Women in Science? Sexism doesn't help... (EU Ad Campaign) - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: TradieTrev
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 11:07:43 am
content: G'day Ladies and Gents,Up for discussion this evening is recent ad campaign promoting women into science by flashy music and lipstick/makeup.The actual ad was deleted by the original owners but a copy can be found here:For discussion purposes I've also included a time news article (which basically represents any decent blokes opinion) :http://newsfeed.time.com/2012/06/25/the-e-u-s-breathtakingly-awful-science-video/And also a great vlog by "Cameron" aka ElectricUnicycleCrew (please note there is a language warning):Another clip probably more productive than the one above provided by a fellow EEV-Forum guru "AntiProtonBoy" - Thanks heaps for the link bloke!:Personally I am appalled that these media types continue to do such things! Why?! It makes no logical sense. Sure they sell the ad to viewers but it gives the wrong impression to the public!!Would love to hear your thoughts,CheersTrev

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 12:04:13 pm
content: Mrs EEVblog (who is a scientist) just gave it the thumbs thumbs down.Dave.

author: hun_yeti
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 12:15:46 pm
content: This is just wrong, sexism is wrong and I think that is the number one reason that there isn't many women in these type of professions.and fighting this with more sexism is just an Epic fail.

author: TradieTrev
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 12:43:08 pm
content: Glad the Mrs agrees Dave!Thanks also for your input Hun_Yeti! I feel the same way when I see young women throw in the towel on their electrical apprenticeships.This EU campaign reminded of the topic you brought up with a Sydney/ maybe it was Melbourne? They had a advert promoting engineering with a bra on a bus station billboard.There was a blog I read (perhaps a few months ago on the front page of eevblog) Couldn't remember the blokes name sorry, but he had a well written blog article about the same sort of feelings I have. Also yes I've done the typical n00b search, but be gentle with me!If there's any other users that could help me out finding it, I'd happily appreciate it & amend it to the original post.Cheers,Trev

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 12:46:37 pm
content: The whole campaign is a mess. Of course with staged photos and, for example, one where they try to sell an electrician job for an electrical engineerBy the way, spot what part of the PPE is not worn? And the the screwdriver technique of the model needs improvement, too.But it gets worse. They do age discrimination in the campaign, in addition to the prototypical discrimination against men. You can only volunteer as a student role model if you are between 18 and 25 of age. Science is only for young women.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 12:52:18 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on June 28, 2012, 12:46:37 pmand likely only generically attractive ones...Dave.

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 01:10:38 pm
content: I LOVE women scientists... they like to experiment!

author: G7PSK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 01:15:17 pm
content: Quote from: Bored@Work on June 28, 2012, 12:46:37 pmWell that hat will make a mess of her hair and without the gloves she could chip her nail polish.I don't know what it is like now but it used to be that at Cambridge university at least that women outnumbered men in things like chemistry and the bio sciences and medical science but engineering of all types it was the other way around and maths was about equal.

author: Rerouter
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 01:22:13 pm
content: between the hair the ungloved hands and having her hands far too close to the tip of the screwdriver while working on a bus bar, oh how media is the true enemy to equality,i myself have met a few women sparkies, there thinner arms make them great cable jerkers (genuinely no puns intended)

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 02:45:50 pm
content: Dr Meghan Gray's comment on the subject:She's spot on, IMO.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 03:59:08 pm
content: If there is anything that could inspire a young girl into science that would be Dr. Gray et. al.Only the last thing she says is not entirely correct. Even if the numbers show that this works as a solution, it still does not preclude the existence of other, even better solutions.

author: TradieTrev
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 05:11:54 pm
content: Quote from: AntiProtonBoy on June 28, 2012, 02:45:50 pmMany thanks for sharing that! I didn't know that this clip existed!

author: Sionyn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 05:52:28 pm
content: i know a very hot meteorologist but its far from her priority more interested in big brothershe very kind hatred kind of girl you take home to mother

author: TheWelly888
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 08:02:52 pm
content: Somehow this ad reminds me of a crap TV advert many years ago, for a brand of tampon which involved glass tubes, blue ink and a bloke in a white coat. The advertised brand stuck inside the tube and the inferior brand was easily pulled out.

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 09:09:08 pm
content: Quite a stupid video, that is. We already know that girls aren't going into science because in middle and grade school they're choosing to be popular and pretty. What a retarded way to counteract that. Hey, you can look hot in a lab coat! You can write equations on a board while some guy is lusting after you!A side rant about this is that...I hate people trying to jazz up science. Science is already cool and awesome. But...it's hard ass work. I don't want people putting stickers and sugar on it trying to get people attracted. If you're concerned about your lipstick...I don't want you playing with test tubes.

author: Mechatrommer
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 11:05:34 pm
content: Quotewell, the other "test tube" can. the not so rigid one! there's sometime when women try to do men's job, things get pretty ugly...

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 28, 2012, 11:14:56 pm
content: The trouble is, it's just not something women are generally interested in. It may sound a little sexist, but it's the truth. I genuinely don't see the point in trying to force it.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 12:38:04 am
content: Dr. Gray's comments are spot-on, IMO.QuoteAh, just shut up. It's not something men are generally interested in, either. I want ... all the people that are actually interested to be able to follow that interest without regard to a prevailing "people like me aren't supposed to be interested in that."And Mechatrommer should keep his opinions about women body-builders in check too. Just because it's not to your taste doesn't make it OK for you to call her "ugly" in public. I'm pretty sure I can find more people who think she's hot than think *I'm* hot...

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 12:40:12 am
content: Quote from: 8086 on June 28, 2012, 11:14:56 pmIt's not that simple. Women are generally not interested in it, because they've had little exposure to it as girls.And, even still...Children are generally not interested in arithmetic...Why bother teaching it to them? They're not interested in history, or biology, or writing. Okay, a few are, but most? So why do we teach kids anything?Education is about opportunity. When you're not exposed to science, your odds of becoming a scientist are probably zero. When you're not exposed to music or art, your odds of becoming a musician or artist are likewise zero. How many of us would be EEs or EE hobbyists if we had not been exposed to this stuff when we were kids?And that's my gripe about the video. It has nothing to do with science.

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 01:07:15 am
content: Quote from: westfw on June 29, 2012, 12:38:04 amActually, that's kind of my point. I never said women shouldn't be interested in it, I said that they generally aren't. I don't think you can really argue with that, as that is the premise behind the whole thread.Up to a certain age, boys and girls have the same exposure to the same things in the most part, I never had anything to do with electronics up till about the age of 15 - when I took a class at school, a class available to both boys and girls, yet mostly there were boys in the class. And note I said mostly - there were some girls there, the ones interested in it. What's the problem there? I don't necessarily see one.Quote from: MikeK on June 29, 2012, 12:40:12 amRubbish, sorry. boys and girls have the same exposure to the same things at school. A boy and a girl going to the same school have the same opportunities offered to them (see above). I've worked as a teaching assistant for several years in several schools and with several age groups, this divide that everyone is jumping on I believe doesn't actually exist, and I don't believe that targeting girls with propaganda about how they should go into engineering or science is going to change anything at all. In fact, in the sciences you will find many women; it's in engineering that they aren't quite so prevalent.It all seems like we're taking issue with an "inequality" that doesn't actually matter, because people like to stick their oar in and "make a difference".So we have more male engineers than females, so bloody what?(inb4 shitstorm)

author: MikeK
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 02:41:34 am
content: Like I said before, most kids aren't interested in the subjects. Why bother teaching them anything?

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 02:50:05 am
content: The only fault I see here is the "Its a girl thing" slogan. It is very conceivable that those 3 lovelies can do science well. Perhaps it is the critics who want to cling to the usual stereotypes of science and scientists.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:08:24 am
content: Quote from: 8086 on June 29, 2012, 01:07:15 amYes, there is basically equilibrium in today's teaching system, and with the information revolution and the internet, both boys and girls pretty get the same exposure at the formal education level, and the availability of information. So why don't we see as many women in engineering and science?Well, science has a big percentage of women, but engineering is still fairly low. And it may take another decade or two for the true results to come in here in this aspect of it.QuoteIt's a problem because whilst both boy and girls have the same exposure to engineering as boys at the formal level as mentioned above, it's entirely different the social and role model level.At school girls will mostly hang out with other girls, so there is the peer pressure and exposure of being interesting the same things they are, and society in general (and parents) still have an innate bias toward engineering being a boys thing. So girls in general are going to naturally get subtly nudged away from electronics and engineering, more so than a boy would.It's a bit of a critical mass thing too. Unless there are other girls out there being visible role model in engineering, and their friends getting into as well etc, odds are that in general electronics end engineering is not going to be seen as a profession for girl. So programs or other things that support getting girls into engineering is a worthwhile cause IMO.Sure, there will always be the outliers. Heck evenIwas an outlier! I literally did not know anyone growing up, childhood friend, family, or adult who was into electronics. And this remained so until I went to study it in my late teens. By all accounts I should never have gotten into electronics at all, I was an outlier.Dave.

author: EEVblog
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:14:22 am
content: Quote from: PeteInTexas on June 29, 2012, 02:50:05 amPerhaps, but I'm very curious to know if they are or not. And not just studying it, but have a genuine passion and interest in it.And if so, were they picked for their "girly" looks?Dave.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 04:59:06 am
content: The video is inherently bogus and sexist in that it propagates the myth that women should be "glamorous" in addition to whatever else they do. Hmmph.This was good too:http://www.upworthy.com/nailed-it-if-youre-a-dude-on-the-internet-you-need-to-see-this-video?g=2Whenever the whole education thing comes up, I like to complain that it's not the "introduction" that we lack. There are lots of programs to get small kids interested in STEM subjects. Applied equally to boys and girls (and in my experience, getting equal response.) And then there is ... "Chemical glassware is drug paraphernalia." "Model rockets require a permit from the fire marshal." "High power model rockets require a BATF license that you can't get till you're an adult." "Don't take electronics through the airport (or to school unless you're sure you have permission.)" "You can't have that; it's dangerous!"So STEM can attract, but it fails to hold all but the most stubborn. Perhaps that's just as well. But I don't think so.

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 05:17:28 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 29, 2012, 03:08:24 amI have seen the first articles about studies where it is argued that girls already get more exposure than boys, especially in formal education, as a kind of overcompensation for the past. Hardly any program specifically targeting boys has been seen in the past, while there is an endless stream of programs and activities exclusively targeting girls.That EU thing is just one of them.It is also interesting that in many countries children are exclusively educated by women for many years. The nursery school teachers, the kindergarten teachers, primary school teachers are almost exclusively women. Only after that a relevant amount of male teachers start to show up. It has come to the point that a male kindergarten teacher is such a rare occurrence that people thing something must be wrong with him "might be a pervert?". At many primary schools the only male they have is the janitor, and he better had to be old, married, or being gay.So, a lot of how girls see the world is taught them exclusively by women.QuoteBecause women teach girls that engineering is not for girls. Engineering has a bad reputation. For the first 10, 12 years of their life girls are taught women, and are taught that engineering is where you get your hands dirty, and girls can't have dirty hands, but are supposed to be pretty. And they dominantly see women in social jobs (teachers ...).It is then no surprise when they don't consider engineering as a career. Initiatives to convince 16 or 18 year old girls to consider engineering come much too late. You have to hammer it into the woman that do the early education that they need to educate girls differently. But well, how do you convince a primary school teacher to not tell girls that a job like a primary school teacher is a great job?

author: RRobot
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 06:47:28 am
content: It takes years of schooling and decades of research to contribute anything meaningful to the real (hard) sciences. And even with that you still might not produce a paper of any significance. The idea that some dumb TV commercial will cause someone to become a scientist or not become one, is the only thing I find insulting here.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 07:31:31 am
content: QuoteEspecially since it IS a pretty great job.I suppose that could be the beginning and the end, right there. STEM professionals tend not to be very visible as role models. Not in real life, not on TV, not in the history books. Girls have, in their teachers, VERY visible role models. The boys; less so, so perhaps they range more. (Best thing for women in STEM: sucky teachers that hate their jobs? I hope not!)Quoteyes. no. maybe? Not every scientist gets to be famous for inventing/discovering XXX. That doesn't mean that they haven't contributed anything meaningful. I can look at my own field and be rather proud of the number of people who made meaningful contributions, who will never be getting their names in any history books. And why should a meaningless science job be any less desirable than a meaningless retail sales job? Don't tell me that it's "harder", because I'm not sure I believe it. I surely would not enjoy the retail sales job!

author: IanB
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 07:49:45 am
content: Quote from: RRobot on June 29, 2012, 06:47:28 amOh come now. Decades? You may start contributing to research as an undergraduate and certainly as a PhD student. Many original contributions to science have come from workers in their 20's. Possibly most.

author: SgtRock
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 08:36:24 am
content: Greetings EEVBees:--As with men, women who want to advance to the top tier in Science, will probably have to forgo taking lots of time off to care for the family. We need to make sure that women who want to be scientists are given the same opportunity to succeed or fail as men. In the US college placement is in large part determined by the Scholastic Aptitude Test or SAT. At some point Educators noticed that women were not (at that time) scoring as well as men. Further inspection showed that this was largely due to a difference in Mathematics Scores. Now at that time the SAT score was half Math and half Verbal. Women tended to do better in Verbal than in math, so the decision was made that in the future Verbal would be 2/3s of the score and Math 1/3, making women appear smarter in general but making women who excel at Math appear less intelligent. The result was leg up for people who are good at book reports over those who are capable of understanding the Mathematics that is at the root of all real physical inquiry. Or as Feynman should have said "this is where we separate the Adults from the Children."--As I have said before, I have heard Liberal Arts Majors talking about how the Engineering Students are stupid. It would help a lot if the Suits in Academia, were not always telegraphing their subconscious notions, that women and blacks cannot cut it, with quotas and commercials, like the one that started this thread.--It does not always take decades before a contribution can be made to real knowledge . Sometimes even undergraduates do cutting edge research. Amelia Fraser-McKelvie of Monash University has found a large portion of the Universe's missing mass in previously unseen filaments that run between galaxies, clusters and super clusters. Good on ya, Amelia. See below link for article:http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/05/24/oz_undergrad_finds_the_missing_matter/"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education.."Mark Twain (Samuel Langhorne Clemens ) 1835 - 1910Best RegardsClear Ether

author: _Sin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 11:06:08 am
content: If there is a bias in our society that is pushing women away from science, then it is absolutely worth our time and effort to attempt to correct that. Why? Because otherwise it seems that we're probably losing out on some *awesome* engineers, who happen to come from the ~50% of the population who are being turned away from their vocation before they've even discovered it. Why would we want fewer great people in our chosen field?Also, I think it might help reduce the amount of macho and/or sexist bullshit you tend to find in a male dominated environment. I'm a bloke, and even I find that fucking depressing.So it's not about dragging people in who don't want to do it, it's about removing the stigma which turns people away, and hopefully everyone benefits.Attacking the root cause, which is probably a combination of societal pressures applied to the different sexes, pretty much from birth, is *hard*. It's especially hard if you're just the representatives of one particular career choice. How do you change the whole of society?However, it is possible to try to attack the problem from the other side, and challenge the particular stereotypes at play, make the career seem appealing, and generally make the people you're trying to attract feel *wanted*. The more women who become engineers (or programmers, or plumbers, or whatever), the less the societal pressures will be an issue for others. And ultimately society *will* change.This video is certinaly not going to do that. It's just patronising bullshit. I'm amazed it got as far as it did before they deleted it. It should've been stopped before someone wasted money producing it.FFS - just highlight how good a career in science or engineering could be. What someone can achieve. How cool it is. Show some of the existing women in the field who are doing awesome and interesting work. Often all people need is a role model to aspire towards.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 12:58:04 pm
content: I have never seen anybody who needs encouragement into science, male or female. The only thing that is lacking is enough funds to support the science.And then some organization gets some cash and orders from above to "encourage science" And guess who do they choose as their target audience? Yep, glamor girls, the female counterpart of football hooligans - same intellectual depth anyway. Not politicians, not financiers but glamor girls. Obviously they were trying to appear as if they were doing something in the most politically correct and inconsequential way possible. And what is the most PC and inconsequential thing possible - science and girls of course!!

author: nitro2k01
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 12:59:56 pm
content: That video was, of course, just horrible. A much getter way of getting girls into science is to do something along the lines of what Vi Hart is doing. She's explaining math with drawings in an informal way. There's something distinctly "girly" about her videos, but certainly no makeup references.https://www.youtube.com/user/Vihart

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 01:25:45 pm
content: I'm against the very idea of trying to get anyone into the sciences. Women know what science is just as much as men do... if they aren't interested in persuing that as a career path than sobeit. You can't manipulate people into changing who they are. Science is about challanging EVERYTHING you have been told as a kid and trying to learn how the world works from basic principles all by yourself. It requires incredible courage and a strong desire to do so... if they don't have both of these things than they won't make good scientists. If someone's decision to take up that career/hobby is based on whether society says it is okay or not, than I don't want that person involved in it. Let them go to art college.For the record, I do not consider engineering to be a science... it is a technical art. Scientists discover the underlying principles that engineers eventually exploit.

author: _Sin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 01:37:12 pm
content: So basically overcoming any associated stigma to become a scientist should be seen as some kind of test now? And women, having to overcome more of that than men, will just damn well have to "man up"?What a load of shit.If you think that's fair, you are part of the problem.

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 01:55:04 pm
content: QuoteIt's not a test, and the act of thinking is not to be associated with manliness... that is the stigma that needs to be avoided. For more women to become scientists, the solution is not to make it so that thinking is not required for science because thinking is a manly thing and it is unfair to say women shouldn't practice sceince unless they're manly; the solution for more women to become scientists is for more women to think! Specifically, about how the world works.There is no tax on thought except the one we put on ourselves! Thinking about how the world works is free to all, regardless of gender, race, or age. I spend hours just looking at my water bottle and asking what makes the plastic platic? Why is the plastic translucent? what does it mean to be translucent? The water inside the bottle is also translucent, what does the water have in common with the plastic? Anyone can have these thoughts, and anyone who does is effectively a potential scientist. If I conduct experiments (any kind) to try to figure out the answers to these questions then I AM a scientist, and if I come to the correct answer, then I am a good one.

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 02:17:11 pm
content: Quote from: _Sin on June 29, 2012, 01:37:12 pmThe only stigma that needs to be overcome are those of closed mindedness, lack of interest, laziness and impersistence. It makes no difference what your gender identitiy is. Is it a test? Yes but there is no obligation to take the test.

author: _Sin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 02:29:14 pm
content: So are you (either of you) saying that there is *not* more stigma for a woman to overcome than a man, or that there is, but that's just fine?To be clear, I think the following things are true:1) Getting into something like science carries a stigma (although maybe much less so today than it did when I was growing up).2) Women are *more* stigmatised than men.3) Any stigma associated with doing something is basically a bad thing.4) One group of people being more stigmatised than another is even worse.I mean yes, science needs people who like to think about stuff. I don't believe for a second that there's any inherent gender-divide in 'thinking', so I have to think that there is some inequality at work here, and I don't like that.

author: PeteInTexas
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 02:50:54 pm
content: This ad came from the perception that "there are not enough women in science". The reasoning goes, as it usually does, that if women comprise about 50% of the population, then there should be about 50% women in science.That thinking is very flawed-becoming and being a scientist is not a random event like gender.As long as there are no direct or indirect efforts to keep women out of science (and there are none in this day and age) the observed proportion of women and men in science is simply a consequence of the choices these people made for themselves.BTW, there are not enough males in full nude exotic dancing. Not that I care.I just want to see ideological consistency from critics.

author: WorldPowerLabs
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:04:17 pm
content: Quote from: olsenn on June 29, 2012, 01:25:45 pmI'll agree that this is often true, but I know plenty of electrical engineers who are involved in cutting-edge, original research in labs and universities. So, while engineering may not itself be science, there are plenty of engineers who are scientists.

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:05:54 pm
content: QuoteThis is absolutely correct! Men and women have different mind-sets. That's not a bad thing. Get over it!Quote1) Getting into science does carry a stigma... that stigma is that you must be smart. It is no less so today than when you were growing up.2) There is no gender inequality in terms of this sigma. Women are NOT more stigmatised than men3) I personally like the stigma of being smart... they are not all bad.4) Refer to statement number 2

author: Unknown
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:06:07 pm
content: Quote from: PeteInTexas on June 29, 2012, 02:50:54 pmNot enough football hooligans in science...Isn't this a male stigma? As a male, if you don't overcome your "football hooligan" stigma you are unlikely to end up in science, period.Same for girls, if you are soap opera - hair saloon - 250 pairs of shoes type of person you will never have enough time for science.

author: _Sin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:18:31 pm
content: Quote from: olsenn on June 29, 2012, 03:05:54 pmCan you point at an actual genetic difference that makes this true, or is this just unsubstantiated sexism?Quote1) "smart" isn't a stigma, it's an entrance qualification. The stigma is what society says about, and to, people who choose to follow "smart". Are you seriously suggesting there less smart women than men? Not just a little bit either, but a significant proportion?2) I think you're just outright wrong here. I'm baffled as to how anyone could think that gender stereotypes, thrust on people from birth, play absolutely no part in how people grow up and the choices they make.3) Again, "smart" itself isn't a stigma.4) The outright wrong one?

author: olsenn
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 03:48:09 pm
content: QuoteA stigma is what people perceive about you... if you are a good scientist then chances are you are smart... or very lucky; however, even if you are dumb as a doorknob people automatically assume that you are smart when you tell them you are a scientist; that is why I say the stigma is that people think you are smart.QuoteYou cannot win this argument; science is all about interpreting the truth based on evidence. The evidence shows that significantly less women take up sceinces than men. Evidence also shows that there are not significantly less women than men. Therefore I can deduce that women are less likely to take up sceinces than men are. If you think the reason for this is some sort of corruption than point it out, but it's innocent until proven guilty... if you cannot provide evidence that there are direct or indirect efforts to keep women out of sceince, than I must conclude that women just happen to be less likely to take up sceinces (I don't care if it's a matter of genetics or just some other form of karma... it isn't the result of men being sexist).

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 04:06:05 pm
content: To be honest Im getting fed up with this equality bullshit. I'm not sexist and am happy to let each to their own. Hec I think I'm going to call discrimination on men not being able to have babies ! Perhaps women would like to share public toilets with men I mean if we are going for this equality thing let's go all the way and become a single sex race ! I'm sure we can do that as a tecnological race. Where do we stop ? Yes remove the stigma from women engineers but that video was utterly pointless to the point that i'd not have known what it was about without being told.

author: PChi
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 04:07:29 pm
content: Yet another waste of EU tax payers money. Don't get me started on another anti EU rant though I am pro Europe and cooperation.

author: _Sin
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 04:32:46 pm
content: Equality is not bullshit, though it's easy for someone who is not the victim of inequality to fail to grasp.As for whether or not there are gender stereotypes associated with certain subjects, I'll just quote that bastion of feminism, Barbie, who famously said "Math class is tough".

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 09:30:15 pm
content: QuoteOk, let's take this thread as an example:https://www.eevblog.com/forum/general-chat/scrapper-girl/msg116675/#msg116675A young woman posts a video with technical content, and the reactions vary from "OMG! Hawt" to "she's a fake; not enough scars" to "stupid airhead"... Tell me that would happen if a guy has posted the same content, and tell me it's not discouraging to either her or other young women reading the comments? "Tryingto keep women out of science"? Perhaps not. Helping to have that effect? I would think so.(And: "Lady Ada" makes the front cover of Wired magazine, spurring an immediate flurry of messages on just how much image manipulation might have been involved in creating that picture ??!!)

author: Bored@Work
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 10:00:31 pm
content: Quote from: westfw on June 29, 2012, 09:30:15 pmYes, just read a sample of my postings as prove that I don't care if a male of female tries to take me for a ride.Regarding that particular video, I even posted information about the production company who staged that video. I would have posted the same if the production company would have hired a dude to do that fake video.QuoteYou know, I actually hope it is discouraging to production companies who stage such fake videos. And discourages actors or conpersons to take part in such fakes, independent of gender.You should blame the fakes for helping to keep out woman out of science, not us who called a fake a fake.QuoteFirst, Photoshop is the lipstick of cover editors. So, if you object to the EU lipstick video, wouldn't it make sense to object to the Photoshoping of woman on magazine covers. In fact, heavily photoshoped women in magazines and on magazine covers are a known source of problematic role models for young women. That alon is a good reason people ask questions.Second, that particular photo was so much different from how people knew Lady Ada from her videos that it is a natural and legitimate to start scratching your head.You should probably stop taking any critical words you hear about a woman as sexism.

author: westfw
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2012, 10:49:21 pm
content: Quoteexcept that if neither had been women, there would have been no posting and no discussion (Go ahead; point me to a discussion of some male geek on magazine cover and how much it was 'shopped, or how much. Or a comment on some clueless male tech video to the effect that the speaker looks too good to be an actual techie...)It's not always (intentionally) malicious sexism, but it's still sexism.

author: AntiProtonBoy
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2012, 12:13:56 am
content: Quote from: Simon on June 29, 2012, 04:06:05 pmWhat's wrong with unisex toilets?

author: vk6zgo
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2012, 01:10:23 am
content: Quote from: olsenn on June 29, 2012, 01:25:45 pm* I would dispute that "Art College" is a soft option.In a real Art College,(as distinct from the few dilettante courses run by some Unis),students learn, among numerous other things, Anatomy,Perspective,History of Art,Metallurgy,& lost wax casting,as applied to the making of bronze sculptures,Lithography,& these days, Computer graphics.Historically,many of the processes which are used in Industry today,had their origin in the methods used by Artists.For instance,who were the first people who needed to know how to cast large bronze statues?And having done so in one piece,worked out that they could make them in several pieces & braze them together?Benvenuto Cellini's Art workshop would have looked more like a factory than what we think of as an Artist's studio.I see Scientists & Engineers patting themselves on the back in this thread,saying "Gee we're smart!".I'm sorry,but you are no smarter than the people that chose other paths--just different!We need more Engineers & Scientists,of both genders,but we also need Artists & Musicians,Novelists & Actors,Doctors,Nurses,Dentists,Master Mariners,Pilots,Cops,--you name it!Above all,we need Historians,to show us what we have done in the past,so we don't keep on trying to reinvent the wheel!

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 30, 2012, 01:28:52 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 29, 2012, 03:08:24 amI agree. And this is the problem with this type of propaganda. Directing it towards the girls isn't the most effective way to convey the message. It has to be through parents and become more socially "acceptable" - I hesitate to use that word though, because it definitely is socially acceptable, just not the norm.Though having said that, I am not sure I buy the thing as a whole - I was brought up without a significant male role model, by a single mother who is a nursery teacher, and here I am in electronics, making use of the opportunities available to me, which were not any different to those available to the girls I was at school with. In fact I know a few girls from school who went into engineering, but also many more who went into other things. And what's wrong with that? I could say the same for the boys! I still don't understand the mindset that if roughly 50% of us are female, then each industry sector should show 50% female employment. What about teaching, nursing, and therapy, etc? The male-female ratio for those is about 1:8 (iirc) so why is nobody shouting about this "inequality"?

author: Simon
author_rank: Unknown
timestamp: July 13, 2012, 06:03:25 pm
content: Quote from: 8086 on June 30, 2012, 01:28:52 amPrecisely ! We could have it either way around but these idiots go for making a fuss

author: XynxNet
author_rank: Regular Contributor
timestamp: July 13, 2012, 06:58:19 pm
content: Quote from: Simon on June 29, 2012, 04:06:05 pmExactly my first thought. There is no science in that video.They should show real science in their ad campain and real scientists with their projects.

author: 8086
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: September 13, 2012, 11:52:37 am
content: Interesting article, page two in particular:http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-trouble-with-barbie-science

author: korborh
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2012, 02:22:16 am
content: Quote from: _Sin on June 29, 2012, 01:37:12 pmWho said the world is fair?

author: korborh
author_rank: Contributor
timestamp: September 14, 2012, 02:33:15 am
content: Quote from: EEVblog on June 29, 2012, 03:08:24 amWell said!It is naive to think men and women are exactly equal and they should have same interests. Evolution has steered the skills, motivations and interests of men and women differently for survival (and social benefits).If someone is interested in pursuing science/engineering seriously, it is a lot of work and sacrifice. Many give up. Its not for everybody, and it happens to be that men pursue it more even though women have the same opportunities growing up. I don't see what is stopping women to go into engineering if they want to.

author: TheWelly888
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: September 22, 2012, 03:47:40 pm
content: I stumbled on this interesting Smithsonian web page listing 10 historic female scientists and though of this thread:http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/Ten-Historic-Female-Scientists-You-Should-Know.html