3 ms·
Not that I agree with the parent comment, in particular i disagree that innate differences overshadow socialization in their effect upon gender proportions in s
by BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Not that I agree with the parent comment, in particular i disagree that innate differences overshadow socialization in their effect upon gender proportions in stem, but I do want to point out that there isn’t a contradiction here. If males, in effect, have less options they find appealing, then we’d expect a higher likelihood of males selecting stem subjects and thus a gender imbalance.
- defrost 2y agoNot as extreme as has been seen. Taking first year (actual) Engineering as an example, in the early 1980s in my state, at the university I attended, many males applied, only those with sufficient test scores were accepted subject to places available (300 intake). 299 males Vs 1 female. In pure math, chem, physics, law, medicine, the gender breaks were approx 35-55% female (somewhat higher than 50:50 female intakes in medicine|law) but Engineering was (at that time) avoided by women in the application process. There are things males gravitate to, there are things that women choose to avoid, and there's a selection committee that chooses from applications. Engineering was a sausage fest .. and not a pleasent faculty to be a female student in.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y agoOh absolutely, 299 to 1 sounds like an absolute joke and clearly is social. I just mean that once we have done the important work to eradicate social barriers keeping women out of engineering, we may still find a disparity. I’m not sure of the exact numbers, but I at least hope things have improved since the 80s.