Where Can I Find Real-Life Nerds Like Me?

[I like Serena]

Hold on, there's another episode of the big bang theory out.
I need to watch it.
I'll get back to you later .

 

[Femme_physics]

But you asked the questions...er,...so you need to get back to yourself later..?

Edit: Oh, I think/hope you were talking about the moment of inertia thread ^^

 

[Lazernugget]

lol True...again though, I find it annoying I have to explain jokes I tell, even to the smartest people I know...anyone know how to use a Nabla? I'm bored and feel like learning...

 

[jhae2.718]

You mean del $(\nabla)$? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del

 

[I like Serena]

But you asked the questions...er,...so you need to get back to yourself later..?

Edit: Oh, I think/hope you were talking about the moment of inertia thread ^^

Yes, this is a temporal quantum anomaly.

 

[I like Serena]

lol True...again though, I find it annoying I have to explain jokes I tell, even to the smartest people I know...anyone know how to use a Nabla? I'm bored and feel like learning...

Here's a nice article about nabla: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Del_in_cylindrical_and_spherical_coordinates

It should keep you busy for a while, especially if you try to deduce the formulas.

 

[Steppn]

I've always wondered why there are so few women in the technical sciences.
Where are all the female nerds?
Does anyone know?

...it's complicated, it can vary culture to country, a link to (some) more sites with debate, discussion and research articles:

http://userpages.umbc.edu/~korenman/wmst/links_sci.html"

Just on the objectifying of women, no, I do not like being objectified, or considered a sex relief gaming centre, I'm not particularly interested in sex for sex's sake with strangers, one night stands or a man's physical appearance-based-attraction.

I am no prude, I love intimacy, I have a healthy, robust, creative, enjoyable, sex drive/life-but my personal preference is for it 'within a relationship' and the relationship is something I am selective about. I don't consider it all some game, (just stating my preferences/beliefs here), and while attention from males can be sometimes flattering, it does absolutely nothing to my desire to jump into bed with them. Complete opposite, thankyou, but 'no' thankyou.

And the other thing with me, is my self esteem, self confidence, self worth...'how I regard myself' is healthy enough, I don't need or want guys to be fawning, or trying to charm me, just treat me with respect as a human is fine by me, as I would hope I respect and treat them. If that makes sense.

I have no issue with what others prefer/do, (given it's all consensual)-it's none of my business.

I am a get-my-mind-girl-before-the-body...prior to anyone possibly begin exchanging body fluids with me.

"Story645" I am enjoying your perspective, and your comments in this thread, I do understand what you are posting about. I get your point on what can be almost intimidating, by some males, to females, 'sometimes'.

Thankyou!

 

[Steppn]

Being called 'honey', 'sweety' and 'babe' etc by my family elders, 'think grandparents era-ish' is not offensive to me, I take it with the intention meant, that of a term of endearment, (they call me by my name anyway-mostly), however by peers, work collegues, university staff, teachers, etc.. I would ask them to please address me by name.

Very, very few do this, (use pet names, my observation here), nor have I heard any female colleagues having been addressed this way, and we can be involved (often) in male workplace fields.

Actually, I thought all that stuff went out with pointy toe shoes? Have pointy toe shoes made a comeback?

 

[story645]

Have pointy toe shoes made a comeback?

Yes, though endearments have generally been filtered out in light of sexual harassment lawsuits and the like. I don't mind some profs using 'em, but it's totally situation/context/culture/personality dependent.

I've never once felt to be treated any differently in lectures than my classmates.

I haven't either, but in one of my classes a prof was obviously going far easier on a female classmate than he would have on a male one. It's kinda random and also somewhat dependent on the girl too.

Femme_physics

I'm also wondering if your experience is a bit different because Israel has gender parity in a lot of STEM field, so even though it's rare to see women in robotics in Israel* it's nothing special to see 'em doing math and science.

*There aren't many women in robotics in the states either, at least from what I experienced doing the competitions and the like. It's gotten better, but for the longest time it seemed like all the girls at robotics competitions were either programmers or girlfriends.

 

[Femme_physics]

Ah well. It's still a good comeback to all these assholes who look down on me because I'm a girl. Seriously, it's annoying. What's so manly about it? I keep telling them, do I have to lift heavy machines in this profession? Is that it? I wonder where does the part of physical strength being important comes in in this field?Well, I don't mind being the underdog :) In fact, I thrive on that!

 

[Andre]

FP,

Could it be that the explanation for all this is somewhat different. Going on thin ice now and maybe it has been said before, but I'm just thinking out loud.

It appears that genes play an important role in how we behave. The genes want their owners to reproduce, whatever species, and for mammals that is a bit complicated due to the rather big difference in effort between the genders, required to produce offspring. Males just go and replicate whereas females are required to do a substantial investment in carrying, nursing, and often raising (alone). Optimizing the quality of the offspring, the female must therefore be very careful selecting her partner, whereas males just go and reproduce. Remember, still generalizing for mammals.

However as the females are selective in their choice, males have to demonstrate why they should be chosen. They must proof to be worthy by being superior in .. fill in whatever is required to be superior in. Experts call this behavior courtship. So in case of the Homo sapiens academensis, smartness is the thing to be superior in. Hence the males must prove that they are, or their genes get frustrated, being a failure. But what will happen if the female competes for smartness or even outsmarts them?

Could it be that this is what you experience?

Just my two cents.

 

[DanP]

One guy in 2nd year of mechatronics studies even rudely told me "what'd you do with this degree?" I argued that a lot of women are into robotics, esp. in the US. The fact it's uncommon in Israel is a shame. It's a diverse field, but the job market in general favors men, and the ratio shows that. (at least in Israel - a tough military-culture country)

Are you sure that the job market prefers man, or it may be that the job market only reflects the statistical preference of females on other jobs ?

In a word, why look at it as a discrimination against women, when it can be a simple reflection of the statistical choice women do regarding their careers ?

Looking at a ratio tells nothing about the causes of why that ratio exist in the first place. Remember , the fact that you choose a career in engineering does not make you a statistical significant marker of women behavior in regarding career choices. It may be very well that most women don't give a dime about going in engineering.

 

[story645]

I keep telling them, do I have to lift heavy machines in this profession? Is that it?

I've had to lift bots to repair them or work on them, (or to keep them up while my friend worked on them) but they haven't been all that heavy or I've had help. I think it's a girls shouldn't work with tools thing and misplaced chivalry.

It may be very well that most women don't give a dime about going in engineering.

Don't remind me. I just volunteered for a recruitment event to get girls interested in STEM fields and only two of the eight in my group were interested in STEM, and they both wanted to be in bio/pre-med. Girls in the hard sciences seem to be rare birds.

 

[DanP]

The fact it's uncommon in Israel is a shame. It's a diverse field, but the job market in general favors men, and the ratio shows that. (at least in Israel - a tough military-culture country)

:)

This bugs me a bit.

What exactly is your perception that Israel's military culture has with perception of women ?
IDF is different by most armed forces, in that they practice conscription of women. If anything, this practice shows that the "though military culture" has no gender biases, and should such biases exist, you should look for other causes then Israel's military culture.

 

[Femme_physics]

@ Andre
Maybe, but the way I see it we all just need to pass a bunch of major tests... so if we could all give each other a hand, male or female aside, we would only benefit from it at the bottom line. If you could just put your oh-so-mighty-ego aside, and you can differentiate your mating game with your degree pursuit, we might just get ahead and see how can we actually help each other. Neuroscience tells us that our brain compartmentalizes, so compartmentalize your ego/ego-brain-prowess/proving-yourself-better idea and you'll get far with the degree :)
But, perhaps I'm reading it wrong, since some strugglers do seek my help. I'm really enjoying mechanics.

@ DanP

I've actually made a presumption and stated it as a fact. Sorry. I'm trying to slap myself out of that lack of confidence. I keep thinking that employers will see it as a woman trying to play in the NBA instead of the WNBA. I hope not. I'll try to slap myself out of it. Do you guys have any famous female engineers I could name?

And yeah, it could not necessarily be military-culture, but it certainly doesn't help...dunno.

I've had to lift bots to repair them or work on them, (or to keep them up while my friend worked on them) but they haven't been all that heavy or I've had help. I think it's a girls shouldn't work with tools thing and misplaced chivalry.

Agreed!

 

[DanP]

And yeah, it could not necessarily be military-culture, but it certainly doesn't help...dunno.

I can't stop thinking at the ancient world. It was in Sparta, a classical militaristic system focused on excellence, where women enjoyed liberties and rights unmatched at that time anywhere else. Athens ? Maybe they invented democracy, but when it comes to women rights they where nothing compared to Sparta.

Not that this says anything a militaristic culture today, but still :P

 

[I like Serena]

I think a man in a technical science typically feels threatened by a woman, especially if that woman outperforms him.
In an old fashioned role pattern where the man is supposed to be the provider, it is hard to take if you can't be useful that way.
And even though this may be old fashioned, the patterns and feelings are still there.

It would make a guy be nasty to girl, just because he can't admit that he feels threatened and that he's in an emotional knot about it.
It wouldn't help if the guy was performing badly in his class to begin with.

 

[DanP]

I think a man in a technical science typically feels threatened by a woman, especially if that woman outperforms him.
In an old fashioned role pattern where the man is supposed to be the provider, it is hard to take if you can't be useful that way.
And even though this may be old fashioned, the patterns and feelings are still there.

Women in hard sciences are so under-represented that it is hard to take seriously the hypothesis of the threatened men. Especially when you argue it through the angle of "the provider". The bulk of the money in those fields go in the pockets of men, not women.

So, Id say you should start looking for another hypothesis.

 

[Steppn]

I believe we are born with the predisposition to 'love' science, to want to seek knowledge, to immerse in science, work in science (whatever the field). I do not believe it favors male or female, I think it can be 'brain hardwiring' and despite, regardless of gender.

There are commonalites between our more famous female and male scientists, (I say that because they are the ones I've had opportunity to observe).

The reason(s) more females are not representative in science fields are complex. To pick out one, a couple of reasons doesn't even begin to skim the surface. And it generalises.

I think any science person, regardless again of gender is interested in the work, the results, the research, the study, the OUTCOMES...and in this day and era what your gender is -is obselete.

To listen to any female scientist you won't necessarily hear her bemoan any glass ceiling, it's about the science, the unknowns you get into the game to begin with, to make a difference and achieve, research, get outcomes. That supercedes gender imparity, and keeps females (and males for that matter), coming back into science. It's impossible to 'not have a passion for science'. Whether you be of the softer, or the hardcore.

Just my thoughts.

Science and passion for it has transcended gender for centuries, (think Hypatia, flayed for her trouble), through to our Sally Rides...science is very powerful if your brain hardwiring is science orientated. Despite xx's or xy's.

 

[I like Serena]

Women in hard sciences are so under-represented that it is hard to take seriously the hypothesis of the threatened men. Especially when you argue it through the angle of "the provider". The bulk of the money in those fields go in the pockets of men, not women.

So, Id say you should start looking for another hypothesis.

So why would a man make a nasty remark to a woman, saying for instance that her place is in the kitchen? Or that there is no future for her in a technical science?
It is just plain rude and there is no basis for it, so why say it?

 

[jhae2.718]

So why would a man make a nasty remark to a woman, saying for instance that her place is in the kitchen? Or that there is no future for her in a technical science?
It is just plain rude and there is no basis for it, so why say it?

Because he's just a jerk?

 

[DanP]

So why would a man make a nasty remark to a woman, saying for instance that her place is in the kitchen?

Maybe because he is just freaking hungry and simply sick of the culinary talents of today's chicks :P You know, if you get some nasty remarks that you should bring even more money home, quit sport practice and be home early like a nice tamed pet, you lash out sometimes too with idiocies. One of them being, if you want all this, I just want an good damn old fashioned lunch on my table. Because I like to eat some real food, not microwaved junk.

But jokes aside, domestic squabbles are not really the subject here. They are better left to divorce attorneys.

Or that there is no future for her in a technical science?
It is just plain rude and there is no basis for it, so why say it?

It may be a simple reflection of the fact that so few women are interested in hard sciences and engineering. IMO it's a stereotype.

 

[Steppn]

It may be a simple reflection of the fact that so few women are interested in hard sciences and engineering. IMO it's a stereotype

I think also for many years the female component of science, especially the hard sciences has been background work, been there but working in the 'backgrounds...'

 

[I like Serena]

Because he's just a jerk?

That shifts the question to why he's a jerk.
I believe being a jerk (between 2 people - groups work differently) is born out of insecurity, lashing out at others.

 

[Steppn]

Just from wikipedia, 'Women in Science':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science

We've come a long way, think of it as a semi-eternal apprenticeship..:-), things are really improving though, encouraging younger women, girls into science if that's their passion is something we can all do, it begins at base level, with us, then you find your own groove:

The involvement of women in the field of medicine has been recorded in several early civilizations. An Egyptian, Merit Ptah (2700 BC), described in an inscription as "chief physician", is the earliest woman named in the history of science. Agamede was cited by Homer as a healer in Greece before the Trojan War. Agnodike was the first female physician to practice legally in 4th century BC Athens.

The study of natural philosophy in ancient Greece was open to women. Recorded examples include Aglaonike, who predicted eclipses; and Theano, mathematician and physician, who was a pupil (possibly also wife) of Pythagoras, and one of a school in Crotone founded by Pythagoras, which included many other women.[1]

Several women are recorded as contributing to the proto-science of alchemy in Alexandria around the 1st or 2nd centuries AD, where the gnostic tradition led to female contributions being valued. The best known, Mary the Jewess, is credited with inventing several chemical instruments, including the double boiler (bain-marie) and a type of still.[2]

Hypatia of Alexandria (c.370-415) was the daughter of Theon, scholar and director of the Library of Alexandria. She wrote texts on geometry, algebra and astronomy, and is credited with various inventions including a hydrometer, an astrolabe, and an instrument for distilling water.[1]

 

[DanP]

I think any science person, regardless again of gender is interested in the work, the results, the research, the study, the OUTCOMES...and in this day and era what your gender is -is obselete.

I do not believe in this. Women and men have different behaviors, and Id dare to say we may even have different genetic propensities arising from very significant differences in our biology.
For one example, the simple fact that we have a different hormonal ensemble of the so called sexual steroids may modulate our behavior. And to add offense to injury, behavior of males and females are not modulated the same way of the society.

Gender is far from being obsolete. Our gender is one of our basic identity traits, an invaluable component of the self. Much of our behavior is modulated by gender. If we try to obsolete gender, we will fail IMO to understand or get pertinent answers to questions like
"Why so many girls care about hard sciences", or "why so few man have any desire to make a career in kindergartens". Stay naked in the front of a mirror near a man, and see how different the two of you are. The differences are not visual only. Part of your biology is necessarily different because of requirements of sexual reproduction. The effects of those differences are not skin deep. They affect behavior.

This is not to say than one of the sexes is better than the other, or that one should have more rights than the other.

 

[Steppn]

I'm not that sure boys, young guys interested in science have that easy a path into it either, it can be pretty challenging to be one of maybe a few nerds in class, the majority of society are not science types, it takes all kinds to make humanity but science is the minority.

 

[I like Serena]

Just from wikipedia, 'Women in Science':

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_science

We've come a long way, think of it as a semi-eternal apprenticeship..:-), things are really improving though, encouraging younger women, girls into science if that's their passion is something we can all do, it begins at base level, with us, then you find your own groove:

In the same article it says:

"The Nobel Prize and Prize in Economic Sciences have been awarded to women 41 times between 1901 and 2010. Only one woman, Marie Curie, has been honoured twice, with the 1903 Nobel Prize in Physics and the 1911 Nobel Prize in Chemistry. This means that 40 women in total have been awarded the Nobel Prize between 1901 and 2010. 16 women have been awarded the Nobel Prize in physics, chemistry, physiology or medicine.[41]"

So we can see that in current day women also make important contributions to science.
Was the ratio in ancient times higher?

 

[Steppn]

I do not believe in this. Women and men have different behaviors, and Id dare to say we may even have different genetic propensities arising from very significant differences in our biology.
For one example, the simple fact that we have a different hormonal ensemble of the so called sexual steroids may modulate our behavior. And to add offense to injury, behavior of males and females are not modulated the same way of the society.

Gender is far from being obsolete. Our gender is one of our basic identity traits, an invaluable component of the self. Much of our behavior is modulated by gender. If we try to obsolete gender, we will fail IMO to understand or get pertinent answers to questions like
"Why so many girls care about hard sciences", or "why so few man have any desire to make a career in kindergartens".


Stay naked in the front of a mirror near a man, and see how different the two of you are. The differences are not visual only. Part of your biology is necessarily different because of requirements of sexual reproduction. The effects of those differences are not skin deep. The affect behavior.

This is not to say than one of the sexes is better than the other, or that one should have more right than the other.

...and I would add to that- that culture, (nurture) family life, can also influence a person.

Biology is a part of us, no argument from me, but does it determine my career?

I think not.

Humanity is made up of different personality types, different temperaments, the minority of that are the science type people, the kindegarten teachers I could well point out come from the bulk of other brain hardwiring types, and naturally there will be a high representation of females. It actually proves nothing.

If you want an example of a 'science type' in education we need not look further than Maria Montessori, her reforms and ideas to education.

The USA has a powerful science type in Wendy Kopp at the moment making great headway with her program, "Teach For America":

Malcom Gladwell interviewing Wendy

http://fora.tv/2011/02/08/Wendy_Kopp_and_Malcolm_Gladwell_Talk_Education_Reform

Dividing humanity by 'biology' or chromosomes is equivalent to wearing block blinkers. You miss far too much. But I do understand the point you make, it is relevant, and has some context, but it is certainly far from be all-end all.

 

[DanP]

...and I would add to that- that culture, (nuture) family life, can also influence a person.

Biology is a part of us, no argument from me, but does it determine my carrer?

I think not.

Don't misunderstand me, I am not saying that biology determines your career. I am saying that biological propensities m/w have may modulate our preferences for a career. This does not mean that you as a girl can't be anything you want to become, should you have the necessary skills, and choose a certain path. It simply means that statistical gender distribution in some careers will always be skewed.

This is why I believe that the ideas of some feminists that we should strive to have quality of gender distribution in each major branches of activities carried out in our society is utopian and misguided. I don't think a female working in as a researcher in biology is less valuable then a female working as math theorist. Then why try to induce artificiality in the choices the women have, and try to force them in careers they might not enjoy so thoroughly, even if they have the potential to make it to the top ?

 

[Steppn]

So we can see that in current day women also make important contributions to science.
Was the ratio in ancient times higher?

I don't know the specifics on that, it would be difficult to imagine a greater time, number and opportunity than right now for female participation into science.

Also remember often achievements in science are 'team' efforts, there have been considerable female science input to teams, 'behind the scenes'..

Lise Meitner (7 or 17 November 1878 – 27 October 1968) was an Austrian-born, later Swedish, physicist who worked on radioactivity and nuclear physics.[1] Meitner was part of the team that discovered nuclear fission, an achievement for which her colleague Otto Hahn was awarded the Nobel Prize. Meitner is often mentioned as one of the most glaring examples of women's scientific achievement overlooked by the Nobel committee.[2][3][4] A 1997 Physics Today study concluded that Meitner's omission was "a rare instance in which personal negative opinions apparently led to the exclusion of a deserving scientist" from the Nobel.[5] Element 109, Meitnerium, is named in her honor.

The point is about having your passion for science and following through, or if I want to breed/train bulls and horses, or just happy to work with kids, which actually can be very rewarding...society does not have the numbers on the ground of science types, so generally speaking there are lack of bums in labs. I will find the best estimated figures of science type people in populations to show you an idea how rare the science bird (meaning male and female) are. Those with the predisposition to science, (male and females-starting from kids) need our understanding and support, encouragement.

 

[Steppn]

I understand your point Dan, I'm of the belief encouragement should be for both female and male children to be able to follow their science passion, well, any kid following their passion for that matter, but especially the sciences.

It's not easy being a nerd fullstop without even bringing gender into it.

 

[DanP]

Those with the predisposition to science, (male and females-starting from kids) need our understanding and support, encouragement.

They need that indeed. But what they do not need is to push them in careers against their wills. Even if you have a guy or a girl who has the ability to solve math like no others, should they choose for example to make a career in sports and focus on basketball, football , track and field or whatever, we do not have to force them in a career which may be unsatisfactory for them.

Too often excellent skill to do something is confused with a willingness to do that thing.

 

[Steppn]

...and agreed on that.

 

[Steppn]

For my fellow females, (and any interested males) here, I am in the midst of some research of women's contribution the sciences/humanity, came across these (relatively old) quotes, attitudes and history are interesting:

"The chief distinction in the intellectual powers of the two sexes is shown by man's attaining to a higher eminence, in whatever he takes up, than can woman." -
Darwin (1871)

"Identical education of the sexes is a crime before God and humanity, that physiology protests against and that experience weeps over." - Clarke (1873)

"Deficiency in reproductive power . . . can be reasonable attributed to the overtaxing of (women's) brains." - Spencer (1867)

"The 'woman's rights movement' is an attempt to rear, by the process of 'un-natural selection', a race of monstrosities - hostile alike to men, to normal women, to human society, and to the future development of our race." - Bagehut (1879)

Here is the site link I am utilising at the moment, these quotes are from it:

http://www.webster.edu/~woolflm/women.html