I think it’s good to expose some flawed arguments for why women should be recruited to engineering schools, hence the link to the article “Should there be more women in science and engineering?”:
Many people hold this truth to be self-evident, that there should be more female students in science and engineering. Typical arguments include possible benefits to women, possible benefits to the economy, and the unfairness of the current female under-representation. However, these justifications are never explicitly and thoroughly presented. Clearly stating and scrutinizing them, we show that they in fact have logical flaws. When made consistent, these arguments do not unconditionally justify enrolling more women in scientific disciplines. In particular, what women want must be taken into account. Outreach programs towards K-12 girls must therefore purport to allow them to choose a field freely, rather than try to draw as many of them to scientific disciplines as possible. This change of mindset must be accompanied by a close examination of the purpose and effects of these programs.”
I do mostly agree. Though I might bring up for example the following part of it:
“Women are more likely to stress interpersonal factors (e.g. helping others), whereas men tend to
value money and status more (Eccles, 1994; Morgan et al., 2001). Would engineering allow women
to help others? The president of the U. S. National Academy of Engineering argues that engineering
does have a positive impact on society and provides an opportunity to help others (Wulf, 1998). Let
us assume for the sake of argument that he is right. What does this argument actually prove? It
shows that women are wrong if they choose not to study engineering because they believe that it will
not allow them to help others. That is, such an argument shows that women should want to major
in engineering. It does not show that there has to be more women in engineering.”
Yes, though I think it’s telling that many women don’t seem to understand they could (at least in theory if only they were smart enough) help others big time by devoting their time to such arcane arts aselectrical engineering – more so than in many other fields (by for example developing fasterandcheaper computer chips whichcould help in finding cures for all sorts of diseases). But the feminine brain rarely seems to understand the merits of such indirect method of helping others, although women in contrast seem to excel in indirectwaysof communication their desires (then again.. that isn’t in my opinion a particularly good thing). Also, I’m not totally convinced many of those women who claim they are interested in helping others are sincere but that’s another story.
Anyway, instead of spending a lot of time thinking hard thoughts, many young girls decide to earn their living by posing in little clothing for example at MET-Art.com. And considering how much of my computer time is spent on watching those girls I have to say I appreciate their efforts (go Liza B!!!). Therefore, I’d say that I’m quite content with women choosing other professions than science and engineering. Andmany pretty girls, who are (quite obviously in my opinion – though of course more study would be needed to establish this as anaccepted fact) a result of countless generations of selection for ornamental traits, are more suitable to earning their living in other fields than those which would require them using their brains, so no wonder they choose the way which is more natural to them. I don’t blame them for that. I blame others who don’t appreciate hard facts.