Why do some people think women suck at science and math?

[DanP]

Male mathematicians are usually very good looking, female mathematicians usually are quite repulsive. Therefore, females only go into the sciences because it is the only place where the gender ratio is so strongly in their favor that they can find a superior mate.

Yeah right. Use a mirror by time in time.

 

[lisab]

Geez, your sentences are getting worse and worse by the minute. Surely you meant, "So, therefore, you're wrong!"

rofl...!

Oh another one - "roll on floor laughing" isn't a complete sentence!

 

[D H]

I think that women are just as good in science as men are.

What's your basis for this claim? Are you saying that the average man in the world has the same innate ability as the average woman? Considering the differences in brain structure and biochemistry between men and women, I'd be very shocked if the two averages were exactly the same.

From my years of experience of trying to get the average clerk to accept a ten, a five, and a quarter for a purchase that costs $13.16, men and women on average are equally lousy at math -- exceedingly simple math to boot. Whether men or women are, on average, better at math has little to do with which gender will do better in math or in fields such as physics and engineering that depend heavily on math skills. The average man and the average woman will be equally lost in such fields. People who do well in such fields are at least one, two, or more standard deviations from the mean. It is the shape of the distribution curves that is of greater importance than the location of the means.

 

[Femme_physics]

The answer depends on the particular thrust of the question. One interpretation: to become skilled at something, you have to do it. So on average, do women do as much math as men?

Great point.

 

[Birkeland]

Birkeland and cristo misspelled "undergraduate"

Wait, I got dinged for using undergrad instead of undergraduate but not for using IMO? I call selection bias!

But seriously, I think it just comes down to social pressures. Anyone who has spent any time around children or works in a secondary school can tell you, girls who are good in science and math classes are seen as not cool. It’s gotten better, but it’s still there. I currently have one student who sets the curve on every test and assignment, but whenever I ask her a question in class she pretends to never know the answer. After this thread, I asked her why. Her response was “because whenever I know the answer my friends make fun of me.”

 

[Pythagorean]

Because women have been set back socially as a result of some biological considerations. Namely, that they were pregnant for 9 months then (should be) breastfeeding and investing time in their offspring for two years:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110328151730.htm

So this strengthens the social bias to the point where (it seems) most women don't even bother trying because they've been convinced that they aren't able.

My advisor is a female and probably the best lecturer in the department.

 

[ideasrule]

But seriously, I think it just comes down to social pressures. Anyone who has spent any time around children or works in a secondary school can tell you, girls who are good in science and math classes are seen as not cool. It’s gotten better, but it’s still there. I currently have one student who sets the curve on every test and assignment, but whenever I ask her a question in class she pretends to never know the answer. After this thread, I asked her why. Her response was “because whenever I know the answer my friends make fun of me.”

I agree with what you said, but anybody in secondary school can tell you that boys who are good in science and math are seen as nerds, and are not "cool". The situation is better for boys because there is usually a loose "nerd community", which girls may find hard to join because it's heavily male-dominated.

 

[lurky]

What I find funny is the people who try to use evolution as an argument, but they're really only talking about one species and they're assuming that they know exactly how early humans lived. (hint: evolution doesn't happen within one species.)

But hey, whatever. Care to do some reading? I have some links:
http://www.wwomenglobally.com/why-s...ience-technology-engineering-and-mathematics/ (try to download the full report as it's fascinating. They ask you for some info but they don't seem to check it [so you can enter hogwash] and the article is free.)

This one is about a pilot project being done in a couple of cities in Canada:
http://www.ictc-ctic.ca/uploadedFiles/Career_Pathways/WIT/Reports/Resources_and_Reports/Report_Items/FIT_Program_Gender_Review_Report-FINAL.pdf
Its aims are to increase enrollment in IT-related fields in general, regardless of gender, but it also tries to increase female enrollment specifically. The article is interesting because it highlights the fact that as early as high school, female students have been "programmed" by society to turn away from STEM.

Now, there are lots of sites out there that claim differences in IQ. They don't support their claims, though, other than by maybe saying "well we host this IQ test and this is what we've found," which doesn't explore the causes. It's always important to explore causes because it could turn out that they had very few female participants, or maybe they had an excess of highly educated male participants, and on and on. Just making statements like the above and leaving them like that begs for the unsophisticated reader to assume that correlation equals causation.

Our (western) society is still misogynistic. It's like racism; it's no longer overt but it still lurks in the shadows and has very strong effects.

 

[Kritmiss]

Why do some people think men are more insecure than women?

Because men are hardwired to want to be top dog! This is only natural as they want to attract us lovely ladies :!)

 

[lisab]

I agree with what you said, but anybody in secondary school can tell you that boys who are good in science and math are seen as nerds, and are not "cool". The situation is better for boys because there is usually a loose "nerd community", which girls may find hard to join because it's heavily male-dominated.

I think what happens in secondary school is critical. Here in the US scientists are often (always?) portrayed in the media as Bill Nye types. That I'm-a-scientist-I-wear-thick-safety-glasses-and-I'm-wacky stereotype isn't going to attract many kids in middle school, *especially girls*.

 

[VikFloyd]

Holy cow! I just came back from school and there are already tons of replies!

PhDorBust, I am not majoring in mechanical engineering just to find a "superior mate". I think if a girl spends years of school studying to become an engineer, doing hard homework, dedicating her time to her work, and then just going into a career for the sake of men is just dumb.

russ_watters: Good point. Not many do.

revnaknuma: Yeah that's true. Most of my friends who are girls hate science and math. They hate it when I talk about math and physics to them. It's like they ignore me. But I have come across girls who can talk to me about physics for hours.

n.karthick: There are girls who enjoy physics and math. It's just that these two subjects bore them.

Birkeland: I get what you're saying. I get labeled "geek", "nerd", "loser", and "no life" when I admit to doing math for the fun of it. I have girls who ask me, "Don't you go shopping" or "Don't you have friends?" They make it seem like I don't go out when I do go out. :\ It does sometimes hurt but I brush it off.

Oerg: Sad but true :(

p.s Why is there an argument over spelling and grammar? I make grammatical errors all the time over the internet. This is the internet not a formal English class essay...

 

[lisab]

Holy cow! I just came back from school and there are already tons of replies!

We are soooo responsive here at PF .

 

[DanP]

That I'm-a-scientist-I-wear-thick-safety-glasses-and-I'm-wacky stereotype isn't going to attract many kids in middle school, *especially girls*.

The "I'm *not* a scientist but I wear-thick-safety-glasses-and-Im-whacky" won't be very popular too. I think the bottom line here is not sitting in the intellectual abilities and their exercise, it's goofy looks and social ineptness which does not attract ppl. There are many intelligent ppl who are preforming very good in their education, but they are also vibrant and full of life, eager of human contact and generally open.

I mean, if you are ugly and socially inept, being stupid won't make you any more popular than being weak, ugly, with bad eyes and and very intelligent. Being stupid in addition to being ugly just won't save your ***.

I don't think that here is the stereotype which is at work. I think it's reality. If you are clumsy ugly and asocial, then you simple are, that's a fact, and that's it.

It's the same as playing football on the neighborhood yard. If one is left out, it is usually left out because he sucks at playing. We usually make this sweeter by saying "It;s not you..." , but guess what, it is usually you. You have no idea how to play ball.

Ofc, I have no idea what actually happens in US, so I might be wrong.

 

[BobG]

It's the same as playing football on the neighborhood yard. If one is left out, it is usually left out because he sucks at playing. We usually make this sweeter by saying "It;s not you..." , but guess what, it is usually you. You have no idea how to play ball.

Ofc, I have no idea what actually happens in US, so I might be wrong.

In the US, we play baseball and we never leave a person out just because they don't know how to play. We put them out in right field and hope no one hits it there for the minimum two innings they have to play (yes, it's actually a rule that we can't leave someone out just because they don't know how to play).

Science and math are two of the activities where we actually can leave out the losers, which makes them a lot more fun.

 

[DanP]

(yes, it's actually a rule that we can't leave someone out just because they don't know how to play).

?? Where ?? Can you clarify pls ? Maybe in PE classes in schools there might be such a rule, but I am speaking of high school guys playing together in a neutral environment, not under adult supervision, out on the yard, where they select their own teams.

 

[ideasrule]

What I find funny is the people who try to use evolution as an argument, but they're really only talking about one species and they're assuming that they know exactly how early humans lived. (hint: evolution doesn't happen within one species.)

Please don't comment on evolution if you don't know what you're talking about. Evolution most definitely does happen within one species, because mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift are constantly acting on the gene pool. Did you think that one species evolv

 

[micromass]

It annoys the hell out of me when people say that women are less smart than men. This is of course not true at all, as I've experienced many times personally.

But why are so many scientists we know of men? Because women didn't get any chance at studying in the past. It's only the last 50 years that the tides are beginning to turn. But things are not done yet, for women still don't get thesame chances as men do!

 

[DanP]

It annoys the hell out of me when people say that women are less smart than men. This is of course not true at all, as I've experienced many times personally.

Define "smart". Anyway, this is a highly contentious subject which always generate tension. You shouldn't be bugged out by the different views ppl hold on this subject. So far, I came to believe and there is no shadow of doubt in my head that women in general are much better at negotiating the social world than men, and they build and maintain social networks with enviable naturalness. It never bugged me when someone told me this.

I do not believe that men have intrinsically better ability then women in sciences. However, I do believe that there might be some different genetic propensities in sexes which can modulate career selection behavior towards certain fields.

Sooner or later, we will have an answer if such propensities exist.

 

[1MileCrash]

Because they aren't logical, they rely on instinct and emotion rather than reason and fact.







No, I'm not being serious, knuckleheads.

 

[collinsmark]

Here are some IEEE Spectrum articles that seem relevant. (The first two articles are related to each other.)

Math and Gender
http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/math-and-gender"

Today men still dominate mathematics, but there is reason to believe that things are changing. One strand of evidence comes from a study at the University of Wisconsin, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, which finds that the overall progress of women in society is a surprisingly good indicator of their performance at the highest math levels.

Math Quiz: Why Do Men Predominate?
http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/education/math-quiz-why-do-men-predominate"

A recent study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences might make him happy. In it, psychologists Janet Hyde and Janet Mertz, from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, used data from math aptitude tests to show that among top math performers, the gender gap doesn’t exist in some ethnic groups and in some countries. The researchers conclude that culture is the main reason more men excel at the highest math levels in most countries.

"When parents are asked to estimate their child’s math talent, they estimate higher numbers for their sons than their daughters despite similar grades in school," Hyde says. Teachers and guidance counselors share this bias, which is why math has served as a filter to keep young women out of science, technology, and engineering.

A Double Standard for Women Engineers?
http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/a-double-standard-for-women-engineers"

When male scientists posed half-naked for a calendar in the 1990s they got kudos; now that female engineering students have done the same, they face recriminations

[...snip...]

"Most of the time when I talk to people and I tell them I’m in engineering, I can feel them treating me as one of ’those nerds,’ ” she says in an e-mail. ”When people think of engineers, they always think of something along the lines of, ’stay in their own cell, never go out to meet anyone, never do anything for fun, their life revolves around a computer….’ For a female engineer it is even worse."

 

[mathwonk]

some people are bigoted insecure morons, with very little experience of the real world. (this is intended a an answer to the original question.)

 

[lurky]

Please don't comment on evolution if you don't know what you're talking about. Evolution most definitely does happen within one species, because mutations, natural selection, and genetic drift are constantly acting on the gene pool. Did you think that one species evolv

The rest of your post appears to be missing, so I'm not misquoting.

Anyway, I was picking a bone over the use of the word evolution where I thought the word adaptation should have been used, however upon checking some online sources (wikipedia was unfortunately all I could find in a hurry that mentioned specifically what I was looking for), adaptation was included with evolution and called an "evolutionary process," so OK, I retract the statement. I still don't think the argument is correct, though.

 

[Pythagorean]

Isn't it ironic that:

1) estrogen is associated with improved mental faculties:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/11/101117161246.htm

And

2) testosterone kills neurons:
http://www.jbc.org/content/early/2006/06/27/jbc.M603193200.full.pdf

 

[pergradus]

At the low to medium end of things, I think women are equal with men in both science and math.

When you get to the really high levels though - people who are considered the best of the best, the type of people who go on to create entire new fields of science and mathematics... it seems to be completely dominated by men.

Does that mean men are superior? I don't know, but it seems like child bearing really does keep most women from achieving true greatness.

 

[chiro]

Personally I think its great to see more women in the sciences, engineering, and technology sectors.

I think there are a lot of elements at play here. The environmental factors as previous posters have pointed out are big. There's a lot of cultural issues with how math, science and technology are perceived and how they are encouraged to both developing males and females.

Certainly I remember when learning programming when I was young that programming was a thing "only for white pale nerds with glasses who played doom, had no hygiene and no social skills". It might be somewhat true still, but no doubt computers are no longer the domain of "Dungeons and Dragons" fans.

Also I think societal values have changed for the better. Half a decade ago, women were encouraged to (dare I say it), stay in the kitchen, do the ironing, and feed the children while Joe husband did the bread-winning and brought home the bacon.

Nowadays women are encouraged to have careers and ambitions outside of being a homemaker and many actually want them, which is why we the diversity and change that we see in the world today.

As for women becoming the best in some field, I think its doable, but I should point out that many people that are ahead of their time and change things often have a tendency to have certain mental prerequisites like being a workaholic, having obsessive tendencies, having some kind of mental 'disorder' whether that can include social withdrawal and isolation, perhaps some kind of eccentricity, and maybe something along the lines of paranoia, bipolar, schizophrenia, or high functioning autism. I'm not sure what the data says about how divided the population is with those traits but I'm going to make a conjecture that men have higher incidences of those traits than do women (only a conjecture!)

Of course not every person who does great things has this mental profile, but certainly when reflecting on the history of mathematics and its contributors, there certainly is some evidence of this being prevalent.

As for the evolution argument, I think this is a joke. The people that spout the "survival of the fittest" argument are missing the whole spectrum of activities that humans (and other living creatures) take part in. Why do people create things, play music, paint paintings, do charitable activities, have inner goals not revolving around survival? Although I've never actually seen an "axiomatic" definition of survival, I highly doubt that his "axiomatic" definition of survival traits includes anything I've just mentioned.

There are countless studies with many creatures including gorillas and dolphins that show the ability of creatures other than humans to demonstrate levels of empathy and actions that aren't strictly required for survival.

 

[Pythagorean]

The hardest working (and brightest) researchers at my institute are Chinese females.

 

[DanP]

As for the evolution argument, I think this is a joke. The people that spout the "survival of the fittest" argument are missing the whole spectrum of activities that humans (and other living creatures) take part in. Why do people create things, play music, paint paintings, do charitable activities, have inner goals not revolving around survival? Although I've never actually seen an "axiomatic" definition of survival, I highly doubt that his "axiomatic" definition of survival traits includes anything I've just mentioned.

There are countless studies with many creatures including gorillas and dolphins that show the ability of creatures other than humans to demonstrate levels of empathy and actions that aren't strictly required for survival.

This is because you don't understand evolution.

It is not and was never about "survival of the fittest". That's the biggest misconception one can have about evolution. It is about reproductive success, and replication of genes. And when you understand that, it becomes much easier to fathom why empathy, charity, even painting , creation of things may play a role in reproductive success.

 

[DanP]

A Double Standard for Women Engineers?
http://spectrum.ieee.org/at-work/tech-careers/a-double-standard-for-women-engineers"

It is easy to understand why happens. This paper has a very interesting point of view on sex as female currency in society. It does worth a read.

Sexual Economics: Sex as Female Resource for Social Exchangein Heterosexual Interactions
Roy F. Baumeister, Kathleen D. Vohs

http://www.csom.umn.edu/Assets/71503.pdf

 

[VikFloyd]

"Most of the time when I talk to people and I tell them I’m in engineering, I can feel them treating me as one of ’those nerds,’ ” she says in an e-mail. ”When people think of engineers, they always think of something along the lines of, ’stay in their own cell, never go out to meet anyone, never do anything for fun, their life revolves around a computer….’ For a female engineer it is even worse."

That's actually true. Whenever I tell someone I am studying engineering people either treat me like a total recluse, call me a nerd, or even call me a tomboy

 

[Phrak]

I've never seen so much gender bending BS all in one place.

Men and women are different: fact.

Men's brains and women's brains are measurably different: fact.

If you are a woman, you can stop whining about discrimination. It doesn't exist on average, USA 2011. So if you can handle it, do it.