The real reason there aren't more female scientists | FACTUAL FEMINIST

[@basedjorts]

As an engineering student, I can tell you one thing for sure, I can say one of the most common things I hear from other male engineering students is they wish there were more women in engineering. If there is any discrimination against women in our field, it isn't from us. We would be happy to have more of them.

[@centrist3684]

Same for com sci. We used to call com sci major a sausage fest/ gay alliance major

[@muslimmetalman]

Ka Mok you learn something new everyday lol

[@cloverfield1131]

But once women actually entered the class you and your friends would make it your number 1 priority to make sure she knows her place as eye candy of the class and that she can't be as good as a guy at engineering though your subtle and not so subtle treatment of her. The reality is men get threatened by women who are entering subjects like com sci or engineering, they don't fit into the status quo. you aren't wishing for more women so you can learn from a female perspective in engineering, you're wishing for more women so it's not a 'sausage fest'. Despite what you may think, being the only girl in that class is not something girls aspire to.

[@refusingrumination]

***** I have to disagree with your insinuation that men are predisposed to a sexist behavior simply because of your pessimistic view point on masculinity in a competitive environment. If I said that women are going to put men in their place because they wanted to be cheerleaders then I would be considered a sexist for assuming that women are superior to men since the position is mainly occupied by females. There is no winning with this form of logic. If you assume that all males are misogynist douches who want to put women down then there is no room for peace, forgiveness, and common ground as equals in the field of engineering. There has to be an assumption of kindness in your fellow man and woman or else you will see devils in everyone.

[@muslimmetalman]

selectedtemptations I agree that paranoia about the females is another side to the feminist "righteous" outrage "righteous" anger is always wrong. An eye for an eye makes the world blind. there is nothing "wrong" about natural affinities. Talent is talent. It's not "sexist" (in the classic "offensive" sense) to assume sexually dimorphic traits in a sex...nor is it to assume it "should" be that way. I don't believe women (or men) were dealt a raw deal by "society". What we have done (and I don't believe "androgynization" is the way out of this) is overlook individual differences. What's funny is that "feminists" oftentimes fall into the same trap. I generalize and I admit it to make the points I need to.

[@goondocksaints9597]

I found that the extreme majority of people advocating for more women pursuing STEM majors on my college campuses were Humanities majors. It always sounded like, "I'M not interested in Science, but more [OTHER] women should be."

[@ameliamilne9065]

As a woman in STEM, let me explain why there might not be more women interested in STEM. First, when growing up a lot of girls get dolls while boys get blocks- sexism in how society treats a female vs male child leads to them having different interests. Second, if you aren't surrounded by people who look like you, you probably won't be as interested in being there! And lastly, and a point I think a lot of people miss, is that since STEM has been dominated by males for so long, the fields have been built by male understanding and perspective. There is a male way to approach a problem and a female way to approach a problem, both equally viable and needed in ANY field. And so, for a women to come into a STEM program that has been built by the male perspective, she might not feel like it relates to the way she would intuitively understand something and then she might become less interested. If you are a woman, DON'T LET THIS VIDEO WEAKEN YOUR LOVE FOR STEM. Find all the bomb ass females in STEM to get inspired by. Understand the things you learn in your own way- it will make you so much stronger in the end.

[@goondocksaints9597]

@@ameliamilne9065 In Sweden they spent the last generation focusing on gender neutral social environments and the result proves the opposite of your theory. Women and men separated even more in career choices, women chose to work more with people and less with things and men chose more to work with things than in other western cultures. If you're in STEM you should know how to research that data so check for yourself.

[@ameliamilne9065]

@@goondocksaints9597 My rebuttal here is that maybe STEM careers could also be successful when working and collaborating with more people

[@goondocksaints9597]

@@ameliamilne9065 Well my rebuttal is that playing with dolls or blocks doesn't lock you into a career path.

[@ameliamilne9065]

@@goondocksaints9597 Agreed, but it does play a part in what you become interested in as you grow older.

[@RoboticsNShenanigans]

When people talk about equality in occupations, they always say "we need more female engineers and scientists". I've yet to see anyone say "we need more female construction workers and miners".

[@cebolenkosingcobo5122]

Its always representation in top tier jobs.

[@ThatsMrPencilneck2U]

Don't you know? Construction supervisors regularly discriminate against people that don't look like they can tolerate swinging a shovel all day long. A lot of women would love to earn the pay that goes with the ability to dead lift 150 lbs. It's not like every man can do this, but there are feminist advocates that argue that women are unfairly barred from work in this industry, where raw muscle is important.

[@snoopydunworkin6652]

And bricklayers

[@Adks007]

That's the problem with the fake feminists out there. They want to compete with men which are easy to do. They want to smoke, drink, wear shorts like men. They say, If men can do, why can't we! They never say, if men can become scientist, why can't I. With due to respect to all the women. I am only talking about fake feminists who talk about equality.

[@priyatoshkumarmahato2635]

@@ThatsMrPencilneck2U you could say there are some women who want that but I don't think many women want to work in construction labor

[@Lichenut]

STEM is hard. I am a woman, and I recently received my BS in Physics. I saw many people (both men and women) drop out or switch majors during my four years. I considered switching majors on many occasions myself! But I stuck with it because I honestly love Physics, and I didn't want to study anything else. Whenever I hear people discussing how to get more women in the sciences, I always think, "Science doesn't want more women. Science doesn't want more men. Science wants more scientists." What I mean by this is just because someone might show proficiency for a subject like physics, they should not study it unless they have the heart and passion to study it. If they are only studying it because they are good at it or because it's expected of them, they will most likely switch out, or if they do get their BS usually don't go back for a Master's or Ph.D. It reminds me of the ending quote from movie Serenity when Captain Reynolds says about flying a ship, "Love. You can learn all the math in the 'Verse, but you take a boat in the air that you don't love, she'll shake you off just as sure as the turning of the worlds. Love keeps her in the air when she oughta fall down, tells you she's hurtin' 'fore she keens. Makes her a home."

[@bookguitarguy]

+Lichenut Love Firefly, nice quote. Good points, and I also believe that no matter how much radical feminists want to force women into STEM fields to boost their numbers, and convince American women how "oppressed" they are (LOL), going into a field to be a feminist heroine and help right the injustices of the world (with all the psychological baggage that goes along with that, for feminists), is the wrong reason to go into a field, and love of the field is the right reason, as you mentioned. "Follow your bliss", as Joseph Campbell put it. :O)

[@Pleaseunderstand]

+Lichenut Can you favorite comments?

[@Lichenut]

+Kid and a Squid now Haha I wish. Until that feature happens, I copy and paste my favorite comments into a word document. Whenever I run into an overload of internet stupidity, I open that document and read it to restore my faith in humanity.

[@Pleaseunderstand]

What a great idea. I think I'll go ahead and copy your comment and make my own database, if you don't mind.

[@Lichenut]

I don't mind at all! In fact, I feel quite honored.

[@hasen1957]

Society has long treated "nerd" males like outcasts. Well guess what, it didn't stop them from pursuing their interests in STEM fields.

[@wohodude100]

But "strong independent women" need to have it not only encouraged to them, but they also need to have a bullshit unfaird head-start and a leg up on males just to be "fair". The fact of the matter is that feminism especially today is mostly bullshit and that most of the shit that these radical feminists push for are actually things they get an advantage over men!

[@gfwinn]

@@wohodude100 It's also interesting to note that if you gave the attribute that are usually associated with a "Strong Woman" to a man those same people who insist in giving said "strong women" an intrinsic advantage would condemn said man as being "toxic." It's just one of many hypocrisies and double standards in modern feminism that people are starting to see through.

[@ediktorek1322]

according to what autor of video had said: if you have trouble with speaking to people, while being male you can develop tremendous math skills. But I suppose you would still be outcast by society, it may not be even society guilt but the objective fact. What is more, if social impaired males would not be able to be enlisted on STEM entry list, they would have much harder job market experience, as they do not have social skills. And there is already heavy STEM drop out as the field is demanding. And I understand that all STEM students would love to have more female students around, but they would not liked if one third of them would not enter STEM university because of quota for females. (Those who would get despite would not mind, but those who could make to despite better score, they life could be ruined)

[@agees924]

wohodude100 You want real feminism, come to Norway! We have a lot of women in STEM and fields. Probably about half of the women in my engineering courses here are women. And we are a feminist country, where men and women choose whatever career they want and don’t worry about the social implications.

[@ediktorek1322]

@@agees924 And your government imports whatever Arabic people they want. (They just happen to refuse christian middle East refugees) And your government also does not care about social implication, just like Norwegian royal subjects. And by the why, not all Engineering is Really engineering: I remember that on my STEM university MOST Females engineers were graduating: marketing and material knowledge, logistics, and such strangely majors with non engines involved things like buildings and architecture (that is more art than ENGINEering.) I wander why they can even have rights to call themselves engineer of marketing? I suppose it comes from printer engineering knowledge: you can print whatever diploma you want if You happen to be university who owns such printer: vampireLogy, and marketLogy engineer. That is funny.

[@coweatsman]

"And all virgins". Imagine if you made that remark about a course dominated by all women. You'd never hear the end of it. The Twitter storm would be F5.

[@BuzzinFr0g808]

***** What? Christina didn't say that; she said some internet poster had slung that insult in the article's comments section.

[@Voidward]

I've never quite comprehended the whole "probably a virgin" thing. It's a lot easier to get laid than it is to study your ass off and be in the 0.1% (or less) of the population that can even comprehend the requisite math. The people doing that math are almost assuredly going to be able to find amazing careers with very high pay. Meanwhile, you can find a hooker on craigslist and get laid the same day for a couple of hundred dollars. How exactly is this an accomplishment?

[@coweatsman]

Stan Velijev There is a small percentage of males who are incels and who can not get laid. For them it's more than just being on craigslist or hiring a hooker. Any one can get a hooker but not everyone wants JUST a hooker. For many incel men it's about a relationship and closeness. There are plenty of 40 year old virgins out there as you would expect with hypergamy. There isn't someone for everyone. Sad but true. This is a problem that will get worse for blue pill types. Women want men who are equal or higher than themselves. Most university and college educated graduates are women and there will not be enough men for them. Female doctors don't marry checkout clerks. What is more men are becoming more intimidated by campus feminists and the oppressive etiquette now taking shape to say nothing of the prospect of Title IX kangaroo courts without any legal safeguards.Campus is a menacing and dangerous place for males.

[@Voidward]

coweatsman "There isn't someone for everyone" Sure, that's obvious. However, the virgin label itself stops applying with a $200 fee. Throwing it around as an insult directed at people considerably more accomplished and intelligent accomplishes what exactly? I just don't comprehend how mashing genitals together is of more value to anyone than intelligent people who have the capacity to change the world. Nikola Tesla and Isaac Newton were both geniuses who didn't have much time for women, and might have actually died virgins. Clearly, they should have focused their lives on getting their dicks wet instead of changing the world. What were they thinking?

[@Warsie]

Stan Velijev For some people, it's the inverse - being easier to do high level math than to "get laid". Ted Kazynski wrote about such, being 'sexually starved' but he easily got into harvard and was a PH.D at being 22. Especially given the sort of people who might self-select into something like theoretical mathematics.

[@corpusc]

this is the kind of rational feminist i like to see.

[@bokunorainbow58]

+Alex Mitchell Most women I've actually met in real life don't believe in the things that get spouted by radical feminists. I think Max Strong is right. The crazy ones get all the attention. Even most channels on KZbin that mention them just talk about how crazy it is.

[@kanavi2]

+Helghast kitty I think you are confusing women with feminist, not all women are feminist, so its easy to find reasonable women, but hard to find reasonable feminist

[@midnytthunda]

true, can you send me your findings? I would love to read it. [e-mail] , title it something obvious so I can easily notice it.

[@bobbyjbobbyj]

The kind who aren’t actually feminist?

[@WeatherMondacicci]

@Natasel The right for women to vote is never going to go away no matter how much you wish for it. It's just not going to happen.

[@jessicadeines]

I am an example of a female with an Dr in Computer Science and Masters in Physics. I went to these fields as they were more interesting to me. Many of my friends naturally gravitated towards teaching and psychology. I don't think I was any more intellegant then them, was much more about interest. I found that in my conversations with feminists on campus that this explanation was very unsatisfactory. A few of my friends that went to feminist studies even went as far as accusing me of betraying my gender by pointing this out and not claiming any hardship in being successful in Physics. I don't think there is anything wrong with the difference between us in interest but I think they were more bothered that the perspective was that STEM fields are more difficult and require more work in general than "softer" sciences or more liberal arts type degrees. I was amazed how often the discussions about women in the sciences turned very aggressive and personal. I never thought that choosing a hard science degree would cause such a rift between us.

[@COULGHOULLADY]

wow I am currently in the same position I study physics and my best friends are in the social sciences (equity I think) they have called me a republican for stating that I dont believe ive faced any discrimination

[@paulthompson9668]

Jessica Deines STEM degrees require more mental effort to get. Ask anyone who has two degrees or a double major. I don't know why people get so offended by facts nowadays. I guess when you have a strong belief that gets debunked by facts, it's easier to get mad at someone else than change your beliefs.

[@jocelynnowen3078]

I agree Jessica. Society is a grey area. Dont make much sense. Engineers are kinda too far outside the box for this silly social trama drama anyway. I did the same thing. I create my own life. You worded this better than I today because I'm tired of this grade school explanation for people in 2020. I have anything better to do, right? Lol

[@tren380]

No you don’t.

[@hlabhlabhlab]

@@paulthompson9668 That's not necessarily true liberal science majors can also require just as much mental effort you just utilize different skills. So many papers and positions to write; like what about politicians, diplomats, certain kinds of specialists and psychologists, etc. The list goes on.

[@valerieromine4396]

If feminism actually was about equality, feminist would be working just as hard at getting more men into jobs such as teaching or nursing as aggressively as they are pushing women into STEM jobs.

[@thecreativemillenial]

Valerie Romine well, this feminist is

[@alanaaragonzulke4431]

The unfairness lies in the difference of recognition (and ultimately financial gratification) between activities predominantly dominated by men and women.

[@EaglePicking]

Alana Aragon Zulke I can easily find counter examples to that idea. Garbage collection, for instance, is done 100% by men. It's very hard work and is not paid well. So you see: there is no conspiracy that lets men have easy and well paid jobs.

[@alanaaragonzulke4431]

@@EaglePicking women are the majority of collectors of recyclable items in open garbage fields in Brazil for instance. Women account for the majority of house keepers, home care and are historically subordinate to roles related to cleaning. Leadership on the other hand, is not often empowered to women. What do you think?

[@alanaaragonzulke4431]

@Gianni Marco data is clear: men die younger because of higher consumption of alcohol, nicotine, they go less often to see doctors and so on. Men also risk themselves more into not very safe circumstances. Historically the patriarchy invented war and kill other man consistently. Do you really think that if we had more women in power, things would end up in wars? Just a reflection...

[@Spawn8214]

I hate when feminists say that STEM fields are hostile and intimidating to women. As a Computer Science graduate whose graduating class was of 16 (2 female, 14 male), the 2 females were always seen as equally awesome computer scientists. No one treated them any differently (though they may have been asked out by other computer science students more often lol) and they both excelled and found excellent jobs. When I ask my other non-STEM female friends why they didn't choose a STEM field... none of them say because it was too intimidating or they were biased against. They all say "because I didn't want to, I like what I do better".

[@RGAlexanderVision]

+Spawn8214 Same here. Personally, I've seen a surprising amount of hostility and intimidation against women in STEM and even THOSE women have either stayed in the field or have left for completely unrelated reasons. I really don't think that is the core problem.

[@sandonkeable769]

+Spawn8214 The reason they were 'asked out' more is because there were more men than women. So mathematically they get to ask more men out but each man only gets to ask once, which means that they in fact had more opportunity than did the men of finding a match. Point is there are discrimination's everywhere and no matter where, due to all of us being kept down in one way or another. You could even argue if they were that ""HOT"" that they were always asked out, than they could have actually, even if unaware caused the men to not study properly, because the men were more interested in them. Now this is the argument that women make when opening an all female gym. They never consider it the other way around though or it also having consequences on the men as well. Such as a weightlifter, who is going for a world title, being in the same room as gorgeous women. And since he is a weightlifter, you would guarantee that his testosterone would be high. Placing cute women in front of him may make him work harder as well (show off) So the whole gender war is nothing more than a political nonsense so the ones who design it, profit and keep the rest of us down and that includes the ones they claim to represent.

[@coutphil]

Same here ! We had only 4 girls and they were very talentuous in mathematics. They were part of the gang. All guys would like to have more girl in these field. I never saw a guy say : "pff, these girls does not deserve to study mathematics" I never heard thing like this !!! Same in economics fields btw. Its hard to have 50% women in companies administrative board when you only have 25-30% of women in economics fields at university. femenist in america should bring this equality fight in country were there is true discrimination.

[@ikeogiamien7139]

I am an engineer. I and my colleagues have, and always will, welcomed women.

[@rachelneff5837]

I am a woman in STEM and I definitely believe I have faces discrimination- people don’t give me as many responsibilities as they give my male counter parts, they don’t expect as much. The boys are given the “harder” tasks of coding, computer modeling, etc. It is BS

[@nushi1990]

As a recent graduate of Electrical and Biomedical Engineering and a girl, I keep reading these articles about how its awful for girls in STEM and how the discrimination is off the walls (mostly on tumblr blogs and such). I've personally never faced an issue in my many years of engineering education and honestly can't think of another fellow female graduate who has. The professors and faculty are exactly as helpful to the girls as they are to the men. This video has it right. Whether its social conditioning or not, most people tend to follow their passion. A girl who truly wants to be an engineer will become one, regardless of what her parents or society or media tells her to be and regardless of what toys she played with. I'm not failing to acknowledge the role society plays in a girl's life, I'm saying that it doesn't play as much as huge of a role as most people in the humanities tend to think it does.

[@ksara2883]

Female engineer here (and brief crane operator) I have not experienced negative discrimination. I spent 6 years at uni doing a double degree and did not experience discrimination or sexual harassment. I'd be surprised if my classmates did as well. And when I did my crane licence training I want discriminated against. I was treated like any other person. I doubt I'm the exception to the rule but of course I'm biased to see my life as normal. The biggest challenge I faced was that my friend weren't interested in STEM. And yeah, had to learn at a young age if I wanted to do the things I wanted to do I needed to get over feeling uncomfortable doing it by myself. I do think this may have something to do with women not picking STEM, it can be daunting being in a class by yourself and you don't know anyone. We also tend to gravitate to what is familiar, that is in general women make friends with other women, and men with other men. So yeah doing a class being the only woman can be intimidating. Not because of the men. But it's less likely she knows or is friends with any of the men in the class. And if the when has experience being sexually abused or assulted by a man in her life yeah she is very likely to feel intimidated being in a room full of men. I will point out I do experience positive discrimination. I work in a government field in Australia. There are quotas on gender, race, disability, etc. I know for the hiring process they need to shortlist for interview the same number of women to men for a single job application. That gives me an unfair advantage to men in the engineering field. I'm also encouraged to take opportunities especially by manages who champion women in male dominated fields. And when there is women's week or some internationa dayl celebrating Women the organisation is likely to want to use me as a poster girl, which gives me more coverage or notice in the organisation. And I've noticed that women in my industry group together and organised events for women to attend to. This is good for networking as well as giving opportunity's for self development. I don't see a similar thing for men. Not because they aren't allowed to, rather I don't see men as inclinded to form such committees that organise and get people together. These are all advantages I have that men around me don't have in my field. And for my studies, special consideration was given to me being female and coming from an underperforming school. Again positive discrimination.

[@reverandglenn]

Sounds like you are a bright, successful woman and not a girl at all. The girls and the boys always have a reason not to succeed or a reason to point fingers at other people, while women and men go about taking care of their business. It seems that in the last 20 years, too many 'activists' are boys and girls and far too few are men and women. Just my opinion.

[@sgnMark]

It's odd, but the social mannerisms and intellectual base for discussion amongst male and female STEM majors seems not just amiable, but incredibly cooperative versus the art majors at my university. So much so that I've completely changed the way I evaluate my choice of friends and partners (I used to be a crazy hippie/rocker type). God bless you engineer types though, you guys are on a different level. I'll stick with environmental science lol.

[@reverandglenn]

@@sgnMark Risking the wrath of the Arts and Humanities here, but I agree with you, Mark. I don't know what is the cause of the hostility/ activism, but I personally believe it is an eclectic blend of the initiating goal that brought people to University (social or degree driven), relatively easy entrance into general arts and humanities degree programs, and of course the lack of competition to get into some of the degree programs such as engineering, medicine, dentistry, pharmacy, computer programming, etc etc. For those who spend much of their time as 'activists' or in groups and committees during the first two years, their academic performance may not be the same as those who spend that time ensuring that those first two years. The first two years are used to determine whether someone is academically capable of succeeding in the programs that are highly competitive, so those who are driven to get into a competitive program see the first two years as only a stepping stone that they must navigate through with a very high GPA lest they do not get an opportunity to move on to the 'interview phase' of entrance to their chosen field. I am not saying that others are not capable, merely that in my experience, many students enter seeking a path that suits them, while the STEM students already know what they want, so they enter post secondary with a goal and their "spare" time is used to study and ensure they are in the thick of the competition. It has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with with the mindset entering university. Pharmacy used to be incredibly competitive to get into, and my class of 84 had only 22 men in it, if I am remembering correctly. Highly competitive, acceptance was 75%+ women, and all were driven to make sure their first two years were academically solid which is necessary to get in....... well, it was at the time.

[@sgnMark]

@@reverandglenn I absolutely agree. My major only admits 90 students once a year and I hear all the time of students getting denied, even with a lateral transfer. I came in from community with a 4.0 with all of my CC classes tailored to UT's program. Most in my major know exactly what they want to do and why. I think the arts programs are more generalized and the skills gained in those programs are in between the lines rather than focus oriented. Not sure if this translates to less cohesiveness in social interactions but who knows?

[@AEI]

Everywhere we hear about massive gender bias against women in STEM fields, but what if it's just not true? The Factual Feminist explains other reasons for the discrepancy that you may not have heard.

[@MrKadidle51]

Well, it isn't true. So there is that.

[@TheRapUpHaven]

In my opinion it comes down to sexual dimorphisism simple as that.

[@Aoitetsugakusha]

This video really doesn't seem to add anything new to the debate, especially given the discrimination and differing interest responses to the poll aren't mutually exclusive. I think most would take it as a given, the genders have different interests in the long term, but the question that's actually important is why they take on that difference. Namely, this video fails to mention other information that's pertinent: the dramatic decline in STEM interests when the same girls are polled from kindergarten through undergraduate (or even post-graduate) studies, the significant career penalties endured by female academics choosing to have children that don't exist for male academics, and the special case of biomedical doctorates, where half of the degrees are awarded to women but women make up far less than half of the assistant professorships in that field.

[@arabhero10]

There is one more aspect I wish Ms. Sommers would have covered: The distinct difference in how young boys and girls are raised, and the tendency for girls to be pushed away from STEM fields. I've heard this argument before and I'd like her to dive into it a little more to shed some light on the fact and fiction of this claim. Or has she already done so?

[@NkoziKulu]

I think it stems from women's trained hatred of the world that men and women as a team have built, the male drive to explore, expand, discover and conquer combined with women nurturing, caring and educating at home to maintain the ethos, is what has elevated us to such an advanced technological culture, but most women have no respect for this, and refuse to aknowledge its strength, as it is alien or 'patriarchal'. Feminism is to blame for this, if equality is what we seek both men and women need to respect the 2 essential roles i mentioned above. Biology generally sorts out who plays which role, but gradual change will only happen if women begin to respect the only path to progress ever discovered. (Science) Get on board girls and continue the journey that has got us this far!

[@Elanarae]

It's sad that common sense is so dead in some parts of the internet / world that "Women and Men usually have different interests" is so mindblowing for some people. I finished my Bachelor of Computer Science with 17 other men and 4 women, and I'll safely say that those women have the same knowledge and skill than we men had. Why? Because they loved the subject, they were interested in Computer Science. But we also had many many many people, men and women who dropped out of the class, why? It wasn't their field. During a school specialized in computer science (Hard to describe ... German here :D) I had a girl that was really bad in computer science. She usually had a 5 in her programming courses and I did my best to help her so she got up to a 3 and she could finish the school to start studying a different subject. She is a Master of Law now, Computer Science just wasn't her thing, but she managed to find her field of interest and rocked it.

[@Drudenfusz]

I think many non-Germans will not get our school grading system, make your 3 a C and your 5 an E and it should be more clear.

[@Elanarae]

Drudenfusz I was talking more of our different kind of Schools, I was talking for example of the "Berufskolleg für Informatik" ... No idea if something like that exists in the USA, it's a Job Education that's done totally in school.

[@Elanarae]

***** No idea if you just went full en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poe's_law and are actually sarcastic or not ;P

[@Juxtaroberto]

Elanarae Ja, das war wirklich ein Witz.

[@Elanarae]

Juxtaroberto Ich habs mir schon fast gedacht ;) Aber es gibt wirklich Leute die so darauf reagieren ..........

[@AogNubJoshh]

1:20 I love how she actually considered this ludicrous explanation. I admire how she gives rational and calm consideration of it, even though it is quite obviously wrong. That's what other feminists are failing at. Rather than rationally and calmly considering differing perspectives, they instead just show outrage and refuse to engage in any discussion. It may seem wrong to them, but without engaging in debate, no progress will be made to enlighten either side.

[@ComfortableTool86]

this is why I love Sommers. She presents logical arguments that give consideration to both sides of an issue and she directly asks for discussion, whether in agreement or disagreement. This is the exact opposite method of the toxic modern Feminist movement.

[@AogNubJoshh]

Kwhyell I'm slightly wary of her though. She doesn't cite her sources, which makes her scarily similar to Anita Sarkeesian. A lot of the time we have to take her word for it, which is dangerous. I'm all up for a balanced argument, but I've spotted a few times her making claims that could really do with a study or citation.

[@Jaximous]

+Josh Blake Yeah, denying to proving a claim wrong and just saying it's "obviously wrong" is a fallacy that a lot of people commit to, mainly third wave feminists.

[@SeanMcCarthyMusic251]

+Josh Blake her sources often show up in annotations on her videos, or she references studies by name or by name of the author, quick googling often finds her sources easily.

[@amystalcup3876]

+JMFruitSalad yeah that's what he said idiot. she's an ideal feminist because she doesn't just dismiss ideas because they sound dumb. she was fact checking.

[@Thatsprettiemuchit]

I am a girl studying higher level STEM. The most challenging thing for me emotionally has been walking into class and immediately being seen as the only girl in the class. This isn't that big of a deal in lots of situations but whenever there is a group project, or group work, I am the one chosen last to be in a group. Groups are formed among the guys who are already friends and I tend to be the excluded one. In high school, guys tend to be friends with guys and girls tend to be friends with girls. If you are the only girl in your class, you tend to be singled out and excluded. It's not necessarily conscious discrimination or any bad intentions, it's just the way it tends to be and it's a shame imo

[@kickassssnation027]

In Nursing, women outnumber us far greater and although we had the same problem, we usually end it up by drawing lots to which group one goes to. Now I finished college and looking back, I think that we got through that without this whole 'war of the sexes' thing because in college, you are taught or should be taught to behave in a professional manner. Like you said, there are no bad intentions or anything, but in the future, we were taught that we will be basically working with complete strangers which is why it is necessary for good professional conduct. Medicine propels them to do the same and I think several STEM students care more for their ways to pass rather than gender issues much like health sciences do. I could understand your grievances, somewhat, but you are basically dealing with people who like to tinker with things rather than talk to people more to expand their horizons there which is probably why the men tend to group to themselves or that they are tiptoeing the line with you and cautious enough not to offend you or anything. :/

[@mr.mohagany8555]

My explanation for what is going on here is that the type of (male) student who tends to go into engineering is a diligent student who has paid close attention to their schoolwork throughout their lives. They don't have the same level of social skills as, say, a theater major might have. (This also ties back into the "cognitive asymmetry" she mentioned on the video, they tend to be great at math but not other things). I'm trying to say, it's more likely nothing to do with you, more likely these guys are in their own world and not concerned with making new friends and also likely to be shy. I would bet a good bit would like it if you were friendly with them.

[@somanramakrishnan1126]

Thatsprettiemuchit I applaud you for being a woman who is putting herself out there (in a rational and intelligent way) to make that cultural change. I can only imagine how it feels to be out of my comfort zone especially with the opposite sex. I feel it really is a shame, but as far as I'm aware, there is no existing quota that stops women from exercising their freedom in education. The real question why aren't women interested in these fields of study? Why aren't there at least 4 or 5 women in your class. Guys tend to befriend guys because they can relate easier, the same goes for girls. My advice to you: explore the world of men in a deeper way, understand their beliefs about women (most of them probably had very little experience relating to a woman, so that may come off as wierdos). If they are crazy and automatically refuse to view you other than as a stereotypical woman, then hey at least you tried. If they start befriending you as an individual due to your character, then you have just made friends with the most anti-social batch of humans on campus, "the nerds".

[@SophosScorpio]

Thatsprettiemuchit Really, being the only girl in class makes you nervous? Huh, I don't remember having that problem when I was in college studying for my Information Tech degree. I was usually the only girl in class myself, but the guys never intimidated me, and honestly I had no reason to feel intimidated. Everyone was friendly, we all worked together, and the only complaint anyone had about anyone was when someone didn't pull their weight in a high stakes class project. My programming, electronics, and computer tech classes were the only ones where I felt truly at home and among my "own kind," so to speak. Don't let it get to you, friend, it's probably not what you're thinking. People choose friends and previous acquaintances for groups because they know they work well and can be relied upon. If you get in there and show them that you're a good group mate and easy to get along with, I'm sure in time you'll stop being the last person chosen. Don't lose heart! Also, remember that ultimately, you're there to get a degree and start a career in a field that you must love. Focus on that and keep pushing forward, and no matter what happens socially, you'll still win. Good luck!

[@cyrushanleone]

Thatsprettiemuchit I agree with RandomGuy. I don't personally know you, but it seems like you may suffer from some symptoms of social anxiety. Try making a few close friends there (even if they are guys). Social Anxiety DOES tend to run higher in those fields and I'm sure there are other guys there that are shy/uncomfortable with new people/big groups too

[@stefanmetzeler]

I studied Physics and IT at EPFL in Switzerland. That was back in the early 1980s. In Physics, we had 3 women out of 93 students, in the second year, it was down to 50 students and 1 woman. In IT, the first year, we had 150 students out of which 15 were women. One day, I entered the wrong lecture hall and was amazed to see that half of the students were girls. A quick look at the course program revealed that this was an architecture class. So there was no barrier to entry, no social, economic or other obstacle that hindered women from entering that university. They ALL could have taken physics, math or IT, but they CHOSE not to. As professional IT consultant and developer, over the last 30 years, I have observed other differences: in IT, as in other engineering fields, you always have projects that are urgent or demand extra efforts over considerable amounts of time - you have to work late or over weekends etc. I have done so with numerous men, but although I occasionally met women working in IT jobs, NONE of them ever agreed to do extra hours to complete urgent projects. They all wanted their time off to engage in social activities.

[@stefanmetzeler]

I should have added one more interesting aspect: the environment was definitely NOT hostile to women! The idea is preposterous! Everyone went out of their way to make it pleasant for women! If there was ONE universal complaint, it was about the lack of women! A 50/50 ratio would have been just fine. We even helped women do their homework. I don't know what we'd have given to have more women around. Who would oppose women in STEM domains. Guys in those domains would love to date women who share their passion for science. Also: Why do those mysterious women haters apparently NOT keep women out of architecture? Clearly, this is a matter of women's choice, be it because of a matter of preference or ability. Based on what I read on this issue, there is a significant advantage for men among the top 0.1% performers, but those are the people who will choose to study in the most math-heavy domains. There are, fortunately, some exceptions. One of my favorites is Hedy Lamarr, beautiful actress and mathematician whose algorithm is used today for mobile communications. And a few personal female friends who did choose mathematics or physics and who did fantastically well. I'm curious to see what my daughter will do when she grows up. I know already that she is highly intelligent. If she should choose to study science and technology, I will totally support her.

[@fred972levrai]

Hedy Lamarr, the woman who invented the frequency escape concept that made it possible for military tactical communication to be secret, and Wi-Fi to work, am I wrong?

[@stefanmetzeler]

Thanks for your contribution, that was very enjoyable reading. I congratulate you on your choices, on your success and wish more women were like you ;) Would have loved to meet someone like you, too...

[@GordieGii]

Chrisimo79 A similar tactic was employed in Australia. The result was that more men were hired. www.abc.net.au/news/2017-06-30/bilnd-recruitment-trial-to-improve-gender-equality-failing-study/8664888

[@PyromancerRift]

"At the beginning of World War II, Lamarr and composer George Antheil developed a radio guidance system for Allied torpedoes, which used spread spectrum and frequency hopping technology to defeat the threat of jamming by the Axis powers." Who did what ? Who knows.

[@jenniferstanton202]

I started out as an engineering major in college. Never did I feel any hostility or bias towards myself for being a woman. I chose to change my major because I decided I wanted to take more science and technology classes. It has been my experience that many of my female friends have no interest in these subjects even though they are equally intelligent.

[@matthewatwood8641]

I'm a guy that's into music, art, and psychology. My interests fall squarely into the female the category. I am very verbal. On intelligence tests, I always get very high overall scores, but my math scores aren't so great. It has never once crossed my mind that I might not be a man, or that I might be somehow more feminine because of all of this. I am unquestionably a very masculine man.

[@MrBobDobolina]

Oddly, there's no call to balance the ratio of male to female students in disciplines that women dominate.

[@TheTelenation]

This is anecdotal no doubt but I find myself matching this. I wasn't raised with gender roles, my mum went to work and my dad stayed at home, my mum never wore make up or a skirt and my brother and I shared toys. Despite growing up in the exact same environment and only be 2 years older, my brother excelled in math where as I excelled in English, biology, history and art. I like it when a subject can have shades of grey, I love the term 'death of the author'. This preference meant I didn't do as well when the answers were black and white, I didn't enjoy chemistry, physics or even Spelling as much as the other subjects because I found 1 + 1 = 2 to be boring and having to follow a strict, single path to get an answer restrictive. I had no social pressures to pursue these other subjects yet I did because of the kind of person I am and that in no small part would have been affected by my sex.

[@adamc6243]

+TheTelenation I've noticed the same with myself and my sister. We are comparatively academically intelligent, if such a thing is possible, though she crushes me on social intelligence. Quite a few of our hobbies are the same. Yet she is "gifted" in creative writing and is better at history and specializes in classical literature and loves it, while I'm "gifted" in maths and specialize in machine drafting and solid modeling and look forward to the challenges involved and using my, yes it really exists, creativity to solve problems. Neither of us were "socially pressured" into our fields yet she has been told that the situation was due to misogyny and not our own desires. We both thought it was silly, and I don't believe she was ever told that she should have gone into the STEM field instead. But I started researching Feminists/MRAs after a coworker, female, lent me the book "Men on Strike" and got curious on the topic and now I'm feeling more offended by that comment than anything.

[@openSUSE5]

+Adam C Me and my little sister share a similar dichotomy. We're both intelligent. I'm into computer science, engineering, and math. She's into literature, biology, and is a talented artist and concert oboe player. We both share the fact that we're socially awkward. I feel bad for her though as I think it affects her more. I always wonder who's the smartest. She scored better than me in her SATs and got better grades in high school, yet when helping her study, I know that I was a lot more intelligent than her in my fields at her age. She lacks any real passion for how things work. When I was her age, I was obsessed with reading every single book on science I could get my hands on. I also read biographies on the Wright Brothers, Albert Einstein, Thomas Edison, Nicola Tesla, Alan Turing, just to name a few. I read introductory books on how nuclear reactors work. I had several manuals on Visual Basic and C++. This much is clear to me though, there can never be an accurate objective standard for measuring intelligence.

[@Spawn8214]

+TheTelenation According to feminism, you are too brainwashed to understand that you are brainwashed into thinking you like those things... when in reality, you actually don't like those things and aren't very good at them and should only like and excel at what the feminists tell you to.

[@sae4842]

Interest plays such a big part into the decision making. As a young girl, I preferred math and sciences over anything else just because 1+1=2. The single answer meant no ambiguity so there was always one correct answer. So I ended up in STEM. I think I was a bit simplistic... One exact answer = easier => math/science is easier => gotta study what comes easier to me.

[@drewyetti]

It's all about preferences by individuals

[@JonathanWeberese]

Notice, it's most often sociology, psychology, gender studies, or English majors saying that the hard sciences hate women. Ask them why THEY aren't in those fields, and they'll probably say "You think I want to be crunching numbers for the rest of my life?" No. I don't. That's exactly the point. I feel a lot of women wouldn't find many of the STEM fields very fulfilling. Many don't get the thrill whenever a speaker system is tweaked just right, or get quite the kick out of a rumbling car and the kick of a supercharger. Why? These are inanimate objects. "Your car goes fast, big whoop. Who does that help?" This isn't excluding women who love these sorts of things, it's acknowledging that, despite equal abilities in many ways, many women are fulfilled by things that STEM fields don't quite meet.

[@summeromaley4298]

You have a scientific evidence there my friend, it must be because women dont want to be "crunching numbers" for the rest of their life. Where did you publish the results of this research exactly?

[@fusion772]

you're exactly right - they are stupid bitches, and they HATE numbers and "boring" stuff like math, science and economics. By all means, stoopit bitches - stick to what you're good at - binge drinking and talking shit with your idiot girlfriends while watching Sex and the City!!! BAHAHAHAHAHA

[@nofybn7794]

You can't say bitches, we are NOT STUPID. Not loving math doesn't make us stupid. I should call you that. Your very sexist I can see and you need to deal with your issues of women and yourself. I don't do any of that! They are not idiots either. We are smarter then you, clearly. You might be slightly better at math but your very very lazy. You are only SLIGHTLY better not a million times better and we are really stupid.

[@crforfreedom7407]

It is not "all about preferences". That is complete and utter BULLSH&@. "Preferences" are not a root cause. They are an "Effect". They show the result of or signify the end behind the means of the crux issue. For instance the example given here with the College Board SAT results. MORE WOMEN ATTEND COLLEGE. Roughly 60% to 40%. But the study showed that for every 100 girls that scored 700+ on SATs, 187 boys did, showing a clear difference in avg. intelligence between men and women. It also explained the difference in mean IQ between races. Everybody today wants to think everybody is cookie-cutter "equal"/the same, but the fact is, we're not all "the same". We're different for what ever reason by race and by sex primarily, other factors too. It's not just the "choices" that divide us. Those are facts. We don't like them. People that have proven a median difference in IQs between races and sexes are run off campuses, shunned and thrown off KZbin, Twitter, Facebook, ETC. *But none of that changes the FACTS; We're not all the same. And the differences are there for MUCH MORE THAN CHOICE.*

[@GoddoDoggo]

While I don't think the low amount of women in STEM fields, or the low amount of men in social and life science fields is necessarily due to outright sexism and discrimination, I certainly think it has a lot to do with gendered expectations we've had for centuries, and that we're still somewhat fed today. I don't know how many times I heard growing up that, "Boys are better at math, boys are better at using tools, boys are tough and don't let things bother them" and "Girls are better at arts, girls are better with kids and animals, girls are good at expressing their emotions." I especially think the dichotomy of emotional expression might contribute to women often being more verbally expressive, and, obviously, the encouragement of the idea that "one gender is naturally better at this thing than the other" influences kids and young adults to head on a path that is more "fitting" for them. Heck, this was actually the reason for my own initial aversion to math. When I was struggling with it, my own high school math teacher outright said to me, "Well, you know, you shouldn't dwell on it so much, it's typical for girls to not be so good at math. It's just not for you." I wouldn't call him "sexist," he was a very nice and fair guy, but I do believe his idea was flawed. After he told me that, I did the bare minimum to pass math classes and focused on other pursuits. I'm somewhat upset about it now, though, because now that I'm teaching myself mathematics, I realize I can actually understand the concepts quite well. EDIT: Incidentally, I've also had long discussions with two of my male friends, both of whom is very quiet, and one of whom tends to bottle his emotions until he blows up. They've each complained that their dispositions stem from them often being told "You're a boy, you can't cry, you have to be tough" and similar notions while growing up. I don't think these expectations are fair to men OR women, honestly. We could stand to be a bit more careful in how we instill expectations in our kids.

[@CommissarWallace]

+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme While it is valid to say that we shouldn't place gendered labels on which field to go into, sometimes people should take the initiative themselves. People should want to defy the limits placed upon them by others, and do what they want. I'm reasonably talented at mathematics, but despite my teachers and my dad telling me to carry it on to degree level, I took History, and I'm far happier doing that. My Music teacher and Arts teachers both told me I was talentless, and now I can play bass guitar and I do my own sketches. I know that my own experiences aren't good evidence, but I really think that accrediting people's dispositions to certain fields to be down to the expectations others place on them removes the agency of the person in question. If someone isn't confident in you, f*** them. Do it anyway and then prove them wrong.

[@GoddoDoggo]

CommissarWallace That's fine and dandy for people with a lot of confidence in themselves and ambition, but not so much for people who are a bit insecure and unsure of what they want in life. I am a very non-competitive person, for example, so when I was a kid, if someone told me I couldn't do something, I didn't get all fired up and want to challenge them, I just kind of went, "Oh, well okay then" and moved onto something I was good at. It does strongly depend on personality type.

[@Spawn8214]

+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme So basically because YOU have a personality that caused you to give up on something because another person told you that you should, you think the world should change to cater people like YOU and forget people who aren't like YOU? And just because you were reasonably talented at something, doesn't mean it would have ever been a career path for you. Stop making the excuse that "Oh it might have been, but someone told me I couldn't do it". You don't have to be competitive to pursue your passion and to make that excuse is outright idiocy and generates propaganda. Guess what, I am very talented at Mathematics and Chemistry and everyone told me I could be a great Mathematician and/or excel at Physics or that I should get into Forensics/Chemistry (I was heavily pushed to pursue those areas by friends, family, teachers, peers, etc.). With all that encouragement, according to your logic and feminist logic, I would have definitely chose Mathematics, Physics, or a type of Forensics/Chemistry field as my career field right? Wrong! I chose Computer Science which is not very Mathematics extensive at all, far from Physics or Chemistry, but is what I was passionate about and what I love doing. Fields aren't gendered because society says, "this field is for men, that one is for women". It's because over time, more men naturally gravitated towards certain fields, and women naturally gravitated towards others. Then society recognized this pattern (as humans are amazing at recognizing and classifying patterns) and assumed it to be true. It's what we do as humans. So, if you took society out of the picture and let everyone choose their career fields with absolutely no societal pressure, you will see the EXACT SAME pattern. We've seen it through every society in history that we know about and even in modern societies where women are free to choose their paths with very little societal influences. In fact, in places where women are MORE free to choose, you see them gravitate away from Physics, Engineering/Technology, and Mathematics fields and pursue Education, Arts, and Life Sciences more often.

[@Spawn8214]

***** It's definitely not right when a female faces discrimination or harassment in male dominated fields (or anyone facing discrimination in any field). It's important to remember though that it's quite a small amount women who do experience this and the fields have vastly improved in the last decade (I work in Computer Science and I have never witnessed discrimination against a female during my time in this field). I do also feel though that a lot of women who complain that they have been discriminated against (e.g. my opinion was ignored because I am a women) often just assume what happened was due to them being female; when in reality, it was due to other factors and would have happened regardless of their sex. I have witnessed this first hand in a conversation I had a while back with a former female friend (former because she went radical feminist and decided I was a women-hater because I disagreed with some of her claims). Basically, she made the same claim as my example above about her opinion being ignored. I then asked her "How do you know it was because you were a women?". She replied "Because they were men". So she made a sexist assumption about the men because they were men. One of the guys she was talking about so happens to be a good friend of mine. I asked him about it and he said "No, we ignored her because she was being extremely rude to us and very pushy with her opinions". Kind of a tangent there, but I feel it outlines my views on this topic a bit more. All in all, it's not right when anyone faces discrimination, but it's important to weed out the propaganda vs actual discrimination and understand it's not as big of a problem as feminists claim it to be.

[@Runner50783]

+Lynne the Trendy Tetraodontiforme I know many brilliant woman from high school, none but one studied engineering, most went to medicine, biology, law school, etc... What is funny is that the biology class was about 90% females whereas most engineering curses is the complete opposite, except for Industrial  engineering  with about 50% split. I studied Systems engineering myself and I classes where always 70% male, In the workplace however, its about 90% as actually most females graduates pursued different paths, others remained in the field and I've yet to find one who is a stellar performer in programming, they become Project Managers, consultants, advisors but the technical stuff is not really of their interest, they care about managerial matters far more and are very well paid BTW.

[@Hiraghm]

In the 1980s (I think it was 1985), I read an article in a science magazine (Scientific American or Omni, or some such) about a study which had been done concerning how men and women viewed justice. The men in the study tended to view justice as punishing bad behavior and rewarding good behavior, while the women in the study tended to view justice as doing the least harm to the smallest number possible. The conclusion they drew was that this difference was a result of the evolutionary environment of the two sexes. Where early men went out on the hunt, early women remained behind at the camp. The hunting parties couldn't afford mistakes; someone could get killed or the whole tribe could starve. But, if a man took a chance, and succeeded, the tribe would eat well and prosper. He might find a new way to bring down game, or a new source of game, or a way to discourage other predators. Back at the base camp, there were left the children, the elderly and the infirm, with the women being the only wholly competent and capable people around to run things. In such a close quarters situation, interpersonal tensions could get out of control very quickly. The danger there didn't lie in making mistakes like misreading the trail or making a noise and spooking the game; the greater danger lay in growing antagonism, hostility and factionalism among various groups of the tribe. The women had the responsibility of keeping the lid on this cauldron of emotion. And so, the conclusion went, the tribes of the men who were best at taking, and most inclined to take calculated risks (and who didn't screw up repeatedly) prospered the most. The tribes with the women who were best able to deal with social drama also prospered the most. Evolution took its course, and the interests of men and women diverged slightly (but significantly).

[@bookguitarguy]

+Hiraghm Very interesting. Having majored in Anthropology, that sounds pretty reasonable to me. There's no doubt that lactation, pregnancy, and nursing young tends to make women value safety and security more than men, that's why men were forced to become the risk-takers, to protect the women and children-which is still going on today, in the age of toxic feminism.

[@Fish4Man61]

+Hiraghm I concur. This is a new, and interesting point of view I haven't heard before. Makes me think.

[@MrItsaplane]

Yeah except evolution hasn't progressed much between what we are now and when we had societies that actually lived in camps. We're not even talking 100k+ years....hell we're not even talking 20! You can't claim these interests are evolutionary stemming from a time where we haven't evolved much since, I'm not saying they're not evolutionary, only discrediting the example

[@eashansoni3761]

This very insightful

[@mr.whiskers3283]

@@MrItsaplane There was no reason to evolve much further once OP's last paragraph came to fruition. Why then, do you dismiss what OP wrote?

[@ScarlettM]

Becoming and working as a scientist is very hard, time consuming and requires a lot of sacrifices. If women turn away from scientific careers because some people think it's a man's job or because someone make a sexist remark or because of something they see on tv - then these women are not invested in scientific career strongly enough. If someone's comment or point of view is enough for them to quit - they don't love and desire this career strongly enough to last in it.

[@CH-ld3vm]

ScarlettM The thing is the workforce is tough. Your coworkers are not your friends they are your competition! If you wanna get to the top, it will be rough and brutal. Men will talk smack to men, men to women, women to men AND even women to women. It's not a gender issue. The road to the top is tough no one is gonna hold your hand and make you feel good

[@Amateur_Pianist_472]

Yes but if one gender gets constant bullying while the other gets hardly any, it's much harder for the female and very for men to just say that they weren't dedicated enough.

[@sachintarkar]

@Ciara He The environment you r stating is not applicable only to scientist who are mostly males but actually this is the complete life of males, we may have many friends, co-workers, relatives in our life but no one in actually cooperates u when u need, we r alone and always be alone in every moment in your life, we live a very harsh, bitter, real and competitive life thats why we are sometimes rude and down to earth in nature, we loves realty and truth instead of fancy and beauty in compare to females. We never ever get a single help from others without paying/batering. Your whole life spent on making others happy and successfully stand on their expectation but this harsh, bitter, real and competitive life and our attitute of preferring realty and truth first make us strong thats why sometimes we r able to do those things that females unable to do. Sorry to u and all females if this seems disagrees for u.

[@kattykleo8579]

You are severely underestimating the effect of cultural influence. *This gender gap in STEM is nonexistent in Africa, Asia and the Middle East.* Girls in these parts of the world perform as well (or even better) than boys in tests, in stark contrast to the US where boys far outperform girls. So this idea that women as a gender are "innately less interested" is bullshit. It is ALL cultural. And it starts young. In the US, girls are taught in many subtle, and not-so-subtle way, that math and science are not for them. If you grow up thinking that way, then of course there is a lower chance you will be able to develop that confidence or interest. It takes a lot to break through social barriers. I think you will find that many of the women in the US who break through those barriers were lucky enough to be raised by parents or teachers who did not play into those cultural stereotypes and were very encouraging. Not everyone is so lucky. Maybe if we didn't teach little girls that they should grow up to be Disney princesses or romance novelists, but rather provide them with STEM role models, that might help...

[@sachintarkar]

Katty Kleo let me give you a very simple example suppose one boy and one girl standing together at night in the pale moonlight both observe the pale moonlight and looks upward at the moon, now guess what going on in their minds??? Girl : Ohh god! what a beautiful night? Moon is shinning fabously! Just like a dream night, soo lovely ! wish i could have a dance with my dream boy in this beautiful moment. Boy : What the hell is this? moon is shinning so much and reflecting a huge amount of light. looks totally different, looks like a day in the night. How this is happening? and Why this is happening? whats going on there? why this happens occasionally ? I should definetly find and look into this. And this leads to a questioning and curious mind in the boys that substantially help them of being a logical, straight forward, truth and facts preferring person. Remember many great scientist has stated that " Science is the product and queen of Questions" If there is no question there is no science.

[@wizleyftw]

I'm in a computer science field and personally i couldn't give a crap if my co-workers are male or female, if they can do the job they deserve to be there, if they want the job they should work hard in University to get there. It has no impact on my life whether women choose to do a STEM field or not. It's up to them individually to choose there own goddamn path.

[@Drudenfusz]

We had quite a few brilliant female mathematicians in the past (Ada Lovelace and Emmy Noether to name two just of the top of my head). So, it is clearly not an inherent incapablity there, but I think that with many feminists playing the professional victim so often, it is no wonder that people start thinking women are incapable, since if there were capable they simple would shine in their fields. That is why I like the factual feminist here, has the original empowering feel to it, and not what feminism has become in general today, where it is no longer about solutions but only about finding who to blame.

[@okaro6595]

Nobody would have heard of those if they had been men. Also you do not get distributions. There of course are capable women, just fewer of them than men.

[@afilina]

I am very good in my field (computer science), and even *I* agree that on average, women don't follow the same methodical, rational thinking process that makes one excel in fields that require it. I also find that on average, men are not good communicators and diplomats. There will always be plenty of deviations from that average, because male and female brains are not black and white; they are a complex combination. This means that we shouldn't focus on statistical distribution of males and females in various fields, but rather whether we give the same chance to those who show an interest. So far, I think that we are doing alright, because I haven't encountered any noticeable resistance to my being female as I progressed through my computer science career. Women older than me in this field will disagree, but it does seem to improve over the generations.

[@mrmurphypiers1241]

Who are they.....?

[@ADerpyReality]

The unfortunate thing about Ada Lovelace is that her teacher/partner of what would become the first computer... Wouldn't let her do the communication and was to egocentric. She was taught all female and male subjects tutored because her mother was bitter about her father a poet. Which she also took interest in much to her mothers disappointment. She was also buried next to her father. Though I think that a genius or a prodigy are something much down to genetics... Your worst subject often becomes your best because of the extra time you had to spend on it. Or at least how I've found.

[@ronitdebnath]

An area is male dominated doesn't mean women wont be there you dumb. It means men outnumber women in that. To say it is a difference of ability is to say there will be more men than women at the very top or vice versa. Let's say you take the top 100 then...you will have skewed numbers not 50-50. That is very different from saying there will be no women. To say it ll be 70-30 or 80-20 in a world of equal opportunity is a perfectly reasonable position to take. So your examples of 3-4 female mathematicians don't prove that women are as good as men. They just prove that we can have very good female mathematicians (which I completely agree with. ). (I never think they will outnumber men) .

[@DanAvenell]

Have you noticed that 100% of 'stunts gone wrong' youtube videos involve MEN? Where are the women? Is the 'stunts gone wrong' community keeping out the females, possibly with rape threats or something? I demand a study NOW! (Oh and in case its suggested that women tend not to get stunts wrong, 100% of 'stunt is awesome' videos are by men too)

[@lolzohmygod]

Wtf??? I don't think that's the case. I guess women generally don't take on the risks and aren't interested in that sort of thing or are perhaps realistic? But where the hell did you get the idea that they would be kept out or "threatened with _rape threats_ or something"?? Also _demanding_ a study won't get you anywhere, who are you demanding anyway?

[@Tantive]

I think you missed the satire over your outrage.

[@camrynvb5803]

Kyle Richmond Because you’re stupid enough to do these stunts and you end up in the hospital. Please explain why men cause and end up in most firework accidents. Is it is because it’s fun? To you, yes. To us, no.

[@DoomRulz]

Keep 'em coming Christina! You're the best :-)

[@tommack9395]

I'm a Sr. Software Engineer, it comes down to interests and what you're passionate about. In the early 90's we had a programming manager resign, and so I reported directly to a Sr. V.P., She was an older lady - and very bright. I remember this one particular meeting with her, I had finished up on a project - which incorporated a very dynamic and data driven interface - and going over a code review with her. After going over my design and the code with her... she praised and thanked me, She said that I captivated her thoughts from the start with the sparkle in my eye and it'd been so long since she had designed and coded anything that she had forgotten how exciting and exhilarating designing and implementing an algorithm can be. ;) When I was a teen, one of my nephew's friends - a preteen at the time maybe about twelve years old - said something to my sister about the Eric Clapton song which was on the radio. "I get off on '57 Chevys, I get off on screaming guitars." "That's stupid, Who get's off on a car or a guitar?" is what he asked her... and she answered "Well many guys do, their eyes light up and they're into it..." - which of course I could relate to because I play guitar. In the later mid 90's I built a network in my home... I had set up four unix servers, and wired up four workstations (my pc and all the kids) to them, Every system involved I put together from motherboard up... plus coded much of the server architecture. I was particular in the scope of hardware - given what I could afford, but when I was through I had a system sporting three terabytes of just disk-space, and enough power I could actually support the systems I worked on at work ion them if I wanted - I could have been a disaster recovery site for them. When conversations came up at work about hardware and such many people came to me - even though I'm a software person. The typical guy would show tons of interest, and I recall some female colleagues ask me... "Well why would you be interested or even want to do that?" I said to them... well look at it like a toy, a hobby, and of course anything I wish to learn in the field ... new language, a new frame-work, new technologies I may do so on my own. "Boy and toys" people wonder why guys get excited over power tools, automobiles, home electronics, guitars and amps... and it beguiles my mind that few understand "interests".

[@jediknight38]

I spoke to a female science scholar and she said this; "Having to study everything about chemistry and physics was so hard, that more than once I actually wanted to quit. Until I realized that the only thing that stood in my way of advancing in my field of choice was me."

[@Christoere]

You are the first logical feminist that I have seen! It's great that you know what you are talking about unlike other feminists! I actually respect this feminist!

[@brianchen4671]

Ironically,according to mainstream feminists,she is an anti-feminist.

[@MyRofaith]

@@brianchen4671 I would agree she faces push-back, but only from the 3rd wave feminists, which are radical and entitled.... older school feminists at least consider what she has to say, some choose to reject it some choose to accept it. Both rational choices. For radicals, it's a religious choice, nary a cognitive thought-thread involved...

[@Sekir80]

I spent a lot of time these days on equality issues and finally found this. I'm glad beyond joy to see a woman, a feminist this rational! I strongly support discussion with her at the helm rather than the toxic ones. I believe a discussion with her and JP would look like a constructive one.

[@megdye236]

The biggest truth here. “There is no simple answer”

[@LawdyGawd]

I agree that lack of interest is the number 1 factor in why fewer women pursue STEM careers. I strongly object to this assertion that sexist discrimination is the universal experience of women in the sciences. I have received nothing but encouragement from both men and women. Men tell me how wonderful it is to see women in math. I worry that by telling girls they'll face endless sexism in the sciences, we're actively DISCOURAGING women from pursuing this interest.

[@openSUSE5]

+LawdyGawd I would say lack of interest and that fact that it's hard drives away most people, men and women. I really think that there is some truth that a lot of the men that pursue this broad field only have skills/passion for that subject whereas women who are capable in STEM also tend to be capable in many other subjects. I have met exceptional women in engineering, but they are few and far between.

[@summeromaley4298]

The fact that YOU received "nothing but encouragement" most certainly doesnt mean that all, or even majority of women receive encouragement. If one says they have experienced harassment and sexist criticism, by your logic, they just refuted your claim.

[@frederickgramcko5283]

Hey sock puppet alphabet avatar troll, get to fook out of this thread, go collect your paycheck from some alphabet soup agency, and get a life. And use your real name fooktard.

[@aarondavid5866]

lack of intelligence

[@genjaminfranklin]

Vice a versa to that person's claim as well. This is why anecdotes and hearsay have no place in an argument with a surplus of analytical and statistical data that hardly gets used, and when it does the anecdotes come pouring in. Feminism is powerful, but between the different facets and subcultures in feminism, there is hardly a concrete outline as to what the current statistics are and where we would like to be. The overarching message is simply that "we aren't doing enough" and that "women are getting the short end of the stick." Stats and figures when they're convenient, anecdotes when they aren't.

[@matthewatwood8641]

I've worked in male dominated professions my whole life. The people I'm used to working around are men; big ol' hairy, rough & tumble, hard working men. Whenever I've run across a woman in these professions, the men are delighted that she's there, and do all they can to support her and help her succeed.

[@KunChien]

from conversations on campus, i have found that there might be another difference between males and females. the motive for studying. of course i don't think the sample is representative, but from what i have heard, males study a subject, because they want to understand how it works. the females i have talked to, usually tell me that they want to get the education to get a better job and to earn more. if this is indeed a trend, then the motive might factor in as well. stem is hard. i can't imagine anyone doing stem, unless they really love the subject and have a legit personal interest, other than money.

[@bookguitarguy]

+Kun Chien Great point. I agree!!

[@verapamil07]

+Kun Chien Very reliable statistical analysis, "discussion on campus with friends". I hope you don't plan to have a career in science.

[@hellterminator]

+verapamil07 That's why he said things like “of course i don't think the sample is representative” and “*if* this is indeed a trend.” You don't need a big sample and rigid methodology to _formulate_ a hypothesis. You need these things to prove it but he doesn't claim to have done that.

[@tuckersmoak6632]

+Kun Chien Then why don't women go into a STEM field? With your logic, females would be going STEM in droves. Your logic is flawed.

[@hellterminator]

tucker smoak Because STEM is hard. If you only want a degree so that you can put a few nice letters after your name in your CV, you'll go for something like communication studies, not STEM.

[@daspits]

There is a simple way to tell if the discrepancy between men and women in STEM fields in the United States is due to biological or cultural differences. If you look at the percentage of women involved in STEM fields in other countries, you can easily see that there is more at play than just biological differences between men and women. For examples, the percentage of STEM researchers that are female in central Asian countries is 46% (see en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_STEM_fields). That is a much higher percentage than the United States, where it is around 24%. Clearly, culture is at play. Whether the difference is because of blatant sexism or perceived gender roles is another question altogether.

[@clausthomsen6410]

While there are certainly cultural differences between countries, there are studies that show, that if you ask men and women across cultures about their preferences, they remain largely the same. One possible explanation then, is that in these countries they lack the same sort of social safety-net that many western countries have, thus people of both genders are more likely to choose their careers based on things like job security or salary as opposed to what they wished they could do, e.g if getting a degree in computer science is more likely to guarantee you can find work, you might choose this, even if it's not your dream job. In fact, the more egalitarian a country becomes, the bigger the differences between what men and women choose to do. Link: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18712468 not sure if the full text is available anywhere for free.

[@zinab2blessa]

Good points.

[@bobs_toys]

I'd noticed this. I'm a Systems Administrator. To have a European woman working in a similar role to me is rare. To have an Asian is quite common. A part of me also wonders if parents having a higher say on what their children do in that culture has much to do with it. Edit: Didn't see (somehow) Kendra's response. That also makes a bit of sense. The Indian women I worked with in these roles had a tendency to be looking at leaving.

[@silkspice2013]

No female in the United States will ever catch up to the females in Asia South East and Middle East unless the bias disappears and it will not happen anytime soon because the culture has an obsession with stereotypes.

[@marko.rankovic]

Because men and women have their differences we are biologically not the same, that will obviously shape interests amongst men and women.

[@нямаиме-к]

+Marko Crush simple,short and completely true

[@agees924]

So are Scandinavians just different breeds then? That is not true in my engineering courses in Norway. It’s almost 50/50.

[@tankarmeng8982]

​@@agees924 It just one example man, are you stupid?

[@YD-uq5fi]

Engineering requires an IQ of at least 120 and the very few women who are smart enough for Engineering happen to be Asian. There. That is what it is.

[@stephenbrookes7268]

I was at secondary school during the 70s, an era that the gender bias in the work place became accutely apparent, and was addressed by legislation. At the end of our third year we took options for our exam courses. That year 76 was the first year that gender based classes ended. Girls could choose to study workshop, rural science and " Male" sports, and boys could do home economics, needle work and field hockey. One girl, the daughter of a well respected local mechanic, joined our metal work course. Did this girl suffer from discrimination? Was she teased, bullied and harassed? Did she get unfairly down marked? No! We boy students loved having a girl in our previously male only class. She was treated as an equal. She once asked me to demonstrate a practical skills in a lathe, she watched closely how I used my hands, where my eyes were focused and other details of the task. She then replicated my actions and felt the tool cutting the metal. She was welcomed and admired by us all for being the only girl in the school to walk into man world and be as at home as any of us. Men (real men) never discriminate against women. The older guys did make fun of newbies, the young entrants or apprentices, as was done to them. If anything women entering these male dominated industrial professions cut a lot of that out, mostly because men (real men) would not haze the young girls cos it would be unacceptable, so we young guys got an easier ride. Females that do not succeed are not failing because of men, they are failing because they are less able to do what they have chosen, in exactly the same way that some men fail when they try to do something they just aren't any good at. Women have many innate abilities that men may never learn, and vice versa, yet we all have a natural trait which some people make a point of learning to ignore. That we are complimentary, we need eachother to make a world.

[@MrAggelers]

Wow, that‘s what I call an objective, non-biased and fact based analysis of the topic, well done! Just a shame that our media and politicians simply seem to lack these skills.

[@pisbell24]

Christina Hoff Sommers is such a nice breath of fresh air.

[@yaninaikei9197]

This subject really interests me and I would certainly like to read more about it. So I would like to know if you could share the sources of these studies. Maybe sharing them on the video description, that would be awesome!

[@maskie4189]

Tbh, the gender gap in STEM fields actually makes it easier for individual women to get into these fields, because there is less competition. This also ignores regional differences, like how it is easier to get into a good college with a STEM degree in Utah than Texas. However, these differences are ignored in favor of peddling the same flawed narrative.

[@yusukeurameshi6490]

I love the fact that you actually leave comments open. Alot of videos talking about things like this don't.

[@elamiri858]

3:58 this is so true! My math teachers keeps telling me i should study pure mathematics, but i'm honestly more interested in other things, and good at them as well.

[@thelovebat]

Hi there, I had a question. I'm a male and have autism, asperger's syndrome to be exact. From what I understand, research and studies indicate that around 9/10 people diagnosed with asperger's syndrome are men, and as a result heavily outnumber the amount of women out there who have asperger's. Many people who have asperger's tend to have difficulties with socializing and communication, and dealing with different forms of social norms and other things. They also tend to have extreme interests in a select few things or subjects, focusing on them quite often which is something that's useful in fields that rely a lot on data, memorization, numbers, etc. Seeing as how a majority of the math, physics, and engineering fields seem to have a much higher amount of men pursuing them than women, do you think there might be any link between the fact that a much higher percentage of those who have autism are men and not women? Considering the large rise in the amount of people who are diagnosed with autism/asperger's syndrome I think this might serve to explain a little bit why there are more men which choose jobs/fields that involve less social interaction and less working with people compared to the fields that women choose.

[@luciabevilacqua5623]

Female with Asperger's syndrome here. Yes, it seems totally plausible. While math isn't particularly fascinating for me (as typical for a female), it definitely is my forte, especially because quantitative data and systematic thinking come naturally to me and I'm quite socially inept. Dr. Asperger himself, the original researcher of the condition, even said that "a dash of autism" is essential for success in such fields.

[@MASTERARTGOD]

Lucia Bevilacqua you guys honestly no offense have the worst possible name for a disease for people who are socially inept through no fault of their own

[@luciabevilacqua5623]

MASTERARTGOD First of all, it's not a "disease." Second of all, there's more than just social aspects of the condition. Not that this goes against the point of your comment; I just wanted to point those out.

[@MASTERARTGOD]

I know there is more just part of it is that. Should rename it something better. it is the equivalent of naming something nastkin and its a skin disease because that is the last name

[@ZDanimations]

If you think being an engineer or it/cs major means you arent working with other people that often, you are in for a rude awakening. You'll be working in a team of engineers and developers throughout your coursework and career. I am constantly dealing with people. New kids dont understand this when they choose these professions.

[@truvc]

I'd love if you sourced your claims. I absolutely believe them, but anyone who hears things they aren't inclined to believe already will ask for proof, and if it's not there will immediately reject it. They'll probably reject it with proof anyway, but it helps to have the evidence to stand on for the minority of people who care.

[@AnonymousC-lm6tc]

Why would you believe her without proof of her claims?

[@beegee1960]

Everyone seems to be concerned about why there are not more women in math and engineering classes like it is a bad thing. But no one seem to be concerned about why there are not more men in the classes dominated by women. They don’t see that as a bad thing. Why is it more desirable for women to move into areas that have traditionally male than the other way around. Is that not itself a devaluation of women, isn’t that saying what men like and want is more important than what women like and want. Feminists can’t seem to decide just what it is they want.

[@freeze4728]

There aren't more female working on being construction worker, miner and bricklayers.

[@jhonstiner7065]

I have to say, you're a breath of fresh air. You're actually looking at these issues from a logical standpoint and proving with evidence every claim you make. I'm so sick and tired of all the professional victims that flood modern feminism. I wish all feminist were like you. I have one question though: Why feminism and not humanism?

[@joo069]

I'm about to read the comments. Bracing for feminists trying to argue the facts that Christina has clearly laid out for us.

[@licensedblockhead]

this is a safe space. we have outlawed feminism. you will not find it

[@MrHippo08]

I know that your comments are old, but I hope that as time has passed you've realised that she is a true feminist. Working with proper studies to enlighten the viewers of how men and women are both different and equal.But I'd asume that the term you two are looking for is feminazi, whom is just as sexist as the polar opposite.

[@juulgod1126]

Lyrical Masochist Chan damn lol someone taking a 7th grade logic class

[@MrHippo08]

***** There's a huge difference between being identified by their Place of birth and being identified by an ideology. As example, a person that identifies as a nazi but is married to a person of a different "race" and has no desire for a "third reich". Would you say that this person is a true nazi just because he sais that he identifies with it?

[@MrHippo08]

I can see your reasoning and do not share the idea that an ideologi is determined by the ones that claims to belong to the ideologi but instead that a person can be identified by the opinions that z has and that they can be linked to ideologies. Irrelevant though as Christina identify herself as a "factual feminism" which I agree with by writing "true feminist" as factual and true are synonyms.

[@michaelt4466]

Holy ninjas. This frank and logical discussion of the issues without anger, contempt, or demonizing opposing views is so refreshing. This is the third video I've watched, and I have to say if everyone were to approach such complex issues so dispassionately, it would make the whole world a better place. Imagine if Hillary and Donald sat down together and talked like this instead of...well, what they're doing.

[@Howleebra]

men and women are radically different... just look at the toys children play with and the games they construct.

[@rosaindica7896]

Women need to get exposed to more role models. Like, ask anyone about female models or pornstars, they will write down a book. But just ask em to name a few female mathematician they will shut their mouths. Its not that there are not women mathematicians. We just don't know about them. We need good idols like Tinker Bell who is an engineer. Girls should watch better movies than Cinderella. Know about Hedy Lamarr and not the men entertainer Marilyn Monroe. I am just so frustrated to see a hell lot of women in porn companies which ruin the natural image of women, but just a few women in tech. Its depressing. I aspire to be a software engineer. And I will surely start an organization to expose talented and brainy women engineers to young girls. We need more women in tech.

[@Bevsworld04]

Let people watch what they want. Young girls will naturally gravitate to princess movies since... well... its magical and there are girls in them. Young boys will gravitate more to the action movies (still child friendly, of course) such as herculese and other stories which involve a heroic protagonist. The kids will probably find the types of exposure you're talking about too boring and uninteresting as they know nothing about it and don't understand what they are

[@bztheman]

Can you please cite your sources in the description field? It'd help me dig deeper into these studies. Thanks!

[@XxUberlostERxX]

Finally, a feminist that uses fact.

[@TheMazosia]

Hello, Ms Sommers! I have just watched your video and I think it's amazing. You are the voice that I was looking for in my relation to modern feminism. Recently I have also looked into this matter out of pure interest -- I am a female student, that will soon earn BSc in Mechatronics and Astronomy and I was wondering why more women in my country (Poland) choose biology, chemistry and medicine over engineering courses focused on building machines. All of those require understanding math and physics, remembering huge amounts of data at once and hours of terrible laboratory work (and in my opininon medicine and biology require a lot of cold blood). Moreover BSc or MSc courses in physics that are related to biology and/or chemistry are full of young, clever ladies. Not to mention courses that are aimed at students that wish to become school teachers in future. I have found a couple of articles about this matter that pointed out that women choose biology, chemistry, medicine, education (also bio- or chemical engineering) etc. over other STEM courses because after earining their title, they can work with people or find new medicine and what-not, that will be useful for the society. Basically, ladies want to do somegood for other people rather than earn a lot of cash and/or earn eternal glory in the field of science. (I am aware, that men want to do good too, of course, but it doesn't make them pick medicine over physics as often as women do.) Here are links to those articles: www.apa.org/monitor/sep03/clues.aspx www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/03/090303082807.htm ns.umich.edu/Releases/2003/May03/r052203.html www.nytimes.com/2013/10/06/magazine/why-are-there-still-so-few-women-in-science.html?pagewanted=all&_r=1& A couple of days ago I have read a new article on a related matter: www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding Have you any information about some other research done, that would explain such drop in the number of ladies studying computer science? It is hard for me to belive that such sudden drop was caused only by the things that were listed in this article. My only intuition is that nowadays most of science fields require coding in one way or another: biology, chemistry, engineering, economy, physics and astronomy cannot simply do without programming and maybe there are those girls that like to code. Lastly, I would like to tell you that I wish I have found your channel eariler (I found about it through the whole Gamer-Gate drama). I really like how you try to analyse both pro and agaist arguments for some thesis, that you check a lot of articles and researches on the matter and how you provide a well-balanced view. I hope that you will stick around for a while here. (And I also hope I haven't made your eyes bleed with my broken English.)

[@mudita4449]

I feel like the less participation of women in the fields of science is due to a variety of reason - First of , before 2000s women were not considered capable of pursuing a career in science . Second, interest . It is absolutely true that most women tend to be more interested in subjects like literature, psychology etc. Rather than maths or physics . I myself am someone who prefers history over maths . It is simply a matter focusing on making a career in one subject rather than another. Third , sexsim. Subjects like math , science and physics are always considered to be better suited for guys. Which is something I strongly disagree with . I have seen equally skilled , smart and hardworking people ( both male and female ) capable of striving in the field of science.

[@EducatedMoron_]

Personally, i think all this fuss about "Lack of women in STEM" is because in many places, a student taking up science is seen as more intelligent than those with non-STEM degrees. Since so many women take up non-STEM subjects, there is a call for representation of more women in STEM subjects, because some people think that there is a stereotype that girls are less intelligent than boys and so they don't take up science in college or loose interest in STEM.

[@hhp3]

There is an explanation you left out. Studies indicate that women and men have the same mean IQ but for men, the standard deviation is greater. Among the really stupid, there are more men. Among the smart, there are also more men. The STEM fields may be truly more difficult than other fields; if so, you are looking at an activity where very high IQ is required. There are simply more men than women who are intellectually qualified. As a professor of Computer Science, I think this explanation accounts for part of the gender disparity in my field. PS: great videos!

[@jimsimpson1006]

I believe this is borne out by a large set of data that involved 20 million subjects who took an IQ test, with a 50/50 male to female ratio. At the mid-point in the IQ bell curve, where IQ is standardized at 100, the male to female ratio is 1 to 1. No big surprises there. However, at the very high, rarified "genius" end of curve (160 or greater) the male to female ratio becomes around 8 to 1. But to even mention such things in the present climate is to risk the full fury of the diversity people.

[@dmli1023]

I remember a professor said that he had A+ female student but changed her major due to the engineering being the male dominant field. Regardless, during my days in the university, I have witnessed more and more female engineering students each year. I think one of the major reasons that there are a lot less females in STEM fields is that young girls are taught prejudicially by parents and other adults. Often, people from the world perceive that girls are incapable of doing engineering related works. I remember one time at an office where two young girls talking about colleges that they were applying. One said that she wanted to study Architecture, but abruptly interrupted by a woman receptionist who said to the young girl that she could not do so because she was a girl. Well, that was just a few years ago. Adults and parents should ENCOURAGE girls and boys of what they dream to do. I agree that girls and boys have different interests, but is it really because she is a girl or he is a boy or is it because we are all individuals and born with a set of unique genes? If we can take off our color glasses when looking at boys and girls, I think there will be a fair amount of female and male students in STEM fields.

[@TheNinerion]

"You can do what you will, but you can't will what you will." (Hegel?) The interesting question here is: in how far are the different interest that men and women have societal or biological, and, should that matter? If women's lack of interest in STEM fields is societal, then what can we do? They are free agents capable of their own choices, even if those choices are influenced by society, we cannot simply reach into the system and willfully manipulate what women want according to what we want, for that would be a violation of their agency.

[@ShadeSlayer1911]

TheNinerion That's exactly what I'm saying.

[@THElovemusicnerd]

IF ONLY we were all at liberty to CHOOSE a degree in what we are truly interested in. Some have to get a degree in another field because of financial status, family, time of completion, expected gender roles, job security, salary, etc.. I am a woman interested in Astrophysics but I don't get financial support from my family. I worked for years to save up money for school and unfortunately, I just don't have the money to go into it because of the time of completion. I need a degree in something I can get a better job in right after getting a B.S..I am hoping to minor in Physics and get a Master's more align to my interest down the line.... And I know many MEN who enjoy literature, art, music, etc., but don't go into the fields because they have to be the "providers" and would not be able to do so with the salary that typically comes with those fields.

[@danpatterson8009]

Discrimination against women in STEM? Point to it. Point to a written policy or rule discriminating against women. Point to any professor or administrator saying that they don't want women in their classes. Point to any company that prefers to hire men for those positions, and explain how they get away with it, how the law prohibiting it is somehow not enforced or evaded. Show me.

[@BOYSWILLBEBOYS2010]

Does no one else find it insanely hilarious that the women pushing for more women in STEM are themselves refusing to go in to those fields? It’s so far out of hand now, there are literally thousands of women going to college to learn a skill they hate. Ladies, Gentlemen & Etc.., enough is enough, seek out that which makes YOU happy and stop listening to those that truly have no interest in your life!

[@AnnaTheFallMaiden]

I think that "different people have different interests" is true, BUT there is a certain societal pressure that forces young people to behave the way they do. If I said as a boy that I like horses, a lot of the other boys would tell me that I'm gay, so naturally I'd suppress this tendency, until I would no longer like horses. Another example: Now that I'm 20, I would rather not tell most of my friends that I would be interested in working as a make-up artist, for the same reason stated above. And I think that the exact same thing applies to girls/women aswell

[@Lyridsreign]

Lordjiraya To be quite honest if you let High School bullies make career decisions for you, I think it's time you re evaluate yourself as a person.

[@AnnaTheFallMaiden]

Lyridsreign i'm not talking about high school bullies, i'm talking about personality shaping from an early age. it happens everywhere, not only in school or with other kids. have you ever heard the term "don't be a girl"? such ..i dont want to call it abuse, but that's what came to mind...especially at a young age shapes your mindset pretty hard I would totally work as a make-up artist, if I had the time to learn it, I just said that I wouldnt say that infront of most of my friends

[@kazuya246]

Lordjiraya Your claim is completely unfounded. Please show me a study that proves that women are discouraged by society to enter STEM fields. With regards to your horse example; if boys are so discouraged from enthusing in horses, why do male jockeys outnumber females 4 to 1? Also why are approximately 95% of jockeys participating in horse races, in the UK, male? Your reasoning suggests that men should be oppressed here.www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167268115000062

[@AnnaTheFallMaiden]

kazuya246 oh lord, how have i sinned to deserve this molestation by fools?

[@TJsaysHey]

Lordjiraya lol you made a baseless and near idiotic comment and when confronted with evidence to the contrary, you resort to dramatic declarations that ignore the points being made against you. You reek of an SJW. Also, there are two types of people in the world, and they're not defined by their gender. They are trailblazers and the ones that need the trail blazed first. If you can not handle idiotic criticisms and discouragement during your pursuit to whatever it is you want, then quite frankly, you do not deserve to reach your goal. Lastly, culture and society can influence, but it can never make a choice for you. Blaming 'personality shaping in childhood' is for foolish perpetual children.

[@drifter23337]

A recent study has shown that, when people are in a society that provides for them what they need for survival, and they can focus on what they REALLY want to do with their lives (I guess you could call that "self-actualization"), we see MORE sexual dimorphism in interests - In other words, men will go to what they are naturally interested in (math, hard sciences, engineering), and women will do the same (go towards humanities, social sciences, etc....)....If you give people equality and prosperity and they no longer have to worry about basic survival, then this will, counter-intuitively and ironically, lead to fewer women in the STEM fields....Women from foreign countries like India are more likely to be interested in STEM fields than American women because they are trying to secure a life for themselves and a better life for their children, rather than trying to do what they really are interested in...Thus, they go where the money is - in STEM....and so this tells you why people may not have as much respect for the "soft" sciences as they do for the "hard" sciences, and why feminine things are undervalued - they are less lucrative, and so the feminists seem to not want equality, but to put women in the hard sciences because it's probably part of their VENDETTA against men - their desire to oppress and disenfranchise them!....So, if you want more women in STEM....take away their entitlements and hand-outs and make them have to scrape by to survive, and then they will go where the money is - in STEM! Anyone else have any thoughts on this theory/my interpretation?

[@EducatedMoron_]

ummm... I didn't read the full Paragraph, but i saw you have written that more women in India than in US are in STEM. Well, that's true. Its called "Gender Equality Paradox". According to this, women in gender egalitarian societies tend to deviate away from STEM. There is a Wikipedia page about it.

[@unknownboy8202]

We boys are actually smarter than girls😂

[@SteelCowGirl4Ever]

I'm not sure why men don't think women have the intellectual capacity to work in stem fields. I had no issue majoring in science and graduating at the top of my class as an honors student. I then went on to become a full-time laboratory technician in the stem field of Genetics & Ancestry. And I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be here getting paid a comfortable living salary for the work I do if I truly sucked at it. Lol I would say remarks such as yours are commonly made by incel males that are stuck doing b**ch work in retail, or idiot work in warehousing and manufacturing because the greater majority of you are choosing to either drop out of high school or not go on to college. Not my problem! Lol

[@tachometer-flac]

@@SteelCowGirl4Ever Your comment proves the point. Name calling instead of staying on topic. That's what 90% of you do.

[@SteelCowGirl4Ever]

@@tachometer-flac So because I used the word "incel" to describe what are basically lazy individuals, that's considered "name-calling?" I can think of worse phrases. Anyway, sorry if you can't handle the facts. lol

[@officialbenzine4075]

​@@SteelCowGirl4Everjust shut it woman, I can't take you serious at all, are you crying right now?😂 You should quit that profession you are doing bcs trust me women will NEVER be taken seriously in science related fields bcs it's simply not made for women!

[@JunFan777]

Electrical engineer here, minor in physics. Honestly, I honestly loved my classes so much, especially physics, it rarely seemed like work to me. I would even do physics and dif eq problems in my free time. I frankly took to it like a fish to water, and knew i found my calling. My grandfather was a chem engineer who developed fuels for the Gemini missions but was lost in most social situations, just like me. My mother is a physician as is my sister and aunt, their patients always comment on their bedside manner and how at ease they make them feel. Yet I've had to tutor them both in higher math when they went back for continuing ed. Point is, I realize there are always exceptions but I've certainly noticed a lack of woman in My classes and work. And frankly the few I've met never seem to b as excited about the material as I am and always struggle in class. Maybe we need to allow all of us to play to our natural strengths and not cram the square peg in the round hole.

[@jrace4179]

Even in northern European countries where they pretty much eliminated discrimination in employment, the STEM fields are overwhelmingly male, not surprising since men tend to gravitate toward working with things while women tend to like working with people more.

[@jimsimpson1006]

But what we have now is an obsessive ideology hell-bent on changing that, even if it means frog marching girls into engineering.

[@ShadeSlayer1911]

For those of you complaining about cultural and societal pressures shaping interests and personalities, yeah, so what? Why is that a bad thing? It's called free will. Some people will go with the flow and do what society expects of them. Others rebel and do the unexpected. What are you going to do about fewer women being less interested in STEM fields? Force them to go into fields they're just not interested in and not as competent in? Have quotas (you must have this many women in this field)? Tell them that the only reason they're not interested is just cuz how they were raised? If you should do anything, it's encourage more women to enter STEM fields, but I suspect that even then there would be fewer women. Why? Because there are just some differences between men and women. Humans are a dimorphic species. This should not be that hard to understand. And if you do want to disproportionately encourage women over men to enter STEM fields, are you not then being sexist? And if you encourage both sexes equally to enter STEM fields, well...don't most public schools already do that by requiring students to take chemistry, math, biology, etc classes? You may think that it's a problem that more men than women enter STEM fields, but why do you think there must be equal numbers in the first place? People just have different interests. And whether that interest is culturally or socially enforced/ingrained, that is still their own choice. You have no right telling them that they should instead go into a field that they don't like just because you think there has to be more women.

[@nuzzlebunny7829]

ShadeSlayer1911 Thank you for this. :) I was encouraged to go into the STEM field just as much as all the boys next to me in my physics classes. And I finished through with it, when all of them did not. I grew up in the same culture as them, but I decided to do what I am good at just like they did.

[@caralynn7807]

ShadeSlayer1911 I completely agree with you. Another thing many people seem to forget is that although the world is becoming more "modern" and there are more women in the workplace now than say, twenty years ago, I truly believe that the majority of women still have the desire and instinct to become caregivers. That is to say that a lot of women may go into the workforce, but eventually leave to start a family. Sometimes they may come back, but at that point, they have a gap in their work history, and often must start from square one again. My mother has a BS in Mechanical Engineering, but only worked in her field for a few years before starting a family with my father. By the time she went back to work, she was so far behind in her field, she would have had to attend refresher courses and learn fifteen years worth of technology advances. Though that prospect was daunting, my mother admitted that she really wasn't interested in returning to that field because she now had different passions and interests and would rather do something different. There was nothing wrong with that, but I truly believe that is the case for many women, though I only have anecdotal and observational evidence for my claims.

[@Wolkenschauer]

ShadeSlayer1911 Thanks =) I am a girl in STEM and I always get annoyed when people make it a huge matter. I was interested in it, I was kind of talented and I liked the idea of earning decent money (which put it above arts, another field I was interested and talented in). It wasn't a huge accomplishment to make that decision but following through with it required a lot of hard work - just like for the males. Do I support bringing girls in touch with STEM? Yes, I generally support the idea of bringing kids in touch with as many different fields as possible so they discover their interests. Do I think that girls interested in STEM should be supported? Yes, but by providing role models and offering help for common problems (for example combining family and work) for both genders. They shouldn't get preferential treatment - it can actually make things worse as it fuels Impostor's Syndrome which is very common for girls anyway. I always was proud that I could keep up with the best guys in my grade and sometimes even surpassed them. Any kind of special treatment would have drove me away from STEM because it inevitably bears a tag of "You can't make it on your own". Actually, one of the things I like most about STEM is that only your performance counts. People don't care about my gender or my looks, they care about me doing a good job. Do I think that there is something wrong if it's not 50:50? Not at all. The focus should be on the individual not on the final result. If there are 55% women in a field but even more would have liked it but felt unwelcome, that's still awful. On the other hand, if there are only 15% women in a field but others simply prefer other pursuits, that's totally fine. From my observations, the vast majority of girls just isn't interested in STEM that much. That's fine but there are still exceptions and as long as these get a fair chance, I'm fine with whatever percentage turns up in the end.

[@timbretrent113]

+Suzume Aoyama Have you experienced sexism in your studies?

[@jroche6]

+ShadeSlayer1911 The voice of reason.

[@JarinXeno]

I got my degree as a computer engineer and currently work in IT security. I can tell you unequivocally that there is no gender bias against women. If anything there is a bias against men, especially white men. As a white man to get into my degree program I had to have stellar grades and a good score on the SATs. For a minority the bar was much lower and for a woman they pretty much only had to be able to sign their name on the application. If there are less women in STEM fields it is not because there is a bias against them it is because less women apply. Same thing in the working world. It is far easier for a woman to get hired or promoted and management positions are handed out to women like candy. Why? Well its not because women work harder or are more knowledgeable then men, its because there is this mistaken idea that women should be given preferential treatment because they are underrepresented. I am all for equality, but it needs to be equality of opportunity not equality of result. Equality of result is what we have in our current system. Lowering the bar for women and minorities in the hopes that it will result in an equal amount of men and women in the field. The standards should be the same for everyone regardless of if they pee sitting down or standing up.

[@masterh9795]

Unless you're Asian, then the bar stays. :(

[@jimsimpson1006]

Lowering the bar for any group of people, whether they be women, minorities or even men for that matter, must surely result in a lowering of standards. I believe that "Equality of outcome" is a brain-dead dogma that will eventually backfire badly on everybody.

[@TravisWizard]

thanks mom

[@vivianledonghae4eify]

How come I never feel like that while everyone is talking about biased against women???

[@johnterry6541]

Even within life sciences, there are highly technical areas where males outnumber females, such as in molecular biology that may involve cloning and protein engineering work. I wonder why.

[@SteelCowGirl4Ever]

I'm not sure why men don't think women have the intellectual capacity to work in stem fields. I'm a woman that grew up with a lifelong passion for Science and agriculture. And had no issue majoring in science and graduating at the top of my class as an honors grad. I then went on to become a full-time laboratory technician in the stem field of Genetics & Ancestry. Everyday I'm faced with situations where problem solving is a must, and where change is a constant evenflow in the data collections I process each day. So I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be here getting paid a comfortable living salary for the work I do if I wasn't any good at it. Lol To be honest, I have no idea what the woman in this video is complaining about. There are hundreds if not thousands of women like me serving in stem fields of all different types. But men are raising just as many complaints for some reason. I feel like a lot of the narrow-minded opinions come from guys who are stuck working in warehousing, retail, carpentry and manufacturing. Most men just don't seem happy in those lines of work anymore. But they don't want to meet the academic requirements necessary for an actual career by going to college. So Ive gotta wonder, how are women to blame for a man's lack of motivation and ambition?

[@GiveMeMarw]

One argument my dad always makes...If there are so many women doing the humanities (English, history etc) then what women are there left to do maths and such? Say there are in a English course 20% men and 80% women, then how is it not odd that there are 20% women and 80% men in physics?

[@aaron4820]

Could you do a video specifically on the "John / Jennifer" STEM study?

[@jerryberry396]

It's almost like feminist want the degree and not put the work in. Something for nothing I say.

[@ChaosAngel667]

The asymmetrical cognitive profile theory also explains why males put more effort on a single subject than females. That is because we males have no other choice. I take myself as an example. I am good at math, programming, investigation and pattern recognition. But I suck at everything that requires human communication. I can't read facial expressions, understand the differences in the voice when someone is trying to make understand "between the lines" or what body language is supposed to mean. So I had to specialize in math and programming because I had no other way to capitalize my work and survive. Now lets imagine there is a girl just as talented as me in math, she would be equally talented in human communication so she would have infinite more options than me to capitalize her work. She can (A) specialize in math and dedicate 100+ hours a week to study or (B) specialize in something easier and yet more profitable. The smart route is (B) so its obvious every smart women will choose it. The ones that doesn't are girls who like me lack the human communication skills to choose anything else but those girls are really scarce.

[@a.od-reszki4674]

Female chem major. Never faced any form of sexism at my department.

[@cryofpaine]

Classic strawman. "It's either they suck at it, they're discriminated against, or they just don't want to." It's more complex than that, especially when you get to the "they don't want to" option. We are creatures of society as well as biology. If you are correct, and it does reflect a fundamental difference in the interests of men vs. women, what causes that difference? Is it simply inherent in our biology? Or, is it the message society sends to girls that they shouldn't be interested in that stuff? Are teachers doing enough to foster an interest in STEM careers in the girls they teach? Are we welcoming to women who want to go into those careers, or do they find themselves ostracized from the rest of their male classmates? We may not be telling them no - in other words, we may not be discriminating against them - but are we actually telling them yes? There are many many factors that go into a person's behavior and thinking, and this doesn't even scratch the surface. You can't possibly make any kind of conclusion based on the little amount of data presented here.

[@JoViljarHaugstulen]

cryofpaine Why is it important to foster an interest in STEM careers in women and not for instance a military career? Why should we try to get more women or men into a field? Just because it would be nice and equal if there was about 50/50 men and women in all careers and jobs? Should we also then try to foster interest in men to become nurses? Or women to become construction workers or miners? Where does the line go? What is the goal?

[@cryofpaine]

Jo Viljar Haugstulen We need to encourage an interest in STEM fields because those are the careers in the future that are going to have the most growth, and are going to shape the future. And we should absolutely be encouraging more interest in other areas as well - politics, business, etc. Miners or construction workers don't benefit from a more diverse viewpoint, nor do they provide any specific benefits to entering those fields, so we would no more encourage women to join them than we would men. But in areas of intellectual pursuits, diversity is absolutely a benefit. A different viewpoint can provide answers that would never be found otherwise. And yes, we should try to foster an interest in men to join predominantly female-populated careers as well, such as nursing or teaching. Those industries would benefit from having a different view, and the men entering them would benefit from the experience of a career that gives them a different view than they would normally get in a male-centric career.

[@Furzkampfbomber]

The argument might be partially incomplete, but calling the whole thing a strawman argument is wrong, since the provided reasons *are* possible and valid reasons for the problem. I partially agree with the notion that there are social mechanisms which subliminally influence interests and that there still are some quite un-subliminal mechanisms in effect. But a lot of that has changed already. I am a male nurse and although in earlier days a man with with intentions of becoming a nurse would have been frowned upon, those days are long gone. In fact, men are encouraged to become a nurse and almost 100% of my female co-workers are glad if they have a man in her shift - and not only because we are better with the lifting, but also because we bring different qualitites than our female co-workers. Otherwise at least here in Germany girls and young women are massively encouraged and supported in every possible area. The female : male ratio at universities is already 60 : 40 in Germany, schools; universites and even big comanies have huge and expensive support programs. And yet the female : male ratio in some areas is still not what some people would like to see. My sister, for instance, is way better in math than I am. She decided to study engineering and when she started, the female : male ration was about 30 : 1. And after a year or so and before she dropped out to eventually study social studies, she was the last female remaining. This was clearly not the falt of society, since her university went to great lengths in order to raise the ratio of females in those fields. The only problem... not a single fuck is given amongst female students and aspirants. I see quite another problem nowadays and it originates from the very "Oh god, our poor females get left behind" hysteria. Nowadays, changes are good you will get left behind in case you are a boy. If a girl decides to non-academic career path, everyone screams bloody murder. What went wrong? Why is she not interested in an academical grade and career? Was she not supported enough? Was she somehow hindered? If a boy decides to choose a non-academical carrer, oh well, he is a boy, what do you expect. Boys get left behind in schools, they get left behind in universities, they get left behind by support programs and they surely get left behind by politics to a point where I feel that this has already become inherent in our society. We have "Girls days" in universities, in companies and in all kinds of other areas, but so far I have *never* seen a boys day anywhere. And the overwhelming majority of children diagnosed with ARDS and drugged and sedated with Ritalin are male, at least in Germany. Boys *are* different, they usually have a way higher need for physical activities, for instance. They tend to be louder, generally more aggressive (not necessarily in a violent way, that is) and less quite than girls - and we can't have that, can we?

[@lamentate07]

As opposed to the strawman that it's based entirely on discrimination? Encouraging men into 'female professions' will only serve to lower their status. It's a stupid idea. Men will always be judged on their status. No amount of idealistic thinking is going to change that. The reason feminists advocate that is because they want power, not equality. They treat power like a zero-sum game.

[@refusingrumination]

You're under the assumption that someone is forcing women to choose non STEM careers with a gun to their head. It sounds like you're blaming society for women's choice to deny a higher education of their own free will. I myself am a man and I will not do what anyone thinks I should do even if it pays more. Women are victimizing themselves when they let others influence their decisions.

[@spooks160]

i know this is anecdotal, but i went from studying engineering to science (~5 years in tertiary education) and not ONCE did i encounter any kind of discrimination based on my gender, nor have any of my female peers. colleges and workplaces are generally provided incentives for undertaking x% of females - hell, my engineering college had so many *female only* scholarships and internship opportunities. when these feminists make out that discriminatory views against women in stem are prevalent throughout our society, it REALLY rustles my jimmies. this simply cannot be further from the truth.

[@barrygormley3986]

It's obviously discrimination. After all, there's nothing men hate more than having young, attractive women working in the same field, and possibly the same lab/office as them. That prospect has no appeal whatsoever for the average man, and especially the stereotypical male scientist who is socially awkward and doesn't meet many people outside work or hobbies.

[@HeyManny69]

Barry Gormley You know, you're right. As a hard working, scientifically inclined male, I find it abhorrent that attractive women are allowed the same opportunities as me. Especially when that means working in close proximity with them, talking to them, sharing office supplies, breathing the same air, etc. And also since I won't be meeting anybody outside of my work/hobbies, I doubly hate being forced into close quarters with nice, attractive women for hours on end.

[@alexandrudanielmladinescu206]

James Butler Okay okay, I get it.You're both being sarcastic.

[@bookguitarguy]

+Barry Gormley Well said brother!!

[@summeromaley4298]

Wow. So, according to you, men want to work with women who are "young and attractive" and NOT with women who can do a good job. I mean, wow. You just confirmed exactly what the problem is.

[@barrygormley3986]

Either men want to work with women, or women are being kept out of these field's due to discrimination. You can't have it both ways.

[@theodorabruin4601]

Most women are not interested in the fields of mechanics and engineering or science. You go towards what interests you, and then if needed, take the courses that apply. Simple as that!

[@myideas8548]

I was an engineer in school and none of the male students wanted less women in the departments (far from it). I would bet in the current climate. Not only is it infinitely easier for a qualified women to get accepted into a STEM program at nearly ANY school, but it is obvious that every company out there would take any qualified women Engineers as employees over men (for many obvious reasons). Women are simply not showing up! If people want to argue that this is a societal effect. The parents of these women would certainly carry the vast majority of blame for steering the girls away from their potential interests in STEM. It is not societies responsibility to re-program women minds if the parents have steered them in a different direction.. If you feel differently, please understand that you wish to impose a structure of what-and-how parents must teach their children (good luck with that one). Frankly, I find the nurture aspect of this argument absurd. Women and men are different on so many levels (not better or worse, just different) and any one in a long term heterosexual marriage can attest to that. We are wired differently at the most basic levels with basic fundamental differences in our interests. The study of infants/toddlers (and adults) backs up this claim to an overwhelming degree. Cross cultural studies show that men value different things than women in the same ways no matter what culture they are raised in.. It is a similar situation for women. As a final point.. Why is there no outrage that there are not enough women plumbers, electricians, or coal miners? Why are feminists not encouraging women to work in the most dangerous professions where the risk of dying on the job is highest? It is only that STEM is a lucrative career path and Psychology and Women's-Studies is not as much. If Engineers were not as valued (at this moment in time.. maybe not as much in the future?) no one would care that women's interests were elsewhere. I find this whole topic a sad commentary on the current state of society. We are arguing about stuff we largely already know the answer to.

[@Poupey]

I would love to hear you talk about how "patriarchy" isn't tangible in the law & social system !

[@SmultronsyltNatha]

Could you put links to all your sources in the description? That would make it a lot easier to find them.

[@AtheistEve]

We're still living with the affects from an education system that pushed females and males into certain gender roles and professions. I left my (single-sex) school at the beginning of the eighties and my school didn't even have the facilities for woodwork, metalwork and other technical subjects. But we did have at least four kitchens and three classrooms dedicated to cooking and needlework. The exam system was also heavily dependent on how well a pupil did *on the day* rather than through continual coursework assessment, apparently the introduction of continual coursework as part of the overall assessment has boosted the number of female students in areas of STEM. So, that has been a helpful move! And, very importantly, I think we need to encourage men to take up much more part-time employment and feel comfortable taking time off to care for their dependents. Women have a very healthy mix of part-time to full-time workers but men are missing out by only having 10% take up of part-time work. We should encourage and support an equal opportunity for men to work part-time so that the ratio for men part-timers is the same as for women.

[@mattias5157]

THANK GOD for a logical, not threatened, reasonable female voice in these political minefield. I don´t know who you are lady, but you have my respect. I have a wonderful wife that I love deeply, so I´m in no way a misogynist, but it´s really good to be reminded that indeed, there are healthy and trustworthy women out there, after all.

[@rodeorodeo7219]

Men and Women as groups are naturally pre-disposed to thinking in different ways. As a result of this it is very important that there are SOME women in STEM because they are likely to address a different set of problems. The key example here is Florence Nightingale who invented the Venn Diagram, perhaps the greatest female mathematician ever. Think about it with men in STEM often being very "Linear" thinkers arguably it would not occur to a lot of them to come up with a new method to easily and quickly digest a complex data set, yet it is a hugely useful and important bit of maths that is in very common usage. There are modern day examples such as Clio Cresswell who is undertaking work applying Maths to complex questions relating to Sex. However just because it is really useful to have SOME women in STEM that is a very very long way from saying that we need more women in STEM. What we need is more women to be happy, comfortable in themselves and studying the things that interest them. More than enough women are naturally interested enough in STEM to ensure that we have a few women in this area and that is all we NEED. Anything else is Social Engineering of the worst and most destructive kind. The differences between sexes are to be celebrated and indeed leveraged to society's best advantage, not denied to suit a particular idealogical agenda.

[@kc2pix]

You say that guys like using tools more, so they go to STEM careers, and women are better at communication and group work, so they go elsewhere has one big flaw in it: BOTH skills are required in order to be an engineer or scientist. The age of the anti-social engineer in the back cubical who just does math all day is long gone. Today engineers are being trained by colleges to both do concrete equations, be able to work in groups and teams with others, and be able to communicate their work to managers, customers, and end users. I think that one of the big reasons that women aren't in STEM is that its seen as just math, so those who want to work with people think its not for them. Children, girls specifically, need to be shown more than just the engineering stereotypes, so they know the diverse experiences STEM careers can offer.

[@jonixstar]

I think it's way oversimplified (and even dismissive) to try and chalk it up to a biological "lack of interest." I think the complexity of this goes back to the concept of what we all learned by middle school: Nature vs. Nurture. To say, _"Women just don't like science,"_ is to ignore literally every potential aspect outside of the forces and statistics that can be readily measured or perceived. It's pretty clear that no single person is purely the product of their genetic makeup, so to pretend that this is the case with women and science is disingenuous to say the least. I am a female computer scientist. My dad had a love of technology that he somehow shared with me. I was fascinated by computers and how they operated, building puzzles, Legos, construction, etc. My sister and I used to build a fort out of our bunk beds and play "Army" with our stuffed animals. I can remember multiple times throughout my life where my mother would be criticized for letting her little girls _behave "like boys"_ or _dress "like boys"_ and she would always defend us saying, _"That's what they like."_ And yes, there were times where she would cave in and buy us Barbie dolls or baby dolls, and force us into a dress or skirt at times just because she grew tired all the pressures from her friends, family and even (omg!) **gasp** SOCIETY! So when we talk about girls having a _"lack of interest in math and science,"_ you have to ask yourself, where is this rampant "lack of interest" coming from??? I don't think it's prominently "innate" in women to not have an interest in it; I tend to believe the lack of interest is *cultivated* in girls from a very young age in the ways we raise our children. Boys are _taught_ to have a "natural" interest in leadership and STEM-like games and toys, where girls are encouraged to play and do things that train in empathy, being "pretty", and other social aspects in life. And lets not forget that these ingrained biases and stereotypes ARE passed down from generation to generation and affect the ways in which we treat people (and raise our children). Ad nauseam. What's more, to pretend that discrimination only exists if it's hostile and intentional is extremely naive.

[@Nabo00o]

I agree, the cultural/society aspect cannot really be disputed, but as you say, simplifying it is likely the biggest mistake we can make from any side of the fence. Because there are also practically unlimited number of cases where humans born in a certain environment turns out completely different than you would expect based on the influence from society, whether its about their sexual identity or anything else. There likely are many factors that decide how a person turns out, and based on what i have seen i refuse to believe that we are soley the product of our external interaction, yet it is even more obvious that our behaviour is not simply programmed from genetics. Unintentional encouragement of gender roles is a pretty interesting topic, considering how much it likely shapes us.

[@MinhVu-zp1kb]

I think you're the one that's oversimplifying, using "environment" to explain human "interest" or "lack of interest". There is a huge flaw when arguing nurture over nature. That same problem also emerged with behaviorists decades ago. Then they started to realize they couldn't mold children into whatever they wanted. Why? Piaget argued, children (human beings) ACTIVELY engage in their environments as they develop. The problem with your "cultivation" argument is that it is suggesting that women are completely passive beings in their environment and their "interests" are dictated by environment.There's a whole body of studies out there: boy or girl, you can give a child the most nourished environment for say "math, science, arts, etc", it does not mean that child will be "interested" in that subject or good at it. That's because his/her "interests" or "lack or interest" has little to do with the environment. Most teachers understand this concept when learning pedagogy. It's what is naturally stimulating and non-stimulating which drives peoples' "interests" or "lack of interest". It's nurture that tends to be overestimated and nature that tends to be undermined in social sciences.

[@jonixstar]

Of course people are active participants in society.. that is obvious. But it is also well understood that people are influenced by the society they live in. It's extremely naive to say that a person's interest (or lack thereof) in something is entirely innate... that women simply have a "natural" tendency to steer clear of math and science--as Factual Feminist is claiming here. It would be like arguing that _"people are fat due to heredity"_ or _"people are fat due to their life choices and/or upbringing."_ Both aspects play a role, so to ignore one in favor of the other is dismissive... and rather ignorant.

[@jonixstar]

Look... my point is that there is not nearly enough "evidence" to say definitively (as Factual Feminist does) that _"women just don't like and are not good at math and/or science"_ as a biological rule. Factual Feminist tries to argue this as fact, and counts the women who *do* enjoy and excel in those fields as exceptions to the rule. I believe that logic is flawed and intellectually dishonest.

[@jonixstar]

_"There's more nuance and she (like Minh) was saying that possibly, not definitely, biology does play a significant role in why certain people pursue certain things and to ignore that possibility for the sake of political correctness would be intellectually dishonest."_ I'm not disagreeing with that. Hear me out. Factual Feminist tries to present finite "possibilities" for why women (in general) are not as prevalent in the fields of math and science. And the thing is, she presents it in a way that suggests women just *naturally* have more interest in other things, and that this should be a good enough answer that even the thought of exploring the possibility of our culture being a primary factor in shaping those interests is a fool's pursuit. I mean... just listen to the way she says it: _"Does sex role, stereotyping, or patriarchy explain these choices...?"_ She says it so patronizingly, it's obvious she's mocking that thought as if it's some outlandish and ridiculous notion. She's trying to make it subtle, but it's not. She may as well have added, _"Ha! Idiots."_ at the end there, because that's the tone she sets. And what she's doing in that regard is arguing that it's absolutely pointless to even acknowledge cultural influence on an individuals' thoughts, feelings, and behaviors. And that to try and maybe correct our behavior and attitudes in the "gendered" way we raise our children is a lost cause because it's all nonsense.

[@TheKhaosDragon]

The Factual Feminist is my favorite Feminist. :)

[@user-go9kw6wf4m]

But then why was computer science dominated by women in 1960s?

[@mattias5157]

We often hear that women can do this and this just as good as men. An I agree, they often can. But do they do it? Do they even want to do it? It´s not because of women lacking in logic or rationality that we have hardly no major inventions made by women - Hi Ada Lovelace, I see you! - and it´s not because of the patriarchy neither, not in our time. It´s about lack of interest and consistency. Or am I wrong?

[@wsc31]

The time when women were actively discriminated against in education is long past. This is clear when you realize the lengths to which "feminists" have to go, and the mental gymnastics they have to perform in attempts to justify their foregone conclusions. For myself all I can say is "vive le difference".

[@bextree]

But why do these preferences exist? Sure, some of it may be biology. But a person's culture and society DOES influence these preferences. Your environment influences you. And there are studies that show that from a young age, boys tend to receive more encouragement in the fields of math and science than girls do, and likewise, girls tend to be discouraged more than boys (of course, this is simplifying it). People's preferences do not exist in a vacuum. There are many reasons (other than biology) as to why they exist.

[@chewie481]

I completely agree and would go as far as saying that biology (at least gender) has virtually no influence in either the preferences or the abilites of people. When I started university, I took part in so called "starter days" where you learn a bit of stuff about how everything works etc. There we had a session with some people from the "Departement for equality between Men & Women" where we would discuss similar topics. One of them pointed out the fact that in eastern europe, the gender ratio in IT is the exact opposite of the one we know (vast majority of students being female). I don't know if that's actually true, but if it is I think it's pretty much proof that the differences in interest/ability are entirely social/cultural and if you want to make it more equal, you need to change society as a whole. Anyway, here are two interesting links regarding similar topics (one is a very long article about three female top level chess sisters and the other is a silly 3 panel comic from smbc about toys and female engineers): www.psychologytoday.com/articles/200506/the-grandmaster-experiment www.smbc-comics.com/?id=1883

[@marksmith8079]

Haven't some studies shown that just placing a female name on the resume enough to have it subconsciously discounted or a female's opinion is equally discounted? This is not people meaning to discriminate just suffering from a cultural negativity. Engineering involves lots of human interaction. I think it mostly that just as woman are getting the STEM access they are realizing the work environment is toxic for everyone- loaded with political and business BS. Woman who contributed to Nobel prizes were screwed over. The Nobel Prize is pretty worthless as measure of anything.

[@dutchik5107]

Never heard of these studies. And those Nobel prizes were in the past. Like long long ago. Schools gladly take female stem applicants. Especially in the fields where there is a really high demand. They will never be able to get to like 50% like ever. But like a few is better. You have to do an intake (at least my school) . everyone for every course does. To see if you fit. But as long as you have OK grades(and possibly not something on your report by your teachers, saying like you blew up a lab), and show like some motivation. You will get in. It is that easy. I would have definetly gotten in though. Im overly passionate. And like my big project you do at the end of high school, was directly related to that major. So like, it would have been completely ridiculous if i didn't get in.

[@otherlibrarian]

One missing factor is simple homophily - or the tendency for like to be attracted to like. Certainly discrimination can play a role, but in general men will tend to engage in the activities where they see other men and women will tend to engage in activity where they see other women. This may not be the deciding factor, but I think it probably amplifies both the perception of discrimination and "interest" effects.

[@naphackDT]

Ryan Deschamps Didn't stop women to take over all the vet schools. Vets used to be entirely male, now they are almost entirely female. If you truly want to do something, there's not much that will stop you save for a severe lack of talent. Those cases exist, but they do on both sides of the gender spectrum.

[@otherlibrarian]

naphackDT Homophily is a factor (one of many), not a rule. The fact that women took over instead of having a completely heterogenous mix only further proves my point though. I need more data to understand it properly, but as one would expect, as more women entered into vet schools, more women entered vet schools.

[@naphackDT]

Well, now that I think of it, vet is a really bad example. First off, the perception of the job is not really gendered (even though a large percentage of vets are now female) and secondly, there is not much interaction between vets, you don't have a lot of colleagues to directly work with, as you can come by just fine with making your own independent business, so homophily also doesn't come into effect. I believe, the big gender shift came with a shift in the very perception of the job, that was caused by a shift in urban society and technological advancement. People grow up, seeing the world and that forms both their perception of certain jobs and their career aspirations. Horses disappeared entirely from urban and suburban areas, which changed the perception of the vet from one that helps people being productive to one that helps people being happy, because animals don't play an essential role in most people's lives anymore and changed from an essential role to an emotional role for most. I feel this change had a far bigger role than any gendered views of the job.

[@otherlibrarian]

naphackDT I am not necessarily suggesting that careers are gendered. Homophily only means that there is a tendency for people to want to hang out with people that are similar to them. This is very common empirical trait you see in almost every network study. It is almost never the main factor and has varying influence depending on the situation. For instance, in romantic / sexual relationships (obviously) heterophily is much more common. What you suggest is an interesting hypothesis, but I am not aware of any particular study that confirms this, other than more women in the workforce did coincide with increased industrialization.

[@bookguitarguy]

+Ryan Deschamps That doesn't explain why so many women (or feminists, at any rate) are obsessed with forcing themselves into fields/organizations enjoyed by men... they appear to be obsessed that they're missing something, and need to tear down men's power by entering these forcing their way into these activities, and then changing them into environments that are toxic to/hostile to men, with false sexual harassment claims, political correctness that represses and demonizes normal masculine behavior, etc.

[@coffeeandluten]

The pie in the sky idea of a 50/50 gender split in all fields will never happen. We have to just deal with reality.

[@jimsimpson1006]

As Jordan Peterson has said, not without social engineering on a massive scale. In any case, who cares about the fields (medicine, education) where men are now a small minority? It's only a problem when women are underrepresented.