Discussion on All-Girl events

[The Swaggy P]

Alright.
I'm going to stray from my original intention of simply pointing out the massive difference in lunch discussions at the IndyRAGE event, and move on to something I've noticed a lot in recent posts.

Most of the females talking about not getting into high-paying jobs because of male dominance, are mainly talking about jobs like Engineering, software design, business management, etc.

But none of the aforementioned females pointed out that more women should be involved in male-dominated jobs such as: Oil drilling, Mining, Sheetrock Layers, or any "Down & Dirty" Jobs that possess similar pay.

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by The Swaggy P

Alright.
I'm going to stray from my original intention of simply pointing out the massive difference in lunch discussions at the IndyRAGE event, and move on to something I've noticed a lot in recent posts.

Most of the females talking about not getting into high-paying jobs because of male dominance, are mainly talking about jobs like Engineering, software design, business management, etc.

But none of the aforementioned females pointed out that more women should be involved in male-dominated jobs such as: Oil drilling, Mining, Sheetrock Layers, or any "Down & Dirty" Jobs that possess similar pay.

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

Go start a program that is designed to inspire people to become oil drillers, miners, sheetrock layers, etc., have a public internet forum organically spring up from the community it forms, and take that discussion there.

Or you can continue being a misogynistic troll here and people will continue to tell you to $@#$@#$@#$@# off, even though those efforts clearly are in vain.

Alternatively, delete your account.

[Cothron Theiss]

Originally Posted by The Swaggy P

Alright.
I'm going to stray from my original intention of simply pointing out the massive difference in lunch discussions at the IndyRAGE event, and move on to something I've noticed a lot in recent posts.

Most of the females talking about not getting into high-paying jobs because of male dominance, are mainly talking about jobs like Engineering, software design, business management, etc.

But none of the aforementioned females pointed out that more women should be involved in male-dominated jobs such as: Oil drilling, Mining, Sheetrock Layers, or any "Down & Dirty" Jobs that possess similar pay.

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

No. The "aforementioned females" get to push for more female representation in any career field they're interested in because all individuals have a right to pursue a career they're passionate about and competent in.

Also, this whole thread began because of YOUR objection to a robotics event that featured women in STEM.
Changing your arguments after losing your first isn't clever or mature.

[Joe G.]

Originally Posted by The Swaggy P

Alright.
I'm going to stray from my original intention of simply pointing out the massive difference in lunch discussions at the IndyRAGE event, and move on to something I've noticed a lot in recent posts.

Most of the females talking about not getting into high-paying jobs because of male dominance, are mainly talking about jobs like Engineering, software design, business management, etc.

But none of the aforementioned females pointed out that more women should be involved in male-dominated jobs such as: Oil drilling, Mining, Sheetrock Layers, or any "Down & Dirty" Jobs that possess similar pay.

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

You are literally on a discussion board about a program aimed to get people into engineering and sofware development fields, in a thread about an event specifically aimed to achieve this. Of course that's what everyone is going to be discussing.

Already talked about this.

So get upset about this! Do something about it! People are missing out on the opportunity to gain fulfilling employment right now, time is of the essence! Start a program to encourage male Kindergarten teachers, and eradicate the perception that men working with young children are automatically sexual predators! Create initiatives to remove sexist barriers to entry and cultural normalization of dirty, hands on work as "a man's job." But that sounds like work, and it's easier to complain about people actually taking these initiatives in other fields. It'd take real passion and concern for these issues, rather than only caring about them for the purposes of an internet argument in favor of the status quo...

The fact is, every heavily skewed datapoint on that graph, in both directions, are simply symptoms of the same, much larger problem: That people refuse to acknowledge that artificial societal pressures and factors generate these uneven distributions rather than some innate biological reality of gender, that in doing so, people reinforce those societal elements that created the disparities in the first place, and that no matter how you cherry-pick careers, these societal pressures are overwhelmingly sexist and present women as generally "less capable." STEM is an attractive field, with very obvious benefactors from gender equality movements, and so it gets a lot of focus. I mean, we're on a discussion board about a nationwide program to get more people inspired by this career -- I doubt you could find a similarly sized "For Inspiration and Recognition of Garbage Collectors," regardless of gender focus. But maybe victories here, and breaking down barriers and perceptions here, can help inpart change across the board. We don't only encourage women in STEM to get women in STEM, we do it because it's a part of the bigger picture in the fight against the patriarchy.

Sidenote, but when did this trend of replacing the word "women" with "females" happen? It might be just me, but it sounds incredibly demeaning and almost dehumanizing, especially since it never goes the other way.

[Chief Hedgehog]

I understand the sentiments laid out by the OP. However, I do value the options of having events such as IndyRAGE to encourage females to take on roles that are not typically set aside for them.

FRC 4607 has a fairly large female segment (~40/60 this last season), and yet it is like pulling teeth to get some of the girls into the programming/fabrication side of things.

Part of this is our collective issues with societal/cultural differences or perceived 'gender appropriations'. Another aspect is the lack of female mentors in these areas. We (4607) do try to include/encourage females into these areas - but even then they are subjugated (unwittingly) to meaningful tasks that demean these girls; i.e "take notes on this because you have better hand-writing". This drives me nuts.

My concern this coming season is to get more females to transition from our Marketing/Business squads to the fabrication/design squads. In fact, one of our best fabricators this last season was a female. And she commanded respect from the males in the lab - because she was one of the best fabricators we have ever had.

But I will state this - even as good as she was, she took a lot of crap. Not from the fabrication squad (don't get me wrong, she took some ribbing from the guys, but it was in a situation where she was able to give it back - and she had fun with it), but from the other females on the team. In fact, it got to a point that she wanted to quit because of her excelling amongst the boys. Again, not from the boys, but from the other females. After a very long talk, she decided to continue with the team. How can we prevent this type of female vs female bullying?

Well, this is why we need these types of events - so that females can showcase their worth amongst their female peers. And so that other females can see that success in these fields are not only possible, but so that they can gain confidence. And that girls such as the aforementioned can gain POSITIVE notoriety amongst her peers.

Just my 2 cents.

[smitikshah]

Originally Posted by The Swaggy P

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

I shouldn't have to push for anything. You have no right to tell me what I should or shouldn't be passionate about. Responses on here want to push for females in STEM because you are on a forum about robotics engineering.

At this point, I think you're just a troll, and not genuinely worried about this event or rights and equal opportunity in STEM.

[ASD20]

Originally Posted by Drake Vargas

The gender pay gap is a statistical myth for the exact reason you mentioned. Women traditionally take on lower paying jobs (Psychology, pediatrician, art vs math, cardiac surgery, orthopedic surgery) as well as take more time off for child rearing.

Pay gap exists, but only when you total up all the money earned by women and all the money earned by men- which is a deceitful way of looking at it.

A man in field X and a woman in field X will make the same amount provided they work the same number of hours at the same level of rigor.

I do agree that the reason there is a bigger push for women in engineering is because it pays more, simple as that. Nobody wants to be a garbage collector, so nobody is going to push for a man or woman to become one. However, the women that do go to college and graduate tend to pick majors that lead into lower paying fields.

Whether this is a result of some sort of systemic sexism, that's up for you to decide.

First of all, there is a pay gap between men and women working the same jobs. I don't have time to look for a citation but I'm sure someone has one.

Second of all, what I find much more alarming than the handful of anonymous trolls, is the fact that somehow this guy has 4 rep bars!!! There are clearly some fairly high-rep CD accounts that support his garbage for him to have 4 rep bars after 8 posts, all of which are offensive comments on this thread.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Drake Vargas

The gender pay gap is a statistical myth for the exact reason you mentioned. Women traditionally take on lower paying jobs (Psychology, pediatrician, art vs math, cardiac surgery, orthopedic surgery) as well as take more time off for child rearing.

Pay gap exists, but only when you total up all the money earned by women and all the money earned by men- which is a deceitful way of looking at it.

A man in field X and a woman in field X will make the same amount provided they work the same number of hours at the same level of rigor.

I do agree that the reason there is a bigger push for women in engineering is because it pays more, simple as that. Nobody wants to be a garbage collector, so nobody is going to push for a man or woman to become one. However, the women that do go to college and graduate tend to pick majors that lead into lower paying fields.

Whether this is a result of some sort of systemic sexism, that's up for you to decide.

It took less than ten seconds of Google searching to find a US Department of Labor article debunking all of these claims, showing that the gender pay gap persists even when you control for time off due to pregnancy, presence of advanced degree, job title, etc.

The information is out there and is, quite frankly, very easy to find. If you don't want it to be true, that's another story. Discrimination isn't a myth.

[Drake Vargas]

Originally Posted by ASD20

him to have 4 rep bars after 8 posts, all of which are offensive comments on this thread.

Having an opinion that differs from the norm shouldn't be considered offensive. The overly PC culture present in FIRST and CD is ridiculous. God forbid anyone say something that might be interpreted as misogynistic. /s

[Shrub]

A question that might help some folks who aren't used to managing systemic inequality and their piece in dismantling it: does anyone have any resources (specific to marginalized people in STEM, maybe) that others can use to learn more without women/PoC having to prove their marginalization?

Here are a few I have found: link a, link b, link c, link d (this one is a little more jargony and isn't specific to STEM).

I am open to critiques on the choices of articles I am sharing as well as starting a collection of more resources to share with others. I am also open to PMs if anyone needs any help implementing change on their own team or needs support.

[smitikshah]

Originally Posted by Drake Vargas

Having an opinion that differs from the norm shouldn't be considered offensive. The overly PC culture present in FIRST and CD is ridiculous. God forbid anyone say something that might be interpreted as misogynistic. /s

Yes, please let us forbid that. It might be hard for you to understand, but from an outsider looking in's perspective, if FIRST/CD condoned posts that could be interpreted as misogynistic we would turn off so many prospective FIRSTers. Not to mention in a professional setting it can be called sexual harassment and/or discrimination and can cause some serious issues.

These certain posts are catalyzing the demise of the already dwindling hope I had left in the thread.

Going back to the post about the pay gap -
As others have cited there are a variety of sourcing offering information that it exists. I have done a lot of research on my own time about it and contacted several different agencies working on improving it. The number one cause I was able to conclude was that women under negotiating their salaries. Women tend to value themselves less and hence negotiate less as opposed to males who tend to overvalue themselves and negotiate for more.

This comes down again to confidence, and multiple arguments on this thread work in favor of the argument women aren't as confident in their abilities even if they are objectively on or above par.

That's why events like these help build females confidence and get them psychologically ready to deal with things like negotiating pay based on your confidence or retention in STEM after a small failure.

[Joe G.]

Originally Posted by Drake Vargas

Having an opinion that differs from the norm shouldn't be considered offensive. The overly PC culture present in FIRST and CD is ridiculous. God forbid anyone say something that might be interpreted as misogynistic. /s

There's a big difference between "I think eliminating bag day would irreparably damage the FRC experience for a majority of teams" and "Because of your gender, you are likely to be less capable at math and science." One is an unpopular but valid opinion that spars debate, the other is an offensive declaration that directly insults and discourages a large group of the very people we're supposed to be inspiring and building confidence in with this program and on this board.

Please don't make this a bag day thread now. Though that might be an improvement.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by The Swaggy P

I find this to be unfair to the male population, for if you are pushing for equal rights, in order to get females into office-based jobs like the ones mentioned above, you should also be pushing for more in the physical labor.

My take on the diversity gap / gender gap was probably similar to yours when I was in high school, because it was based on the idea of a zero sum game. If a society is going to promote something, it must be ignoring something else, right?

The more experience I gain in the real world only shows me this couldn't be further from the truth. The number of opportunities available is not a fixed number, like it might be for an admissions office at a university. Growing a percentage of a population in engineering doesn't mean the rest of the engineering population needs to lose that percentage - the overall number can grow!

Applying it to this example, adding a girls-only event doesn't take away any other opportunity a boy might have.

Last point. In fields requiring a brain (creativity, critical thinking, etc.), diversity of thought is an admirable goal. If we can't approach a problem from every angle, we might not find the best solution. I don't have to think long to imagine life experiences that I have not and cannot experience simply because of my gender - and those are perspectives that I lack and cannot use in solving a problem. Imagine where the world could be and isn't because of the lack of diversity in engineering.

[Cothron Theiss]

Originally Posted by Joe G.

Please don't make this a bag day thread now. Though that might be an improvement.

At first look this is a pretty terrible thread. But then again, if you just ignore the disrespectful/trolling posts that keep sparking the debate, you have a list of some really great responses as for why All-Girl Events are great. Might be nice if someone made a white paper of all of the positive responses from people in this thread.

[ASD20]

Originally Posted by Drake Vargas

Having an opinion that differs from the norm shouldn't be considered offensive. The overly PC culture present in FIRST and CD is ridiculous. God forbid anyone say something that might be interpreted as misogynistic. /s

Here are some of your posts along with some of the quotes that preceded them in italics. I went through the trouble of bolding what some might interpret as offensive or misogynistic (and I was fairly conservative with it) and underlining things that are untrue along with some commentary in case you don't understand why. I tried my best to explain these problems, but if anyone else can explain it better, feel free to chime in.

Karthik, everyone seems to be up in arms about the lack of female representation in engineering. In my opinion, that ostracizes men more than anything else. The very graph you posted shows fields with almost no males, and nobody seems to be upset that there aren't more male kindergarent teachers. At the same time, I don't see anyone complaining that men almost completely fill the most grueling jobs on this list. This isn't a very good argument for "equality".

Taking a discussion about women and immediately trying to change the focus of the conversation to the men. This may be interpreted as you not caring about the issues women face and only caring about your own gender.

Originally Posted by smitikshah
For example. just today, all the "bros" (as they like to call themselves) made plans to go out for a lab team lunch, and I was the only one that wasn't invited.

There is nothing wrong with this situation. Really, this isn't going against any law or infringing on any of your rights. This is a group of men going out to have fun, it is fully within their right to choose who they want to hang out with. Do you honestly think you have the same definition of fun as them? Both guys and gals like hanging out with people most similar to them, there is nothing wrong with that.

I shouldn't have to explain how this is insulting.

Originally Posted by Joe G.
Just because it's legal to be a rude person, doesn't mean you should be a rude person.

Not wanting to hang out with a person isn't rude. Do you actually believe that? Other people should be able to tell me who I can and can't hang out with?

Any elementary schooler would be able to tell you that excluding someone is in fact, quite rude.

It's incredibly naive to think biological factors don't play a role in the distribution of careers. Biology is the single largest determinant in a persons character. Yes, there are societal pressures, but they are driven by our innate biological tendencies. We tend to enforce the norm as guided by our unique neurological makeup. Men are typically more aggressive than women, women are typically more empathetic than men. Meaning that on the whole, a lot of women aren't going to like working in a competitive environment whereas men will. And in science, you need competition.

Textbook definition of predjudice and sexism and just because you use the word typically, it doesn't change anything. It is the exact same as this famous quote:

“When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.”

I might do a part 2 if I have time and it's necessary, but I've spent way too much time on this for now.