Slashdot Mirror
Women Skip Math/Science Careers To Have Families
hessian notes a Cornell survey, published in the Psychological Bulletin, of 35 years of sociological studies that concludes that women tend to choose non-math-intensive fields for their careers not because they lack mathematical ability, but because they want flexibility to raise children or prefer less math-intensive fields of science. "'A major reason explaining why women are underrepresented not only in math-intensive fields but also in senior leadership positions in most fields is that many women choose to have children, and the timing of child rearing coincides with the most demanding periods of their career, such as trying to get tenure or working exorbitant hours to get promoted,' said lead author Stephen J. Ceci... The authors concluded that hormonal, brain, and other biological sex differences were not primary factors in explaining why women were underrepresented in science careers, and that studies on social and cultural effects were inconsistent and inconclusive. They also reported that although 'institutional barriers and discrimination exist, these influences still cannot explain why women are not entering or staying in STEM careers,' said Ceci."
Yeah, that's the problem, too many over-religious Christians in the scientific fields! You just can't keep Christians away from science!
Read it and weep.
This guy's the limit!
Doesn't a doc have to finish her residency? So, if she gets pregnant and takes maternity leave, she'll just have to come back and finish? I don't get how it reduces the quality of care.
In my own research, I was able to find many examples of women having babies when it was definitely not good for the man, for the society, or even for the woman.
When exactly is this true ? America has on average 2.1 children/woman, this is just barely enough (ie. more would be preferable).
In europe birthrates are so low that they are on track to eradicate European presence in Europe before 2150 (and make Europeans a minority in Europe by 2050).
Are you contending such a thing would be good for either Europe or Europeans ? We need more babies, not less. Much, much more. Most places in Europe would be well served by a doubling or tripling of the number of native babies.
Why is it a good thing? Is it bad for a woman to work? What about get an education? If she doesn't work why does she need to be educated? You haven't articulated your argument fully.
I was referring to the fact that its so one-sided. If a woman quits or takes a leave of absence to care for her children she's a good mother. If a man does it he's a 'couch slug'. Yes that's sexist but it does reflect the mainstream opinion more closely in my experience
Most feminists that I know do not differ in this preconception. That is, they're about as rigid and resistant to change as the conservatives are in this matter.
I have read of extreme cases where a man can. The scenario basically follows a couple with a newborn in a remote area that was not modernized. The woman died somehow, and the baby wasn't old enough to ingest regular food.
Although many guys have joked about how they'd never leave home if they had girl boobs on them, I doubt any of them would ever want to lactate...
Unfortunately the system (I speak for the life sciences, not sure about the rest) is made so that only the outstanding people get funding. No funding == no work (and no pay, of course). This is what prompts the terrible "publish or perish" syndrome that also causes a lot of bad papers to be published (in bioinformatics, my own field, it's a disturbing trend), aside also lowering the life quality of the people involved.
Also, in my own experience, a part of the higher-ups doesn't have any kind of family, therefore they are actually oblivious to the fact that you may have something going on outside the laboratory. For example, I know of a female colleague who worked exactly sixty days, roughly 12 hours per day, without stopping a single day. And to the person who led her group, it was something perfectly normal to do.
A CC-licensed illustrated horror novel
Not only that, but women have more of the innate ability to regulate and juggle all the things necessary for keeping a kid (or two, or three) fed, occupied, out of trouble, at school or sports practice or wherever, as well as the tons of other things she's got to do to keep the home life and kids' extracurricular activities going.
Unfortunately the facts don't back up that maternal superiority complex. Statistics are clear, if it's a choice between being raised by a father or raised by a mother - kids are better off with the father. Teen pregnancy, drop out rates, drug use - are all higher with single moms than with single dads.
What you describe is nothing more than the reality of one parent staying at home while the other works. What would change if the dad stayed home while the mom went to work? Nothing.
Here is an article on the study by the BBC. Google finds a lot of similar articles.
Centralization breaks the internet.