There is a movement afoot that many of us probably don't know about. I like to call it "Feminizing Science".
"Oh what a sexist term!" you say.
Well not quite. What I mean by "Feminizing Science" is that there is a growing movement out there that feels we need to scale back science or hamstring it in order to get more women into the field. In other words... quotas. For instance if you have a brilliant genius and a mediocre student, the mediocre student should be given preference because the brilliant genius happens to be a man and the mediocre student a woman. That's right, Affirmative Action for the sciences.
I mean who really cares whether we pick the best person for the job or the most intelligent or the one who is most likely to make breakthroughs? It's all about diversity in the end isn't it? Who cares if more women could really give a crap about science, we need to push them into it whether they want it or not.
In her excellent common sense article "Why Can’t a Woman Be More Like a Man?", Christina Hoff Sommers points out some of those behind this movement and why women don't take Science.
“It is a system,” [MIT biologist Nancy] Hopkins says, “where winning is everything, and women find it repulsive.” This viewpoint explains the constant emphasis, by equity activists such as Shalala, Rolison, and Olsen, on the need to transform the “entire culture” of academic science and engineering.
So why are there so few women in the high echelons of academic math and in the physical sciences? In a recent survey of faculty attitudes on social issues, sociologists Neil Gross of Harvard and Solon Simmons of George Mason University asked 1,417 professors what accounts for the relative scarcity of female professors in math, science, and engineering. Just 1 percent of respondents attributed the scarcity to women’s lack of ability, 24 percent to sexist discrimination, and 74 percent to differences in what characteristically interests men and women.
So, most women find science boring and dull and could care less. "But we need diversity! At all costs!" they cry. "Force them to take science, it's only the right thing to do!"
Now I'm all for equality in opportunity. I could care less if someone is a man, a woman, black, white, asian or a bog person. When I'm looking to get something done, advance our society as a whole and generally make the world a better place I want the most intelligent, experienced and driven person - not one who was slated into the position because of sex or race. However there is active legislation and a movement to "Title IX the sciences".
Now there is one caveat when it comes to my decision making - and to the disappointment of those who wish to think me a racist or sexist instead of a realist - that is to think America first. What is best for our country comes first, as without our country we cannot continue advancing. Call me a Nationalist or what have you, but I firmly believe that we have the most open society for people to pursue opportunity and I will fight to the death for it. As for sex and race within that society, we need to stop dictating quotas and start dictating quality.
Now go read Christina Hoff Sommers full article. It's not boring. Really, it's not. Oh, you're a woman. Not interested in science? Well then reading it is your choice I'm not going to force you for the sake of diversity.