After reading Lara K. Schubert’s series of articles on the role of gender in structural engineering in
the February and April issues of STRUCTURE magazine, I find myself in complete disagreement
with the author. Neither earthquakes nor hurricanes nor gravity care about gender and, regardless
of the sex of the engineer, clocks stubbornly refuse to tick more slowly as deadlines approach.
There is an old axiom that correlation does not imply causation. A proclivity towards analytical
thinking and the use of logic are common traits among engineers not because the majority are
males, but because these traits are critical to success in engineering. The use of logic to solve
problems is what draws many, both male and female, to the profession in the first place. If a
larger percentage of men than women either naturally possess these traits or wish to further
cultivate them through their career, it should be irrelevant. Women greatly outnumber men
in both nursing and elementary education, but this does not provide evidence of discrimination
against male nurses or elementary school teachers. Qualities that lead to enjoyment and
success in these fields, such as being nurturing, are found more often in women, and in a free
society people will naturally be drawn towards careers that match their interests and skill sets.
It is the nature of the profession not the gender of the professionals that shape the culture.
The key for a well functioning society should be that analytical women and nurturing men
can and often do find success in engineering and nursing, respectively.
I also found the two anecdotes of gender discrimination from the sciences (physics and neurobiology)
as evidence against structural engineers to be misleading. Besides coming from professions
not in the field of engineering, both examples came from an academic setting, whereas the vast
majority of structural engineers work in industry. An ‘old boys club’ is more likely to be found
in academia, where tenure exists, than in a highly competitive industry made even more so
by the last economic downturn. Discriminating for any superfluous reason will cost structural
engineering firms both talent and business. In this way, the free market is able to punish bad
actors and help suppress discrimination in a way not possible in academia.
James Lintz P.E., LEED AP