Different Explanations For The Representation Of Females

The part of woman in today's general public is some way or another questionable. Why there are so few women in science written by K.C. Cole, the author discusses the role of woman in our society in different domains. The author used personal experience to discuss and give more credibility concerning this topic. Also, K.C. Cole insisted that we are still living in a society where women are not taking all their right. In addition, women have the ability to achieve their goals if they do not give up and get influenced by others (Cole, n.d). If we give women the chance to show what she’s thinking and planning of, it can end up with a very high achievement. In my opinion, women are still less than men in some critical positions although the primary subject these days is gender equality and rights.

The force of societal stereotypes is a large part of this gap. Instead of joining STEM careers, the most common careers among women are secretaries, nurses, and elementary and middle school teachers (Mandell). This truly illustrates that when well-rounded, talented women have the choice, they are inclined to delve into the field in which society expects them to belong. In this way, the stereotype of women not being involved in STEM is forcing less women to be involved in these fields. The deficiency of women in technical fields, despite their well-roundedness and ability, can be directly related to unyielding cultural stereotypes that stigmatize women in supposedly masculine fields.

All though women in STEM face many challenges as a whole, a question being posed in this study is whether or not women in math and physics intensive studies face unique obstacles. Underrepresentation in STEM seems a stubborn fact of the matter, however, it is not even across the board. The number of women present in the life sciences (sciences such as biology, environmental studies, health care, etc.), both at the academic and professional level, is much higher than the number of women present in fields that focus heavily on math, physics, and engineering. More and more women are choosing to pursue post-secondary education and enter the specialized workforce; in 2010 the AAUW found “Women currently earn over half of all doctoral degrees

Women may have chosen not to direct themselves within this field of study; it may be a field attracting a majority of males. Therefore we must not assume that hegemonic masculinity is present without considering this matter further. In addition, these statistics date from 2012; therefore perhaps the most recent statistics show otherwise as a result of an improvement and tightening of the gender gap in recent

Julius Caesar was an important historical figure that contributed greatly to the Roman Empire. Based on historical events, Julius Caesar was a powerful and positive leader because of how he proved his intelligence in dangerous situations and empathy towards others. Even in dangerous situations, Caesar’s intelligence allowed him to succeed. “With 50,000 men Caesar is able to hold off attacks from Vercingetorix while finishing the wall” (Campbell 1). This quote suggests that Vercingetorix’s force was 30,000 larger than that of Caesar’s, Caesar was still capable of using his wit to create a plan to hold of the enemy.

As a student coming from a purely humanities background, the idea that gender discrimination could occur in the field of science as a concept was completely alien to me. However it has come to light that gender discrimination in the field of science is not a myth but in fact a harsh reality for which the reasons remain skewed.

She questions, “Does it matter that fields in science and engineering are primarily the domain of men?” (Nagel 90). Although some people may argue that having fields of science dominated by men does not matter, there are reports that prove otherwise. Besides, creating inequality in the work fields, it creates an environment where females are discouraged to pursue science-related fields. In Nagel’s writing, she does not address why women are the minority in science fields nor how society can change to become more balanced. Though these questions are broad and difficult to answer, it is important that we start addressing the issue and work towards solving it. This suggests that women should also have an influence on large-scale national and international decisions important to them and their communities, just as men do. Additionally, it is vital for scientists, researchers, and society to recognize the importance of seeing gender in climate science, to be able to address serious social problems that arise because of global climate

Despite earning just over 50% of all science related bachelor’s degrees in recent years, women actually earn less than 20% of engineering degrees and hold around 15% of all engineering jobs (“Statistics”), thus being significantly outnumbered by men in these such fields. Science fields in general are largely disproportionate in terms of gender, though the numbers fluctuate as statistics get more specific. For instance, of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) fields, women hold the highest percent of jobs in life sciences (yet still below 50%) and the lowest in engineering at 30% lower rates than that of the aforementioned (National Science Board). This leads many to question the reasons behind such unbalanced statistics, and although it is nearly impossible to pinpoint one definitive cause, it can be agreed upon that there are several influencing factors. Among these are stereotypes, implicit biases, college and workplace environments (Hill, Catherine), pay differences, and of course,

These differences are commonly discussed, “The general statement that men and women respond and behave differently under the same circumstances is true; demonstrable differences in behavior and in general brain operations have been carefully documented and described”(McGraw-Hill,1998). For example, male babies are commonly more aggressive than females; this tendency often continues throughout life. As a child, females often learn to read earlier than males and use this skill to better tasks involving the alphabet. Although there are some women who can break the stereotype, the generality that men are better at spatial operations still holds true. Men tend to be better at finding their way through a maze or using a map. Researchers, from Norwegian University of Science and Technology, decided to test these generalities by administering testosterone to women in the test group. FMRI imaging was used to test the subjects. The results showed that “ men in the study took several shortcuts, oriented themselves more using cardinal directions and used a different part of the brain than the women in the study”(NTNU,2017). Women without the testosterone supplement tended to solve the maze using complex routes, instead of following a path directly to the destination. Once the women received a drop of testosterone, they suddenly began to use cardinal directions and use a more

Multiple studies and statistics have demonstrated that women scientists face serious obstacles to promotion in STEM fields, a state of affairs that seriously hampers scientific progress. Scientific breakthrough is certainly an onerous and a nontrivial task, and effectively excluding half the population from meaningful participation slows the progress of such breakthroughs. Great women scientists such as Marie Curie and Rosalind Franklin have proven beyond a doubt that women are more than capable of succeeding in these fields. Yet continual bias against women in science costs us valuable scientific researchers at every step of the academic ladder. Awards, salary, and promotion differences between males and females grow especially larger as the faculty rank increases. Only 14.8% of the full professors at the top research institutions in the life sciences are women, clearly demonstrating the skew for male research scientists [3]. Bias against researchers who are clearly capable of prominent achievements only limits humanity’s ability to make significant scientific

areas of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics employers are not getting enough women (Pozniak). High school girls only represent 17 percent of computer science Advance Placement (AP) test takers (O'Shea). The most significant group of minorities who are behind in earning computer technology degrees and working in science and mathematical professions are women. “Historically, women’s low representation in science and engineering was said to be due in large part of their lack of ability, interest, or both” (Horning 30). However, this is no longer a true fact according to Ward. Some suggestions to increasing the amount of women in sciences include introducing already present women faculty as mentors. Over the last three decades,

Humanistic-scientific divide is evident in higher education with females underrepresented in scientific fields. However, whether this fully reflects the gender segregation in higher education remains unclear. In higher education, gender segregation has been empirically found to be a universal feature but nations significantly differ in the degree females are underrepresented or overrepresented. The balance that cross-national similarities have with gender segregation variances across field is yet to be established.

Jill Williams, director of Women in Science and Engineering at the University of Arizona says that “boys are encouraged to be interested in math and science-based activities to a greater degree than girls”

This analysis of the current situation of female underrepresentation on science professions, shows an updated perspective of women’s place on professional fields. The article starts by stating the dramatic increase of female students of higher education. It shows evidence of women earning more than half of bachelor’s degrees in America; this factor only results on the increasing of the questions regarding the underrepresentation of women on the professional ground. Thus, the authors present two possible scenarios explanations to the phenomenon: the need to balance career and family, plus the lack of networks inside the career. The article evaluates the first statement by presenting statistical evidence of familiar influence over women’s professional life, such as the high rate of married unemployed STEM graduates, quite differently to the results of the married male on the profession. The second factor refers to the lack of support and mentorship that women encounter on their careers which lead to feelings of isolation among female professionals. Consequently, demotivating them from the avid pursuing of their careers.

Another stems from preferences for education and work, there are of course factors besides education that shape the occupational distribution patterns of males and females-these include aptitude, tastes, economic factors and gender discrimination (). But importantly, to the extent that women prefer not to go into science based fields, there may be shortage of workers with the requisite level of education; the emerging pattern suggests a strong link between development and education of women, but not between the development and the number of women scientist (Nagaraj, 2001). There is therefore a