Lower in right: Detroit Section of the Society of Women Engineers, September 1952
This Post was inspired by an awful Women in STEM event I went to last year in which the moderator laughed when a panelist opened up about pumping challenges at work. During this event every woman presenter has prominent pictures on their slide deck showing their weddings, husbands, and babies and barely any pictures of themselves in their (frankly interesting and amazing) careers.
Stuck in the Recruitment Era
While touted as an effective intervention, there is little to no hard quantitative studies of voluntary membership in women-focused professional organizations has had on career success. Given the abysmal retention of women in STEM careers, more scrutiny of the content offered by women’s professional organizations (that often charge high fees for conferences and admissions) is needed.
Women in STEM evens and the development of professional organizations became a popular intervention to challenge sexism in STEM in the 1970s, and 1980s. The initial focus was on assisting women at gaining entry into STEM. Less attention was paid to retention and navigating STEM academic and workplaces.
I have been in academia for 15 years, and I have yet to attend a Women in STEM event that meaningfully addresses the realities women face once they are inside these institutions—sexual harassment (don’t listen to STEM influencers), discrimination, salary negotiation, legal rights, or labor protections such as the PUMP Act and paid leave. Broader structural issues, including unionization, wage disparities, health insurance, ageism, and politics, are largely absent, as is any effort to organize collectively for change. Instead, these events overwhelmingly focus on grant writing, résumé polishing, networking, mentoring, and polished narratives about “diversifying STEM”. Not what happens when we are really in these spaces.
I joined SWE (Society of Women Engineers) as an eager freshman in 2010. Yet the only meaningful event I went to was a screening of “Top-Secret Rosies”, about how women’s contributions to WWII have been minimized. Afterwards, a few women spoke candidly in the Q&A about the mental anguish they felt getting Cs, and I felt some solidarity and support in this as I was academically struggling.
SWE has been criticized for pandering to conservative members. For example, when Roe v. Wade (which guaranteed federal protection to abortion) was overturned, people condemned SWE’s tepid response (“No statement that SWE issues will change the outcome of this ruling and our members need to vote their minds on the issues important to them”). The comment section condemns SWE all around:
This is the BARE MINIMUM of an acceptable statement… and you still manage to tell your members to “respect the opinions” of those who want to take away their fundamental rights 😡 […] Also, as a women’s advocacy org, how are you actually advocating for your members? Where is your direction to groups doing the ground work on this issue? Where is your list of steps your members can take to get involved? Other organizations like the Association for Women in Science condemned the Overturning of Roe v. Wade and announced intent for advocacy.
SWE’s Revised 2022 Instagram Post on the Dobbs decision, issued after members’ outcry.
SWE seems to have made little effort to move away from recruitment and entry initiatives. Why go to the SWE WE25 Convention?:
Connect with recruiters, companies, and organizations to learn about career opportunities
Increase your knowledge of emerging technology trends and best practices
Learn about career development and even get help with your resumé
Be a part of the world’s largest career fair for women and allies in STEM
Perusing the 2025 full schedule revealed some of the worst examples of “Puffy Pink Feminism” including The Engineer Wears Prada (“This session will discuss appearance-based biases, being authentic in the workplace, and embracing femininity in the work environment, especially in science and engineering”), Transform Your SWE Section From Drab to Fab, and Beyond the Label: AI Techniques for Healthier Beauty Choices. Twenty-three events focused on career development and leadership, including executive presence and influence.
While more than a dozen events addressed diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging, though only a few appeared to directly engage with race or sexism and some were led by problematic companies like Chevron and Dupont which have polluted indigenous land. Most had broader themes such as “FOMO Is Real: Tips for Improving Inclusion While Remote Working” , “How to be a STEMinist”, or “Brains, Beauty, and a Bit of Chaos:”—(“societal norms often suggest that certain careers, like engineering, require sacrificing femininity”).
Twelve events centered on technology, AI, and emerging tech (problematically for us future workers was one panel…“The Robots Are Coming… Empowering Teams to Embrace Change”), while over a dozen were devoted to industry-specific and technical deep dives. At least two dozen events focused on finance, communication, productivity, work skills, and work–life balance (for example, “Are You Thinking of PIE?: An Emotion Management Technique”). Some tech talks were led by weapons manufacturers like Boeing. Keynote speakers were superstar women including Dr. Kimberly Jones, Deputy Division Chief at NASA’s Marshall Space Flight Center; Melanie Lang, Co-Founder and CEO of FormAlloy; and Thy Tran of Micron. While thier accomplishments are laudable, most women in STEM will not reach these ranks.
Plus as I pointed out on Instagram, they had no covid protocols!
Don’t Make Me Go!
Women in Tech Conference Harvard. The Large lecture hall, stadium seating, and positioning the women in the front of the room makes it harder to sustain dialogue.
Younger college-aged women in STEM, who often attend such panels, just can’t relate to the experiences of older, established female leaders with families. Often, they will bring in the someone who has had outstanding and unusual career success by the age of 35 and has married a man and has small children. Here are some candid reddit responses:
A candid quote from “This is why your “Women in Tech” event sucks”
Don’t make me sit through another talk on the lack of diversity in technology and startups. Issues of technology, diversity and inclusion are a regular part of my career and do not suffer from an awareness problem, thanks. Can you please teach me how to do something awesome or educate me about something new? And by all means, do arrange for your diversity speaker to visit a room full of startup bros and give them the diversity talk instead?
Stop pushing your corporate sorority version of feminism on women working in startups. If a startup has less than 15 employees, the females working there are not protected by federal discrimination laws that cover gender-based discrimination, and your methods will cause more harm than good between male founders and female employees.
Other women have expressed concern about the lack of discussion of sexual harassment. Even in STEM fields with gender parity among students or workers (medicine, for example), they are still considered “male-dominated” because leadership remains male-dominated, which is a significant predictor of sexual harassment. These environments often have a tolerance for this behavior, and no explicit guidelines on sexual harassment in regard to promotion. In a podcast, Frazier Benya remarked that:
“Lifting the Veil”: Authentic Conversations in STEM Spaces
Women’s Studies Class at Pomona College. The setup of round desks, small groups, and conversation appears to facilitate authentic dialogue.
Recruitment and retention of represent fundamentally different challenges and therefore require different interventions. While many Women in STEM initiatives continue to emphasize recruitment, far less attention is paid to what happens once women are already inside STEM institutions.
Even at the collegiate level, participation in women-focused professional STEM organizations appears to have little measurable impact on career readiness. Yet women in STEM have expressed a desire for more substantive, gender-specific discussions in professional organizations—particularly those that address power, inequality, and institutional barriers rather than surface-level professional development.
Qualitative research among academic women in medicine suggests that targeted interventions can yield meaningful benefits, particularly for academic promotion. One persistent barrier to women’s advancement is the lack of sponsorship, including access to senior faculty willing to write the reference letters often required for promotion. Participants described how structured programs facilitated sponsorship by connecting them with more senior women who could advocate on their behalf.
However, access to these benefits is frequently limited by membership or participation fees, raising questions about equity and accessibility.
Importantly, increasing women’s awareness of inequality and power differentials within the workplace can itself be an effective intervention. In one qualitative study of women participating in a leadership program, participants described the experience as transformative, providing them with the language, confidence, and strategies needed to recognize and respond to gendered dynamics at work:
“The program was an eye opener for me because I felt as if a veil was lifted and I finally saw how under-represented women are in my organization. We have 30 project managers and only 1 woman – me. When I give a presentation, they drill me with more questions. At first, I thought it was me, but my co-workers noticed it too. In meetings, men would take the seats at the table and women would sit behind them. I remember thinking this can’t happen anymore, so at the next meeting, I started sitting at the table. The program gave me courage and tools to manage those difficult situations.
Take Feminist Science Studies
Feminist science studies classes were my salvation during my engineering degree. It was the first time I could articulate the turmoil in my head. However, there's not much data for how many women in STEM take Feminist Science Studies. Likely only a fraction of tech/engineering women are exposed to feminist science curriculum, though these studies become crucial for addressing STEM's gender gaps.
There is little helpful guidance for women looking to find strategies to succeed in STEM, especially very technical spaces. And I’m not talking about how to make a resume, how to find a mentor, or apply for jobs. I’m talking about how to recognize power differentials, sexism, racism, —How to “lift the veil” so to speak.
I drifted away from Women in STEM events feeling like they were useless and the leaders didn’t care about me. Where there was 0 mention about factors that drive women from STEM. Everything seemed like a fairytale, just work hard enough and get a 6-figure job, and “Lean IN” and you’ll do fine. Yet, when I looked to the feminist science studies department, I finally found the authentic, genuine discussions I NEEDED.
More on feminist science studies next week!
College freshman year I took my first feminism class , and in day one the professor was like the way this classroom is set up (it had a bunch of individual desks) gives all the power to the instructor not the students and I was like I was in the right place! She moved the class to a conference room with a round set up!
I wish I could say I am surprised by this, but alas... I am not. The names for some of the sessions are downright insulting. Great article highlighting this issue, which is also present in the "self-care" framed in-services, etc. that we get fed in healthcare.