Salon interviewed Danica McKellar on her gender based mathematics textbooks.
The books are trying to encourage girls to get active in mathematics; by telling them that being smart and learning math is the sexy thing to do. The interviewer shows concern that sexing up math may be damaging to girls, although equating intelligence and sexiness is probably pretty far from the worst thing we can do.
It’s basically a new way of saying math isn’t cool, so let’s make it seem like it is. So the theory goes, if the kids think it’s cool they won’t be afraid to learn it, and to excel. McKellar just happens to be using sex.
But that really does not explain why the gap happens in math. Math isn’t cool, but I don’t remember the English nerds being all that popular either. (If they were… boy did I miss that boat). If it just wasn’t “sexy” to be “smart” the issue would be seen across most school disciplines, but it’s exclusive to math.
McKellar touches on the really issue but doesn’t linger long.
If you ask a boy who’s getting a B-plus how he’s doing in math, he’s likely to say, “Oh, I do great.” You ask the average girl who’s getting an A-minus how she’s doing, she’s more likely to say, “Oh, I dunno, I don’t really get it.”
No confidence in one’s ability to actually perform with mathematical skill. Is there a lack of confidence because it’s not sexy? No.
There is a problem with stereotypes here but it has more to do with gender essentialism than ‘cool’. Why are girls not confident? Because we consistently undermine the ability of girls to learn math.
Math is a man thing. In days long ago it was simply too tough for us feeble minded females and up until extremely recently it wasn’t that we were feeble, no, our brains were just better equipped for other things.
Of course now females are outperforming in the classroom we apparently just aren’t getting interested in the sciences because our brains don’t adjust to that type of work. Yeah, talk about the ever changing goal posts.
