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.
This is a general goal. And it completely depends on what they're doing. If they're addressing gender imbalance by trying to better understand why it exists, and they help address those issues (such as helping address the specific reasons why women don't go into STEM fields early in life), then there is no issue.
There are ways to do this that aren't affirmative action or a quota system. You grow the pool of women in the field so that they become more of the qualified candidates. Once you have more and more qualified women in these fields, that creates a feedback loop to the younger girls and gets more interested in it (because they have more positive role models).
Some people are arguing that we're already there...I say they're ignoring the research that shows that we still have societal barriers in the way...certainly much less than before, but they're still there.
It's akin to the argument that because we elected a black president that things are all perfect on the race front. If only that were true...
So, the NBA should set a goal of having 60% of its players white?
So, the NBA should set a goal of having 60% of its players white?
Nice deflection.
Are you implying that women are less capable than men at preforming STEM work?
Gender differences notwithstanding (which exist), that doesn't mean there is a difference in overall ability to preform the work. Are you suggesting that there is? Please kindly prove that.
Yet we do. Boys are no longer graduating high school or college at the same rate girls are, and yet virtually every effort is geared towards girls. It is as if boys have been deemed expendable.
I think much of the root cause of the double standard is that women are better at working collectively towards common goals and that women are much more vocal about their issues. That and it having become politically incorrect to care about the fate of boys anymore. Men need to find their voice.
Yet we do. Boys are no longer graduating high school or college at the same rate girls are, and yet virtually every effort is geared towards girls. It is as if boys have been deemed expendable.
I think much of the root cause of the double standard is that women are better at working collectively towards common goals and that women are much more vocal about their issues. That and it having become politically incorrect to care about the fate of boys anymore. Men need to find their voice.
You completely misunderstood me. I agree with you.
When I said "we shouldn't" it was in regards to you saying "Why do we only focus on girls?"
You completely misunderstood me. I agree with you.
When I said "we shouldn't" it was in regards to you saying "Why do we only focus on girls?"
Yes I know you have been agreeing with me. Sorry if I made it sound like I didn't understand that.
I don't begrudge girls having any and all career paths open to them. My son went the STEM route and my daughter into education, but those were what fit their natural bent rather than anything we encouraged them to do. Both were free to go to any school they wanted and to be any major they wanted. Interestingly my son-in-law also went the STEM route and my daughter-in-law also went into education.
Thus far I have granddaughters and no grandsons, and so have a keen interest in them having every avenue open to them, but I remain concerned that society's near-exclusive focus on girls is going to result in a generation of lost boys not realizing their potential.
I live in a rural area. The largest employer in my county is the hospital. Wages there for nurses and techs are well above the median family wage in this area, let alone median individual wages, and that workforce is overwhelmingly female. There is a college here with a 4 year nursing program and a tech school with an LNA program. Their websites don't show a single photo of a male student so as to at least subtly signal boys that maybe those are careers available to them, let alone an advocacy program actively encouraging boys to apply. The factories of old are mostly gone. Boys coming of age here have few middle class level opportunities if they want to stay which is why I get so frustrated that everything seems to be geared towards only the girls.
The article cited a 50:50 goal, that is simply not possible unless you are overlooking men. The fact of the matter is the pool of women that go into these careers is small. They would be hiring women based on their sex, not on their qualifications.
If they were hiring men because they were men you wouldn't be making the "it's their company" argument.
People should be hired based on their merits, sex is not a merit with some small exceptions.
No, I don't think that it's the "societal norms" that play role in this imbalance.
I know so, because I've been raised in Soviet society and the ideas of women's emancipation were far more advanced there than in the US, (even for a reason that economic system was supportive of these ideas, unlike the economic system of the US, that was not initially set to accommodate them.)
So the girls were encouraged to participate in math and science from the early age on, as much as boys. Soviet state didn't care whether it would receive more men in technical field or women - it wanted ANYONE in that field - men, women and minorities alike. So the authorities essentially put the old German system of education in place, borrowed from earlier times, raising bar high and screening ALL potentially capable kids from the early age on. ( By the 7th-8th grade it was pretty clear who was capable to proceed to higher education, and who was going to learn trades in different vocational schools.) So the few girls that made it after all the tests and entering exams to the top Universities were a "real thing" - no one could contest their abilities, because they've got there as the result of tough competition. But I assure you that they were few and between, comparably to boys. ( Minorities were doing poorly in STEM field as well BTW.)
Overall I have to note that STEM schools had the lowest competition even for boys - sometimes you simply had to pass an exam to enter them, it was sufficient, since they were short of people ( unless of course it were top tech. Universities.) It was quite different story when it came to Humanities of course, and it didn't matter whether it were top Universities or the mediocre ones. The competition there was much bigger, since LESS people overall ( men of women) were capable of studying math/physics than Humanities.
So no, it's not about the "societal norms" - not at all. There is definitely a different factor at play here.
Agree. I also was partially raised in USSR and very familiar with the system. And yes, all the central Asian and caucasus minorities were not good in STEM and received affirmative action. There was actually only one minority (the Jews) that outperformed the slavic groups.
Are you implying that women are less capable than men at preforming STEM work?
Gender differences notwithstanding (which exist), that doesn't mean there is a difference in overall ability to preform the work. Are you suggesting that there is? Please kindly prove that.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4270278/
We conclude that early experience, biological factors, educational policy, and cultural context affect the number of women and men who pursue advanced study in science and math and that these effects add and interact in complex ways. There are no single or simple answers to the complex questions about sex differences in science and mathematics.
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.
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.
