Guys,
So the fellows over at MGTOWforums were pondering just why it is that there are so few women engineers. There were a number of theories advanced to explain this gender imbalance – women are “crap at math,” “their [sic] just too stupid,”“you can’t build a bridge with ‘feelings.’” (Snap!)
But it was shade47 who offered the most convincing theory. It all has to do with incentives:
Im an engineer myself and in my opinion women could be good engineers if they wanted to be but its a hard sell since they can make money by lieing on their backs and shitting out bastards. …
i dont think women above a five in looks would have the patients [sic] to deal with the hardship of actually studying when she knows that shell end up getting knocked up or married and stop working in approximately 5 years after graduation.
Ladies, focus on your womb turds and leave engineering to the geniuses who don’t know the difference between “patience” and “patients.”
Shaenon: That may be the first female headed team to win a prize in science. But Rosalyn Yallow was awarded the prize in 1977, for work she did as part of a pair. I don’t know, from her comments that one could say either of them, “headed” the team.
She was the second woman to win a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.
(nb I’m acquainted with her son. I’d not say we were close, but we move in some of the same circles. If it weren’t for knowing him, I don’t think I’d know of her).
NWO: Since the gov’t forces this, why aren’t 50 percent of Staff Grade (majors, Lt. Cols and Cols) female? The Gov’t runs the military, and it’s had women in it since the 1970s (before that the women were in separate branches, The Women’s Army Corps, etc.), so it it’s mandatory, that would be the first place to see it, right?
Why is it that the Meg Whitman’s of the Business world are rare enough that they can say, “I was able to run a business” when they campaign for office?
Why are the Presidents of Universities overwhelmingly male?
Why aren’t the bankers half female.
You can’t say they can’t hack it, because you say the gov’t forces it to happen. People who hire, and promote people have to do that.
Unless it doesn’t, and you are lying
Way, way, way too many of my college friends who majored in science are leaving their careers, or willing to leave their careers, to have kids. I think it’s the single biggest roadblock to women in the sciences, and it constantly gets overlooked because it’s “their choice”–even though men aren’t expected to make a choice between family and career.
I attended an all girls school and when applying for college courses, everyone seemed to go for business, law, science, social studies etc. I was the only one that applied for computer games development. I was one of two girls in a college course of 50 people. I think with this subject, and others like engineering, there’s just a general lack of interest amongst women.
Katz, you´re right on all three
1. A lot of women who major in sciences leave their careers to have kids
2. Its their choice
3. Men are not expected to do that choice (are instead expected to support the kids and the woman)
Maybe this is cursing what a woman could do if she didnt want kids? maybe this is sabotaging whatever they are doing before they even start doing it? I know I wouldnt do well in X area if I knew I was going to quit beforehand.
Are kid-less, sterile, lesbian, single, whatever the case “not pregnant women” doing more important stuff in science etc?
I would add another reason why traditional roles sabotage women’s careers. One of my female relatives is, in fact, an engineer who worked in a very male-dominated research institute in the 1970’s. According to her, many men there married fellow scientists — and the women were then expected to use their education and expertise to promote their husbands’ careers; in other words, men straight up appropriated their work. Even girlfriends and mistresses often suffered the same fate.
Amused, right, men are evil! add that to the list.
Your assumption here “Maybe this is cursing what a woman could do if she didnt want kids? maybe this is sabotaging whatever they are doing before they even start doing it? I know I wouldnt do well in X area if I knew I was going to quit beforehand.” is what used to, and still does, keep a lot of women from getting hired in the first place, or getting promoted. Especially younger women. The people responsible for hiring assume the woman is going to either underperford, quit in a few years to have kids, or be unable to commit due to the pressures of childrearing.
I think the more important area of focus shouldn’t be what women are doing to sabotage themselves. Why not make being a parent and working more compatible? Parental leave for both parents, subsidized day care, encouraging fathers to do more than just “support the kids and the woman”, and take an active role in rearing their children, rather than just providing the funds alone.
Pecunium,
Why arent there at least half of women in the role of guitar players, musicians, girls in bands etc?
How about illustration? animation? computer programming? 3D? design?
I run a company in the videogames dev area. Its very, very rare to find a woman working on the field. Whenever I find one (that is good) I hire them
In the other hand theres plenty of women working perfectly fine in other areas (writing, administration, human resources, etc)
Most working enviroments are and were male dominated, because most of the work force was previously all male
Now that women have went into college etc for half a century or so, I say women just pick different areas of interest than men. I havent seen female discrimination or women not getting jobs or promotions due to gender in real life. I only hear such things as explanations of why it happens, but never witnessed it myself
filetofswedishfish,
I run a company and I have a bunch of friends who run companies. According to you, Im responsible for this. And Im not.
“Parental leave for both parents, subsidized day care,”
I havent been put in that position yet, but, truth is I dont generate enough money subsidize parental leave. I hire people because I need them to generate money for the company. Only big companies can afford to lose employees and keep running. For all the smaller fishes, money comes from workforce. Private companies are not charities = human labor is everything.
Actually yes you are-by refusing to let your employees, male and female, have time off to reproduce, you are treating your employees as nothing more then automatons, You can claim it is because “I lose money!” But ultimately it is “I do not want to share the income with my employees by letting them grow their own families.”
I run an office of 11 employees, we have a tight budget and they have not gotten raises in five years-but they have the time they need to have children and take care of those children. Sacrificing one lets them do the other.
PosterformerlyknownasElizabeth,
Where did I say I “REFUSE”?
I said I dont generate enough money and you turn that into “treating employees as automatons” and making me a bad guy?
f*** off.
Why arent there at least half of women in the role of guitar players, musicians, girls in bands etc?
The most popular singers are women.
How about illustration? animation? computer programming? 3D? design?
There was an article in 2008 about that :
http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/05/18/the_freedom_to_say_no/?page=full
It seems that math-precocious men are much more likely to go into engineering or physical sciences than women, while math-precocious women, are more likely to go into careers in medicine, biological sciences, humanities, and social sciences.
nomoreniceguy,
“The most popular singers are women.”
Well, yes, thats obvious. Same with actor roles / fama stuff, physical attractiveness and personality are more important than brains.
Checking the link
“while math-precocious women, are more likely to go into careers in medicine, biological sciences, humanities, and social sciences.”
Thats what seems to be happening. So, why? is it just a different set of interest / sensibilities? or is feminist right that the reason is the “bullying”?
Well, yes, thats obvious. Same with actor roles / fama stuff, physical attractiveness and personality are more important than brains.
These women that sing write their own songs and play music instruments, they are not stupid.
First you say that there is almost no women among musicians and now you admit that most musicians are women but they are stupid.
no more mr nice guy,
Read properly, cool? I said:
“Why arent there AT LEAST HALF of women in the role of guitar players, musicians, girls in bands etc?”
And Im not including “singers” because you dont need a math / rational / logic brain to sing. Otherwise most of the stars wouldnt be there.
“and now you admit that most musicians are women but they are stupid.”
In the same way most male singers are stupid. Hard to fight that fact, right?
Actually yes you are-by refusing to let your employees, male and female, have time off to reproduce, you are treating your employees as nothing more then automatons,(Elizabeth)
What a joke. What happens if the business only makes enough to pay the bills(mine included). Do I have to go into debt to insure that the employees arent more than automatons?
“Subsidized” generally means by the government, in some way. That way small companies as well as large have the ability to offer this to their employees.
“I run a company and I have a bunch of friends who run companies. According to you, Im responsible for this. And Im not.”
Just because I say these sorts of attitudes affect many women does not mean I’m accusing you and your friends of being sexist in your hiring practices. But, in the same vein, just because you and your friends aren’t sexist in your hiring practices, doesn’t mean that no hiring department is sexist.
In saying that women “just pick different” subjects than men, you’re conveniently forgetting the cultural background behind the choices women make. From early on, there are things presented as “ok for girls” and “less-ok-to-bad for girls”. Granted, you can reject this stuff, but a lot of people don’t because it’s hard to swim against the current. I was told beginning in grade school that girls just aren’t good at math. I’m passable at it, but I’m in a language field, so I don’t need much of it. I still get shock that I *play* video games, I can’t imagine if I designed them. my sister does- nobody assumes she’s skilled, or they assume she designs the “soft” girl games, like Angry birds, or any number of the really simple games you see for things like the DS. Those games have less prestige within the industry, and it’s a vicious circle that I could definitely see keeping women out of game design.
Do I have to go into debt to insure that the employees arent more than automatons?
Um, yes, treating people like human beings is a requirement for an employer.
YOHAMI, I don’t know what to make of any of your garbled, underpunctuated comments, so I’m not going to reply to them.
I love how YOHAMI and titfortat completely ignore Elizabeth’s second paragraph…
Alex, you mean this?
“I run an office of 11 employees, we have a tight budget and they have not gotten raises in five years-but they have the time they need to have children and take care of those children. Sacrificing one lets them do the other.”
Good for her!
Kaz,
“treating people like human beings is a requirement for an employer.”
For sure. But going into debt? no unless you can pay that later.
Im not arguing that people should be treaten like automatons. Elizabeth introduced that idea to mess with the dialog. I stand for social rights.
“YOHAMI I don’t know what to make of any of your garbled, underpunctuated comments, so I’m not going to reply to them.”
Thats fine by me.
*I meant Katz.
Hilarious, Im supposed to become an automaton so someone else can have kids and take time off, even though I would go into debt and not be able to raise my own family. You do realize some small businesses cannot afford to ‘share’ the profit because there really isnt enough to share. I know, that does make me a bad business person, but definately not a bad person.
I run a company in the videogames dev area. Its very, very rare to find a woman working on the field. Whenever I find one (that is good) I hire them
In the other hand theres plenty of women working perfectly fine in other areas (writing, administration, human resources, etc)
I sincerely hope you do take your female job applicants as seriously as your male applicants, but based on the second paragraph there, I’m inclined to doubt it. Personally, if I were going in for a job interview, and my prospective employer made it clear that he thought qualified women in my field were rare and that women are just naturally better suited to working as secretaries, I would run for the hills.
Well, no, in this shitty job climate, I wouldn’t. But I certainly wouldn’t have high hopes for whatever brainless clerical job you offered me.
(Where the hell do you live that most of the women you meet are secretaries? Are you a “Mad Men” character? I know there’s a lot of sexism in the video game industry, but yeesh.)