Pink Math · 12:40pm Apr 24th, 2016
Here’s a bit of wisdom from the SMBC comic:
As the creator of a few pink math blog posts (see: The Pinkie Pie Guide to Irrational and Transcendental Numbers) this got my attention. Let’s examine the problem.
There are two issues here. The first is the how to attract more female students into mathematics (and science and engineering), both to promote gender equality, and to ensure the subject thrives.
The second is challenging the pinkification of girlhood by marketing companies where products marketed at girls use stereotype pink themes, instead of the more varied range of colors and styles offered to boys.
The two come together when a typically male-dominated committee decides they want a campaign to promote math to girls. With all good intentions, they delegate this to a media firm, who then produce something like:
- EDF’s Pretty Curious campaign. Because girls like pretty things. So this is obviously how to get them into science and math. This was not well received by women working in science. Imagine how Rainbow Dash or Spitfire would view a ‘Pretty Fast’ Wonderbolt recruitment campaign and you get the idea.
- IBM’s Hack a Hair Dryer. Because all girls love their hair dryer, so that’s the obvious way to get them into tech. Yeah.
- Or this classic: Science: It’s a Girl Thing! Because science is really all about glamor, fashion and makeup.
The last two were formally withdrawn after it was realized that they had rather messed up. The better initiatives are those that recognize that girls are attracted to science and math for much the same reasons that boys are. The problem is when they are discouraged from pursuing it by a culture which suggests math is somehow not feminine. One solution is make sure that young children see plenty of female characters doing math and science. Twilight Sparkle is a very useful role model.
Of course there’s nothing wrong with girls liking pink thing, flowers, cute animals and fashion. The problem is when this is presented to them as the only option. This is something which Lauren Faust understood very well, hence her diverse cast of ponies includes traditionally feminine characters like Rarity and Pinkie Pie, as well as the likes of Rainbow Dash and Applejack.
There’s nothing wrong with pink math itself. What’s flawed is the patronizing logic: You’re a girl, so you must like pink things, so the way we can get you into math is with lots of pretty pink worksheets with flowers.
What about my pink math blog posts? If I was presenting these as a way to get girls doing math, then that would be wrong. But that’s not it. They are written to entertain and educate Pinkie Pie and math fans of all ages and genders. Of course if they do encourage anyone to engage more with math, that’s cool.
Of course many girls do like pink hairdryers, and potentially this sort of thing can help reach out to those who may have previously dismissed math and science. Just remember that liking pink is just a preference for a particular color. Math can be done in any color and if you want it pink, you can have it that way. There is still a place for ‘pink math’ campaigns, you just need to cut out the bit which labels it as ‘for girls’ and instead make it clear it is for anyone who likes pink. Pinkie Pie is a popular pony with lots of fans, both male and female, which makes her a great character to front such a campaign.
Incidentally, this is a position I did not realize at first, but came to after some time watching the show. When I first started writing science-themed pony stories, I was only thinking about using Twilight Sparkle as a character to explain the technical stuff. It was only when I started writing Rock Farms and Nuclear Reactors that I realized that actually Pinkie Pie has just as much, if not more, potential as a science communicator.
Anyone remember Legally Blonde? The film in which Reese Witherspoon plays a pink fashion obsessed Californian blonde who enrolls at Harvard Law School. I like it partly for the academic jokes and feminism, but also because the message of the film: that just because you’re a glitter-loving girly-girl, it doesn’t mean you can’t also be an academic high-flyer, is both very true, and not universally recognized.
There is still a perception in many schools that math, or even academic study in general, is something just for eggheads like Twilight Sparkle. Of course math and physics departments are full of such nerdy characters, but universities are diverse places, and there are also bright students as fashion conscious as Rarity, quiet animal-lovers like Fluttershy, and crazy party animals like Pinkie Pie. I know. I have taught math to many talented young women like this.
See also: Can Twilight Sparkle get more girls into physics and other sciences?
First question: Does anybody in fact know this campaign was begun by a male-dominated committee?
I do! It was not. The person in charge was the EU Commissioner for research and innovation, Máire Geoghegan-Quinn.
Second question: Does anybody know whether the videos in question were made by men or women? I tried to find out but did not.
Third question: Are these silly-looking "make science pink" videos effective?
Answer: Maybe!
Dr. Reena Pau showed the "Science: It's a girl thing!" video to 38 girls and asked them what they thought of it: Science: What The Girls Think!
So... relying on stereotypes about girls may be an effective way of encouraging them to enter science. Though I'd like to see a comparison to a different type of video, to control for the "say what the teacher wants to hear" effect.
Curt Rice wrote an article for the Guardian about the video, in which he said:
Emphasis on the last 2 lines: Loads of emails from girls who want science to have a sexier image. That's what girls thinking about entering science want.
Funny thing, though: as we see, Kurt already knew that that was what "loads of girls" said they wanted when he wrote his article, yet his article was a scathing denunciation of the video. So what did Kurt really want? Not to encourage women to enter science. Not if it meant confronting reality and discovering what girls actually think and want, and that they aren't just like boys, or adults.
If you actually want to increase the number of women in science, rather than push a narrative about the oppression of women by the patriarchy, then you find out what things will encourage women to enter science and do those things.
This may be a problem that affects boys too. In my experience, showing more than casual interest in math, science, music, art, literature - that is, anything that not related to certain popular sports - means that you are "probably gay" or a "beta male" of some sort. It actually seems more acceptable for girls to participate in intellectual and artistic activities. What's considered masculine or feminine could be culture-specific.
In places where STEM subjects are seen as exclusively masculine, I would say that positive female role models are important. If girls see women they respect doing science, I'd imagine they're more likely to consider a career in it.
On a different note, the educational aspect of MLP is something I miss. What happened to Twilight and her anemometer? And I'm still upset about the destruction of the Library. I mean, what message is that sending? The bees didn't deserve that, and neither did the books.
Maybe one reason for male dominated science not having females as much is because if a female can be just as inteligent and do just as much good research etc and Still have the time for appearence and social interactions, it makes them far more capable than the males, who then at best look on in bewilderment as their best efforts are then overlooked in comparison to they with the same idea but far more acceptable style, or they go on to take offence, bluster, fear, influence etc.
There is a very old quote. For a woman to be accepted as equal to a man, she has to be better. Fortunately, thats usually not difficult.
The great thing about being lazy, is that you might spend ten times the effort solving a problem once, but it means you then dont have to solve it the next thousand times.
To my dying day, or at least until the Alzheimers kicks in, I'll remember how a girl classmate in high school responded me when I suggested she needed to focus more on her programming:
"I'm a girl, why should I know anything about that? That stuff's for boys."
I was too young and immature to ask what her having to be a girl has anything to do with it, and didn't have the ability to knock down her excuses even if I had. All I know is that something went wrong somewhere.
3892800 Woh woh woh, slow down there! This is about changing the preconceived notions of young girls entering science, not our preconceived notions! We can't excuse campaigns like this making outside viewers feel uncomfortable, just because they happen to be effective!
New paper, possibly of interest.