4 ms·

This article simply means when equal opportunity is offered, there are still fewer women choose to take STEM as their career. Vindictive? No really. The resear

This article simply means when equal opportunity is offered, there are still fewer women choose to take STEM as their career. Vindictive? No really. The research seems to suggest woman prefers STEM more, when there is no other viable economic opportunity, which makes such choice a conscious calculation, and do render the past accusation that there is an systematic oppression in the society to keep women away from taking the initiative, groundless. This at least speaks some volume, the current diversity program is incapable to achieve its own goal, thus further enforcing such agenda might not be fruitful.

guitarbill 9y ago
> the current diversity program is incapable to achieve its own goal What exactly is the goal of this "diversity program"? Maybe they are completely capable of achieving their goal, it's just not the one you think it is. (This is the curse of technical people: when you spend so much time thinking and solving problems rationally, it's easy to assume all situations can be approached in this way.)
- mamon 9y ago
  Most diversity programs state 50/50 man/women ratio as their goal, which, according to the article is counterproductive.
  - guitarbill 9y ago
    Counterproductive for what? Individual happiness? Yeah, maybe. But that's not the only possibility. 50/50 is the "goal", but what's the motivation? Let's assume that we're talking increase in people, i.e. you want more women in STEM/tech/whatever, not simply less men (for some reason this option is rarely mentioned. You could fire enough men to get to 50/50, mathematically that's equally valid). Say I wanted more qualified employees without paying more - I can't think of a better to achieve this. Of course, I have no evidence for this and it's super paranoid, but it's just one example how the goal might still make sense.
    - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
      Another, less paranoid, motivation to consider, some might argue that STEM is important to civilization and having more of it is a good thing, even if people could go into other careers that are more personally lucrative, but are more zero-sum in their potential for benefitting the human race. Making the pie bigger rather than fighting for the biggest slice of a diminished pie.
      - gurkendoktor 9y ago
        If maximizing the STEM workforce is the goal, then aiming for a 50:50 gender balance seems like an unintuitive way to get there. If not enough women apply for a job, the incentive is to stop hiring men, and the number of STEM professionals goes down.

guitarbill 9y ago

> the current diversity program is incapable to achieve its own goal What exactly is the goal of this "diversity program"? Maybe they are completely capable of achieving their goal, it's just not the one you think it is. (This is the curse of technical people: when you spend so much time thinking and solving problems rationally, it's easy to assume all situations can be approached in this way.)

mamon 9y ago
Most diversity programs state 50/50 man/women ratio as their goal, which, according to the article is counterproductive.
- guitarbill 9y ago
  Counterproductive for what? Individual happiness? Yeah, maybe. But that's not the only possibility. 50/50 is the "goal", but what's the motivation? Let's assume that we're talking increase in people, i.e. you want more women in STEM/tech/whatever, not simply less men (for some reason this option is rarely mentioned. You could fire enough men to get to 50/50, mathematically that's equally valid). Say I wanted more qualified employees without paying more - I can't think of a better to achieve this. Of course, I have no evidence for this and it's super paranoid, but it's just one example how the goal might still make sense.
  - ZeroGravitas 9y ago
    Another, less paranoid, motivation to consider, some might argue that STEM is important to civilization and having more of it is a good thing, even if people could go into other careers that are more personally lucrative, but are more zero-sum in their potential for benefitting the human race. Making the pie bigger rather than fighting for the biggest slice of a diminished pie.
    - gurkendoktor 9y ago
      If maximizing the STEM workforce is the goal, then aiming for a 50:50 gender balance seems like an unintuitive way to get there. If not enough women apply for a job, the incentive is to stop hiring men, and the number of STEM professionals goes down.