Women in STEM - who is at fault?

[EBearhug]

I was reading Computer Weekly's Focus paper on Men for women in tech.

It says it mentions parents heavily, which it does - and this is no bad thing, because I do think parents have quite some influence on what their children may decide to do for a career - I know quite a few people who went into the same or similar careers as their parents, and we all know of acting dynasties and so on. (And I suspect that me ending up in IT has quite a bit to do with it being something my parents knew nothing about.)

However...

"Industry experts suggest that dads rarely stand in the way of their daughters pursuing careers in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (Stem) as they want to believe their daughters can go on to achieve any desired career." (p5)

"But mothers are often cited as one of the reasons girls choose not to go into technology, as they often dissuade their daughters from pursuing a job in the technology industry, fearing it would not suit them." (p15)

So yay, mothers to blame again. But - do women have a clearer idea of how hostile an environment it can be? I think a lot of men just don't see any sexism. My manager has said there is no sexism, in response to me giving examples of minor sexist things which happen every day. I've had a few colleagues over the years who've outright said that they don't think that women can think logically or always react emotionally (I usually respond with examples of men who always react emotionally.) Plus of course, those who respond to surveys and give interviews to CW on diversity are probably pretty much self-selecting and are more likely to be the type who do recognise the issues and are aware of the various barriers.

I've spoken to male colleagues (most of my colleagues are male - I work as a unix sys admin,) about why they think there are so few women in IT - mostly, the response has been along the lines of, "well, it's IT, women don't want to do it." They don't see the problem, and they think it's a choice that's freely made. They've never been asked to think about why women make that choice, or if it's even a truly free choice - nor about how they might contribute to reasons why women choose not to enter tech careers.

I am all for getting more men involved in diversity - too often it's all about women in tech (or wider STEM) and the majority of men, who create the culture we work in simply by being the majority, aren't involved at all. I'm just feeling uncomfortable about it implying (or maybe I'm just being paranoid and inferring things which aren't there,) that men never stand in the way of girls entering IT, but women do.

And then I worry about whether I am doing enough to promote STEM; I know I do sometimes have doubts about it, because of the constant low-level sexism. I've never actively suggested anyone shouldn't suggest it, but equally, I have stepped back a bit from actively promoting it. I bet none of my male colleagues has the slightest worry about this...

I wondered what others thought.

Krs1 what advantages do you think I might have?

Name just one.

It's not my job to educate you John. There's plenty out there, go and read it.

Again, the assumption that it's womens job to educate men. And to justify their life experiences to them.

It was a rhetorical question. One you clearly can't answer.

John - maybe your sector is nowadays a shining example of equality and you're not privileged in your workplace. We are specifically talking about STEM fields. OK?

That's fine Errol - as I say I have no experience of STEM and am not authorised to comment.

@Gentlemanjohn, with respect, we are talking about women in STEM industries and unfortunately for many, this kind of sexism is a daily chore.

Men are often blind to it as well, as they are not on the receiving end. I pointed out several incidents to my colleagues (all men), who had been in the same meetings and they hadn't noticed at the time, but did agree in hindsight. One then made an active effort to support me from then onwards, but the others forgot about it as it didn't directly affect them.

I also don't agree that men have no advantages from being male. This may be true in some very female-dominated sectors (such as early years childcare), but otherwise there are lots of published research studies showing that men have intrinsic advantages in the workplace.

Things like CVs with male names being more likely to get interviews (which is also why 'trans-women' who say they they gain no advantage from the patriarchy are not correct), to expectations for female colleagues to perform housekeeping roles (washing up cups etc.).

I don't think you know what 'rhetorical' means. A person asking a rhetorical question doesn't expect an answer- it's done to create a dramatic effect or make a point. You have done neither.

Perhaps you could to get back to the point of the thread, which is about women in STEM? Oh no that's right, you can't because you are man working in education and retail. You know nothing about the subject but you have just popped in to demand that women who DO know about it educate you and PROVE their own lived experiences to your satisfaction.

An excellent example of male privilege.

John- have you ever been at a family gathering where the women did the cooking and cleaning up while the men socialised and drank beer?

That's male privilege there. I watch my mil with her gc- and right from the beginning the boys sit and play video games while the girls apparently prefer to "help" dust and hoover, and cook....

gender.stanford.edu/news/2014/why-does-john-get-stem-job-rather-jennifer

I've posted the link before. Identical CVs with a male name were offered higher salaries, and deemed to be more competent than the same CV with a woman's name.

The advantage to being a man doesn't even require you to be present.

It's been a while since I worked in retail, but back when I was the only female salesperson at a certain large electronics retailer (all other women were on the tills - I was dismissed out of hand when I applied for a tech role), at the end of the day when we faced up all the stock and generally tidied up a bit, I was always the one handed the duster. I was often one of the last out of the store as the men disappeared to 'go to the toilet' when the time came and ducked out of doing this bit of their job.

Men are often blind to it as well, as they are not on the receiving end

I was vaguely wondering whether one of the exacerbating factors in IT type fields that they may be particularly attractive to the subset of men with poorer social skills/'theory of mind' ?

Please don't let John derail yet another interesting and important thread.

www.uccs.edu/Documents/dcarpent/altruism.pdf

Shows how women's careers suffer if they don't do 'workplace housekeeping', whereas men who don't suffer zero consequences.

www.apa.org/monitor/dec05/tasks.aspx

Shows how men received more credit then women on joint tasks.

But no, there are are no advantages to being male at work

I could have had any career I wanted - I was an all round A grade student, but I chose teaching. No one ever suggested anything else. My parents didn't try to influence me - they just wanted me to be happy in whatever I did. No one else ever suggested any alternatives to me, apart from my English teacher who suggested I'd be a great social worker.

Do you think, had you been a boy, you would have been encouraged to do something 'more' with your potential?

Hmm..."men just don't and can't understand the struggles women face"

Man "tell me so I can understand"

Woman "Again, the assumption that it's womens job to educate men. And to justify their life experiences to them."

Man on board with hundreds of threads explaining the struggles of women.

Man: Explain to me personally the struggles of women.

Woman: How about reading the fucking threads?

Woman - Google is your friend . Also large buildings called libraries lend free books. Large retailers sell books online. It's amazing.

I have had none of these advantages.

I'd love to be a house keeper. I would have a meaning to my life and wouldn't be toiling away doing a job I loather for very little money. This would be a privileged position for me.

Lots of men don't have careers.

They have jobs.

This is the reason why many working class women choose to be stay at home mothers - because it's actually preferable to what their husbands have to do.

I sometimes think feminism these days is amounts to middle-class women wanting to get have glittering careers and make lots of money while all the other women and men can go jump.

*loathe

This isn't about you John.

It's about WOMEN IN STEM

Part of it is because girls are, on average, better at arts subjects than boys are. So they tend to choose arts subjects more often as subjects are considered equal in the education system

I know this is way back in the thread, but I think that it is wrong. Girls and boys are treated differently from the moment their sex is determined. The way they are treated impacts the way the brain develops. I don't know if girls are better at art, and boys at science, but if that is correct, it's not an innate hardwired thing, it's down to conditioning since birth.

Woman "men just don't and can't understand the struggles women face"

Man "tell me so I can understand"

Woman "here's a list of concrete examples"

Man "well I've never seen any of those things happen"

Woman

My personal experience is that coed schools and parents turn girls off STEM. I went to girls schools for secondary and at all of those schools you'd end up with girls doing STEM subjects. My Facebook includes people who studied Computer Science, Chemical Engineering, Organic Chemistry...

There was a good documentary on BBC called No More Boys and Girls which explored how to create an education that benefitted for both sexes.

Woman "Here's some links to published scientific research that show across social class and sector, men have advantages over women in the workplace"

Man "I have had none of these advantages"

Woman , bangs head against wall

The documentary included stuff like how caregivers subconsciously treat girl and boy babies differently. They put babies in opposite sex clothes and the caregivers offered a doll to the "girl" and robot to the "boy" subconsciously.