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."
It is used to make you solve other site's capchas.
Do the words seem like they come from a book? Obivously not. The interested capcha breakers make a deal with RECAPCHA.com and when they want to break a capcha, they send it to recapcha, it passes it along with a real capcha and then it send the result back to them.
Who's behind this? Google of course. First they tried really hard with "OCR" and after that failed they pushed the RECAPCHA trick.
why? figure it out. it's easy.
thank you.
Because those countries may also not care too much about patents and copyrights? I'd say that's something to consider when outsourcing research. I for one would not really put it into, say, China...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
"Because those countries may also not care too much about patents and copyrights?"
Companies are double dealers, the real winners are those who luck out in certain sectors and those in a position of power or authority to skim/glean the most profits, companies will spout copyright and patent protection on one side and heave off expensive workers for low wage workers on the other.
The problem is companies don't care for workers anymore, there are whole legal services dedicated to avoiding hiring local (expensive) workers. Since when have most companies been long term thinkers? Many companies operate on short-termism, the same kind of short sighted thinking that led to bank lending crisis.
There is a reason why "personnel management" is now called "human resources"...
Basically you're right. I see it every day. Currently I'm fighting for a larger inbox for an employer. It would make sense. He could speed up his work considerably. Instead of getting the documents on paper and scanning them, he could get them as mail attachments (yes, ftp and so on... forget that, impossible to do). Problem is, the inbox would weigh down on his cost center because I have to "charge" him for more inbox space. And the additional cost does not outweigh the benefit. Actually, though, the cost is completely virtual because the mail server has the space and it does not cost the company a dime.
This isn't even short term thinking, this is actually boneheaded cost center centric thinking without an eye for the overall benefit. And that's what's gonna kill us eventually, economically.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Dear EsbenMoseHansen:
Noticing a trend between what you have said and your signature I couldn't help but question, "how is Atheism not a religion?"
I'm assuming you feel "humans were not designed" because there is zero irrefutable proof and, as such, requires "faith" to think that. However, the counter-argument is that, you have zero irrefutable proof to the contrary, that humans have evolved. In such a case then you must have "faith" that what you have read, studied, pondered, etc. is in fact truth.
Consider the original question: How is Atheism not a religion? Most people define "religion" as a faith in the unseen. Apply that to your zero-proof theorem that humans are participating in the "great game of evolution" and you have faith in the unseen.
As a side note, I completely agree that agnosticism is the absence of decisiveness.
To the real topic at hand: it doesn't take much to realize that women have a built-in need to have children (not to mention the hardware required). Whether you want to attribute that to culture, religion, science, economics or whatever, the truth is, the need is there. Much the same way men have a need for sexual release. You can try to study things and act all "scientific" about it, but that is the way we, as humans, operate.
Animals have rights!
It's much easier to turn someone into a saint after he's dead.