Women in Engineering: An Alternative Perspective

Today, I would like to explore a slightly different topic and something that may be considered a bit controversial by todays standards. Given my personal experience in the field and observations over time, however, this is something that I think requires some thought and questioning. Many may disagree and are equally entitled to their own opinion. My goal in writing this piece is not to give an absolute opinion or what is right or wrong, but to continue to open the door for the opportunity to have an open discussion exploring the issue from multiple angles and to bring clarity that we really don't always know everything.​

The topic of the day is women in engineering - in particular, the observation of what appears to have been and to be a big push to get more women into technical areas such as engineering, and further, what appears to be a push for equal outcome of men and women in the field, as opposed to equal opportunity. 

When I was in high school and college, everyone seemed to praise those that decided to pursue careers and schooling in technical sciences, in particular engineering. Often, the unintentional message in this, or what was internalized by some, by so vehemently pushing women into these fields, however, was that it was “unacceptable” to pursue “non-technical” fields. Jobs in non-technical fields would lead to "unstable" careers, lower "status," less "freedom" etc. etc. But, what does this even mean? What defines something technical vs. non-technical in the first place? And what defines something as good or bad? Is this not dependent on each individual and their own preferences, passions, and skillsets?

These labels and definitions of what should or shouldn't be ok require careful examination to determine independently what is and is not true for each individual. And, when certain beliefs, or sides of arguments, becomes so strongly pushed or accepted as true, it usually puts me in a position of taking a step back and trying to take a larger view of the issue at hand in order to better understand what is at play and what we might be missing that lies under the surface. Additionally, focusing too heavily on one side often instigates the need to counterbalance - kind of like what this piece or writing is attempting to do. 

So, let’s begin by asking the questions:

1. Why is there such a big push to get women into engineering?
2. By focusing so closely on one aspect of a larger system, could we be missing a vital flaw deeper in said system?
3. What are the intended and unintended consequences of pushing these agendas?

Often, in my experience, we humans try to find solutions to what we think are “problems,” when in reality, they are problems that we inherently create ourselves because we are human and we like to solve problems. This desire to solve problems leads to innovation and development and some pretty cool shit, but it can also lead to some fairly damaging mentalities. It is not either-or. There is so much more to our world than we know and can conceive of.

Let’s take this a bit further and ask a few more questions:
​

1. Why aren’t more women in engineering in the first place?
2. Is it possible that some women don’t want to be in engineering and what we think is an “unequal” ratio of men to women is a natural byproduct of how the system naturally organizes itself?
3. Is it possible that there is some deeper issue within the industry that needs to be explored or challenged and that women have something different to offer to counter-balance this issue?
4. Is it possible that, based purely on the fact that men and women are different, not all women thrive in this environment?
5. Why does it make sense to push a career or outcome based purely on gender rather than interest, passion, mindset, skillset, etc.?

I am in no way, shape, or form saying that women should not be able or to pursue engineering, enjoy engineering, or be in engineering, but rather that the pursuit should be for the right reasons for the individual. Some women may want to go into engineering in the same way that some men may want to go into art, for example. Furthermore, the women that want to be in engineering make kick-ass engineers, but in my experience, going into it because people tell you you are good at it or you “think” you should, creates inner conflict, a series of failed jobs, and a point to question what you are doing and why.

​Let's ask a few more questions:

1. Is it possible that some women inherently enjoy and do better in fields that allow for more creativity, whatever that means? In fields that better align with who they are? In fields that allow the difference in the way the female brain works to be leveraged rather than crushed?
   
2. Are we creating more damage in other areas of the system by pushing these agendas?
   
3. Could the engineering industry benefit from the difference in how females process information if it was openly accepting to such change?

These questions are for everyone, including myself to explore, which is why I pose them.

The one thing I do know, however, is that nature seems to find a way of self-organizing into the most optimal configurations for itself. So, what would happen if we learned from this and allowed these systems to organize themselves naturally? Allowed the ratio of male to female engineers to determine itself? Maybe it is natural for there to be a skewed ratio of men to women in engineering that results from equal opportunity, rather than equal outcome. Maybe it isn't. And further, why should we expect equal outcome, so long as each individual has the opportunity to explore different avenues. Maybe this is not true. Maybe it is. Maybe the answer lies in the middle. Until next time....