Fantastic discussion of how to use PowerPoint in the classroom.
There’s a new magazine aimed at the "advanced maternal age" mom (35 or older). Expect regular articles on amnio and calculating genetic risks.
A really bad idea for a mailbox.
Elizabeth finds that homeownership rates for 35 year olds have stayed constant between 1982 and the present. She asks, "So how is it possible that homeownership can feel so out of reach to
almost everyone I know, even as the homeownership rate didn’t decline
at all? "
Bloggers as public intellectuals. Two from Dan and One from Laura at Geeky Mom.
Why aren’t there more women scientists? It’s not their cup of tea, according to Dan and Megan. Of course, Megan has chosen to compete in male-dominated field (political punditry) right now. She got out of technology, not because she didn’t like computers, but because she couldn’t deal with the guys.
Apt. 11d 
Here follows a bunch of speculation, fueled by dimly remembered figures:
I think that steady homeownership rate is deceptive if the mix of mortgage types and the amount of equity in the homes has changed. The ownership rate may be steady, but the homes are less securely held. I don’t have the numbers at my fingers, but I also don’t think the under-35s of 1982 are the same as the under-35s of the present, given shifts in mobility, job security, and age at family formation. Plus, this figure disguises the fact that during our recent housing boom, people were buying homes at ages when they wouldn’t have even considered it back in the day–think 24-year-old Casey Serin. Also, it became very common for single people to buy homes. Media stories about condo sales to young single women were one of the signs of impending doom.
LikeLike
what Megan actually said was: “..But ultimately I left not because of a hostile environment, or because I worried that it was masculinizing me. I left because I just didn’t care as much as the guys I worked with…”
LikeLike
Yes, that’s what she said. She had a healthier attitude towards her job. She wanted a life outside of work. The guys that she worked with were too intense, and she didn’t think she could compete with that. Could that work the same way with women scientists? They may love physics, but don’t enjoy being in an environment with others (men) that are that are so single focused. Women also know that even if they don’t have kids at the time, they will in the future. Obsession is only possible for those with wives.
LikeLike
I remember a female college classmate back in the 90s talking about how she was practically the only girl around in electrical engineering and she was dealing with some flattering but borderline stalkerish behavior from male classmates. It could have been just the weird last-woman-on-earth-dynamic, but I’d also note that that electrical engineering/computer science would be the low social skill end of the male gene pool, full of obsessives, perfectionists, and Aspergerish types. (My husband has a Palm software-writing hobby and I think I have a good handle on what kind of guy likes to write code and catch software bugs in his spare time. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.)
I think dave s. posted a link to a very good piece recently on why women don’t become scientists, explaining the difficulties of the scientific career ladder, and pointing out what a better deal medicine is.
LikeLike
“Obsession is only possible for those with wives.”
Or single guys with iffy hygiene.
LikeLike
I came very close to drifting into the world of the obsessive techy, but I was saved by circumstance (a town too small to have a peer group if I got geeky) and beer. Though I now drink mostly wine, I’ll never forget what I owe Milwaukee’s Best Light.
LikeLike
Beer saves the day!
LikeLike