Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To complain to Sunday Times on "UK girls flop" headline

211 replies

Duckdeamon · 22/02/2015 08:38

Today's Sunday times (can't link as they have a paywall) has an article about the UK having one of the biggest gender gaps in science at age 15 of 67 countries (upcoming OECD/ Pisa report). Article is interesting: through quotes it discusses sexism, science and maths and technology leading to well paid job opportunities, that girls are being prevented from doing, gender imbalances in science, and evidence that girls are as good at maths and science as boys.

But why use the headline "UK girls flop in science league"? Which suggests that the girls are at fault!

The results are shocking, and girls are being let down.

OP posts:
Moniker1 · 24/02/2015 18:37

No I think girls do not think about their future financial position to any great extent so end up in lower paid jobs.

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 18:43

So why do you think changes in the divorce terms will lead to girls choosing different options at GCSE / A-Level?

Moniker1 · 24/02/2015 18:47

Surely that is why there are few male nurses, primary school teachers, and in areas with other opportunites few male secondary teachers, few male social workers. Isn't it because the men aim for better paid work? Maybe I'd misunderstood but that had been my assumption, that boys must consider the pay more than girls.

And my point is that girls should choose better paid careers ie the male dominated ones. Is that wrong somehow??

JassyRadlett · 24/02/2015 18:47

No I think girls do not think about their future financial position to any great extent so end up in lower paid jobs.

So what makes them think differently from teenage boys, then?

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 18:53

I think your assumption is incorrect, yes.

I think the idea that boys and girls aged 14/16 are so fundamentally different when thinking about their future is a bit odd and I don't really get it.

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 18:55

So you think that girls don't bother thinking about careers because they think they'll marry someone and have some babies and he will look after her and if they divorce she'll be supported and not have to work.

And you think that boys are career minded and actively choose subjects that will lead to lucrative careers just because. Or maybe just because, they will be expected to provide?

You know it's not 1956 in US sitcomland, don't you?

Moniker1 · 24/02/2015 18:57

Why do women dominate the poorer paid professions?

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 19:01

Well that's a rather large question isn't it.

Why do you think they do?

It's a very complex issue. Take a look around the world, at the position of women in society in different countries and cultures across the globe. Notice anything?

I think the idea it's because they think they'll be looked after if they get divorced is a bit simplistic. And also attributes very long-term avaricious thinking to female children, which is a bit peculiar.

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 19:02

Oh and also means they're a bit stupid.

Because they are all not bothering with thinking about qualifications on the basis they will marry Mr Right, and don't have a Plan B.

hmm2 · 24/02/2015 19:05

Probably the hundreds of years of society telling people what is men's work and what is women's work that is still having to be broken down when that finally happens we might also see a better valuing of jobs improved work outputs as well as better opportunities for all to excel

MamaMary · 24/02/2015 19:06

OP, did you complain to the ST?

It's worth noting that on Monday (yesterday) The Times ran the story again this time with the headline 'British girls struggle with science'

Really mis-leading.

Moniker1 · 24/02/2015 19:09

Take a look around the world, at the position of women in society in different countries and cultures across the globe. Notice anything?

So women choose low paid professions because they are brow beaten into it by society? They don't have the autonomy to make a decision or choice themselves?? The girls choosing GCSEs think, oh, I mustn't get above myself I'll choose something easy? Is that what you mean?

Duckdeamon · 24/02/2015 19:13

Urgh, another bad headline! Talk about perpetuating the unhelpful stereotypes!

No I didn't complain, just vented on here!

OP posts:
NoCryingInEngineering · 24/02/2015 19:22

Or girls choosing GSCES see headlines like "British girls struggle with science" and think maybe I should do something I'm more likely to do well in

noblegiraffe · 24/02/2015 19:30

So women choose low paid professions because they are brow beaten into it by society?

Research has been done that consistently shows that if you submit two identical CVs for a well-paid position, but one with a male name and one with a female name, the one with the male name is more likely to be considered for the role

Just like selection bias against women who want to be MPs. They are far less likely to be selected as a candidate for a winnable seat.

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 19:33

Moniker1 your version means that the position of women around the globe is because girls and women choose to be there.

Nice.

I still don't understand how you think changing terms on divorce will make female children choose differently. Do you also think it will mean male children choose differently, actually? That would make sense wouldn't it?

Is all of this based on how you felt when you were a girl because your ideas don't resonate with me at all, and while obviously we can't all be the same, I find the idea that women around the world end up doing the donkey work for fuck-all reward because that's what they choose a really shitty assertion.

Moniker1 · 24/02/2015 19:45

Well we are discussing girls not doing science at school so they then can't do it at uni. And they do have a choice then. I agree that the attitudes around them will influence them but if you do reasonably in class, and know that you can do chemistry, to then opt to do something else at 15 seems daft, why not study what you are good at.
So what is influencing them?
I don't dispute that there is sexist bias against women in the workplace.

PilchardPrincess · 24/02/2015 20:51

If you look at the stat for Physics in single sex & mixed schools that is pretty stark.

There are plenty of theories around, my personal view is that it's a combination of subtle / subtleish things that build up over the life a a child and point them in certain directions.

I took maths/physics at school and did a related degree, I did it because I was good at it and because it was incredibly interesting, this is all quite personal to me, the idea that there are girls who are missing out on something that they would love due to something that is going on in society and in schools, similarly boys being pointed away from certain subjects and areas that they would love. It just seems like such a terrible shame.

Andrewofgg · 24/02/2015 21:00

noblegiraffe I have said for years the pre-interview stage of selection for jobs should be done without sight of the applicant's name or school. Obviously you cannot keep gender secret once the interview stage is reached!

In the case of university: selection should also begin without sight of name or school and where there is no interview - which is most of them - it should stay that way until offers are made. Then there can be no conscious or unconscious bias for or against men or women, one race or another, one sort of school or another. Anyone see any reason against it?

funnyossity · 24/02/2015 21:49

Re the interest in money:

In A Child of Our Time with Robert Winston, the 4 or 5 year old boys all (I think!) said they wanted to be rich and the girls gave more varied answers including being kind. Sadly it was such a long time ago that I watched it and I can't remember the damn question! Grin

This anecdotery seems to be playing out in my younger family members at the moment as they go through the choosing pathways stage.

ErrolTheDragon · 24/02/2015 22:56

Andrew - yes, 'blind' applications seem like a pretty good idea to me. Some organisations have done such things - eg I think some orchestras do 'blind' auditions, with the result that they've selected significantly more women than before. Unless there is some specific need to know, why do forms need gender information?

I was discussing this subject a bit with DD this evening. She reckons one thing that may be putting some of her peers off (she's yr11 so they've just been doing lots of careers stuff and sixth form options) is that people are pushing STEM too hard! She also mentioned being very pissed off when someone commented how great it was that she was a girl planning to go into engineering... because it shouldn't be comment-worthy. It's just what she wants to do, and she knows she's perfectly capable of doing.

ErrolTheDragon · 24/02/2015 23:01

funny - a lot of socialisation has happened by the age of 5. Not to mention that most girls by then will have been exposed to Barbie dolls..... (hey, maybe that's it - do girls in other countries get quite so much bloody barbie and disney princess shite?)

EBearhug · 24/02/2015 23:41

There are a whole load of reasons why girls don't go into STEM. Obviously not all reasons are valid for all STEM fields and for all women, but there are common themes.

Education
I think we specialise too early in Britain. We expect children to make choices at 13/14, when they mostly won't know what they want to do, and won't always understand the ramifications of the decisions they make. It's an age where fitting in is hugely important for most people, and it takes a strong personality to be the girl who chooses to be a minority in the class, particularly if you're an all-rounder, and could as easily choose to focus on languages or the arts. It isn't a coincidence that more girls do maths at A-level than other STEM subjects; maths is compulsory at GCSE, so more people have the prerequisite qualifications. I think baccalaureate-style exams are preferable to the narrow selections of A-levels, and I think the sort of degree where you have to do modules from arts and sciences before deciding on a major is also a better education. (Not that I am suggesting we need to have yet more screwing up of the educational system while it gets changed, because I think some stability is what is needed more than anything, rather than yet more changed policies every year.)

Also, this thread has shown there is still a problem with teachers and others seeing engineering and the like as something which girls don't do. It isn't a coincidence that more girls do A-level physics from single sex schools than mixed schools. You just don't have to put up with that sexist crap. I've also noticed that on Radio 4's The Life Scientific, the women interviewees have often been to single sex schools. (I went to a single sex school, which was a non-selective state school - it's not just about independent schools and grammars.)

Stereotype threat
This is where girls think they're bad at maths, because society and the press go round telling they are (like saying they're a flop at science). It is an issue in the UK - it seems to be far more socially acceptable to say that you can't do maths than it is to say you can't read (though illiteracy is also an issue.) And yet I can't think of any jobs which don't use at least basic arithmetic, if not more complex maths as part of it, not just STEM careers. (You do also need to be able to read for pretty much all jobs.)

Unconscious bias
This is also an issue in education and industry. There have been plenty of studies where men and women are judged differently for the same thing, e.g. "Wow, he's published 3 papers!" "She's only published 3 papers."

Sexism in the work place
Knowledge of STEM careers
Many people, including educators and others, don't really have an understanding of the vast range of STEM careers. Computing is all like the IT Crowd, and science is all
Parental input

EBearhug · 25/02/2015 00:03

Dammit, stupid PC, who would work in IT...

Sexism in the work place
It's definitely still out there. Some employers are good - Crossrail was mentioned above, and I've heard before they're good for female engineers - but that doesn't mean the whole industry is. Overt sexual harassment can be comparatively easy to counter, in that it's clearly wrong, but you still need to be sure of yourself to fight it, and if you're early on in your career, if you don't have much support (because you're the only woman) - sometimes, it's easier to leave rather than gain a reputation as someone who's awkward with no sense of humour. Not all sexism is overt, but it's not a coincidence that many women will be better qualified than their male peers - like it or not, women in STEM careers often do have to do that much better than the men they work with to get the same level of recognition. Not all employers are the same - but it's sufficiently widespread that it is a problem generally, not just for one or two employers.

The pipeline is also definitely a problem. Yes, most STEM fields have women in prominent positions, be it industry or academia. But you need to see women at all levels, not just for the real high-flyers who have a meteroic rise, but for the ones who work hard and get steady promotions, like many men can expect.

Knowledge of STEM careers
Many people, including educators and others, don't really have an understanding of the vast range of STEM careers. Computing is all like the IT Crowd, and science is all white lab coats and safety glasses. There's actually a far wider range of jobs than that (the Science Council have identified 10 types, and most of them need skills we stereotypically see as more female, like communication, working with other people, all the rest of it.

STEM jobs can be long hours - but many can also be quite flexible (not that all employers recognise this), so it can be fitted round family life. They're usually interesting and varied and intellectually stimulating, and can be well-paid, too. Why wouldn't anyone want that? But often, people won't consider STEM careers because they just don't have enough understanding of what's involved.

Parental input
This is massively important, and one area where cultural differences are huge - and this is a cultural issue rather than anything else - nearly all the points above come down to culture. I was talking to an Indian colleague a while back, and she just didn't get the STEM issue we have. Her parents gave her the option of doing medicine or engineering at university, else they wouldn't support her doing it. I can't imagine most British parents being that restrictive (which is a good thing), but it doesn't mean they don't have any influence. Many people go into careers that their parents did, or that they saw other family members doing, or friends' parents doing. I know there were things I never considered when I was at school, simply because I knew nothing about them and whether they'd suit me. (Actually, when I was in the 6th form, I remember saying, "I don't know what I'm going to do, but I know it's not going to be in IT or banking." I've now been in IT for nearly 2 decades, and 5 years of that was for an international bank...) There's not that wide a range of careers in my extended family, and I think most families can say the same. Children need to gain an awareness of different careers, and some of that will come from parents - but they can only talk about what they know about. Plus people have mentioned upthread how there isn't the same respect for STEM careers here in other countries.

None of these things can seem so big in themselves, but not having an understanding of what possibilities there are in STEM careers, and society telling you girls don't really do STEM stuff, and wanting to fit in, and not seeing any women in the workplace, you have to be particularly determined in a way men don't have to be.

Girls aren't making free choices. They're making choices constrained by all sorts of societal expectations.

Moniker1 · 25/02/2015 08:03

The pay thing - do we still encourage DCs to choose a subject they are interested in to study at uni.

Because not to consider the salary or job prospects once graduated is nuts.

Are pupils told that, well, if you become an X you won't be able to save the deposit on a mortgage for 20 years but if you were on the average engineers wage it would take you only 10 years.

At 16 you see people working in different jobs, those people have a car, they have a home but, unless you know them well, you won't know how skint they are, that they don't expect ever to own a house and can barely afford the rent, unless you are very close to that person somehow.

So basically at 16 you have no clue how much people earn. Except maybe the bankers in the city with their million pound bonuses. And you have no idea that there is very little chance of progression in your chosen career path or that your money will not automatically increase with experience.

Perhaps the salaries are mentioned in careers advice but exactly what you can/can't afford for the area you live in would also help.

Swipe left for the next trending thread