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

501–510 of 748 posts

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#501

Post by erikpukinskis »

n4r9 wrote: post #477
uncle_j wrote: post #469

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

That doesn't justify that sort of systematic pressure. An African American is much more likely to be a [edit: convicted] murderer than a white American, but that doesn't make it ok to cross the road whenever you see one.

> An African American is much more likely to be a murderer than a white American

[citation needed]

It is true that a black man is more likely to be prosecuted for murder but that’s a wholly different statistic.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#502

Post by barry-cotter »

HammockWarrior wrote: post #397

Seems like much of the problem could be solved by just having the working world chill the f' out for women and for men. For example, a 32 hour workweek along with generous paid parental leaves. Everyone should have time for a life outside of work, not just women of childbearing age. Also, The whole idea of having young people work like dogs in order to have a shot at making partner, or gaining tenure, or gaining a me…

Shorter workweeks would unavoidably lead to lower economic growth. People get better at things the the more they do them and the more hours they work the more they get done. The marginal value of an extra hour worked only turns negative around 60 hours.

No one is forcing people to work that hard to gain money and social status. They do it to themselves.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#503

Post by toomuchtodo »

ck425 wrote: post #280
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.…

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…

Conversely, day care should be exceedingly expensive to account for the cost of having high quality labor (vs minimum wage caregivers) tend to children, with the end result being day care is a last resort, not something provided universally (when taking into consideration the volume of “bullshit jobs” in the marketplace); your job should be of an exceptional nature to be preferred over childcare obligations.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#504

Post by buzzkillington »

maire wrote: post #453
datashow wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Non-working mothers is a modern anomaly. It used to be a sign of wealth for a man to have a non-working wife. You really need some data to back it up here. "I worked, my mother worked, my grandmothers worked, and my great grandmothers worked." is not good evidence. For one, there is a representative issue. For another, there is a huge difference between part-time work and full-time work. We don't know how many hour…

Labor force does count the actual workforce. They only count "wage slaves". One grandmother was a farmer. She took over from my grandfather when he got sick and he became the house husband. So she would not have been counted. I am not clear if it would have counted my other grandmother since she was a business owner. She owned a beauty salon. She also opened the first health food store in Berkeley with her sister to…

>One grandmother was a farmer. She took over from my grandfather when he got sick and he became the house husband.

I'm not sure what you think this proves. When the choice is "do something or starve" people do all sorts of things they would rather not do, from farming to prostitution to selling their children:

https://rarehistoricalphotos.com/4-children-sale-1948/

There but for the grace of god went your mother.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#505

Post by barry-cotter »

pgeorgi wrote: post #112
oefrha wrote: post #51

> We spend billions of dollars training women in STEM. By not making full use of their skills, if we look at only the american economy, we are wasting about $1.5 billion USD per year in economic benefits they would have produced if they stayed in STEM. So here’s a business proposal: ... With all due respect, I don’t understand this call to action. Faculty position is basically a zero sum game. If more women end up as…

> With all due respect, I don’t understand this call to action. Faculty position is basically a zero sum game. If more women end up as faculty, fewer men will. So, unless it costs more to train women than men, I doubt any “investment” would be saved The assumption is that aptitude for these positions is roughly the same between genders, so if there's a significant imbalance, society doesn't get the best people on the…

> The assumption is that aptitude for these positions is roughly the same between genders, so if there's a significant imbalance, society doesn't get the best people on the given set of seats.

Aptitude can be exactly equal and aiming at equality can still be a poor choice if men and women are different. Among medical school graduates women are more likely never to practice, to work part time, to retire early and less likely to work past retirement age. If working more hours leads to more productivity and we value productivity rewarding productivity makes sense.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#506

Post by deyouz »

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…

If you are going to claim something as harmful as that, I want you to present clear evidence and peer reviewed studies to support your claims.

What you were suggesting is that men are better than women at STEM. Simplg saying men have more testosterone doesn't cut it as evidence. (Besides, competitiveness doesn't make you a better researcher or employee, and can even be harmful in a team).

I also need data for the number 2 in that list. At what are men better at than women by a significant ammount? And how does that thing relates to STEM?

And number 3 doesn't prove absolutely anything. Women were subjugated throught history and basically no opportunity to do anything. Even with their limited possibilities, you still have women like Hatshepsut, Ada Lovelace, Marie Currie, Sappho, Ann Lister, Hypathia of Alexandria, etc. And now that they are finally allowed in higher education they outperfom men in terms of degree gained. So there is clearly not something that holds them back from studying. If they have the ability to get a PhD, then they can also be good researchers. Simple as that.

If you are going to continue with this subtle sexist talk (implying men are better than women at STEM), I want clear examples. Thanks.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#507

Post by Danieru »

maire wrote: post #453
datashow wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Non-working mothers is a modern anomaly. It used to be a sign of wealth for a man to have a non-working wife. You really need some data to back it up here. "I worked, my mother worked, my grandmothers worked, and my great grandmothers worked." is not good evidence. For one, there is a representative issue. For another, there is a huge difference between part-time work and full-time work. We don't know how many hour…

Labor force does count the actual workforce. They only count "wage slaves". One grandmother was a farmer. She took over from my grandfather when he got sick and he became the house husband. So she would not have been counted. I am not clear if it would have counted my other grandmother since she was a business owner. She owned a beauty salon. She also opened the first health food store in Berkeley with her sister to…

> She took over from my grandfather when he got sick and he became the house husband.

Neither would have her husband been counted in the non-farm labour force survey. Thus swapping husband for wife would not have shown up as a change in the first place.

This is an interesting discussion. I remember my economists professor talking about how in Alberta during the 2006 boom labour force participation dropped as wages increased. In that case it was an example of the in-elasticity of labour demand.

From the social aspect it was an example of how for many families 2 working parents is not optional. A situation was fully true earlier in the industrial revolution. As the revolution progressed and labour had more negotiation power over capital real wages rose and duel working parents decreased.

Thus my pet theory is that the reduction in real wages is a non-trivial driving force for the current historic high labour force participation stats.

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#508

Post by bjourne »

buzzkillington wrote: post #499
maire wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

>Non-working mothers is a modern anomaly. If by modern you mean common for the lower middle class in 1850 sure: >And here occurs a curious inversion. It is a fact of common observance that in this lower middle class there is no pretense of leisure on the part of the head of the household. Through force of circumstances it has fallen into disuse. But the middle-class wife still carries on the business of vicarious lei…

Are you sure Thorstein Veblen's quote is accurate or applies to the majority of the female population at the time?

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#509

Post by epicgiga »

alexithym wrote: post #425
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.

Fair, but calmly worded reason hasn't budged these bunch or their regime for decades, so "repeating the experiment" etc

Re: An alternative argument for why women leave STEM

#510

Post by kendallpark »

falcor84 wrote: post #484
kendallpark wrote: post #432

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed. How many times have you heard a man say he had to choose between his career and having kids? The fact that it is predominantly women who feel they have to choose between children and career IS institutional sexism. We say we've achieved "equal opportunity" when women are allowed to participate in career fields that had originally evolved around the male workforce. Is that parity? That women can succeed in cer…

>How many times have you heard a man say he had to choose between his career and having kids? I agree with your sentiment, but there's a big biological difference here in terms of the fertility age. As discussed in the article, this question is very urgent for women in their 30s, but men can delay reproduction until their late 40s with no major issues. As such, men don't face an ultimatum on this, the way that women…

> As such, men don't face an ultimatum on this, the way that women do.

But at late 40's do these men feel like they have to choose between children and early retirement?

Furthermore, most men don't just wait around until their late 40's to find a young woman to reproduce with. Human relationships aren't this calculated. You don't get to plan when you end up meeting the right person. Life happens. There are plenty of men in their 30's in committed relationships with women in their 30's. Just because he can delay reproducing doesn't mean they can. Usually this is a decision that a couple makes together. And I haven't heard a man say that he had to choose between his career and having kids because his wife's biological clock was ticking.

Post reply on HN