I’m fairly certain that this story of an initially normal social interaction would have turned out very different had I not been an engineer. Ah, the adventures of being a woman engineer:

A year or two ago, a big group of us (including the Steel Toed Stilettos crew) were going out on the town and our first stop was a pretty typical bar on one of the main streets. Priyanka and I were waiting by the bar to order some drinks and a guy at the bar starts to chat us up. He’s young, early 20s, about our age. He asks us if we’re students. We say, no, but we are recent graduates. We talk a bit more and mention that we are engineers. Usually, I get a kind of surprised reaction and sometimes an “oh, that sounds hard” or “that’s way too much math for me.” Sometimes, mentioning that I’m an engineer completely kills the conversation as it becomes apparent that the topics of interest we have in common is a big fat zero.

However, in this case, it turns out that this guy is also an engineer. This only steers the conversation towards nerdier topics. I start talking about some project I worked on that involved a microprocessor and somehow we arrive at him asking me, “So, how many microprocessors can you program?” Wait, are we having some sort of engineering pissing contest at a bar on a Friday night? Really? Apparently, the answer is yes, and if this is really happening, I’m throwing down. So, I answer: “At *least*… 7.” This was probably slightly exaggerated at the time and is definitely not true any more (I’m a little out of practice). His response: “Oh, I can probably program 3 or 4 microprocessors.”

Clearly, I have won this random microprocessor programming pissing contest which we have just engaged in. But, really, why and how did we get here? Was this guy trying to hit on us or just have a casual conversation? In either case, he failed terribly. At this point, Priyanka and I both realize how suddenly awkward the conversation has become and make our escape to join our friends at a table on the other side of the bar.

Moral of the story: If you’re trying to pick up engineering ladies, “How many microprocessors can you program?” or anything that initiates a kind of engineering pissing contest is most likely NOT an effective pick-up line. There’s nothing wrong with nerdy, but at least try to be a little creative. :P

“You’ve just got to have thick skin.” This is the “advice” I’ve heard from several males when I talk openly about the gender biases and discrimination in engineering. For a long time, I told myself, “Yeah, thick skin, just deal and get over it.” While I understand that the idea is “don’t let it get to you,” I absolutely detest this phrase. Thick skin implies passiveness. Just take it and try to brush it off. It implies helplessness. A mentality of “you can’t do anything to change things anyway, so don’t even try.” I refuse to have that mentality, especially towards something as important as my career in a field that I absolutely love. I refuse to go though life waiting hopelessly for things to magically get better. You have to stand up for the things that are important to you.

There is a certain finesse to choosing your battles, but just letting everything go and not speaking up for yourself gets you nowhere. Sometimes the points can be subtle. Other times, you have to be explicit and initiate that awkward conversation that no one really wants to have. Sometimes, standing your ground and making your point may change your relations with other people, but it has to be done. Relying on thick skin only prepares you for abuse; identifying and addressing the root of the problem is the best way to induce change.

The confusing part is that not all women in male-dominated fields share the same perspective on the best way to induce change and increase acceptance of women in engineering. Particularly, on the common problem of how to integrate women into an established all-male group. I had a female coworker who was unbelievably intelligent, confident, hardworking, and overall, just amazing. We were the only two women in a group at a large engineering-focused company. We were both new to the company/group and wanted to be “part of the group.”

At work, plans were made to go to a bar for a social hour. It turned out to be a sports bar where the waitresses wore skin-tight, low-cut referee shirts and spandex shorts as their uniform; I can’t even imagine what the interview for this job would be like, wtf. When we got there and I noticed how much the setting was clearly geared towards the straight male, I made a comment to my female coworker about it. Her response was to the point of “Yes, but this is what you have to do to be part of the group.” The group happens to be mostly male and this is the kind of place they hang out. Isn’t it better to go with the group even if it’s to a place that isn’t quite fitting to you, rather than completely boycott it and become disconnected? Can’t fight the boy’s club? Then join it! I understand and respect this perspective, but something just did not sit right with me. It seemed so gender slanted for a work-related event at a company that touted its “family friendliness.” I wrestled with it for a while, but didn’t really know what I could do about it.

The next time we had a social hour was at a normal restaurant, where the servers were properly dressed, and I was looking forward to a normal, enjoyable evening. The conversation got going and everything was pleasant. Then one of my coworkers, who had been in the company for a long time, started complaining about our current boss. He told us how under previous bosses at the company the group had gone out to titty bars and used company money to pick up the tab. When I heard this, I felt like someone had just punched me in the face. I started to question, would that have happened if there had been any women in the group? Were they really using company money, that I was now helping to earn, to go get off at some titty bar? Shouldn’t the company be buying the equivalent for women, trashy romance novels or vibrators or something?!

I was angry and conflicted, but I could not brush this one off. I couldn’t stay silent. In an extremely awkward conversation, I told my boss about the interaction. I didn’t give him all the details, just that this coworker talking about titty bars at a work-related dinner did not seem appropriate to me. Since I was still new to the group, I was not quite sure what my boss’s reaction would be. He was actually quite upset and told me he would talk to that coworker about it. I felt relieved that I had spoken up, but I also felt like a snitch. Now, my coworkers would see me as someone that they had to watch what they say around; like I had just lost my cool card or something. As much as this made interactions with that coworker slight awkward, I still knew that it was what I had to do. Part of me wishes I would have had the courage and confidence to tell him directly instead of going through my boss, but I addressed it the best way I knew that I could. In the end, this and a number of other work and living situation issues are what drove me away from that job, and honestly, I’m much happier for it.

If something is truly important to you, having thick skin will not prevent it from getting to you. Once it gets to you, pretending it doesn’t bother you only fuels the fire. And, ignoring it will just make you burn from the inside out (or explode spontaneously). It takes courage to challenge the status quo, but if things are going to change for women in engineering or in any situation, we have to continue to step up and take on that challenge.

I am often confused by the use of “guy” as a generic term for an individual of either gender in some sort of engineering discipline. While working in industry, my manager once said to me “you’re an applications guy,” and my response was “no, I’m not a guy.” He clarified that he meant it in the general sense of person. To him, “applications guy” was a synonym for any applications engineer, so the fact that I was female didn’t play into the equation. It strikes me as odd that “I’m an applications guy” is an acceptable statement, but if I were to just say “I’m a guy,” I would get some very weird looks.

One of my professors also uses “guy” as a generic term. Granted, his first language is not English and he sometimes mixes up words, but his use of “guy” seems to be generally accepted. At first, I thought he was using “EE guy” or “physics guy” in examples assuming that they are by default male. But when he asked another female student in the class “are you materials guy?” I realized that he meant it in a gender ambiguous sense.

Somehow, the inherently gendered “guy” has become a gender ambiguous term, but I do not think it has lost all its male connotations. I know “you guys” is often used in a gender neutral sense and is generally accepted, but referring to one woman as a “guy” just seems awkward. So, what should be used instead? For engineers, this is not too difficult. The word “engineer” alone is gender neutral and fairly descriptive. So, “I’m an applications engineer” works fine or “I’m an EE” if we want to keep it short and cute. Even with scientists, “I’m a materials scientist” or “I’m materials” if you want to embody your entire field; both are understood. So, why waste extra words just to cause gender confusion?

I like to keep it short and simple: “I’m EE.”

I was talking to one of my relatively new male classmates and somehow we got onto the topic of last names. I mentioned that if I got married, I would not change my last name. There are a variety of reasons for this: consistent identification for publishing papers, cultural identity, I really like my last name, and it has been part of my identity my whole life; why would I want to change it? When I mentioned this, my (white American) classmate was completely taken aback. He didn’t understand why I wouldn’t want to change my last name.

So, I gender-inverted the situation. I asked him, “What if your wife-to-be asked you to change your last name to hers, would you change it?” His reply was to the effect of “Absolutely not, but that’s just not what people do.” So, just because it’s a loose cultural norm, it’s ridiculous for me to want to keep my last name, a huge part of my identity, just because I’m a woman? And it’s even MORE ridiculous for me to ask him to change his name even though that is exactly what he is asking me to do? Something seems absurdly lopsided here.

What gets me is that many people, both men and women, have completely accepted this. I keep seeing most of my female friends changing their name once they get married. This is absolutely a personal decision and I can only speak for myself, but I wish more women considered the option of not directly taking their husband’s last name. Maybe hyphenating is the best option or maybe it actually makes more sense for the husband to take the wife’s name. Gasp! Luckily, I think things are slowly changing. I see a lot more hyphenated last names. I know a handful of women that kept their last name after getting married. Also, divorce and remarriage is so common now-a-days that name changing just doesn’t seem worth it.

The bigger point (spurred by the engineer in me) is that we should not just accept everything as is. We should question the norm, probe deeper into why things are done the way they are, and change them for the better. When an old solution isn’t working anymore, we reevaluate and revise it. I think that should apply to not just products and technology, but also to things like politics, social interactions, language, and culture. Things don’t change over night, but they have to start somewhere.

So, what’s in a last name? A HUGE part of your identity. I’m definitely keeping my last name, and if you don’t like it, you probably shouldn’t plan on marrying me. :P

As a grad student, my wardrobe is fairly casual: jeans, t-shirt, and some accessories. I like to be comfortable, but still try to be somewhat fashionable. As an engineer, I fully acknowledge and, yes, embrace my nerdiness. I recently found the intersection of these two attributes, fashionable and nerdy, in a very unexpected place: Forever 21.

While looking through the massive amount of clothing at Forever 21, I noticed an “I Only Date Nerds” shirt.  I instantly identified with this shirt (and ended up buying it). I soon discovered that this shirt was not an anomaly. There was a whole line of nerd shirts! And, not just depicting guys as nerds, but recognizing women as nerds too! I’m not sure when this shift happened, but being nerdy is finally cool and even cute! Nerds around the world rejoice, hurray!

This one only depicts the guy as the stereotypical nerd, but there’s nothing saying the girl isn’t a nerd too.

Not sure if there a deeper meaning here besides: “Look, a nerdy Snoopy!” but it’s cute.

Nerdy *is* the new cute!

If Hello Kitty is doing it, you know little girls will follow suit. Way to be a role model Ms. Kitty.

Apparently, wearing thick glasses is still the biggest nerd stereotype, which is completely inaccurate. (Some of us wear contacts now.) And, not to give Forever 21 too much praise since they have also come out with shirts that poke fun at nerds and perpetuate the negative stereotype. But, all-in-all, I think it’s great to see nerd appreciation going main stream. Let’s hope it’s not just a fad.

In a standard signals and systems course the topic of image processing using signal analysis is usually covered. Signals and systems can be a very math heavy course and gets abstract fairly quickly. Since many people are visual learners and like to see the real applications to this abstract math, image processing is a great way to make those connections and see math/engineering really do something interesting.

In our class, our awkward male teaching assistant started talking enthusiastically about image signal processing and how much we were going to like it. This particular teaching assistant was often excited about random things we learned in class, but was extra excited about this topic. He showed us an example of the image we would be working with. A “classic” picture in image signal processing commonly referred to as Lena, a face and bare shoulder of a young woman in a large feathery hat. He went on to explain that the girl’s face and the feathers in her hat provided contrasting textures, good for seeing the effects of image processing on various textures. He then proceeded to explain the very interesting history of this image. The guys (and I do mean all males, not the general “guys”) that were doing research on this topic originally needed an image with various textures to work with and, so, used something they had lying around the office: a playboy centerfold. Yup, that hat is the only thing Lena is wearing. Though, they “modestly” cropped the picture to just her face, which is still the standard picture used today.

To me, this exemplifies the boy’s club background in math, science, and engineering. I was appalled that something so blatantly aimed at the immature straight male would still be standard in our present-day, supposedly gender-unbiased curriculum. There are no barriers for women to be respected in math, science, and engineering today? Bullshit. Women are still fighting against the boy’s club mentality rooted in the history of these technical fields. And, unfortunately, only time and women who refuse to be turned away by such an environment will change that.

For the assignment in my signal and systems course, I decided to make a statement by using my own image for the assignment. I wanted to counter the female porn star image with a male porn star, but the only one I knew was Jeff Stryker the gay male porn star (maybe another statement about our society) thanks to one of Margaret Cho’s comedy acts. So, I found a full body nude picture of Mr. Stryker and “modestly” cropped it above the waist. I then did the image processing assignment using this picture, and wrote a note to our teaching assistant about how I disliked the connotations of the Lena picture and decided to use my own porn image that better fit my perspective. I still do not know if he really got the point I was trying to make, but I’ve never gotten to look at gay porn for a homework assignment before, so at least it was interesting. All I know is that if I ever teach a signals and system course, I definitely won’t be using Lena as my image of choice. I’m still debating whether I’d require my class to the use Jeff Stryker image or not, but we’ll cross that bridge when we get there.