They weren't "sticking vacuum tubes", they were doing all the logical programming that allowed those tubes to spit out meaningful results. Back in the days programming languages didn't exists, logical units had to be programmed one by one based on the way they were connected together...some sort of primitive assembly language. Very serious math, logic and electronics were needed to even come close to one of those metal beasts.Cornfed wrote: ↑June 27th, 2018, 9:51 pmHiring some girls to stick vacuum tubes in the right place does not demonstrate that females are good programmers. (Of course, fighting on the Jewish side in WWII was societal suicide). Getting females into STEM is surely societal suicide. Either they suck in which case we are squandering our only comparative advantage. If they don’t suck it is likely that our best females and the talented men they are displacing are not having children, so we are bringing about Idiocracy. Suicide either way.
Whatever men say, getting girls into STEM is producing better graduates. Full stop. Statistics prove it. I know it by experience. Female students are usually (relatively!) more disciplined and more studious than their male counterparts. While it is true that girls are benefiting from a school/college culture that constantly encourages and empowers them, often at the detriment of male students, this is enough evidence that women are just as intellectually capable as men and - with the right spurs and incentives - they can outrace them.
Lastly, you should stop thinking that having a (STEM) career is the opposite of being a mother. There are plenty of examples of jobless women who could have all the time in their hands to bring up their children in the best possible way, yet they end up being terrible mothers. And women who manage to juggle between their jobs and their motherly roles with good results.