fester@math.berkeley.edu (07/25/88)
In article <12003@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> ix665%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (Sue Raul) writes: >, discrimination doesn't start or end with whether there's a >computer in the little girl's life or not - it may not be in a little >boy's either, as is true for hundreds of other items. The least a parent >may want to think about is, within their budget, allow exposure to >all sides of "being human" - [followed by a good list of various kinds of stimuli for children] Just one point - playing neutral in a negative context isn't going to result in equality. In other words, parents concerned about giving their children equal opportunity in the world need to *actively* attempt to balance out the ways in which their children will be discriminated against by educational/religious/whatever-else-applies institutions. Otherwise external socialization, which is much more powerful than upbringing, will just run its course. Thus while daughters should feel free to choose humanities as well as technical or scientific studies, and whereas a variety of opportunities ought be made available to all children when possible, *encouraging* girl children towards the sciences (up to a point) is a minor measure to help counteract the discouragement they may well be getting outside the home. Being strictly neutral lets standard socialization have the upper hand. Lea Fester fester@math.berkeley.edu [Note that this is especially easy in regard to computers--there are lots of "computers" on the market as childrens' toys. TR]
maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) (07/26/88)
I very much agree with Lea that being neutral in terms of a girl's interest in science or lack thereof is not enough. I worked very hard with my daughters to ensure that they developed a positive attitude about mathematics and the sciences, including getting a computer and working with them on it, because I was SO aware that they were still exposed to so many influences in society that continue to deny or diminish women's interest and capablilities in things technical. I encouraged both of them to keep up with math and science in high school...and now, if they make a choice one way or the other, to concentrate on humanities or technical areas, or, as it looks like my older is doing, to combine them, I know it's THEIR choice, made from knowledge and confidence. Valerie Maslak
rha@bunker (Robert H. Averack) (07/27/88)
In article <12502@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> fester@math.berkeley.edu writes: >Just one point - playing neutral in a negative context isn't going to >result in equality. In other words, parents concerned about giving >their children equal opportunity in the world need to *actively* attempt >to balance out the ways in which their children will be discriminated >against by educational/religious/whatever-else-applies institutions. >Otherwise external socialization, which is much more powerful than >upbringing, will just run its course. No problem at all with this. >Thus while daughters should feel free to choose humanities as well as >technical or scientific studies, and whereas a variety of opportunities >ought be made available to all children when possible, *encouraging* >girl children towards the sciences (up to a point) is a minor measure >to help counteract the discouragement they may well be getting outside >the home. Being strictly neutral lets standard socialization have the >upper hand. Here though, Lea, I think we need to be careful. At some point in a child's development, the child will show a natural tendency/capability towards a particular area of study. I believe that this natural tendency needs to be encouraged and built upon, irrespective of whether it falls under the Sciences, the Humanities or the Arts. In so doing, the child is likely to excel that much higher in this area of interest. Furthermore, it is this excellence that will help pave the way towards a successful adult life. Despite this, I sure hope that my daughter, Amanda, likes Math! 8-) -- {yale!,decvax!,philabs!}bunker!rha Bob Averack Bunker Ramo, an Olivetti Company Two Enterprise Drive - Shelton, Connecticut 06484
clambert%hector@Sun.COM (Caroline Lambert [summer intern]) (07/29/88)
In article <12654@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> rha@bunker (Robert H. Averack) writes: >>...*encouraging* >>girl children towards the sciences (up to a point) is a minor measure >>to help counteract the discouragement they may well be getting outside >>the home. > Here though, Lea, I think we need to be careful. At some point in a >child's development, the child will show a natural tendency/capability >towards a particular area of study. I believe that this natural tendency >needs to be encouraged and built upon, irrespective of whether it falls >under the Sciences, the Humanities or the Arts. I disagree. What if you had a girl who did well in math and science, but did exceptionally well in, say, languages? Wouldn't it be better for her to become a scientist/engineer with an interest in languages than a linguist who knows Stokes' theorem? Besides, how do you know that her performance in math/science isn't affected by the very fact that she is a girl? - how can you tell if that is a natural tendency or not? Caroline Lambert caroline@polya.stanford.edu clambert@sun.com
gds@spam.istc.sri.com (Greg Skinner) (07/30/88)
In article <12780@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Caroline Lambert writes: >I disagree. What if you had a girl who did well in math and science, >but did exceptionally well in, say, languages? Wouldn't it be better for >her to become a scientist/engineer with an interest in languages than >a linguist who knows Stokes' theorem? It would be best if you let *her* decide what she wanted to do, then encourage that. >Besides, how do you know that her >performance in math/science isn't affected by the very fact that she >is a girl? - how can you tell if that is a natural tendency or not? Could say the same thing for her performance in languages. I'm not a parent, but I believe parents' responsibility is to make choices available to their children, rather than making the choices for them. The girl might become a great scientist, or great linguist, or perhaps *both* (a natural language AI researcher perhaps), depending on the amount of encouragement she gets to pursue all avenues. --gregbo
crm@cs.duke.edu (Charlie Martin) (08/01/88)
[In the discussion of whether to allow a girl to choose whatever field she wants or to encourage to go a less traditional route...] I disagree. What if you had a girl who did well in math and science, but did exceptionally well in, say, languages? Wouldn't it be better for her to become a scientist/engineer with an interest in languages than a linguist who knows Stokes' theorem? Besides, how do you know that her performance in math/science isn't affected by the very fact that she is a girl? - how can you tell if that is a natural tendency or not? Caroline Lambert caroline@polya.stanford.edu clambert@sun.com NOoooOOo! Why is it better? Because engineers get paid Big Bucks, while linguists don't? Because engineering is "better" for political reasons? Because she's a female and therefore *shouldn't* go into traditional female-dominated jobs (assuming linguists are more likely to be female rather than male, for which I have no evidence)? How do you know if her natural tendancy toward math/science has been affected by geing a girl? Damnfino. But I *am* pretty certain that if someone is exceptionally good at something and is pressured -- "encouraged" -- into doing something they are not good, it is equally evil whether the person is male or female, talented in math, science, linguistics or cooking. If the liberation of women has any meaning at all, it means freeing women to choose to do what they like best and are best at, without outside pressure to make a choice specifically based on sex. Charlie Martin (crm@cs.duke.edu,mcnc!duke!crm)
rha@bunker (Robert H. Averack) (08/02/88)
>In article <12654@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> I wrote: >>I believe that [a child's] natural tendency >>needs to be encouraged and built upon, irrespective of whether it falls >>under the Sciences, the Humanities or the Arts. In article <12780@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> clambert%hector@Sun.COM (Caroline Lambert [summer intern]) writes: >I disagree. What if you had a girl who did well in math and science, >but did exceptionally well in, say, languages? Wouldn't it be better for >her to become a scientist/engineer with an interest in languages than >a linguist who knows Stokes' theorem? Thanks for your followup, Caroline. I suppose that I was addressing the case where there is a strong tendency towards a particular area, rather than overall strength across varying disciplines. In the example that you cite, some encouragement in areas which will provide better future employability (in this case, math/science) would seem to be the way to go (although the language strength could lead towards excellent opportunities in International Government or Business Relations). However, if there is a strong tendency towards one particular discipline, then, I repeat, you don't cut against the grain. -- {yale!,decvax!,philabs!}bunker!rha Bob Averack Bunker Ramo, an Olivetti Company Two Enterprise Drive - Shelton, Connecticut 06484
clambert%hector@Sun.COM (Caroline Lambert [summer intern]) (08/02/88)
In article <12792@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> gds@spam.istc.sri.com (Greg Skinner) writes: >It would be best if you let *her* decide what she wanted to do, then >encourage that. But, but, but....how many kids really know what they want to do at the point when they have to make serious career decisions? Without external guidance they will more likely pick the path of least resistance, which is also the path of least challenge and therefore probably of least reward. Obviously, if the girl really hates technical stuff of any sort, then there is no point in encouraging her in that direction, but if she is ambivalent, then she should be given encouragement to pursue something that she may think is too difficult or unsuitable for her because of the stigma attached to women in technical fields. Dragging personal experience into this - I found languages far easier than science and math when I was in high school, and was tempted to go into that in university. My parents kept a neutral standpoint, encouraging me neither one way or the other. It was an older brother who persuaded me otherwise. Two friends in the same position chose the other route because they thought they wouldn't do well in science at university, though they had done reasonably well at it in school. Needless to say they have both had a hard time finding satisfactory work after graduation. I ran into the same dilemma when choosing grad schools - by the time I had finished as an undergrad I was fed up with.....I'm not sure what, but I wanted a change. Maybe it was from struggling with being the only woman in most of my classes; feeling left out; putting up with professors who thought I only passed some courses because of help from a boyfriend. I had taken language classes as options, and applied to various grad schools in different subjects. I was offered a scholarship to go to Yale to study modern Chinese literature, and was very tempted to do it, but was again persuaded against it by a friend who pointed out that it was better to be a scientist with a linguistic background. I rarely met encouragement like that, but I needed it to stay in science, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. It boggles the imagination to think where I'd be now had I gone to Yale, but I'm fairly sure now that I would have regretted it. I have a daughter and I'm going to give her all the support and encouragement she needs to be a scientist or engineer, if she has any inclination at all in that direction. Caroline Lambert caroline@polya.stanford.edu clambert@sun.com
clambert%hector@Sun.COM (Caroline Lambert [summer intern]) (08/03/88)
There were so many comments on this I don't know who to quote. Anyhow, I think we're losing the point of the original argument, that girls should be encouraged (not forced, not persuaded, but simply encouraged) to take an interest in technical stuff in order to counter the discrimination that creeps up in sneaky, ill-defined ways in our society. If the discrimination weren't there, then why are there so few women in technical fields? What else can be done to change this trend, besides parental support and encouragement? I think part of the problem with this discussion is that we've been discussing career choices of girls who have already been subjected to this subtle discrimination - this discrimination has to be 'countered' earlier on in life. Probably a child's teachers aren't going to be of any help, so it must be left to the parents, if they feel so inclined. And obviously, this encouragement can be carried too far. As for science being better than some other field - well, I have to admit I'm biased, since I love what I'm doing. Yes, it would be better to be a happy linguist than an unhappy scientist, but we have to try to understand why a woman would be unhappy as a scientist. I would expect that the women who think they would not like being in technical fields, think so because of some early unhappy experience with math, science or whatever, brought about because of some form of discrimination. Caroline Lambert caroline@polya.stanford.edu clambert@sun.com
tron@tc.fluke.com (Peter Barbee) (08/03/88)
I'm not sure I understand this talk of encouraging our daughters into technical versus other fields. Are we expecting our daughters to right the wrongs of past generations? Isn't that a big load? When I was in school, especially through high school, I was *expected* to get excellent grades in math and science. Anything else was not acceptable. Of course my sister was too and now she is the one getting her Phd in math while I just have a BSME. It seems (to me) that what we need to do is destroy the myth that females aren't good at math (and other technical/science stuff) by virtually demanding good performance - the same that we (or at least some) do with males. I don't think anyone should be "encouraged" into a particular field, we need to support with our encouragment whatever filed is chosen. Why should we treat young women different than young men? Peter B
fester@math.berkeley.edu (08/04/88)
>At some point in a child's development, the child will show a natural >tendency/capability towards a particular area of study. I believe >that this natural tendency needs to be encouraged and built upon, >irrespective of whether it falls under the Sciences, the Humanities or >the Arts. Yes, I agree, but again part of my warning has to do with the fact that if she shows a natural ability in a field like math (i.e. one in which her educators are not receptive to seeing, or perhaps furthering, her talent) then it WILL BE IGNORED in best case, and denied in worst. I hate to bore everyone with my personal experiences again but they SO well demonstrate my points - as an example, consider the following two things: 1. I demonstrated a natural ability for math in junior high, a fact which was commented on by my teachers and then soundly ignored. 2. Three years ago, in the final hours of a very long roadtrip from Boston to Miami, I found out about a conversation my brother had had with our old chemistry teacher from high school (who was very close to me, by the way). He said they had been discussing how our parents pushed us into sciences, even though *I* was no good at them (which wasn't the main point, but cited as one of the problems.) It is true that I despise the experimental part of experimental sciences, but they meant everything that falls under the loosely used term, science, and in particular they also meant math. Now, if I was so "not good" at math that a teacher and a brother-who-is-a-year-younger could verify it even in high school, would I ever have been able to even get a Bachelor's in it, much less go on to grad school ? Clearly there is a perceptual problem, and this is what I must warn parents about again and again: if your daughter is good at math, chances are excellent that nobody will see it, they literally will not be able to, or that if seeing it, they won't bother to help her develop it. This is the early childhood version of the mentoring problem that affects us women so much in college and grad school. Experiences of course will vary, but I tend to think that if I ran into so much sexism in a quite liberal environment, then it can only be worse in other places around the country. Sometimes this surprisingly proves false, however. Lea Fester fester@math.berkeley.edu ucbvax!math!fester
daveb@geac (David Collier-Brown) (08/05/88)
>From article <12903@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, by clambert%hector@Sun.COM (Caroline Lambert [summer intern]): | I think part of the problem with this discussion is that we've been | discussing career choices of girls who have already been subjected | to this subtle discrimination - this discrimination has to be | 'countered' earlier on in life. Probably a child's teachers aren't | going to be of any help, so it must be left to the parents, if they | feel so inclined. One of the best stories I've heard about countering this kind of socialization was from a friend's (aged) parents, who told how she hit the ceiling when her father picked out a dress for her to wear when she started kindergarden. "I'm not wearing a **dresss**! Only **girls** wear dresses." (She reportedly was aware she was female, like her mother, but wasn't aware that girl meant female: she thought it meant wimp). --dave c-b -- David Collier-Brown. |{yunexus,utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers Ltd., | Computer science loses its 350 Steelcase Road, | memory, if not its mind, Markham, Ontario. | every six months.
gnu@ucbvax.berkeley.edu (John Gilmore) (08/07/88)
In my junior and senior high schools in small-town Pennsylvania,
there were significantly more girls than boys in the advanced math
and science classes.
--
John Gilmore {sun,pacbell,uunet,pyramid,amdahl}!hoptoad!gnu gnu@toad.com
"And if there's danger don't you try to overlook it,
Because you knew the job was dangerous when you took it"wauford@utkcs2.cs.utk.edu (melissa wauford) (08/09/88)
In article <12984@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, fester@math.berkeley.edu writes: > > 1. I demonstrated a natural ability for math in junior high, a fact > which was commented on by my teachers and then soundly ignored. > > Experiences of course will vary, but I tend to think that if I ran > into so much sexism in a quite liberal environment, then it can only > be worse in other places around the country. Sometimes this surprisingly > proves false, however. Interesting. My experience is so different. When I was in 6th grade, a teacher started me (and no one else, male or female) on single variable algebra. On the strength of this I was put in an advanced math course the next year and an advanced science class a year after that. It wasn't until the year after that that they put me in advanced English. This was in Tennessee and Texas, hardly bastions of liberalism, educational or otherwise. The advanced math and science courses were a tad more male-dominated than the advanced English, but in general considerably more than a third of all the classes was female. I'm not sure what all of this proves. Does the relative academic standing of the school have something to do with the amount of sexism there? (My mother was always careful to move into school districts with the best schools.) Does the timeframe? (I started 6th grade in 1973.) Is it the difference between large and small towns? Most importantly, have things changed? For the better or worse? Melissa Wauford MWAUFORD@UTKVX1.UTK.EDU
joanne@hpccc.hp.com (Joanne Petersen) (09/20/88)
I hadn't realized how unusually lucky I was to have a grade-school teacher recognize that I had math potential when I was in 6th grade, and he arranged tutoring for me (and helped my parents pay for it!) with a local college student (U.Chicago), who taught me some basic things like doing square roots algebra, and trignometry. Of course, then I was fired up with the interest and it was expanded when I went to private school (again, with scholarship help) and discovered an outstanding math teacher in 8th grade, who continued to teach me through high school.... I always felt that I was supported by parents and teachers in my endeavors to learn about mathematics. How unusual this sounds now, in the context of the 'discrimination' discussion....
pedersen%math.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (09/22/88)
In message <5375@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>, hplabs!joanne@hpccc.hp.com (Joanne Petersen) writes: > I always felt that I was supported by parents and teachers in my endeavors > to learn about mathematics. How unusual this sounds now, in the context of > the 'discrimination' discussion.... I was supported by my parents and teachers too. The general public is a different story. I have a tale of two math majors to tell. The first math major is me. Once I'd declared my college major, I was plagued by people telling me: "Oh, my, math, that's unusual for a girl to do" "You must be really bright" "You don't look like a math nerd (you're really pretty)" "You don't act like a math nerd (you have social skills)" I pretty much ignored these comments, considering them the same way I consider silly statements like: "Math was always my worst subject" "I stopped taking math after 8th grade" "I hate math" Which is to say, I take all of these as thoughtless things said by people trying to make conversation but not knowing what to say. The second math major is an acquaintance of mine, who was plagued by the same comments, and _hated_ them. Hated them so much that she switched majors in her senior year of college, just because she had come to hate math (the cause of all these comments) so much that she would have done anything not to have her diploma say "Mathematics." She tells me that "Math is unusual for a girl" made her feel like she was wierd, (or at least that other people thought she was wierd). "You must be really bright" made her question her ability, because she didn't think she was exceptionally bright. She began to think that maybe she shouldn't be a math major, because everyone seemed to think only geniuses could do math, and she couldn't see herself as a genius. "You're much too good-looking to be a math major" also bothered her a lot, I think because of the implicit message "I can't accept all of you as you are: either I can see you as a good-looking person, or as a math major, but not both." Similarly for "You don't act like a math nerd." She also had people tell her, which I never experienced, "Gee, I'm glad I only found out now you're a math major, because I never would have gotten to know you if I'd known it from the start." I think in particular she got the message "_Men_ won't like you if you're a math major." She reacted to all these stupid comments by coming to feel like a misfit, a pariah due to her math, and thus abandoned the math. She is now a musician; I, a mathematician. I was struck by how differently we reacted to similar experiences. I found it easy to brush society's attitudes off as silly and not worthy of notice; she felt society's lack of approval keenly. [I wonder if it's better for women in c.s. After all, people at least expect c.s.majors to make lots of money and often people think they know what c.s. is when they don't know exactly what it is a mathematician would do. TR]
dkeisen@gang-of-four.stanford.edu (Dave Eisen) (09/24/88)
In article <5396@ecsvax.uncecs.edu> pedersen%math.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU writes: >I was supported by my parents and teachers too. The general public is >a different story. I have a tale of two math majors to tell. > >The first math major is me. Once I'd declared my college major, I was >plagued by people telling me: > > "Oh, my, math, that's unusual for a girl to do" > "You must be really bright" > "You don't look like a math nerd (you're really pretty)" > "You don't act like a math nerd (you have social skills)" > >I pretty much ignored these comments, considering them the same way I >consider silly statements like: > > "Math was always my worst subject" > "I stopped taking math after 8th grade" > "I hate math" Make that three of us. Of course I don't get "That's unusual for a girl to do" and nobody has ever accused me of being pretty, but I get all 5 of the other responses very routinely. These comments never bothered me too much when I was still in school, but now that I'm a faculty person it's almost gotten to be too much to bear. I've gotten to the point where I do my best to not tell people what I do for a living. I love Math, I've loved it ever since I was a small boy. My job is exactly what I've dreamed of all my life. And I love my work, but the social hassles have taken most of the fun away from it. I'm not sure how this all differs for men and women. I think society still expects men (more so than women) to be primarily interested in making money. I know I get lots of people who don't understand why I'm a mathematician when I could be out in the real world making twice the money I make. I guess the world never understands starving artists. And I've never heard of a little girl dreamily saying "When I grow up, I want to marry a Mathematician." Dave Eisen dkeisen@Gang-of-Four.Stanford.EDU 439 Del Medio Ave., #39 Mountain View, CA 94040 (415) 941-6810
sethg@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Seth Gordon) (09/26/88)
pedersen%math.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU in <5396@ecsvax.uncecs.edu>: `I was supported by my parents and teachers too [in being a math major]. `The general public is a different story.... ` ` "Oh, my, math, that's unusual for a girl to do" ` "You must be really bright" ` "You don't look like a math nerd (you're really pretty)" ` "You don't act like a math nerd (you have social skills)" I have a tale of a computer science major I know. She wanted to do computer science all her life, but formally declared it in her *senior* year of MIT (if memory serves; normally, you declare your major at the end of your freshman year). Incoming women at MIT, she says, are told *explicitly* what majors Women Should Not Take. Engineering, except perhaps civil engineering, is verboten. And *computer science* -- heaven and Phyllis Schadfly forbid! I have heard one male student "joke": "Women at MIT are actually men who worked their balls off getting in here." And then, of course, the director of MIT's Women's Studies Program was a professor for fifteen years before getting tenure... but that's another story. -- * L'shana tovah... forgive me my net.sins : Seth Gordon / MIT Brnch., PO Box 53, Cambridge, MA 02139 : bloom-beacon!athena.mit.edu!sethg / standard disclaimer
seltzer@ernie.Berkeley.EDU (Linda Seltzer) (09/26/88)
#The second math major is an acquaintance of mine, who was plagued by #the same comments, and _hated_ them. Hated them so much that she #switched majors in her senior year of college, just because she had # #She is now a musician; I, a mathematician. I was struck by how #differently we reacted to similar experiences. I found it easy to #brush society's attitudes off as silly and not worthy of notice; she #felt society's lack of approval keenly. Just to show how different people's experiences can be - I used to be a full time engineer. Then I changed my major to music, and I work part time in engineering. When I was studying engineering, all I received was praise. "That's wonderful." "You really have it together." Or, one night after work, "You look like a real businesswoman." When I left my job and enrolled full time in music school, the comments I received were: "Don't come to me for help". "Composers are a dime a dozen." One man who was attracted to me when he met me at work immediately stopped paying attention to me when I confided to him that I was planning to leave to atend graduate school in music. Some other men have had the same reaction; God forbid they might have to spend some of their money on a wife's expenses for humanities graduate school, instead of having a woman shell out half the money for a down payment. I'm sorry, but my experience was totally opposite to those you described. I received lots of encouragement from most people as long as my life style seemed to follow materialistic values, and I received a lot of negativity as soon as I made a decision which some people considered "impractical" (note that my personal happiness was not considered in this evaluation of what was "practical"). Even some of my friends, whom I have known for years, cannot accept my decision to work seriously in the humanities instead of in a business career. (Luckily, I have received a lot of encouragement from the music professors here at Berkeley, and from musicians elsewhere).
vicki@gatech.edu (Vicki Powers) (09/26/88)
The next time someone says "Math was always my worst subject in school",
look them straight in the eye and say,
"Oh well, I can't read."
I hear "Math was always my worst subject" and "You must be really smart" all
the time, but so do most of the male mathematicians I know so it doesn't seem
to be a gender thing.
A not-so-related story (from Lois Gould's book "Not Responsible for Personal
Articles") :
Gould was watching TV with her two sons when President Nixon was being
interviewed. A little girl said that she wanted to be Pres. when she grew
up and Nixon responded by saying "But you're too pretty to be Pres., when
you grow up you should get married and have kids". The response from the
sons : "Boy is that wierd", "Yeah, Nixon is married and has kids!"
--
Vicki Powers | vicki@mathcs.emory.edu PREFERRED
Emory University | {sun!sunatl,gatech}!emory!vicki UUCP
Dept of Math and CS | vicki@emory NON-DOMAIN BITNET
Atlanta, GA 30322 |