View Single Post
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 03-07-2015, 13:57
Siri's Avatar
Siri Siri is offline
Dare greatly
AKA: 1640 coach 2010-2014
no team (Refs & RIs)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: PA
Posts: 1,602
Siri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond reputeSiri has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via ICQ to Siri
Re: Sign this petition to allow girls in robotics! (at Timmins Public library)!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Zalinsky View Post
In all seriousness, I think all these programs are fine, I would just like to see consistency in people's arguements- if you jump on a bandwagon against a STEM boys-only program, you should do the same for a STEM girls-only program.
I don't think anyone on either side objects to programs whose curricula are specifically designed to help groups who benefit from the targeted assistance. The upset comes from two other places:
1) When counterpart specificity is not available for another group in need. [e.g. If everyone benefits from playing in either the girls or boys basketball league, you don't see people complaining.]
2) When the criteria for eligibility do not align with the foci of the curriculum.

Take your "Girls Rock" event. This and other STEM Girls events are specifically designed to help girls understand that stereotypes they face precisely because they are female are inaccurate and can be overcome. This is in fact a gendered event, and its program doesn't make sense for boys--it's not beneficial to them because they face different stereotypes.

Compare this to the library group. Its described curriculum is not a gender-targeted solution. They're not trying to help boys overcome stereotypes about truancy that they are exposed to simply because they are boys. (And this is a thing, but it's not what they explained.) The program in question is gender-neutral, and the eligibility criteria are not. I doubt anyone would be complaining if Timmins had advertised "club for students who struggle to maintain N-grade reading over the summer", because this is a reasonably targeted problem, just like "club for girls who want help overcoming gender-based stereotypes in STEM". Moreover, consider the case where Timmins had advertised what they meant, and a girl showed up with exactly the same testing patterns as a boy in the club. I'd wager that even people who are apt to forgive gendered programs would be upset. Because with true advertising, everyone realizes that this is not a gender-targeted solution. It's a gender-neutral solution subjected to a statistically consistent gender-based stereotype.

No unrelated attribute--gender, race, ethnicity, etc--should be used as shorthand for a problem that merely correlates statistically with it. If you mean people that struggle with reading over the summer, say that. If you mean people who struggle against gender-based stereotypes, say that. If Timmins were running a simultaneous program that was "Girls/Latinos/Caucasians ONLY Widget-X training club" because girls or Latinos or Caucasians are statistically worse at X, just like boys are statistically worse at reading, I'd be equally upset. Because they'd be stereotyping girls/Latinos/Caucasians the same way they're stereotyping boys.

Finally, consider the counterpoint for boys. If Timmins were running a club especially for say, boys who'd lost their dads and were struggling through teenagedom without father figures, no one would even blink. Because we understand that this is in fact a difficult situation specifically for the audience who meets the admission criteria. The program wouldn't be as helpful to a girl--and I say this as a girl who indeed lost her father at that age. I'd hope there's a counterpart club for girls. On the chance that there wasn't, I should be allowed to able to garner what I can from the boys' club. To be less melancholy, this is how girls get on football teams where there isn't enough interest to form a fitting-caliber girls' team. Despite low (arguably too low) numbers, girls have made it in such cases, and this is generally celebrated as in line with societal good.


tl;dr: Say what you mean. Don't rely on unrelated attributes to convey something that isn't related to them.
__________________

Last edited by Siri : 03-07-2015 at 14:00.
Reply With Quote