Calling my female scientist friends
Sep. 12th, 2012 05:25 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
drwexhttp://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-trouble-with-barbie-science
Diana Betz has an article up on Scientific American titled "The Trouble with Barbie Science", about efforts to recruit more women into the sciences. Among other things she's reacting negatively to work done by the Society of Women Engineers, an organization I've respected in the past for knowing what it's doing.
So I'm asking my female scientist friends here - what do you guys make of this? Is the SWE right? Is Betz right? Are they both right, or both missing the point?
Diana Betz has an article up on Scientific American titled "The Trouble with Barbie Science", about efforts to recruit more women into the sciences. Among other things she's reacting negatively to work done by the Society of Women Engineers, an organization I've respected in the past for knowing what it's doing.
So I'm asking my female scientist friends here - what do you guys make of this? Is the SWE right? Is Betz right? Are they both right, or both missing the point?
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 12:25 am (UTC)Why do we want more women to go into math and science? Why should that be a goal of ours?
I understand why we want our high schools and colleges not to discriminate against girls/women who are good at math and science and want to go into those fields, but is it actually a problem if more men want to pursue careers in math and science than women?
Why isn't there a corresponding campaign to get more men to be elementary school teachers?
I happen to be a woman, and I also happen to work as a software engineer in a largely male, technical field. It is not unusual for me to be the only woman in a room with 50 or 100 men. I don't think anyone should stop me from doing what I do, or force me to conform to a stereotype that says women aren't good at the things I am good at, but I don't think anyone has ever tried to do those things.
To answer your specific question: I am pretty sure that nothing involving Barbie (or actresses with a similar style) could significantly affect my motivation to do anything, one way or the other. I am sure you will be shocked to hear this, but I don't identify all that closely with Barbie, and I never have.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 12:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:26 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:38 am (UTC)Of course, the applies much more to sciences that are at least somewhat about living things, like medicine or ethology, than to things like physics or chemistry. But there have been lots of cases where various fields have gained new insights when women entered them, because the men hadn't realized where their blind spots were until someone with different blind spots came along.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:53 am (UTC)I believe because we have reason to believe there are women who would like to go into math and science, but don't go into those fields. So if we focus on supporting women going into/choosing those fields, we hopefully remove some barriers to entry.
Why isn't there a corresponding campaign to get more men to be elementary school teachers?
There is, at least in my area.
I don't think anyone has ever tried to do those things
I'm a programmer, and I used to think similarly. Then I had a daughter, and she started being interested in playing video games, and I realized there's no way I'm going to be ok with my daughter dealing with some of the nonsense I dealt with in my youth from geek-boys-and-men. It didn't seem a big deal, because it was just there for me. But the level of hostility, aggression, and sexualization is really not something I'm comfortable signing my daughter up for. I worry more that she's interested in gaming & electronics than that she's interested in drawing & music. Listening to what some high-school and college-aged women still have to deal with trying to get involved in the open source community is kind of heart breaking. I'd love for my daughter to follow in my footsteps. Except, not.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 12:35 am (UTC)I see the bigger problem as tightly-proscribed gender roles, and that's what the article points to as well. Making math pink, as the wise man phrased it, panders to cultural ideas about femininity. In order to reach girls, is the best tactic to be hyperfeminine and think that's enough? Does that completely endrun around the need to figure out what the real barriers are to women in science, and break them down? I think not.
What they do mention as being actually helpful is what every young person needs: mentors. Putting a human face on anything makes it more approachable and appealing. A Barbie with a little pink laptop is not at all the same level of inspiration and validation as, say, Simone saying that we know lots of girls who Do Science (or work in the trades, or have lush beards, or.....etc) and naming them off one by one.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:43 am (UTC)I recall from my memories of reading "Reviving Ophelia" is that if you want girls to be interested in math and science, you have to hook them before they hit puberty (less than 12 yrs old). Middle school programs are generally a waste of time because they are too late.
The problem that I have always seen is not that encouraging kids to get into science is difficult, but avoiding active discouragement. My son's 8th grade science teacher (male) would be sarcastic and make fun of kids who had wrong answers. He clearly was in the old 20th Century Cold Warrior camp that said only the intellectual elite should be encouraged to pursue science. I made a point of discussing with my kid why this was wrong, the 21st Century needs people with math and science skills at all levels. There is plenty of value in someone who grows up to be a lab tech with an Associates degree. In my opinion, anyone who isn't born into the religious/reality-deniers camp is a potential ally and needs to be encouraged. I did indeed give the science teacher a tongue-lashing about his approach, but I doubt that it had any effect.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 02:33 am (UTC)We don't teach English with the idea that only 20% of the kids are going to be any good at it, anyway. We shouldn't teach math and science that way, either.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 01:46 am (UTC)I think showing more people Doing Science who are approachable by girls and seem familiar to girls is going to do a lot more than some weird "computer Barbie." My daughter thinks women and men can program computers because she lives it. But society subtlety tells her *constantly* that girls don't solder electrical circuits, build robots, or launch rockets. Not only does she not see women typically doing these things, but the people (usually men) in charge of kid-oriented-activities in those realms tend to assume she's a tag-along, there with a brother, not there for herself. She's 9 and she's already well aware that one of the first things she has to do is make sure the people running activities know she's there to participate, not just watch. "Girls don't like that stuff, let's just let the boys do it."
Pink math doesn't change that. It doesn't *actually* make it more accessible. It's window dressing. I think folks look to things like computer Barbie as a place holder. Until there are more women doing these things (if ever that happens) providing a female face can be difficult.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 02:39 am (UTC)Female role models are important, but they should be real female mathematicians and scientists, not Barbie or Barbie-like actresses who are dressed like more stylish versions of mathematicians and scientists...
Speaking as a frumpy, Teva-wearing engineer (to quote the original article), I really have to ask: why does it matter what I wear? I was impressed with Marie Curie and Grace Hopper in my teens and twenties, and later (when I started to narrow in on Internet protocols) by Radia Perlman. I never cared about what any of them were _wearing_, though, just about what the were able to accomplish. They made me feel like it was possible for me to be what I wanted to be.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 03:04 am (UTC)http://findingada.com/
no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 03:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-09-13 12:50 pm (UTC)I have to admit that my initial response to the article was "ugh, wtf?" And I mostly agree with the comments made here wrt how women *actually* approach STEM fields vs how some media hack thinks some idealized set of women might do the same.
That being said, it's largely a culture thing -- y'all probably grew up in a largely-liberal, largely-urban environment. Beyond that environment, gender determinations of roles and careers is alive, well, and kicking. If this sort of pink nonsense encourages even one girl who would never ever think about science to consider it as a viable acceptable career choice -- sure, socialize the choice that way. But don't let that be the *only* picture of women in science.
no subject
Date: 2012-09-14 12:32 am (UTC)