The author of this piece is bullying you for being white and male? And they're the same sort of person that bullied you as a kid for your interest in science?
The door has been just as open to women as in any other field - the difference with science/tech is that (according to perception) only social outcasts are on the other side.
Even in 2015 GE was running those ads that make engineers looks like effeminate men who can't work with "real" tools, and that was from a someone trying to make their tech look good!
Maybe what's really happening is that boys are impulsive enough to let their love of a subject overwhelm their better judgement, and girls take an objective look at long-term career prospects, then sign up for law or med school, both of which have very high female participation.
I enjoyed the work leading to my PhD and the time spent at the startup was educational, but I have to conclude that pursuing the PhD was overall a mistake. I like the idea of the diversity of the sciences better reflecting the population at large, but I'm very angry that expensive education for a career with lousy prospects is being advocated. Considering the career outlook, poor pay relative to demands, and the disproportionate burden of child-rearing placed upon them, I see avoiding a career in the sciences as a rational choice for anyone, especially women.
That's very easy to say but where are the jobs for these people? http://www.nature.com/news/2011/110420/full/472276a.html
We would be better off identifying areas where there truly is a shortage of people (if any) and directing talented people there instead (and no, programming is not one of them).
>> The great universities of the West churn out far,
far more PhDs than there are post-doc positions for,
let alone tenure-track.
The PhD is just one road to learning, which still has value for those who choose to pursue it.
More like he took apart a walmart alarm clock and glued the parts to a mini suitcase (Described by the media as a "pencil case")
Do you have a link?
He got invited to the White House to provide counterbalance to the social idea that brown-skinned kids with beeping electronics are criminals that should have the cops called on them.
The simplicity of the project makes the reaction of the school worse not better.
He actually asked them to handcuff him and then take his picture because he said it would look cool. Look at the picture, the police officers are smiling in the background. He played them.
He was arrested and taken off school grounds. Next time please do your own research.
The police should not have been there at all, since the device is so obviously not dangerous.
There's nothing wrong with taking things apart to figure out how they work. I did the same thing at his age. But I wasn't pretending I built them. And we shouldn't hold his actions up as something to emulate.
That isn't to say I'm not concerned with the overreaction teachers, administrators and police had to the device. As far as I'm aware, the only reaction that they should have had—hey, that device has exposed mains!—didn't happen.
I've also heard different versions of the clock story.
Not saying everybody has an equal start - for sure not everybody is or was encouraged to become a scientist to the same degree. But it is not really an external force (or patriarchy and white supremacy) that is the culprit...
Pity, it would actually be interesting to discuss how to encourage kids into science, without the leading victim narrative.
What are these societal pressures that exist "without a doubt"? Every time I've tried to dig into the subject, I can only find ephemera and anecdotal testimony. Pressures echo from generations gone by, I know, but to what extent? And I know I haven't lived the life of someone systematically oppressed, but at least in the area I group up in, it seemed the exact opposite was true- systematic uplifting.
I'm not trying to say that they don't face any hardships, though I may not be privy to them, but rather that this whole problem could be rephrased without the women/minority angle. "People are discouraged from going in to science." is a better way to look at it, imo.
You really don't see any of these stereotypes in your daily life? Why are physics departments 80% men ? Just random chance?
The toys might simply reflect preferences, why would companies be interested in pushing gender stereotypes? Yes, maybe more boys got a home computer for Christmas than girls - but how many girls had that home computer on their wish list?
Entering fields were nobody looks like you: maybe the women from Harvard is more similar to the man from Harvard than another man from community college, though? It's feminist theory to claim the difference between men and women is such a huge separator.
Some studies have some merit, like the response rate according to names, but it is not really enough to chalk it all up to discrimination.
As for the 80%, no it is not random chance - men and women are different.
My not-validated theory to explain it: maths is hard, let's go shopping! (Translation: women have other options).
No I don't.
> Yes, maybe more boys got a home computer for Christmas than girls - but how many girls had that home computer on their wish list?
Exactly, I'm glad you see the problem. Everyone unconsciously adopts stereotypes based on how people around them act, and what they see in the world. Children are especially susceptible.
> Entering fields were nobody looks like you: maybe the women from Harvard is more similar to the man from Harvard than another man from community college, though?
Good point, class and upbringing are diversity issues too. You do see a lot of efforts to introduce computing and sciences to low-income schools and neighborhoods, which is great.
> Some studies have some merit, like the response rate according to names, but it is not really enough to chalk it all up to discrimination.
Nothing is 100% discrimination, but where it's a problem, it should be addressed.
> As for the 80%, no it is not random chance - men and women are different.
> My not-validated theory to explain it: maths is hard, let's go shopping! (Translation: women have other options).
Oh, I see. Should have read your whole comment before I started writing a response.
Obviously things have been changing slowly, but my point is that if you have ever talked to a woman or person of color about their experience in this career path, there would be mountains of really disturbing stories and examples of pressure/patronizing behavior/flat out harassment that keeps them from feeling welcome in the career they've been studying for sometimes decades.
Not to mention all the subconscious biases we have related to the fact that girls never really had the social support to keep pursuing their interest in tech from a young age, while boys did.
I really encourage you to talk to some people around you and ask about their experiences, not because I'm blaming you personally, or all white men personally, for causing these issues. But because as a society we need to be much more aware of the larger forces at play in how our world is structured, and take part of the responsibility of fixing them.
I especially doubt the common advertising narrative. I think it is much more likely that companies simply advertised what they thought would sell best (as in maybe boys being more likely to buy Chemistry kits), rather than them having a budget for pushing the patriarchy.
I'm sure other than that PoCs generally had less access to chemistry kits, probably mostly because they couldn't afford them. But I don't think that Chemistry kit was the issue.