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

Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 144 posts

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#21

Post by epistasis »

stuckinhell wrote: post #4

National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track - https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 Even where I work, I'm under a lot of pressure to hire more women engineers to the point we bend rules and relax standards. There is a ton of societal and economic pressure with slogans like "the future is female". I'm a mother and I do not think this is a good thing. I have a so…

Given the amount of harassment and pressure on women in science that men don't experience, I've always found that the women who stick around tend to be more capable than the average male scientist.

If you have to relax standards to hire women, you're doing it 100% wrong and should evaluate your sourcing of candidates. And perhaps the evaluation process and environment itself. Women know bad environments, and capable women will stay far away.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#22

Post by froeb »

In physics at least, it's been my experience that even though the percentage of women physics professors is low, almost every one is an above-average researcher. They are certainly harder working on average. Meanwhile, there will be several men in the department who have just coasted. This isn't among new profs, but among those who have been around long enough that they definitely experienced gender discrimination in hiring. I don't think this is a biological thing, just an interesting side effect of strong gender discrimination, where the women who make it in have to be exceptional to do so.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#23

Post by nodesocket »

stuckinhell wrote: post #4

National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track - https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 Even where I work, I'm under a lot of pressure to hire more women engineers to the point we bend rules and relax standards. There is a ton of societal and economic pressure with slogans like "the future is female". I'm a mother and I do not think this is a good thing. I have a so…

As Jordan Peterson has been championing, equality of outcome is not the same as equality. Better candidates, more qualified students are being passed up because they are male, white, pick your stereotype of privilege here. It’s a serious societal problem leading to anger and extremism.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#24

Post by boc »

8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #10
kilgnad wrote: post #2

How is this an "accomplishment for gender equity." Isn't this still inequity? I think the fact that the writer couldn't perceive how this is still, logically speaking, "inequity" speaks to the bias at play in this area. But then again is true equity even possible? Is it a logical possibility given the biological differences between men and women? Perhaps it's a scientific fact that women are superior to men in scienc…

I wonder if for many righting a historic wrong ends up spilling into retribution territory, where it feels justified to inflict vengeance upon one demographic group for a past injustice.

We’re all human. People who are in charge today aren’t biologically better/worse people than the people they oppress. Change the social norms and the oppressed group will adapt. Some of the oppressed will seek reconciliation. Others will seek retribution and they might succeed.

To pretend that marginalized groups DON’T work this way is (imo) soft racism/sexism/classism. We’re all the same human species.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#25

Post by kilgnad »

boc wrote: post #24
8f2ab37a-ed6c wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder if for many righting a historic wrong ends up spilling into retribution territory, where it feels justified to inflict vengeance upon one demographic group for a past injustice.

We’re all human. People who are in charge today aren’t biologically better/worse people than the people they oppress. Change the social norms and the oppressed group will adapt. Some of the oppressed will seek reconciliation. Others will seek retribution and they might succeed. To pretend that marginalized groups DON’T work this way is (imo) soft racism/sexism/classism. We’re all the same human species.

That doesn't mean there aren't morphological differences between sex. Men in general have bigger muscles and penises, while women have breasts.

There is nothing logical or scientific that precludes differences in intelligence either. Clearly women are significantly smarter then men in practically every area.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#26

Post by stuckinhell »

epistasis wrote: post #21
stuckinhell wrote: post #4

National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track - https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 Even where I work, I'm under a lot of pressure to hire more women engineers to the point we bend rules and relax standards. There is a ton of societal and economic pressure with slogans like "the future is female". I'm a mother and I do not think this is a good thing. I have a so…

Given the amount of harassment and pressure on women in science that men don't experience, I've always found that the women who stick around tend to be more capable than the average male scientist. If you have to relax standards to hire women, you're doing it 100% wrong and should evaluate your sourcing of candidates. And perhaps the evaluation process and environment itself. Women know bad environments, and capable…

Sure but that's not incentives work in businesses.

If I can get a women engineer onto a certain team of extremely high performing all male engineers at my firm, I can get a bonus of 20k easily, and hit a DIE initiative goal which is good for my career. It's good for my career unless the team stops performing well, but if I've already leveraged it into another position then who cares ?

These are some of dynamics occurring in reality of many fortune 500 companies right now with recruiters, managers, directors, and executives.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#27

Post by ipaddr »

kilgnad wrote: post #2

How is this an "accomplishment for gender equity." Isn't this still inequity? I think the fact that the writer couldn't perceive how this is still, logically speaking, "inequity" speaks to the bias at play in this area. But then again is true equity even possible? Is it a logical possibility given the biological differences between men and women? Perhaps it's a scientific fact that women are superior to men in scienc…

Greater intellectual superiority because of the % entering college? College is a status symbol and women are buying into it more than males. It shows men are more independent thinkers and feel confident they can get along without a degree. It also because entry level jobs in fields women are interested in require college where men have more options in the trades.

As women are dominating college entry over men a college degrees is less a proxy for intelligence and more for a middle class status symbol.

As companies fight over the pools of women grads the smart companies are picking up the males who are being excluded and reaping the rewards

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#28

Post by lgleason »

Unless the majority of academy is female, I would guess that you probably have a lower number of women running and a lot of pressure to get more women into these positions. This is what happens when you favor equality of outcome vs equality of opportunity.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#29

Post by Godel_unicode »

Calavar wrote: post #20
area51org wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Perhaps it's a scientific fact that women are superior to men in science The only valid broad generalization is that there are no valid broad generalizations. My take? I think we men are used to having things handed to us, and women in our society are used to having to try hard, and with more or less equal opportunity, they're kicking ass.

> Female researchers in mathematics, psychology and economics are 3–15 times more likely to be elected as members of the US National Academy of Sciences (NAS) or the American Academy of Arts and Sciences than are male counterparts who have similar publication and citation records That line doesn't really match with men being asked to try equally hard. It seems to me that academic and professional societies are despar…

That’s not what’s happening though. It’s a highly imbalanced class, just “the right way”.

You’re also quite incorrect about when DEI programs started, they’re just actually called that now. Women have outnumbered men in universities since around 1980 because of attempts to get more women into college.

Edit: hard to keep up with the ninja edits, the point in the last paragraph is significantly changed.

Re: Females more likely than males to be elected in US scientific societies

#30

Post by dasil003 »

Zetice wrote: post #12
stuckinhell wrote: post #4

National hiring experiments reveal 2:1 faculty preference for women on STEM tenure track - https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1418878112 Even where I work, I'm under a lot of pressure to hire more women engineers to the point we bend rules and relax standards. There is a ton of societal and economic pressure with slogans like "the future is female". I'm a mother and I do not think this is a good thing. I have a so…

It’s funny, for men to think society is against them, when in reality they define society. As a straight white male, there are very few rooms, very few jobs, very few situations where I don’t have absolute confidence that I belong there. Is it so bad to think everybody should feel that way? Your son will be fine.

No one group defines society. It's fair to say men hold a disproportionate amount of power, and its admirable to acknowledge your own privilege as you are doing here, but it's critical to not start believing that the cultural narrative du jour is somehow the ground truth. The minute we do this, we feed political polarization between genuinely good people, and open the door for liars and sociopaths to manipulate us like herd animals to their own ends.
Post reply on HN