3 ms·

> However it is very insightful to notice that females are only 25% in engineering, and 76% in public administration. Those are the worst imbalances, but there

> However it is very insightful to notice that females are only 25% in engineering, and 76% in public administration. Those are the worst imbalances, but there are others almost as bad. There is a lot of work to do in getting real balance. Of course, all the work will go to fixing the "females are only 25% in engineering," and whatever effort is spent fixing "females are...76% in public administration" will round down to zero.

CodeGlitch 5y ago
Just a guess here, could it be because people find more success / public exposure in engineering? We can all name famous engineers, not sure I could name a single famous public administrator...
- rjsw 5y ago
  > We can all name famous engineers, not sure I could name a single famous public administrator... I can think of several female politicians with a doctorate in subjects like public administration.
cronix 5y ago
Wait until you see how many women aren't in the plumbing industry. > There are over 276,986 plumbers currently employed in the United States. > 5.1% of all plumbers are women, while only 91.1% are men. Women already have 5x as many engineers as they do plumbers. Maybe we should start concentrating on other sectors critical to modern society. I've never heard anyone complaining about this massive, massive disparity. I can only conclude that we care about women being in some professions, but not others, so it's not really about general parity. It's selectively targeted parity. There are many industries with numbers like this, not just plumbing. https://www.zippia.com/plumber-jobs/demographics/ https://www.zippia.com/plumber-jobs/demographics/
- ModernMech 5y ago
  I am in CS education, and the efforts to decrease gender disparities in my field, from my perspective, are being driven by academics. People have this perception that maybe this is being forced on us from on high or by outsiders with an agenda, but the reality is my colleagues are very motivated to solve this problem, and they don't need outside motivation or directives to do so. We are targeting academia because that's the industry we know best, we have the power and knowledge to change it, and we believe it will help our community. That we or others are not targeting the plumbing industry doesn't mean no one cares about that issue. Academics are very loud, and major media loves to amplify what we are saying and doing. I don't think plumbers and the plumbing industry enjoy the same status in American society. But it's probably an issue that plumbers and the plumbing industry should champion first rather than outsiders. With 5% female representation, there might not be a critical mass of women in that industry to start a movement for change, it will probably be up to male plumbers to see any effort get off the ground, so I am curious what their general feeling is. My female colleagues are the most motivated to solve this issue, as they are invested personally to see that future generations of women have an easier time in our industry. They host conferences and write papers about the issues most important to women in our field, and they derive solidarity and purpose from this comradery that motivates them. That kind of dynamic probably is harder to recreate in industries with 5% female participation.
woodruffw 5y ago
> Of course, all the work will go to fixing the "females are only 25% in engineering," and whatever effort is spent fixing "females are...76% in public administration" will round down to zero. It occurs to me that they’re the same problem, since a woman who goes into engineering probably doesn’t end up going into public administration. So you only need fix one of them, and the other follows. And it’s no particular surprise that people find engineering more interesting to talk about.
- tablespoon 5y ago
  > It occurs to me that they’re the same problem, since a woman who goes into engineering probably doesn’t end up going into public administration. So you only need fix one of them, and the other follows. That's assuming a fixed pie. If you push more women into the PhD level (or discourage men), then you could perhaps fix the engineering disparity while keeping the others. An overall disparity that favors women will probably not be perceived as much of a problem. > And it’s no particular surprise that people find engineering more interesting to talk about. Why? Engineering is in fact often incredibly boring to most people, and I would be very surprised if people spend more time talking about it than public policy.
  - woodruffw 5y ago
    > That's assuming a fixed pie. If you push more women into the PhD level (or discourage men), then you could fix the engineering disparity while keeping the others. Sure. But the broader professional job market is approximately zero-sum: most people above the working class have exactly one job, so addressing a gender disparity in one segment should functionally address disparities in other segments, no? > Why? Engineering is in fact often incredibly boring to most people, and I would be very surprised if people spend more time talking about it than public policy. Sorry, this was unclear: I meant that the public talks more about getting people into engineering fields than into public administration, since the former is seen as a reliable path to the middle class. Engineering itself is boring; the public policy around the engineering workforce is of exceptional interest to a lot of people.

CodeGlitch 5y ago

Just a guess here, could it be because people find more success / public exposure in engineering? We can all name famous engineers, not sure I could name a single famous public administrator...

rjsw 5y ago
> We can all name famous engineers, not sure I could name a single famous public administrator... I can think of several female politicians with a doctorate in subjects like public administration.

cronix 5y ago

Wait until you see how many women aren't in the plumbing industry. > There are over 276,986 plumbers currently employed in the United States. > 5.1% of all plumbers are women, while only 91.1% are men. Women already have 5x as many engineers as they do plumbers. Maybe we should start concentrating on other sectors critical to modern society. I've never heard anyone complaining about this massive, massive disparity. I can only conclude that we care about women being in some professions, but not others, so it's not really about general parity. It's selectively targeted parity. There are many industries with numbers like this, not just plumbing. https://www.zippia.com/plumber-jobs/demographics/ https://www.zippia.com/plumber-jobs/demographics/

ModernMech 5y ago
I am in CS education, and the efforts to decrease gender disparities in my field, from my perspective, are being driven by academics. People have this perception that maybe this is being forced on us from on high or by outsiders with an agenda, but the reality is my colleagues are very motivated to solve this problem, and they don't need outside motivation or directives to do so. We are targeting academia because that's the industry we know best, we have the power and knowledge to change it, and we believe it will help our community. That we or others are not targeting the plumbing industry doesn't mean no one cares about that issue. Academics are very loud, and major media loves to amplify what we are saying and doing. I don't think plumbers and the plumbing industry enjoy the same status in American society. But it's probably an issue that plumbers and the plumbing industry should champion first rather than outsiders. With 5% female representation, there might not be a critical mass of women in that industry to start a movement for change, it will probably be up to male plumbers to see any effort get off the ground, so I am curious what their general feeling is. My female colleagues are the most motivated to solve this issue, as they are invested personally to see that future generations of women have an easier time in our industry. They host conferences and write papers about the issues most important to women in our field, and they derive solidarity and purpose from this comradery that motivates them. That kind of dynamic probably is harder to recreate in industries with 5% female participation.

woodruffw 5y ago

> Of course, all the work will go to fixing the "females are only 25% in engineering," and whatever effort is spent fixing "females are...76% in public administration" will round down to zero. It occurs to me that they’re the same problem, since a woman who goes into engineering probably doesn’t end up going into public administration. So you only need fix one of them, and the other follows. And it’s no particular surprise that people find engineering more interesting to talk about.

tablespoon 5y ago
> It occurs to me that they’re the same problem, since a woman who goes into engineering probably doesn’t end up going into public administration. So you only need fix one of them, and the other follows. That's assuming a fixed pie. If you push more women into the PhD level (or discourage men), then you could perhaps fix the engineering disparity while keeping the others. An overall disparity that favors women will probably not be perceived as much of a problem. > And it’s no particular surprise that people find engineering more interesting to talk about. Why? Engineering is in fact often incredibly boring to most people, and I would be very surprised if people spend more time talking about it than public policy.
- woodruffw 5y ago
  > That's assuming a fixed pie. If you push more women into the PhD level (or discourage men), then you could fix the engineering disparity while keeping the others. Sure. But the broader professional job market is approximately zero-sum: most people above the working class have exactly one job, so addressing a gender disparity in one segment should functionally address disparities in other segments, no? > Why? Engineering is in fact often incredibly boring to most people, and I would be very surprised if people spend more time talking about it than public policy. Sorry, this was unclear: I meant that the public talks more about getting people into engineering fields than into public administration, since the former is seen as a reliable path to the middle class. Engineering itself is boring; the public policy around the engineering workforce is of exceptional interest to a lot of people.