That women face negative pressure when they go into STEM is a real and documented problem.

Negative pressure from who?

From the peers.

The main reason why girls are not choosing STEM is because it doesn't intrest them as much. You can try to put the blame on anything you want, but that's reality.

I love technical things and am the father of 1 son and 3 girls. I of course would love to do technical things with all of them. With my son it's easy to get him excited about lego and such. With my girls? Well, maybe you should give it a try. I decided to play with my kids the things they like to play with. And with my girls it's (unfortunately for me) non technical things.

This preference is also highly documented in gender equal societies. So do us all a favor and stop talking bullshit while it's obvious why women don't select STEM: they don't want to.

PS: My oldest daughter is going to follow STEM next year. I'm happy, but mainly wish her to be happy. If she continues it, fine. If she decides she wants to do something else, also fine. She's good at math so that's the main reason she picked it.

Are your girls representative of the entire female population?

Seems like it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox#:~:tex....

This whole thread is nothing but documentation of the reverse; men being discriminated against left right and center, women being given fake interviews where they're guaranteed to get hired anyway due to Diversity! managers, team re-orgs where the explicitly feminist manager somehow totally by coincidence selects every single woman to be a TL and creates exactly enough teams for them to lead, etc.

In contrast this "real and documented" is just an assertion. I never saw any evidence of it.

It's the fault of STEM when women arrive and totally dominate the classes and yet are still not awarded recognition and opportunity, yes.

See: Philippa Fawcett "above the Senior Wrangler"

I don't know where you did STEM related education, but in my environment a women in a group project would get extra points relative to the rest. So I saw the exact opposite of what you describe.

And at work, women seems to rise to management levels easier than men. But hey, this is EU, not US.

Edit: you're pointing me to something that happened in 1890? WTF???

> 100% historically discriminatory to women

You replied to a comment about historically - and what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree.

The roots of higher education were laid with the exclusion of women baked in.

So women are now excluded from education like the olden days? Wtf?

Indeed .. why exactly would you think that?

Is this your thing is it, incorrectly framing what others write and then appending. Wtf?

You claim that STEM discriminates women today because of something that happened in 1890.

I would like to see some evidence of that related to today, not something from 1890. And not your empty statement of "what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree".

Maybe here is something you should read, which refers to the state as it is today: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender-equality_paradox#:~:tex....

> You claim that STEM discriminates women today because of something that happened in 1890.

No.

You claim that I made that claim.

I made no assertation of causal linkage, I merely pointed out a historic fact about the roots of modern education in the UK and US.

Your words:

> and what was once a pattern still persists to a lesser degree.

. . . and you read that as evidence of a causal relationship then?

And you'd like me to defend something that you see there?

This is your thing is it, framing what others say and then demanding they defend your reading?

Doing well in classes doesn't award recognition and opportunity for men either, though. STEM only values experience.

This is the problem: It is believed that, at least historically, STEM only pushed itself on boys. They were given lego, electronic kits, etc. while girls were given dolls, kitchen sets, etc. Once one was ready to enter the working world, men had that experience to lean on. Women not so much.

I'm not sure how applicable that is anymore, though. It's quite okay, even encouraged, for girls to play with 'boys' toys these days.

> Doing well in classes doesn't award recognition and opportunity for men either, though.

Read bio's of everybody who got "Senior Wrangler" from (say) 1850 onwards, it's a great read and a number of them founded majar US seats of learning.

Now read the bio of the women who out thought all of them.

> STEM only values experience.

All of them started out as new born babies and progressed through school having no world experience until they got some on the back of offered opportunities or private wealth.

STEM today is built upon people with no initial experience who gain it along the way.

Or you know, "the classes" have nothing to do with real life performance as per usual in our school/academia world.