Where did all the physics ladies go?

[Danger]

You are absolutely right, I continuously fight prejudices.

Good on ya'. That's one of the things that I've always admired about you, along with your linguistic expertise. (It always humbled me a bit that as a professional writer with English as my first and only language, I relied upon a Dutch chick for advice. :p)
And no, that next disgusting "poster" that you showed has never appeared within out borders. I know that weed is legal in your country, but you really should try to keep your advertising executives away from it while they're on duty.

 

[zoki85]

But, it looks like Monique isn't a single lady...

 

[256bits]

How about this one, it shows the demographics of females (vrouwen) and males (mannen) in (health)care. The women are overrepresented in each group, but what does the picture tell you next to the percentages? The male is on the foreground!? in an active position: I am going to help you. The female is standing three steps back and strikes a pose "don't I look pretty in these heels?" Really: if the message is that 94% of the home care workers are female, why isn't the female portrayed as the dominant role (in the foreground)? Sexism is all around, even if you don't catch it at first sight.
.

The sexism is easily seen and explained in that picture, but not easily explained away, since if it is to be informative it should be truthful, which it actually is in portraying the projected roles of men and women, but not truthful in the subjective message it gives contrary to the idea of equality of the sexes.

But for the previous "Nurse" and "Man of Steel", is not so obvious. The outfits are "cute", and are marketed, and will sell simply for that reason. Of course, being color coded so that parents will never have to worry if their kid is a boy or girl, or do a physical check if they forget, is an added bonus for the non-thinking parent. Passesby can even tell the sex of the child by the clothing.

"Man of steel" . The boy is to grow up being in charge and control, with the girl following along. The best she can hope to achieve is to date him.Pity the poor boy and girl who don't know there role later on in life, and become confused if they desire something else.

The sexuallity of children is a marketing tool. The marketers prime objective is sales.
Social policy or awareness is the least of their concerns.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/BUSINESS/03/26/abercrombie.bikini.controversy/index.html
as an example of the promotion of sexuallity for young kids.
( You have to wonder who would really buy that kind of stuff )

 

[Danger]

Passesby can even tell the sex of the child by the clothing.

So, it's supposed to be blue for a boy and pink for a girl? I say dress it in purple. If someone has the balls to ask, tell them that it's a hermaphrodite.

 

[Lisa!]

Where did all the physics ladies go?

Everywhere!;)

 

[jack476]

I think it really goes back to the cultural perception of math as being a male interest. Society expects women to be in nurturing/people-oriented careers, and math is something that is often perceived as cold, uncaring, and devoid of emotion. Plus, I think society puts more emphasis on women than on men (especially in young people) to be attractive and personable, math is seen as something for nerds and therefore unappealing. I don't believe in claims that there is some inherent difference in cognitive ability or emotional perception that causes there to be a gender imbalance.

 

[Danger]

I don't believe in claims that there is some inherent difference in cognitive ability or emotional perception that causes there to be a gender imbalance.

There is a difference in most instances, but neither one is superior to the other. It's something like the differences between left-handed people (artistic) and right-handed ones (pragmatic) or between gays and straights. The brain structure is not the same. Men in general have a relatively smaller corpus callosum (specifically the midsagittal part thereof) than women, and those of gay men and lesbians are midway between. That structure is the communications link between the right and left hemispheres. Not unrelated is the fact that left-handed people generally have a dominant right hemisphere and right-handed ones are left-brained. I don't know what my brain looks like, but I tend to share thought processes with both men and women because I'm ambidextrous and don't have a dominant hemisphere.

 

[Simon Bridge]

Reveal: I originally got into physics as a way to meet women.

When I was 1st year undergrad, women physics students outnumbered the men about 3:2 ... higher in bio and less in chemistry.
In Engineering, my original major, the ratio F:M was more like 1:3. And they tended to be jocks to my nerd.

In my 1st post-grad year, women outnumbered the men about 3:1, they'd stuck us all on one big room and the intellectual environment was supercharged; but all the men went to work as physicists and only a couple of the women ... much to the frustration of the profs.

Guys who came up through undergrad with a woman lab partner know that women in sciences do tend to think about the subject differently - and come to value that difference. Science thrives on diversity of thought so there is a genuine drive, beyond politics, to get more diverse backgrounds, where these are identified as real differences, into NZ University science schools.

Online - many women find the extra attention they get for being a woman somewhat erksome so are reluctant to publicly present their sex.
I suspect that the members with "girls names" may get more "help" than others, but have done no formal studies.

I've taught sen.phys. in an all-girls Catholic secondary school - when it came time for a class project, all the girls chose astrophysics.
The main reason why was that it was not well covered in the rest of the course. One of the assessment points in the project was an essay - going new-agey, I had the students personify some aspect of what they studied and write a story about what it felt to be that way. i.e. what does it feel like to be a supernova reminant? ... encorporating the physics they learned natch.
Turned out to be the most popular question ...

So I'm going to have to second the "girls are more romantic" ... but I'd add that girls are socialized to have a more romantic outlook. Current secondary education in NZ focusses in getting boys to get more relaxed about expressing their feeling as part of the overall empowerment process.

BTW: always do the essay question - it is the most leniently marked.

 

[UncertaintyAjay]

But surely the romance of physics in general is what attracts anyone to pursue a career in it in the first place right? I mean even for men, there is something endearing about physics, about the beauty inherent in its laws and equations .

 

[Danger]

But surely the romance of physics in general is what attracts anyone to pursue a career in it in the first place right?

I just wanted to blow stuff up...

 

[UncertaintyAjay]

Well there's that too, but then wouldn't you have been better off with chemistry

 

[Danger]

Well there's that too, but then wouldn't you have been better off with chemistry

Nope; I was thinking nuclear right from the beginning.

 

[UncertaintyAjay]

Right

 

[tzimie]

BTW there is not so bad in ITm we have 50/50 on average, 60-70% women in support, and 25-30% in R&D.

 

[zoki85]

Hey, this PF featured thread is even more *clickable* now due to nice thumbnail pic (I guess)

 

[RonL]

Hey, this PF featured thread is even more *clickable* now due to nice thumbnail pic (I guess)

My faulty brain is trying to tell me I have seen that girl somewhere before and I tend to think it was here on PF ? can anyone reveal the story:)
It's obvious she she has some serious chemistry going on behind her:w or maybe in front.
Thanks

 

[Arsenic&Lace]

There are lots of women in biophysics, as an example. I think the easiest explanation is that pure physics is a relatively anachronistic discipline. Few people in general are pursuing it. If you are interested in science, and there has been an increase in the number of women interested in science, you are likely pursuing biology, biochemistry, materials science, or engineering, since these fields are very scientifically relevant.

Biophysics attracts people with backgrounds in math, computer science, biology, and biochemistry, and it does not have a gender imbalance anywhere near as astounding as in pure physics.

 

[BHL 20]

More men would probably like to have a career in astrophysics than the amount that actually does. But astrophysics is a highly competitive field, and men can't use the gender imbalance card as a free pass in.

 

[BobG]

http://41.media.tumblr.com/919800891c0969561c953476785d39f2/tumblr_nbsgsn2QGg1s71tbxo1_500.jpg

Wow, seriously? I don't think I've ever seen a nurse (of either sex) wear high heels.

In my EE classes, the number of women were very small. In fact, the number of minorities were also very small. The only reason minorities outnumbered the women was because one of the women was black. It was almost all entirely white guys.

My job isn't directly related to my major. I work as an orbital analyst, which is almost all physics. That has a much higher rate of women. It goes in spurts. My current work center used to consist of four women. It currently consists of four men. In fact, there's currently only two women working as orbital analysts on the entire contract, which is the fewest I've ever seen.

One big reason for (usually) having quite a few women is that almost everyone working with military satellites is prior military (they already have security clearances). The military is pretty big on attracting women into the military - especially in career fields that are technically oriented rather than physically oriented.

But, surely, the novelty of working in an all female shop has to have some attraction (they were called Einstein's Angels, after that Lynda Williams song). Or, maybe, thinking there has to be some attraction or giving them nicknames for being an all female shop is kind of sexist.

 

[Danger]

But, surely, the novelty of working in an all female shop has to have some attraction (they were called Einstein's Angels, after that Lynda Williams song). Or, maybe, thinking there has to be some attraction or giving them nicknames for being an all female shop is kind of sexist.

Or it could be hazardous to your health. From personal experience, I can tell you for sure that if one woman happens to get pissed off at you for something, even if you've done nothing wrong, the whole damned herd turns on you like vipers.

 

[Curieuse]

Fair point. I went into astrophysics because of an assignment I did when I was 10 on black holes. I don't remember why I chose black holes (I suspect Stargate SG1), but I remember as I was finding information for the assignment I just thought that nothing in the universe could possibly be more interesting. I loved the idea that we didn't understand what happened within the event horizon, and that our understanding of physics meant that we might never. It caught my imagination and I decided I wanted to be the one to solve the riddle of the black hole. That enthusiasm never died, instead it extended to many other areas of astronomy, cosmology, and high energy astrophysics.

me too. i did that same project in my high school, I'm still in my undergrad though long way from a physicist... My major in high school (yes high school wee have to choose between Bio-Phys-Chem and Math-Phys-Chem) was initially biology but i switched to math and physics just 'cause of that assignment and a LOT of Stephen hawking.
Maybe it's 'cause of the boom at the time about Astrophysics, Theoretical physics, space time fabrics, multi-verses and so on...
BUT Maybe a really big part of choosing it as a career is that in astrophysics we study about indefinite space and its fantastic diversity of inhabitants, the continuum is so diverse that we tend to consider everyone on Earth as a team irrespective of their gender status, or any other...we view ourselves as sitting on a pale blue dot in the middle of everywhere.. while we engage in such a view of nature we forget about differences in gender and so on.. and so we kinda tend to embrace that view and thus the subject.. :p
Reflection is such an interesting thing!

 

[Danger]

My major in high school (yes high school wee have to choose between Bio-Phys-Chem and Math-Phys-Chem)

Still better off than I was. Physics was available only in 9 and 10. Biology and Chemistry were available only in 11 and 12. (I don't know anything about 13 because I quit after 12). You had to choose one or the other in 11, with the condition that you had to switch to the other for 12. I took Bio in 11 because I liked Chem better as a personal interest and wanted a higher level of education in it. Unfortunately, I got a pretty decent teacher in 11 Bio and an idiot fresh out of teachers' college with no chemistry knowledge in 12 Chem. He was actually reading the textbook a couple of days ahead of the lessons to know what to teach.

 

[symbolipoint]

...fresh out of teachers' college with no chemistry knowledge in 12 Chem. He was actually reading the textbook a couple of days ahead of the lessons to know what to teach.

Don't blame the teacher for all of that. He was doing the job assigned to him regardless what he really would want to teach. Reading the textbook before giving the lesson is THE PROPER AND SENSIBLE thing to do. ANY good teacher would do that.

 

[Danger]

ANY good teacher would do that.

That's not how teachers were assigned then. They could choose the subject that they wanted to teach, and were expected to have at least a post-secondary education in it themselves. The other Chem teacher was one of the most respected chemists in the province as well as being a teacher, and took his students to provincial and even national championship contests. The one that I got, as I mentioned in another thread, marked my answer of "rocket fuel" wrong on a test question as to some uses of hydrogen because that answer wasn't in the textbook. He was about 23 at the time; I was 18, and I'd known that since I was 7.
Good teachers read ahead, or skim ahead, in the textbook just to determine what the next lesson will entail, not to learn the subject from the ground up a week before the people that he's supposed to be teaching. What if a student has a question about something not already covered? "I have no idea" is not an acceptable answer.

 

[symbolipoint]

That's not how teachers were assigned then. They could choose the subject that they wanted to teach, and were expected to have at least a post-secondary education in it themselves. The other Chem teacher was one of the most respected chemists in the province as well as being a teacher, and took his students to provincial and even national championship contests. The one that I got, as I mentioned in another thread, marked my answer of "rocket fuel" wrong on a test question as to some uses of hydrogen because that answer wasn't in the textbook. He was about 23 at the time; I was 18, and I'd known that since I was 7.
Good teachers read ahead, or skim ahead, in the textbook just to determine what the next lesson will entail, not to learn the subject from the ground up a week before the people that he's supposed to be teaching. What if a student has a question about something not already covered? "I have no idea" is not an acceptable answer.

That must've been at a different time and different governing region. Age of 23 year is in general too young to be a high school teacher - not absolute - just in general. Some governing territorial authorities specify that a teacher with some given quantity of credits in a subject qualifies the teacher to instruct that subject, which is not always sufficient advantage to the teacher nor to the students who would receive the instruction.

 

[RonL]

That must've been at a different time and different governing region. Age of 23 year is in general too young to be a high school teacher - not absolute - just in general. Some governing territorial authorities specify that a teacher with some given quantity of credits in a subject qualifies the teacher to instruct that subject, which is not always sufficient advantage to the teacher nor to the students who would receive the instruction.

The 1950-1960's were wonder years that very few today can believe really existed, "leave it to beaver", "happy days" and a few others had good foundations to work on:).
I was much like Wally and being such a swell guy got me through the years when I should have been held back, as well as I can remember teachers were not held to the same standards as today:(.
There might be some on the forum that began teaching around that time frame, I really would love to hear some correction.:)

 

[BobG]

That must've been at a different time and different governing region. Age of 23 year is in general too young to be a high school teacher - not absolute - just in general. Some governing territorial authorities specify that a teacher with some given quantity of credits in a subject qualifies the teacher to instruct that subject, which is not always sufficient advantage to the teacher nor to the students who would receive the instruction.

This is similar to my state. There's two ways to qualify as a high school teacher in science/math, etc.

You need a teaching degree (plus certification) to be a teacher. Having a certain number of credits in a given field allows you to teach that subject in high school.

Or, you need a degree in the field you want to teach in, plus have to complete certification (testing to ensure the teacher understands at least the basic fundamentals that would have been taught to a person with a teaching degree).

For a person that majored in education, taking the extra credits to qualify for tough to fill teaching slots in science/math means higher pay.

For a person that majored in a more technical field, choosing to teach, period, usually means lower pay than they could earn elsewhere. Not to mention that they have to somehow complete that teacher certification program. If they really want to teach, they'd be better off getting at least their masters and teaching at a college. It pays more and college instructors aren't required to get teacher certification.

Supply and demand determines which is more common.

I do remember the student teacher we had in our math analysis class. He was a very smart guy. Teaching, though, was a challenge for him. He had a tendency to make these humongous leaps from one step to the next and, when asked to explain how he got from step D to step E, he'd just look at the problem and reply, "How can that not be perfectly clear? It's so self evident that I'm not sure what I could say to make it any more clear!" (Which really meant that I learned this short cut so long ago that I can't even remember the long way anymore.)

 

[StatGuy2000]

Wow, seriously? I don't think I've ever seen a nurse (of either sex) wear high heels.

In my EE classes, the number of women were very small. In fact, the number of minorities were also very small. The only reason minorities outnumbered the women was because one of the women was black. It was almost all entirely white guys.

I don't know where or when you graduated from university, but were there no Asian students in EE? I graduated back from my BS in 2000, and I would say that perhaps >50% of the students in EE (at the very least) were Asian (primarily Chinese or East Indian).

 

[Danger]

That must've been at a different time and different governing region..

Most likely; I have no idea where you are. This was southern Ontario in the early 70's.
I might have been wrong about his age, but I don't think so. At any rate, he was definitely not over 25. (One of the girls' gym teachers was 22 and was often mistaken for a student.)

 

[BiGyElLoWhAt]

Was I the only one that looked at this article? I find it very interesting that, despite the fact that the physical sciences tend to be male dominant, that percentage of women getting a consecutively higher degree (UG->G->PhD) decreases... Non linearly at that (for the ones that decrease UG->G, it seems quadratic). There are 5 listed fields in the chart where the percentage of women increased from UG to G, but the PhD is ALWAYS significantly lower than the UG.
I just thought I would point that out.
http://www.socwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fact_12-2007-stem.pdf
Should this be written off as such?
In male dominant fields, a decrease in 1 male major and 1 female major causes a percent decrease in female majors?

 

[zoki85]

http://www.socwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fact_12-2007-stem.pdf

Wow! 14% in EE? I thought the percentage was way below 10%.

 

[jz92wjaz]

I was in EE, and I think it was less than 10% at my school five to ten years ago. There were 1 to 3 girls in my classes, and typical class sizes ranged from 15 to 40.

 

[BobG]

I don't know where or when you graduated from university, but were there no Asian students in EE? I graduated back from my BS in 2000, and I would say that perhaps >50% of the students in EE (at the very least) were Asian (primarily Chinese or East Indian).

Shockingly, no.

I took night classes and most of the students were adults with jobs - in other words, local residents. All of the students were from within 100 miles of the school. No out of state students, no out of country students, etc.

We don't have a huge Asian population, but I'm surprised we had no Asian students at all (at least none that had any classes with me). We did have one Asian professor (she was one of the four best professors I had).

 

[StatGuy2000]

Was I the only one that looked at this article? I find it very interesting that, despite the fact that the physical sciences tend to be male dominant, that percentage of women getting a consecutively higher degree (UG->G->PhD) decreases... Non linearly at that (for the ones that decrease UG->G, it seems quadratic). There are 5 listed fields in the chart where the percentage of women increased from UG to G, but the PhD is ALWAYS significantly lower than the UG.
I just thought I would point that out.
http://www.socwomen.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/fact_12-2007-stem.pdf
Should this be written off as such?
In male dominant fields, a decrease in 1 male major and 1 female major causes a percent decrease in female majors?

What I would be interested in seeing are three things:

(1) Whether the decrease in the percentage of women pursuing graduate degrees decreases at similar rates in other, non-STEM fields (and how does it compare to the percentage of men pursuing graduate degrees in non-STEM fields).

(2) Furthermore, what are the patterns for men pursuing graduate degrees in STEM fields? Do we see similar trend toward decreasing rates of those pursuing PhDs (not the absolute percentage, which we will expect to be higher, but the trends). After all, most undergraduates in whatever field do not go on to pursue a PhD -- what I'm interested in is whether the overall level of decrease is different between the different populations.

(3) Among those women who finish a UG in STEM fields and did NOT pursue further graduate studies, what did they end up doing? And how does this compare to men?

 

[Danger]

My faulty brain is trying to tell me I have seen that girl somewhere before and I tend to think it was here on PF ? can anyone reveal the story

Without my glasses, I can't be sure. She bears some similarity to Linda Park from "Star Trek: Enterprise", but the clothing and graphics don't seem to be from that show. She played a Dr. in the "Chemistry" episode of "Legends". Could that be it? (I've never seen the show.)