The moment I began noticing it, I couldn’t stop.
Every time I walked into a physics classroom or lab, my eyes instinctively scanned the room, counting how many women there were. Usually, it was a number that could be counted on one hand in a matter of seconds. No one else seemed to notice or care. The professor would begin lecturing as equations slowly filled the space. To me, the most important "variable" was not the one being written on the chalkboard; it was the gender of all the people around me. What once felt like a coincidence slowly became a reality that I had to face every single day.
The absence of women in a STEM
The absence of women in a STEM field is often dismissed as a problem that time will eventually solve itself, but I’ve seen firsthand that this isn’t the case. This is an ethical failure, not just a statistical one. There is this pressure from the system that pushes women out and in doing that, we lose great potential as well as their contributions to our future. This systemic force is reflected in research done by the National Science Board which found that "micro-biases" accumulate over the course of a four-year degree. This data suggests that by a woman’s senior year, she has likely navigated hundreds of these tiny moments of friction. The Society of Women Engineers suggest that some people call the path from school to career a "pipeline," a more accurate term for this experience is a "chilly climate." It’s an environment that feels unwelcoming in ways that are often hard to put into words until you’ve experienced it first-hand. I’ve seen this feeling show up in labs, where a woman’s suggestions are double-checked while a man’s choices are accepted or where a woman’s voice is simply overlooked in group discussions. We must consider the ethics of an environment where a woman’s path to a degree is filled with more obstacles than her male classmates. If our system only rewards those willing to tolerate a “chilly climate,” we are losing talented scientists who are being forced to choose between their passion and their personal well-being.
The loss of women affects society
The loss that we are experiencing is not only affecting the individuals involved but also, our society. These voices that are being silenced are the ones we need to hear if we want to build our future. According to the U.S. Department of Commerce, equal representation in a STEM field is critical because “the people who design our roads, program our AI, and build our renewable energy systems are the ones who decide which problems are worth solving.” At the end of the day, science isn’t just about abstract theories; it’s a tool we use to solve real problems for real people. When the people designing our future all have the same background, the solutions they develop will naturally be limited to their own shared experiences.
As I’ve gone through my physics courses and prepared for a career in engineering, my understanding of the “common good” has changed. It’s not just some vague idea about being a nice person; it’s the actual responsibility to make sure the benefits of technology are shared by everyone. If the engineers working on new technology don’t consider the specific needs of everyone, then that’s not really the common good. School may teach us the science, but ethics tells us why we are doing it and who we are doing it for. In the past, we have already seen the ethical consequences from this kind of thinking. For decades, car safety tests were conducted using only male-sized crash dummies, and medical research often ignored the fact that women are affected differently than men with certain diseases. These aren’t just oversights; they are the result of a system that didn’t have enough women present to ask the right questions. When we fail to include women’s perspectives, we risk building a world that only works for the people who designed it. Real innovation requires more than just technical skill; it needs a mix of different life experiences to make sure the solutions that are created work for everyone.
Fairness of the environment
The common good is not just about the final products that are created; it is also about the fairness of the environment where those products are made. Many people like to think of science as a fair competition where the best ideas always win. However, research shows that there are hidden obstacles built into the system that have nothing to do with how good you are at physics. One study referred to by the Society of Women Engineers found that when professors were asked to rate the competence of two resumes that were identical in every aspect, the one with a man’s name was rated as more "competent" than the one with a woman’s name. As a woman in physics, I feel like I’m not just expected to be good, I’m expected to be extraordinary, just to prove that I’m worthy of being in the field. This extra pressure does more than just tire us out; it slows down the progress of science by making it harder for new ideas to break through. If it is a struggle just to exist in the field, we end up denying the creative thinking that drives real scientific progress. The Cancer Research Institute indicates that diversity can be crucial for progress and innovation. When we let stereotypes dictate who can be a scientist, we are literally leaving life-saving ideas off the table. Ethically, we shouldn’t be asking women to be superheroes just to get the same respect as a man in a science field.
The gender assumption made in STEM fields
The assumption is often made in STEM fields that the gender gap is simply a result of men and women having different interests. The argument is that we should just allow people to make their own career choices, even if it means we do not have a 50/50 split. However, this assumes that our interests are something we are just born with, instead of something that is changed by our surroundings. It is much easier to choose a field when you feel invited into it from the start. The American Physical Society states that, a student’s “physics identity”—their sense of belonging and interest in the field—is shaped by their environment long before they ever decide on a major. If a student walks into a lab and feels like an outsider because nobody looks like them or the environment feels unwelcoming, then their decision to leave isn’t really a choice—it’s a response to a room that wasn’t built for them.
Mentorship is the Key
Another key part of this is mentorship. During my time at the College of Saint Benedict, I’ve seen firsthand how a supportive voice can change a student’s path. Unfortunately, the Society of Women Engineers notes that a lack of female mentors is a top reason why women leave the STEM field. It’s hard to stay in a field when you don’t see a path forward. If we don’t have women in those mentor positions now, the students who are deciding what they want to do, lose the support system that they need to keep going. That initial “scan of the room” shouldn’t have to be a discouraging moment for a new student, but without representation, that’s exactly what it becomes.
As I start my engineering career this June, I feel a double responsibility. Of course, I need to be a great engineer and do solid work. But I also have an ethical responsibility to help change the culture of the rooms I walk into. It’s not enough to just “get through” the system myself; I have to be intentional about clearing the path for the people following me. Real ethics in science means ensuring that the door stays open long after I’ve walked through it.
Closing the gender gap in science is about more than just data; it’s about making sure our future is shaped by a diverse group of people. The “common good” only works if everyone has a voice in defining what that looks like. We have to stop looking at diversity as an extra credit assignment and start seeing it as a necessity for progress. At the end of the day, gender inequality doesn’t just hurt women—it hurts our ability to find the best solutions for the problems we all face.
References
Beach, Michael, et al. “Women in Engineering and STEM: A Review of the 2025 Literature.” Society of Women Engineers, Society of Women Engineers, 2025, swe.org/magazine/women-in-engineering-and-stem-a-review-of-the-2025-literature/.
CRI Staff. “Women in STEM: Shaping the Future Together.” Cancer Research Institute, Cancer Research Institute, 24 Apr. 2024, www.cancerresearch.org/blog/women-in-stem.
Jilani, Zaid. “How Diversity Improves Science and Technology.” American Association for the Advancement of Science, 17 Nov. 2021, www.aaas.org/news/how-diversity-improves-science-and-technology.
“The Stem Labor Force: Scientists, Engineers, and Skilled Technical Workers.” National Science Board, National Science Foundation, May 2024, ncses.nsf.gov/pubs/nsb20245/.
“Women in STEM: Representation Matters.” Commerce, U.S Department of Commerce, 21 Mar. 2024, www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2024/03/women-stem-representation-matters.