Why Are There So Few Women in Science?

[Evo]

No. You are wrong all woman has the exactly equal preference as Astronuc has pointed out.

I believe you misunderstood what astro said, you should go back and re-read it. Affirmitive action is designed to make sure that there are similar number of minorites to majorities, regardless of if they are qualified.

I'll give you an example, when affirmative action was put in place, my office was a good balance of whites and hispanics (TX), but no blacks lived in the area. So suddenly we had a quota of blacks to hire or be financially penalized, so we stopped hiring anyone but blacks. No blacks applied. So we went after black people, they failed the entrance test and couldn't be hired. Our employee numbers were dwindling since we were allowed to hire only blacks. So we waived the employment tests, they were given 3 or more months to complete a 2 week training course, most couldn't pass training. So, we hired them anyway so that we could start hiring people capable of doing the job. The ones that failed were on one side of the room where they'd gossip, paint their fingernails and read magazines. They were union, and affirmative action, couldn't be fired.

Now there were black people that did pass and did well.

I don't blame the black people, they came without a work ethic, without an education, victims of their place in society. In other words, you just can't stick a person without the desire or the knowledge into a job and expect them to succeed. We failed them.

Affirmative action (placing unquailified people into jobs) is not the answer, but fairness in hiring people of equal qualifications is.

 

[Kholdstare]

No. You are wrong all woman has the exactly equal preference as Astronuc has pointed out.

I'm sorry. I meant equal opportunity.

 

[HeLiXe]

Your first line is confusing. When you say "it was put in place to prevent discrimination", don't you also mean "it prevents discrimination against women" ?

No I do not

In today's US any kind of discrimination is not tolerated. In overall sense discrimination is non-existent now thanks to anti-discriminatory laws. Nobody can prevent woman from doing whatever she wants. So there's no point of affirmative action trying to guarantee placement of woman in academics and employment, as nobody's stopping them.

And doing so might make them go against their wish if in a hypothetical scenario less than n number of women wants to enter the field, [where the affirmative action requires at least n number of women enter the field].

What does any of this have to do with why there are so few women in science? Your initial response to my post referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields. I fail to see how someone can choose to go through college and get a career in science related fields just so they can help an organization meet a quota.

 

[WannabeNewton]

I haven't noticed this with physics as much as math. In my special relativity class and advanced mechanics class there were an overwhelmingly large amount of girls but in my differential geometry class there wasn't even one (granted on the first day there was a girl but she dropped out the next day :[). My mom used to tell me how when she was doing her PhD in immunology her graduate biology classes would be filled with guys but nowadays you can easily find female majorities in many biology classes at various unis. I think we just need to give it time; demographics in science fields take time to change - this isn't a surprise.

 

[Kholdstare]

No I do not

What does any of this have to do with why there are so few women in science? Your initial response to my post referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields. I fail to see how someone can choose to go through college and get a career in science related fields just so they can help an organization meet a quota.

I did not respond with it for OP's question. I did so to clarify that by legal procedures discrimination is already removed where you said "...put in place to prevent discrimination..." which imply somehow discrimination still exists.

I never said "affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields". Rather I said it fails to do so. Please re-read my previous posts.

 

[HeLiXe]

I never said "affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields". Rather I said it fails to do so. Please re-read my previous posts.

I said you referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields...I was not quoting you in that context.

Today's society already encourages women more than men in science field (in overall sense). e.g. affirmative action, title IX etc.

^^This is the previous post that addressed my post and I responded to it. I cannot logically deduce from this statement that you are saying affirmative action fails to encourage women more than men to get into science related fields. Anyways I digress...all of this is really not addressing the OP and I'm not sure I'll be clear on what your stance is regarding the points of our discussion.

 

[FalconOne]

Self-imposed quotas are illegal. They technically can't exist.

It's technically illegal for an employer or school to take my military obligation into consideration when deciding if they are going to accept me. Unfortunately, one school told me that if I was seriously interested in their program, I would find a way to make it to their visit day. I have training for four months. I can't "find a way" to leave, lol. Anyway, I basically have come to accept that I'll be discriminated against. I'll probably get my doctorate, get married, become a mom, and never get hired. It's ok.

My little sister, who is in eighth grade, came to me with physics homework. I helped her, and I asked her why her grades aren't so good. "Good grades are for boys." Yikes! And then my parents say that she probably won't go to college, so they are grooming her for sports and having her take "easy classes" in high school. It might be a cultural thing. My grandma is more worried about me getting married than me graduating college. I'm 23 and unmarried - how horrible!

Anyway, those might be reasons why women don't go into science. Almost all my high school friends are stay-at-home moms, for instance.

 

[Kholdstare]

I said you referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields...I was not quoting you in that context.

^^This is the previous post that addressed my post and I responded to it. I cannot logically deduce from this statement that you are saying affirmative action fails to encourage women more than men to get into science related fields. Anyways I digress...all of this is really not addressing the OP and I'm not sure I'll be clear on what your stance is regarding the points of our discussion.

I don't know how you missed this post.

Affirmative action have nothing to do with enabling women in science positions. It was there to bring the numbers to equal. Neither does it encourages women to go to science itself than anything else nor does it prevent discrimination against them. Rather it establishes a series of social myths.

In my first post I naively wrote it encourages. However, with further analysis I saw that false and changed my stance. I fail to see why you skipped all that and argued me over my initial response.

 

[WannabeNewton]

I'm 23 and unmarried - how horrible!

Anyway, those might be reasons why women don't go into science. Almost all my high school friends are stay-at-home moms, for instance.

23 and unmarried how dare you young lady! I do agree with you that the school environment and the family environment play a role in all that. I recently graduated from an all science and math high school and almost all of my female friends chose either biological engineering, computer engineering, computer science (the majority), or some other form of engineering for their major. In my family, I have a female cousin about to graduate high school and her parents gladly support her wanting to go into astrophysics and want her to stay away from marriage as long as possible (as do my parents with respect to me). So yeah I agree that one's family values and priorities as well as the female culture in schools play big roles but the times they are a changin' .

 

[Kholdstare]

Self-imposed quotas are illegal. They technically can't exist.

It's technically illegal for an employer or school to take my military obligation into consideration when deciding if they are going to accept me. Unfortunately, one school told me that if I was seriously interested in their program, I would find a way to make it to their visit day. I have training for four months. I can't "find a way" to leave, lol. Anyway, I basically have come to accept that I'll be discriminated against. I'll probably get my doctorate, get married, become a mom, and never get hired. It's ok.

My little sister, who is in eighth grade, came to me with physics homework. I helped her, and I asked her why her grades aren't so good. "Good grades are for boys." Yikes! And then my parents say that she probably won't go to college, so they are grooming her for sports and having her take "easy classes" in high school. It might be a cultural thing. My grandma is more worried about me getting married than me graduating college. I'm 23 and unmarried - how horrible!

Anyway, those might be reasons why women don't go into science. Almost all my high school friends are stay-at-home moms, for instance.

FalconOne, I'm just curious. Which country are you from?

 

[lisab]

FalconOne, I'm just curious. Which country are you from?

I think since this topic is bound to have a strong cultural influence, giving your country of origin would be helpful for all participants -- totally optional, of course. But it would provide some context.

 

[drizzle]

I think since this topic is bound to have a strong cultural influence, giving your country of origin would be helpful for all participants -- totally optional, of course. But it would provide some context.

For real, Lisa?


Edit: Just to elaborate more on my.. point [], I think it's a personal option to be whatever they want to be. No need to blame surroundings, and one should be responsible of her/his choices.

 

[FalconOne]

I'm in the US, but my grandparents came from Poland! I just live in a really rural area. Verizon Wireless doesn't service us, I am on dial up, etc.

Also, out of a high school class of almost 150, only 20 of us went to college. Not all of us graduated.

 

[Evo]

And kholdstare is not from the US, which is why he/she has an odd perspective.

 

[drizzle]

And kholdstare is not from the US, which is why he/she has an odd perspective.

How do you know?

 

[WannabeNewton]

How do you know?

The all seeing evo. I'm disappointed you would even question her abilities Gad.

 

[drizzle]

The all seeing evo. I'm disappointed you would even question her abilities Gad.

If it's not seen here, or in kholdstare's profile, these posts should be deleted. It's the member's privacy, s/he has the right to share that piece of information or not.

 

[Evo]

If it's not seen here, or in kholdstare's profile, these posts should be deleted. It's the member's privacy, s/he has the right to share that piece of information or not.

There are 196 countries in the world, although they'e made it obvious in previous posts, IIRC, since I knew without ever looking.

Saying he's not American is not saying where he is from.

 

[drizzle]

There are 196 countries in the world, although they'e made it obvious in previous posts, IIRC, since I knew without ever looking.

Saying he's not American is not saying where he is from.

What I meant is that piece of information you just gave us, is unnecessary.

 

[Evo]

What I meant is that piece of information you just gave us, is unnecessary.

In light of what's being duscussed, it is important. Laws differ from country to country If he wishes to speak for a non US country, that perfectly fine, but since we are a US based forum, the US is the default unless corrected.

 

[micromass]

What I meant is that piece of information you just gave us, is unnecessary.

It is necessary, since it puts more perspective to his posts. If he wants evo to delete the post, then he should ask.

Anyway, let's get back to the thread.

 

[drizzle]

It is necessary, since it puts more perspective to his posts. If he wants evo to delete the post, then he should ask.

Anyway, let's get back to the thread.

Or she.

I don't agree on that, but let's see how it goes.

 

[Monique]

FYI, equal opportunity is nothing more than a concept in the United States either: faculty believe males are more competent when they judge identical applications.

Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2012/09/14/1211286109

 

[NemoReally]

I never really got the 'males are brainier' bit. TBH, I'm not sure how anybody who had the opportunity to observe mothers, grandmothers, aunts, sisters, cousin and female peers could fail to recognize that some of them were a heck of a lot smarter than most of their male counterparts. I do, however, grok the 'women are prettier' bit ... perhaps this is why I didn't notice anything odd about the old wave/particle thing.

However, it does lead to a few random observations ...

The old "getting married" bit doesn't seem to have stopped a lot of women from becoming qualified in beauty therapy, teaching, medicine, etc. Perhaps answering the question of why there are so many women doing other stuff (and less men in some cases, perhaps?) might be apposite?

I have a vague recollection of an old New Scientist article claiming that most women who had entered science had received encouragement from their fathers but less positive signals from their mothers.

My UK University in the late '70s had a very high proportion (predominant) of (very good-looking (1)) females in the biology and biochemistry depts. There were far fewer women in physics, maths and engineering, less of whom were likely to make it on to the front cover of a glamour magazine (I married one of the exceptions).

Regrettably, based on observation of my children, there do seem to be gender-based preferences exhibited from an early age in the focus of and interpretation of activities. For example, my youngest daughter (as a 2 yr old) regarded a pram as something to push her dollies around in, whereas my elder son tipped the dolls out and played with the wheels and as for my younger son ... anyone familiar with the works of the Professors Foglio will have him pinned as a Spark. The very same daughter likes science and is good at it, but she is (as a 12 yr old) very much a 'girl' in her outlook (yes, I know, that's why the quotes) and far more of a 'people' person (2). Maybe 'hard' science is generally seen as less sociable? As an auxiliary question, how many men, as well as women, are put off science by the 'nerdy' associations?

------------------------------------------------

Notes:

1. yes, I'm male; you think I'm not going to pick up on this little factette, already?

2. OTOH, I've noticed that girls tend to be at least as adventurous as boys. My daughter saw the Red Arrows last year and wants to be an aerobatic pilot ... there are a good number of 'feminine' role models in this field eg, Svetlana Kapanina and Cecilia Aragon.

 

[russ_watters]

And kholdstare is not from the US, which is why he/she has an odd perspective.

Let's call it a "different" perspective...

 

[Astronuc]

I think the reason there are fewer women has a lot to due with preference. Men, on the average, enjoy science a lot more than women. For example, I am in all honours classes in my school and you can definitely see the gender divide. More females in English and French, whereas more males in Math and in the Sciences. However, all of the females in my honours classes are very good at math and science (although the males in my honours classes [except English honours] aren't necessarily good at English). Anyway, my point is these females aren't in Math and Science honours not because they aren't good at it, but because they simply have less interest in it.

It is not clear if the 'preference' or 'enjoyment' of math/science is inherent, or a product of the culture/environment in which students evolve. It is readily apparent that the big names in math and science are mostly male, so perhaps that may be a source of discouragement to women in early years of education. In my high school, the proportion of girls in my math and science classes was close to 50%, but slightly less, and they all planned to go to university and had similar aspirations to boys in the class. I'm not sure how exactly that proportion changed during university, since all of us generally went to different universities. In my university, the proportion of women in science and engineering classes was much lower ~10% or less.

In university, I did observer some level of discrimination, but overall, the faculty encouraged students. I only encountered high ranking faculty member who was apparently hostile to women and minorities in science and engineering. That was during the early 1980s. Similarly, I encountered students whose parents had not provided much encouragement in their education, but those were in the minority.

In the educational system, a teacher's expectation will affect how students perform. If a teacher expects less from girls than boys, that may adversely affect the performance (and subsequently preference) of girls in their academic programs.

When I was teaching in university, I encouraged all of the students that classes I taught, although there were a few cases where I encouraged some poorly performing students to pursue studies outside of engineering.

 

[Kholdstare]

And kholdstare is not from the US, which is why he/she has an odd perspective.

Why can't a guy from US have different perspective?

The all seeing evo. I'm disappointed you would even question her abilities Gad.

I guess my writing style gave away.

In light of what's being discussed, it is important. Laws differ from country to country If he wishes to speak for a non US country, that perfectly fine, but since we are a US based forum, the US is the default unless corrected.

I keep tab of US culture through media and at least I'm aware of anti-discriminatory laws in US. I cannot tell whether they are implemented properly or not, though it seems that they are. The rest of my argument is based on philosophy. If this setting disqualifies me from writing for US perspective, its OK.

 

[Kholdstare]

If it's not seen here, or in kholdstare's profile, these posts should be deleted. It's the member's privacy, s/he has the right to share that piece of information or not.

Its OK. I'm actually from antarctica. Ask penguino, he can tell.

 

[Evo]

I keep tab of US culture through media and at least I'm aware of anti-discriminatory laws in US. I cannot tell whether they are implemented properly or not, though it seems that they are. The rest of my argument is based on philosophy. If this setting disqualifies me from writing for US perspective, its OK.

Actually I find that many non-US posters quite often have a better grasp.

Its OK. I'm actually from antarctica. Ask penguino, he can tell.

See, I knew it!

 

[HeLiXe]

I don't know how you missed this post.



In my first post I naively wrote it encourages. However, with further analysis I saw that false and changed my stance. I fail to see why you skipped all that and argued me over my initial response.

I did not skip over it at all and addressed it, this is your second response to me, but it conflicted with your initial response to me which is what caused me to address you in the first place. If you had said that upon further analysis you changed your stance, I would have easily understood and further discourse regarding this matter would have been unnecessary. Otherwise your statements were conflicting and I could not understand your stance.

 

[Kholdstare]

I did not skip over it at all and addressed it, this is your second response to me, but it conflicted with your initial response to me which is what caused me to address you in the first place. If you had said that upon further analysis you changed your stance, I would have easily understood and further discourse regarding this matter would have been unnecessary. Otherwise your statements were conflicting and I could not understand your stance.

I'm sorry that I had forgotten what I wrote in my first response, and was wrongly assuming it was the same thing as my second response which I corrected latter.

In my first post I naively wrote it encourages. However, with further analysis I saw that false and changed my stance. I fail to see why you skipped all that and argued me over my initial response.

But you never hilighted the fact that my second post contradicts with my first one and directly proceeded to criticize the first one. If your intention was not to address the first point, rather address the conflict, you could have said so in this post.

What does any of this have to do with why there are so few women in science? Your initial response to my post referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields. I fail to see how someone can choose to go through college and get a career in science related fields just so they can help an organization meet a quota.

 

[Kholdstare]

FYI, equal opportunity is nothing more than a concept in the United States either: faculty believe males are more competent when they judge identical applications.

That's really bad to hear.

But in this system the statistics goes either this way or that way [if you ignore the very low probability of these studies yielding exactly same result for male or female]. So, if whatever you do study will almost always point out discrimination or reverse discrimination, [from a purely logical point] what's the point of doing that?

It is not clear if the 'preference' or 'enjoyment' of math/science is inherent, or a product of the culture/environment in which students evolve. It is readily apparent that the big names in math and science are mostly male, so perhaps that may be a source of discouragement to women in early years of education. In my high school, the proportion of girls in my math and science classes was close to 50%, but slightly less, and they all planned to go to university and had similar aspirations to boys in the class. I'm not sure how exactly that proportion changed during university, since all of us generally went to different universities. In my university, the proportion of women in science and engineering classes was much lower ~10% or less.

In university, I did observer some level of discrimination, but overall, the faculty encouraged students. I only encountered high ranking faculty member who was apparently hostile to women and minorities in science and engineering. That was during the early 1980s. Similarly, I encountered students whose parents had not provided much encouragement in their education, but those were in the minority.

In the educational system, a teacher's expectation will affect how students perform. If a teacher expects less from girls than boys, that may adversely affect the performance (and subsequently preference) of girls in their academic programs.

When I was teaching in university, I encouraged all of the students that classes I taught, although there were a few cases where I encouraged some poorly performing students to pursue studies outside of engineering.

I don't know how much role society play to encourage or influence students to go to science field in the US compared to other factors. However, my guess will be not much. In my case it was just my curiosity rather than social encouragement. [Actually I hate my current science job , but then again I'm also a lazy guy and love to do nothing at all ]

 

[HeLiXe]

I'm sorry that I had forgotten what I wrote in my first response, and was wrongly assuming it was the same thing as my second response which I corrected latter.

No probs

But you never hilighted the fact that my second post contradicts with my first one and directly proceeded to criticize the first one. If your intention was not to address the first point, rather address the conflict, you could have said so in this post.

I actually did highlight the contradiction immediately in this post...

ok... >_>

In any event I did not say it prevents discrimination against women, I said it was put in place to prevent discrimination and to guarantee placement of women in academics and employment...this by means of a quota. My original point is that it does not encourage women to go into science related fields, and in answering the OP I stated that society encourages women to seek careers in fields related to health, education, social sciences etc. I am not debating the benefits or travesties of affirmative action.

which is prior to the post you are indicating. If you are able to go back to this post you will see I put both conflicting statements side by side and said "ok...>_>" but I think the error here is that I did not consider you were not familiar with my expressions. This is a sort of colloquialism indicating confusion. Like this emoticon ""

 

[HeLiXe]

no no no ...it's like this emoticon I forgot we have this one here. Anyways sorry about that, I will try to be more clear in the future.

 

[Kholdstare]

I actually did highlight the contradiction immediately in this post...

Which was after this post.

What does any of this have to do with why there are so few women in science? Your initial response to my post referenced affirmative action as an aspect of society that encourages women more than men to get into science related fields. I fail to see how someone can choose to go through college and get a career in science related fields just so they can help an organization meet a quota.

If you had highlighted the conflict in the above post, the confusion could be avoided.

no no no ...it's like this emoticon I forgot we have this one here. Anyways sorry about that, I will try to be more clear in the future.

It has nothing to do with the emoticon.