“I do not mind that you are a girl, but the main thing is that you yourself do not mind”

Einstein has given us another reason to love him! In 1946, a South African girl named Tyfanny – who had been corresponding with Einstein – revealed to him in one of her letters that she was a girl.  Tyfanny wrote that she had “always regretted this a great deal” and begged of Einstein, “I hope you will not think any the less of me for being a girl!”  Einstein replied to this “I do not mind that you are a girl, but the main thing is that you yourself do not mind. There is no reason for it.”

Einstein: New feminist icon?

I find this so brilliant because Einstein does not simply tell her that it’s fine she is a girl, he tells her that there is no reason for her to be distraught over the fact that she is one.  And I think that this sentiment is so important – women should not have to apologize for their sex/gender.  Being a girl is not a bad thing.  It’s not something to be “regretted”, and I love that Einstein recognized this and tried to impart this lesson upon Tyfanny.

Tyfanny also wrote “Anyway, I hate dresses and dances and all the kind of rot girls usually like. I much prefer horses and riding.”  I think this is another important thing to discuss – being stereotypically feminine does not make you less intelligent or less of a scientist.  Some women will like dresses and dancing, others will not.  Whether or not a woman does bears no weight in how intelligent she is.

How do seventh graders see scientists?

I recently came across this website, which posts students drawings of scientists before and after visiting Fermilab.  While at Fermilab, the students had the opportunity to meet with scientists in small groups.  They deliberately chose a white male, female, and African American scientist for the students to meet with.  The before and after drawings and descriptions of scientists are extremely interesting and illuminating.

Some of my favorite posts are from Amanda, Ashley, Beth, James, and Pat.  A common theme expressed in the before and after descriptions are that scientists are normal people, not mythical beings – some of the students seemed surprised that scientists had outside interests like sports and music. A LOT of the students drew old, white men with crazy hair in lab coats in the “before” illustration.  In the after illustrations, the scientists are of all ages and wearing normal clothes (Amanda notes, “I saw people walking around in sweatshirts and jeans. Who knows? Maybe I can be a scientist.”) It’s also really encouraging how many people drew women and people of color after visiting Fermilab.  It seems like this exercise was a great way to reinforce that there are scientists of all kinds, and that anyone can be a scientist if they want to be!

Drawing of scientist before and after, by Ashley. Source: http://ed.fnal.gov/projects/scientists/ashley.html

For some humor, check out Katie (“Their jobs sound very interesting because they can do whatever they want and still get paid for it” – if only!),  and Beth (“The scientist has big square shaped glasses and a big geeky nose.”)

Show me what a scientist looks like…

…This Is What a Scientist Looks Like!

I recently stumbled across this really awesome blog called “This Is What a Scientist Looks Like“. Essentially, this blog tries to change the stereotypical perceptions of who a scientist is and what they look like.  Some of the pictures posted on the blog show us scientists who are women, and scientists who have families (including several with young children).  But it also shows us scientists doing things that aren’t science.  Scientists are not one-dimensional, and spend plenty of time doing things outside the lab/classroom.  There is a weightlifting entomologist, a soccer-coaching psychologist, a bagpipe playing biologist, a scuba-diving planetary scientist, and a fashion blogger/pharmacologist.

I think that showing that scientists come in many different forms can go a long way in increasing the representation of women in the sciences.  Scientists are not mythical men in lab coats, doing experiments through the night in their basement laboratories.  We do not all wear nerdy glasses and sport pocket protectors.*  Scientists can be your sister, your friend, your neighbor, your mother, and may even be you!

What stereotypes about scientists do you think need to be dispelled?

 

*Despite this, we will probably be nerdy in other ways. And actually myself and most of my friends wear glasses..

Preconceived notions

Recently, during conversation with someone I had just met, she made the assumption that my research adviser is male.  My research adviser is a woman, and I politely corrected her and we continued with the conversation.  I think that the assumption that an adviser is male is representative of the fact that the stereotypical scientist is male.

I think it’s really important to be aware of this issue.  Several months ago, I assumed professor was male during a conversation with my sister.  When she corrected me, I was a little embarrassed (especially  since I try to be really careful about that sort of thing), and I haven’t made the mistake since.  When discussing a person whose gender is unknown, try to always refer to them as “he or she”.  Women are scientists and professors, and plenty of men hold stereotypically female positions.  It’s really easy to make these sorts of assumptions.  For me, being corrected on it was a great wake-up call.  So don’t be afraid to politely correct people when they wrongly assume your physics professor is a man!  By correcting these preconceived notions, we can start to change the image of the stereotypical scientist.

Hey – didn’t you know that homework isn’t for girls?

Yet another offensive and sexist t-shirt!  A couple days ago I posted about a t-shirt that reads “Cool Story Babe.  Now make me a sandwich.”  While that t-shirt relegates women to the kitchen, a new shirt from J.C. Penney sends the message that girls should leave homework to the boys.

This shirt was sold on J.C. Penney's website.

I’ve already blogged about a product from Forever 21 that displayed the statement “Too Pretty to Do Math”.  The J.C. Penney, which is marketed towards younger girls, goes even farther.  Not only does it say that the wearer is “too pretty to do homework”, it also says that her brother has to do it for her.  The phrasing here really bothers me.  It doesn’t say “so my brother does it for me”.  It says “so my brother has to do it for me”.  This implies that she is intellectually incapable of doing said homework.  Apparently, girls cannot be pretty and do their own homework.  I can’t imagine who thought this shirt would be a good idea.  Why didn’t they also make a shirt that said “I’m too handsome to do homework, so my sister has to do it for me”?  Oh right, because it’s just girls that are told by clothing chains/movies/magazines/advertisements that it’s better to be pretty than to be smart, as if being intelligent is intrinsically unfeminine.

After receiving a slew of complaints, J.C. Penney did remove the shirt from their online store (it was never sold in-store).  While that’s a step in the right direction, the shirt should have never been sold in the first place.

Oh yeah, and the shirt was marketed with this caption: “Who has time for homework when there’s a new Justin Bieber album out? She’ll love this tee that’s just as cute and sassy as she is.”  Cause Justin Bieber beats doing well in school any day.

What do you think about the shirt?

Cool Story Babe. Now make me a sandwich.

Will the "woman in the kitchen" jokes ever get old?

I had the misfortune to view this t-shirt multiple times while on vacation a few weeks ago.  I saw it in several shops on a boardwalk in New Jersey, as well as in a mall in Staten Island.  I was pretty disgusted by it the first time I saw it, and it only got worse as I saw it being sold in multiple shops, and then on a boy who must have been about 12.  My sister told me she saw a woman wearing it.

The fact that people are still amused by t-shirts like this is seriously unfortunate.  Not only does it reinforce the age-old stereotype of a woman’s place being in the kitchen, it also promotes dismissing women rather than giving them the respect they deserve.  And the fact that I witnessed it being worn by such a young boy makes it even worse; I hate to think that some kids grow up thinking a shirt that promotes sexism is “cool” (and that parents would be okay with their child wearing it…).  It was also pretty disturbing that a woman was wearing it – it’s so frustrating when some women dismiss overt sexism as a joke.  I suppose one could argue that the message could also be directed toward a male, but given that men are never told to “get back in the kitchen”, I’d say with great certainty that the “babe” being addressed is intended to be a woman.

What do you think of the shirt? Insanely sexist or a harmless joke?

Too pretty to do math?

This magnet was sold on forever21.com.

Recently, a magnet became available on forever21.com with the statement ‘I’m too pretty to do math’.  After the company received complaints, they removed the magnet from their website.

It’s pretty disgraceful that Forever 21 would sell a magnet that perpetuates such a ridiculous stereotype.  Forever 21 is a stylish clothing outfitter who sells mainly to teenage girls and young women.  A magnet like this would be certain to reach a wide audience of girls.  This quote is tying one’s looks to one’s intelligence – saying that subjects like math (and by extension, science) are only for girls who aren’t “pretty”.  This is bad for several reasons.  For one, it discourages girls from pursuing math-oriented careers for fear of being seen as “uncool”.  It sends the message that girls who want to be pretty and feminine shouldn’t pursue math, which gets the reputation of being difficult and boring.  It also relies on the stereotype that women aren’t as good at math as men.  One article mentions that there would never be a magnet stating “I’m too handsome to do math.”

You would think that as increasing numbers of women pursue careers in science, the stereotype about women being bad at math would die down.  But apparently not!  While it’s good that the magnet has been taken off the website, it’s pretty terrible that it was ever available in the first place.  Because math is cool! And because whether a person is good or bad at math has nothing to do with their gender.

Gender, culture, and mathematics performance

The paper “Gender, culture, and mathematics performance” was published in 2009 in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  The paper sets out to answer three questions:

1. Do gender differences in mathematics performance exist in the general population?
2. Do gender differences exist among the highly mathematically talented?
3. Do females exist who possess profound mathematical talent?

After addressing these questions, the paper talks about the effects of sociocultural factors on observed gender differences.  I discuss their answers for each question below:

Question 1: In studies published in 1966 and 1974, a developmental psychologist found that gender differences in math performance were well established, and that males scored higher.  She noted that, while their elementary school performance was similar, boys’ skills began to increase faster than girls’ around age 12/13, which created a large gap by the time they reached high school.  In a recent study based on No Child Left Behind data (representing over 7 million students), it was found that gender differences in mathematics performance were close to zero in all grades, including high school.  This pattern was found for all other ethnic groups studied.  Thus, the gap that was found in previous decades has now disappeared.  However, the No Child Left Behind data was not able to shed light on a possible gap in complex problem solving.  For this, the researchers looked at data from the National Assessment of Education Progress, and found that the gender difference was trivial.  The math skills of girls are equal to those of boys.

Question 2: In 1984 it was hypothesized that the variability of intellectual abilities was greater among men; this would mean that there are more men than women at both the low-achieving and high-achieving ends of the spectrum.  To test this hypothesis, they use variance ratios.  A variance ratio greater than 1 would indicate greater male variability in math skills.  Data from state math assessments found variance ratios slightly higher than 1.  They found that the ratio of males to females scoring at the 95th percentile was 1.34, and the ratio at the 99.9th percentile, the ratio was 2.15.  However, this varies greatly from country to country.  For example, as many girls or more girls than boys scored in the 99th percentile in Iceland, Thailand and the United Kingdom.  This challenges the greater male variability hypothesis, which one would expect to hold for all populations.  In another study, it was found that some countries have no difference in variability, and others even had more female variability.  This paper suggests that greater male variability is due to sociocultural factors, rather than biological differences.

Question 3: Of course.  Females with great mathematical talents definitely exist.  The scarcity of women mathematicians in the 20th century is due to a severe lack of opportunity for women who wanted to pursue math and science fields.  The paper cites many superb women mathematicians, such as Ada Lovelace, who is regarded as the world’s first computer programmer, and Grace Hopper, who developed the first compiler for a programming language.  You can find a large list of women mathematicians here.  Just because women mathematicians find themselves in the spotlight far less than male mathematicians doesn’t mean they don’t exist.

From this paper, we can conclude that sociocultural factors have more of an effect on the gender gap than innate biological differences between males and females.  One study listed in the paper concluded that there was a strong correlation between “a country’s measures of gender inequity and the size of the math gender gap both at the mean and the right tail of the distribution.”  The paper concludes that “gender inequality, not greater male variability, is the primary reason fewer females than males are identified as excelling in mathematics and the high and highest levels in most countries.”

Gender inequity can take many forms, including people advising females against taking STEM courses, mathematically talented girls not being supported, a lack of female role models in mathematically based fields, hostile work environments, teachers paying more attention to boys, and more.

(Source: Gender, culture and mathematics performance, published by the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in 2009.)