Actually, he made a great point there. He became interested and went and looked into becoming a spy. Eventually he found the spy profession wasnt for him. But without the movies he never even looked at the possibilaty of becomming a spy. This might trigger women to actually considder sience as a carreer. Instead of overlooking it completely. Sure not everyone who wqtches it will become a scientist. But it might help dusting of the image of science and make women at least consider it as a carreer option. Verry shortsighted of her to dismiss this argument just on the basses that brady never became a spy.
You'll never figure him out. He's either a quadruple or quintuple agent working for any number of teams whom are affiliates of countries you thought you didn't think couldn't not be on the other side of the other side of the enemy which might be our friend disguised as the enemy.
Brady Haran is SO GOOD in counterargumenting. I just love it. It's not over the top and makes some kind of sense, which helps not only to examine but to reinforce his fellow hosts, too.
His skills at science communication are frankly ingenious. These professors are all clearly amazing at their jobs, but they wouldn't be able to teach nearly as many people without Brady's clever intervention.
I'm 15 and I've been interrested in science, just because I'm curious. But that Science-girl-thing video wouldn't convince me or any of my friends that we could actually do it. Brady's videos do, so thanks, by the way. I can only agree with Dr Gray. I'd like to add that maybe it's mainly those female stereotypes that cause gilrs beeing distracted from science
I guess any of the Sixty Symbols videos wit Dr. Gray does more to attract and inspire young people, especially girls, to do science than any shiny advertisement can do. People who are able to find a passion for science are those people, who scrutinise things, who strive to look behind the surface. And with marketing videos there isn't really anything to be found behind the surface.
Why are people so obsessed with marketing any specific field to any specific group of people. If you like it and are interested, you'll do it.. Trying to artificially fill all areas of study with a completely even distribution of skin color/gender/orientation/whatever is just pointless. If something just happens to have more of one type everyone flips their shit.
Frosty. I agree that trying to artificially fill an area of study evenly is not necessarily helpful. But when a broad field like STEM is dominated in the way it is by a particular gender or race or whatever then you have to stop and ask, why is that? All things being equal it doesn't seem very likely that such a majority of scientists or mathematicians or engineers should be male, considering that women are (on average) as capable as men at thinking critically about the world (I say on average because of course in both genders there are people who are more or less capable). So unless one rejects the hypothesis that women are as capable as men at STEM then one must accept that all things are NOT equal - that somehow in the system there is some force doing more to drive men towards STEM than women (or, correspondingly, driving more women away). That's at least part of the reason why people are so obsessed, and why campaigns are made - because people who care about STEM (or whatever) want the best possible people doing it and it seems likely that this is not happening when there is such a demographic inequality. --- Also, to address this point: "If you like it and are interested, you'll do it." Aside from it being false, since people are driven by more complex motives than "do I like this?" (for example, will this help me earn the resources - money - required to feed my family). How on earth do you know if you like something or are interested if you NEVER try it? Even though most activities are available for people to do it's super unlikely that any of us will try even a percent of them with enough depth to be able to decide if we really like something or are interested in it. Many will simply never be encountered - I know that there are plenty of nifty activities that I've never heard of. Many will be known but not tried, either because they are hard and require training (learning an instrument), expensive (many luxury activities or activities tied to geography - imagine me growing up in New England learning to surf, or a person from Florida learning to ski - both would be prohibitively expensive simply due to travel), or (and this one is important) socially abnormal (consider the stigma associated with RPG's, in particular DnD, during its infancy - only in the last decade with the rise of board gaming into the realm of popular culture has this reduced, and even then it's basically a separate - but much larger now - culture). Campaigns to tackle these problems should be applauded - they try to reduce barriers by providing information, training, financing, and a sense of community so that people can decide for themselves if they 'like it and are interested'.
NWRIBronco6 Obviously it's a little more complicated than just "If you like it and are interested, you'll do it." But i decided to not try for a 'WALL O TEXT' critical hit :P Anyways though, males and females have the exact same course loads throughout early school. So both are given the exact same opportunity to get their toes wet. Sure there may be a disparity, but i think it's largely in part due to males being more prone to a type of obsessive thinking that focuses on sciencey stuff(i'm sure this will be taken the wrong way)
Frosty. Sorry for the text wall. I like to be thorough. And I get what you're saying, Frosty. And you are correct that in the earliest school curriculum is basically the same. But even by middle school there are electives that seem to be split among the domestic / artsy and mechanical / engineery line (shop vs. home-ec, for example). Kids at that age are very impressionable and have strong social pressures pushing them towards one or the other - but guys can like cooking and sewing as much as girls can like drilling and cutting. In general I also wouldn't use the K-12 curriculum as the standards for what people will find interesting and eventually 'do' in life. If so everyone would either be a mathematician, a literary analyst, or an athlete (with maybe a few scientists and historians - primarily of American history - thrown in there for fun). "it's largely in part due to males being more prone to a type of obsessive thinking that focuses on sciencey stuff(i'm sure this will be taken the wrong way)" Ha, I don't take this comment negatively. You're possibly right that there is some sort of thought process in STEM that favors the way that males think. I just believe that it is not nearly enough to account for the observed disparity, and that trying to analyze and address other possible reasons for male dominance (or any other disparate factors such as race/ethnicity, economic status, etc...) is a worthwhile endeavor. --- In short it's certain that some people over-react to disparity, and the quest to even everything out perfectly has negative consequences because it overcompensates if there is a natural reason for the disparity. It shouldn't become fashionable, as a result, to criticize all attempts at evening the odds - if someone is proactively seeking to get people involved in something that they find worthwhile then that's harming nobody, and possibly helping many.
NWRIBronco6 My thing is basically this: The door should be open for everyone, but there is no need to try to funnel certain types towards it. I really don't see how we "Need" more women in STEM, nor do i see why we "Need" more men in (whatever field is female dominated). The whole thing just seems like a "want". If a problem is solved, it doesn't matter if it was solved by 5 guys and 5 girls, or 8 guys and 2 girls, or 8 girls and 2 guys. (Just to be clear, i'm sure stereotyping and whatnot does hinder female interest in the field. I just don't think it's this massive force holding back a hurricane off women trying to get in)
Frosty. I'm not sure anyone said it's a "need" thing. People "want" a more inclusive STEM field and will spend their time and energy towards it. My feeling is that if they want to put the effort into giving more people opportunities to try out STEM then I will applaud them (or more likely ignore them), but there's very little need for active criticism. Let's keep things pro-active and work to get as many people as possible interested and involved - if that involves targeting a specific demographic from time to time where's the harm in that?
If I had seen that video before I developed an interest in science, it might actually have put me off! I've never been a girly girl, in fact quite the opposite, and one of the (many) things that I love about science is that nobody expects you to be girly. There's no pressure to conform to some ideal of femininity in order to be accepted- all you have to be is genuinely interested and willing to put in the work. Presenting science as just another area where you have to fit a stereotype to get by would have completely turned me away, and I wouldn't now be studying for a degree in Theoretical Physics. Definitely a fail of a video.
My god,what a wonderful woman she is.And her voice has such a dreamy quality to it,I could listen to her all day.Where as with most women,that as soon as they speak,it's like listening to finger nails on a black board.
I respect women like Dr Megan Gray. She reminds me a professor at my university as the first person that made a real connection between academia and my place in the world. ... I have schizophrenia and I identify with poetry, art, philosophy, history and literature. My professor gave me great grades because she allowed me to work within my unbound potential, my professor treated me like an equal and was unlike anyone I've ever met. I really like the pain it takes to earn good grades because I love writing perfect essays. Though I don't fit in, my professor made a simple connection which is personal and visceral. Individualism and the individual experience is less important within popular culture. Popular culture and academic culture are disparate entities...
It is the stereotypical portrayal of women that is offensive, not the stereotypes of science or scientists. I agree with you, Dr Gray. The video "Girl Thing" misses the mark by a very, very long shot.
Dr. Gray is pretty and smart, like several of my university professors. IMO, I currently see the government encouraging science to form a certain infrastructure which in principle has to confront certain pragmatic aspects, intrinsic to the same government system... it's like dealing with Eddy currents.
My question is will this campaign work by turning boys away from science if science is a 'girl thing' Science is a human thing, cooking is domestic chemistry, gardening domestic biology, DIY domestic engineering, and the list of thing that men and women both do all the time which are essentially science goes on, maybe dragging those real world applications into the classroom will spark the science in children rather than the glitz and glamour or the abstract science in schools already.
I dont think its discouraging, quite the opposite actually. I like being surrounded by nice people in the lecture, and if they happen to be girls - even better! :D (I just had to make a joke! :D ) I actually NEVER heard of this campaign. Still saying science is a girly thing wouldnt have kept me from being into it. Well I can only speak for my self.
Meiryousa I live on a college campus and no we don't walk in perpetual shame, no one I know has ever apologized for being male (especially in front of a classroom) and no one hates me for being male. Sure there are some people who have extreme feminist views but they're very few and far between. And you don't generally find them in science or engineering majors. But that's always going to exist. If you gather 10s of thousands of young people in one place, some are going to have extreme views. But you can't stereotype a campus' views based on the opinions of the minority.
sabin97 this was a complete non-sequitur also lol at saying those people have profited, when what they actually received were death threats, some of which were made to their private addresses/phones, and having their private info spread on the internet. Oh if only I was as privileged as them!!!!!1!!1!1!
In fact, I think that the stereotype of "too busy to brush my hair" that is paraded around science labs is driving women out of science. It is ok to be well put together AND be an excellent researcher.
As a technical student I can vouch for this, I study information technology and we were doing our computer fault finding test, the class I'm in has more women than most as its a more basic class. But this one fault many people were given according to my instructor is the one women always find and men just give up on. this is simplistic of course, but a solid example of a male dominated subject where women really add something tangible.
Who really cares about gender in a job? What's the next issue to be concerned about? Height or weight or ethnicity... Puhleeze. Let's stay focused on things that really matter.
It's an advertisement. The first rule of ads is grab people's attention. Given that the main audience of this particular ad was young girls who like all kids these days have the attention of 10 seconds, the images on the screen cannot be static for more than a few seconds. Science is fun in a sense that it is meditative. The fundamental structures of nature be it inorganic or biological are difficult to elucidate. To understand them, one has to think long and think hard which is the antithesis to the short attention span problem of modern society. An another example of this is many tutorial videos include upbeat music. To me who only wants to watch the videos for the information, the techno music is a huge distraction. I wish the video makers would offer a toggle format that allows the audience to toggle off the music and only listen to the narration.
The ad just shows how our society fails on a daily. People care too much about what other people think and are thus desperately trying to fit in. It is incredibly ironic that the commercial is stuffed with stereotypes although it is trying to encourage young women to break out of them. So yes, the ad was a complete failure, in fact it almost seems sarcastic because it does pretty much everything wrong you could do wrong.
At 4:20, the voice behind the camera mentions that the video shatters the stereotype that scientists are gray haired old men by showing young glamorous girls. Well, there is one right here in front of our eyes right now! And she does not need heavy makeup, high heels, nor to waddle like a fashion doll and saying "dude" and "cool" to look like a female scientist! THAT, exactly that, is what should be shown to future female scientists. The guy(s) who created that "Science it's a girl thing" seem to love dolls more than real women. Definition of "doll" : a feminine-shaped thing, molded to look like a sex symbol, hand-painted to sell well, with nothing inside. If you don't believe me, look at Barbie. Sorry, but that's not what we need in science!
I don't think the campaign should exist at all. I am in favor of removing barriers to entry, but nothing else. If you want to know why there are few women in science, it boils down to three little words. Science is hard. Now, it's not that women can't do it. But (most) little girls are taught from a young age that they don't have to do anything hard and that life will be made easy for them. Boys, on the other hand are taught that life is hard. The difficulty of science doesn't discourage them because it is just more of the same.
I totally agree to what you are saying! In the end the only limiting factor is society, meaning the way they, as in girls, are brought up! Generally families, where both parents graduated from university will raise children that will do the same! Id say that women that are at university come from a more educated background, this appllies a lot less to men! (cultural customs)
Meiryousa Sorry but all the research I have read from psychology shows what you are saying is wrong. Read Lev Vygotsky "Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes" and the assoiated arguments and then read the counter arguments (of which there are few valid ones).
I teach physics for more than 30 years, and, I can tell you that most girls are not interested in science. That's the way they are and you just can't force them to be interested in things they don't like. Physics is exciting and interesting but girls don't even like to hear about it... Girls interested in science are extremely rare... You can make campain videos, but to my oppinion these videos won't change the facts...
MrKA1961 iA. Funnily enough most people in my 6th form that study the sciences in a-level are female and boys are the minority, so i guess we are changing what people are interested in
MrKA1961 I agree. If you conduct a survey on the number of girls in disciplines like physics math or chemistry you'd be disappointed. That's menacingly low. These fields require more labour, patience and critical thinking than in others. Perhaps girls are not interested to work in these fields. They keep themselves busy in making boyfriends, makeup, shopping ie, anything other than science. Society will be better if we have more female scientists.
Most Girls are not interested in science, this is a fact. How many girls are into most hobbyist/enthusiast fields like CB radio or Retro computers or antique cars? Sure girls should be allowed to do these things, but it doesn't attract as many as men. You cannot force this. Men like working alone in a shed. Women like working with people. Unless you can make science more social they it won't attract most women.
I understand the marketing science behind the campaign. No one will argue that women and men are constantly bombarded with specific images of what popular beauty is. Thse images are so powerful they can be used to identify time periods from pictures of people with distinct hair styles, clothing and etc. When marketing a product you try to grab the attention of the largest demographic possible and with women glamour is a large portion of it, if not the largest. MARKETING IS A SCIENCE
The biggest problem that the video will not cover is that WOMEN THEMSELVES are not choosing to go into STEM. Most would rather get a nice easy, gender studies or sociology degree.
I agree. When it comes to gender/race issues I often ask myself how a unifying solution can arise from any agenda that singularly promotes a specific race/gender. Any special treatment well intended or not only creates an exception to the rule, when rules and laws should affect ALL of us equally. Merit is what really matters, and the most gratifying achievements are the ones that earned.
I agree with you. I went to a fair today with my dad and the lady at the ticket booth asked if I needed a child's ticket because I wasn't wearing make-up. I'm seventeen. This also happened at a restaurant about a couple months ago. The hostess asked if I wanted a child's menu (I did because I like the games they have on them but that's not the point). And again, I wasn't wearing makeup. I don't like wearing make-up. I feel more comfortable without make-up.
The greatest SCIENTIST (not just a physicist or biologist or chemist act) was a woman. Marie Curie was the only person to ever win 2 nobel prizes with each being for a different science (chemistry and physics). She then applied her discoveries to the health field. basically she was an all around bad ass. I find her more of an inspiration than any nameless commercial character wearing high heels.
I don' t like stereotypes and certainly this is an awful way to encourage girls to try science, but if you want to have the attention of average young girls, you need to talk to them in terms they understand.
People are individuals, it has nothing to do with male or female. Societal stereotyped roles absolutely do have a huge impact on pushing people toward or away from various professions.
What she said about that study where hyper feminized role models actually discourage girls reminded me of how it was eventually found that the DARE anti-drug program actually exacerbated the drug problem in schools. That's the problem with marketers. They're SO confident that they know what's best, that when they're wrong they take everyone down with them.
The drop rate for students who initially pursue a science major as an undergraduate are unbelievable. If this commercial could entice more people to look at science, I doubt its imagery would help them stick through it once it becomes a lot more math and sleepless nights than sexy lab assistants and high heels.
Thank you for the support. I'm glad someone understands what I was saying, and it's nice to see someone not jumping to baseless conclusions to bite my head off.
How do you think stigma's are broken? By getting people to take those tentative first steps, by trying to change the attitude and opinion toward the industry. Some fear bullying, some fear losing their friends, which may seem trivial to an adult and yet to a teenager those are some of the biggest things in their world. Besides that, since when was passion a requirement for any career? In the real world, not everyone has the option or means to choose a career they're passionate about.
Thanks Dr. Gray, no one could have gave a better reply to this campaign. Science is about passion, is about this endless desire of discovering how both world and society work. The EU campaign does not address that, it's just a very cruel stereotype of young girls.
I think a big problem with the usual approaches to enticing young people in general to the sciences and mathematics is that young people aren't given enough credit for what they are capable of comprehending. They're scared off from these fields because they're treated so commonly as though these are minefields in a sense. If we act like these fields are incomprehensible barriers for students, then they'll learn to avoid them, or to dread them. Show students videos discussing complex topics, and give them a chance to work through them. If they need help, give it to them, but don't act like it's impossible that a young student might be able to understand something better than an adult. I think it's worth noting that Brady's various channels really do a good job with what Dr. Gray is espousing as the way to draw more people into science, and Dr. Gray herself seems like an excellent candidate for a role model for young women interested in scientific careers. I'd love to see Brady's videos have such an impact on prospective scientists, because I really do think they showcase scientists talking about and demonstrating things they love.
its like those commercials for technical college, (although theyre actors with scripts) they are being truthful, so they talk about their passion on a personal level to target people who really want to work on cars or build houses - not people who think its all drag strips and knocking stuff over. or in this case, youre not going to walk in on a female professor wearing lingerie and high heels, althought possible, not often.
I have not heard about that study and if you could post a link I would appreciate it. It seems like an interesting subject. There is one thing related to global rise in temperatures I can reference. It is a fact that higher levels of CO2 are tied to higher temperatures thanks to the greenhouse effect. You can compare CO2 and temperature graphs and see a pattern emerge. In the las ~200 years CO2 has risen dramaticaly and temperature is sure to follow.
I agree with this. I finished mine after many years of hard study as a Biologist and Post-Grad work at the University of Dundee in Scotland, UK. I now have a successful career at a large UK based supermarket doing IT and planning work. Frankly, I get laughed at when I say that I work for Tesco with the title Dr. But I earn double what I would if I pursued that scientific career. I would leave my current job in a flash if I could do what I love and worked hard for, for a decent salary.
Science doesn't need girls per se. It just needs brains and money. Science is not suffering for this nearly as much the 'girls' are. A career, or even a side interest in science is so rewarding that to see a whole demographic disenfranchised is tragic. I'd like to see female scientists becoming valid role models for girls because quite frankly their current choices in that area are dangerous. We have to promote intelligence as aspirational. The days of 'cool to be dumb' and 'bling' have to end. This is for the SPECIES people; not for science, and not even just for girls. When I grow up I want to live in a world with loads more Dr. Meghan Grays. Ideally loads and loads and loads more.
I agree that the two sexes possess complementary characteristics, and that women shouldn't be expected to shoulder such burdens. At the same time, they should not be objectified, patronized, or underestimated. That's all I was trying to convey.
We are into science because of the excitements we get from exploring new things and learning the truths about them. High heels, lipsticks and fashion should have nothing to do with it. If they indeed draw people into science because of the ad, they have drawn the wrong pool of people.
Because of "equality" and "equal chances". Those words in our society mean having a majority of non-scientists vote upon a M/F ratio that they deem plausible, and then implement quota that companies should obtain. You can even force the companies into such sexism by "stimulating" hiring the minority group with subsidies. Why is this pretty much forcing? Because in a competitive/capitalist model you'll suffer as a company if you're the one not to use this benefit.
Exactly. On top of your point the reason their are stereotypes is because as humans we like to group things into neat categories. Granted these categories really only exist culturally and within ourselves, but the reason we do it is because we can observe that certain groups act certain ways ON AVERAGE. So what that many women, I would even say most, like make up and dresses and shoes? Does that make a women who doesn't any LESS a women? No.
Meghan I feel every single Word you have said in an very clear message. It came through my ears dirirectly to the heart. The power of your words could grab any beautiful, ugly girl with or without make up. Thank your!!!
Im 15, wanted to be a scientist since I was 2 years old (paleontologist, knew almost every dinosaur name at the time), now I'm between choosing physics (theoretical or astronomy) or biology (zoology or molecular). This kind of things have never attracted ME (just opinion) to science, just the marvel of knowledge and discovery of the unknown is enoguh to drag me into the marvelous way of science.
In regards to the spy inspiration point, Bruce lee movies don't accurately represent what fighting is but in America whole generations of people were inspired to become fighters and pursue careers because of his movies. I'd like to put that up for rebuttal.
I am an attractive young women, I finished my Associates in Math and Science and I am currently studying my Bachelors in Aerospace Engineering and I believe that if Dr Meghan Gray spent a bit more time on (in her own words) "Being HER SELF" she would spend less time worrying that sexy hot women maybe attracted to following a career in science. I believe I am an example of a hot women being attracted to science rather then believing that being attracted science some how makes me hot!
I think it also needs to be considered that our global culture is rabidly anti-intellectual. Parents, by and large, do not want their children to grow up to be intellectuals and children don't want to grow up to be intellectuals because every aspect of our culture portrays intellectuals very negatively. A knowledgeable, rational person is always portrayed as socially inept, cold and unloving, arrogant, and usually putting other people in danger. Principled people are also seen as extremists.
Beautifully said. Female scientists have contributed SIGNIFICANTLY to the field of science - and did so even before being recognized as a person under the law, or being awarded the degree's they've earned. So respected in science by their male colleagues (in some cases, sadly not all) that they would be addressed as DOCTOR, even if they were not issued the degree they earned, much to the dismay of many university officials. Why can't THAT be placed in an ad campaign instead of lipstick b.s.?
I am a person, man or woman: it does not matter. I let my own actions and my achievements earn my respect. Go on and keep allowing your actions earn yours as well. When did I preach anything about equality? I don't think the problem here is what men and women do, but what we value as who earns respect. Mothers and teachers and scientists and business people ALL can earn respect in their own right. We should just allow all people to pursue their passions, and appreciate the successes they bring.
'I believe this is what this campaign should be focusing on trying to change'... why do we need to change the system that is already perfect in terms of performance? Why do we need to make 50 50 males and females when 99.9% males has been proven to work very very very damn well? Why do we need to fulfil women's selfish needs? Why? Why is it so insulting for them to even cook at home and be good housewives now while men honorable being forced to be conscripted without a single complain? Why? Why?
This is what I hate about the modern politically correct culture. Women have equal opportunity to engage in science and to follow that career path, Nothing is stopping them. Just like when people say it's "disgusting" that the average income for a woman is less than a man. This has zilch to do with oppression, and more to do with the careers that men are inherently more interested in (business, science, engineering, economics etc.) are simply higher paying than the female counterparts.
Good point. I am a female scientist and when I saw this I couldn't help but think of the damage it would do to young girls and boys. While boy are more highly representative in STEM fields, perhaps portraying scientists as they really are (we are a diverse bunch), would be a better use of time and money than making it pink or blue. jmo
I think she made a very good point. If you love something, then do it. It doesn't matter how you look or who you are; what matters is your interest in the subject and your passion to want to pursue a career in that particular subject. And, if you just so happen to look like a model and love science, then great. But I think it doesn't matter who you are, as long as you have an interest in doing something.
We shouldn't. We don't have to be more accepting towards one group or the other. We can be equally as accepting towards everyone, and I think that would be nice.
but in the long term, there's reason to believe that if a more proportionate number of women get involved in science (relative to men) by reaching out to those who otherwise would have never realized their interest in science, then stereotypes of women will ultimately evolve as well to gradually encompass an interest in science as just as valid as that of mens'.
I graduated as an industrial product designer. But beforehand i had an education in woodshop, right now i work in an independant construction company with friends.. But my girlfriend wich ive been with the last 6 years has already an diploma in industrial engeneering , and is going to graduate civil engeneering.I admire her for that she's smart and has the looks, just like Dr,gray only a bit younger. And its not uncommon in Belgium for girls doing science,there where alot of girls in my class
i agree that it should show actual scientists working where they work, talking about what they do. it would make more sense and help show the diversity of science, and show that not everyone wears makeup, and that most people eat.
When my daughter was little she wanted to be a "paleontogolist". She even told that to astronaut Gene Cernan ( the last man on the moon) Now she is a fashion designer, coincidentally.
They are trying to sell science to young women. Cheesiness and jargon won't cut it. It has to be aimless and sexy. Look at early advertising and compare it to modern advertising. You just can't reach people through their conscious minds.
I agree with you on that principle, but until we have achieved a culture where genders are seen as equal and irrelevant, the question of how to market to certain subgroups will still be a necessary one. In this case, marketing science to girls NOW is one thing we can do to help achieve that culture in the future.
Maybe the EU commission wanted to counter the idea that women in science were usually like Leslie Winkle or Amy Farrah Fowler. So they try to get the Tricia McMillans (alias Trillians) interested. And then get it wrong by making "Science" serve as another sexy attribute to attract attention.
Exactly. It's like running a campaign for women in handegg, because you don't like the ratio between men and women playing handegg. Men are more aggressive and competitive on average than women, and would therefore be more inclined, naturally, to play sports like basketball, handegg, football or ultimate frisbee. It's not sexism, it's just nature.
There's no overt barrier, but that doesn't answer the question as to why women don't choose STEM. It may be a matter of time and generations. As more women join STEM fields, they become more visible and more girls grow up with the impression that it's normal for them to be in STEM fields. To illustrate: I joined a male-dominated business without realizing it because I grew up around professional women. The thought that I wouldn't belong there never occurred to me, so it never held me back.
I think the best way to get more people into science is what Brady, MinutePhysics, Veritasium, ViHart, SmarterEveryDay and all of them are doing. So, thank you Brady and thanks to all of them for making great videos.
Totally agree with Dr Gray here. Science should be promoted without targeting a specific group so those naturally attracted to it take it up, and if only small percentage of those attracted are female - so be it. Also, in my humble opinion Brady's videos featuring ultra-likable scientists presenting scientific topics in a cool manner is the best way to attract young people to science. Your channels/videos should be promoted more!
Here I am a girl scientist who looks for opportunities! ... the interest and passion is there but the money is not! ... I was accepted in Nottingham university to do a PhD in optics but I couldn't find a grant to pay the fees and living!
The only way to improve any young person's interest in any subject of education is making those resources available,catchy ads and rhetoric does not suffice!
Dr Gray is, of course, correct to express concern about the pressure on girls to conform to the 'girly' stereotype which the mass media so consistently exert. I think this video acknowledges the impact this pressure can have and seeks to bring such youngsters to science and do not believe it is intended to discourage girls who might be more secure or less concerned about their femininity.
i live in germany and my basic point is that one there is no generalized world culture and that most of the stuff that you'd consider anti-intellectual is not forced upon the people (like daytime television, its really bad in germany). Its really down to the way you were brought up not only to the culture for example you can live in a really conservative envoirenment and still be pro intellectual if your family consists mostly of academics. sorry im actually quiet tired ill continue later
To rephrase the message, the call is to the stereotypes to break their mold and take on a fantastic field. If it works to get more women into science, that's a good thing.
"And how has your spy career gone then, Brady?"
"Okay, not so good."
That's exactly what a spy would say. Now I'm suspicious.
I see what you did there... :-)
Actually, he made a great point there. He became interested and went and looked into becoming a spy. Eventually he found the spy profession wasnt for him. But without the movies he never even looked at the possibilaty of becomming a spy. This might trigger women to actually considder sience as a carreer. Instead of overlooking it completely. Sure not everyone who wqtches it will become a scientist. But it might help dusting of the image of science and make women at least consider it as a carreer option. Verry shortsighted of her to dismiss this argument just on the basses that brady never became a spy.
You'll never figure him out. He's either a quadruple or quintuple agent working for any number of teams whom are affiliates of countries you thought you didn't think couldn't not be on the other side of the other side of the enemy which might be our friend disguised as the enemy.
Brady Haran is SO GOOD in counterargumenting. I just love it. It's not over the top and makes some kind of sense, which helps not only to examine but to reinforce his fellow hosts, too.
His skills at science communication are frankly ingenious. These professors are all clearly amazing at their jobs, but they wouldn't be able to teach nearly as many people without Brady's clever intervention.
I'm 15 and I've been interrested in science, just because I'm curious. But that Science-girl-thing video wouldn't convince me or any of my friends that we could actually do it. Brady's videos do, so thanks, by the way. I can only agree with Dr Gray. I'd like to add that maybe it's mainly those female stereotypes that cause gilrs beeing distracted from science
I guess any of the Sixty Symbols videos wit Dr. Gray does more to attract and inspire young people, especially girls, to do science than any shiny advertisement can do. People who are able to find a passion for science are those people, who scrutinise things, who strive to look behind the surface. And with marketing videos there isn't really anything to be found behind the surface.
+QuorkQTar
Rosalind Franklin!!!!!
:)
Yes!
Why are people so obsessed with marketing any specific field to any specific group of people. If you like it and are interested, you'll do it.. Trying to artificially fill all areas of study with a completely even distribution of skin color/gender/orientation/whatever is just pointless.
If something just happens to have more of one type everyone flips their shit.
Frosty.
I agree that trying to artificially fill an area of study evenly is not necessarily helpful. But when a broad field like STEM is dominated in the way it is by a particular gender or race or whatever then you have to stop and ask, why is that? All things being equal it doesn't seem very likely that such a majority of scientists or mathematicians or engineers should be male, considering that women are (on average) as capable as men at thinking critically about the world (I say on average because of course in both genders there are people who are more or less capable).
So unless one rejects the hypothesis that women are as capable as men at STEM then one must accept that all things are NOT equal - that somehow in the system there is some force doing more to drive men towards STEM than women (or, correspondingly, driving more women away). That's at least part of the reason why people are so obsessed, and why campaigns are made - because people who care about STEM (or whatever) want the best possible people doing it and it seems likely that this is not happening when there is such a demographic inequality.
---
Also, to address this point: "If you like it and are interested, you'll do it."
Aside from it being false, since people are driven by more complex motives than "do I like this?" (for example, will this help me earn the resources - money - required to feed my family).
How on earth do you know if you like something or are interested if you NEVER try it? Even though most activities are available for people to do it's super unlikely that any of us will try even a percent of them with enough depth to be able to decide if we really like something or are interested in it.
Many will simply never be encountered - I know that there are plenty of nifty activities that I've never heard of.
Many will be known but not tried, either because they are hard and require training (learning an instrument), expensive (many luxury activities or activities tied to geography - imagine me growing up in New England learning to surf, or a person from Florida learning to ski - both would be prohibitively expensive simply due to travel), or (and this one is important) socially abnormal (consider the stigma associated with RPG's, in particular DnD, during its infancy - only in the last decade with the rise of board gaming into the realm of popular culture has this reduced, and even then it's basically a separate - but much larger now - culture).
Campaigns to tackle these problems should be applauded - they try to reduce barriers by providing information, training, financing, and a sense of community so that people can decide for themselves if they 'like it and are interested'.
NWRIBronco6 Obviously it's a little more complicated than just "If you like it and are interested, you'll do it." But i decided to not try for a 'WALL O TEXT' critical hit :P
Anyways though, males and females have the exact same course loads throughout early school. So both are given the exact same opportunity to get their toes wet.
Sure there may be a disparity, but i think it's largely in part due to males being more prone to a type of obsessive thinking that focuses on sciencey stuff(i'm sure this will be taken the wrong way)
Frosty.
Sorry for the text wall. I like to be thorough. And I get what you're saying, Frosty. And you are correct that in the earliest school curriculum is basically the same. But even by middle school there are electives that seem to be split among the domestic / artsy and mechanical / engineery line (shop vs. home-ec, for example). Kids at that age are very impressionable and have strong social pressures pushing them towards one or the other - but guys can like cooking and sewing as much as girls can like drilling and cutting.
In general I also wouldn't use the K-12 curriculum as the standards for what people will find interesting and eventually 'do' in life. If so everyone would either be a mathematician, a literary analyst, or an athlete (with maybe a few scientists and historians - primarily of American history - thrown in there for fun).
"it's largely in part due to males being more prone to a type of obsessive thinking that focuses on sciencey stuff(i'm sure this will be taken the wrong way)"
Ha, I don't take this comment negatively. You're possibly right that there is some sort of thought process in STEM that favors the way that males think. I just believe that it is not nearly enough to account for the observed disparity, and that trying to analyze and address other possible reasons for male dominance (or any other disparate factors such as race/ethnicity, economic status, etc...) is a worthwhile endeavor.
---
In short it's certain that some people over-react to disparity, and the quest to even everything out perfectly has negative consequences because it overcompensates if there is a natural reason for the disparity.
It shouldn't become fashionable, as a result, to criticize all attempts at evening the odds - if someone is proactively seeking to get people involved in something that they find worthwhile then that's harming nobody, and possibly helping many.
NWRIBronco6 My thing is basically this: The door should be open for everyone, but there is no need to try to funnel certain types towards it.
I really don't see how we "Need" more women in STEM, nor do i see why we "Need" more men in (whatever field is female dominated).
The whole thing just seems like a "want". If a problem is solved, it doesn't matter if it was solved by 5 guys and 5 girls, or 8 guys and 2 girls, or 8 girls and 2 guys.
(Just to be clear, i'm sure stereotyping and whatnot does hinder female interest in the field. I just don't think it's this massive force holding back a hurricane off women trying to get in)
Frosty.
I'm not sure anyone said it's a "need" thing. People "want" a more inclusive STEM field and will spend their time and energy towards it.
My feeling is that if they want to put the effort into giving more people opportunities to try out STEM then I will applaud them (or more likely ignore them), but there's very little need for active criticism. Let's keep things pro-active and work to get as many people as possible interested and involved - if that involves targeting a specific demographic from time to time where's the harm in that?
If I had seen that video before I developed an interest in science, it might actually have put me off!
I've never been a girly girl, in fact quite the opposite, and one of the (many) things that I love about science is that nobody expects you to be girly. There's no pressure to conform to some ideal of femininity in order to be accepted- all you have to be is genuinely interested and willing to put in the work. Presenting science as just another area where you have to fit a stereotype to get by would have completely turned me away, and I wouldn't now be studying for a degree in Theoretical Physics.
Definitely a fail of a video.
I find intelligent women absolutely gorgeous.
Intelligence is a very sexy. It isn't the ONLY thing, but it's pretty important.
+Joe Alias human sexuality will and has continued to keep humanity primitive and ignorant
+Darren Boss they might prefer you found them intelligent.
People always seem to forget the large number of women working in the biology/medical field. Science is not only physics.
Sorry but I guess I won’t be contributing to anything because I like science but physics is the last thing I want to take.
if they just put any Dr Gray's youtube video in the campaign it would have come out way sexier
My god,what a wonderful woman she is.And her voice has such a dreamy quality to it,I could listen to her all day.Where as with most women,that as soon as they speak,it's like listening to finger nails on a black board.
man I wish that wasn't true but it sometimes is.
Great job of giving a compliment by tearing down millions of people in the same sentence...
im just throwing my 2 cents in here...Dr Gray is gorgeous...just sayin.
I respect women like Dr Megan Gray. She reminds me a professor at my university as the first person that made a real connection between academia and my place in the world.
... I have schizophrenia and I identify with poetry, art, philosophy, history and literature. My professor gave me great grades because she allowed me to work within my unbound potential, my professor treated me like an equal and was unlike anyone I've ever met. I really like the pain it takes to earn good grades because I love writing perfect essays. Though I don't fit in, my professor made a simple connection which is personal and visceral. Individualism and the individual experience is less important within popular culture. Popular culture and academic culture are disparate entities...
4:08 Professor Poliakoff?
It is the stereotypical portrayal of women that is offensive, not the stereotypes of science or scientists. I agree with you, Dr Gray. The video "Girl Thing" misses the mark by a very, very long shot.
6:13 epic rebuttal
she's dreamy. i love how she pronounces all her T's. it's beauTiful.
"And how has your spy career gone?" Top kek m8
well, he's a video-journalst....so he's sort of in a similar field....surveillance and information retrieval.
Dr. Gray is pretty and smart, like several of my university professors. IMO, I currently see the government encouraging science to form a certain infrastructure which in principle has to confront certain pragmatic aspects, intrinsic to the same government system... it's like dealing with Eddy currents.
It's good for more girls to get in to Science but if they look at the video and think that's what science is all about their going to be dissapointed.
Lol. The biggest troll/got pranked ever. Big oof. Seriously though, that video doesn’t solve anything.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions
+Ben Jones would be better off using the tiles on the the space shuttle asuming you cuold glue them down
My question is will this campaign work by turning boys away from science if science is a 'girl thing'
Science is a human thing, cooking is domestic chemistry, gardening domestic biology, DIY domestic engineering, and the list of thing that men and women both do all the time which are essentially science goes on, maybe dragging those real world applications into the classroom will spark the science in children rather than the glitz and glamour or the abstract science in schools already.
Of course it won't discourage boys from doing science.
I dont think its discouraging, quite the opposite actually. I like being surrounded by nice people in the lecture, and if they happen to be girls - even better! :D
(I just had to make a joke! :D )
I actually NEVER heard of this campaign. Still saying science is a girly thing wouldnt have kept me from being into it. Well I can only speak for my self.
Meiryousa I live on a college campus and no we don't walk in perpetual shame, no one I know has ever apologized for being male (especially in front of a classroom) and no one hates me for being male. Sure there are some people who have extreme feminist views but they're very few and far between. And you don't generally find them in science or engineering majors. But that's always going to exist. If you gather 10s of thousands of young people in one place, some are going to have extreme views. But you can't stereotype a campus' views based on the opinions of the minority.
Meiryousa Let me guess, they are systematically privileged because men are expected to hold the door open for them, and to pay on dates?
sabin97 this was a complete non-sequitur
also lol at saying those people have profited, when what they actually received were death threats, some of which were made to their private addresses/phones, and having their private info spread on the internet. Oh if only I was as privileged as them!!!!!1!!1!1!
As we approach 8 years since this video was made, is there any update on whether the ad campaign was successful?
Physics is maths minus the sex appeal
+HowToAdvanced I'd say the reverse
In fact, I think that the stereotype of "too busy to brush my hair" that is paraded around science labs is driving women out of science. It is ok to be well put together AND be an excellent researcher.
The very interesting thing about the ad it is that it was inciting dumb people to become scientists.
As a technical student I can vouch for this, I study information technology and we were doing our computer fault finding test, the class I'm in has more women than most as its a more basic class. But this one fault many people were given according to my instructor is the one women always find and men just give up on. this is simplistic of course, but a solid example of a male dominated subject where women really add something tangible.
That was amazing. Your argument was so calm and logical and well-organized. You are a credit to scientists.
'How has your spy career worked out?'
Touché, Dr Gray, touché
Who really cares about gender in a job? What's the next issue to be concerned about? Height or weight or ethnicity... Puhleeze. Let's stay focused on things that really matter.
This scientist is soooooo attractive 😍😍 and she discusses this subject with such grace!! I could just listen to her every day
It's just marketing garbage, isn't it?
And marketing garbage is always... well... garbage.
It's an advertisement. The first rule of ads is grab people's attention. Given that the main audience of this particular ad was young girls who like all kids these days have the attention of 10 seconds, the images on the screen cannot be static for more than a few seconds.
Science is fun in a sense that it is meditative. The fundamental structures of nature be it inorganic or biological are difficult to elucidate. To understand them, one has to think long and think hard which is the antithesis to the short attention span problem of modern society.
An another example of this is many tutorial videos include upbeat music. To me who only wants to watch the videos for the information, the techno music is a huge distraction. I wish the video makers would offer a toggle format that allows the audience to toggle off the music and only listen to the narration.
Stop commercializing everything.
+Gray Beard
but...... but....... but capitalism....
But your Tolkien so.......
:p
:)
+Gray Beard says he behind the image of a hyper-marketed movie genre franchise ;-)
Steve Gould
He said "everything" thus, he just doesn't want competition.
;)
Just one question, which probably solves all this issue: How many girls/women were involved and participated in making this marketing video for girls?
+fedrosimpson Probably conceived by marketing people used to promote beer and cosmetics.
Great majority of employees in Marketing and Advertising are women.
The ad just shows how our society fails on a daily. People care too much about what other people think and are thus desperately trying to fit in. It is incredibly ironic that the commercial is stuffed with stereotypes although it is trying to encourage young women to break out of them.
So yes, the ad was a complete failure, in fact it almost seems sarcastic because it does pretty much everything wrong you could do wrong.
That commercial is hilarious. It can't be real.
At 4:20, the voice behind the camera mentions that the video shatters the stereotype that scientists are gray haired old men by showing young glamorous girls. Well, there is one right here in front of our eyes right now! And she does not need heavy makeup, high heels, nor to waddle like a fashion doll and saying "dude" and "cool" to look like a female scientist! THAT, exactly that, is what should be shown to future female scientists. The guy(s) who created that "Science it's a girl thing" seem to love dolls more than real women.
Definition of "doll" : a feminine-shaped thing, molded to look like a sex symbol, hand-painted to sell well, with nothing inside. If you don't believe me, look at Barbie.
Sorry, but that's not what we need in science!
>the voice behind the camera
you made it sound like brady was some mysterious entity
@ David Danis
Actually, in another video, he actually is. Mysterious, fantomatic, ghostly. BOOOOOO! (LOL!) watch?v=GOgsn5NECWw
I don't think the campaign should exist at all. I am in favor of removing barriers to entry, but nothing else.
If you want to know why there are few women in science, it boils down to three little words. Science is hard. Now, it's not that women can't do it. But (most) little girls are taught from a young age that they don't have to do anything hard and that life will be made easy for them. Boys, on the other hand are taught that life is hard. The difficulty of science doesn't discourage them because it is just more of the same.
That's right, their ego carries them.
Walsh2571
It's not their ego that carries them. Their lives are filled with obstacles anyway. Women are the ones accustomed to "the royal road."
I totally agree to what you are saying! In the end the only limiting factor is society, meaning the way they, as in girls, are brought up! Generally families, where both parents graduated from university will raise children that will do the same! Id say that women that are at university come from a more educated background, this appllies a lot less to men! (cultural customs)
Meiryousa Sorry but all the research I have read from psychology shows what you are saying is wrong. Read Lev Vygotsky "Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes" and the assoiated arguments and then read the counter arguments (of which there are few valid ones).
ots not speculation where you can prove it. My PhD was in an area of psychology.
I teach physics for more than 30 years, and, I can tell you that most girls are not interested in science. That's the way they are and you just can't force them to be interested in things they don't like. Physics is exciting and interesting but girls don't even like to hear about it...
Girls interested in science are extremely rare... You can make campain videos, but to my oppinion these videos won't change the facts...
MrKA1961 iA. Funnily enough most people in my 6th form that study the sciences in a-level are female and boys are the minority, so i guess we are changing what people are interested in
Funny, all the teacher's I've had who assumed I wouldn't be interested really made me feel like I should engage.
MrKA1961
I agree. If you conduct a survey on the number of girls in disciplines like physics math or chemistry you'd be disappointed. That's menacingly low. These fields require more labour, patience and critical thinking than in others. Perhaps girls are not interested to work in these fields. They keep themselves busy in making boyfriends, makeup, shopping ie, anything other than science. Society will be better if we have more female scientists.
I didn't like this campaign at first, but now I do like it. Sure scientists can be shallow and obsessed with fashion and lipstick. Why not
Most Girls are not interested in science, this is a fact. How many girls are into most hobbyist/enthusiast fields like CB radio or Retro computers or antique cars? Sure girls should be allowed to do these things, but it doesn't attract as many as men. You cannot force this. Men like working alone in a shed. Women like working with people. Unless you can make science more social they it won't attract most women.
+alex ojideagu So you're telling women, we like working with people and men don't. That is one of the most inane stereotypes ever.
I understand the marketing science behind the campaign. No one will argue that women and men are constantly bombarded with specific images of what popular beauty is. Thse images are so powerful they can be used to identify time periods from pictures of people with distinct hair styles, clothing and etc. When marketing a product you try to grab the attention of the largest demographic possible and with women glamour is a large portion of it, if not the largest. MARKETING IS A SCIENCE
The biggest problem that the video will not cover is that WOMEN THEMSELVES are not choosing to go into STEM.
Most would rather get a nice easy, gender studies or sociology degree.
It's like forcing women into the military, making exams easier, etc. Then when war comes, many could die. Making science weaker. Doesn't make sense.
I agree. When it comes to gender/race issues I often ask myself how a unifying solution can arise from any agenda that singularly promotes a specific race/gender. Any special treatment well intended or not only creates an exception to the rule, when rules and laws should affect ALL of us equally. Merit is what really matters, and the most gratifying achievements are the ones that earned.
anyone have the original video?
I agree with you. I went to a fair today with my dad and the lady at the ticket booth asked if I needed a child's ticket because I wasn't wearing make-up. I'm seventeen. This also happened at a restaurant about a couple months ago. The hostess asked if I wanted a child's menu (I did because I like the games they have on them but that's not the point). And again, I wasn't wearing makeup. I don't like wearing make-up. I feel more comfortable without make-up.
The report that she mentions at 07:00, is there any chance of a link? :) Cheers
The greatest SCIENTIST (not just a physicist or biologist or chemist act) was a woman. Marie Curie was the only person to ever win 2 nobel prizes with each being for a different science (chemistry and physics). She then applied her discoveries to the health field. basically she was an all around bad ass. I find her more of an inspiration than any nameless commercial character wearing high heels.
I don' t like stereotypes and certainly this is an awful way to encourage girls to try science, but if you want to have the attention of average young girls, you need to talk to them in terms they understand.
People are individuals, it has nothing to do with male or female. Societal stereotyped roles absolutely do have a huge impact on pushing people toward or away from various professions.
What she said about that study where hyper feminized role models actually discourage girls reminded me of how it was eventually found that the DARE anti-drug program actually exacerbated the drug problem in schools.
That's the problem with marketers. They're SO confident that they know what's best, that when they're wrong they take everyone down with them.
Can someone link me to the video they are discussing?
The drop rate for students who initially pursue a science major as an undergraduate are unbelievable. If this commercial could entice more people to look at science, I doubt its imagery would help them stick through it once it becomes a lot more math and sleepless nights than sexy lab assistants and high heels.
Excellent point.
Thank you for the support. I'm glad someone understands what I was saying, and it's nice to see someone not jumping to baseless conclusions to bite my head off.
How do you think stigma's are broken? By getting people to take those tentative first steps, by trying to change the attitude and opinion toward the industry. Some fear bullying, some fear losing their friends, which may seem trivial to an adult and yet to a teenager those are some of the biggest things in their world. Besides that, since when was passion a requirement for any career? In the real world, not everyone has the option or means to choose a career they're passionate about.
Thanks Dr. Gray, no one could have gave a better reply to this campaign.
Science is about passion, is about this endless desire of discovering how both world and society work. The EU campaign does not address that, it's just a very cruel stereotype of young girls.
I think a big problem with the usual approaches to enticing young people in general to the sciences and mathematics is that young people aren't given enough credit for what they are capable of comprehending. They're scared off from these fields because they're treated so commonly as though these are minefields in a sense. If we act like these fields are incomprehensible barriers for students, then they'll learn to avoid them, or to dread them. Show students videos discussing complex topics, and give them a chance to work through them. If they need help, give it to them, but don't act like it's impossible that a young student might be able to understand something better than an adult.
I think it's worth noting that Brady's various channels really do a good job with what Dr. Gray is espousing as the way to draw more people into science, and Dr. Gray herself seems like an excellent candidate for a role model for young women interested in scientific careers. I'd love to see Brady's videos have such an impact on prospective scientists, because I really do think they showcase scientists talking about and demonstrating things they love.
its like those commercials for technical college, (although theyre actors with scripts) they are being truthful, so they talk about their passion on a personal level to target people who really want to work on cars or build houses - not people who think its all drag strips and knocking stuff over. or in this case, youre not going to walk in on a female professor wearing lingerie and high heels, althought possible, not often.
I have not heard about that study and if you could post a link I would appreciate it. It seems like an interesting subject. There is one thing related to global rise in temperatures I can reference. It is a fact that higher levels of CO2 are tied to higher temperatures thanks to the greenhouse effect. You can compare CO2 and temperature graphs and see a pattern emerge. In the las ~200 years CO2 has risen dramaticaly and temperature is sure to follow.
I agree with this. I finished mine after many years of hard study as a Biologist and Post-Grad work at the University of Dundee in Scotland, UK. I now have a successful career at a large UK based supermarket doing IT and planning work. Frankly, I get laughed at when I say that I work for Tesco with the title Dr. But I earn double what I would if I pursued that scientific career. I would leave my current job in a flash if I could do what I love and worked hard for, for a decent salary.
so why was the Large Hadron Collider built in Switzerland and not Saudi Arabia?
Science doesn't need girls per se. It just needs brains and money. Science is not suffering for this nearly as much the 'girls' are. A career, or even a side interest in science is so rewarding that to see a whole demographic disenfranchised is tragic.
I'd like to see female scientists becoming valid role models for girls because quite frankly their current choices in that area are dangerous. We have to promote intelligence as aspirational. The days of 'cool to be dumb' and 'bling' have to end. This is for the SPECIES people; not for science, and not even just for girls.
When I grow up I want to live in a world with loads more Dr. Meghan Grays. Ideally loads and loads and loads more.
I agree that the two sexes possess complementary characteristics, and that women shouldn't be expected to shoulder such burdens. At the same time, they should not be objectified, patronized, or underestimated. That's all I was trying to convey.
We are into science because of the excitements we get from exploring new things and learning the truths about them. High heels, lipsticks and fashion should have nothing to do with it. If they indeed draw people into science because of the ad, they have drawn the wrong pool of people.
Because of "equality" and "equal chances". Those words in our society mean having a majority of non-scientists vote upon a M/F ratio that they deem plausible, and then implement quota that companies should obtain. You can even force the companies into such sexism by "stimulating" hiring the minority group with subsidies. Why is this pretty much forcing? Because in a competitive/capitalist model you'll suffer as a company if you're the one not to use this benefit.
Exactly. On top of your point the reason their are stereotypes is because as humans we like to group things into neat categories. Granted these categories really only exist culturally and within ourselves, but the reason we do it is because we can observe that certain groups act certain ways ON AVERAGE. So what that many women, I would even say most, like make up and dresses and shoes? Does that make a women who doesn't any LESS a women? No.
Meghan I feel every single Word you have said in an very clear message. It came through my ears dirirectly to the heart. The power of your words could grab any beautiful, ugly girl with or without make up. Thank your!!!
Im 15, wanted to be a scientist since I was 2 years old (paleontologist, knew almost every dinosaur name at the time), now I'm between choosing physics (theoretical or astronomy) or biology (zoology or molecular). This kind of things have never attracted ME (just opinion) to science, just the marvel of knowledge and discovery of the unknown is enoguh to drag me into the marvelous way of science.
In regards to the spy inspiration point, Bruce lee movies don't accurately represent what fighting is but in America whole generations of people were inspired to become fighters and pursue careers because of his movies.
I'd like to put that up for rebuttal.
I am an attractive young women, I finished my Associates in Math and Science and I am currently studying my Bachelors in Aerospace Engineering and I believe that if Dr Meghan Gray spent a bit more time on (in her own words) "Being HER SELF" she would spend less time worrying that sexy hot women maybe attracted to following a career in science. I believe I am an example of a hot women being attracted to science rather then believing that being attracted science some how makes me hot!
I think it also needs to be considered that our global culture is rabidly anti-intellectual. Parents, by and large, do not want their children to grow up to be intellectuals and children don't want to grow up to be intellectuals because every aspect of our culture portrays intellectuals very negatively. A knowledgeable, rational person is always portrayed as socially inept, cold and unloving, arrogant, and usually putting other people in danger. Principled people are also seen as extremists.
Beautifully said. Female scientists have contributed SIGNIFICANTLY to the field of science - and did so even before being recognized as a person under the law, or being awarded the degree's they've earned. So respected in science by their male colleagues (in some cases, sadly not all) that they would be addressed as DOCTOR, even if they were not issued the degree they earned, much to the dismay of many university officials. Why can't THAT be placed in an ad campaign instead of lipstick b.s.?
The first part of the European Commission campaign is aimed at girls around the age of 12. Not women around the age of the women that are in the ad.
I am a person, man or woman: it does not matter. I let my own actions and my achievements earn my respect. Go on and keep allowing your actions earn yours as well.
When did I preach anything about equality? I don't think the problem here is what men and women do, but what we value as who earns respect. Mothers and teachers and scientists and business people ALL can earn respect in their own right. We should just allow all people to pursue their passions, and appreciate the successes they bring.
'I believe this is what this campaign should be focusing on trying to change'... why do we need to change the system that is already perfect in terms of performance? Why do we need to make 50 50 males and females when 99.9% males has been proven to work very very very damn well? Why do we need to fulfil women's selfish needs? Why? Why is it so insulting for them to even cook at home and be good housewives now while men honorable being forced to be conscripted without a single complain? Why? Why?
This is what I hate about the modern politically correct culture. Women have equal opportunity to engage in science and to follow that career path, Nothing is stopping them.
Just like when people say it's "disgusting" that the average income for a woman is less than a man. This has zilch to do with oppression, and more to do with the careers that men are inherently more interested in (business, science, engineering, economics etc.) are simply higher paying than the female counterparts.
I think more people, girls AND boys, should watch Meghan Gray talk and be an inspiration.
Good point. I am a female scientist and when I saw this I couldn't help but think of the damage it would do to young girls and boys. While boy are more highly representative in STEM fields, perhaps portraying scientists as they really are (we are a diverse bunch), would be a better use of time and money than making it pink or blue. jmo
I think she made a very good point. If you love something, then do it. It doesn't matter how you look or who you are; what matters is your interest in the subject and your passion to want to pursue a career in that particular subject. And, if you just so happen to look like a model and love science, then great. But I think it doesn't matter who you are, as long as you have an interest in doing something.
We shouldn't. We don't have to be more accepting towards one group or the other. We can be equally as accepting towards everyone, and I think that would be nice.
but in the long term, there's reason to believe that if a more proportionate number of women get involved in science (relative to men) by reaching out to those who otherwise would have never realized their interest in science, then stereotypes of women will ultimately evolve as well to gradually encompass an interest in science as just as valid as that of mens'.
I graduated as an industrial product designer. But beforehand i had an education in woodshop, right now i work in an independant construction company with friends.. But my girlfriend wich ive been with the last 6 years has already an diploma in industrial engeneering , and is going to graduate civil engeneering.I admire her for that she's smart and has the looks, just like Dr,gray only a bit younger. And its not uncommon in Belgium for girls doing science,there where alot of girls in my class
i agree that it should show actual scientists working where they work, talking about what they do.
it would make more sense and help show the diversity of science, and show that not everyone wears makeup, and that most people eat.
When my daughter was little she wanted to be a "paleontogolist". She even told that to astronaut Gene Cernan ( the last man on the moon) Now she is a fashion designer, coincidentally.
They are trying to sell science to young women. Cheesiness and jargon won't cut it. It has to be aimless and sexy. Look at early advertising and compare it to modern advertising. You just can't reach people through their conscious minds.
I always like this "devil's advocate" thing when making a point, it really works.
I agree with you on that principle, but until we have achieved a culture where genders are seen as equal and irrelevant, the question of how to market to certain subgroups will still be a necessary one. In this case, marketing science to girls NOW is one thing we can do to help achieve that culture in the future.
test tubes an circuit boards and microscopes an hot chicks. it got me into science.
I wouldn't marry her for sexual reasons. I would just ask her stuff and watch her explain them all day.
Maybe the EU commission wanted to counter the idea that women in science were usually like Leslie Winkle or Amy Farrah Fowler. So they try to get the Tricia McMillans (alias Trillians) interested. And then get it wrong by making "Science" serve as another sexy attribute to attract attention.
Exactly. It's like running a campaign for women in handegg, because you don't like the ratio between men and women playing handegg. Men are more aggressive and competitive on average than women, and would therefore be more inclined, naturally, to play sports like basketball, handegg, football or ultimate frisbee. It's not sexism, it's just nature.
There's no overt barrier, but that doesn't answer the question as to why women don't choose STEM. It may be a matter of time and generations. As more women join STEM fields, they become more visible and more girls grow up with the impression that it's normal for them to be in STEM fields. To illustrate: I joined a male-dominated business without realizing it because I grew up around professional women. The thought that I wouldn't belong there never occurred to me, so it never held me back.
I think the best way to get more people into science is what Brady, MinutePhysics, Veritasium, ViHart, SmarterEveryDay and all of them are doing.
So, thank you Brady and thanks to all of them for making great videos.
Totally agree with Dr Gray here. Science should be promoted without targeting a specific group so those naturally attracted to it take it up, and if only small percentage of those attracted are female - so be it. Also, in my humble opinion Brady's videos featuring ultra-likable scientists presenting scientific topics in a cool manner is the best way to attract young people to science. Your channels/videos should be promoted more!
Here I am a girl scientist who looks for opportunities! ... the interest and passion is there but the money is not! ... I was accepted in Nottingham university to do a PhD in optics but I couldn't find a grant to pay the fees and living!
The only way to improve any young person's interest in any subject of education is making those resources available,catchy ads and rhetoric does not suffice!
You will not blink involuntarily after reading this.
Dr Gray is, of course, correct to express concern about the pressure on girls to conform to the 'girly' stereotype which the mass media so consistently exert. I think this video acknowledges the impact this pressure can have and seeks to bring such youngsters to science and do not believe it is intended to discourage girls who might be more secure or less concerned about their femininity.
i live in germany and my basic point is that one there is no generalized world culture
and that most of the stuff that you'd consider anti-intellectual is not forced upon the people (like daytime television, its really bad in germany). Its really down to the way you were brought up not only to the culture
for example you can live in a really conservative envoirenment and still be pro intellectual if your family consists mostly of academics.
sorry im actually quiet tired ill continue later
To rephrase the message, the call is to the stereotypes to break their mold and take on a fantastic field. If it works to get more women into science, that's a good thing.