For Girls, the Beauty of Math and Science can be more than Skin Deep
Submitted by Change the Equation on Thu, 2012-05-24 07:40
Will girls get more interested in science if we feminize it, make it more stereotypically "girly"? Not really, say the authors of a new study out of the University of Michigan. In fact, such efforts might even do more harm than good.
Girls often lose interest in math and science when they're in middle school, leading some to speculate that feminizing those subject might help turn things around. The U of M researchers put this idea to the test, showing middle schools successful women displaying traditionally feminine characteristics such as makeup and pink clothes. Girls exposed to such role models reported a decrease of interest in math and science.
Girls were more motivated by images of female scientists dressed in more gender-neutral clothes, wearing glasses or reading. The study's authors speculate that "girls not interested in math and science saw simultaneous success in both domains at least attainable, suggesting that their lack of motivation was related to the perceived unlikelihood of combining femininity and STEM [science, technology, engineering and math] success."
In other words, traditionally feminine images carry so much baggage that they erode girls' interest in STEM.
So should we demonize makeup and the color pink? Certainly not, unless we want fuel the very
stereotypes we strive against. Yet if the study is right (and we should always treat single studies like this one with caution), then "feminizing" math and science in the most superficial sense may not be the way to go.
Yet let's not conclude that we should therefore present math and science in the same way to girls and boys. Study after study has shown that girls are more likely to respond to STEM fields when they see how much value work in those fields can bring to society. Concern for the greater good is not an exclusively feminine trait, mind you. But a focus on the social impact of STEM might affect girls more strongly than visions of pink dresses do.
Comments
I have a hypothesis, as a
I have a hypothesis, as a male recent college graduate who majored in computer science. I don't know if my hypothesis is "ready for primetime", but I have nothing to lose by commenting here about it. One thing that I believe is "mentally blocking" kids from becoming interested in STEM is the "ugly, socially-maladjusted nerd" stereotype. Both boys and girls, I believe, for the most part, find the stereotypical nerd socially repulsive both to potentially be and to potentially be with as a lover/intimate partner.
The female students don't only see the other females in this field; they also see the males. Most people are heterosexual, and the arrival of puberty (middle school, for many) opens the floodgates for the hormones that drive sexual attraction. Successful female role models may be more likely to get prepubescent females interested in STEM, but puberty is the 800-pound gorilla in the room. That could explain the drop in female interest in middle school that was described in the article. I have not really tested this hypothesis, but I think that the girls need to see that "hot" and/or "cute" guys are in stereotypically nerdy fields, such as computer science, rather than mostly weak-kneed, pimply, flabby or too-skinny, and socially-maladjusted guys. How many females go wild for famous males like Johnny Depp, Tom Cruise, or even Justin Bieber vs. other famous males like Bill Gates, or even the "hip" Steve Jobs? One can go wild for a field (passion!), just like one can go wild for a person (also passion). Perhaps one could go wild for a field as a result of one's going wild for a significant person in that field.
Also, kids can see through [most ...] BS, so it must not look staged ... at all costs! STEM needs an extreme makeover ... the denizens thereof, that is. To be a stereotypical nerd who complains that most women are not attracted to him is to complain about the wind (equally a part of Nature as human sexuality). Sexual attraction can be studied scientifically and philosophically, but it does not stem from reason, for the most part. I consider the best religious explanation of how people end up going wild for each other to be the god, Eros (Cupid), shooting his arrows at them ... but the arrows are not shot in a completely random pattern. This is not a scientific explanation, but does not purport to be one either.
Fellow men of STEM, exercise regularly to get physically fit and better-looking, and improve your social skills ... if you're looking for a date, that is. A hint on the exercise: start with a small amount per day, such as running 1/4 of a mile, or doing 10 push-ups. Exercise is a dopamine-booster, and if you say run time trials, can be as appealing as a video game, with a high score (low time) list and all. If you can find other people to compete against, there's even a multiplayer mode! Improving your social skills does take practice, and it can be hard if you have certain social disabilities, such as Asperger syndrome or social anxiety. There is nothing inherently unattractive to women about our interests, for the most part, such as programming, the physical sciences, and even the games that we play (many females enjoy video games, despite the stereotypes), and they can make us great provider material, but to be a great provider and not also a great lover (a so-called alpha male) is a recipe to attract gold diggers (attractive or not) who will stab you in the back for your money in divorce court when they grow bored of you, and our "legal" system enables them to perform this evil stabbing maneuver.
Post new comment