SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the doesn't-stem-student's-interest dept.
Research into the obvious, but someone has finally done it: Three women researchers have studied the behavior of undergraduates in STEM fields, and concluded that there basically is no problem. From the abstract:
"The results show that high school academic preparation, faculty gender composition, and major returns have little effect on major switching behaviors, and that women and men are equally likely to change their major in response to poor grades in major-related courses. Moreover, women in male-dominated majors do not exhibit different patterns of switching behaviors relative to their male colleagues."
Furthermore current recruitment efforts to attract more women tend to be counterproductive. In an interview, the primary author says:
"Society keeps telling us that STEM fields are masculine fields, that we need to increase the participation of women in STEM fields, but that kind of sends a signal that it's not a field for women, and it kind of works against keeping women in these fields."
One of our female students told me that the women are interviewed endlessly, for one project or another: "tell us about your experience", "are you doing ok", "have you experienced sexism", and on, and on. That alone is enough to make them question their career choice.
(Score: -1, Spam) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @09:36PM
You know Dick Nіggers.
We ain't never fuck no old pussy.
We fuck a whole lotta young pussy tho.
Bring on da Stem Womens! Dick Nіggers gonna give dem Stem Womens thick nіgger shaft up to they necks.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @09:43PM (8 children)
How many people can I find in this thread touting the accuracy of this research who also say economics isn't science?
I'm sure it's just a coincidence that the submitter failed to mention the author of this paper: The National Bureau of Economic Research
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @09:51PM
Tempted to mod you down so less people notice your comment, causing more of them to commit the foretold hypocrisy.
(Score: 3, Touché) by bzipitidoo on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:19PM (1 child)
There's at least one person insinuating that there could be a bunch of hypocritical hard science snobs around here who disrespect economics but praise this article because they are ignorant of its source.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:09PM
Insinuating?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Arik on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:27PM (1 child)
Economics is far from a mature science at the moment, and certain schools of economics are indeed wholly unscientific, but that doesn't mean I throw the whole field out with the bath water.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @10:20AM
Yes, we must keep the trickle down theory because that stimulates job creators.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:35PM
I look down on all the social sciences (including this), since they are almost never rigorous enough. I'm sure someone like VLM would count, however.
(Score: 2) by Hawkwind on Friday September 08 2017, @03:11AM (1 child)
Although I may be skeptical of accepting the article 100%, I find myself looking at your comment and thinking "straw man".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @06:40AM
Why?
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @09:53PM (9 children)
She says she's never experienced any sexism, and that being one of the few women in her tech career makes her feel special. She thinks men have the same experience as women, but only women misinterpret the usual irritations of work as being somehow gender related. When most of the people are men, there are going to be a lot of assholes who happen to be men; I guess it's the Fallacy of the Minority to find persecution where there isn't.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by chromas on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:55PM (7 children)
Sounds like she's got the internalized misogyny. It's not her fault. Through her parents and friends, the patriarchy has trained her from birth to believe that her experiences are her own and that she can do whatever she wants without feeling oppressed even though she is. It's a shame really.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @12:30AM (5 children)
That doesn't even make sense. Not to mention that it is highly disrespectful of women. Basically, you're saying that women don't have minds of their own, and that the patriarchy had to give them goals, personnas, and everything that makes them what they are.
Does the liberal left ever even LISTEN to the crap they are spewing?
(Score: 4, Informative) by hemocyanin on Friday September 08 2017, @12:39AM (3 children)
Recalibrate your sarcasm detector ASAP.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by aristarchus on Friday September 08 2017, @01:02AM (2 children)
But did you read this part?
In accusing the post of being "the liberal left", it is obvious this response is by a right-wing nut-job, who, being a right-wing nut-job, does not have a sarcasm detector, or the capability to have one installed. There is this wall, you see.
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday September 08 2017, @02:54AM
I see a different possibility. The poster may well have recognized the sarcasm as directed against 'the liberal left' (which is a misnomer for this faction, btw, but it's a common one) and simply chimed in to support that. The original, sarcastic, post obviously does bear a strong resemblance to the 'progressive' and 'intersectional' crowd. After all, if it didn't, neither of us would have been able to recognize it as sarcasm so easily.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by meustrus on Friday September 08 2017, @03:58PM
Given that the post is currently modded +5 Insightful, I'd wager a lot of not-right-wing-nut-jobs don't have sarcasm detectors either.
If there isn't at least one reference or primary source, it's not +1 Informative. Maybe the underused +1 Interesting?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by c0lo on Friday September 08 2017, @12:41AM
I suspect a case of Poe's law here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @07:48AM
How the heck did this get to +5 Insightful instead of +5 Funny?
(Score: 3, Funny) by krishnoid on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:56PM
Ugh, so misogynistic to say that about women. She should be forced to turn in her woman card [hillaryclinton.com] and be recognized as the ... uh ... privileged sexist male cishet something something that she truly is.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:00PM (2 children)
I feel confident that more paywalled papers will aid in our understanding of this likely complex and nuance topic
(Score: 4, Funny) by bob_super on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:20PM (1 child)
The way around the science paywall is easy: Hang a left after the 69th porn site, then a right right after the 2nd right-wing site, another right after the 911th conspiracy site, a sharp left just before the media trench, then you're only 100 prostitution ads away from the movie stream zone, below which you can find some science papers. Don't go too far, or you'll get stuck chest-deep in rotting tweets and discount meds. Good luck, we all count on you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:57PM
And to think it used to be "First star on the right, and straight on till morning!" Peter "Stem" Pan Syndrome.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Justin Case on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:05PM (46 children)
Equal opportunities not outcomes!!!
Nobody had to recruit me into my career. I thought it would be interesting, and it was.
Why shouldn't people -- all people -- be allowed to choose careers they find interesting instead of being pushed into something they clearly don't want?
This is just more ridiculous, wasteful, frustrating social modification from the everything-must-be-exactly-the-same-for-everyone-everywhere department.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Snow on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:12PM (41 children)
It's the feminism movement. They've already won all the big stuff, so now they attack whatever imbalances they perceive are left (however minor).
Anecdotally, there are plenty of females in my IT department. It's pretty close to 50/50. Our head of IT is a woman too.
No one gives a shit that there aren't many male nurses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:24PM (20 children)
Or male HR/Recruiting people (dominated by women in the companies I've worked at).
Or male dental hygienists.
Or male waiters at low/medium costs places.
Or any number of other professions that have a male/female imbalance.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:29PM (19 children)
I hate to sound sexist, but at least 3 of these examples involve service jobs with public contact, and frequently physical contact (nurse and hygienist). As a man, I'd much rather have a woman putting her hands on me (or in my mouth, etc.) than a man. But ask most women, and they'll probably agree; they'd rather have a random woman than a random dude (now if the guy was guaranteed to look like George Clooney or something, that'd be different, but that's just not the case with random men in service positions). Also, most people seem to admit that women are generally just nicer to look at than the average man, and psychological studies show that people like to be around and talk to people who are attractive, so it's pretty obvious I think why people would prefer female service people. It's a double standard, but nature and biology aren't fair.
Now HR I can't really answer, as that's not really a service position. It just seems to be a female haven for some reason, but worse, it seems that the very worst types of women congregate in those departments.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:37PM (17 children)
HR is easy to explain. Those companies that have done away with "personnel managers" in favor of HR, were actively seeking a token to fill the position. No white males need apply for an HR position. Not even if you should actually find a white male who wants the job.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Friday September 08 2017, @12:14AM (16 children)
Anecdotal data point: isn't there also a minimum weight requirement, and a rather hefty one at that? Has always been the case everywhere I worked dating back for decades now.
(Score: 2, Offtopic) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 08 2017, @12:26AM (14 children)
It's probably an unwritten policy. Our HR woman teeters on that "morbidly obese" line. She also has huge hooters, and likes showing them off as much as possible.
Interesting thing about the dress code. The company has several plants around the US. The dress policy was reasonable, I think, for the most part. Then, our HR woman decided that the girls in production could not wear those legging things. Believe me, SOME of those women look damned good in skin tight ultra-sheer synthetic not-quite-pants. Why was that? Well, the fat-assed old broad can't look good in those things, so no one in the plant is going to look good in them!!
Imagine that - dress codes designed to make heifers feel good about themselves!!
Now, more seriously, if I were to write a dress code, EVERYONE would be covered from neck to ankle. No shorts, no midriff showing, no cleavage, shirts would all have half-sleeves like a crew neck T, or longer. In an industrial environment, clothing serves a protective role, that far outweighs attractiveness and/or modesty. And, since burns are probably our number one hazard, I would STRONGLY encourage people to wear cotton, and discourage any kind of synthetic fibers. Fires are far more survivable in natural fiber clothing, than any plastic crap.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @12:44AM (5 children)
Stop it you sounds like a blue Meany ... Have a toke and stop caring about work place safety like a straight edge ...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @01:05AM (3 children)
'Tis Runaway. Just wait a while, and he will pass out from alt-right manipulated rage.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday September 08 2017, @02:51AM (2 children)
You jest, but over the last few weeks something has taken a seriously concerning turn in his posts. It sounds like something broke inside honestly.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 08 2017, @02:23PM (1 child)
This, from a broken person? No, nothing has broken. I'm the same old asshole, you're the same ditzy chick. Have you had your eyes examined, lately?
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday September 08 2017, @04:52PM
Anosognosia is a common symptom--or maybe comorbid disorder--with people in your situation. In plain English, part of your brokenness is inability and/or refusal to see how messed up you're getting.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 08 2017, @02:27PM
"stop caring about work place safety"
You are obviously not a burn survivor, nor are you closely related to any. Perhaps you would like to visit Children's Hospital, or the Shriner's Hospital, and get to know a few survivors. Your life will be changed.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:21PM (7 children)
Fires are far more survivable in natural fiber clothing, than any plastic crap.
Surely this depends on the exact artificial fiber you're talking about; they vary wildly in their properties you know. Isn't Nomex an artificial fiber? Race car drivers are covered head-to-toe in that stuff. Maybe you should have production uniforms made of that stuff.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 08 2017, @02:29PM (6 children)
Nomex is relatively high dollar - and people don't wear it to be fashionable. But, you're right, cotton isn't safer than ALL synthetics. Cotton is much safer than any popular synthetics sold at Wally World, or Fashion Bug, or any other stores frequented by fashion conscious young people.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:47PM (2 children)
If you're working in a production plant where fire is actually a significant concern, then why doesn't the company invest in some uniforms for everyone to wear then? They can keep them at the plant and let people put them on before they start work, so the cost isn't borne by the employee, and the clothes can be reused as employees come and go. Fab workers at semiconductor plants don't have to buy their own bunny suits, for instance. It's not at all abnormal for manufacturing companies to have company-provided safety clothing for employees.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday September 08 2017, @03:27PM (1 child)
The company won't invest in uniforms because people are disposable.
I remember a time when corporations declared that "People are our most valuable resource!" At that point in time, employers actually did try to make life better for employees, tried to make the work environment better, and tried to promote people based on merit. Those days are long gone. Today, people are as disposable as dirty socks. Globalization has achieved it's main mission!!
Oh, back to my own preferred dress code? From our current starting point, it would be pretty damned difficult to enforce such a dress code. For the wages production workers are paid, you can't expect people to run out and buy a new wardrobe. Some guy gets a job here, he's going to wear whatever he has in his closet, because we don't pay him enough to invest in different clothing.
Before I could reasonably expect people to conform to my dress code, I'd have to raise their pay by something in the range of 10%, AND introduce some minimal job security. Once I began to identify real "keepers" among the employees, then I'd have to give them some additional raises, to help ensure that I kept them. Hiring people at minimum wage pluse $1.00 doesn't attract "keepers", nor does it entice one who wanders in the door to stay. The wages only contribute to the high turnover.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @03:44PM
Hiring people at minimum wage pluse $1.00 doesn't attract "keepers", nor does it entice one who wanders in the door to stay. The wages only contribute to the high turnover.
This reminds me of a girl I met on an online dating site years ago (we only exchanged messages, never met in person). She worked in HR for some retail chain, and complained about the quality of candidates they got for their near-minimum-wage jobs. I pointed out that such low pay isn't exactly going to attract the best people and maybe they should offer more. I never heard from her again.
After that, I never again entertained the possibility of dating someone who works in HR.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Friday September 08 2017, @06:02PM (2 children)
This isn't true. Almost all navy clothes are synthetics. They're designed to burn easily without sticking to your skin.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @11:12PM (1 child)
Citation needed.
(Score: 1) by i286NiNJA on Friday September 08 2017, @11:56PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniforms_of_the_United_States_Navy [wikipedia.org]
Search the word polyester. Almost all these uniforms are polyester blend designed to burn easily without sticking to skin. It's not like there aren't millions of people who know this.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:19PM
I honestly have no idea what you're talking about. I've worked in a bunch of places, and the stereotype for HR that I've seen is 20s-50s white women in reasonably fit condition (the younger ones can be quite hot, the older ones are in reasonable shape, not usually very fat). The ones older than their 20s seem to generally be pretty cold bitches though; you probably have to be pretty cold to work in that job where you're willfully screwing employees over to help the bottom line.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @04:43PM
This is a good point, that I think people need to take into account.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:33PM (9 children)
There's probably a decent number of guys that would be more comfortable with male nurses in certain cases.
Something that always comes to my mind is early childhood education. There's often a lack of positive male role models for young boys.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Grishnakh on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:20PM (4 children)
There's probably a decent number of guys that would be more comfortable with male nurses in certain cases.
Like when? If someone's going to be putting their hands on me in a medical setting, I'd much rather it be a woman than a man.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @12:16AM (3 children)
I had a Muslim friend who felt very uncomfortable as he had never really had physical contact with a woman. He said it was really awkward because he was nervous and jumpy, while she kept laughing. Afterwards, he would always joke about how the first woman that saw him undress couldn't stop laughing.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @12:41AM
We have to convert Muslims with our loose Western wimminz.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:23PM (1 child)
Sounds like the experience was good for him. People need to break out of their shells and shed their oppressive moral codes like this.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @07:40PM
A medical context is not the best place to push someone out of their comfort zone.
Sometime later, he was embarrassed when he had hemorrhoids and avoided going to the doctor for a while. He eventually went and specifically requested a male doctor.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:42PM (3 children)
I'm not one of them. I had a male nurse groping me last year in the ER. No, I was not more comfortable with a male nurse, than I would have been with a female nurse. Now, funny thing about female nurses is, they can be too damned attractive. I had no problems with mature women, who ranged from attractive to unattractive. The young nubile thing who walked in on me while nekkid was a real hit to my composure. The mature women who were obviously mothers and grandmothers were comfortable to be around, no matter how many clothes I had on or off. The girlish looking youngster was pretty damned uncomfortable.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 08 2017, @03:09AM (2 children)
I had round of IV antibiotics for a case of osteomyelitis that lasted several weeks, so I regularly visited the office for new IV placements, and got to know the 4 nurses there. They ranged from supermodel attractive to potato, and their IV placement skills were perfectly negatively correlated with their attractiveness. By the end I was requesting the potato and refusing the other extreme.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:27PM (1 child)
That's probably because the supermodel one was the youngest, and therefore the most inexperienced, and the potato was the oldest and therefore most experienced. So it's not too surprising that the oldest one will have the best IV placement skills. But this isn't always age-correlated: motor skills vary wildly by individual, regardless of age. Some people just have better "feel" than others.
Personally, I'll take my chances with the supermodel (if I don't already know her to be lousy with a needle). I have excellent veins and no nurse ever has trouble doing an IV on me, though some do have more finesse than others.
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 08 2017, @09:33PM
There was some age difference, late 20s to early 40s, but the middle talent nurses were also 20s and 40s. There's some truth to the notion that "when you're that pretty, you don't have to do much else to get by in the world..." she couldn't place a needle in an easy vein over half the time. Worst of it was the suggestion that I needed a PIC line, I didn't need a PIC line, I needed one of the other 3 nurses who could actually do their job.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:04PM (2 children)
I bet the female nurses working in the bariatric ward would probably appreciate more male nurses. Or better hydraulics/robotics.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Kell on Friday September 08 2017, @10:27AM (1 child)
A lot of people forget that male nurses get all the shit lifting jobs. My brother was an RN and injured himself several times on the job - the female nurses all demanded he do the lifting, and he couldn't get out of it. Even when he had already been suffering lifting injuries.
Scientists ask questions. Engineers solve problems.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:30PM
Hospitals used to have employees called "orderlies" who were there mainly to do this job, and to deal with combative patients. Usually they were giant, burly men.
Somewhere along the line, they fired them all to save money, thinking the nurses could do this work. My mom used to be a nurse, and saw this transition. She ended up getting injured lifting an obese patient, and suing the hospital (and settling). This shit should be illegal.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:06PM
That isn't actually true. There are groups pushing for more male nurses and medical paraprofessionals. The reasons why include that the men tend to be physically stronger, mixed sex requirements for exams (i.e. male doctors working on women require female staff presence and female doctors working on men require male staff), the general number of applicants is dropping, some people prefer male nurses, and men are viewed as being less likely to gossip, which is important as HIPAA suits go up.
(Score: 2) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:20PM (3 children)
No one gives a shit that there aren't many male nurses.
That's so trivially proved wrong I don't understand why people keep using it as a talking point. [google.com]
(Score: 3, Informative) by hemocyanin on Friday September 08 2017, @01:05AM (2 children)
A couple random support groups for male nurses? That's not much to shout about.
May I suggest "The Gender Equality Paradox - Documentary NRK - 2011 - Feminism / Gender Studies": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p5LRdW8xw70 [youtube.com] where the question of why, in the world's most gender equal country (Norway) men and women still largely choose traditionally male and female jobs. One of the interesting studies explored was that in the least modernized countries, women tend to be interested in "male" jobs but as countries modernize and women get more freedom, they tend to not be interested in such jobs.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @02:28PM (1 child)
The original claim was (emphasis added): "No one gives a shit that there aren't many male nurses."
Clearly there is someone who gives a shit, as GP demonstrated. So this claim is patently wrong.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Friday September 08 2017, @11:00PM
*eyeroll*
By the same quality of evidence, we could say it is official US policy to support Furries.
(Score: 4, Informative) by linuxrocks123 on Friday September 08 2017, @12:53AM
Actually, I've been told by multiple people who should know that they do care, and that they actively try to recruit men into nursing programs.
It wouldn't really make sense for them not to care, when you think about it. Some people aren't really comfortable with people of the opposite sex performing invasive medical examinations on them. True, probably more women than men are uncomfortable with that, lessening the problem, but still.
(Score: 2) by Hawkwind on Friday September 08 2017, @03:24AM
The nursing graduate program in my neck of the woods wants more male nurses. They have to be careful of federal regs but they promote males where they can. So, please retire the abolsute statement that no one cares about males in nursing.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by requerdanos on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:34PM
Well, those people, drain on society that they are, are certainly involved.
But I don't think they are the whole thing.
There have been lots of fields that were entirely, or almost entirely, one gender--Doctors (men), Nurses (women), Flight Attendants (women). Some things happen in those fields under those circumstances. Within the fields, practitioners tend to learn to expect their peers to be people of the predominant gender and develop either latent or outright biases against those of the opposite gender. Also, within society itself, the same biases appear, possibly to a larger degree.
Even if the reason for a field being mostly one gender is an innocuous one*, not based on gender discrimination as such, the biases and discrimination still tend to develop in that environment.
These three fields that I mention have made enormous progress, judging by what I see in the United States, and men and women are accepted (much closer to) equally.
It's important to address such biases and work to correct them--starting with ourselves, not bashing others over the head with our notions.
--------------------
* if the reader does not "believe" in gender, this will all probably go over his head. In such case, I encourage further study.
(Score: 1, Troll) by jmorris on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:28PM
Remember, Diversity is our Strength. And if we find any actual diversity we will smash the crap outta the bigots responsible. Once you can Double Think those you are golden.
Seriously, we pass laws punishing any actual diversity that pops up, disparate impact they call it. Doesn't matter if all sides agree no discrimination other than merit is involved, disparate impact means you get boned anyway. The only way to avoid being boned for disparate impact is to discriminate on the basis of protected traits like race, gender, national origin, etc. and not get caught, which is easy since as long as you are doing the 'right' sort of discriminating the system averts its gaze.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday September 08 2017, @10:29AM (1 child)
Yeh, I got into this because as a kid, I was insanely interested in what made things tick.
But, you know, I sunk a helluva lotta time, energy, and money into doing this.
It would have been a bad decision if I had gotten into this solely for money. Learning the skills to compel others to do stuff for me would be have been a more economically productive use of my time, albeit not nearly as much fun as doing the stuff myself. Same reason I don't like televised sports. If I am involved, I am doing it, not watching someone else do it.
But then, that is a moot point, for if I had spent my time learning techniques of compelling others to my will, I would have never acquired the technical skills I now possess. If that had been the case, all I could do is compel is the production of bullshit.
All I ended up doing was whoring myself to men wearing suits who were looking for the lowest-cost provider. Its hard to sell technical skills when they suit-guy is looking for presentation skills.
I trained to be the monkey prancing around with my cup while the organ grinder decides what I will get to eat. My skills being so specialized I just about had to work under a corporate system. Until retirement. Now, I can work on my own terms. If the guy thinks his impressive suit and car mean something to me, well, let me say at this point in my life, I want to be paid like a gentleman if I am going to implement his dreams instead of implementing mine.
I believe the women are smarter than this when it comes to the economics of a career in STEM.
But men, well, we like to do things that are fun. I know I do. I like to design and build things. Things that have never been seen before. I despise ass-kissing. For me, respect is an earned thing, not something I do because I am told to do it.
I will obey others under veiled threat of economic penalty or physical violence if the guy doesn't get his way, but respect them? No.
Respect is earned. Its not something that can be required of me. Obedience can, but not respect.
I find it hard to commit myself to something I do not believe in personally. And frankly, a lot of modern corporate types come across like a TV ad pitchman. While they may know all sorts of weaseltalk, I know the onus is on me to make it work. If I have to be subordinate to a weaseltalker, I may as well hang it up right then and there.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @03:54PM
I believe the women are smarter than this when it comes to the economics of a career in STEM.
I don't think it's just that, I think there's also a large component that women in this society are typically more social than men are, and STEM jobs are seen as not-so-social (though that's changing with all this open-plan-office bullshit), and in reality, STEM jobs really do involve less talking to people on average.
Same reason I don't like televised sports. If I am involved, I am doing it, not watching someone else do it.
I agree entirely about this one. I like playing some sports, but I have no interest in watching someone else do something I could be doing myself, even if I can't do it half as well as they can.
But I have noticed that an extremely large number of women in the dating market are huge sports fans. What's with that? They also seem to love big dogs and hate cats too. Honestly, I'm not sure why they're still single, especially at this age (I'm talking 35+ here), and my only hypothesis is that the stereotype of men being beer-swilling big-dog-loving sports fans might by an incorrect stereotype only applying to a small minority of men, and that more women fit this stereotype than men. In this very liberal east-coast city (DC), finding dateable women who aren't pit-bull and sports loving alcoholics is a real challenge.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Virindi on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:19PM (34 children)
I am female and I am a programmer, and went to a computer science program.
All I ever want is for people to judge based on merit. People tend to take an initial impression and generate preliminary assumptions. This is as much about your appearance as it is about gender. For instance, if you are "too" well dressed and kept, people will assume you might not be knowledgeable. In my experience this effect is larger than gender alone.
However, after working with someone for a short time those initial assumptions quickly fade away for the vast majority of people. It doesn't take long for them to replace assumptions with real data based on the work you do. This can even happen in a single conversation by displaying your knowledge of the subject. Honestly these assumptions are not a huge barrier unless you make them one, and work between fellow technically minded people does tend to be merit based.
One place where problems come in is nontechnical people. While your fellow engineers mostly see merit, management types have no idea what skill or ability looks like. So sometimes they will treat different people differently for stupid reasons. This is also not unique to gender, but is also based on things like who pretends to be their buddy, who sucks up best, etc. It seems to be a problem for a lot of engineer types.
Another minor annoyance is the internet. Don't get me wrong, I love the anonymous nature of the internet, the fact that if you show up nobody cares who you might be, just what your ideas are. But as soon as you mention something about yourself you get problems. The common meme of "there are no women on the internet" can get quite tiring to always deal with, and I'm not talking about going around and constantly shoving facts about yourself in other people's faces. I'm talking merely about casual conversation.
To be honest though, I would say to anyone who wants to be an engineer, do what you want. People these days seem to be extra bad at ignoring heckling, and you should be able to handle a little BS from time to time just as a human. It is part of life. I have not observed any real, serious barriers. But that's just one person's experience, I'm sure there is some serious bullshit going on somewhere out there (some of that silicon valley VC stuff seems pretty bad, but once again those aren't technical people). It just isn't prevalent in places I have been.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Justin Case on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:42PM (11 children)
Me too.
So at the risk of contradicting my previous sentence, if I see someone wearing an expensive business suit and tie (or the female equivalent) I assume they are clueless about software development, systems administration, or any of the other nitty-gritty computer technical skills. Yes, it is a prejudice, and I'm not sure I can ignore it, because it is based on about a thousand consecutive experiences.
On the other hand, I've been guilty of seeing a very attractive woman in a technical role and thinking "bet she's here because someone thought she was hot." Of course I tried to conceal that opinion, and it is a good thing, because within 5 minutes of talking to her I had to reverse my judgment and acknowledge she had skillz. We enjoyed a happy and productive working relationship for several years.
How to defeat the mental short-circuits we take based on past experience? I'm not sure I know. I'm pretty sure pushing women (or anyone else) into STEM "just because" isn't the solution.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Virindi on Thursday September 07 2017, @10:57PM (2 children)
Exactly. The big problem is management who cannot revise their judgment based on demonstration of knowledge and skill, a problem with currently pervades western society. The best solution is to require that all managers are skilled in the job they are managing, which in the old timey days was a common requirement.
It is the same root cause for, in many cases, gender discrimination, discrimination against introverts, excess office politics, etc. All things which seriously harm the productivity of society and make the lives of honest people who care about their work difficult.
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:03PM
Which after such a demonstration, it reverts back to the existing problem of management not being able to identify/recognize the value of knowledge and skill in the first place.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:44PM
"Scientific Management" wasn't completely useless. If it had been, it might never have taken off. It works fairly well in supervising factory workers in the sorts of industrial jobs that it was really designed for. Applying it to work environments that are substantially different doesn't always work well, however, and the worst thing is that when you have a company lead by scientific managers they shape everything else in favor of what they know how to manage - predictable assembly-lines with easily measured metrics.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Arik on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:02PM (4 children)
I can understand and empathize, and also steal the opportunity to expand slightly.
That's a prejudice that I am (and apparently you are) aware of. I'll let you speak for yourself but with me that's a prejudice you can get past in a few seconds, if it isn't accurate in your case. And several people have.
I don't think it's possible, and I'm not even sure it would be all that useful, to remove all prejudice entirely. Prejudice is a natural way for us to make split second decisions when we haven't the time to use the more sophisticated parts of our brains.
Where it becomes a huge problem is when it hardens into deeply set prejudices, like racism can be for many people, and like looking down on people who don't follow fashion obviously is for many, and so forth. Where it's not a prejudice that's owned and kept on a leash by a rational mind, but is given more-or-less free reign to lead the show instead.
"On the other hand, I've been guilty of seeing a very attractive woman in a technical role and thinking "bet she's here because someone thought she was hot." Of course I tried to conceal that opinion, and it is a good thing, because within 5 minutes of talking to her I had to reverse my judgment and acknowledge she had skillz. We enjoyed a happy and productive working relationship for several years."
You see? That's how it works. Assuming you are a healthy heterosexual male that thought was always going to flit into your mind when you first saw someone you would describe in that way. That's basic animal instinct that's going to happen no matter how many billions of dollars are spent to try to stop it from happening. But it doesn't matter. Because even though the thought went through your mind it did not somehow prevent subsequent rational thought from taking place.
Good post man.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:08PM (3 children)
Hmmm. Does that mean you're ready to remove me from your enemies list?
Of course if I were your friend again, I'd have to pledge to continue using NoScript.
What to do, what to do?
(Score: 1) by Arik on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:38PM (2 children)
And no, you have no obligations to me whatsoever. IIRC I foed you for making such an absurdly bad argument that I concluded I was being trolled. If you do it again my reaction might be the same *shrug*
That's just my nature, don't let it stress you.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Friday September 08 2017, @12:17AM (1 child)
Not stressed at all. You remained on my friend list throughout, because you have the most technical common sense around here, personal quirks notwithstanding.
But come on, if I was really trolling you... a troll wants to be noticed, to get a response. What response could be sweeter than getting someone to actually foe you? :)
(Score: 2) by Arik on Friday September 08 2017, @12:57AM
It was simply to adjust your initial post score, as seen on my screen. For awhile you lost your +2, which meant that you only needed to be modded down twice to become invis to me. At least, I think it still works that way. Not sure if there was ever any practical effect but that was what was intended, and if you'd made a habit of trolling it might have invis'd some of the posts as other people caught on. Apparently you do not make such a habit, so it was time to remove it anyway.
If there is a way to do it without it being visible I missed that, and would happily do that instead, as what you said here is true.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 2) by JoeMerchant on Friday September 08 2017, @03:14AM
My prejudice runs to the extracurricular activities focus - if you're president of Eta Kappa Nu and Tau Beta Pi, organizer of both annual charity fundraisers, community liason to the Elks, Rotarians and Food Bank, etc. etc. etc. - when exactly did you have time to learn and practice your engineering skills? It's great to have social skills, but people who throw themselves headlong into the social endeavors often seem to be hiding from other inadequacies.
🌻🌻 [google.com]
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @08:01AM
No it's not. That tie cuts off the oxygen supply to the brain.
Also, think about it like this: Suits are worn by sales people, managers, bankers, politicians and insurance people. It is the uniform of the professionally dishonest. Why would anyone with actual skills want to be seen wearing that? It's like the white-collar version of the orange jumpsuit.
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday September 08 2017, @10:37AM
I have that same initial prejudice.
Kinda like seeing a large flying black bug with yellow dots. I have been stung by some of those. And the prejudice transfers in me to all flying black bugs with yellow dots.
To me, that kind of dress signals an obsession with power and money.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by DeathMonkey on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:02PM (1 child)
However, after working with someone for a short time those initial assumptions quickly fade away for the vast majority of people.
That doesn't really help if you don't get the job in the first place...
(Score: 4, Touché) by Virindi on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:09PM
A problem easily offset by putting people skilled in the subject in charge of hiring. See above :)
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday September 07 2017, @11:57PM
Hmmmm . . .
My son's story might interest you. He graduated from Texas A&M at Commerce. His first job was a pretty good job, but he started looking around pretty soon for a better job. Found one that really interests him, and applied for it. He made it over the first couple hurdles, was scheduled for an interview, and found himself being grilled by a team of engineering types. He said it was almost like taking an oral final to graduate college.
He got the job, and recently questioned one of his coworkers about the interview. He was told that he was at a disadvantage for having graduated from Commerce. Commerce can and does graduate well educated people, but their reputation sucks among real engineers. The inquisition was designed to find out quickly whether he actually educated himself at Commerce. Aggies from other colleges may or may not be put through the same sort of inquisition, depending on which campus they attended.
Which prompted my son to do some research into the quality of education at various colleges and universities around the nation. He says things really suck for STEM at more colleges than not.
All of that only demonstrates that some of the hurdles that women and/or minorities may face aren't due to their minority status, but to their choice of college.
(Score: 0, Flamebait) by kurenai.tsubasa on Friday September 08 2017, @12:19AM (6 children)
You go, girl! Get the boys primed for the next round of the misogynerd narrative!
I can't believe those saps still think that the misogynerd narrative is authentic or in any way reflective of reality! Can you hear those dumb boys breathing a sigh of relief, thinking this is somehow going to deter feminism from continuing to slander and libel an entire demographic of 3.5 billion people? We'll just bring out the giftpil^Wpoisoned M&M^WSchrödinger thing if they go all #notallmen again. How the fuck did they miss that it was Nazi propaganda when we did it?! Twice!!! Haha, that was great when it blew up in that Trump kid's face! (Skittles even, lol.)
Can you believe the white knight corp still honestly believes the whole sexual harassment thing?! Dorks!
Next Tuesday is the next drop, right?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday September 08 2017, @03:22AM (5 children)
Kurenai, there is enough prevalence of rapey men out there that the Skittles thing becomes an unfortunately useful metaphor. This is reality for every woman. I *still* cross the street at night if I'm alone and see guys most of the time, and I'm taller than almost all of them and probably as heavy as 1/4 or 1/3 of them at least.
The difference between when the Nazis were using it vs. this example is that 1) there is far more basis in reality, 2) we have the data to back it up, and 3) it is not coming from a position of strength or advantage.
This is a nasty thing to say, but it needs to be said: this constant fallacious overgeneralization makes you look awful, and as unfair as this is, it makes MtFs everywhere look bad. Every goddamn time I come on here and see this I have to remind you that most feminists, let alone most women in general, aren't TERFs. You get nowhere with this and you only shore up the unfortunate stereotype of early-stage transwomen as mentally unstable drama magnets.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @11:16AM (2 children)
> I *still* cross the street at night if I'm alone and see guys most of the time, and I'm taller than almost all of them and probably as heavy as 1/4 or 1/3 of them at least.
Likewise, but I'm male.
Possibly has something to do with someone hitting me in the throat with their arm as I jogged past a group of lads when I was younger (~13/14 years old).
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:38PM (1 child)
How about that jogger in London who pushed a woman in front of a bus recently? Men just aren't safe to be around. I can see why a woman alone would want to avoid getting to close to random men in public. I wonder if this also has something to do with how, when you're a man and single, women in public avoid looking at you, and basically treat you as a creep, but when you're walking around with a girlfriend, their demeanor totally changes and they readily look you in the eye.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 11 2017, @01:17PM
> How about that jogger in London who pushed a woman in front of a bus recently?
How about the man who was pushed in front of a tram by a woman? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/manchester-woman-tram-murder-push-in-front-charrissa-loren-brown-wellington-greater-manchester-a7787111.html [independent.co.uk]
Women just aren't safe to be around.
Or maybe it's just psychopaths that aren't safe to be around? The mind boggles.
(Score: 2) by chromas on Saturday September 09 2017, @09:37AM (1 child)
Oh sure, but when you apply it to economic migrants it's suddenly racis.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Monday September 11 2017, @06:45PM
It is racist, but it also happens to be true...just to a far, FAR lower extent than with the rape statistics when the cohort in question is "has a Y chromosome." I'm not a popular person for this, but I believe most stereotypes have some basis in truth.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @03:27AM
Tits or GTFO! [knowyourmeme.com] The current topic is one of the few that actually benefits from you identifying yourself as female, because it lends credence to your experiences. However, you may be misunderstanding part of "no girls on the internet". This can also be read as "everyone's voice is of equal value here, no matter the gender".
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday September 08 2017, @03:30AM (10 children)
Uuuuugh, tell me about it. I get the feeling like almost all jobs are 90% or more about making the right social noises and maybe 10% actual work. It's nice to meet another woman in the tech field, though you're *far* more technical than I am--I just build and fix the silly things and make them do server stuff, whereas you actually program them.
The darkly hilarious part of this is when the men gas on about how they're the logical sex, and then if you truly examine how and why they do what they do, it's pure in-group politics and social signalling--as emotional as it gets!
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Virindi on Friday September 08 2017, @03:57AM (9 children)
Yeah, I often see mentioned by feminists (the crazy ones) that logic is a "male" thing, and as such it should be rejected. That's about as ridiculous as an argument can be. There are rational, thinking people of all stripes. And, rejecting rational argument means a rejection of civilization itself. All of civilization is built on the concepts of predictable laws, scientific fact-finding, etc. A world where everyone just acted on their whims and "feelings" would be a world of children, and it would be unable to function. People would starve.
It's all a high school like game of political one-upmanship with those people. I can't stand it. And yep, men do the same thing too!
I tend to think that western civilization is fast approaching a crisis where political bullshit overwhelms the value of real work and nothing can get done anymore.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Friday September 08 2017, @06:25AM (1 child)
You're not alone in feeling that way...unfortunately, though, I don't think we're going to right course in time. I'm not a psychic, or at least not the kind that can read the future, but I do get precognitions and they've been...unpleasant...for the last several years. And especially the last several months. A perfect storm, involving several literal storms, is brewing, and I can feel the dam about to burst.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1) by anubi on Friday September 08 2017, @10:51AM
For what its worth, Azuma, I have been having this same intense foreboding for a couple of years now... watching how we are going yet further and further into debt and seeing how much debt the average family is in - and kids! Especially our kids! Neck deep in college debts - trying to pay off creditors when they need every penny they can get their hands on to start up their own families.
Its like waiting for the ice shelf to calve. You know its gonna happen. But you do not know when.
Its time for the next economic collapse. [wikipedia.org]
It's gonna be a real wham-dinger, as we can no longer "drop the interest rate" to infuse yet more borrowed money into the system.
Our manufacturing engines have been sold years ago. We can no longer trade altitude for airspeed. We are now barely clearing the trees. When it stalls this time, we hit the ground. Hard.
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Friday September 08 2017, @12:53PM (4 children)
Thank you for the best yet explanation of why those who lean right economically are very perturbed by the silliness we hear from those who lean left economically.
If you want to kill people by the hundreds of thousands, or millions, study the countries that have gone whole-hog leftist economics.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:43PM (2 children)
If you want to kill people by the hundreds of thousands, or millions, study the countries that have gone whole-hog leftist economics.
And if you want to see places that are hopelessly mired in conflict and war and oppression for its citizens, study the countries that have gone whole-hog conservative and religious.
The countries that are the best and safest to live in are places that are capitalist market economies with a very healthy dose of socialist welfare-state services, and which have almost completely abandoned religion. The more religion there is (whether it's worshiping some unseen deity, or some family dynasty as in one particular country), the worse it is.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Friday September 08 2017, @03:23PM (1 child)
Totally agree. That's why I was careful to specify economically right leaning rather than authoritarian right leaning.
Damn! It's almost like we need more than one right-left line for describing political opinion.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @03:59PM
Places that are extremely right-leaning economically aren't very nice to live in either, and result in a few ultra-wealthy people and everyone else dirt poor. As I said before, the best places are countries with mostly-free-market capitalist economies (so not far-left) but with substantial welfare-state protections and programs. For that economic axis, either extreme leads to very bad conditions.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Virindi on Friday September 08 2017, @05:07PM
I don't think it's entirely the same, but perhaps related. The problem you are talking about is that "left" income redistribution requires authoritarian power, and the further you go the more of it is needed. There have been plenty of other places that practiced high levels of such power, though, which instead continued the standard "crony capitalist" model. So while attempting to achieve equality of economic outcomes can cause those horrors, it is just one cause.
The real disease is the stubborn human belief that you can solve problems (often solved by abuse of government power) by giving government more power. It is the belief that government can be used to solve all of society's problems, rather than just act to keep a stable, peaceful environment for society to work out its own problems. Dealing with social problems by force is never successful unless views were already changing anyway.
(Score: 1, Flamebait) by Grishnakh on Friday September 08 2017, @02:45PM
A world where everyone just acted on their whims and "feelings" would be a world of children
Sounds like any country where religion plays a major part in society.
, and it would be unable to function. People would starve.
Yep, the most religious nations right now do seem to have a big problem with that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday September 08 2017, @04:19PM
Uhhh, considering that Trump is now the US President, I think we may have already hit the wall. YMMV.