Why do some people seem so threatened by the notion that there are sex-related, heritable differences in interests and aptitudes? Look at our closest cousins, the primates – all of them exhibit substantial differentiation in behavior between males and females. Look at the evolutionary history of Homo Sapiens – why would we expect that we have erased the evolutionary pressures that differentiate male and female behavior? See any number of Dawkins’ works, or Steven Pinker’s popular books for supporting evidence (quickly dons asbestos suit in anticipation of the Lewontin, Rose, and Gould apologists showing up en masse …).

None of this says that science and engineering are the exclusive province of males. No reasonable person denies that females have had major obstacles to overcome in access to many academic fields, and that such obstacles have often been in place from early childhood. No reasonable person fails to do what he/she can to erase those barriers, and looks forward to the day when those barriers no longer exist at all (and no reasonable person can deny that those barriers are today much less important than even 20 years ago). But no intellectually honest person can deny that, across statistically significant samples, sex is a significant factor in aptitude and interests. (Note that I did not say the major factor or the most significant factor, so build your strawmen on somebody else’s back, thank you very much.)

It’s great when girls / women do great at science. It’s great when boys / men do great at science; plenty of them got horribly abused in all levels of school for being “geeks”, “nerds”, or for people of color, “acting white” (see the work of the economist Roland Fryer about this). But what’s even better is when people get to pursue their dreams and do the stuff that really makes them happy, whether that leads to equal outcomes for the sexes in science and engineering or not!

Certainly women are achieving more, both in the sciences and humanities, and I’m not knocking that. Good for them. But I’m worried that at least part of the reason may also be that the guys of the current generation are slacking. I’m not sure why – the usual suspects of video games, poor role models, or what. But it’s worrisome.

Or rather, you should make some effort to discover the state of anthropological and sociological research in the fields of science and technology, and specifically the gender disparity therein, before you make unfounded claims based on articles you read on CNN or wherever.

Your claims about “interest” are predicated on a rather shakey argument:

1) Our interests are entirely or mostly determined by our gender, or by other genetic factors. This assumption is generally based on the stereotype that men are good with logic and tools, while women are good with emotions, language, and interpersonal relationships.

2) The process of knowledge-making was handed down by god or the universe or something, and should not be tampered with at all. Seemingly, it was perfectly designed for men and their logical, tool-loving minds, which is why there are so many men in science and so few women. To alter that would only be a detriment to science/an affront to god/whev.

2) Given #1 and # 2, women are less likely to do science because it overwhelmingly deals with logic and tools. Wait, hold on, ignore the report-writing, the client-meeting, the grant-funding, the shmoozing, and the grad-student-herding. Also ignore the fact that women are also under-represented in fields that require a tremendous amount of interpersonal relating, like politics and business.

Thanks for the points you made and the chance to respond. I’ve been involved with education programs at NASA for the last 18 years; it is where I first met Phil. I’ve worked hard to ensure an inclusiveness in every program I have worked with. There are also many programs that target specific populations that are de facto exclusionary to others. There is nothing wrong with this, as long as everyone has the ultimate opportunity to rise to their potential. But, at my son’s school, there was a very aggressive teacher that basically made him feel not welcome, and, as I mentioned, skewed the opportunity to the girls. No cooties involved in this, just someone’s opinion of who was entitled to the program.
The US needs more engineers. Period. Race or gender does not matter, the more kids who are encouraged the better. These young women who won the Siemens award are shining examples of what we need to address future opportunities. But we still need more. With all the increase in numbers from females in/and underrepresented populations, we are not seeing a total increase as the largest group that contributed to that number, caucasian males (my son), has decreased. All students should be afforded equal opportunity to access these programs, and encouraged to do so, and made to feel welcome if they choose to attend.

You’d never get away with saying the opposite.

The comments made me sad. It provides evidence that sexism is still rampant among supposedly rational people. A post about some girls winning some awards somehow lead a few people griping about how all accusations of sexual abuse are made up. The heck???

For all of you who like to say “Well, this is how it is, so this is how it is meant to be” regarding sex and performance—you realize one could make the same arguments about race, right? Your arguments could easily be used to “prove” that [insert ethnic group here] are biologically inferior. You don’t say such things, of course, because to do so would be to expose yourself as prejudiced.

To the guy who griped that his son was reluctant to join robotics group because it was cootie-fied, I have a few points:

1) If it’s hard for a boy to join a group with lots of girls in it, imagine how it must be for a girl to join a discipline that has been male-dominated for CENTURIES.

2) Was he reluctant to join because the girls were actively pushing him out, telling him that boys aren’t meant to build robots, etc., or was he reluctant to join because girls are icky? If it’s the latter option, then sexism and viewing girls as undesirable is the culprit. Sexism hurts dudes, too.

3) Would you have griped if the robotics group were, say, predominantly Asian? (I’m assuming you’re caucasian—if not I apologize.) And when your kid said he didn’t want to join a group that was full of Asians you would grouse about how hard it is for a white kid to not be in the majority anymore? Would you gripe about how “those people” are pushing you and your kind out of the sciences? (I’m assuming not—these are rhetorical questions and all. Just trying to point out how prejudiced it all sounds.)

Thanny, you’re right. I’m a Ph.D. student in ecology and my field (as well as much of biology) seems to be well on its way to becoming female-dominated. Guess men just aren’t cut out for or interested in biology.

Thanks for posting the link to the videos — those were awesome. Good science, clearly explained.

And congrats to the winners!

Really? Why?

MAYBE I’d be willing to consider that possible if you do literally mean men and women.

But if we’re pulling kids off the street? No way.

Even in the first case, though: better at what? Better in what ways? Because “science” and “engineering” aren’t just about straight-up mathematical and technical skills. It’s not about sitting around all day with big ideas in your head, bolstered by some equations. Not by a long shot. A good part of what goes on in, say, astronomy, is project management, communication (intra- and inter-collaboration), team management, hiring, teaching, training and development . . . .

I’d rather think at a deeper level.

I want a President that can do a good job. Race and gender should be irrelevant.

Voting for someone because they are female is just as stupid as voting against someone because they are a woman. It’s a willful reduction of unknown petabytes of intellect down to a single bit.

Why do people seem to have such a difficult time seeing both sides of the coin?

A bunch of people at my work, both male and female, used to mentor science and engineering at local schools, but no longer due to the reason you state. There was a local case of a guy getting accused of something, and it took a lot of time and a lot of money (it nearly bankrupted him) to clear himself, and it only happened because the girl finally admitted to making it up.

I’ll let you guess if the girl received *any* punishment whatsoever.

Yeah, and boys like me who were into science and math were *SO* lauded by society at large, especially our peers in high school.

Oh, and being into math and science was REALLY attractive to the girls!

Christ! I just broke my *own* sarcasm meter!