Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet
Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals
Women Engineers.... 44
- Thread starter jmw
- Start date
- Status
I want to pursue KENAT's observation of 21 Mar 11 14:44 above: "Why should we encourage more women, or any other identifiable group, into engineering essentially at the expense of other 'over represented' groups?"
Indeed, why should we?
There is an assumption out there that if there are fewer women than men in engineering then the *ONLY* explanation is that there are some sort of invisible, yet almost infinitely strong, "barriers" preventing greater female participation. Any other explanation (e.g. that women, on average, just aren't that interested in engineering) is rejected----because such alternate explanations fail to prop up the ideology that males and females are totally interchangeable on all levels.
According to that ideology, all differences between little girls and little boys are simply due to nefarious parental influences that must be removed in order to bring about a gender-free utopia on earth.
You think I'm joking---but I'm not. For example, see the following Globe and Mail article about the gender-free nursery school in Sweden:
In fact, if one makes arguments to the effect that little boys tend to be better and more interested in math and physics and little girls better and more interested in verbal pursuits and relationships, then one can end up sneered as as being an "essentialist."
I'm all for removing unjust discrimination wherever it exists---but that was done decades ago in engineering. The percent of female engineers now simply reflects the true and natural level of interest in engineering amonst women---i.e. something like 15%. If hordes of women are not flocking to enginering its because they just aren't that interested. They're never going to achieve "gender equality" of 50/50, and it's not because of "barriers".
Indeed, why should we?
There is an assumption out there that if there are fewer women than men in engineering then the *ONLY* explanation is that there are some sort of invisible, yet almost infinitely strong, "barriers" preventing greater female participation. Any other explanation (e.g. that women, on average, just aren't that interested in engineering) is rejected----because such alternate explanations fail to prop up the ideology that males and females are totally interchangeable on all levels.
According to that ideology, all differences between little girls and little boys are simply due to nefarious parental influences that must be removed in order to bring about a gender-free utopia on earth.
You think I'm joking---but I'm not. For example, see the following Globe and Mail article about the gender-free nursery school in Sweden:
In fact, if one makes arguments to the effect that little boys tend to be better and more interested in math and physics and little girls better and more interested in verbal pursuits and relationships, then one can end up sneered as as being an "essentialist."
I'm all for removing unjust discrimination wherever it exists---but that was done decades ago in engineering. The percent of female engineers now simply reflects the true and natural level of interest in engineering amonst women---i.e. something like 15%. If hordes of women are not flocking to enginering its because they just aren't that interested. They're never going to achieve "gender equality" of 50/50, and it's not because of "barriers".
-
1
- #103
KM,
Good try.
Women don't flock to engineering because girls are told they suck at math and science starting really early. I had to fight to be allowed to take the math and science I did, all because I'm female. How many times has your expertise been questioned because of your gender? How many times have you been appointed the meeting note-taker because of your gender? It is in little, insidious ways like this that girls are taught not to be anything mathematical or scientific.
And in response to your comment: "I'm all for removing unjust discrimination wherever it exists---but that was done decades ago in engineering." - tell that to the young architect who refused to listen to my engineering comments in the field. His exact comment was "Well, let's wait until the REAL engineer gets here."
Right.
Good try.
Women don't flock to engineering because girls are told they suck at math and science starting really early. I had to fight to be allowed to take the math and science I did, all because I'm female. How many times has your expertise been questioned because of your gender? How many times have you been appointed the meeting note-taker because of your gender? It is in little, insidious ways like this that girls are taught not to be anything mathematical or scientific.
And in response to your comment: "I'm all for removing unjust discrimination wherever it exists---but that was done decades ago in engineering." - tell that to the young architect who refused to listen to my engineering comments in the field. His exact comment was "Well, let's wait until the REAL engineer gets here."
Right.
The term identifiable group, leads me to think that people form groups because of some commonality. And we all know of the natural commonalities of race gender, simular background, etc., (the exception should be department, or business structure). But it looks like the commonalities are a restraint of thought. That people of simular mind would tend to achieve simular thoughts, and thus outcomes. Which is the percise reason engineering groups should be people of different identifiable groups, so as the scheve a greater range of ideas and projected outcomes.
The term identifiable groups, therefore should not be applied to engineering.
The term identifiable groups, therefore should not be applied to engineering.
sita, I was never discouraged in HS from taking math and science. I excelled in them but I think the real difference was the teachers. My HS math teachers, men, had daughters and my HS science teacher was a woman, with a son and daughter. She was tough as nails, too, and told me "don't ever let anyone get to you and make you cry again." I grew up in a very small community, which was five miles from the K-12 school; consequently, any discouragement from college prep courses would have eliminated classes. The school was so small it couldn't offer physics. My childhood conditions were known, which may have been another factor because I can't remember getting much discouragement with math and science ever. What I remember most was encouragement to do better because I would often not do my best, sometimes far from it. My childhood was very confusing. Life is very dynamic, which is why I don't think we'll ever really know "cause and effect" in many situations with people. Often people don't think about the motivation(s) behind action(s).
KM, discrimination in engineering is alive and well. A manager discriminated against me because I am "good lookin'." That's what he said not my view of me. I've been told one of my biggest problems is that I am female and I've heard that many times. I've heard stuff from men that makes me feel all dirty. I've been told countless times another problem of mine is that I am smart, too smart. Too smart for a woman. I am not smart but I have worked very hard, long hours to get experience and education.
I don't believe in gender equality and never will. We are different and I am glad we are. Men have a lot to offer women, once they figure out how to be men.
KM, discrimination in engineering is alive and well. A manager discriminated against me because I am "good lookin'." That's what he said not my view of me. I've been told one of my biggest problems is that I am female and I've heard that many times. I've heard stuff from men that makes me feel all dirty. I've been told countless times another problem of mine is that I am smart, too smart. Too smart for a woman. I am not smart but I have worked very hard, long hours to get experience and education.
I don't believe in gender equality and never will. We are different and I am glad we are. Men have a lot to offer women, once they figure out how to be men.
- Thread starter
- #106
Well, one thing's for sure, we'll never figure out women!
I know I've taken this out of its true context, but it made me think:
With most people without barriers or discrimination we get a full spectrum of talents: good, bad, indifferent and an occasional exceptional. For male engineers, perhaps.
But if I judge by the quality of those women engineers I've met, the barriers and obstructions and the disincentives all seem to act as a filter so those that do come through do seem to be the cream of the crop. Perhaps this is a fair observation or perhaps it is just that the "novelty" of women engineers has made them stand out in my experience rather more.
One problem in this may be that we are a multi-national group which hasn't yet attempted to discern any differences between different cultures.
It may be that some of the comment here that seems not quite to jell with our own experiences is because we don't know the cultural contexts for each of the comments.
It might be interesting to explore cultural differences relative to the comments so far made.
For example, I imagine that the UK environment is still far from being gender neutral in attitudes. In both the US and the UK, two world Wars did something to change the traditional "role" or view of women but perhaps not enough.
On the other hand I suspect that in Russia, women engineers are more common and might possibly compete on a more level playing field. But that is perhaps coloured by my own experiences which perhaps by chance meant a higher proportion of women engineers. - one of our Russian agencies was headed up by a woman engineer and had a very capable (and attractive) woman engineer in a key role. A pattern that has repeated elsewhere in other (old) East Block countries I have dealt with.
My problem is that maybe I have just being seeing the cream and maybe my attitude isn't what everyone would like it to be so maybe I don't see it as it is.
PS there ain't no such thing as too good looking.... but in a way I understand the comment because it has crept in on a couple of other threads.
In a male dominated environment it may well be a challenge for some to take seriously or to be un-distracted by smart good looking women. But that is not the fault of the woman but a comment on the male problems of control and professional respect.
What I really wonder is how tough it has been for some of the women who started out in engineering many years ago and who are now mature but at the top of their profession or industry. Is it any easier now or not? Will we see many more women reaching the top in the coming years (and possibly out of proportion to the general representation if I'm right that just the cream is coming through at the moment).
It also seems that so far the discussion has primarily looked at the difficulties of an equal work/job status environment.
But, will it be any easier with more women bosses?
Is it easier for a woman to work for a woman?
How do men respond to working for women engineers?
JMW
I know I've taken this out of its true context, but it made me think:
With most people without barriers or discrimination we get a full spectrum of talents: good, bad, indifferent and an occasional exceptional. For male engineers, perhaps.
But if I judge by the quality of those women engineers I've met, the barriers and obstructions and the disincentives all seem to act as a filter so those that do come through do seem to be the cream of the crop. Perhaps this is a fair observation or perhaps it is just that the "novelty" of women engineers has made them stand out in my experience rather more.
One problem in this may be that we are a multi-national group which hasn't yet attempted to discern any differences between different cultures.
It may be that some of the comment here that seems not quite to jell with our own experiences is because we don't know the cultural contexts for each of the comments.
It might be interesting to explore cultural differences relative to the comments so far made.
For example, I imagine that the UK environment is still far from being gender neutral in attitudes. In both the US and the UK, two world Wars did something to change the traditional "role" or view of women but perhaps not enough.
On the other hand I suspect that in Russia, women engineers are more common and might possibly compete on a more level playing field. But that is perhaps coloured by my own experiences which perhaps by chance meant a higher proportion of women engineers. - one of our Russian agencies was headed up by a woman engineer and had a very capable (and attractive) woman engineer in a key role. A pattern that has repeated elsewhere in other (old) East Block countries I have dealt with.
My problem is that maybe I have just being seeing the cream and maybe my attitude isn't what everyone would like it to be so maybe I don't see it as it is.
PS there ain't no such thing as too good looking.... but in a way I understand the comment because it has crept in on a couple of other threads.
In a male dominated environment it may well be a challenge for some to take seriously or to be un-distracted by smart good looking women. But that is not the fault of the woman but a comment on the male problems of control and professional respect.
What I really wonder is how tough it has been for some of the women who started out in engineering many years ago and who are now mature but at the top of their profession or industry. Is it any easier now or not? Will we see many more women reaching the top in the coming years (and possibly out of proportion to the general representation if I'm right that just the cream is coming through at the moment).
It also seems that so far the discussion has primarily looked at the difficulties of an equal work/job status environment.
But, will it be any easier with more women bosses?
Is it easier for a woman to work for a woman?
How do men respond to working for women engineers?
JMW
Well as for the 'your beauty is a distraction', that isn't confined to engineering. I saw a TV segment about a woman on wall street who got the same treatment, and it didn't sound like it was unique to her or her field.
Now, one might think it might be more of an issue in male dominated fields such as engineering, but then again other fields that were once male dominated are now much more equal, so if it is more of an issue in engineering then why?
Plus during my schooling it seemed those of the female persuasion were actively encouraged in math and science as much as the boys. Though of course, not being a female I probably didn't pay as much attention. I certainly don't recall being told not to worry about language skills or even typing because I was a boy. As I've mentioned before, toward the end of high school and at uni the ladies actually got more encouragement to go into engineering etc. than the boys from what I could see.
This topic actually came up with one of the ladies in our software dept at our weakly coffee & donuts session last week. Sadly she was unable to contribute much beyond what has been said here, she did agree with the issue that maybe a lot of women have a lower tolerance for some of the general frustrations of the job. It also seemed that ladies are slightly more common in software development than in say mechanical engineering.
Now, one might think it might be more of an issue in male dominated fields such as engineering, but then again other fields that were once male dominated are now much more equal, so if it is more of an issue in engineering then why?
Plus during my schooling it seemed those of the female persuasion were actively encouraged in math and science as much as the boys. Though of course, not being a female I probably didn't pay as much attention. I certainly don't recall being told not to worry about language skills or even typing because I was a boy. As I've mentioned before, toward the end of high school and at uni the ladies actually got more encouragement to go into engineering etc. than the boys from what I could see.
This topic actually came up with one of the ladies in our software dept at our weakly coffee & donuts session last week. Sadly she was unable to contribute much beyond what has been said here, she did agree with the issue that maybe a lot of women have a lower tolerance for some of the general frustrations of the job. It also seemed that ladies are slightly more common in software development than in say mechanical engineering.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
- Thread starter
- #108
Damn, my next post got wiped before it got posted.... lets try again...
Kenat, I wasn't aware we were considering engineering in comparison with other occupations, just trying to work out how good or bad things are in engineering. For all I know, engineering may be among the more favourable occupations, though I wouldn't count on it.
When I was a kid, girls did domestic science (cooking and needlework) and boys did woodwork or metalwork. Later on, technical drawing.
I'm guessing art was gender neutral.
JMW
Kenat, I wasn't aware we were considering engineering in comparison with other occupations, just trying to work out how good or bad things are in engineering. For all I know, engineering may be among the more favourable occupations, though I wouldn't count on it.
When I was a kid, girls did domestic science (cooking and needlework) and boys did woodwork or metalwork. Later on, technical drawing.
I'm guessing art was gender neutral.
JMW
Surely comparing to to other occupation should be done to some extent to see what if anything is engineering specific, and what is more general? Given that some other occupations that earlier last century were male dominated have achieved, or exceeded parity (at least in UK & US by the looks of it) doesn't it make sense to consider what is fundamentally different about engineering.
That is if you subscribe to the opinion that all professions should have near parity.
That is if you subscribe to the opinion that all professions should have near parity.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
jmw, it is surprising that you'll "never" figure out women.
I don't think WWI and WWII changed the role of women that much. My paternal grandmother worked outside the home and her mother ran her own business most of her adult life. She had to as my great-grandfather was a scoundrel. My maternal grandmother worked alongside my grandfather in the cotton fields. My mother and her sisters were working prior to WWII. Women have always worked in my opinion and not sat around eating bonbons and drinking champagne. ;-)
Men are discriminated against, too. Some men have no desire to be part of the Good Ol' Boys Club any more than some women do. I have male friends that don't use foul language and don't drink. Those attitudes set them apart from the "herd." It isn't just women who receive cruddy treatment but this thread is about women.
I know women from the cream and not so cream that have stuck with engineering. From my conversations with these women, they enjoyed engineering school and they enjoy engineering as a profession. They do not enjoy being treated as though they are second class engineers and citizens.
I've been at this 20+ years. It didn't get easier as I went; it got worse. As I learned, men began to understand I was not a mere token but did, indeed, have a brain and used it. The secure-with-themselves engineers have not been a problem and I remain in contact with them. Some male engineers are jerks and those are the problem children.
I've worked for one female engineer and it was a very good experience. She set expectations and got out of the way. We got along fine. She worked hard and didn't politic. The men didn't like working for her because of her gender and they thought she was a bit clueless. The real problem, as I saw it, she was smart and not a bit clueless. They couldn't get away with much and they wanted her job. In my estimation, they were unqualified for her job.
I've worked for some outstanding male supervisors, too. Those men I have a high degree of respect and admiration for. Those men also have daughters and not too many sons. I don't believe that made them partial to women or our issues but that it enabled them to know how to treat women respectfully and understand we have capabilities.
If female operators are any indication, more female bosses will not make it better. Women can be jerks just like men. Listen to women in female dominated fields.
Therefore, in my opinion, it will always come down to the individual and the choices they make about who and how they want to be as a human. You either want to do the right thing by all people and work at it or you do not.
KENAT, I have female engineering friends that went the high tech route and they've had very few issues and women tend to go that route more so than old, heavy manufacturing, from what I've noted. I went into old, heavy manufacturing and have endured too many problems. So many I have contemplated leaving the field twice. They can't believe the garbage I've run into and that I put up with it for so long.
I don't know that all fields have parity. I've not reviewed stats or looked for them. I have often been the only female engineer or female EE in my little sphere of manufacturing. Some women have trouble with that. I didn't.
I don't think WWI and WWII changed the role of women that much. My paternal grandmother worked outside the home and her mother ran her own business most of her adult life. She had to as my great-grandfather was a scoundrel. My maternal grandmother worked alongside my grandfather in the cotton fields. My mother and her sisters were working prior to WWII. Women have always worked in my opinion and not sat around eating bonbons and drinking champagne. ;-)
Men are discriminated against, too. Some men have no desire to be part of the Good Ol' Boys Club any more than some women do. I have male friends that don't use foul language and don't drink. Those attitudes set them apart from the "herd." It isn't just women who receive cruddy treatment but this thread is about women.
I know women from the cream and not so cream that have stuck with engineering. From my conversations with these women, they enjoyed engineering school and they enjoy engineering as a profession. They do not enjoy being treated as though they are second class engineers and citizens.
I've been at this 20+ years. It didn't get easier as I went; it got worse. As I learned, men began to understand I was not a mere token but did, indeed, have a brain and used it. The secure-with-themselves engineers have not been a problem and I remain in contact with them. Some male engineers are jerks and those are the problem children.
I've worked for one female engineer and it was a very good experience. She set expectations and got out of the way. We got along fine. She worked hard and didn't politic. The men didn't like working for her because of her gender and they thought she was a bit clueless. The real problem, as I saw it, she was smart and not a bit clueless. They couldn't get away with much and they wanted her job. In my estimation, they were unqualified for her job.
I've worked for some outstanding male supervisors, too. Those men I have a high degree of respect and admiration for. Those men also have daughters and not too many sons. I don't believe that made them partial to women or our issues but that it enabled them to know how to treat women respectfully and understand we have capabilities.
If female operators are any indication, more female bosses will not make it better. Women can be jerks just like men. Listen to women in female dominated fields.
Therefore, in my opinion, it will always come down to the individual and the choices they make about who and how they want to be as a human. You either want to do the right thing by all people and work at it or you do not.
KENAT, I have female engineering friends that went the high tech route and they've had very few issues and women tend to go that route more so than old, heavy manufacturing, from what I've noted. I went into old, heavy manufacturing and have endured too many problems. So many I have contemplated leaving the field twice. They can't believe the garbage I've run into and that I put up with it for so long.
I don't know that all fields have parity. I've not reviewed stats or looked for them. I have often been the only female engineer or female EE in my little sphere of manufacturing. Some women have trouble with that. I didn't.
lacajun, going from memory the % of women in software according to the stats we found was something like double that in mechanical.
Posting guidelines faq731-376 (probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484
Something that has not been covered is that the percentage of engineers who are women significantly varies in different countries.
In China, 40% of engineers are women. In Sweden it's 26%.
However, in the UK only 9% of engineers are women and in Australia it's 11%.
Here are some articles on this topic:
In China, 40% of engineers are women. In Sweden it's 26%.
However, in the UK only 9% of engineers are women and in Australia it's 11%.
Here are some articles on this topic:
- Thread starter
- #113
Thank you Josephv, good links. Most interesting to find that in Russia, from holding a majority of engineering posts women are now in decline..... would have been nice to have some insights into the Chinese situation.
JMW
JMW
-
3
- #114
moltenmetal
Chemical
We shouldn’t be encouraging anyone to become an engineer unless they’re passionate about it and have voluntarily demonstrated the aptitude for it. Doesn’t matter if they’re male or female. Too many kids study engineering simply because they’re good at math and science and someone told them engineering was a good gig.
We should NOT be targeting a complete balance between the sexes in engineering by encouraging girls to go to engineering school, any more than we should be curbing women’s enrolments in medical schools to achieve that balance (yes, it’s swung in the other direction). There’s a huge difference between providing opportunity to all and expecting equal participation.
I was mentored by and studied with some excellent female engineers. That experience helps to dispel some of the societal stereotypes that can colour people’s attitudes. But if the perceived barriers to entry into our male-dominated profession act as a filter, it’s a very imperfect filter. I’ve met many female engineers who were, in objective terms, really lousy at the technical aspects of their jobs.
I’ve had lip and attitude and other inappropriate behaviour from others that I’m sure, if I were female, I would have attributed to sexism. If I were a visible minority, I might attribute those same behaviours to racism or xenophobia. In reality, they were a result of the people involved basically being equal opportunity @ssholes. I’m not denying that sexism exists- clearly it does, in engineering as in all other aspects of society. I’m merely saying that ‘isms are a convenient explanation for @sshole behaviour when the victim is already feeling insecure because they are identifiably different than the normative majority.
Sex segregation can tend to exascerbate undesirable behavioural tendencies associated with either sex. It happens in sex-segregated schools and near-unisex workplaces for both sexes. It would not surprise me at all if male engineers were more sexist than the average university educated male, and that would have consequences for female engineers they work with. But I’m sure that you’d find male plumbers to be a great deal more sexist on average than male engineers. It’s important to realize that these normative tendencies on the part of groups of people say NOTHING whatsoever about who we are as individuals.
We should NOT be targeting a complete balance between the sexes in engineering by encouraging girls to go to engineering school, any more than we should be curbing women’s enrolments in medical schools to achieve that balance (yes, it’s swung in the other direction). There’s a huge difference between providing opportunity to all and expecting equal participation.
I was mentored by and studied with some excellent female engineers. That experience helps to dispel some of the societal stereotypes that can colour people’s attitudes. But if the perceived barriers to entry into our male-dominated profession act as a filter, it’s a very imperfect filter. I’ve met many female engineers who were, in objective terms, really lousy at the technical aspects of their jobs.
I’ve had lip and attitude and other inappropriate behaviour from others that I’m sure, if I were female, I would have attributed to sexism. If I were a visible minority, I might attribute those same behaviours to racism or xenophobia. In reality, they were a result of the people involved basically being equal opportunity @ssholes. I’m not denying that sexism exists- clearly it does, in engineering as in all other aspects of society. I’m merely saying that ‘isms are a convenient explanation for @sshole behaviour when the victim is already feeling insecure because they are identifiably different than the normative majority.
Sex segregation can tend to exascerbate undesirable behavioural tendencies associated with either sex. It happens in sex-segregated schools and near-unisex workplaces for both sexes. It would not surprise me at all if male engineers were more sexist than the average university educated male, and that would have consequences for female engineers they work with. But I’m sure that you’d find male plumbers to be a great deal more sexist on average than male engineers. It’s important to realize that these normative tendencies on the part of groups of people say NOTHING whatsoever about who we are as individuals.
Here is another interesting article:
"The under-representation of women in engineering continues to be a cause of grave concern, particularly as international competitiveness and homeland security focus attention on the need to increase native participation in the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. Comprising 56 percent of all undergraduate and 58 percent of all graduate students, women represent only 20 percent of B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. degrees awarded in engineering (Freeman, 2004; National Science Foundation, 2004)."
International competitiveness is a good point considering that:
In China, 40% of engineers are women. In the West, the numbers are around 20% (Sweden on the higher end at 26%, UK on the low end at 9%).
"The under-representation of women in engineering continues to be a cause of grave concern, particularly as international competitiveness and homeland security focus attention on the need to increase native participation in the U.S. science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) workforce. Comprising 56 percent of all undergraduate and 58 percent of all graduate students, women represent only 20 percent of B.A., M.A. and Ph.D. degrees awarded in engineering (Freeman, 2004; National Science Foundation, 2004)."
International competitiveness is a good point considering that:
In China, 40% of engineers are women. In the West, the numbers are around 20% (Sweden on the higher end at 26%, UK on the low end at 9%).
cranky108, I know one female instrument hand that faced men trying to get her terminated because she couldn't lift 50 lbs. like a man. She had a bad back just like some men do, who can't lift 50 lbs. That didn't seem to matter to those men. She stuck with it and moved into a management position. She is a hard worker and stays out of trouble. I say good for her!
What was the problem with the men? They viewed her as taking a man's job and men have families to support. Ah-ha, but not all men do and that was true in their little world. If she can't do the job a man could do, then she shouldn't be in the position. I agree. But, technically she was competent, with one physical limitation. She was also a single mother, which they objected to because that would cause her to miss work. They thought she should be married. It didn't matter that she had no support system beyond her own capabilities. They also objected to her desire to have more children because that would distract her from the tasks at hand, cause her to miss work, etc. Would it help, if I mentioned she was also drop dead gorgeous?
Oddly enough, the most vocal man wound up with some of the same issues. He ate crow pie for awhile and gradually came around to being an OK kinda' guy. I was very glad because I had to work with his group a lot.
I know another female instrument hand that was viewed as technically weak; however, she was stronger technically than her male counterpart. I worked with both and knew their capabilities.
What was the problem with the men? They viewed her as taking a man's job and men have families to support. Ah-ha, but not all men do and that was true in their little world. If she can't do the job a man could do, then she shouldn't be in the position. I agree. But, technically she was competent, with one physical limitation. She was also a single mother, which they objected to because that would cause her to miss work. They thought she should be married. It didn't matter that she had no support system beyond her own capabilities. They also objected to her desire to have more children because that would distract her from the tasks at hand, cause her to miss work, etc. Would it help, if I mentioned she was also drop dead gorgeous?
Oddly enough, the most vocal man wound up with some of the same issues. He ate crow pie for awhile and gradually came around to being an OK kinda' guy. I was very glad because I had to work with his group a lot.
I know another female instrument hand that was viewed as technically weak; however, she was stronger technically than her male counterpart. I worked with both and knew their capabilities.
You hit on a good point, why would anyone want to stay in a job they felt unconfortable with. However, it may not be completly the good ol'boys club. I think there is also some respect issues from managment for those positions (Managers tend to look at where they want to go, and not at who is supporting them).
So maybe that is why we seem to have better results with contractors than internal people for some things.
So maybe that is why we seem to have better results with contractors than internal people for some things.
She was comfortable with the job and some men didn't mind helping her. They viewed her back as they would view a man's bad back. That's what I would expect but we don't all operate with the same life views. Her long term goal was to move into management and she made it in good time, too. There are Boys' Clubs in the hourly ranks, too. Bad discrimination doesn't know boundaries.
The contractors that worked for me were pretty good at getting some things done because they had the freedom to cut to the meat of the matter. Some direct employees fear doing that because some managers do retaliate and when they do, it's not "pretty." Managers can get away with some nasty tactics because they're management thus untouchable.
After all, TheTick's first post got a lot of stars pretty quickly so that individual nailed it. We don't emerge from the womb knowing right from wrong and how to treat people properly. We have to be taught.
The contractors that worked for me were pretty good at getting some things done because they had the freedom to cut to the meat of the matter. Some direct employees fear doing that because some managers do retaliate and when they do, it's not "pretty." Managers can get away with some nasty tactics because they're management thus untouchable.
After all, TheTick's first post got a lot of stars pretty quickly so that individual nailed it. We don't emerge from the womb knowing right from wrong and how to treat people properly. We have to be taught.
"We don't emerge from the womb knowing right from wrong and how to treat people properly. We have to be taught."
That is a very correct statment. But as children try to test the limits, I believe some adults also do.
Also true is that we tend to congrate with people like ourselves. And definition of ourselves seems to change with the situation. At least that is what I have noticed in myself (yea that's me in the corner with the weard people). It's not that I intend anything by congrating with people I like. It seems confortable.
That is a very correct statment. But as children try to test the limits, I believe some adults also do.
Also true is that we tend to congrate with people like ourselves. And definition of ourselves seems to change with the situation. At least that is what I have noticed in myself (yea that's me in the corner with the weard people). It's not that I intend anything by congrating with people I like. It seems confortable.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- News
- Locked
- Question
- Locked
- Article