4 ms·
One reason could be - in poor/developing countries STEM is understood as the escape path from the poverty, while in developed countries people seem assured in t
by zerr 9y ago
One reason could be - in poor/developing countries STEM is understood as the escape path from the poverty, while in developed countries people seem assured in their future even if they go in humanities or any other non-tech field - thus following their interests/hobbies rather than the need.
EDIT: unintentional tl;dr as it seems :)
- nukeop 9y agoThis could be true, assuming USA is a poor/developing country.
- Valmar 9y agoRich and prosperous corporations, and a trodden-on and money-deprived worker-class, not to mention the abused poor and homeless?
- zerr 9y agoThe absence of a good welfare/healthcare system is one of the main reason I'm reluctant to moving to US - while personally I might be well off, assuming "big 4" (or 10, whatever) provide good insurance for developers - what if my children won't want to became developers but e.g. musician, literature school teacher, artist, etc... they would be doomed in US. So yes, when it comes to healthcare and affordable education, and gun control - US is really poor/undeveloped country, worse - they aren't even moving in the right direction.
- lr4444lr 9y agoIf they want to become teachers, they will have very good social benefits in terms of pensions, affordable health insurance, and many work protections. Our government sector in most states is generally quite good on the benefits side, relatively speaking.
- archgoon 9y agoPossible. So possible in fact that is mentioned in the article itself, citing the original authors. > “Countries with the highest gender equality tend to be welfare states,” > they write, “with a high level of social security.” Meanwhile, less > gender-equal countries tend to also have less social support for people > who, for example, find themselves unemployed. Thus, the authors > suggest, girls in those countries might be more inclined to choose stem > professions, since they offer a more certain financial future than, > say, painting or writing.
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- cribbles 9y agoThis is the thesis of the linked article.
- halflings 9y agoAnecdotal +1 to this thesis, which is also presented in the article: I come from Morocco (quite similar to Algeria/Tunisia, which seem to have the highest % of women in STEM), and people are first looking for a job that will guarantee financial freedom. STEM jobs seem to be the most likely to guarantee this, and as such there's more women interested in these fields. Looking at the graph however, this doesn't seem to explain the full variance (many developing countries have lower levels of representation).
- howlgram 9y agothis would not only explain why less women go into stem, but also why more guys go into it, as it is common for a guy to feel the onus of securing financial safety for his family. And not gonna lie, even I, a guy, picked STEM partly because I see it as the best escape route from this country, I would have picked something more fun and less demanding otherwise
- tom_mellior 9y ago> it is common for a guy to feel the onus of securing financial safety for his family In other words, this is not about what the article claims (girls are just not interested, presumably for biological reasons) but about expectations hammered into all of us by society.
- belorn 9y agoSecuring financial prospects is also highly associated with dating success for men but not women. One might wonder how important dating success is during the ages in which young men decide to go into stem.
- IshKebab 9y agoI guess you are a man as your ability to read the article is not great!