Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child • Hacker News Board

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#151

Post by vixen99 » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 6:33 AM UTC

roenxi wrote: post #91

thomasmeeks wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The answer is a quick Google search away, diversity increases innovation: https://www.google.com/search?q=diversity+increases+innovati... If you don't agree with that, I'd love to hear why, and why the related studies are false. Can start with this one, which is the first result: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.685... There's quite the bibliography to pour through there, though, if you really…

The study you linked has nothing to do with gender or diversity w.r.t. minorities. It's subject is economic geography. We can be pretty confident that if 50% of the population are women then 50% of the best candidates for a given job, by natural aptitude, are women. The same logic applies to minorities as well, so we can be confident that any process calibrated to finding the best person for the job is going to turn…

No, we can't be 'pretty confident'. Sometimes the 'best' don't want to do the job. 90% of nurses are female (in Sweden where gender equality is a top priority).

What would be the motivation to induce or somehow encourage males to take up a career for which they clearly have no particular enthusiasm. I wonder how many males harbour a secret desire to be a nurse but are discouraged by societal norms? Need some amazing evidence for that one.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#152

Post by oliwarner » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 8:21 AM UTC

therealforsen wrote: post #10

I have yet to be told why it is important for there to be as many women in STEM as men apart from statements that I'm sexist for not knowing

I think it's more that it would be the natural state if not for the ingrained social factors that disadvantage, dissuade and outright remove women from those careers.

And that's important because it means a portion of the best brains are dropping out the mix, largely against their will.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#153

Post by belorn » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 8:55 AM UTC

gboudrias wrote: post #122

belorn wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Using Swedish statistics from a few years ago, 12.5% of the population has a professional job which has at minimum 40% men and 40% women. 88.5% do not. Split per gender this was 88.4% for men and 88.6% for women. If we state that bias is a risk then we must conclude that around 90% of the population work in echo chambers (more if we find that 60/40 is still quite bad segregation) and could use the benefit of reduced…

Could you explain what point you're making? I can't tell if you're disagreeing with me or not.

Not an disagreement, but rather a remark. What ever the effect of gender segregation is, it would then be practically universal here because thats how the data look like.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#154

Post by sadris » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 10:31 AM UTC

This is why I think women would birth children first and then decide if they want to raise them or pay someone else to raise them. Pretty stupid to spend 4-8 years of your life and thousands of dollars on schooling only to abandon that investment.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#155

Post by repolfx » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 11:21 AM UTC

aeredhel wrote: post #132

throwaway770210 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I too have been discriminated against due to my gender. One of the first jobs I took (in IT) was for a large regional airline. After I had worked there for about a year, a position opened up that would have amounted to a promotion, both in pay and position. I had both the experience for the position, as well as a good reputation in the company. Further, my supervisor (with whom I had a good relationship) was in charg…

You weren't particularly discriminated against due to your gender but rather fell a victim of both incompetence and immaturity. Whether actual gender discrimination is also incompetence and/or immaturity is up to discussion. But it seems to still be acceptable in some places in the US. I hope Western Europe is doing better, but I don't know.

How does that work?

I don't think asking job candidates out on dates is especially smart or professional, but the comments here seem backwards.

If a man asks a woman out on a date, that means he DOES want to spend more time with her ... like at work. Even if the woman were to say no, he might still want to give her the job, just because he likes her. This is discrimination to the woman's advantage should she choose to take it.

If a man refuses to hire another man because he'd rather hire a woman so he can try to date her, that means he does NOT want to spend time with that man. This is to the man's disadvantage.

There is clear discrimination in both these stories, against the men and in favour of the women. DoreenMichele may have felt she couldn't work with a man who asked her out on a date, but plenty of people do manage it. And of course men can ask women out on dates without perceiving them as "sex objects", that's itself a kind of bizarre assumption or even insult to men. Men and women date successfully all the time without objectification coming into it.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#156

Post by belorn » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 12:03 PM UTC

vixen99 wrote: post #151

roenxi wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The study you linked has nothing to do with gender or diversity w.r.t. minorities. It's subject is economic geography. We can be pretty confident that if 50% of the population are women then 50% of the best candidates for a given job, by natural aptitude, are women. The same logic applies to minorities as well, so we can be confident that any process calibrated to finding the best person for the job is going to turn…

No, we can't be 'pretty confident'. Sometimes the 'best' don't want to do the job. 90% of nurses are female (in Sweden where gender equality is a top priority). What would be the motivation to induce or somehow encourage males to take up a career for which they clearly have no particular enthusiasm. I wonder how many males harbour a secret desire to be a nurse but are discouraged by societal norms? Need some amazing…

What motivate a person to work? There is plenty of study that has asked this question and tried to quantify how much it is for money, a feeling of being useful, the social environment, perks, having fun, social status gain, and so on.

Pretty sure more males harbour a secret desire to be a nurse than males that harbour a secret desire to be a garbage man, and yet we see nurses are 90% female and garbage men being 90% male. The question is why.

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#157

Post by charliebrownau » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 1:13 PM UTC

Its almost like WOMEN and MEN are actually different and do choose different work fields and women typically want kids around 25-35

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#158

Post by charliebrownau » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 1:58 PM UTC

Funny how we NEVER hear about 50/50 discriminating quotas for:-

* Garbo

* Sewage workers

* Mowing lawns

* Landscaping

* Plumbers

* Electricians

* Snake catchers

* Night Petrol station attendant

* Construction

* Mining

* road crews

* IT/PC repair

* Power pole repair

#equality

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#159

Post by tomp » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 2:53 PM UTC

phil248 wrote: post #102

chimpburger wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For the same reason its important for there to be as many women in mining, oil rigging, heavy industry, and forestry.

Are you being facetious? Obviously labor intensive work does not reap the same benefits from diversity of perspectives as scientific or creative fields.

You haven't explained how diversity of sex/gender contributes to diversity of perspectives. Also, are you happy to hire white nationalists and racists in the name of "diversity of perspective"? If not, then you're not being honest in your argument...

Re: Nearly Half of US Female Scientists Leave Full-Time Science After First Child

#160

Post by tomp » Wed, Feb 20, 2019, 2:56 PM UTC

gboudrias wrote: post #123

topmonk wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In India there is a more equal split between women and men in the STEM fields, yet women are much less liberated then in Western countries. The reason being is that women there are forced to enter whatever career gives them the biggest paycheck, which happens to be STEM. So, I'd say your assumption is incorrect.

I'm not saying it benefits the public necessarily, I'm saying it benefits those who opt for diversity. I don't expect STEM to have as big an impact on women's liberation as, say, business or politics. I don't think two cultures can be compared on this basis, my assumption is that, within one culture, diversified organizations will win out on average.

But diversity is only valuable to the extent that it helps create a better society. Like, ideally noone would even have to work! And there are plenty of examples of segregated (i.e. non-diverse) situations that we support becaues we deem them socially beneficial (e.g. sex-specific gyms and toilets, tall people competing in basketball, smart people are scientists, ...) (to be precise, personally I don't support these, but our society seems to, which would imply that the people on average do).