Continental Shelf

(Continuing the discussion of women in science and technology from Part 3 last week, and leading up to Ada Lovelace Day.)

What’s so great about it?

Today I want to talk about some of the reasons science and technology are particularly interesting for women, despite any obstacles.

Let’s face it: at any job that requires raw strength, on average women are going to be disadvantaged compared to men; we expect that when brute force is a necessary ability, there will be more men than women on the job. But there really aren’t that many jobs where that is much of an issue anymore because we human have created a lot of tools to make our lives easier and increase our productivity.

If there is one arena where women should be able to compete with men on even biological footing, it’s in mental pursuits and white collar jobs. The primary obstacles are cultural; we have plenty of evidence that show how malleable the human brain is and how the first few years of life and education shape us. Children in general are bundles of possibility and creativity; only through the mill of high school and adolescence are they ground into the dust of conformity and apathy.

By the time they hit the math and science classes, high school students have often become disaffected; and evidence shows that this is worse for young women, who receive a lot less encouragement than men toward science and technology.

How can we kill the fun out of science and technology? Science is discovery, understanding, the “Ah-ha!” of figuring out what makes things work, the intricate and amazing beauty of an interconnected world. Technology is the entertainment of toys for grown-ups, gadgets, gizmos, gear. How can we make all this boring?

It’s true that math and sciences are “hard” and require a lot of work. But look at the long term: is it not a great big lot of work to be a store clerk, to wait tables, to wash floors, to be the lowest paid employee in the office and have to take on a second or third job to make ends meet? At least as an engineer, a microbiologist, a software developer, a GIS analyst, or a toxicologist, you put extra work up-front in studying, but typically you can expect a career that is respected, physically undemanding, reasonably paid, and in growing demand.

You also have access to opportunities to continue to learn and grow, stay informed about the newest developments in your field, take additional training, tackle new responsibilities, and generally avoid becoming obsolete.

If that is the kind of thing that drives you (as it drives me), you can get a job where you can make a difference. Environmental and medical careers are two obvious avenues; research and development or teaching can also provide a lot of personal satisfaction.

The pay is usually also quite fair. No, you don’t pick science and technology in order to get rich quick; and no, the glass ceiling is not gone yet. But you can definitely expect middle class or upper middle class comfort, and be more “employable” than you be without a tech-oriented skill set. And you can help break the damn ceiling.

A career where you can have fun, excitement, personal satisfaction, reasonable pay, prestige and respect, where you can compete well, where you can make a difference or get your nurturing on if that floats your boat — what’s not to love?

Other posts in this series:

• Part 1 (February 24): Hollywoodian portrayals
• Part 2 (March 3): My techie friends
• Part 3 (March 10): Boyz in our ‘hood
• Part 4 (today): What’s so great about it?
• Part 5 (March 24): Ada Lovelace Day — some role models

Links of interest:

• Women in technology — on the Guardian‘s Tech Weekly podcast