Feminism

[crazy canuck]

In that an average person can be taught to be a competent lawyer or a good programmer if they value those things enough, but you can't teach the average person to be an outstanding mathematician or musical composer even if they really, really want to be one.  At that level, innate ability above the norm is a necessary but not sufficient requirement.

Isnt all you are saying is that one cannot be taught to be creative.  People can be given the opportunity to be creative but not everyone given that opportunity will succeed.

I guess that's true, depending on how you define "creative". I think everyone is creative to some extent, but to go beyond established wisdom and truly blaze new ground in fields like mathematics involves I think having a certain high level of innate ability.

What do you mean by "innate".  That seems to be a self referential definition - those that are able have it and those that dont dont.

You can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems.  The kids who pull a Mono and spend all their time doing homework will get 100%.  But to be a great mathematician takes more than rote learning.  It takes creativity.

Same thing with Musicians.  You can teach anyone willing to learn how to play a song from a song sheet.  Again, the kids that pull a Mono and practise that song over and over again will get very good at playing it.  But improvisation may elude them.  That takes creativity.

I liked your examples of math and music because they are so closely linked.

[merithyn]

Well, you did start this thread

Huh. I thought I started a discussion, not stirred shit. That is what Languish is meant to be, I thought. That is, actually, why I asked the question. I think of Marti as the only drama queen on Languish now, and I wondered if I appeared to be the same here. You've answered that question. Thanks.

I think a lot of us here say & do things on Languish that they wouldn't often say or do in the real world.  For example in the real world I don't often discuss politics or social issues, and if I do it's only with close friends & family.

I start conversations here I wouldn't start in the real world, but I don't think that beyond that I handle things any differently. I have noticed, however, that I am often perceived as being upset or "screaching" when I'm not in the least bothered by a particular topic. I put that down to the limitations of online discussion, but now I wonder if it's not more because that's actually how many of you see me.

[Barrister]

What do you mean by "innate".  That seems to be a self referential definition - those that are able have it and those that dont dont.

You can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems.  The kids who pull a Mono and spend all their time doing homework will get 100%.  But to be a great mathematician takes more than rote learning.  It takes creativity.

Same thing with Musicians.  You can teach anyone willing to learn how to play a song from a song sheet.  Again, the kids that pull a Mono and practise that song over and over again will get very good at playing it.  But improvisation may elude them.  That takes creativity.

I liked your examples of math and music because they are so closely linked.

Except we're not talking about amazing, world-class mathemeticians.  We're wondering why women don't go into university-level computer science programs.  I think that qualifies as part of the "you can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems".

[crazy canuck]

What do you mean by "innate".  That seems to be a self referential definition - those that are able have it and those that dont dont.

You can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems.  The kids who pull a Mono and spend all their time doing homework will get 100%.  But to be a great mathematician takes more than rote learning.  It takes creativity.

Same thing with Musicians.  You can teach anyone willing to learn how to play a song from a song sheet.  Again, the kids that pull a Mono and practise that song over and over again will get very good at playing it.  But improvisation may elude them.  That takes creativity.

I liked your examples of math and music because they are so closely linked.

Except we're not talking about amazing, world-class mathemeticians.  We're wondering why women don't go into university-level computer science programs.  I think that qualifies as part of the "you can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems".

You might be talking about that.  Malthus said something that I found interesting and I am exploring that with him.

[merithyn]

Except we're not talking about amazing, world-class mathemeticians.  We're wondering why women don't go into university-level computer science programs.  I think that qualifies as part of the "you can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems".

Malthus veered off slightly, but that's Languish.

The point remains that it appears to be a cultural reason behind the lack of women in that particular field. That leads one to question how to change that, and if it should, in fact, be changed. Should we just allow the cultural pressures to stand, or is it worthwhile to try to shift them for a more equitable market for women?

[Martinus]

I like feminists and feminism. I agree with feminist ideas in 9 cases out of 10. It is a refreshing perspective and ideology. I think only idiots think it is evil or fundamentally wrong.

[merithyn]

I like feminists and feminism. I agree with feminist ideas in 9 cases out of 10. It is a refreshing perspective and ideology. I think only idiots think it is evil or fundamentally wrong.

Well, I would argue that the recent (as in the past 10-20 years) use of the word has tainted it to mean something other than what you're thinking of. At least, that's true in the US. That's why I asked the questions I asked.

[DGuller]

Except we're not talking about amazing, world-class mathemeticians.  We're wondering why women don't go into university-level computer science programs.  I think that qualifies as part of the "you can teach anyone who wants to learn how to do math problems".

I think you're going too far the other way.  When I was in college, many CS majors hit the wall at the point where they had to take discrete math, algorithms, and data structures courses.  While they were not rocket science courses, and I aced them without too much effort, a lot of CS majors were totally lost in them.  There is a pretty high floor on the math ability required to be a computer scientist.  It won't explain 10:1 gender ratio you see with math professors, but it will easily explain 2:1 ratio.

[Martinus]

Women are rarely chosen for top jobs in any company or industry.

The top jobs are by definition outliers, which tend to be men. Boys are more likely than girls to be mentally retarded too. I don't know how much of a factor that is in the CEO world, but it has to be something. Probably not the amount that it is currently skewed.

I bet you will see it even out more in the future though. They are saying that in the younger demographics 20-30ish women are making more than men now.  That will probably translate to more women CEOs later just like how we now have sixty percent or so of college grads being female. Time will do it.

The thing is, most CEOs are not super-smart. I think many women do not choose high levels of professional career as they have different priorities (notwithstanding the old boys' network bias). I worked with female bosses and I worked with male bosses, and they are just... different. I think the best bosses I had were women. But also the worst bosses I had were women. But I generally welcome more women as they offer an entirely different perspective.

[Martinus]

I like feminists and feminism. I agree with feminist ideas in 9 cases out of 10. It is a refreshing perspective and ideology. I think only idiots think it is evil or fundamentally wrong.

Well, I would argue that the recent (as in the past 10-20 years) use of the word has tainted it to mean something other than what you're thinking of. At least, that's true in the US. That's why I asked the questions I asked.

Oh it's the same here in Poland - to call someone a feminist is often an insult and there are many stupid women who make it a point of pride to claim that they are not feminists. I just think most people are stupid.

The point is, while your local social progress mileage may vary, the conservative right everywhere makes it a point to deride and denigrate feminists, so the general public begins to question feminist goals and demands and distances itself from them. Are feminists ever wrong? Sure. But they are pushing in the right direction.

[The Minsky Moment]

I understand all of that. The question is why, not what.

There is extreme male brain theory - as exemplified by the arguable connections between Asperger's and mathematics ability.  I think that was what Malthus was driving at earlier.  All very speculative IMO but perhaps there is something to it.

My guess is that the broader disparity in tech/engineering/comp sci is a combination of conforming to adoloscent stereotyping and social bonding (younger girls are less likely to "get into" the techgeek or hacker subculture than younger boys) and - for individuals of a given level of intelligence and ambition - better perceived comparative opportunities in professions like law, medicine, or politics, where there is a greater concentration of potential same-sex role model/mentors, less risk of pack hostility, and (more speculatively) more room to take advantage of possible advantages in emotional intelligence or interpersonal interaction.

[merithyn]

I think you're going too far the other way.  When I was in college, many CS majors hit the wall at the point where they had to take discrete math, algorithms, and data structures courses.  While they were not rocket science courses, and I aced them without too much effort, a lot of CS majors were totally lost in them.  There is a pretty high floor on the math ability required to be a computer scientist.  It won't explain 10:1 gender ratio you see with math professors, but it will easily explain 2:1 ratio.

But the same requirements are not there for computer programmers. Only computer scientists.

[Martinus]

I understand all of that. The question is why, not what.

There is extreme male brain theory - as exemplified by the arguable connections between Asperger's and mathematics ability.  I think that was what Malthus was driving at earlier.  All very speculative IMO but perhaps there is something to it.

My guess is that the broader disparity in tech/engineering/comp sci is a combination of conforming to adoloscent stereotyping and social bonding (younger girls are less likely to "get into" the techgeek or hacker subculture than younger boys) and - for individuals of a given level of intelligence and ambition - better perceived comparative opportunities in professions like law, medicine, or politics, where there is a greater concentration of potential same-sex role model/mentors, less risk of pack hostility, and (more speculatively) more room to take advantage of possible advantages in emotional intelligence or interpersonal interaction.

Well but that does not explain why lawyering is male dominated. And I have seen female M&A negotiators who were brilliant and completely in control of a room full of men with bloated egos (and not through "female wiles" or whatnot, but simply the ability to compromise).

[Cecil]

I like feminists and feminism. I agree with feminist ideas in 9 cases out of 10. It is a refreshing perspective and ideology. I think only idiots think it is evil or fundamentally wrong.

Well, I would argue that the recent (as in the past 10-20 years) use of the word has tainted it to mean something other than what you're thinking of. At least, that's true in the US. That's why I asked the questions I asked.

Thats because you live in different countries. Without knowing jack about the feminism movement in either the US or Poland I´m guessing in Poland its still on a more 70ies demand our rights as equal citizens level while in the US its become more of the Swedish norm where much of the vocal feminist movement has taken an extremist path which have served to alieanate it from the mainstream. Over here in the 90ies everyone would call themselves feminists but lately its become almost a swearword with people calling themselves feminist being considered to be part of said extremist groups.

[derspiess]

Well, you did start this thread

Huh. I thought I started a discussion, not stirred shit. That is what Languish is meant to be, I thought. That is, actually, why I asked the question. I think of Marti as the only drama queen on Languish now, and I wondered if I appeared to be the same here. You've answered that question. Thanks.

I think a lot of us here say & do things on Languish that they wouldn't often say or do in the real world.  For example in the real world I don't often discuss politics or social issues, and if I do it's only with close friends & family.

I start conversations here I wouldn't start in the real world, but I don't think that beyond that I handle things any differently. I have noticed, however, that I am often perceived as being upset or "screaching" when I'm not in the least bothered by a particular topic. I put that down to the limitations of online discussion, but now I wonder if it's not more because that's actually how many of you see me.

Can we just pretend I said no?