Gender and science interests

Disgruntled Julie has a post up about the Gender Gap, in which she writes about how girls tend to be more drawn to biological subjects rather than the physical sciences, and wonders about the underlying biology as opposed to nuture. Go read it, and read the comments!

My own perspective - well, I was obsessed with tractors at about age 4 (and mechano), and then got into dinosaurs (the starting point for Julie's discussion was a post by LabMom about a lack of girls in a preschool 'dinosaur science camp'), then horses (and NOT stupid pink ones with flowers on and 'brushable hair'. I preferred greys, grey shire horses for perfection, and still have a small stash of Britain Farms plastic models of various breeds of heavy horses in a box somewhere). I found astronomy fascinating. I never wanted to be a princess (I wanted to be an adventurer or an explorer or something like that most of the time) and I didn't and don't like pink. Even my much more girly sister wasn't into princesses or fairies to the extent almost every little girl seems to be now - I wonder if it is a generational thing (i.e. something to do with the social context, consumer items available, media of the last decade) as well as a girl thing? Or something else to blame on Princess Di??

At 16, after some arguing with the school (who, probably because it messed up their timetabling, refused to allow me to take maths and history and two other subjects at A level, and ignored my arguments that a) I would be bored doing only three subjects (which was/is the norm) and b) that I used the same bit of my brain to do maths and history) I did the classic 'hard science' subjects - maths, further maths, chemistry and physics. I'd dropped biology at 13 (being a newly converted vegetarian who did NOT want to cut up mice, and finding all the teachers either dull or patronising). I liked these subjects... I didn't like being one of a small number of girls who did them, because the boys were unpleasant and hostile a lot of the time in and outside class. I noticed the difference most in further maths, because in the first year our class was six students, three boys and three girls, and it was a nice group and a comfortable environment. In the second year they managed to merge us with the other further maths group, making 13 - 3 girls and 10 boys. Made timetabling easier and teaching more cost effective, I'm sure. But the class just stopped being fun, apart from the intrinsic fun of doing maths. Fortunately there was a LOT of fun in the maths!

I went to InternationallyRenownedAncientUniversity intending to take a degree in Physics, but by the end of my three years I was in another branch of science altogether, which is more closely related to high school biology. My PhD involved a move into Beach Studies, an interdisciplinary subject which draws on all the science disciplines, but uses techniques which are biological in origin. And I felt really, really bad about it - as one of the girls who was good at hard sciences, I felt I should stay there (not that I actually liked all the girls who made up our 10% or so gender minority, a lot of them were very boring and earnest and pragmatic). I loved some parts of the subject matter with a clear flame which still isn't gone - astronomy and quantum mechanics are just delightful. But I came to see that actually studying both of those things involved a lot of electronics, a skill area where I was constantly made to feel stupid and unwanted (looking back, I had a pretty crap set of grad student lab demonstrators - but also, I'd NOT been building my own kits of this and that from an early age. I preferred reading. I was way behind the skills development of your typical geeky boy, who in that era at least had often built his own basic computer or robot from a kit...).

So for me, the combination of identifying an area where I was not well prepared for university level work and a hostile and boring classroom environment (yes, it can be both. That's when the social group passively or actively shuts you out, but it looks as if they are having fun, and you feel you want to be a member of the in group, to do what they do. The other... well, they don't seem to want you there, and you don't see anything there that's worth the constant hassle) which made fixing the lack an uphill struggle made me disinclined to stay in the hard sciences, in the area which at school I had found the most exciting. If I'd had a longer, more modular degree programme, I probably would have tested out a few more things and ended up working on similar sorts of problems but using a different skill set and within a classic science department rather than my current very broad-based departmental home. Regardless, things have worked out pretty well.

But in the context of the discussion over at DJ's, I found myself feeling a bit prickly about all the comments on how girls may/are, on average and taken across a population, be more inclined to the soft sciences. And I think it's because that sort of discussion makes girls that DO like maths and hard sciences, and AREN'T all into healing the sick and cuddly animals, 'wierd' even among girls who like science. We need a language that accepts diversity of interests without labelling things by gender AT ALL. My gender/sex/possession of a uterus/choice to have long hair but wear trousers should have NOTHING TO DO with my interests as a child, the subjects I was able to study at school and university, or my experiences in any classroom or other professional environment. About the only gender-related accomodation which I do appreciate is the provision of hygenic facilities for the disposal of sanitary items - well, I like to know that there are sensible parental leave policies and facilities, and access to childcare, but that's not entirely about gender or at least it shouldn't be.

I just like knowing how things work, and I don't see what gender has to do with that. All little kids have a lot of curiosity (which can be annoying when they poke sandwiches into the video slot or unscrew a torch and lose a key little bit of metal or loosen all the handles on all the drawers they can reach), and that makes them open to science. Dorothy Sayers wrote "...a desire to have all the fun is nine-tenths of the law of chivalry" and I have long considered that to be part of the 'anti-gender-balance' elements in science - we women are not welcome because we might spoil some of the fun, we might demand a share of it...

I do agree that making toys and objects that are appealing and attractive to children AND TO THEIR PARENTS and other relatives who buy presents, who I suspect are more influenced by traditional gender labelling. For example, I notice that a supplier of lovely kitchen things who sends regular catalogues full of desirable things has started making kids-sized aprons and basic cooking supplies which come in simple colours, or in pirate or fairy or dinosaur or butterfly designs. Pirate aprons and mixing bowls could definitely help encourage some boyish boys into the kitchen. So, what about fairy princess magician chemistry sets with lots of pink and purple equipment and potion recipes with 'nice' names and imaginary purposes, like luring unicorns? Excavating magic crystals to make jewellary, or an electrical set to build a tiara that lights up, with lots of sparkle and opportunities to make the object look attractive as well as functional? If bug camp is great for boys, but what about flower camp or butterfly camp for girls? Same activities, different slant... And maybe making some science-linked toys and games less aggressive and competitive*?

All this probably means better teacher training, since many early-years teachers are themselves not at all keen on maths and science... so how can they share an enthusiasm they don't have?

*so many engineering type toys seem to be 'build your own car and have races' or 'make a killer robot with lasers' type things. Playing war has never appealed to me and I wasn't that competitive with anyone except myself.... and a lot of girls (and bright and thoughtful little boys, in my experience) aren't into war games and fighting and killing things.