Women in Engineering. 61

[Compositepro]

I'm not a woman, and this topic is not of great interest to me, but this blog was quite interesting:

http://www.ecnmag.com/blogs/2015/06...asses?et_cid=4617690&et_rid=45570172&type=cta

 

[JNieman]

I like what Notorious RBG, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, said when approached about how many women on the SCOTUS Court is "enough", back in early 2015:

"Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg said there will be enough women on the Supreme Court when it is all women.

Ginsburg said, “People ask me sometimes, when do you think it will be enough? When will there be enough women on the court? And my answer is, when there are nine. Some people are taken aback, until they remember that for most of our country’s history, there were only men on the high court bench.”

She's not wrong. With so many candidates available for a seat when they open up, it's not at all difficult to think that the best candidate for the job could be a woman 9 times consecutively. That's not statistically unfavorable. That, to me, isn't proof of some sexism if the pendulum swung 'the other way' as I think many believe.

It's not 'vengeance' or 'eye for an eye' retribution. It's not "reverse sexism". If we were really honest about professional selections, we wouldn't bat an eye at the idea of a panel of all women happening at any point.

 

[GregLocock]

The odds are about 500:1. Thanks for playing,we take all credit cards.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[natepiercy]

Cranky108,

Too often I hear this sentiment:
"I can't vote third party, that would be throwing my vote away!"
If you're at the point where neither primary candidate represents you, your vote is trash to begin with. Consider voting for a third party, where there might be even the slightest chance of electing a reasonable candidate.

 

[TheTick]

If your vote is tallied, it is not "thrown away". You have expressed your opinion, and you were heard. It's not like you're betting on a roulette table.

In some ways, third-party votes resonate louder. The major parties take notice of who is voting third-party and why, and respond with long-term changes to their positions.

 

[cranky108]

I sometimes wonder what would happen if Mickey mouse actually won.

There are other things to think about other than the candidate. Like the markets, the unions, etc.

 

[JNieman]

@GregLocock

This isn't flipping a coin. This isn't a statistically equal microcosmic binary digit being flipped a million times. The SCOTUS is not a statistically relevant number to anything.

Real life does not follow a path of simple statistical means or averages. There's a nearly infinite number of happenstances that can occur leading up to the appointment of a S.C. Justice to alter a pool of possibles and none of it has to do with the statistical possibility of a simple 'Y' chromosome in an average human population.

Simple taking 2^9 is irrelevant.

More importantly: Is there something wrong with the idea of having 9 women on the bench?

 

[hokie66]

Based on the women there at the moment, I think there is a lot wrong with having any more.

 

[drawoh]

If your vote is tallied, it is not "thrown away". You have expressed your opinion, and you were heard. It's not like you're betting on a roulette table.

In some ways, third-party votes resonate louder. The major parties take notice of who is voting third-party and why, and respond with long-term changes to their positions.

Quite a few years ago here in Canada, a bunch of Quebec Separatistes voted for the Parti Rhinoceros. The result was that a number of Rhino candidates were runners up in the election.

--
JHG

 

[JNieman]

Based on the women there at the moment, I think there is a lot wrong with having any more.

Pretty sure you're part of the problem.

 

[cranky108]

So you would object to having right leaning women in the court? You believe only left leaning women should on the court.

What does that say about you?

 

[JNieman]

@cranky108

If you're responding to me, let me clarify:
The problem is finding a few people disagreeable based upon experience with them, and painting everyone like them (in whatever likeness; gender, race etc) with the same disdain, encouraging barring them from participating. That's bigotry and not acceptable.

I'm saying there's nothing wrong with women on the court, full stop. I've strongly disagreed with some of Sotomayor's rulings, in particular, but I've never once thought it was because she's a woman.

 

[IRstuff]

Who said anything like that? The court had 7 men and two women; based on demographics, there should be 5 women, and they could be a mix of left or right, just as there is a mix now.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[JNieman]

@IRstuff:

I asked:

"More importantly: Is there something wrong with the idea of having 9 women on the bench?"

Post by hokie66 from 21 Jul 16 20:45 appears to respond with:

"Based on the women there at the moment, I think there is a lot wrong with having any more."

(emphasis mine)

If I'm drawing an improper conclusion, I can't see reading it any other way. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[IRstuff]

That would seem to make the poster want right leaning women, doesn't it, not left, given that almost all the women that have even been in SCOTUS were either middle or left.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[JNieman]

I think you're stretching to be honest. I'm all for giving a person the benefit of the doubt, especially via text, but it seemed clear to me. The subject of the exchange was women. In general. Not conservative women, constitutionalist women, libertarian women, liberal women, progressive women, or any other adjective. So "having any more" only logically points to "any more women".

Whether in jest, light-heartedly or with a seriousness, it matters not. The effect is the same; proliferation of a poisonous and backwards mindset.

 

[KENAT]

Actually, the subject of the exchange is women in Engineering, not supreme court members of any sex or political persuasion.

Posting guidelines faq731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

(probably not aimed specifically at you)
What is Engineering anyway: faq1088-1484​

 

[TheTick]

Here's an infuriating story to raise the hackles of our precious few female members and get the discussion back on track...

On a recent flight, I sat next to a young woman returning from a job interview. She is a recent graduate with a BS in physics, obviously quite bright and curious. She interviewed with a tech company in Silicon Valley.

They dragged her all the way out to California, only to tell her upon arrival that they were not going to interview her for a technical position, but for an office position. The HR hack would not even consider introducing her to any of the managers on the tech side, even though that was the premise that originally brought her out there.

During the interview, they declined to give her a complete tour of the facility. The interviewer said it would be "cruel" to let her see the parts of the operation that she would not be allowed to work in but would certainly be most interested in.

 

[IRstuff]

Given the poster, I think the "Based on the women there at the moment" refers to the fact that all 3 women currently on the court are all left-leaning. While the question was clear, there's always a tinge of politics or religion in question such as this.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BKorP55Aqvg

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[SLTA]

* beats head slowly against the wall *

I went to our local ASCE meeting yesterday. 40 people there - 3 female engineers. But yeah, it's all because women aren't interested in engineering. It has nothing to do with the fact that about 75% of the males at that meeting were unwilling to make eye contact with us or say hello, let alone hire us for fair pay. (And they weren't just shy nerds - they were introducing themselves around like mad to each other.)

Have I told the story of when my mom went to a meeting (PhD in nuclear physics, freakin' AMAZING at it) as the expert in whatever the meeting was, and one of the men assumed she was someone's secretary and started explaining just the very basics of physics to her? He wanted to make sure she wasn't lost while taking notes. SHE WAS THERE AS THE EXPERT.

I'm super glad that some women never have to deal with this. I really am. I sure wish that had been my experience. I will say that I'm so much quicker to call out the BS to someone's face than I was as a young engineer, and that helps. Having my own company helps too, because folks know when they call that I'm a woman so it likely culls the herd a bit.

Please remember: we're not all guys!

 

[JohnRBaker]

Not to turn this into being any more 'political' than what it already is, I'm wondering what you all think of what the campaign manager for a major party's presidential candidate had to say when asked a question about women:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/paul-manafort-trump-women-voters_us_57916482e4b0fc06ec5c7899

John R. Baker, P.E. (ret)
EX-Product 'Evangelist'
Irvine, CA
Siemens PLM:
UG/NX Museum:

The secret of life is not finding someone to live with
It's finding someone you can't live without