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#467

Post by pnako »

Nouser76 wrote: post #287
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 diverse opinions lead to better end products. Having homogenized groups of people means you're leaving some viewpoints out, and those viewpoints have sometimes been extremely helpful for me as a software developer.

Yes I've observed that it's useful to have people like physicists or electrical engineers in a software development team, because they have a different perspective on things.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#468

Post by AlexCoventry »

allovernow wrote: post #369
AlexCoventry wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no biological evidence to the contrary, and the statistical, circumstantial evidence can all be convincingly explained by the kinds of structural issues raised in the OP.

Are you sure about that? Consider the following non-inclusive list: 1. Differences in hormonal expression and response affecting behavior and interests, e.g. testosterone and competitiveness (biological) 2. Measured differences in performance in different types of intelligence, e.g. spatial reasoning (statistical) 3. Consistent differences in achievement and specialization between men and women across almost all soci…

The studies I've looked at for 1. aren't convincing. If you have any in mind and want to share, I might take a look, because I find the topic mildly interesting.

2. and 3. can be explained by structural issues, as I said.

It's not really a question of the distribution of capabilities in men and women today which interests me the most, but the potential malleability of those capabilities given the right social structures, because if there's a way to bring a larger fraction of the population into STEM work, we'll have a much more creative and prosperous society.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#469

Post by uncle_j »

n4r9 wrote: post #454
uncle_j wrote: post #415

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 i…

How is it not one of those circumstances? Men find it extremely difficult to make a career as a nursery teacher, for example, because nursery schools and parents of young children don't trust men as a nurturing caregiver. It's a clear cut example of how a sexist view of men - biologically inspired or otherwise - is harmful to men.

That isn't sexism. There is a far higher likelihood that a sex offender is a man rather than a woman. While unfair it isn't unfounded fear and parents are naturally protective of their children.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#470

Post by hanniabu »

the_gipsy wrote: post #433
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 women have a right to the same opportunities as the other 50% of the population.

Yes, but you don't see many, if any, complaints about under-represented saturation divers.
Post reply on HN