Women, STEM careers, and the outrage of the month

Seems like every week there's an new story in the news, viral video, blog post, etc about sexism in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math) fields and how that's a barrier for girls and young women in entering these fields.  Over the summer it was a poorly timed prank at a tech conference and more recently it was internet buzz over a really cool building toy aimed at girls. Regardless of content, it seems like there's always predictable outrage from some quarters about how the over-arching culture in tech fields is a misogynous one and how this, rather than more logical reasons make many tech fields a boys' club.  With apologies to my more liberal and/or feminist friends, this is a load of hogwash.  I agree that male geeks can be quite sexist and nasty about women, both intentionally and unintentionally.  I've experienced this kind of hate and imagine that all my geek sisters have had similar awkward experiences.  However, this is where I diverge from lockstep feminist/liberal thinking in that I refuse to feel victimized by stupid, rude, and/or unprofessional behavior. In encouraging me to feel threatened, I believe this line of thinking gives this behavior more bandwidth than it deserves.

Let me clarify.  Let's say a group of dudes with more brains than common sense says or does something unprofessional.  This unprofessional behavior somehow gets documented and goes viral. Instead of mocking it and moving on, there is likely to be some chatter about how women in tech fields must feel so marginalized. That and the idea that tech workplaces are hotbeds of misogyny seem to crop up at the slightest provocation like a bedbug infestation in a New York hotel. This makes me mad both because it's wrong and insulting. Most male nerds or geeks I've gotten to know through work are among the least racist/sexist/homophobic/classist people I've met either because they simply don't care or because they know what it's like to be hated for irrational reasons. Also, I resent the implication that I should feel marginalized or oppressed when I don't. The barrier to entry for any hardcore tech field is education and most white middle class women like me have had access to the same educational opportunities as their male peers. I don't think I need to be crying oppressed when there are tons of people who ARE denied access to these opportunities because of how they look or the circumstances in which they are born. I suppose I see the "sexism in tech fields" media chatter as manufactured outrage when there are real issues to be angry about. 

Also, I don't like the implication that I'm so fragile emotionally to allow someone acting like an idiot stand between me and my goals. Women, especially female geeks and nerds are a tough breed.  As a nerdy kid I definitely felt marginalized because my interests (anthropology, medicinal plants, sci-fi, and the Black Death) were way outside mainstream "girl" interests of the late 80s/early 90s.  As a young woman, I experienced a bit of sexism here and there, but having an awesome female mentor during grad school kept that to a minimum.  I began to experience more of this as my work veered into programming.  Nothing too horrid, but a general feeling that I wasn't considered smart or good at what I do as a default, but that I had to prove myself.  I know that I started dressing more girly at work as a subtle way of thumbing my nose at this.  It stings a little when I meet someone new in a professional setting and have to prove that yes, the lady in a skirt and pearls knows her stuff.  If I were playing into the victim narrative that I feel the left so dearly wants me to adopt, I'd say that I feel marginalized or demeaned.  Thankfully, I have a thicker skin than that.  Anyone who has been called a nerd or a freak as a kid knows how to ignore the silliness and find ways to not let it bother you.

So what do I think is the real culprit here? Why are some tech fields like physics, engineering, or computers/software development, still populated by mostly dudes?  I believe things that cause lots of kids to be turned off of STEM fields tend to affect girls more strongly.  Recent PISA test scores confirm that science education in K-12 is substandard relative to other industrialized countries. There also aren't very many opportunities for kids to explore STEM fields in a fun way and those opportunities tend to be more focused on boys.  Finally, mainstream culture is anti-intellectual in a lot of ways and I think girls feel more pressure to conform in this respect.  Most importantly, I think that race and/or class issues tend to confound gender bias with the net result of fewer girls in tech fields.  That, however, is the subject of a whole other post. 

Best at Exercising?

Ms Frog can play real sports if she wants to; she doesn't have to try to be the best at exercising like her parents (sorry, Kenny Powers).  She's nowhere near old enough to participate in sports, but she will be one day.  Both of us did sports as kids and while I can't speak for my husband, I know I'm better for it.  I swam pretty seriously in high school and I enjoyed it even though I wasn't a super-star by any stretch of the imagination. Swimming taught me to set goals and achieve them through hard work.  I think it also helped me tune out the messages I was receiving from my immediate surroundings about the importance of being pretty above all else.  I wasn't a pretty girl, but being a strong girl went a long way in helping me develop some much-needed self confidence.  Ms Frog is a very pretty girl, but regardless, I see confidence in one's strength as the root to a positive self-image.  It's a short leap from "I can climb that tree" or "I can run fast" to "I'm smart enough to do X" or "I'm good enough to deserve Y".  This doesn't have an age limit and is equally applicable to a small child, teen, or adult woman.  Being fit and training for my increasingly crazy races gives me confidence in both personal and professional situations.  Likewise, Ms Frog stood up taller the day she kicked a ball or did a somersault for the first time. 

The other really important thing I learned from sports is that sometimes your best simply isn't good enough.  I remember how rotten it was to get a bad time or have my school team lose a meet.  Since I was a teenager, I'd go home thinking it was the end of the world.  The next morning, I would (usually) wake up and vow to work harder in practice or take more time to help a team-mate so this wouldn't happen next time.  I've experienced some bumps in the road during my adult life and I know there were points I would have given up on various things if I hadn't learned from sports to keep trying even if it's tough.  We tell Ms Frog to shake it off or that she's tough when she gets hurt.  When she's bigger, I imagine we'll tell her to keep at it if a game, meet, or other sports event doesn't go her way. 

A bargain for whom?

I'm going to take a break from my usual mom-themed posts to talk about why I buy the majority of my clothes from thrift stores and yard sales even though I can afford to do otherwise.  The recent collapse of the clothing factory in Bangladesh where 400+ people died due to shoddy construction and other safety violations (see www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-22364891) has brought the issue of the human cost of cheap fashion back into public consciousness. So yes, that great shirt you found for next to nothing at H&M probably came from a factory very much like this one.  I could go on to bemoan the consumerist nature of fashion and scold people for buying into this, but why? I don't have a problem with wanting to look good, follow trends, etc.  What I do have a problem with is doing this at the expense of someone's right to safe working conditions (preferably) at a living wage.  This especially angers me when the cost of improving factory safety to conform with legal standards in a particular country is often pennies to the shopper.  A bargain brand's price is its main selling point, and these brands rightly assume that shoppers will go elsewhere if they have to pay a bit more.  For every person like me that says "no thanks", there are hundreds of others who want that bargain and really don't care why it's so cheap.

So then why bother? Normally, I would agree.  I tend to prefer to be an informed observer about social/political issues that I care about because I recognize that there are very few things I can do about them.   With apologies to my more politically active friends, I believe that activism is largely a gathering of like-minded souls and rarely yields any tangible results.  I say "rarely" instead of "never" because my friends' determination and committment has shown that it sometimes works so I do sip that haterade less frequently.  I think this is an issue where people can actually do something although I'm under no illusions that my decision not to shop at Target, H&M, etc will force these brands to change their wicked ways. By buying clothes at Goodwill, a consignment shop, etc, I'm not contributing to the problem.  Plus, it saves lots of money, and I'd rather put the money I would spend on a new piece of clothing towards our mortgage, my daughter's college, etc.  There are some things that are gross or impractical to buy used.  Also, not everyone likes to grub around thrift stores and/or feels ok wearing used clothes.  I think these are situations where someone can and should become part of the solution which is to buy from brands that use fair and safe labor practices.  Major bargain labels won't die if you opt out, but individuals can make a difference for these smaller guys.  Supporting a smaller or mid-sized ethical brand can help it grow into something like American Apparel, which can/does attract buyers away from the major offenders. 

I'll end with this website/blog that has resources to help find things made in the US (www.usalovelist.com) as well as a plug for American Apparel, Fluevogs, Doc Martens, and thrift stores.  Hope y'all think about this and see you at Goodwill!

Oh no, you didn't..

I was out at the playground with Ms Frog when I ran into another mom I know from the neighborhood.  She said she was looking into daycare for her daughter who is around the toad's age and asked what we were doing.  I said that she had just started and that we all love her school.  We then talked for a while about different daycares and preschools in the neighborhood while making sure our kids weren't getting into any lethal trouble.  She then asked what our hours were at school and whether there was some flexibility.  I said that Ms Frog is there full-time, but that there is the option of a shorter day and/or fewer days per week.  She replied that the shorter day option is still too long for her.  Here's where I could have changed the subject, but I didn't.

I asked her why she felt that way and she answered that it's too long a day for a small child.  Again, I should have nodded, smiled, and changed the subject.  Instead I asked her how she felt about that for families that don't have a choice.  She acknowledged that she was coming at this issue from a privileged position as someone who can afford to stay home, but said she understood even though she felt bad for the kids.  Once again, this was my cue to either run away or change the subject.  I couldn't resist and asked how she felt about a situation where both parents care about their careers.  She replied verbatim that "those people really shouldn't have children".

Oh no, she didn't... Dear readers, I assure you, she did.  I really wanted to go white trash on her or mention that I feel bad for the children of helicopter parents even though I understand the situation.  I took a deep breath, looked at my daughter, and did none of the above.  I looked her in the eye and said in my stern mommy voice that my husband and I care deeply about our work and our little girl is proof we're doing something right.  She tried to backpedal, but the words had already come out.  Maybe I shouldn't have fed the troll, but my actions didn't change what this lady feels in her heart.  This makes me more upset than angry.  I've said it before and I'll say it again that it really upsets me how much women tend to hate on each other.  It's so much worse when the women doing the hating are mothers; doubly so when they're mothers of daughters.  We're all trying to be the best wives, moms, and friends that we can be in the way that makes sense for us.  My way is probably not someone else's and it's upsetting that some women honestly believe that others who make different choices are the enemy without thinking about the reasons behind those choices.

I was much more judgmental before the toad entered my life, but have backed off considerably because I see the responsibility I have as the mother of a daughter to teach her to support rather than condemn other women.  I've learned a lot from peers and elders who have or are making different choices from mine.  My closest women friends and I don't always see eye-to-eye and while we may engage in some heated debates, a spirit of mutual respect prevails and we [mostly] come away having learned something.  I've also learned quite a bit in talking to people who aren't close that have different ideas.  I want my daughter to grow up to be someone who can learn from differences instead of condemning them.  Seeing her mom, her elders, or her aunties approach difference with reason and understanding instead of judgement may help her learn this.  Had I gone white trash and given that lady on the playground a piece of my mind, this lesson would have been lost.  I might not have learned something feel-good here, but this situation reinforced something I learned from a very dear friend; judge not lest ye be judged.

Why it's important to act like a lady or the importance of manners

I'm part of an online forum for parents in our neighborhood, which I occasionally look at while I'm drinking my coffee in the morning.  Amidst the chaff about how vaccines, toy guns, princesses, and refined sugar are the root of all evil are occasional informational and/or thought-provoking posts.  The former are good fodder for snark, but the latter are why I subscribe to and occasionally contribute to this forum.  One such thought-provoking comment was a response to a recent post about a mom's concern about her language.  The person writing the comment made the observation that swearing is a benign example of how women and moms worry too much about being "nice".  They wrote that they believe that this pressure is damaging to women and plays into the cultural stereotype of moms having to be nice/good/accepting all the time.  She advised the person posting to swear away and revel in causing a bit of "cognitive dissonance". 

I chewed on this idea on my drive home from work that day because I both agree and disagree with this statement.  I agree that many women my age were encouraged as children to not stand up for themselves or pursue their interests to the same degree as their brothers, cousins, or male friends.  I remember being routinely told off for asserting myself and seething every time I was encouraged to
to be "pleasant and agreeable" instead.  I grew up in an environment that did not prize outspoken women and had pretty rigid gender roles so this seethe boiled into a predictable teenage rejection of everything "nice" or "feminine".  Like all teenage rebellions, this wasn't particularly grounded in sound logic.  I believed that looking like a girl, using good manners, or being attracted to anything that my elders considered nice or appropriate was somehow colluding in a plot to force me down a path I didn't want to go.  Predictably, I wore mens' clothes, did sports, and read/listened to things with the maximum possible shock value.  Choosing to stand out had some positive effects.  I stayed out of trouble and learned lots of good life lessons thanks to sports and discovered some great bands and authors.  I also attribute the presence of many good things in my life to the choice to step away from the expectations that many of the adults around me had of girls and, by extension, of me.

Gradually, though I grew to realize that a wholesale rejection of "nice" or "feminine" served its purpose during my teens and early 20s, but is not applicable in the adult world.  As I've grown older, I've realized the importance of manners, and shockingly, of acting like a lady.  I believe that good manners, which includes being mindful of one's language, are an outward statement of self-respect.   People that are secure and respect themselves respect other people and can assert themselves without being aggressive or shrill.  I believe this is equally true for men and for women.  I also think that women tend to equate being aggressive and shrill with being strong, which I think is a mistake.  The ladies who I consider to be both my personal and professional role models are able to get what they want in life while managing to be (mostly) kind and respectful to other people.  This kindness and respect is what I consider to be acting like a lady.  Although the outward appearance of "lady-like" behavior is eerily similar to the one I grew up with, the rationale is much different.  Growing up, I was taught to use good manners to stifle dissent and to discourage me from asserting myself.  As an adult, I try to use what I was taught as a child to speak my mind and assert myself in a way that is respectful both of myself and of other people.  The difference also is that I understand when it's appropriate to be "nice" and "good" and when it's appropriate to unleash my inner fury.

Gender isn't completely fluid

Some people believe that gender should be completely fluid and that it's something that kids need to completely figure out on their own.  I disagree.  I believe that there is a broad range of gender-normative behavior and that each kid needs to figure out how to fit within these boundaries with adult help.  There are exceptions to this such as intersex individuals or kids that come from families with rigid gender roles, but let's assume for the purposes of this discussion that we're talking about anatomically normal kids from relatively open-minded families. 

I suppose this is why the attitude of crunchier parents towards their anatomically normal and normally identified sons' desire to play with Barbies or wear sparkly pink dresses in public creeps me out.  Kids don't know that certain things aren't ok unless adults tell them.  This doesn't mean I'm equating wearing girls' clothing with torturing kittens, but it's still something that's not quite acceptable in my book.  Maybe I'm more traditional in this way, but I still believe that it's good to tell a child that they need to fit themselves and their behavior into some relatively broad norms.  That same little boy doesn't have to play football or macho games with his friends to be masculine, but he also shouldn't be wearing a pink tutu.  Boy clothes can be boring, and a kid who wants to jazz up his wardrobe with a sparkly dress can be redirected into blinging out a shirt.  Although the two things are similar, one is on the girly end of socially acceptable, but the other crosses the line.  It's not that I don't think boys can be feminine or girls masculine, but there are limits. 

Going past these limits can make life really difficult and affect things like a kid's ability to make friends, focus at school (hard to do when teased), or develop aspects of themselves outside their gender identity.  I believe in pushing boundaries, but not to the extent that a small person's healthy development is compromised.  If my daughter wants to play football and/or dress like a dude, I'll probably encourage her to take a small step to the lady side.  Hockey, basketball, rugby, and soccer are all contact sports that people of both genders enjoy playing and are just as, if not more physically demanding than football.  Likewise, there are lots of gender neutral or menswear-inspired clothes that she can wear.  The difference is subtle, but it is the difference between a mannish woman and a person of unknown gender.  Unfortunately, she might be subject to ridicule for both, but falling within the broad definition of feminine will save her a lot of heartache.  I don't think this will be a problem for us because Ms Frog already seems like a girly girl, but who knows?

I don't think that everyone should be the same and I'm all for expanding definitions of "normal" whether it's gender, sexuality, religion, or life choices.  However, there are certain really broad things that I think people agree to do in a society in order to live, work, and play with others.  It's not required to like or even agree with these others, but it's necessary to be able to co-exist.  This co-existance requires some very broad similarities.  For instance, I've got very little in common with the mother of a Quiverfull family (speaking of rigid gender roles) who lives out in the boonies and home-schools her brood of 8 according to the precepts of the Bible.  However, we both identify as women and are both mothers so we could recognize each other enough to interact if necessary.  People in this culture break others down into either male or female and identifying someone as one or the other is a basic thing that governs the nature of an interaction between people.  I'm not arguing whether this is good or bad here, but acknowledging that it exists.  A family's definition of gender that is too broad or too restrictive can derail this process through hampering development of a gender identity that is both true to a particular child and falls within certain boundaries.

What about men?

There was a lot of buzz this summer about an article in the Atlantic about the idea of women "having it all".  The idea of separating work and home life began in earnest with the industrial revolution and men and women alike have had to figure this out.  The only group that didn't have to do this were middle or upper-class women who were denied employment or educational opportunities that would have forced them to do so.  This changed in the 1960s and 70s when more of these women began to pursue jobs and educational opportunities previously closed to them, at which point the discussion about "having it all" began.  Let's forget for the purposes of this post that the idea of "having it all" is heavily steeped in race and class privilege.  Let's also forget that success means different things to different people.  I am a middle-class white lady who has an advanced degree in science, a reasonably demanding job, and a small child so this conversation is relevant to my personal set of circumstances. 

What has annoyed me about this conversation is how it has evolved to exclude men.  The author of the article in the Atlantic mentions her supportive/loving husband and talks about their partnership.  A TED talk that proceeded this article by a few years also mentioned the importance of men.  Subsequent buzz has largely ignored the guys.  Why? Men balance work and family and have always been expected to do so.  All the men I know have a deep and abiding love for their families.  It's a different relationship than moms', but no less affectionate and nurturing.  No one talks about the anxiety a man feels when they leave a sick kid to go to work.  Likewise, there's radio silence about how sometimes a guy feels stressed about meeting his work and family obligations.  Are we that dumb as a society that we don't recognize a man's capacity for loving his children? That we exclude half the human race from this discussion? Are the ladies facilitating this conversation so short-sighted as to not understand that support is mutual and that men and women face similar challenges? The assumption that a man isn't/cannot be as caring and nurturing of his children as a woman makes me angry.  Furthermore, it is assumed that a man struggling to meet his work and family obligations can handle it and will suffer in silence.  We ladies can learn something about powering our way through difficulties quietly and gracefully like guys do.  Likewise, men can learn from us about the value of talking things through with a friend or asking for help.

Maybe I'm not seeing the problem clearly because my family is not a traditional one.  My husband and I both have careers that we're highly invested in.  We're both mildly obsessed with working out to the point where it always seems like we're training for a race.  We both want to support each other in reaching our career and personal goals and recognize that sharing responsibilities is an essential part of supporting each other.  We each want the other to be happy both for its own sake and so we can raise a happy, confident daughter.  Plus, there are a lot of places where traditional gender roles are reversed in our household.  He's a much better cook and is the more nurturing/permissive parent.  I'm often "bad cop" and am a bit more detatched, but we both love Ms Frog and want the best for her.