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