Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 02-19-2017, 09:07 PM
 
3,092 posts, read 1,938,785 times
Reputation: 3030

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biker53 View Post
I agree, yet there is a bias against hiring men in many medical settings. Also, whereas there are many programs encouraging girls to go into STEM fields, you don't find comparable programs encouraging boys to pursue nursing and med tech fields.
Let's not forget daycare centers. How about tax incentives for men to open and run them?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-19-2017, 09:10 PM
 
26,719 posts, read 22,375,416 times
Reputation: 10018
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic View Post
Let's not forget daycare centers. How about tax incentives for men to open and run them?



( I dunno about that one... )
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-19-2017, 11:37 PM
 
49 posts, read 53,711 times
Reputation: 100
I say we put 20,000 woman in the infantry and see how OP feels about that.

Quote:
General Electric (GE) plans to employ 20,000 women in science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) jobs by 2020 because the “male dominated” sectors are suffering from a “talent crisis for women,” the company said in a Feb. 8 announcement.
Most women don’t know what a camshaft does, few know and even fewer know about connecting rods.
The reason they give literately no crap about much in the way of anything related to machines.

Quote:
The goal is to obtain a “50:50” gender representation for all “technical entry-level programs,” a strategy GE claims is “necessary to inject urgency into addressing ongoing gender imbalance in technical fields.”
Simple just do what the government has done give women a proverbial leg up in every situation. This might cost GE a few billion bucks and degrade the work force but hey. Law suits suck *** better avoid them by practicing sexism. If you hire anything with a vagina you will of course achieve your goal.

Quote:
The announcement states that only 14% of engineers and 25% of IT professionals are women, according to the U.S. Bureau of Statistics. The company expects that a continued lack of women in such fields will affect productivity and diminish “the potential of digital and other new technologies.”
The only woman who actually made, a meaningful contribution to digital technology was wait for it.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...covered%29.jpg
She died 25 years ago and no woman has come close to her. Simply put no woman has and likely will stand as a replacement for Grace.

Quote:
A failure to address this, GE wrote, “is like leaving money on the table – it creates a substantial economic cost.” To rectify the situation, “companies, governments, and other organizations” must “work together to put the right system of incentives and support mechanisms in place.”
They don’t pay taxes they are already a huge economic cost. Not to mention the cost of actually getting them into these jobs. It honestly makes more sense for GE to invest in Fusion energy than this. Hell there is more sense in investing in the US nuclear industry.

GE shareholders should be upset that their goal has become social engineering rather than maximizing shareholder value.

Women are wired to seek security. It’s part of the reason they seek good providers, men with power and alpha males. They see security there. Building new things and entrepreneurship means risk. Something most women want to avoid.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 01:15 AM
 
15,492 posts, read 10,426,487 times
Reputation: 15747
"GE to employ 20,000 women to end ''male dominance'' in STEM fields"

Not long ago, I read that women are already favored for jobs in STEM. I also read that more females, than males, quit their STEM jobs. Why is that? I think we should encourage girls to study math and science. However, you can't make people enter a certain field.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 03:56 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 790,069 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
That's for sure. As noted previously and illustrated again by this paragraph, you seem to lack even the most basic grasp of the subject and therefore cannot comprehend the relevant arguments in this debate. Nobody here thinks women are incapable of doing physics or that women who work in physics are "random outliers". It is simply the case that, on average, women are less interested in physics than men.
Yes, some people do. See below. And the statement that women are less interested in physics is rather meaningless when the why is the most important aspect of this conversation and the OP.

And you guys are pretty funny talking about anybody grasping anything when all you do is make rather pointless claims. There is nothing simple about women being less interested. The only thing that is simple here is your point of view on the topic. It does not begin and end with your shortsightedness.
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Yes, that's precisely what I am saying.
And it's not only "Black people and Spanish," but OTHER minority groups as well - be that Kazakhs or Uzbeks.
As I've said I hail from a different part of the world, with different economic/ideological background, where everyone was getting the same access to math/science education, yet the minorities didn't fair in these subjects very well. It were mostly ethnic Russians and Jews ( mostly males) that were finishing schools on top of their class in math and physics/chemistry, and proceeding to top Universities, as much as the government was encouraging EVERYONE to succeed in these areas. ( It wanted specialists, no matter of WHAT background/ gender/ethnicity.)
And my observation in the US is the same; Blacks can be very intelligent ( both men and women); BUT their natural kind of abilities lay in different areas, not in STEM ( math/engineering/mechanics.) These are the areas where White males are naturally more capable.
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supachai View Post
Saying that men are innately better than women at math and science doesn't imply that all men are better than all women in math and science. This seems to be the issue you have a difficult time coming to terms with. Groups are made up of individuals, but the group does not define the individual.
I'm not sure what the point of this paragraph is. Individuals are impacted by social expectations, beliefs, biases, etc. A lack of role models, a lack of women present in the sciences impacts young girls' understanding of gender roles early on, which subsequently drives academic and professional decision making. Besides, the statement that men, as a group, are innately better at maths/science is not only false, but again it harms. Anyhow, prove it. Show me mechanistically how this is the case.

Quote:
Horses are innately larger than dogs. You could also say that Great Danes are innately larger than miniature horses, but that doesn't make the first statement any less true.
These comparisons do not fit. Horse size is not impacted by social expectation and bias. Also, I do not believe words like innate, inherent, intrinsic are accurate to use. An intrinsic property is not subjected to external influence and cannot be changed as I understand intrinsic properties (in my chemistry at least), and intelligence is multifactorial. So, potential is a more fitting term.

So, do women as a group have the potential to do well at maths/sciences? Good question. I say of course (others will disagree). Do dogs as a group have the potential to be larger than horses? Not a good question.
Quote:
I brought this up previously because you attempted to refute the large body of evidence which shows that men outperform women in math and sciences by pointing to the lone exception of Finland in the PISA, which showed to me that you don't understand averages. You have yet to lead me to believe that you do.
No, you are incorrect. I did not attempt to refute the fact that boys outperform girls by noting Finland. That was a misunderstanding on your part. And really, it would have been an obviously nonsense argument that nobody would make. I clearly noted that Finland, and a number of other nations really, are outliers for the claims that boys are innately better at maths and sciences. Again, not that boys do not perform better on average than girls globally.

eta: I did just have a thought- perhaps people do not understand what innate/intrinsic means or perhaps it's applied differently in sociology/psychology (if at all) compared to how it's used in science. Maybe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 04:11 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 790,069 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
My experiences as a black woman in the US differs from the generic female experience.

We are also not trying to play oppression olympics in this thread.

I applaud GE for making a goal of hiring more women. And as I mentioned earlier, I hope they also build a retention plan along side this initiative.

Having your colleagues assume you are dumb, assign you crappy projects and decide you lowered the bar by joining the team doesn't actually keep those future women at GE.
The fact that this is the assumption at all is a part of the problem and these people do not understand it how it further drives the problem.

Quote:
Originally Posted by elan View Post
"GE to employ 20,000 women to end ''male dominance'' in STEM fields"

Not long ago, I read that women are already favored for jobs in STEM. I also read that more females, than males, quit their STEM jobs. Why is that? I think we should encourage girls to study math and science. However, you can't make people enter a certain field.
We, as a society, can start by encouraging women by dropping the narrative that women as a group have less potential.

As far as women quitting goes, I think it depends on the field. Women are the primary caretakers of family so they need to go where the money and flex time is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 04:17 AM
 
1,640 posts, read 790,069 times
Reputation: 813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griphin View Post
I say we put 20,000 woman in the infantry and see how OP feels about that.


Most women don’t know what a camshaft does, few know and even fewer know about connecting rods.
The reason they give literately no crap about much in the way of anything related to machines.


Simple just do what the government has done give women a proverbial leg up in every situation. This might cost GE a few billion bucks and degrade the work force but hey. Law suits suck *** better avoid them by practicing sexism. If you hire anything with a vagina you will of course achieve your goal.


The only woman who actually made, a meaningful contribution to digital technology was wait for it.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped...covered%29.jpg
She died 25 years ago and no woman has come close to her. Simply put no woman has and likely will stand as a replacement for Grace.


They don’t pay taxes they are already a huge economic cost. Not to mention the cost of actually getting them into these jobs. It honestly makes more sense for GE to invest in Fusion energy than this. Hell there is more sense in investing in the US nuclear industry.

GE shareholders should be upset that their goal has become social engineering rather than maximizing shareholder value.

Women are wired to seek security. It’s part of the reason they seek good providers, men with power and alpha males. They see security there. Building new things and entrepreneurship means risk. Something most women want to avoid.
Exhibit A. This is what girls have to contend with that boys do not. The ill-thought, careless bias and sexism. Same goes for minorities. Enough already.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 04:27 AM
 
2,528 posts, read 1,651,181 times
Reputation: 2611
Quote:
Originally Posted by erasure View Post
Ahh... er... no.
Not "Christians," since USSR was officially an atheist state.
The Jews were not accepted NOT because of their religion (some didn't have any at all, ) but because the Soviet gov. didn't want them to get educated in STEM and to get the jobs pertaining to state secrets, because Jews were prone to leave the country...

(Sorry for interruption.)
I'm talking about Russian Empire. Please note that I used the name Russia, not USSR, and I'm talking about the time pre 1917 in compare to the twenties (USSR) when the quotas and limitations on living in major cities gone away.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 04:39 AM
 
10,829 posts, read 5,413,052 times
Reputation: 4710
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
Why do people need role models?

The possibilities in your imagination are limited by what you can see and have access to.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supachai View Post
What? Is this really the way your mind works? You can't imagine something unless you see it first? This is the problem right here.
Exactly.

Science, math and engineering never would have happened in the first place if they required "role models."

Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408 View Post
When I graduated high school there were no schools in the area that had computer programming classes. Definite let not within 100 miles.
So what?

How was it different for males in your area?

I'll bet some of those males were building their own computers and programming them.

Why didn't you?

Quote:
Oracle just got sued by the labor department for underpaying everyone who wasn't a white male.
Anyone can "get sued."

Doesn't mean they did anything wrong.

This "equal pay" stuff is nonsense.

If women make less, it's because they work less or choose lower paying jobs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mash123 View Post
You don't have access to tv and books?

How can somebody be an avid reader and not to read Jules Verne?
Or Sir Arthur Conan Doyle? Or H.G. Wells? Or a biography of Marie Curie?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phyxius View Post
If women really wanted to work in the STEM field, then they will put the effort. Some women like to complain about "it's too difficult and want to dumb down the criteria instead of taking the time to learn the materials. You want equal opportunity, there you go. If women aren't going to put in the time and effort to be just as good as men, that's their problem.
Exactly.

And this applies to other fields as well.

I had a job that required a lot of hard physical labor, and of course the company had to hire women to do a man's job.

So I was partnered with a woman for a shift. I did my half of the hard work, and then I said, "Now it's your turn."

She wouldn't do it, and ended up crying. So I had to do her job for her.

I thought of complaining to management, but of course they wouldn't do anything about it -- too afraid of being sued and bad publicity.

Women need to go back to making babies and cooking for their children and husbands.

Yes, there are some women who can do better than the great majority of men in careers outside the home -- but not many.

All this "women's equality in the workforce" junk has done is reduce men's wages by doubling the size of the labor force so that now both parents have to work just to get by and their kids become sociopaths because they aren't properly raised.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassy Fae View Post
some believe women are innately intellectually inferior in maths/sciences.
They are.

Quote:
They also believe minorities are innately not "wired" for it as well
They're right about that.

Quote:
...all based on anecdotal personal experience.
No, it's based on fact.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Enlightenment View Post
Companies should be open to hiring people without regard to race or gender. They should not, in foolish attempts to meet arbitrary quotas and advance social engineering goals, hire based on race or gender as is proposed in the OP. How is the distinction here not obvious?
Exactly.

Companies should hire based on merit, period.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supachai View Post
I know a woman engineer who went on to start her own business and because of this, her company is favored for contracts with the government as a woman-owned business. The business environment favors women and minorities. My company often has to partner up with women and minority-owned businesses just to get certain contracts.
No wonder our infrastructure has been falling apart.

All this favoritism for the incompetent is destroying our society.

Last edited by dechatelet; 02-20-2017 at 04:47 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-20-2017, 04:42 AM
 
2,528 posts, read 1,651,181 times
Reputation: 2611
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cassy Fae View Post

As far as women quitting goes, I think it depends on the field. Women are the primary caretakers of family so they need to go where the money and flex time is.
Suppose I'm a manager in IT. Sometimes I have urgent demands from clients and management, urgent enhancements etc, and I need sometimes people to stay long hours. But she must go to pick her kids at 15:30...
So why would I hire a woman? Why would I invest in her so much time and effort if she will quit anyway? So I will hire that 25 years old single guy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top