"Only one-fifth of physics PhDs in this country are awarded to women, and only about half of those women are American; of all the physics professors in the United States, only 14 percent are women." --Eileen Pollack

It's a man's world. This is an indisputable fact, supported by a variety of receipts, from misogynistic religious social orders to the epidemics of violence against women around the world. Internationally, women are at the very least overlooked and underestimated, and at the very most systemically oppressed and brutalized. 

There are many arenas where this reality is obvious. Take the American government, for example. The USofA is ranked 104th for female representation in government in the world. From 2016 to 2017, we actually dropped nine places, from 95th place to 104th. In the 1990s, we were 52nd. Gender gaps and discrimination appear in all areas of life and range from the subtle, implicit and barely noticeable to the jaw-dropping and embarrassing. There's one arena, though, that often gets overlooked by those who aren't in it: the STEM fields. 

What is stem?

"...the increase in STEM degrees is largely fueled by the abundant job opportunities and competitive salaries awaiting graduates."

STEM is an acronym for science, technology, engineering and mathematics (medicine is sometimes included in the definition). Social sciences like psychology and sociology are sometimes considered to fall under this umbrella. For the most part, however, the "S" in STEM is typically referencing the hard sciences like chemistry or biology. 

In an increasingly technological world, educations in STEM are becoming more and more valuable. The fields have much to offer by way of "job prospects, prestige, intellectual stimulation and income." Highly respected and in demand, careers in these fields offer lucrative returns on investment (i.e. college education). Jobs in science, technology, engineering and math account for more than 10 percent of the jobs in America. Additionally, a good chunk of them pay nearly double the US's average wages for non-STEM jobs, according to Forbes. 

The average salary for entry-level STEM jobs that requires a bachelor's degree or higher is $66,123. According to CollegeChoice.net, the highest paying career is petroleum engineering. Those guys can expect to make a median early career salary of $102,300, and a median mid-career salary of $176,300. In other words, they ain't hurtin'. It isn't hard to see why these fields are so popular. In fact, according to the National Student Clearinghouse, the number of bachelor's degrees in science and engineering increased by 19 percent from 2009 to 2013. The NSC also predicts "occupations in STEM to grow by nearly 25 percent through 2020."

I mean, it is the 21st century, after all. Science and technology are the building blocks of our society nowadays. STEM is to the 2000's as literature was to the 1800's. So, if this realm of academia is so amazingly awesome, with so many obvious benefits, how is it that women are so often faced with a much different, and often much more negative, experience? The answer is simple: STEM is a boys' club. 

women in stem

In 2012, Yale University produced a study effectively proving bias against women in the STEM fields. Biologists, physicists and chemists--both male and female--at six different research-intensive universities participated in a double-blind, randomized study. They received applications from a fictional applicant who was randomly assigned a male or female name. 

The scientists, regardless of their sex, were significantly more likely to offer the male applicant the job, rating him more competent and hireable than the female student with the exact same qualifications. And even when some chose to hire the woman, they set her salary nearly $4,000 lower than the man's salary, on average. It should be noted that the female scientists were just as biased as the men.

Is any of this shocking? If it is, you aren't paying close enough attention to the ubiquitous presence of implicit cultural biases. They're everywhere. And as a result, women in STEM often have to go toe-to-toe with archaic expectations of what it means to be a woman, particularly in a male-dominated field. In a Harvard Business Review article entitled "The 5 Biases Pushing Women Out of STEM", Joan C. Williams--a distinguished Professor of Law at the University of California--explores the roadblocks women and girls often face when venturing into the arenas of math and science. 

According to her research, there are four predominant patterns of bias women are consistently subjected to. It should come as no surprise that women of color experience them to different degrees. Let's take a look at these, shall we?

facing down cultural giants: biases against women

The first pattern of bias women in STEM face is known as prove-it-again. "Two-thirds of the women interviewed," explains Williams, "reported having to prove themselves over and over again--their successes discounted, their expertise questioned." Of course, I can't just take Williams's word for it. While I'm certain her research is more than credible, I just had to reach out to a female scientist on my own to see if this statistic rings true. 

Nour Al-muhtasib, PhD is a neuropharmacologist who is currently a Postdoctoral Associate at Yale University. In 2010, she obtained her Bachelor of Science in biochemistry from the University of Maryland, College Park. And later, in 2018, she was rewarded a PhD in pharmacology from Georgetown University. Dr. Al-muhtasib first caught my eye when this tweet of hers went viral:

Her comment thread quickly became flooded with other women offering their own stories of abuse and systemic bias in the workplace. In regards to the prove-it-again bias, when asked if she ever felt the need to be twice as good as her male counterparts in order to get half of the validation, trust, support or success that they have, she responded with an enthusiastic "Yes. Yes. Yes." 

Al-muhtasib went on to explain her default role in the lab, admitting "I am always the one cleaning up after the men because they don't keep the lab clean. I do it because otherwise, things break and stop working." The box of acceptable behavior that women are expected to exist in is omnipresent. Those age-old feminine traits--submissive, docile, air-headed, second-class--follow professional women around like a scornful grandmother wagging her finger, reminding us to keep our posture and cross our legs.

This brings me to the next bias against women in STEM: the tightrope. 

"Women need to behave in masculine ways in order to be seen as competent, but women are expected to be feminine." --Joan C. Williams

In such a male-dominated field, feminine characteristics aren't particularly welcome. At the same time, however, they're expected, yet criticized. More than a third of female scientists feel pressured to play a traditionally feminine role, while 53 percent reported push back against behaviors deemed "too masculine". In fact, if women exhibit overtly masculine traits--competitiveness, aggression, assertiveness--they risk social ostracism. 

Therefore, women in STEM report feeling the need to walk a tightrope between being "too feminine to be competent, and too masculine to be likeable." For Black and Latina women--who are often stereotyped as being angry and out of control--the pressure to conform to restrictive norms is even more burdensome. With their personalities under more scrutiny--as minorities are often seen as the lone representative for their entire race--these women's need to balance carefully on the tightrope is even more pronounced. If they fall too far to one side, they risk social isolation, another type of bias that was found to mainly affect Black and Latina women.

This tightrope extends to mothers and wives with careers in math and science, who face criticism from both men and women regarding their lifestyle balance. This leads to another bias, the maternal wall. "From professional life, [I hear] 'You need to give your all to work if you want to be successful," explains Dr. Al-muhtasib. "The assumption is women can't have a spouse and kids in addition to work..."

In the STEM fields, which often require years of schooling and long hours in the lab, women with children often find themselves running into a "maternal wall" of sorts. Opportunities previously available to them begin to slip away as employers and peers alike start to question: are they competent enough? Will they be committed enough? Almost two-thirds of female scientists with children report encountering this annoying either/or dichotomy: you're either a good scientist, or a good mother.

And due to all of these hurdles women have had to jump, the final bias--tug-of-war--suggests women who faced discrimination in the early days of their career are more likely to distance themselves from other women. In the 2010's, there's more than enough room for multiple women in science. However, that wasn't always the case. Gender bias against younger women at the hands of older women who "probably had to go through hell" can often create unnecessary conflict.

About 75 percent of female scientists claim they've experienced supportive women in their work environments. However, 20 percent reported feeling the need to compete for "the woman's spot". 

cultural stereotypes: only asians and nerds allowed

There may only be five proven biases, but there are more implicit stereotypes at work in our culture that prevent young women and girls from even wanting to pursue a degree in STEM.

To get a glimpse at American attitudes about science and those who enjoy it, you need only to reference pop culture. Take the well-known teen comedy Mean Girls, for instance. The main character, Cady Heron (played by Lindsay Lohan) is a natural whiz at math. In one of the early scenes of the movie, she tells her new friends how mathematics is easily her favorite subject in school, to which her best friend Damian responds, "Ew, why?" 

Throughout the movie, Cady--who was raised in Africa--eventually realizes that math is seen as an unpopular academic subject in America that only nerds enjoy. She then proceeds to pretend to be terrible at math, failing her tests and almost the class, in order to capture the attention of her crush and fit in with the popular girls at school. 

Another prevalent source of proof of these enduring stereotypes is the hit television show The Big Bang Theory. The show is about a group of socially inept, yet brilliant, male physicists and their bubbly, attractive blonde neighbor, Penny. Air-headed and barely able to add 2+2, Penny is who all the boys want and all the girls want to be. On the other hand, one of the female scientists on the show, Amy, a neurobiologist--played by actress Mayim Bialik, who actually has a PhD in neuroscience in real life--is dumpy, rigid and seriously in need of a makeover. 

In America, the assumption is "only Asians and nerds" actually like math and science. In the words of Eileen Pollack, who wrote a New York Times article analyzing the lack of women in STEM:

The Big Bang Theory is a sitcom, of course, and therefore every character is a caricature, but what remotely normal young person would want to enter a field populated by misfits like Sheldon, Howard and Raj? And what remotely normal young woman would want to imagine herself as dowdy, socially clueless Amy rather than as stylish, bouncy, math-and-science-illiterate Penny?"

With overwhelming odds like these stacked against women in STEM, its no wonder their representation at the doctoral or career level is so dismal. Female participation in majors like physics, chemistry, astronomy, statistics, math and geology has remained flat over the years, and has actually shown declines inversely proportional to small upticks in computer science and engineering. Over the past 15 years, the numbers paint a clear picture: gender gaps in the STEM fields are enduring and consistent, with computer science and engineering showing the most discouraging numbers. 

No need to fret, though. Women in this country and the world over have come so very far since the days when we weren't even allowed to go to school. Progress is never linear. But now we know exactly what needs to be addressed to ensure women and girls feel just as represented in the prestigious STEM fields as do their male colleagues, brothers, fathers, sons and husbands.

First and foremost, we as a culture need to make a deliberate, conscious effort to check our own implicit biases against women, which unfortunately plague us all. We also need to refine our culture--which is currently one that "teaches girls that math isn't cool and no one will date them if they excel in physics"--into one that welcomes this aspect of academia as a necessary and celebrated part of any innovative culture. Sweeping change never happens overnight, but the first step is always awareness. 

I hope that, in writing this, I taught at least one person something they didn't know before. And I hope to have inspired at least one woman to pursue her academic interests. despite the odds that may be stacked against her.

Because odds and obstacles be damned, females are strong as hell. And when have we ever let a few hurdles keep us from moving forward?