Women get more support throughout their education; they get more feeebies to enter technology fields (even though, when it is admitted that the medical field really IS made up of scientists, technicians, engineers and mathematicians, there about as many women in STEM as men); their employers are continually encouraged to hire women at all levels (despite higher rates of male unemployment).
I have yet to read a single report proving that having even more women in STEM, or in a company, boosts productivity or bottom-line profitability. Just to be clear on this, in those areas of STEM (mostly medical) where women are in the majority, I have yet to read a single report proving that having more men in STEM, or in a company, boosts productivity or bottom-line profitability.
Diversity of thinking and skills counts; diversity of genetic makeup of the people with those thoughts and abilities is irrelevant.
Overwhelmingly, I have felt the men engineers around me (once they figure out I’m smart – see “assume competence” below) to be very helpful, respectful, and supportive.
Quite so. Men like to have women around and tests have shown they will generally will hire a woman over a man, all else being equal. So what more is needed? Do we really want to encourage people who are not smart (assumed to be competent), helpful, respectful and supportive? Does it matter what sex the stupid, unhelpful, disrespectful and unsupportive person is – they are not people you want in a team.
So, like men, women who can do the job well get hired and promoted. Like men, those women who can’t do a good job either don’t get hired or manage to get hired but have a tough time.
The difference is I can’t change the culture by being friendly.
Do you really want to change the culture whereby the capable employees have a good time, to one where the incapable are encouraged to join their ranks? Not in a company that my pension funds are in, I hope. A business is there to generate income, not fulfil some fluffy ideological communist outcome.