Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Yesterday, FIRST uploaded this video -- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_nZ...&feature=share -- to their YouTube account.

A quick Google search for "Jane Cosmetics robotics" leads to a number of puff pieces about their sponsorship of the event, with some being more accurate than others.

http://www.nationswell.com/beauty-co...-change-world/
http://www.glam.com/jane-cosmetics-f...champtionship/
http://www.secondcitystyle.com/2014/...-championship/
http://blog.realtimestl.com/tag/jane-cosmetics-co/

I was not able to see opening ceremonies today because of work; did the representative from this company give a speech? What was its content?

Given FIRST's recent focus on improving representation of minorities and women in FIRST and STEM, generally, the inclusion of this sort of messaging seems completely tone deaf and at odds with the work we've been doing elsewhere.

I am really unhappy to see this. This is a big miss on FIRST's part.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I saw this booth yesterday in the pits and was instantly confused. I guess I just don't really understand why they were at the event. In a place where it is heavily emphasized that both males and females are capable of doing the same work on teams, whether its on the organizational side or the technical side, it was strange to see something that is so gender-targeted and has seemingly nothing to do with FIRST's mission.

The owner spoke at the Deans List ceremony. A truly inspiring speech!

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Can you give a summary of it?

I don't remember her name unfortunately. She has owned over 240 companies with over a billion in revenue. She and dean felt using some of her cosmetic and beauty companies to recruit from new sources.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Lynn Tilton was the speaker. Her speech didn't seem that out of the ordinary, just your typical "you students are building the future" stuff, and honestly wasn't that memorable. The speaker owned over 100 companies, with a whole bunch being in tech, defense, etc. fields, right inline with your run of the mill major FIRST sponsor. Curious why her FIRST connection seems to be done through this rather than any of her other endeavors.

Dean has been speaking a lot about how FIRST has to move beyond traditional sources of support in order to reach a wider audience. This certainty seems inline with this idea on paper, though execution seems to miss the mark on tone to some degree.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

From my understanding of her Dean's List speech, it was that she felt strongly about getting more girls involved with FIRST, and she felt getting two of her cosmetics businesses involved could help that. (From the sounds of it, Dean had approached her, and she got to make the choice of which of her companies she would use as a front for her holding companies involvement).

What this is really about is part of the whole we need to get more people, both individuals and businesses, involved that aren't Science and Technology companies. While I'm not exactly crazy with the promo video FIRST released, I overall applaud this. We need to show the world that everyone has a place in FIRST, even if you don't directly plan on going into work with Science and Technology. It's not about getting kids into STEM Jobs, its about getting the world to appreciate and respect the importance of STEM. The fact that we have a company completely out of STEM recognizing this is HUGE, and I hope more companies not directly in STEM follow.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Unfortunately -- and I'll try to find the things I've read that back this up -- emphasizing traditional gender expectations (like makeup, femininity, being pretty, etc.) as part of efforts to boost interest in STEM among girls often has a negative impact. Girls already feel a tremendous amount of pressure to conform to traditional standards of beauty, largely due to marketing efforts of companies like Jane Cosmetics, and asking them to cope with those pressures while dealing with the pressures incumbent in pursuing STEM as a girl serves to drive them away.

While there's nothing wrong with makeup or femininity inherently, it's when they become an expectation rather than an option that we get into trouble. Since those things are still very much part of the expectations our society places upon girls today, their presence at a FIRST event is misguided. FIRST should be presenting itself as an alternative; a place where girls can become competent, contributing members of society and nobody is going to care what they look like or act like while doing it. If, later, they want to put on the trappings of femininity, they should be able to do so all the while knowing that none of it will have any bearing on their value in making the world a better place.

Broadening support for FIRST is laudable, but doing so at the expense of its core goals is a bad trade.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Perhaps this could be viewed as a way to inspire girls who are using their products (the ones who are currently "conforming" to the traditional "norms") to take a look at something like FIRST and realize there is a place for them in the organization as well. I coach a team with 10 girls (out of 21 team members this year). Some of them are big into wearing make up and some are not, but they are ALL big into working on the robot and being a part of the team.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I am willing to guess that this idea may have been a factor in the speaker choosing to involve the companies she did.

I wouldn't say that this was at the expense of the core goals of FIRST. Maybe because (like you said) there is a push in FIRST at improving representation of minorities and women, this is an attempt to show that STEM roles are friendly to girls who are into things like makeup, since it may seem to those girls that they are pushed away for being too "feminine".

tl;dr FIRST is trying to bring people in, not drive people out.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Also, they were handing out Janes makeup sample packs to any females as they left the Deans List event.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As a girl who regularly enjoys doing and wearing both makeup and nail polish, I applaud this move. In our attempt to include more girls, we've always stressed that they can do everything boys can do. That they're not any different from the boys. We should be encouraging girls that there's a place for them in FIRST, regardless of whether or not they feel more comfortable in heels, a dress, and makeup, or jeans, sneakers, and a hoodie. There's nothing wrong with enjoying looking/acting like a "stereotypical girl" just like there's nothing wrong with not meeting those same stereotypes.

For me, make up isn't about trying to reach an arbitrary standard of beauty. I use it to express myself and my interests. My eyes and nails usually match my team colors. This weekend was spent in scholarship row so every day, my eyes have sported FIRST's colors. Life's short and make up comes in all kinds of colors. Why shouldn't I have fun with it? I enjoy wearing heels just as much, but I realize it's simply not practical to wear them all day to a competition.

Neither fact should have any bearing on my abilities or my roles on my team.


And as an aside, I'd rather do things like stripes or numbers on my face (or the face of others) in makeup because I know the products were intended to be used on the face. I've used inferior products that my students have reacted poorly too. I know what I'm getting into with makeup and I know the best ways to apply and remove it.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I like this explanation, being the more charitable and less cynical one. The promo video and the whole thing do seem to be quite at odds with what we're used to seeing in FIRST, but it may be a good angle to show "girly" girls that they can be part FIRST and STEM too.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Here's some reading as to why this may be harmful -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stereotype_threat

This is very different from dissuading girls from participating because of how they express themselves or how they behave. Offering makeovers is, instead, a way of preying upon girls' insecurities and suggesting that, despite whatever success they may have had on their team and at the event, they will be better off still if they conform to some societal ideal of beauty. There is a marked difference between targeting girls that already have an interest in makeup and targeting girls with makeup and this seems very much like that latter.

Edited to add: I don't necessarily care that a cosmetics company is sponsoring FIRST, really, but do take issue with offering makeovers during the event. A better, more meaningful approach might be to promote FIRST at cosmetics-related events rather than the other way around. All of that being said, having read a bit more about Ms. Tilton today, I am not really comfortable with her being anywhere near FIRST at all. I would not offer her as a role model for the students on our team.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I got the chance to talk to Lynn Tilton today, and what's been mentioned here is exactly her point.

Bring new people in, not drive existing out. Not only is Jane cosmetics a line with the 'buy one, give one' mentality, but if girls who are typically into 'girlier' things like makeup see FIRST through Jane, that could be a pretty good thing.

I don't think anyone is saying FIRST girls have to look or be a certain way, but rather, let's find a new avenue to bring more girls into FIRST and get the FIRST community into it too. Personally, I'd love to go over there and try out the products - because if they're good, and Jane supports FIRST, I'll definitely buy.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Why is that any different from offering study classes for the AP test? Or a coach helping a student excel at a sport? If someone wants to get help/suggestions from someone who knows a lot more, then why not?

I would posit that the ladies who have already joined First are already somewhat immune from social pressures.

The question is: How do you approach the next level of ladies: Those who are interested in First/Stem, but are sensitive to social pressure?

Those ladies already feel the social pressure to conform to "societal ideal of beauty", so nothing is lost if you can show that that part of their life does not change, but they can also be part of First/Stem. In fact, she may be able to use her First/Stem training to improve products that help her to conform to societal ideal of beauty.

If a lady wants to be feminine, then there is no reason to not let her be what she wants to be. Trying to appear "neutral" is just as much damaging to the lady that is dissuaded from being what she wants to be.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

If there were a golf coach helping people with their putting in the pits, that would make just about as much sense as this.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Well, learning is one thing; learning is fixing ignorance. Offering a makeover is sort of implying that there's something inherently wrong with the way your face is. But I may be biased, as I'm not a fan of makeup in general.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Lynn is a very successful business person and has excelled in a part of the world dominated by men. She is very good at what she does and she is very clear and direct in her dealings.

I heard her message, and my interpretation was if you feel comfortable and confident, you can achieve more.

She didn't say you have to wear make-up or a certain type of clothes, she didn't say wear cosmetics so that people will like you, she didn't say dress or look a certain way. She simply said feel confident - whatever that means to you and however you achieve that.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Hi all,

I posted the following in a friend's discussion in Facebook and decided to add it to this thread as well.

" Just a comment here:

Women and girls in shelters and safe houses from abuse - are very appreciative of clothing, make up, hair styling, and feminine hygiene products. How do I know this? 418 worked with a woman who founded a charity to help the homeless and, in particular, young teenage girls, for several years.
I've worked with, and supported, Safe Place here in Austin.

Furthermore, we all know about girls on teams and the wide spectrum of self-esteem and acceptance.

If the booth is popular, it could have a positive impact. The wise team will interview the girls and the people in the company and get some feedback before bringing judgment. Just sayin'."

In the last paragraph, I talk about a 'wise team' interviewing the girls and the folks who are working the booth during this event. It's actually a pretty awesome concept and would open up the impact viewpoint like crazy, providing insight many of us have never thought about. Anytime anyone feels better about themselves, it is a good thing.

I've often wondered how to help boost the self-esteem of girls on teams and if we can do more to help them see a future in the STEM programs - envisioning their place.

Let's not be so quick to judge and, instead, wait for some feedback from the opportunity. Also, this opportunity runs both ways: the company is sure to be impacted by the amazing girls in FIRST. It is bound to be an eye-opening experience for the company, just as it has been for other folks outside of the STEM bubble. Let's pop it and see what happens.

Jane

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

This could be an unpopular opinion, but I couldn't care less about what FIRST sponsors advertise providing that we aren't being led to believe that hollywood makeovers are relevant to what my team is doing.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Obviously, as a guy my opinion on this topic doesn't have much impact...

That said, one of my students, Madeleine, won Dean's List this year and had a chance to meet and talk with Lynn Tilton. From what she told me, she came away from it incredibly inspired. Having such a great role model involved in FIRST - a strong, confident female who has been incredibly successful in a high-powered world typically dominated by males - can only help us. Madeleine isn't really a girl to go giddy over makeup or makeovers, and I'm sure if given the choice she would rather of had one of the other companies Lynn owns present (especially if it involved seeing the guts of a helicopter or car). I hope Madeleine gets on here and posts her thoughts, after having a chance to decompress from the weekend :)

IMO, we need to do everything we can to pull in more girls. While giving robotics girls a makeover might be interpreted as giving the wrong message, how awesome would it be if we could get some info about FIRST distributed with makeup? Imagine a girl going into a beauty salon before a dance her freshman year and reading a pamphlet for FIRST... Could that be a good way to reach someone we normally wouldn't reach? I don't know if there are any plans for further cooperation with the companies, but this would be one possible example of how these companies could help us spread our message.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'm sure the business woman in question is very successful and inspiring and I commend her for that. I also am not at the championship event. That being said, what I take away from this is that she is a successful woman who has many companies yet choses to show the company that targets women. Rarely are makeup advertisements telling women "you're cool just the way you are, but here are some products that make you conform to stereotypical beauty standards." I get targeted ads, which explicitly say "look younger, hotter, sexier, etc." The only mainstream cosmetics company that "embraces women" is dove, who doesn't sell make up but skin care (which is arguable half cosmetic and half comfort).

Her make up company may not be explicitly saying "hey we want you to be sexier" but by offering make overs and commenters saying "girls are more confident wearing make up", we are saying "you'll be more confident if you are prettier/sexier/etc." I don't see a company offering the boys a place to do bicep curls, bench presses, or push ups (body building is the commonly considered the male equivalent to make up).

And this is inappropriate. In an arena that says "look, your brains are important" and where dean often says "this has more career potential than bouncing a basketball," we are telling girls that they're looks are still a large part of their value. It's not explicit, and that's the point. Make up is most commonly used to achieve the beauty standard (clear skin, large eyes, full lips). By saying that "it's good that make up makes the girls more confident", we're saying that being pretty makes them more confident (and this a huge can of worms revolving around the issue of a girls worth being tied to her appearance).

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Which other of her businesses should she have shown off? I doubt they would have let her bring in a few helicopters.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Why not? Aircraft manufacturers use scale models for displays all the time.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Yeah, lets put a couple Apaches near a bunch of other booths and pits.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As an avid Society of Women Engineers collegiate member who has attended several SWE conferences, I think this is an incredibly smart move for FIRST. When I heard about the makeovers at championships, I was very excited. If I had been there, I know I would have made a special trip to visit their booth. Bringing exciting activities to FIRST that interest all it's participants is imperative. At SWE conferences we have had makeup handed out by companies in the past because of the chemical engineers who work on them, and I love it!

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

If it's a scale model, there is nothing wrong with it as it would fit between the other booths and pits. Plus Apache helicopters are very cool and probably the most advacanced helicopter in the world. The technolgy in the Apache is phenomenal, most people when they think of the Apache, they think its just another gunship helicopter, but it is much more, just take a look at the link at the bottom. Remarable feat of engineering.

It would be cool though if Boeing had a real Apache helicopter at competition :D :D , but that wont happen.




http://science.howstuffworks.com/apache-helicopter5.htm

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

as a woman of FIRST, I would like to say that I have no desire for a more femine FIRST and find the whole idea that we, as equal competitors, are being represented by a cosmetics company a little insulting. I'm sure that they did not mean to imply that our worth as members of a team could be judged by our outward appearance, but that is how it feels when they choose cosmetic companies and models to represent us. I don't see why we need to be represented separately. I am a member of FIRST robotics, why can I not simply be represented by FIRST?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Because, you know, boeing would bring a whole airplane and nasa would bring a space craft. Really?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Because thats all Boeing and NASA can show off.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

You, FIRST or anyone is not defined by any one sponsor. I've seen efforts to boycott virtually every single founding sponsor of FIRST because each company violated someone's moral framework. If for instance, you go to Bing (because after all, Google is evil) and search "why should I boycott <sponsor>" I'm sure you'll get plenty of reasons why FIRST shouldn't have that company as a sponsor.

The perception that someone who wants to use cosmetics shouldn't be on a robotics team is as silly as saying someone who's on the volley ball team or hockey team or dances ballet cannot be on the robotics team because they couldn't be "geeky" enough.

Our love of science and technology is what brings us together. Let's just leave it at that an not start carving out exclusions.

Personally, I'm for more inclusion, let's ask the sugar beet farmers, the Emu ranchers, the P90X guys and the International Association of Hermits to sponsor FIRST as well.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I agree. I previously stated that our worth as members of a team can not be determined how we look. That goes both ways. It is ludicrous to assume that because someone wears make up that they are any less valuable as a member of FIRST and I am genuinely sorry if it came across that way.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

When I was visiting with an FTC team that I previously mentored, they were telling me all about going to the Jane Cosmetics booth and getting their makeup done. What I saw was young girls who were excited that they could have fun competing with their robot and get some free makeup at the same time. They didn't go get makeovers to make themselves feel better, or because they felt inadequate without it; they were simply happy about the fact that there were two things they enjoyed at the same place.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I didn't hear or see Ms. Tilton at any point in time, so I can only talk about their exhibit in the pits and the way it presented the company.

I generally don't wear makeup, and I'm having some issues with my eyes right now that mean I couldn't have gotten my makeup done. (Which I probably would have, assuming there was time, even with the teasing I would expect from my team for acting so out of character. I like being able to dress like a slightly different version of myself.)
But I was still curious, so I stopped by their booth on Thursday or Friday. I talked with one of the exhibitors, and basically said, "This is the last thing I would have expected to see here. Why are you here (what do you hope to achieve)?"
The answer I got was something to the effect of "We are trying to empower young women by showing them that they can be both beautiful and smart/involved in STEM." Which is a good sentiment, that you don't have to give up part of your identity to be a part of this community. But it rubbed me the wrong way by implying that we aren't already pretty, that it matters, or that there is only one standard of beauty (that, of course, just happens to be helped by their products).
I also didn't get a very good vibe from their exhibit, because it was set up too much like a makeup store (as opposed to a demonstration of their technology, though I'm not sure what that would have looked like) for comfort, so that probably didn't help. Any time it feels like someone is saying "Buy this!" it puts me a little bit on edge.

That being said, because it's the last thing I (and, I assume, others) expected to see associated with FIRST, I agree it would be a good outlet for recruiting from a slightly different segment of the population. They just need to tweak the subtext and premises of their message.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As a guy who at least tries to be receptive to gender issues, this is where I have to sit on the topic.

Garnet Squadron was 50% girls this year, and was actually 100% so starting out (by coincidence, not by design). I didn't see or hear any big fuss from our girls one way or the other. When I walked by their booth, I didn't see any carnival-barker-esque tactics going on. It could be enjoyed or ignored* at will, and that felt fine to me (all I'm-not-a-girl biases known).

*Okay, so you couldn't ignore their sponsorship on Einstein--but that's no different from UTC or Qualcomm or any other sponsor there. Doesn't count.

To stir the pot among those with objections to Jane's presence as it was: Is there a scenario where a makeup brand could have a presence at Championship that wouldn't draw your ire?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Just remember, as Jeremy Bem states in an interview with his mother, "...it’s okay to have conventional desires as well as unconventional ones."

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Let me start off by saying that as a girl in FTC and FRC robotics I am really excited that FIRST is trying to get more girls involved! Additionally, as an FLL mentor for a few years now (some of the teams I work with are all-girl teams), I think the sentiment that "girls can be beautiful and smart/involved in STEM" is a valid one to communicate. However, I think that there are more effective ways to go about getting more girls into FIRST.

From what I've read and seen from personal experience, the most effective time to get girls involved in STEM activities (and keep them involved) is around 4th-6th grade, or elementary and middle school. Perhaps I got into the makeup world a little late, but it is my thinking that by the time girls are old enough to be interested in/wearing makeup, it is already too late to be effectively targeting them for FIRST. I think you need to catch them before they've even begun to deal with the pressures and weird dynamics of societal ideas of beauty or insecurities about appearance. I hope that in the future FIRST can work with organizations like GoldieBlox, a company aiming to inspire more girls to become engineers by developing toys, to get more girls involved at younger ages.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Don't offer makeovers and have representatives on hand to discuss your research, development and manufacturing roles. Pretty straightforward stuff.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I have to say that I was a bit taken aback when I saw the display that Jane had set up in the pit area. I also had the reaction at first that this could be sending the wrong message, depending on the way the information was communicated to the students. Here is what I would have liked to have seen from Jane:

We employ chemical, manufacturing, programmers, packaging, etc. engineers and graphic design, marketing, project management, etc personnel.
Here is our workshop showing students how to make homemade lipgloss, chocolate asphalt, etc. that they can take with them.
The message is that females can design and configure the electrical, mechanical, software, and be on the drive team and not just perform the Team fund raising, chairman's award presentation, finances, etc. tasks.

I want to see the 30% female involvement increase to 50% and I want to see that 50% be hands on the robot vs. 90% of the 30% performing all the other skills required for a successful team.

With that being said, if you are a girly-girl who loves tech and gaming, please do not give up your femininity either. A pink phone case is your individual taste and you have every right to have it as well as wear make-up, a skirt, or heels. We only request you to be classy and not trashy in your choices because trashy is still sending the wrong message in today's still male-dominated engineering workplace.

If you want to talk to a female engineer who has served on a design team for various space missions, please come find me at an event or send me a PM.

BTW, NASA had hardware in Atlanta one year. I believe it was the Robonaut vehicle.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I ignored the makeup booth. It wasn't targeted at me and I don't feel qualified to assess it, beyond a general feeling of unease at the existence of the idea that makeup is for girls.

I could not ignore Ms. Tilton. Her speech didn't seem particularly focused to me, but I might have been distracted by the cognitive dissonance her high heels evoked in me. I am not accustomed to seeing someone with such good business success make a conscious decision to walk that way.



(Full disclosure of my personal opinions: I think high heels make people look silly, and I generally do not appreciate makeup.)

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'm not sure if any scenario should be upsetting. Companies like Rolex sponsor a ton of motorsport events, even though watchmaking has nothing whatsoever to do with racing cars. If the company is willing to help FIRST reach it's goals in return for a little product exposure, why should anyone object?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Is timing still captured during lapped races?
I'm thinking Rolex 24, 24 of Sebring, Daytona 500, Pepsi 400, Grand Prix, Le Mans, etc. Omega/Swatch for the Olympics.

Non-government, non-direct tax-payer-funding via government, government contractors, or government suppliers is what they are going for with non-traditional funding sources. Congress does funny things sometimes and FIRST needs to be sustained without Congress providing the funding for FIRST indirectly through a funnel from NASA etc. and the KoP suppliers who's primary customer is the Fed.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

As an observer who was actually at the FIRST Championship, heard Dean introduce Ms. Tilton at least twice (therefore hearing his take on her inclusion), and hearing Ms. Tilton speak on her own behalf, I'd like to offer a perspective:
The theme throughout the event was let's stop preaching to the choir. Over the past quarter century, FIRST has become pretty good at infiltrating STEM-centric industries. Now their focus is on expanding beyond that. They've created partnerships with celebrities, television networks, athletes - and Jane offers an example of industry beyond the traditional tech firms with which we're normally associated.
Ms. Tilton explained that she could have brought in one of her mills, automotive manufacturers, etc. - but those are already captured audiences. Cosmetics is largely untapped with regards to FIRST, and could have the largest effect.
Since she, and her corporate interests, are new to FIRST, I'm not at all surprised that a new sponsor set up a booth (which was given its prominent position, I assume, in proportion to the monetary donation given) that displays its products, and allows interested parties to test them out. Of the 'makeovers' I witnessed, I didn't see anything garish. I didn't see any implied message other than "hey, we support FIRST, and here's our company and what we do" - just like any other corporate sponsor does.
In her remarks, like Chris said, Ms. Tilton expressed support for confidence, not conformity. And rather than espouse the societal idea of beauty, she chose to focus on the philanthropic nature of the product line.
As with many things, if one enters this partnership with preconceived notions and makes value judgments based on those biases, then one is mostly missing the point.
The hope is Jane will help #MakeItLoud
And I don't see this partnership as any more outlandish than McDonald's sponsoring the Olympics. It's all about Top Of Mind Awareness, for all parties involved.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Madison, I understand your point and I think it's something to keep in mind. However, if we are going to dissect corporate sponsorship's ethics or social impact I believe it would be equally valuable to ask why we don't take a look at the defense suppliers, bio-engineering firms (Monsanto), and the company voted 'worst in America in 2014' (Comcast/NBC). They are all major FIRST sponsors.

This is the situation we are in. FIRST needs money to become all it can be. As long as we can control that impact inside FIRST and turn it into a net positive, I'm for taking money where we can get it. There is a line to be drawn in accepting sponsorship dollars, but I don't believe Jane is where that line belongs.

In the scheme of things I believe that a loving family and a cast of FIRST mentors will structure females self-worth more than a cosmetics company and their advertisements. I expect the additional exposure that FIRST will receive will help far more people that it will hurt.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Or even introducing new offensive gender expectations like "Brains and beauty go hand-in-hand".

I don't even . . .

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Would anyone who feels strongly that the message presented by this new sponsor be willing to condense the key points into a letter to Lynn Tilton?

When we're dealing with a passionate person (and potential huge funder), that wants to support FIRST... I'd work off the assumption that her heart is in the right place, and try to give some constructive feedback on things to watch out for. I know nothing about her true intentions, core beliefs, etc... and it's not fair to make assumptions on that because of her appearance. She may have some different ideas that go against FIRST culture, but maybe she can help us reach more students without losing our message? I'm also acutely aware that the mental snap judgement I made when I saw Lynn walking the stage during Einstein is not too different than the stereotyping I've been on the receiving end of in the past.

I too had a general uneasiness during champs... just from this encroachment of mainstream culture and "values". I think we all have a personal vision of what FIRST is, or should be. In my opinion, bringing in teen music stars whose music I abhor, or sponsors in 6" heels... doesn't mesh with my vision.

However, my vision isn't the only vision. It appears Dean's vision is to cast a wider net, and I have to respect that. It is going to happen, and all we can do is to re-affirm FIRST culture and beliefs so the newcomers grow into existing FIRST culture.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I find this whole discussion fascinating. Disclaimer: My opinion is not fully formed, and I appreciate everyone civilly sharing theirs as I think through it it all.

I definitely wanted to go to the booth and have someone pamper me for a few moments. I love when people do my hair, perhaps because it reminds me of time with my sister when we were younger. And I always feel like I am horrible at putting on makeup, but I LIKE to wear it (seriously, how do you keep mascara from smudging?!) So it would have been nice to get some tips. I chose to spend my time elsewhere though, like checking out the laser-etching machine.

Important word here: choice. Yes, the booth was center stage in the pits, but every interaction that I witnessed between the company and students was a positive one. And those who chose to not check it out were free to do so without being bombarded in other ways. They were inclusive, generous and respectful. They were gracious and professional.

The pluses that I see:

• Opening discussions with our teams about what it means to be female in STEM and business industries.
• Opportunity to assess our own views of stereotypes.
• Showcasing a strong female role model in the business world. Lynn seems like a ruthless business leader, passionate about her work and compassionate for those in need. (I enjoyed her Dean's List Award Ceremony speech)
• Bringing non-STEM companies in to see everything that we do: Making it Loud from the inside out instead of just preaching to the choir.
• Showcasing a stereo-typically more girly company to expand interest in FIRST and STEM.

Some possible deltas:

• Inaccurate portrayal and judgment that females need makeup to be successful.
• Possible increasing pressure on teenage girls to fit in with the stereotypical view of feminism.
• The misinterpreted impression that in order to be powerful, girls need to embrace their outer beauty more than their inner.

I wish I would have had the opportunity to talk with Lynn Tilton and ask her about these concerns. She seems like an intelligent woman who believes in the spirit of FIRST. I was inspired by her speech. The quote that stands out to me is, "When people feel better about themselves they are more courageous, confident and compassionate."

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

If that's an actual quote, I might have misunderstood a lot of what she said. When a video of the speech becomes available, I'll definitely be reviewing it with a more careful ear. It seemed that she was speaking from a viewpoint that I couldn't quite identify, and I came away with the impression that she was trying to tell us that how one looks is an appropriate basis for self-esteem.

However, I haven't noticed that courage and confidence go along with compassion. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding that as well.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I remember that quote as well, and it sounds accurate to me. The reasons she had for bringing those companies to Champs might have been very good, but it's also very easy to get the wrong read from it.

High School females have a lot of pressure to be wearing makeup and looking glamorous - they get it from Hollywood, from trying to appear like an adult, and from their peer group. Given that pressure, I can certainly understand (which is NOT the same thing as thinking it's appropriate) how they might lose confidence if they didn't have time to arrange their makeup or style their hair, which many of them don't at a competition like this. They put in incredible hours running around at the competition, only to get back to the hotel and crash, waking up just in time to come back and do it all over again. I could see how it could be nice for some of those students to get their hair and makeup done during some downtime at the competition, and how doing so might help them feel more confident while talking with their peer group in the pits.

And there are definitely some (I know a few of them from my team!) who see no real need or use for makeup, and are perfectly comfortable and confident without it.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Thanks to Jasmine for sharing her thoughts from this weekend! It would be interesting to hear more from some of the woman who attended to get their reactions/thoughts from interacting with the booth and hearing Ms. Tilton speak.

My first reaction was I thought it odd to see them there but after hearing their story I think it is neat to see FIRST partnering with more unique outlets. As Dean said this weekend we need to penetrate new groups because our stands are only filled with us. I don't think they are pushing feminism on females in FIRST but it is nice to see more successful females for our students to look up to both in STEM related industries and out! We all have our students who are interested in pursuing a STEM career but there are so many amazing students on our teams who pour their time into non-technical parts of the team and have similar ambitions later on in life. A lot of the media, movies, television shows, etc push that smart and pretty are two complete polar opposites (of which we all know is completely false) but it puts a lot of pressure on females to shy away from one or the other. Maybe this can help break some stereotypes that push females away from STEM.

Only time will tell to see how strong this partnership grows. I still remember three years ago when Will.I.Am showed up at the Manchester kickoff and to see where that has led. I hope we can get more people in these other industries passionate about what FIRST does and help spread our message to their customers/followers and bring what FIRST has to offer to more and more students.

I love one of the remarks that was made about the Olympics and McDonalds. Its interesting how one of the most unhealthiest food companies sponsors an event that showcases athletes all of whom would never recommend eating fast food while training. I'm sure each time an athlete does a photo shoot consuming/endorsing their product their trainers are hoping they didn't swallow. ;) Whether or not this relates to the topic at hand or not is one thing.

Carry on.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I agree with Taylor, as two of our girls who was chosen to get makeovers, it was nice that they got them. However, the girls weren't affected by it, and one being our student captain, she was more in a hurry to get her makeover done and get back working on the robot. When they came back from their makeovers, they were praised with how great their hair looked and their makeup done, but it didn't deter them in anyway shape or form. Nor did it take away from them being who they are.

I personally, am excited that FIRST is reaching out beyond the typical "STEM" partners and going into different ideas of possible partners. We have variety of girls on the team, some wearing makeup to none at all. But being able to be "pampered" at an event that is suppose to be a "man's world," I think getting a little makeover is fun. I see it as "anything you can do, we can do better and put on makeup while at it." Not all of you will agree with this.

I hate putting on makeup, but when I take the time to do it, I like what I did. (sometimes). While everyone thinks that makeup is something terrible, you'd be surprised at how you can put it on and be totally transformed. Everyone had some form of makeup (face, body, glitter, etc) on this weekend boy or girl. While as girls, we are suppose to have it on a certain way, think outside the box and have uses for makeup in different ways. I certainly wouldn't want to put sharpie marker on my face to represent my team colors.

Disclaimer: this is my opinion and does not reflect anyone else's. I had a great time at the event, and it's been far too long since my last one. I'm back! <3

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Personally I don't have a problem with Jane Cosmetics having a large booth at CMP and doing makeup and hair for those interested. While it doesn't follow the norm we are used to neither did the culinary institute that had a booth there too. It was a very popular booth. Thur, Fri and Sat I was staffing the Senior Mentor/Vista booth that was just around the corner from Jane Cosmetics and there was always a significant line of people waiting so it certainly was popular with some attendees. If you've ever been to Roboprom you'll see that there are always a number of the girls there that are in their fancy prom dresses, high heels and make up so clearly there are members of our community that enjoy showing off their girly girl side at least occasionally.

The only fault I see is that the person introducing Lynn Tilton and the booth didn't provide a little more back ground in what she has accomplished and what an inspiring individual she is. Her story is inspiring and we need more people like her who are passionate about saving US based companies and US based jobs. Rather than liquidating companies her firm revitalizes those companies and does so without off-shoring the manufacturing and jobs. http://www.patriarchpartners.com/Med...raphy_2014.pdf

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Anecdotes and feelings are wonderful and all, but research says that "girly" STEM role models, "do not motivate girls." *

I'm going to make a bridge between "girly" STEM role models, and this make-up thing, because I have yet to see any evidence that they aren't essentially the same thing.

I have posted about this before. I am an avid reader of literature about girls in STEM. I have my own stories and case-studies of girls in STEM, but no two stories are the same. However, large scale studies show trends. Lets take a look:

"Despite good intentions, attempts to glamorize STEM women may be less motivating to girls than more “everyday” female STEM role models, say U-M psychology researchers Diana Betz and Denise Sekaquaptewa."

One study involving middle school girls, asked participants about their favorite subjects, and determined who were “STEM-identified".

The girls read about three female university students displaying feminine characteristics or gender-neutral traits. Role models also displayed either STEM success or general school success. Participants completed a self-evaluation about their future plans.

"The researchers found that feminine STEM role models decreased girls’ self-rated math interest, ability and short-term success expectations. They also had a negative impact on girls’ future plans to study math among girls who did not identify with STEM."

"[The researcher] says girls not interested in math and science saw simultaneous success in both domains at least attainable, suggesting that their lack of motivation was [the notion of the] unlikelihood of combining femininity and STEM success. ...Role models whose success seems unobtainable can make young students feel threatened rather than motivated... if they believe that women in STEM are “too good” to be role models."

If you go to the thread, you can see other studies linked.

One response does a nice job of summing up why a make-up counter is not effective (emphasis mine):

"Girls/women not already interested in STEM almost universally report decreased likelihood of studying STEM after interaction with an overtly feminine STEM role model, essentially based on the representativeness heuristic. Overtly feminine STEM role models also decrease younger girls' perception of their abilities regardless of their initial interest in STEM or personal characteristics...

the feminine role model works for you and I because we're already interested in STEM (and believe we can succeed). Overtly feminine STEM models can be encouraging, but aren't eye-opening. In fact, they're actually eye-closing."

_________________

Its worth noting that just because you aren't experiencing negative effects and you think its great, doesn't mean it is (likewise, just because I think it's discouraging doesn't mean it is either).

Also, just because you don't see obvious, glaring-you-in-the-face negative consequences, doesn't mean they can't exist and that is where the problem lies.


_________________________________

And one last comment, has anyone considered how this will effect male-female interactions? I've experienced being a sexual object in FIRST before they added a make-up booth, which is implying (even if you don't think so) that girls need to be pretty to have worth** (because that is the underlying principal cosmetic companies use to make a profit).


*Are you a girly mentor? Fantastic! Be you! Are you not girly? Great! Be you! There is merit to having a range of mentors to connect to all types of students.

**self worth, worth in others eyes... etc

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Where there any males who took advantage of the booth?
Media and entertainment presenters wear makeup and are very professional in the image they project.
Our team, and I assume many others, have members who have been coached on how to speak and act when the cameras are pointed at them. I would have been eager to talk to them and learn how a professional would apply makup to my face to cut down on glare and what color and style clothes work well on camera.
At least this thread challenges our assumptions about appropriate gender issues.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Katie, everything that you say here is interesting and brings up questions worth discussing. I have no doubt that the research you've read is accurate.

My main question is: Does the research point out solutions (don't use girly femininity to endorse STEM) or does it point out symptoms of a larger societal issue of women judging other women (of all ages) based on various kinds of appearances.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I did see a few guys waiting in the line but didn't see them in the chair so I don't know if they were just hanging out with their friends while they waited in line or what.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

A quick google search leads me to a this page titled "Engaging Girls in STEM, Exemplary Practice Research on Engaging Girls in STEM"

Unsurprisingly to me, this report suggests that getting girls involved in STEM activities at all ages and explicitly telling all students that their skill levels (in all fields) are not fixed at birth (this has moderate supporting evidence) is an effective way. This actually has stronger evidence in success than female STEM role models(low supporting evidence).


A report on a program used to encourage girls says the following paragraph which addresses getting non-STEM identified girls into the STEM program:

And the last I will quote is research/review from The Girl Scouts of America:

The solution is pretty simple, which is mostly just exposure. I have not read all the studies on the "engaging girls in stem" page, but I'm willing to bet they will conclude with "more exposure, positive reinforcement, and relatable mentors."

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

This is totally anecdotal and thus will not have as much value as Katie's excellent posts on this topic, but I just want to reiterate this point. A pervasive belief in younger students I've worked with, particularly the women, is the nagging idea that they're not "smart enough" for this stuff. These students get discouraged when they attempt something they don't start out particularly great at, especially when other (male) peers seem to breeze through it. I don't know why, but there seems to be a greater tendency in the young women I've mentored to feel that skill in something is inherent and not improvable with practice. Working to defeat this idea is important. Showing that everyone can get better or even become the best at a task they did not start out good at is crucial. In some way engineering "rock stars" can sometimes make a task seem even more daunting: the idea sometimes becomes that only these amazing, remarkable people find success in STEM.

Mentoring small groups of people through a new task and sticking with them as they improve on it, gradually reducing your role in the task, seems to be in my experience a really effective way of breaking through this barrier. This year we had a few first year men and women who didn't feel particularly skilled at anything and weren't sure where they wanted to be on the team. I started the build season with them leading them through the prototype of our gripper. At first it was mostly me-directed and they received tasks. As we prototyped through the weeks I consciously tried to step farther and farther back, letting them take more and more charge of it, until by the end of the season this team assembled the competition claw without me even attending the meeting. Their skill set grew dramatically, they took ownership of the project (iterated the design based solely on *their* idea), and they're absolutely inspired.

The point I'm getting at here is that effective inspirational mechanisms seem to have a common theme: communicating the idea that "you can do it too". Inspiration should be making these aspirations seem possible and within reach. I think there's value in showing that you don't have to be a specific "kind" of woman to be a STEM hero, but I think this role-model ism needs to be coupled with other forms of inspiration to really sink in. Otherwise you just present another example of how "only super humans can do STEM".

Maybe a few women who otherwise wouldn't enter our lab would because of this program, and that would be great. There needs to be some caution though in including a company whose business model inherently rides on the patriarchal idea of a woman's worth being partly determined by her appearance. Then again, we happily welcome companies who profit off of war into FRC, with open arms, so maybe this isn't such a big deal :P

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Isn't that exactly what Jane Cosmetics supplies - more exposure?
*with the invitation to leave one's preconceptions at the door

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Okay, I've been reading and processing, and I think it's time to jump in.

I think this is a huge part of why I've stayed away from this thread. Am I any less of a mentor because I like makeup and hair and high heels just as much as I like building robots with my students?

I don't buy this 'girly girls aren't inspiring' thing. I think the problem might be that some organizations might be using someone who is a girl but not necessarily a STEM enthusiast, as a STEM role model, and that's where you get into a tricky situation.

Katie, this made me think of something: Why can't I be relatable AND dolled up?

Where is the place in FIRST for a girl who likes 'girly' things but also likes robots? Why are we putting her down in this thread? She is no less of a FIRSTer just because she likes to dress up, and if she enjoyed the I Am Jane booth, then good for her!

I'm unfortunately reading some of the posts in this thread as 'Real FIRST girls don't -need- all that silly hair and makeup stuff,' and I'm pretty disappointed in that attitude. As Carolyn said earlier, why aren't we, the 'girly' and the 'non-girly', banding together to bring even more girls into FIRST and STEM, regardless of what they like to do with their hair?! I think we're all being a little judgmental here.

The way I saw this booth was as a first step in Lynn Tilton's efforts to help bring girls into FIRST. Since she is a person I'd consider a successful role model, I think it's pretty cool that she's going to use two of her more female-focused companies to try and shed some attention on FIRST for a new audience. To me, having those companies at Championships was a way for her to get us behind that movement, (sort of a "hey, FIRSTers, we're here!") and then for her to follow up going forward with FIRST information broadcasted out to I Am Jane's target customers.

It's really too bad that instead of rallying behind her idea to bring more girls (yes, the ones interested in makeup) who might not have seen FIRST yet in their lives, we're essentially saying that 'those girls' aren't welcome here.

I'm seeing a lot of parallels to when will.i.am was first announced as a partner in 'making it loud'. I distinctly remember people saying 'we don't want the kind of people who listen to his music in FIRST.' I think Will's support has been pretty awesome, and a big step in the way of changing culture - you know, the entire goal of the organization?!

We can't be a niche culture or a secret club anymore. Time to start being a little more accepting of those outside the 'robotics norm'.

EDIT::

I agree with this. It's a careful line to be on, but we have to balance this the right way. I think it's a good opportunity to try and bring some girls who wouldn't ordinarily see FIRST, but I do understand the point of 'let's not teach girls that beauty is everything.' That's right! Let's instead teach them that they are smart and awesome and capable, and oh by the way -- whatever makes you more comfortable and confident? Go rock that.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

After having read this article, posted by Katie, I would love to see the interviews talked about below:

I'm assuming there was a photo shoot accompanying the article and given how media portrays everything else, I have a hard time believing that each one of those girls wasn't wearing makeup or at least digitally altered in some fashion. Perhaps her skin was airbrushed to remove some acne, or some foundation and concealer was applied to hide the fact that she didn't sleep well the night before because she was stressing out over a test or project.

Personal background time:

Growing up, I had a sizable collection of toys that would rival the most diverse pre-school. All of the building type toys, dolls/Barbies, makeup/hair things, coloring materials, and books galore. We had a full (7 feet tall) bookcase dedicated to just books for children of all ages. And I LOVED to wear dresses. My mom can sew (it's still black voodoo magic to me) and she regularly made me dresses for various holidays. Then I turned 7 or 8 and just stopped wearing them. I still don't know why. As a teen I wouldn't touch them and now at 22, I'm "rediscovering" them and even own MULTIPLE dresses. (Gasp!)

And now? I'm studying to be an engineer. Personally, I'd be turned off by "student displaying feminine characteristics" because from the quote alone, it sounds hyper-feminine. Nauseatingly so. Why did she have to be in pink? Why not a more feminine cut top (as opposed to say a t shirt) in a light color? Why couldn't she wear glasses? Why do reading and glasses seem to go together in this study as being "unfeminine"?

It's been my experience that usually people have varied interests. I build robots, swing dance, wear makeup, LOVE bright colors, and am studying engineering. I'm a role model to those on my team yet my interests don't seem to lump me into any one of those pre-defined categories... Just because I wear makeup doesn't make me feminine just as wearing glasses and loving to read doesn't make me "gender-neutral".

I agree with Jane's feelings on wanting girls to feel confident. You don't have to use makeup to look like a clown. What about using it to teach girls the power it has to allow them to focus less on what they look like* and more on what they're doing? For that matter, I've seen some men who are better at applying no-makeup makeup (makeup that looks like you're not wearing) than I am.

* Middle and high schools are often incredibly self conscious. It's a trope in movies and tv where the lead will have a "massive acne breakout" before the big event. I feel that used correctly, makeup can allow both men and women to focus less on personal flaws, that few others notice except for them, and focus more on the task at hand. (Do you really notice light acne on someone? I know I don't. Do I notice even the tiniest speck on my face? You betcha.)



Tangentially related: In addition to all that above, I'm queer. And I'm out. More than seeing more girls in STEM, I'd love to see more support for LGBTQ FIRST students. The STEM field is harder than most to come out in because it is so polarized by gender binaries and expectations. I've talked to a few teams about starting to get involved with supporting LGBTQ students in some of their outreach efforts and each of them has been worried about backlash from their school and parents. This is a topic I haven't seen brought up at all on CD. Regardless of your feelings on homosexuality or gender binaries and expectations, all of our students should feel supported and included.

If anyone, student or mentor, wants to talk to someone about identifying on the LGBTQ spectrum, my inbox is always open. Or heck, just pm me and let me know that I'm not the only queer CD'er on here.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Kimmeh, thanks for sharing. I respect your thoughts a lot and applaud the way you presented yourself. As I get my thoughts together I will probably PM you to ask about ways to make my team more of a "safe" (for lack of a better word coming to mind) place for LGBTQ students.

I'm proud of this community for discussing the issue the way we have. *THIS* is what CD should be like all the time. Let's keep it that way. :)

...to continue the conversation:

Chris offered some awesome advice about working with female students on teams. There definitely is a stigma that skills involved in STEM activities are natural, and we should work to show / teach anyone who feels this way that they too can learn any skill involved in STEM industry through dedication and passion. (I know that I fail at this often when I say things like, "I'm not good at math." That statement may be true, but I still should acknowledge that with practice and dedication I have the power to change that.)

Katie offered some great alternative ways to engage girls in STEM activities / FIRST. I appreciate those articles that you posted. I plan on spending time throughout the week reading them closely. (They're a bit long to try to digest all at once currently).

While Katie is promoting alternate ways to engage women in STEM, I very much appreciate Libby's post as well. I believe what she is eluding at is this concept of "(s-word) shaming" that is prominent in our society, especially middle and high schools.

This is what I have been struggling to figure out in this conversation:
What is the root cause of the lack of female students in STEM activities? I believe that it is because of a variety of reasons, but that one big reason is the tendency of women to judge other women.

Why do we do this? Why do we have labels like "girly-girl," "(s-word)," "prude," "makeovers," etc?

What does it mean to be "feminine"?

How do we model healthy body-image, confidence, and compassion to our FLL students, who are the most impressionable?

No one has all the answers. And I certainly still don't think my opinion is THE ONE to listen to. But having this discussion here, and feeling comfortable expressing our different opinions is a START.

Using positive words to describe ourselves and other women, no matter how they look or act, is also essential.

Edit: CD is censoring my link/word. I'm respecting that, but just wanted to point out that I don't mean the s-word that means poop.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Appears they did do a makeover for a few boys too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_nZ...gEw t7JGSfcrM

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

When speaking with Lynn, a big thing for her was that she didn't want women to feel like they had to give up anything to be in STEM. She doesn't want the more "girly-girls" who do like to wear pink and makeup and high heels to feel as though we couldn't be ourselves and be successful in STEM. She wants all kinds of women to confidently be a part of STEM and FIRST, and I think that is a really valuable effort.

Also, of all the cosmetics companies out there, I think Jane is probably one of the best to be affiliated with FIRST. Their mottos include "Compassion is contagious" and "Live to give". Lynn and her staff really represent these ideas well.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

To add to the discussion, a few thoughts and real examples:

Most females want to help people. They do not necessarily see how engineering helps people when they are K-12. What is engineering and how does it help people? needs to be introduced to them before grade 6 to spark their interest.

The SWE booth at Champs was performing various hands-on workshops with the students. I perform hands-on workshops with female students to let them create a mini-robot of their own design that they can take home with them - a lesson in creativity and design. They seem to love it once they get past the part of there are no directions (I get asked sometimes). Some get it on their own, some partner, some copy off their neighbor, and some do not even try because "it's too hard". Some think it's 35 minutes of social time.

The lack of women in STEM is complicated and is going to take much time to fix. I would like to think it is getting better as new hires are pushing employers to be the workplaces of the future and instituting change. Just know that there have also been several studies on why women in engineering leave the workforce (just because they enter it, it does not mean they will stay in it).

People fear that which they do not understand. That fear leads people to act out against their fears and the people in their workplace. Instead of accepting diversity, they create adversity vs. taking a live-and-let-live attitude. For example: I had a supervisor who hated goth kids/people who shopped at Wal-Mart and had no qualms about expressing her disgust either. I know someone else who thinks gay men are going to recruit his sons to be gay. Just know that not everyone is a natural includer.

There are still men in the engineering workforce who believe that women should not be engineers: their opinion is that a woman's place in their workplace is to bake cookies, make copies, and fetch their coffee for them. I say this because I had two physically attractive female friends who had this actually happen to them. Another friend worked for a company who's CEO hated women in his workplace. She is an amazing woman, and she really helped them out with their production.

Certain sectors of engineering are still very very conservative. Do not show tattoos, piercings, unnatural hair colors, or say what you really think or feel because people form perceptions based on what you look like rather they actually know you or not. One of the ladies who worked on the same floor as I did would wear super short skirts, wedged espadrilles, and low-cut sleeveless tops to work. It makes people stereotype her into the category of performing certain types of favors in exchange for promotions - rather is was true or not - she was sending the wrong message. Keep in mind that the engineering staff is not allowed to wear skirts/dresses, heels, open-toed shoes, jewelry, etc. in the processing areas that had metal grating platforms.

TV shows like TBBT are not helping: People identify with Penny and laugh at the expense of the smart characters. I had to stop watching because I know real people just like Sheldon, Raj, Howard, Amy, Bernadette, Leonard, and yes, Penny and I could not stand seeing them be the butt of jokes/made fun of week after week. It feeds the stereotypes and the us vs. them.

Not everyone can be a doctor, lawyer, engineer, mechanic, computer programmer, pharmacist, teacher, nurse, brick layer, general contractor, electrician, plumber, airline pilot, waiter/waitress, cashier, etc. Not everyone possesses the skill-sets needed even if they are smart. It takes determination, persistence, passion, perseverance, problem solving, and a positive attitude to be successful. Otherwise, we end up with people who are mediocre or below mediocre at what they spent so much money to learn in school/university.

With that being said, sometimes weaker areas can be improved upon. I had issues with math that I had to overcome. It took about 30 minutes of sitting down with a professor to figure out my issue, and I never had a problem after that point. Math is just like any other problem in life: 1) recognize the type of problem; 2) what are the steps to solve that type of problem?; 3) what do you think the answer should be? 4) solve the problem; 5) Do the Results make sense/are the results in the ballpark?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I figured this was a good a place as any to post this article about the number of girls at St.Louis. I think they did a pretty good job talking about the teams and the STEM opportunities.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

From my perspective which is that of a female who has always been "one of the guys" or a "tomboy" and very involved in working on my team's robot, I just wanted to share my thoughts on this subject. I have been in FIRST for ten years going from FLL to FTC to FRC and have been on fabrication, electrical, and programming subgroups.

I went to Worlds this year as a Dean's List Finalist and heard both of Lynn Tilton's talks. I can't say for sure what Ms. Tilton wanted to communicate, but the message I got was: "Okay, as a female, you have done robotics, but I'm here to make you look pretty/girly!" She was in the perfect position to encourage girls to get involved in the STEM side of robotics, but she made no mention of it. Of the 11 kids on my team this year, six of us were girls, but I was the only one who would work on the robot. The other girls on the team were comfortable with writing and public relations, but attempts to get them to help with the robot were not successful. They felt like programming and building was for the guys. If Ms. Tilton had come in with her helicopters, as she said she could have, what a great female role model it would have been for the rest of the girls on my team. But by bringing in her cosmetic products instead, she missed an opportunity to encourage females to get involved in STEM fields.

Ms. Tilton's cosmetic booth was not the only time I felt girls were being stereotyped at Championships. As a Dean's List Finalist I was told that I would have a picture taken with Mr. Noel Lee, President of Monster. We were told, "Mr. Lee would like you to pick a set of headphones. Put them around your neck for the picture." There were two colors available: pink and matte black. Never having liked pink I asked for the black set to wear for the picture but was told, "No, you must wear the pink ones." Just because I am a girl?

Not all girls want to wear makeup and like all things pink. I was deeply saddened at Championship to see girls stereotyped in these ways. FIRST is in a unique position to encourage girls to get involved in the STEM fields, but they missed some great opportunities in St. Louis to do just that.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Does anyone have a video of her speech or transcript of it from the Dean's List ceremony? I'm interested that people heard different messages.

What do you think her message should have been?

What do you think of Dean's push to involve other businesses besides just the STEM companies?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

If you were asked to do this, it was not by FIRST. Please know your story has been noted. In the future, sponsors asking for media will need to be more logical about things like this.

I'll try and track down a copy of the speech, if the video of the Dean's List ceremony isn't yet up on FIRST's YouTube channel. I got to spend some considerable time with Lynn, and I know the intent behind her words was certainly NOT 'I'm here to make you look pretty'.

As I've said before, her thoughts on bringing her more female-oriented companies to Championship was to help make the FIRST community aware of the outreach she has planned to do through them, to help bring girls who have not yet seen FIRST into our community. She wants to use these companies as well as others to help reach out and spread the message of FIRST. She's not here to 'fix up' the existing people in FIRST, she's here to get us more people. Yes, more girls, with varying interests.

One of the main points in her speech, and why she brought I Am Jane to the CMP, was the company's motto: "Compassion is contagious". She feels that the more confident a person feels in their own skin, the more energetic and enthusiastic they're going to be about the world around them. Nowhere in her speech did she say that people HAD to wear makeup to be confident, valued, or any of the other things we seem to be assigning here. In fact, I'm almost certain she said something about the fact that what brings you confidence is different for each person.

I think what she was hoping for as a response was excitement from the community about a new way to bring young women who might be discouraged from science & tech BECAUSE they are 'girly girls', into FIRST.

Was bringing a makeup station to Championship the best way to communicate that? Maybe, maybe not. But I sincerely hope the community can understand what her intent was - to get us, the existing FIRST community - girls and boys alike- behind this movement to help get some new FIRSTers from other audiences.

As Dean has said time and time again, we're preaching to the choir if we're only telling other techies about FIRST. It's time to get to the point of a household name, and we can't do that if we only stick within our own crowd.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

This is an interesting topic, and I am actually surprised by your experience, I would strongly recommend you start a thread discussing these types of issues. As an observation, the HS team I was on at least 50% of students were LGBTQ, I also attended an old very traditional engineering school that had a very active and well respected LGBTQ community, and now am working as an engineer and know many LGBTQ co-workers, I always believed the STEM community tended to be pretty accepting as there isn't much stress put on your personal life, but rather on your technical abilities, perhaps I am completely wrong about that, either way I think it warrants its own thread and discussion.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

For what it is worth several male members of our team took advantage of the booth to get eye shadow, lashes and other makeup done up just for kicks. I am not saying that they looked good after it, but did seem to have fun with it. Many of the female members of the team also seemed to like the idea.

I guess when it comes to FIRST I try to be open to support from a variety of sources. What does a company like J. C. Penny have to do with robots? Do they sell programmable controllers? Do they market aluminum flat stock? No, but they are a member of the community that sees the value of supporting our youth and recognize FIRST as a great way to do that. That is usually enough for me from any sponsor.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

J.C.Penney's Investment in FIRST as part of its own existing afterschool program.
I'm not exactly sure how many of these Teams were supported by J.C. Penney's Grants, but we lost the following 17 Rookie teams between 2012 and 2014:

Florida Rookie Teams Lost between 2012 and 2014:
3938 Miami Radix Robotics 2013
4052 Fort Myers Wolfpack 2013
4066 Groveland MechMate 2013
4088 Port Charlotte Flash4ward 2013
4133 6406 E Chelsea St S2-Boltz 2012
4157 Fort Myers Imaginarium 2012
4179 Cantonment Tahisco Techs 2013
4184 Naples Wreck-techs 2013
4190 Port Richey Hephaestus 2012
4197 Dade City Lacoochee Cowboys 2013
4214 Riverview Robo-Flames 2012
4222 Sanford Frolicking Nerds 2012
4223 Lakeland Robo-Flight-Transformer 2013
4321 Jacksonville Vikings 2013
4333 Tampa Team MOSI 2012
4341 Mulberry Panther Robotics 2013
4706 Miami Bulls 2013

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I find this post so inspiring. When I heard that Jane Cosmetics was going to be at FIRST champions I got really excited because I enjoy wearing makeup as well as other stereotypical girly things. That being said I am also a leader on my FRC team and I truly love FIRST robotics and engineering. Not all girls love pink but some do. I think when trying to attract more females into STEM programs, girls should be looked at as equals to boys. There is nothing wrong with a girl that likes to build robots and there is nothing wrong with a girl who likes to do the chairmans award presentations and work more on the business side of things. Something that I have experienced in my 3 years in FIRST is never being looked down upon just because out of all of the hands working on the robot mine were the only ones with red nail polish on them. FIRST has a place for everyone and in my experience is a very open and welcoming community.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I personally talked to Lynn Tilton by request of Dean Kamen. When we spoke, she emphasized her belief that brains and beauty do not have to be separate.

Ms. Tilton is not saying that you need to wear makeup to be beautiful or smart; she is saying that for many women, makeup boosts confidence. And confidence is integral to success in any field, especially STEM fields that are traditionally dominated by men. For Ms. Tilton, confidence came from makeup. She wants to share makeup with girls so that they too may feel more confident; she is sharing her secret ingredient for confidence in the hope that others may find their own secret ingredient for confidence.

Dean wants to get more girls involved in FIRST. He wants to spread the word to these girls, and what better way than by spreading FIRST with makeup, one of the products women use most? By affiliating FIRST with makeup, FIRST can reach out to girls who may be outside of STEM. I think that a makeup partnership will be beneficial, because when girls buy their makeup from Jane, they will discover that Jane sponsors FIRST, and will potentially learn more and join FIRST.

Personally, when I first considered joining Exploding Bacon, I did not think it was for me; I didn't think I was that much of a nerd or a geek. Soon afterwards I realized that FIRST is not just for nerds or geeks, but I went into it thinking that it might very well be. We need to stop this preconceived notion. The first thought that FIRST should produce is not “oh that's just for nerds,” but “oh that looks like fun.” FIRST needs to break the social boundaries that promote the separation of popular from nerdy, and brains from beauty.

As for the makeovers at Championships, I think they're a great idea. They really promote the idea that brains and beauty go together. The girls that wanted makeovers went and got one, and the girls that did not want a makeover did not get one, just like the people that wanted to learn about Monsanto went to the Monsanto booth, and those that did not want to, did not go to the Monsanto booth.

I believe that the goal of the Jane booth and FIRST's partnership with Ms. Tilton is to help girls in FIRST feel more confident—if they need more confidence—as well as to promote FIRST to unconventional audiences (the audiences that we in FIRST also need to focus our efforts on obtaining) because FIRST has two goals: to create well-prepared STEM leaders, and to create a new generation and new culture that reveres STEM and recognizes its importance.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

If Jane Cosmetics returns for 2015 onward, I was wondering (in light of some comments earlier in the thread) if it might be better to call them "makeup sessions" instead of "makeovers" to avoid perceived stigma (by some) that someone might need to be "madeover". Just a thought.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

That's actually a good thought. :]

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I am a boy. I am writing this wearing a hot pink Hollister shirt. Not all girls may like pink, but some boys do.

The interesting thing about stereotypes is they aren't inherently bad. Stereotypes had to come from somewhere, right? Stereotypes are shortcuts for you brain to try to classify a person based on how they look and their interests. Its like TvTropes for people

The issue arises when you hold onto those stereotypes and try to put people in a box. Why are we stereotyping people who like makeup as "not for FIRST"? Makeup is just like deodorant, except deodorant is kinda a necessity. Okay, that was a bad analogy. Makeup is like earrings. The point of clothes is not only for not being naked, but to express yourself and be confident.

TL;DR makeup is not evil

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Some of the comments in this thread have gotten to me. There are a few people who, I feel, have the opinion that wearing makeup is bad. As someone with hundreds of dollars invested in my current makeup collection, this upsets me. I don't wear makeup because someone tells me I should. I wear it because I enjoy creating colors and patterns. It means that I still GET TO COLOR! On my face! AND I can show everyone what I did. Heck yeah! I enjoy finding out what colors/products work with my skin or learning how to do that cool makeup technique/style that I saw on Reddit or YouTube.



Sometimes, it provides a sense of normalcy to my life. I unexpectedly lost my dog last Thursday. My skill with makeup allowed me to make it look like I hadn't spent hours the night before crying so that I could go to work on Friday. My coworkers knew what happened and weren't expecting me in, but going to work made me feel normal, as did my makeup. Then again, other times it's just for fun. Hello rainbow eyelids for PRIDE events!

You don't have to like wearing makeup. You're well within your right. But please, don't make feel like less of a person, or someone unworthy of FIRST/STEM because I enjoy wearing it.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'd like for folks to provide concrete examples from this thread where the text has given them the impression that people who wear makeup don't belong in FIRST, that people who wear makeup should feel bad about themselves, etc. I certainly don't intend to communicate either of those ideas in my criticism of the makeover booth or of Jane Cosmetics as a sponsor. It's important to me to be aware of when my language isn't being interpreted in the manner I intend because I would not want to drive away girls from participating inadvertently. I'm sure that others agree with me about that.

It's really pretty simple as I see things:
1 - FIRST wants to encourage more girls to be involved.
2 - FIRST engaged a successful businesswoman to become a sponsor. 2A - This woman has demonstrated success as a businessperson, but has no special knowledge of or expertise in methodologies for encouraging more girls to participate in STEM activities.
3 - This woman advocates for and presents a methodology that research by subject matter experts shows to be ineffective.

If I and others can find the findings of research in this area in a few moments of Google searches, it's a bit ludicrous to think that FIRST didn't bother or didn't care enough to see what the effect of this would be on its students before agreeing to it. I have no doubt that the intentions of everyone involved are noble -- but even the best intentions can't change the reality that this sort of method doesn't work. Full stop. The end.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'm not sure about the certainty of your #3. Katie did point to research that came to the conclusion that using glamorized women as role models for STEM did not prove to be effective, but I am still not convinced that this research can be seen as the end all of the discussion.

My question remains: Does this research say that "girly" women who wear makeup should not be held up as STEM role models, or does it point to a more general societal issue of females being taught to judge other females at various ages because of various styles? I am more inclined to believe that it points to the second.

If we say, "There's no room in our program for a makeup industry," then it seems like we are also saying, "There's no room for girls who like makeup in FIRST." I find that unacceptable. There needs to be room for ALL females in our program.

If we showcase and preach acceptance of all females, regardless of makeup choices, fashion, culture, ethnicity, etc, then we can open the doors of STEM to more females. By having a makeup sponsor, offering the option for free makeup and hair sessions, I can only see how we are opening more doors.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I'm very late to this discussion and with somewhat trepidation I'm posting. At best the last term anyone would describe my personal appearance is "Metro-sexual" I often wake and look in the mirror and go "Umm PsychoSanta is back, time for a trim"

I am a believer in "You feel your best, you do your best". Around here you are rocking some serious weld joints that are class A, just beat down a Bridgeport Knee mill older than your dad to make a perfect part, got one of Ether's questions on CD right, have clothing on that makes you feel special, got your makeup working so that in the Sodium shop lights you don't look like the Great Pumpkin Charlie Brown: you feel special, so tonight is going to be great. Kimmeh had a good post about this.

You are then happy and in your zone and cool things work.

I want roboteers to excel. If makeup makes that happen then I'm all behind the new Andy Mark "Kokomo Colors line" and the new "JVN Shine Down" product lines. But really behind Jane Cosmetics. I like the change from MakeOvers to Makeup. And I dread walking by to get told "Hey Foster, the Neanderthal uni-brow is so 200BC..... "

One thing about FRC is that it's multi-inclusive: Mechanical, electrical, programming, strategy, drive, spirit, finance, fundraising, program management, logistics, community relationships, robot outreach, etc.

Confident roboteers that feel good/proud about themselves make a great impression.

So I view the new sponsor line as a good thing, adds value in a different direction, brings new ideas in, brings new people in. An infusion of new ideas are good, otherwise we would still be rolling around in the corn.

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

Emphasis mine.


I second Carolyn's belief that it points to the second. I'm not inherently trying to discount the article by U of M, but like before, I want raise questions on how they presented the girls in the study. It sounds like the "student displaying feminine characteristics" might be similar, visually, to Elle Woods (Legally Blonde). I find it hard to believe that wouldn't turn many girls away from STEM. In order to be feminine and in STEM, I have to look like that? If you told me that in high school I would have been out of there faster than you can say "Pink dress". Yes she's feminine, (and successful at law), but in an over the top way. It's already triggering preconceived notions. The "gender-neutral" girl sounds more like how more girls self identify.

When I look at Mary Barra, I see a successful feminine woman. (If being the first female CEO of a major auto maker doesn't count as STEM success, then I don't know what does.) I see jewelry, makeup, scarves that serve little purpose than fashion, and clothes that flatter her. But wait. Her clothing seems to favor blacks and grays. Which clashes with our previous definition of feminine clothing needing to be pink. At least for me, she's relatable. She's human. And I'll confess, given that she's a graduate of my university, I may admire her more that others.

It sounds more human and less like a caricature of being feminine. Humans are remarkably complex creatures who don't fit into one label. And the study I'm citing targeted middle schoolers, who are already incredibly self-conscious and susceptible to influence.

By all means, if you can show me studies that don't seem to take the more extreme portrayals, I'm more than willing to look at them. But in the mean time, I'm still hesitantly cautious at best.


I am all for getting some eye shadow in "Official" FIRST Red and Blue shades. How do we make this happen?

Re: Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship
 

I don't agree. It looks to me like you're saying that something like "There's no room for a veterinary program" implies "There's no room for people who like animals." It's easy to disagree with the conclusion, but I don't think the conclusion follows from the premise.

There's room in FIRST for girls--or boys--who like makeup. FIRST might not actively encourage baking, but there's room in FIRST for people who like cooking. There's room for students who play music, write Twilight fanfic, participate in competitive dance, go fly fishing, and enjoy any number of non-technical activities.

Okay, maybe not the Twilight fanfic.