Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /sci/ - Science & Math
You are currently reading a thread in /sci/ - Science & Math
What exactly are the fields that are considered "girl science"?
Biology
inb4 computer science
exercise science
biology
>>7992533
Biology, Chemistry, ... Psychology
but it doesnt mean they are girls only.
nothing more interesting and alarming than Crispr-Cas9 atm.
>>7992533
Marine biology.
Dental hygiene.
It's definitely biology, but I really can't complain, they do a good job in that field.
>>7992533
Sociology.
That's about it.
>>7992570
>sociology
>science
>>7992549
>Marine biology.
this field seems to have more men, or at the very least an equal amount of men or women
>>7992533
Define 'girl science'. Do you mean that the female academics in the field are the majority for example?
>>7992686
not OP but I would define it as the fields with greater female presence across the board from undergrad to professor
anything that isn't math or physics
inb4 math isnt sciencememe
>>7992549
>marine biology
This man is the greatest of them all, though.
>>7992535
>Study of the food chain
>>7992533
Engineering
>>7993559
u wot m8
Biologist here, I went in to this field with no idea how to talk to girls, but by the end of undergrad a solid majority of my friends I made in classes were females. Most of my classes were at least 1:1 male:female, some of them there were less men than women
>>7992533
There is no such thing.
Please, tumblrites, stop coming to /sci/ to make bait posts like this to then take screenshots and post them in 'geekfeminism' and shit.
I know you are desperate for evidence of the patriarchy but do it on /b/ please. This board still has some dignity.
>>7993528
You mean physics or engineering? Math is 50/50 to slightly leaning to women.
>>7992533
Gynaecology
>>7993844
/thread
>>7992533
Equestrian studies
>>7992571
That's the point.
Biology, neuroscience and psychology. Math scares women away
>>7993528
>>7993811
I feel like most women in STEM only ever git gud at a niche field, that's why you see so many women in math academia they can get into incubated niche fields while the more difficult math fields is occupied by males. Physics and especially engineering requires mastery of a much wider set of fields in order to be succesful at it.
Same thing happens in chemistry, girls do research in specific math light fields requiring them to only master the field itself and most of their research is labwork while physical chemisty and modelling is again more masculine.
This isn't gender bait, my experience is just that women have other things that are far more important to them, I don't see many getting obsessive about STEM and spending late nights on their work, it's just another job to them.
>>7994207
>This isn't gender bait, my experience is just that women have other things that are far more important to them, I don't see many getting obsessive about STEM and spending late nights on their work, it's just another job to them.
I really, really hope you aren't serious. You are pretty much wrong on every count (and not only because you generalise your biased 'observations' to every STEM female), and I would actually argue and explain why you are wrong point by point, but then again if you are serious, then you are too far gone for my post to mean anything to you.
>>>/r9k/
I think this is your only viable option now.
>>7994234
>I would actually argue and explain why you are wrong point by point,
I'd love to see you try.
social "science"
feminist "science"
cosmetic science
>>7994241
Okay, then. Sadly, I have nothing better to do so I will just pretend you will use logic rather than beta bitterness as you read my post.
Since you mention engineering, you'd love to know that the US is not the only STEM female sample. In Eastern/South EU and some Asian countries, females are very prevalent in engineering programs (and jobs), and I speak from personal experience, just like you do (Unfortunately, only west EU and America catalogue all these gender disparities in their uni programmes, because these countries are the ones who care about these differences). So that pretty much rules out the 'women just don't have the skills and go into easier fields' argument.
I don't know what you are trying to say with your second paragraph. Let's assume physical chemistry is more sparsely populated by women, what's your explanation? That they can't into math? Dont want to? Since you bundle women into this one specific homogeneous group of people, I'll say this:
Since we already know that women are a big part of math academia, saying women favor math light fields is kind of contradictory... Math academia contains a lot more high-level math than chemistry fields.
Additionally, you'd probably want to know that 'labwork' still is a part of PhDs. Men are required to do lab work as well, no matter the field.
In your final paragraph, you use personal anecdotes to validate your biased view. I'll also say that there are women that I have seen in academia that worked longer hours and lost more nights than the men doing work because they loved what they did. You're extremely biased if you deny that there are many men who don't care about their work or PhDs. Or you haven't ever been in a PhD lab.
Protip: this is why they are in academia in the first place. If they wanted 'just another job', they would just get it.
I wanna end myself for wasting time writing this... Oh well, at least I can pretend I made you see how the real world looks like in my eyes.
>>7993556
>that episode
Is it the best one of all time?
>>7994207
>I don't see many getting obsessive about STEM and spending late nights on their work, it's just another job to them.
I don't think you've worked in the industry then friendo. Most people don't give a fuck and they get a degree in STEM because they know they'll get a job on the way out. The only people in university I remember being dead set on their research were women.
>>7994324
>condescendingly lectures someone for using anecdotes
>by using anecdotes
no wonder women are bad at stats :^)
>>7994339
sources and stats or fuck off
>>7994343
That's because I was implying that my own view might not be 100% accurate. I don't consider my views to be truly unbiased. You could tell if you actually read the post and my last phrase
>in my eyes
This is how I personally view things.
If you want to be taken seriously, at least refer to my points directly.
>>7994353
>my points
as you said your whole point is "in my eyes this is true ok"
there's nothing to address.
>>7994349
>people
>giving two fucks about their jobs
>where you do the same repetitive actions over and over again
People do just enough work not to get fired. I don't think this is news anon. You should try talking to engineers, scientists or anyone that works a job. They'll tell you the same.
If you're asking why aren't there more women in STEM and you're not looking for people to tell you women are stoopid and dumb.
The simple answer is that some people have different paths to happiness. Perhaps a woman could get a degree in mech engineering and enjoy her job or maybe she finds out that she enjoyed studying the subject but the industry isn't for her. So she goes to become a teacher because the pay is pretty good, it's less stressful and has similar benefits. Same thing happens with dudes all the time.
When I worked part time to pay for university my GM had a degree in mech engineering and told me that the industry just wasn't for him. Shit happens.
>>7994361
Burden of proof falls to the one making the claim.
1) He made a claim that women like math-light fields, while admitting that math academia has a lot of women who have proven themselves. This is a contradiction.
2) He also said that women lack the wider skills needed in engineering which is why they aren't present in engineering. I simply pointed out that the prevalence of women engineers in East EU and Asian countries shows that the gender discrepancy in the western world might have cultural roots, rather than genetic ones.
These are the barebone points you want to address. Simplified enough now?
>>7994373
>people
>giving two fucks about their jobs
>where you do the same repetitive actions over and over again
lol, just because you are a fucking drone, doesn't mean every one else is. if you are stuck doing the same shit that means you haven't learned how to do anything new since you got there. way to develop your skillset.
just because people don't jump for joy at the thought of going to work, does not mean they don't take their profession seriously and have pride in their workmanship.
>>7994377
>burden of proof
>he said I said
he made a claim with no evidence and you condescendingly came forward claiming to have the answer and that we were taking a lot of your precious time to even deserve to hear it
then you started spouting nonsense "in my eyes this is true" bullshit
the burden of proof is on whoever makes claims, and you made a lot of them as well. you also act like a total prick. once more, there's no point to address because you're talking out of your ass. the fact that the guy did so as well really doesn't matter. get it through your head: you didn't put a single valuable point forward. your nonsense is as useless as his and you're worse than him because of the shitty condescending attitude.
>>7994433
>you didn't put a single valuable point forward. your nonsense is as useless as his
Okay, so a contradiction in his argument is not a fault worth discussing? If not then what do you even mean by addressing his points? My first point isn't even a claim, I am literally pointing out a fault in his argument. Read my post again
As for me making claims as well and being condescending, I will give you that. My second point does make a claim, and you can either take my personal anecdote for granted and continue to address it, or ignore it on grounds of me not being arsed to waste time trying to prove someone wrong because I was autistically triggered. The choice is yours. I am not going to comment on the rest of your post about me posting nonsense, because it was disproven by the first part of this post.
As a math student I only have some personal observations. Applied math like numerics, statistics and optimisation seems to have a pretty good women/men ratio in relation to other fields. That is just my limited observation though.
>imblyign grils can do science
memes
>>7994324
Hey you're pretentious
>>7994500
>it was disproven
>because I said so
>i was addressing a fault in his argument
>with anecdotes
typical woman. still no source or anything of value
>>7993561
>Engineering
>science
Pick one
>>7992533
>girl science
What is doing science not indifferent to Gender?
>>7994737
>4chan
>woman
>/sci/
>woman
wew lad
>>7992533
Maths is about 50% female.
Not only students but younger professional also.
Physics has very few females.
>>7992533
gynecology?
>Implying Chem is for women
Honestly at my Uni all the lecturers for Physics, Chem and Maths are Men, bar one Organic Chemist. Most my class are men, I live in Australia for the record.
>>7996307
>women prefer to be examined by a male gyno
[citation needed]
