Part 2 of “Get More Women in STEM”

Part 2 of “Get More Women in STEM”

Well, since I haven’t yet gotten an answer on why getting women in STEM (a field most of them have no interest in) is so important, let’s look quickly at some of the resources devoted to that sole goal.

That’s right, the White House.

“If we’re going to out-innovate and out-educate the rest of the world, we’ve got to open doors for everyone. We need all hands on deck, and that means clearing hurdles for women and girls as they navigate careers in science, technology, engineering, and math.”

— First Lady Michelle Obama, September 26, 2011

So there you have it, only girls, not reason given why, just open the doors (as if they’re closed to women –citation still needed). Why not help men get in as well? Why not just help removing hurdles for all people?

But no, men’s issues are invisible to her, and it’s only the women she cares about. Nevermind that most scientific and technological achievements have been accomplished by men throughout history, no, let’s not even acknowledge that. Let’s just say these great men like Edison, and Tesla, and Einstein, and Heisenberg, and Planck were “privileged” (a common feminist shaming tactic) and had “hurdles removed” for them (which is demonstrably false). Let’s just shit on all the hard work it takes to accomplish something and try to get people in through the back door and call it “achievement”.

(and I should point out that many female scientists –like Marie Curie- have done great contributions to humanity as well in the past, did they do it by having someone “get them into STEM”? No. They worked for their accomplishments, just like the men did)

Don’t believe the hype.


One thought on “Part 2 of “Get More Women in STEM”

  1. Fidelbogen

    There is no good reason to artificially “force” female numbers into any particular sector or situation.

    Of course, if you are a feminist you will think there is a good reason. That is because more females in situation x = more female power in situation x.

    For a feminist, that would sound like a pretty darn good reason to artificially squeeze more female numbers into situation x.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s