Jane Cosmetics at 2014 Championship

[Libby K]

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

Originally Posted by Carolyn_Grace

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.

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.

Originally Posted by Katie_UPS

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."

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::

Originally Posted by Chris is me

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

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.