Math Is Hard, Let's Go Shopping!
Feb. 18th, 2005 10:44 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
sisabetI've got another meeting to run to in a minute, but this one involves Pizza! so they have my full and utter cooperation.
Also, I might be a little bit in love with them. They are feeding me pizza!
::is easy::
All last night, in between waiting for the pending botulism attack that never came, I thought about vids and vidding and being a vid viewer and this morning while I was laying in the tub, I was composing a very long and detailed LJ post about this and all morning at work I have been adding to it, hoping to get a moment to just sit back and type it out.
And then I checked the New York Times headlines and forgot all about it.
http://nytimes.com/2005/02/18/education/18harvard.html (free registration required)
So apparently the President of Harvard University is something of a... well I believe the technical term is "A Dick" but since I am a woman I am intrinsically wired to not really care about technical things.
But - to be fair - he does say several times in the released comments (about the shortage of women in science and engineering fields) that he would love to be proven wrong. I am no fan of censoring ideas... but see, while he states that these are just ideas -- he also discounts that socialization has very much to do with any of this at all.
(I also love how he manages to imply that catholics aren't really wired to be investment bankers and jewish people just don't farm).
And while he says that these ideas are just that - ideas - and hey, I agree we need to ask questions and search for answers -- my big problem is that he appears to not only be voicing an intrinsic female disinterest (we just don't have the ability) in science as a potential reason there is a shortage of qualified women in the field, not solely as an idea - but as a belief that he will hold until it is proven otherwise.
And I think I can safely say that he Just Does Not Get It. He discounts socialization without ever understanding exactly how pervasive it can really be. It isn't even like this is something we have overcome and this current generation of adolescent girls have a wide-open choice to enter into any field that they find interesting - no, we have made GREAT progress in recognizing the many and insidious ways we as a society steer girls actively away from being interested in Math and Science, but hell - we still have a lot to do.
It was less than 15 years ago that Mattel released a talking Barbie doll that actually said the subject line of this post. The doll was pulled and the saying has now entered our collective unconsciousness, but the fact remains that a MAJOR TOY PRODUCER let this product go all the way through to customer and no one stopped and said "Hmmm... this is kinda ridiculous and demeaning." And if you don't think Mattel had a major impact on a lot of the American Female Collective Experience - well, maybe you had a different collective experience than I did. It happens. (and I am not saying we all played with Barbie dolls. I am saying that we were encouraged to play with Barbie dolls and a lot of us did as we were encouraged. I myself had a very strong and active Barbie addiction from 1979 up and until I finally went cold turkey in 1987. It was rough. Even now I sometimes see money in units of $10 with each unit being represented in my head by 1 Barbie Doll. An Example: "Oh, I just got $100 bonus! Wow, that is like ten barbies!")
My point is that this is not something we are going to overcome in a generation or two. We just identified it as actually being real and valid when I was a child. I don't expect to see real and permanent progress in fighting this until... well I probably will be dead. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't work really hard at recognizing and eradicating this mindset and supporting our young women absolutely. This just means there is a ton of work and time keeps marching in one direction. I think - see I was never really good with that kinda stuff.
::goes shopping::
Also, I might be a little bit in love with them. They are feeding me pizza!
::is easy::
All last night, in between waiting for the pending botulism attack that never came, I thought about vids and vidding and being a vid viewer and this morning while I was laying in the tub, I was composing a very long and detailed LJ post about this and all morning at work I have been adding to it, hoping to get a moment to just sit back and type it out.
And then I checked the New York Times headlines and forgot all about it.
http://nytimes.com/2005/02/18/education/18harvard.html (free registration required)
So apparently the President of Harvard University is something of a... well I believe the technical term is "A Dick" but since I am a woman I am intrinsically wired to not really care about technical things.
But - to be fair - he does say several times in the released comments (about the shortage of women in science and engineering fields) that he would love to be proven wrong. I am no fan of censoring ideas... but see, while he states that these are just ideas -- he also discounts that socialization has very much to do with any of this at all.
(I also love how he manages to imply that catholics aren't really wired to be investment bankers and jewish people just don't farm).
And while he says that these ideas are just that - ideas - and hey, I agree we need to ask questions and search for answers -- my big problem is that he appears to not only be voicing an intrinsic female disinterest (we just don't have the ability) in science as a potential reason there is a shortage of qualified women in the field, not solely as an idea - but as a belief that he will hold until it is proven otherwise.
And I think I can safely say that he Just Does Not Get It. He discounts socialization without ever understanding exactly how pervasive it can really be. It isn't even like this is something we have overcome and this current generation of adolescent girls have a wide-open choice to enter into any field that they find interesting - no, we have made GREAT progress in recognizing the many and insidious ways we as a society steer girls actively away from being interested in Math and Science, but hell - we still have a lot to do.
It was less than 15 years ago that Mattel released a talking Barbie doll that actually said the subject line of this post. The doll was pulled and the saying has now entered our collective unconsciousness, but the fact remains that a MAJOR TOY PRODUCER let this product go all the way through to customer and no one stopped and said "Hmmm... this is kinda ridiculous and demeaning." And if you don't think Mattel had a major impact on a lot of the American Female Collective Experience - well, maybe you had a different collective experience than I did. It happens. (and I am not saying we all played with Barbie dolls. I am saying that we were encouraged to play with Barbie dolls and a lot of us did as we were encouraged. I myself had a very strong and active Barbie addiction from 1979 up and until I finally went cold turkey in 1987. It was rough. Even now I sometimes see money in units of $10 with each unit being represented in my head by 1 Barbie Doll. An Example: "Oh, I just got $100 bonus! Wow, that is like ten barbies!")
My point is that this is not something we are going to overcome in a generation or two. We just identified it as actually being real and valid when I was a child. I don't expect to see real and permanent progress in fighting this until... well I probably will be dead. This doesn't mean that we shouldn't work really hard at recognizing and eradicating this mindset and supporting our young women absolutely. This just means there is a ton of work and time keeps marching in one direction. I think - see I was never really good with that kinda stuff.
::goes shopping::
