The premise is that more diversity in a particular occupation, the better. “Strength in Diversity” is the mantra.

Now, no-one’s fighting for more women in the fields of plumber, HVAC, or construction. Where they want more “inclusion” is in medicine, law, and “STEM” — Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math. So the question arises, WHY?

If we use the mantra “Strength in Diversity,” applied to such fields, the only way women could add anything is if they think differently than the men already in the field. This brings up the logical inconsistency. If men and women have, in general, similar thought patterns, then bringing more women into the field will not change things much, and if men and women do not have similar thought patterns, then the notion of sex parity in these fields goes out the window.

Some studies do suggest that men and women do, generally speaking, think differently. Obviously, there are outliers in both groups. In the technology fields, most of the women think more like their co-workers than like typical women, and often have more male friends than female.

While there may be some benefit to ensuring that young girls do not exclude themselves from STEM fields because “girls don’t do computers,” I do not think that that attitude is really prevalent anymore. Girls know that they can study Computer Science, or Math, or Engineering, but just aren’t that interested. Pushing them into fields in which they have no interest will not be doing them any favors either.