~ archived since 2018 ~

Have any of you seen the recent GE commercial where they say they want to increase the number of women in their STEM jobs by 20,000 by 20/20?

ManChildProud · 2017-06-22T00:45:56+00:00

This is just plain irritating to me. Does society have any of these "programs" for men for jobs that haven't been traditionally...

ManChildProud

June 22, 2017

8 upvotes

/r/MensRights

Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB

Post Information

Title	Have any of you seen the recent GE commercial where they say they want to increase the number of women in their STEM jobs by 20,000 by 20/20?
Author	ManChildProud
Upvotes	8
Comments	21
Date	June 22, 2017 12:45 AM UTC (9 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/6iq305/have_any_of_you_seen_the_recent_ge_commercial/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/have-any-of-you-seen-the-recent-ge-commercial.919843 https://theredarchive.com/post/919843

Comments

[–]Walaishy 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (30 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_UR_FactorioLayout 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Walaishy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_UR_FactorioLayout 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Walaishy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]PM_UR_FactorioLayout 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]Walaishy 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Lets say a young girl does well at math. She might make her parents proud at first but once she hits puberty the pressures on her change. Things like looking pretty and being social start becoming more important. Even if her parents support her efforts to study hard, society won't. Even if her friends are all hard learners themselves there will always be those that will try and demean her.

There is pressure to start a family, pressure to be popular, and pressure to fit in, to name a few. There will be those that tell her that she needs to pick girly activities. Trying to engage in engineering types of activities may be met with disapproval. Religious families may have other limits on women pursuing these fields. Much of our society dictates how women should act and if their behavior does not conform to that they are shunned.

Now take into consideration other factors that influence men as well. If you don't have parents that know math then they can't help you with your homework. If they are not rich, they can't afford a tutor. If they live in a rural area, Pursuing STEM may not seem practical. All these circumstances can limit any person from choosing a STEM degree.

Limits on time due to getting pretty, acceptable practices due to social pressures, and social inclusion due to cultural beliefs can all play a role in preventing women from engaging in STEM fields. This is on top of those that are also faced by men. The fact of the matter is we need them; we need everybody. If they aren't making it we need to find out why and get them on board.

[–]PM_UR_FactorioLayout 2 points3 points4 points 9 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Lets say a young girl does well at math. She might make her parents proud at first but once she hits puberty the pressures on her change. Things like looking pretty and being social start becoming more important. Even if her parents support her efforts to study hard, society won't. Even if her friends are all hard learners themselves there will always be those that will try and demean her.

Society won't support her efforts to study hard? Do you have any evidence to support this claim? And if a young girl is a math wizard but her parents pressure her to put that aside and be pretty instead, that's a failure on the parents part, not society.

There is pressure to start a family, pressure to be popular, and pressure to fit in, to name a few. There will be those that tell her that she needs to pick girly activities. Trying to engage in engineering types of activities may be met with disapproval. Religious families may have other limits on women pursuing these fields. Much of our society dictates how women should act and if their behavior does not conform to that they are shunned.

This is not a systemic barrier, it's social stigma. None of this has anything to do with the STEM field or women's access to it. If you want to start an educational campaign to reduce this stigma for everyone in every field of work or study, I'd support you 100%, but that's not what we're discussing here. Everyone, male or female, has equal access to STEM fields, in fact women with a STEM degree are more likely to be hired than men, which means there are no systemic barriers.

Now take into consideration other factors that influence men as well. If you don't have parents that know math then they can't help you with your homework. If they are not rich, they can't afford a tutor. If they live in a rural area, Pursuing STEM may not seem practical. All these circumstances can limit any person from choosing a STEM degree.

Again, not systemic barriers. Systemic refers to a system as a whole, and you're referring to specific situational difficulties. "Women are not allowed in STEM fields" is a systemic barrier. "A man or woman may live in a rural area" is not systemic.

Limits on time due to getting pretty, acceptable practices due to social pressures, and social inclusion due to cultural beliefs can all play a role in preventing women from engaging in STEM fields. This is on top of those that are also faced by men. The fact of the matter is we need them; we need everybody. If they aren't making it we need to find out why and get them on board.

Personal choices, not systemic barriers. We as a society need to start some program to get more women into STEM because they feel the need to take extra time getting ready in the morning? Not my problem. We as a society need to do something because a woman's culture says she shouldn't do STEM? Also not my problem. It's equal opportunity, not equal outcome, and nothing you've stated actually affects women's opportunities to get into STEM.

[–]Walaishy 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago* (12 children) | Copy Link

Society won't support her efforts to study hard?

No doubt you are familiar with bullies. They exist across all groups within society. I am sure you have met someone that was a bully or was bullied. If not then yes, I can provide sources that they exist and that they target, at least in part, kids that study hard.

that's a failure on the parents part, not society.

Who we pin the blame on is irrelevant. It's society that ends up holding the bag. If we are not solving the problem it will just end up being a bigger problem for society in the long run.

it's social stigma

If it systematically prevents a group from actualization then it is a systemic barrier.

None of this has anything to do with the STEM field or women's access to it.

I wasn't talking about access, I was talking about obstacles. If it is an obstacle then it needs to be addressed. It's not going to go away on its own and having a less educated populous creates a drag on society and its resources.

If you want to start an educational campaign to reduce this stigma for everyone in every field of work or study, I'd support you 100%, but that's not what we're discussing here.

That is what we are discussing here. Recall where I said in my original post

If I could have things my way I would put a TI-83 in the hands of every man, woman, and child I met.

and in the same post

Not only should we be encouraging women to engage in STEM but every minority that is disproportionaly underrepresented in STEM fields should have its own initiative.

and in my next post

If any group is underrepresented, we need to find out why and change that.

You asked specifically about women and so I answered specifically about women but I am talking about all people. This includes minorities that are underrepresented, country folk, people whose culture discourages them from from engaging in STEM fields. Anybody that needs help should get it. We need all pistons firing when it comes STEM. If someone can't hack it then we deal with that reality but everyone should try.

Everyone, male or female, has equal access to STEM fields, in fact women with a STEM degree are more likely to be hired than men, which means there are no systemic barriers.

It means they have equal access but that doesn't mean they don't experience barriers. Let's take a literal example to illustrate this point. Say you have a buddy that is afraid of spiders and a spider spins a web across the entrance to the school. In theory he has equal access to the school and if he would just come inside he could receive an education. In practice, he can't bring himself to get close to the entrance. It doesn't matter that this is not a big deal for you; it doesn't even matter that he is being unreasonable, for him the threat is very real.

in fact women with a STEM degree are more likely to be hired than men

Again, I am not talking about quotas. I am talking about systemic barriers.

Systemic refers to a system as a whole

Systemic refers to relating to a system.

"A man or woman may live in a rural area" is not systemic.

It is to people that live in rural areas. Consider someone having a stroke in a rural area. They are far more likely to survive when they are 5 minutes away from a hospital than if they are 55 minutes away. For them, it makes no difference that people living in urban area are much closer to a hospital. If the system prevents them from receiving aid in a timely manner, the it is a systemic barrier.

Personal choices, not systemic barriers.

Sure, if it is a personal choice. Peer pressure however, can be difficult to overcome and if it is not their choice to engage and they are coerced into participating the it becomes a barrier. If it is integrated into their cultural norms then it is also systemic.

Not my problem

Not your problem, our problem. We need everyone on board that can be on board. Every person that is being constrained by a solvable problem sets us back as a society. The fewer people participating the less progress we make. The more people that are not participating the more trouble makers emerge.

Let's take the example of a painter that falls and breaks his arm. This isn't my fault. He wasn't even working on my house but helping him get back on his feet is in my best interest. If he doesn't go to the hospital his arm might set crooked. He might not be able to work again. Now he is a burden on the system. He might even turn to crime if he can't make ends meet.

Although I am not personally responsible for his accident it is still in my best interests to help him, not just because he might turn to crime that may impact me down the line when he steals from my car but because having him working means one less person the system has to support which I will end up paying for in the long run.

I get the feeling you believe we are talking about blame. That isn't what this is about. It's about making sure people are being taken care of. Not just because I would want also be taken care of if I were in their place but because if I don't take care of them it is going to come back to me in the end either directly or indirectly.

[–]PM_UR_FactorioLayout 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

There's other issues in the curriculum of Engineering and Science. Namely, you're required to take math classes that aren't directly relevant to your major (I did some time in both electrical and chemical engineering and failed out due to issues with Calc).

Instead of requiring a standard Calc, we should do an "Engineering Applied Math" as an alternative that focuses solely in advanced mathematics as it applies to engineering and it should coincide with your other engineering courses.

From my friends who ended up graduating in various degrees of Engineering, they usually tell me they used less than 10% of Calc 1-3 in their major-related classes. We can condense most applications of that high level math down to one or two semesters.

Expect great resistance from the math dept as they're the ones responsible for this crap.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Do you know what a differential equations is

Yes. It is an equation that relates its functions with derivatives. You need to know how to both derive and integrate functions. I'm agreeing with you here.

I failed out even though I do understand how to solve things like heat transfer and other problems that require calculus. That wasn't the problem. I understood how calculus can relate to engineering just fine.

What the problem I and many others who attempted STEM degrees faced was a set of Calculus and high level mathematics courses intended for mathematicians, not engineers. I failed Calculus II three times, and not from lack of trying. I tried with different professors, I had GSAs who were absolutely brilliant tutor me, and all the while I had proceeded onto electrical engineering classes that were using calculus equations. I knew how to solve those and handle those assignments fine. But what I had trouble with was the parts of calculus that were irrelevant to my study.

You can easily take the parts of calculus that are necessary for engineering degrees and spin them off into applied mathematics courses.

But it's because of getting burned out on math consistently, I failed out of college. My GPA was a 2.1, but I had B averages across my core classes outside of my Calculus classes.

It's because of this when I return to school I'm going for a language degree.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Okay, I'm struggling to understand what parts of calc 2 you felt were not relevant for engineering fundamentals. I don't recall anything in calc 1 or 2 that wasn't relevant to the higher level math I learned in later post calc courses and used in later engineering courses.

In engineering courses you end up using a lot more fixed equations that you just plug-n-chug than in mathematics but if you don't understand the underlying mathematics you'll be unable to perform derivations from base principles, which is critical in engineering.

As such I'm struggling to imagine specifically what supposedly "irrelevant" concepts you would have struggled with while supposedly doing well with what you seem to be relevant.

Moreover you need to realize that if you never passed calc 2, you never made it into the actual mid level engineering courses where advanced math is so critical and therefore a prerequisite.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I got as far as 300-level electrical engineering courses actually - thanks to an advisor who did everything in his power to see that I could succeed at college - until the university pulled my scholarship and I was forced to drop out. The advisor vouched for me and put through overrides for me to continue attending higher level courses.

I was able to pass ECE 3111 and Diff EQ just fine but Calc II I never got higher than a D in.

I can even today figure out how a processor's going to process data fed into it according to its design specification or deal with circuit theory, binary and hexadecimal data and even design a simple processor, but you try to have me graph an integral function or do trig substitutions and I'm going to not have any idea how to do it. I never did well with graphing - my mathematical ability is fine when it comes to algebraic concepts and solving differential equations that have a standard procedure. But put some random polynomial in front of me and ask for an integral or derivative I'm going to be struggling with it.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

You don't seem to understand how these concepts work.

You can't do differential equations without the ability to freely integrate or differentiate a "random" polynomial. That's literally the first and/or last step in solving most differential equations. Integrated and differentiated polynomials are literally what you're solving for. Claiming to be able to do diff-EQ without a decent grasp of calculus is about as believable as claiming to be able to do calculus without a decent grasp of algebra.

In short your story literally doesn't add up. I don't care how qualified you think you are to be an engineer (and I've seen plenty of intro courses start with a 3 so that doesn't say much). The fact is that calc 2 is an intro class for engineers, usually taken freshman year or tested out of from high school, and is so with good reason. The fundamentals learned in that class are used every day in mid level undergrad engineering coursework and if one cannot handle it, they have no business in an engineering degree program.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 9 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You can't do differential equations without the ability to freely integrate or differentiate a "random" polynomial. That's literally the first and/or last step in solving most differential equations. Integrated and differentiated polynomials are literally what you're solving for. Claiming to be able to do diff-EQ without a decent grasp of calculus is about as believable as claiming to be able to do calculus without a decent grasp of algebra.

I did, however, do it just fine. Up to you to believe me, but you clearly don't. Either way, you can be denialist about the problems with engineering curriculum, but the numbers don't lie - around 60% of freshman engineering majors drop out or change majors. 40% don't even make it through the first year. You may think this is okay but I don't. It's not acceptable and it's a failure of the education system to keep up with the times.

In ECE 3111 the difference was a lot in the course structure compared to Calc II and Diff Eq. In ECE 3111 the tests were open-note. In the field, your work is all open-notes. But never in a single mathematics class in college did they ever allow notes during tests. That's one difference. Another is that I question the ability of doing engineering work using paper and pencil when it's all done by computer related methods whether it's electrical engineering and done with a CAD program or you're a mechanical engineer designing something in Pro/E or MATLAB.

[–]ee4m 1 point2 points3 points 9 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 9 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link