Why are women not interested in problem solving?

[Astronuc]

Don't tell me I'm too young. So what? I've seen enough to make a conclusion and that's that. BTW, I am in college.

Too young = lack of experience, particuarly in the wider world. One's OP makes some broad generlization based on a very limited sampling. One's OP belies the lack of experience.

I know many female scientists and engineers (many with PhD's), and they are very interested in problem solving. They do research at universities, NASA, DOE, commercial and private companies (including mine), and many similar institutions throughout the world.

As I said a female who has some degree in some scientific subject is NOT necessarily an intelligent female IMO. But someone who passionately likes to solve logical problems and make beautiful pattens from information and does this _outside_ of her profession is who I'm looking for. There are simply no such women that I have ever seen.

And such woman may not be interested in one, especially if one expresses such a negative attitude.

And what about the society? Last I checked we live in 2008 when girls are portrayed smart (like Lisa Simpson) in media. Just look at how many quotas are set in various universities to fit more women into their programs. The list goes on...

Feel free to provide a comprehensive list so support one's claim.

Yes there is discrimination for women in science, but it is a POSITIVE discrimination.

Please provide examples.

Are females ever discouraged by their family and peers from majoring in engineering and computer science? Personally I'm not aware of any such cases.

In some cases - yes! I know of such women.

I had a professor who thought women and non-whites should not bother striving to be the best, and his attitude was an impediment to several colleagues and classmates.

I had an intelligent woman in one class I taught who seem to hold herself back, even though she was the best student.

Education, encouragement and support have to begin in earliest years for anyone to achieve high levels. Now some are inherently intelligent and don't need a lot of encouragement, but they still need support or access to learning materials. The vast majority of people need encouragement and more support.

 

[loseyourname]

Well before this thread turns into "bash-the-male-chauvinist thread", I think it's worth inquiring why is it guys largely outnumber girls in engineering courses. I think the same can be said of computer science, judging from what I've seen. I don't know about maths and physics majors, so does anyone know the gender enrolment ratio in these majors?

We might also inquire about why engineering, computer science, physics, and math majors are considered to be the only ones interested in problem solving. Social workers don't solve problems?

 

[~christina~]

Of course she would be. Unfortunately I have only met a few women that played chess and they got really annoyed when they lost. I have met some women who have rocked my sox off on the pool table though. And unfortunately they were all taken. :-/

I do play chess, and I don't get annoyed by loosing..too much.

 

[Math Is Hard]

Wellll, technically, he seems to have a negative attitude about feminists, which is definitely not the same as having a negative attitude about women. In fact, it might be argued that he thinks women should get more credit than feminists give them (but who am I to put words in his mouth).

Is it only toward feminists? It seems the OP has a negative perception of women in general, considering these earlier remarks:

Most of the girls today have the princess attitude towards life and feel that others should do things for them while they do nothing productive. They are very unoriginal and many of the things they say and do is taken from latest movies and TV shows (the type I would never waste my time watching becuase I have much better things to do.)

 

[ekrim]

Why do you feel that only women "who passionately likes to solve logical problems and make beautiful pattens from information" are intelligent? IMO you're a little overzealous about a new hobby of yours.

 

[Defennder]

We might also inquire about why engineering, computer science, physics, and math majors are considered to be the only ones interested in problem solving. Social workers don't solve problems?

You're confusing me with the OP. Nowhere have I implied that "problem-solving" fields are restricted to the sciences. My only question in this thread is why there exists such great gender disparity in certain fields of study.

 

[Defennder]

I had a professor who thought women and non-whites should not bother striving to be the best, and his attitude was an impediment to several colleagues and classmates.

I had an intelligent woman in one class I taught who seem to hold herself back, even though she was the best student.

Education, encouragement and support have to begin in earliest years for anyone to achieve high levels. Now some are inherently intelligent and don't need a lot of encouragement, but they still need support or access to learning materials. The vast majority of people need encouragement and more support.

Some time back I read a paper by some social scientist on the phenomenon of minority students in college "acting white". While clearly I don't know much of the history of troubled racial relations in the United States, is there a similar societal pressure on females not to get too smart, perhaps termed "acting male" or something?

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

 

[rootX]

Some time back I read a paper by some social scientist on the phenomenon of minority students in college "acting white". While clearly I don't know much of the history of troubled racial relations in the United States, is there a similar societal pressure on females not to get too smart, perhaps termed "acting male" or something?

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

It's definitely changing. I think statistics about women in engineering, cs,... would improve by time (just few more decades). I put most of the blame on old societies (that still exist in most parts of the world) not on the women. But even in nature, female animals tend to avoid hard work (which would justify women behavior/work in our own ancient societies).

 

[lisab]

Some time back I read a paper by some social scientist on the phenomenon of minority students in college "acting white". While clearly I don't know much of the history of troubled racial relations in the United States, is there a similar societal pressure on females not to get too smart, perhaps termed "acting male" or something?

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

I HATE that term, "acting white." I just can't understand that attitude!

I attended two (US) schools in high school: one, mostly white; the other mostly black. And I heard that term a lot more from blacks in the white school, than from blacks in the black school.

Just an observation.

 

[Defennder]

It's definitely changing. I think statistics about women in engineering, cs,... would improve by time (just few more decades). I put most of the blame on old societies (that still exist in most parts of the world) not on the women. But even in nature, female animals tend to avoid hard work (which would justify women behavior/work in our own ancient societies).

I don't see how that is true in nature. For one thing I've heard that female lions do all the hunting while all the male lions do is flaunt their superiority. And it's interesting to know that in the animal world, it's the males who advertise themselves to attract mates, whereas for humans it's the opposite.

 

[Astronuc]

Some time back I read a paper by some social scientist on the phenomenon of minority students in college "acting white". While clearly I don't know much of the history of troubled racial relations in the United States, is there a similar societal pressure on females not to get too smart, perhaps termed "acting male" or something?

I am not aware of 'societal pressure' that discourages women from being smart. It might be more a lack of encouragement, but I'd have to ask some of the women I know about their perceptions and experiences.

I have to wonder if there is some subtle peer pressure during the years of primary education, or if it's a matter of lack of support by parents.

I was listening to a program about the effect of modern/pop culture on young girls, so I wonder if there is subtle influence that discourages women from pursuing science in favor of being more acceptable to the opposite gender.

Little girl's fashions are marketed as 'hot'. And hot is what young girls want to be. Dr. M. Gigi Durham has written a book called The Lolita Effect.

http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wamc/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=1318016&sectionID=663

On the other hand, one of the girls I knew from 4th grade through high school went on to get a PhD in biochemistry. We even went to the same university, where she studied biology and chemistry, and I studied physics before switching to nuclear engineering at another university.

 

[rootX]

I don't see how that is true in nature. For one thing I've heard that female lions do all the hunting while all the male lions do is flaunt their superiority. And it's interesting to know that in the animal world, it's the males who advertise themselves to attract mates, whereas for humans it's the opposite.

Oops sorry, you are right. In most cases female hunt/do all the work that sustain their life (but hunting doesn't earn them power or authority over others) and it's males who predominate. I meant like males mostly focus on tasks that can earn them power - engineering is one of them.

Even though, in my opinion, we are still very related to those animals but we are developing as we are getting more and more resources. So, now we have more and more time to think about relatively less important issues like discrimination. And, I don't think females would ever do any engineering/problem solving job if we had very limited resources [relying on our past to make this statement and economics principle of specialization].

 

[Astronuc]

But even in nature, female animals tend to avoid hard work (which would justify women behavior/work in our own ancient societies).

Um, like Defennder mentioned, the female lions do most of the hunting, and female leopards and cheetahs hunt for themselves and their offspring, and teach their offspring (both male and female) to hunt. I think one needs to take a closer look at nature.

As to why human societies became male-dominated - that is a puzzle to me.

 

[loseyourname]

You're confusing me with the OP. Nowhere have I implied that "problem-solving" fields are restricted to the sciences. My only question in this thread is why there exists such great gender disparity in certain fields of study.

I wasn't confusing you. I just quoted you because you were listing those fields, but I only meant what I said as a furthering of what you were saying, not to imply you personally felt that way.

 

[siddharth]

Regarding Defennder's question, this study might be interesting as it shows how social influences and culture can affect performance (which in this case, is measured as scores in a math test)

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/short/320/5880/1164

Analysis of PISA results suggests that the gender gap in math scores disappears in countries with a more gender-equal culture.

I think that this is behind a paywall. Here's a post which discusses the study.

 

[Defennder]

Regarding Defennder's question, this study might be interesting as it shows how social influences and culture can affect performance (which in this case, is measured as scores in a math test)

I think that this is behind a paywall. Here's a post which discusses the study.

Interesting article I see. I found this to be particularly relevant:

These[/PLAIN] results suggest that the gender gap in math, although it historically favors boys, disappears in more gender-equal societies...The gender gap in reading, which favors girls and is apparent in all countries, thus expands in more gender-equal societies.

There's also this article published in the Boston Globe linked to in the blog you quoted:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/05/18/the_freedom_to_say_no?mode=PF"
Excerpts:

Now two new studies by economists and social scientists have reached a perhaps startling conclusion: An important part of the explanation for the gender gap, they are finding, are the preferences of women themselves. When it comes to certain math- and science-related jobs, substantial numbers of women - highly qualified for the work - stay out of those careers because they would simply rather do something else.

although it also notes that such disinterest may itself be due to sexist discrimination at the workplaces:

The researchers are not suggesting that sexism and cultural pressures on women don't play a role, and they don't yet know why women choose the way they do. One forthcoming paper in the Harvard Business Review, for instance, found that women often leave technical jobs because of rampant sexism in the workplace.

I have not been able to find the source of the paper published in the Harvard Business Review. Does anyone know the title of the paper?

 

[Astronuc]

With respect to the previous post, perhaps this article refers to the study in HBR:

BACK in the bad old days, the workplace was a battleground, where sexist jokes and assumptions were the norm.
. . . .
Women were shut off from promotion by an old boys’ network that favored its own. They went to meetings and were often the only women in the room.

All that has changed in the last three decades, except where it has not. In the worlds of science, engineering and technology, it seems, the past is still very much present.

“It’s almost a time warp,” said Sylvia Ann Hewlett, the founder of the Center for Work-Life Policy, a nonprofit organization that studies women and work. “All the predatory and demeaning and discriminatory stuff that went on in workplaces 20, 30 years ago is alive and well in these professions.”
. . . .
The reason the “hard sciences” are “so much worse than other fields,” she said, is multifaceted and rooted in the societal perception that women simply are not as good in math and science as men are.

This notion persists despite the dozens of studies that show the abilities of boys and girls are equal well into high school.

“Most people just don’t look at a woman and see an engineer,” Ms. Muller said.

Diversity Proves Elusive for Women in Technical Fields,
By LISA BELKIN, NY Time, May 15, 2008
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/15/fashion/15WORK.html

This may be the article in HBR, but I'm not sure.
Off-Ramps and On-Ramps: Keeping Talented Women on the Road to Success
http://www.hbsp.harvard.edu/hbsp/hbr/articles/article.jsp?articleID=R0503B&ml_action=get-article&print=true

 

[siddharth]

Here's another article in science which was published very recently

http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/321/5888/494

Gender Similarities Characterize Math Performance

Standardized tests in the U.S. indicate that girls now score just as well as boys in math.

They conclude that there is no gender difference in math skills in grade 2-11 students in the US.

Interestingly, they graded the math questions in 4 levels of difficulty and found that very few questions in state tests were at higher levels. Perhaps the test makers should take note.

 

[Moonbear]

There's also this article published in the Boston Globe linked to in the blog you quoted:

http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2008/05/18/the_freedom_to_say_no?mode=PF"
Excerpts:

This is an important factor to consider. Lack of women in a particular field (or any group you want to examine in a particular field) doesn't necessarily mean lack of ability or skill or opportunity in that field. Likewise, prevalence of men in the field doesn't necessarily mean they have greater ability, skill, opportunity or even interest in that field. The last point is something hitting home for me recently, and makes me wonder if this pattern exists more broadly than just my little local population sample.

So, keeping in mind this is anecdotal (but this is GD, so I'll indulge), here's what I've recently been noticing in the biomedical research community at our university. We are ALL struggling to get external funding (there's just too little to go around, this is a known problem and has been going on for several years now). A lot of the faculty are unhappy with this situation and feeling the stress and frustration of being in a job where they can't do what they were hired to do because they don't have the funds or resources to do it. These aren't just people who are bad scientists, these are people who are very good at what they do, but even great proposals don't get funded now because there's barely money for the most outstandingly excellent proposals. You can see it in the reviews coming back, reviewers are nitpicking things that would never have been nitpicked before just trying to find reasons to rank one above another to find a cut-off point for the sparse funding they have.

Okay, so that's the set-up. People are feeling discouraged about staying in research, both sexes, various ranks.

Now, who have I seen changing careers or directions in their careers or focusing on building new skill sets to effect a change in career in the near future? The women. It seems we're the ones saying, "This is a crappy situation, so I'm taking the bull by the horns and getting out while I can." Is it that men don't want to change, or don't want to get out? From those who have expressed their frustrations to me, no. I've had several come up to me since it came out I was applying for education-based positions rather than research-based ones, and their comments have all been similar. "I've been thinking about making such a change too," or "I wish I could get out of here as well." What's holding them back? A sense that they are responsible for providing stability for their families, that they can't just pick up and move, that they can't risk changing careers and losing the stability of the income they have now to support their families, and things like that. While my own situation doesn't have to factor in family stability, the interesting thing is that there ARE women who are married and have young children who are also changing careers and moving. They seem to be approaching it differently...the best way to guarantee stability and support for their family is to move to where there's a better job opportunity in a different field. It seems women are able to "get out" while men feel "stuck." The men seem to be hanging on until they can move up, while the women move out.

In a way, it seems to be dispelling the notion that women follow the men for their careers. It seems that if the women don't want to move, the men aren't picking their families up and moving. Or maybe this is a new change in a direction that didn't exist before, or maybe it's just my isolated population here that behaves differently than the general population. It's just interesting to me.

 

[WarPhalange]

I think the real problem is that scientists have yet to find an actual vaccine for cooties.

 

[LightbulbSun]

I wish the OP would grow up a little. You're in your early 20's right? Thanks for making my age group look more ignorant with your ridiculous post.

 

[Air]

I'm a women and I'm interested in problem solving.

I will be going to university from September to study for a Maths degree.

 

[scarecrow]

Easy.
Men like to probe things, women like to chat about them.

:rofl:

nice one.

 

[ice109]

look i don't have time to read this entire thread but i'll throw my opinion into the mix and hopefully it's not redundant.

i think there are less women in rigorous sciences because of societal norms. simply look at toys aimed at young girls.

http://toys.about.com/od/hotnewtoyreleases/tp/girltoys2005.htm

and aimed at young boys

http://toys.about.com/od/toysbyage/tp/topboysstoys.htm

the differences are subtle. firstly there are only 3 truly creative toys on the girl's list: the crochet set, the easy bake oven, and the aqua doodle. while on the boy's list there are 4: playdoh, snowcone maker, aqua doodle, and create your own book. one could chalk that up to the statistical insignificance of the sample. the other toys involve manipulation of already made objects. but on the boys list is one more thing that not only is very telling but also if considered a creative toy tips the scales so much so that the difference in creative toys is now statistically significant. on the boys list is the learning system. now while this doesn't directly imply that boys are encouraged to solve problems it does indirectly.

in most egalitarian societies girls score equally as well as boys on math and science tests. in societies with poor women's rights, historic and present, girl's score poorer. if that's damning i don't know what is.

 

[Moonbear]

the differences are subtle. firstly there are only 3 truly creative toys on the girl's list: the crochet set, the easy bake oven, and the aqua doodle. while on the boy's list there are 4: playdoh, snowcone maker, aqua doodle, and create your own book.

Huh? Since when is Playdoh only a boys' toy? EVERY kid plays with Playdoh. Same with something like a snowcone maker or a create your own book. I had all of those as a kid, and they were never considered boys' toys.

 

[ice109]

Huh? Since when is Playdoh only a boys' toy? EVERY kid plays with Playdoh. Same with something like a snowcone maker or a create your own book. I had all of those as a kid, and they were never considered boys' toys.

how could you miss the point? i googled boy's toys and girl's toys and found recommendations from a fairly popular site. i didn't have to support the fact that i believed these were the toys little girls and boys played with; it was granted to me by the titles of the pages. if you really want to challenge the reputability of my source, I'm sure that i can find much more offensive sites.

 

[Moonbear]

how could you miss the point? i googled boy's toys and girl's toys and found recommendations from a fairly popular site. i didn't have to support the fact that i believed these were the toys little girls and boys played with; it was granted to me by the titles of the pages. if you really want to challenge the reputability of my source, I'm sure that i can find much more offensive sites.

I didn't miss the point, I STRONGLY disagree with it. I DO doubt the reputability of the source. C'mon, what girl HASN'T played with Playdoh? It's a completely gender-neutral "toy." Heck, when I was a kid, I think more girls than boys might have had it. They might have just been struggling to fill out the list. The real problem is that people would seek out sites to tell them that some toys are boy toys and others girl toys. If you know any little girls, you'd realize they LOVE creative things just as much as boys. Arts and Crafts type things (which includes Playdoh) are equally loved by both genders.

 

[ice109]

I didn't miss the point, I STRONGLY disagree with it. I DO doubt the reputability of the source. C'mon, what girl HASN'T played with Playdoh? It's a completely gender-neutral "toy." Heck, when I was a kid, I think more girls than boys might have had it. They might have just been struggling to fill out the list. The real problem is that people would seek out sites to tell them that some toys are boy toys and others girl toys. If you know any little girls, you'd realize they LOVE creative things just as much as boys. Arts and Crafts type things (which includes Playdoh) are equally loved by both genders.

umm you disagree with the thesis that the reason there are more males than females in rigorous sciences is because of societal norms? maybe i should've read the thread after all.