
9th Grade Girls Soldering - nmorell
https://alum.mit.edu/pages/sliceofmit/2014/07/15/yougogirl/
======
leoc
"Forbidden

You don't have permission to access /pages/sliceofmit/2014/07/15/yougogirl/ on
this server."

~~~
michaelt
Google cache:
[http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https:/...](http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:https://alum.mit.edu/pages/sliceofmit/2014/07/15/yougogirl/)

~~~
leoc
You can even just paste the URL and it will work. Apparently some clever-dick
is looking at referrer information.

------
jonmrodriguez
In today's world, it's valuable / necessary to teach a 2nd style of soldering
as well: using a heat gun and solder paste to manually reflow surface-mount
components. It's just as easy as using a soldering iron, and for many cases
much easier! And it's the only way to solder modern chips.

Also I agree with JamesArgo, always use lead-free solder.

------
JamesArgo
Use lead-free solder folks; I strongly believe we should keep lead solder the
hell away from children.

~~~
bdamm
Yeah but have you actually used lead-free solder? It'll increase the burns and
also create goopy messes of melted plastic and the tears of children.

------
drz
Or, you know, leave everyone to their own devices, and let people choose the
fields that engage them.

Males and females are not equal, in metabolism, strength, ability, or anything
else. They have equal rights, but this does not mean that they deserve equal
representation in all fields. Those with the highest merit deserve
representation. Trying to fight this simple fact is the height of folly.

~~~
steveklabnik
Until you've demonstrated programming has some biological basis, this
'argument' is absolutely ridiculous.

~~~
crazy1van
I think it's less about ability and more about interest.

~~~
sp332
Right, that's what this fixes.

~~~
drz
No, it isn't. You can't dictate interest.

~~~
sp332
It is trivially easy to influence interest.
[http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/06/25/more-women-pick-
co...](http://www.washington.edu/news/2013/06/25/more-women-pick-computer-
science-if-media-nix-outdated-nerd-stereotype/)

~~~
drz
This study is about stereotypes, not interest, not merit, not anything that's
actually relevant.

You know what shows interest? A female willingly taking and passing CS
courses. Not this bullshit.

~~~
sp332
What you need is a study showing how many women showed interest and then were
talked out of it. [http://www.npr.org/2012/07/12/156664337/stereotype-threat-
wh...](http://www.npr.org/2012/07/12/156664337/stereotype-threat-why-women-
quit-science-jobs)

~~~
drz
> When female scientists talked to other female scientists, they sounded
> perfectly competent. But when they talked to male colleagues, Mehl and
> Schmader found that they sounded less competent.

Could it be that they, comparatively, are?

Nah. That would make too much sense.

Let's blame it on the all-powerful patriarchy, which we can't even prove to
exist.

That's not insane at all.

~~~
sp332
It's the same women, in conversations with men vs other women, sound
different.

Edit: you're the first person to mention the patriarchy, let alone blame it.

~~~
drz
Yes, and the researchers aren't even considering the possibility that these
women sound incompetent when talking to men, because they actually,
comparatively, are.

They discount the most obvious explanation without even testing for it, and
expect to be taken seriously. What a joke.

~~~
sp332
Women suddenly become less competent when talking to men?

~~~
drz
The obvious hypothesis is that women sound less competent when talking to men
because they _are_ less competent than men, on average.

They don't sound less competent when talking to women because they _aren 't_
less competent than other women, on average.

Playing dumb won't help you win this argument. It will just make you look just
as dumb as the researchers.

~~~
sp332
[http://schmader.psych.ubc.ca/publications/2011/Talking%20sho...](http://schmader.psych.ubc.ca/publications/2011/Talking%20shop%20and%20shooting%20the%20breeze%202011.pdf)
_our male and female samples were matched by rank, discipline, and research
productivity and impact_

The particular men and women chosen for the study were not, objectively
speaking, different in competence. This is a study of perceived competence.

~~~
drz
> because they are less competent than men, on average.

Not necessarily in comparison to the specific researcher they're talking to.
_On average._

Reading comprehension is a great skill. You should look into it.

~~~
sp332
I was responding to your post: _Yes, and the researchers aren 't even
considering the possibility that these women sound incompetent when talking to
men, because they actually, comparatively, are._ The researchers were
investigating how much of the perceived competence difference was real and how
much was a difference in perception only. So they controlled for actual
differences, and found a large difference in the way equally-competent men and
women are perceived.

~~~
drz
You keep playing dumb. It's not working for you. It won't ever work for you.

The hypothesis is that the exhibited feeling of incompetence is because men
are better than women _on average._

How many times will I have to repeat this until you get it?

~~~
sp332
Oh it's _you_ who has this hypothesis. I thought you were referring to
something in on of the links I posted. So if that's your hypothesis, why not
look for a study that tested it?
[http://www.economist.com/node/11449804](http://www.economist.com/node/11449804)
[http://www.voanews.com/content/girls-get-better-grades-
than-...](http://www.voanews.com/content/girls-get-better-grades-than-boys-
math-science/1904864.html)

But aside from that, wouldn't you like to get the women are are actually good
at math and science to get into STEM fields, even if they are a minority? I
think that's a question we can actually do something about, even if we can't
change how good women are at science. [http://www.macleans.ca/general/girls-
good-at-math-half-as-li...](http://www.macleans.ca/general/girls-good-at-math-
half-as-likely-to-study-stem/) I'd like to encourage good female programmers,
however many of them there are, to go into programming jobs.

~~~
quantized
Has changing goalposts ever worked for you?

~~~
sp332
I answered the original question first. If you don't like that paper, you can
Google for more yourself. And yes, asking better questions works for me!

~~~
quantized
You answered a question about comparative scientist competence (which is
highly objective, because it's judged on the basis of peer review of published
work) with stats about elementary school grades handed out by teachers (which
is highly subjective, because it's a virtually unchecked power, almost never
judged by any outside auditor), not to mention the difference in age, task,
environment -- basically _every single criterion_ is different. It's not a
question of liking anything. You're simply trying to move goalposts.

Judging by the various forms of intellectual dishonesty you've attempted thus
far, I would gladly do my utmost to prevent anyone the least bit like you from
finding employment anywhere near me for as long as I live.

~~~
sp332
This thread started with drz saying we should leave everyone to their own
devices, and "those with highest merit deserve representation". I agree that
this should be happening, but I disagree that it is happening. drz then
claimed that you can't dictate interest. I disagreed. drz claimed that only
taking and passing CS courses can "show interest". This is obviously false; if
ever a woman was interested but then discriminated against, she might not pass
the CS course. I submitted an article on stereotype threat, which is one
reason that competent women might not succeed in class or industry. I think
drz took this to mean that I thought women were, on average, as competent as
men. I admit to getting confused at that last change in topic since I don't
think it's relevant or interesting. No one in the original article, or anyone
else in this conversation, has made that claim.

