A Novel Series for Women's History Month and Beyond

 A novel series I highly recommend is one based on a set of real-life sisters and their amazing accomplishments. If you have not yet discovered Amy Stewart's Kopp sisters series, allow me to introduce you to it.  When you read the books, always take time to read the author's notes at the end about the historical figures featured in the novels and and where the fiction deviates from facts for dramatic effect or because there is no detailed record to work off for certain aspects. You can also learn about the characters' history on her site. 

Girl Waits with Gun is the first of the series. Set in 1914, it introduces Constance Kopp, as the main heroine who foils those who threaten the sisters' household that includes the irascible Normal and the somewhat flighty but very talented Fleurette.

Lady Cop Makes Trouble  continues their story, focusing on the trials and tribulations Constance faces as one of the few female deputies in the United States in 1915, and the only one in her NJ neighborhood.  

Miss Kopp's Midnight Confessions takes us into 1916 with Constance working through new challenges with her career as a deputy and dealing with Fleurette's desire to spread her own wings. Speaking of wings, Norma's interest in homing pigeons (a bit of fiction, the author admits) takes on increasing importance.

Miss Kopp Just Wont't Quit keeps the story going in 1916 with Constance's adventures and unrelenting pursuit of justice. Fleurette also won't give up on her dreams of being on the stage.

Kopp Sisters on the March*  takes place in 1917 and has World War I bring the sisters in contact with new characters and new situations as they get an opportunity to support the war effort and challenge the assumption of feminine limits in new ways.  Much of this novel centers around a real historical  character named of Beulah Binford, a notorious female in her day.

*Another historical novel I just finished reading relates to what the Kopp sisters series touches on -- the young American women who paid their own way to go to France and contribute to the war effort. I recommend Lauren Willig's Band of Sisters. Like Stewart does in the pages following the story, Willig  clarifies her sources and the inspiration for certain characters and events in the novel.

Set in 1918, Dear Miss Kopp is an epistolary novel, a deviation in format from the omniscient third-person narrative form used for the previous five novels, as well as the one that follows it. With one sister in Washington, another in France, and a third travelling around to entertain troops stationed at various camps in the United States, they keep in touch by letter. New characters are also introduced and contribute to the letter-writing or serve as the recipients of letters that Fleurette does not share with her sisters.

Beginning shortly after the war's end in 1919, Miss Kopp Investigates allows Fleurette to come into her own as an investigator. You see that she's really grown up in this book. The sisters also have to come together to help out their widowed sister-in-law and hit on a tremendous plan at the end that is actually based on what they did in real life.

I can't wait for the next installment in the series that should be out toward the end of the year -- if the author keeps up her pace. Each novel is engaging in terms of events, character development, and the insight into the ways in which women had to overcome obstacles to blaze new paths that defined the 20th Century.

Related: To Boldly Go Beyond Barriers

The Tech Gender Gap: 10 Facts

 

Minding the Gender Gap: 10 Facts about Women in Tech

The original version of this article posted on May 3, 2019 and was assigned to the URL that now links to the updated version I wrote in 2021. https://www.techopedia.com/minding-the-gender-gap-10-facts-about-women-in-tech/2/33715 

Assessing the state of women in tech does present a kind of half-full – or more precisely quarter-full – glass perspective. There is definitely still a marked gap in terms of representation in the field and even pay. However, there are also signs of movement in the right direction. So while we do mind the gap, we should also look at what works to narrow it down.

1. The quarter-full glass on the job level

According to the women in tech statistics assembled by Honeypot, the U.S. is ranked second worldwide for female opportunity in tech. But even in this country, women make up less than a quarter (24.61%) of the U.S. tech sector while they make up 46.76% of the workforce across all industries.

That figure is better than the representation women achieved in HackerRank’s survey of over 14,000 professional software developers, which included fewer than 2,000 women. As the notes on the Kaggle data set pointed out, that amounted to just a 16.5% to 83.4% (female-to-male) ratio. But around a quarter is likelier in light of the numbers of engineers in actual companies updated regularly on a spreadsheet in Tracy Chou’s Women in Tech list. Though the numbers vary widely, the average representation for women software engineers at the companies listed appears to fit that percentage figure that comes close to a quarter.

Further corroboration comes from the Wall Street Journal, which cites figures from AnitaB.org, which surveyed over 628,000 people in technology and found women at 24% in 2018, of them a figure that represents 1.09% growth over the previous year.

2. The quarter-full glass on the education level

About a quarter of STEM graduates are female, according to Honeypot, 24.24% to be precise. HackerRank emphasizes the positive here, saying, “young women today are 33 percent more likely to study computer science compared with women born before 1983.” It also says that they are on the right track in studying “the exact same languages that are most in-demand for roles across front-end, back-end, and full-stack, according to our 2018 Developer Skills Report.” So there is progress, and it does make sense to have about the same percentage for graduates as one finds in the workforce. But then there’s the next fact.

3. Women still come up short on the pay level

Women who have positions in tech are not achieving pay parity. According to the Honeypot figures, men in tech in the U.S. are earning $98,265, while women are earning an average of $86,608, indicating a pay gap of 11.86%.

4. Where the glass drops below the quarter rate: in more advanced positions

Even the optimistically worded HackerRank admits “there’s one fact that’s hard to ignore: Women are by far more likely to be in junior positions than men.” They found that one-fifth of women remain in junior positions even when they’re over 35, which translates into their being “3.5x more likely to be in junior positions than men.”

5. Women tend to leave 10 years in

While women may hold close to a quarter of tech positions, the percentage drops for higher level jobs in tech. “Leave rates for women in science, engineering, and technology (SET) peak about 10 years into their careers,” according to Catalyst. This drop-off is very significant, not just for the lack of representation of women at high levels, but because it translates into fewer women in tech positions that would have the power to hire.

6. The glass is only 1/10 full at the hiring manager level

That is borne out by the additional insight on HackerRank’s Kaggle comments. There are far fewer female hiring managers than male ones – just 10.3% among those surveyed. That doesn’t bode well for new entrants into the field connecting with mentors and sponsors to stay on track to advance their own tech careers and avoid the drop-off.

7. Women CIOs are still scarce but have increased

Though there is still only a one in five chance that you’d find a woman in the position of CIO at a Fortune 500 company, that still marks some improvement over the 16% share for women in 2017, according to Boardroom Insiders and represents the best levels it has seen in its tracking over the last ten years.

8. How women CIOs get there

Education appears to be a major factor in women’s advance to the CIO position. Boardroom Insiders found that 40% have MBAs, which is up from 34% in 2017. A somewhat larger number – 51% – have at least one advanced degree. The graduate program route is more popular than starting at the bottom. Just 11% said that’s the way they got to their CIO position, a significant drop from the 19% in that category last year.

9. Progress on the entrepreneur level

In 2018, over 40% of new entrepreneurs in the U.S. were women, according to the 2017/18 Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) report. Sarah Wefald, technical product manager at Laserfiche takes this as a positive sign because “having women tech leaders can have an effect on the entire workforce.” She notes that her own company “was founded by a woman in the 1980s,” when it was considered remarkable, and now women make up nearly half of Laserfiche’s employees.

10. It pays to support female founders

Women at the helm doesn’t only translate into better opportunities for women, but for investors as well. First Round reports a 63% better return for “companies with a female founder” than for those “with all-male founding teams.” As Monica Eaton-Cardone comments, “Thus, betting on diversity is a smart investment. Despite that, we still have incredible disparity in terms of who gets funded, and I believe that women being underrepresented in decision-making roles is a major reason why.” This “creates a kind of self-fulfilling prophecy: Women can’t get access to VC funding, and thus, have a hard time refuting the line of thought that prevents them from getting access.” (Crypto is helping to create gender equality in business. Learn more in How Crypto Can Help Women Gain More Equal Footing in Business Leadership.)

Conclusion

While the glass is currently about a quarter full overall, we have to note where there is movement and what has yet to be done. It is important to open more possibilities for women to not only enter the field of tech but to stay on, advance and lead. That assures not just a more equitable future, but a more profitable one, as well.

Thinking on your feet

I've been assailed by terrible shoe fashion advice through ads and influencer videos that make me believe women have not come a long way, baby, at all in terms of rational dress (see http://www.sageandsavant.com/2018/04/09/background-information-rational-dress-movement/).

Women used to bind themselves in corset that prevented them from breathing properly and even could shift organs out of place, but women today are doing the same kind of thing with their footwear, especially if they are slaves to fashion. So the point of this blog is to counter the really bad and potentially harmful advice that many influencers on YouTube are promulgating in promoting pointy-toed shoes.

These women have sold their souls and your toes out for the sake of the brands pushing this current fashion monstrosity. They recommend women actually torture their feet for the sake of "elongating" the look of their legs.


 Quite frankly, I find point-toed shoes repulsive -- not attractive. The human foot is not at all shaped like this, and picturing feet shaped like that or how they are getting misshapen is not at all attractive.

 Those are what I picture squished into those point shoes, and that i  not a pretty picture. The picture above comes from the video below.

Do you think shortening your calves is a good thing? Well that can happen just from high heels, but when you add on the point toe that the high heels force the front of your feet into, you get even uglier effects like foot pain, blisters, bunions,in-grown toenails, and even really ugly hammer toes. So even if you delude yourself into believing you look great while wearing such shoes, once you kick them off, you'll see your feet are paying the price and making you look worse than you would have if you had worn something that really fits a human foot.

But it's women themselves who opt to torture themselves with footwear that is the antithesis of empowerment. They want to buy into fairy tale fantasies that are as flimsy as the Emperor's new clothes.  At least, that's what Boden's marketing team seems to believe. Here's the ad I got in my email today:

So it's the glass slipper idea that is meant to sell you on a pair of point-toed leopard patterned boots that you would believe will win you a prince and a happily ever after ending. But since they brought up that Grimm's fairy tale, let's take a closer look at the foot fetish at the center of the story and what that entailed for those who tried the slipper.

Unlike the Disney version that showcases a glass slipper left behind by accident, this story features a golden one that the prince traps on purpose. When the step sisters try it on, their mother encourages them to cut off parts of their foot to fit -- very much like women do to themselves in squishing their feet into pointy shoes. Her argument is that they would not need to walk when they are queen, and, indeed, part of the reason high heel originated as a fashion statement for the rich was as proof that the wearer had no need to walk. So here's the central part of the text:

When evening came Cinderella wanted to leave, and the prince tried to escort her, but she ran away from him so quickly that he could not follow her. The prince, however, had set a trap. He had had the entire stairway smeared with pitch. When she ran down the stairs, her left slipper stuck in the pitch. The prince picked it up. It was small and dainty, and of pure gold.
The next morning, he went with it to the man, and said to him, "No one shall be my wife except for the one whose foot fits this golden shoe."
The two sisters were happy to hear this, for they had pretty feet. With her mother standing by, the older one took the shoe into her bedroom to try it on. She could not get her big toe into it, for the shoe was too small for her. Then her mother gave her a knife and said, "Cut off your toe. When you are queen you will no longer have to go on foot."
The girl cut off her toe, forced her foot into the shoe, swallowed the pain, and went out to the prince. He took her on his horse as his bride and rode away with her. However, they had to ride past the grave, and there, on the hazel tree, sat the two pigeons, crying out:

Rook di goo, rook di goo!
There's blood in the shoe.
The shoe is too tight,
This bride is not right!

Then he looked at her foot and saw how the blood was running from it. He turned his horse around and took the false bride home again, saying that she was not the right one, and that the other sister should try on the shoe. She went into her bedroom, and got her toes into the shoe all right, but her heel was too large.

Then her mother gave her a knife, and said, "Cut a piece off your heel. When you are queen you will no longer have to go on foot."
The girl cut a piece off her heel, forced her foot into the shoe, swallowed the pain, and went out to the prince. He took her on his horse as his bride and rode away with her. When they passed the hazel tree, the two pigeons were sitting in it, and they cried out:

Rook di goo, rook di goo!
There's blood in the shoe.
The shoe is too tight,
This bride is not right!

He looked down at her foot and saw how the blood was running out of her shoe, and how it had stained her white stocking all red. Then he turned his horse around and took the false bride home again.
"This is not the right one, either," he said. "Don't you have another daughter?"
"No," said the man. "There is only a deformed little Cinderella from my first wife, but she cannot possibly be the bride."
The prince told him to send her to him, but the mother answered, "Oh, no, she is much too dirty. She cannot be seen."
But the prince insisted on it, and they had to call Cinderella. She first washed her hands and face clean, and then went and bowed down before the prince, who gave her the golden shoe. She sat down on a stool, pulled her foot out of the heavy wooden shoe, and put it into the slipper, and it fitted her perfectly.
When she stood up the prince looked into her face, and he recognized the beautiful girl who had danced with him. He cried out, "She is my true bride."
The stepmother and the two sisters were horrified and turned pale with anger. The prince, however, took Cinderella onto his horse and rode away with her. As they passed by the hazel tree, the two white pigeons cried out:

Rook di goo, rook di goo!
No blood's in the shoe.
The shoe's not too tight,
This bride is right!

Kind of gory that story, and really not what a woman who expect to be able to stand on her own two feet should aspire to, especially not in our supposedly enlightened age.

Related post: https://uncommoncontent.blogspot.com/2018/06/feminine-feet-study-in-contrasts.html

Beyond Pink

[this is a post I originally wrote on another one of my blogs. I brought  it out again here in honor of the month.  ] 
Gayle A Sulike, PhD, a medical sociologist and 2008 Fellow of the National Endowment for the Humanities for her work on breast cancer culture, is the author of Pink Ribbon Blues: How Breast Cancer Culture Undermines Women's Health (Oxford University Press, 2011). Each chapter is followed by pages of footnotes for this carefully researched book that points out the dark side behind the pink ribbon. It is not a cheerful picture, nor a completely hopeful one, as very little true progress has been made in the battle against breast cancer, for all the fanfare of pink products, awareness, and the popularity of "the cause."

Certainly, every woman should read about how mammograms could actually fail women and, in some case, cause harm and should be aware of the risk/benefit ratio, the costs, and the questionable motives of some who benefit.  "Screening mammography is largely responsible for the ever-increasing diagnoses of stage 0 breast cancers, the types that are not technically breast cancers at all." (p.183). Such results stack the deck for the claim that early detection saves lives when the lives "saved" were never in danger in the first place.  In addition to false positives, mammograms can yield false negatives, meaning that the cancer that is there will not be detected. Generally, they are more effective at detection in women over 50 than younger women. In an article that appeared in 2009, "Chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society Dr. Otis Brawley said: 'I'm admitting that American medicine has overpromised when it comes to screening. The advantages to screening have been exaggerated" (p. 20).

Sulike also examines the mythology of the "she-ro" who must rise above her suffering according to the script tied with a pink ribbon. She also touches on "pinkwashing" as a serious problem that gets in the way of true progress. Infantalization of women results from a culture that considers it appropriate to offer teddy bears and Barbie dolls dressed in pink to those afflicted with cancer to show you care. Pink, of course, is the color strongly associated with little girls.  Would men be treated the same way?  Of course, some of this is based on feminist analysis, and reader may just find her take on the significance of Power Puff Girls debatable. But it is, certainly, an intriguing argument.


Her main points are encapsulated both at the beginning and the conclusion of the book. On p. 374 she says:  "Pink ribbon symbolism not only distract the public from the harsh realities of breast cancer and the actions that would be necessary to move toward  its eradication, it also produces a feel-good culture in which the idea that breast cancer is a good cause translates to a belief that supporting it is a good thing that will always lead to good outcomes. The pink ribbon effect demonizes and isolates those who do not happily accept all of the pink goodness the culture has to offer." 

The only weak part of the book is that she does not really build a substantial case for what would work to truly make a difference.  Is it even possible to eradicate breast cancer?  She does say that certain chemicals used by companies are linked to breast cancer, but I'm not quite clear on if she would say that the solution lies there. There are always contributing factors, but so many health conditions do prop up unexpectedly with no known cause. Nevertheless, the book is worth reading for its wealth of information and for its infusion of some healthy skepticism. It's good to  think before going pink or joining up with anything just because it is popular and seems to be  going for a good cause.


I also wrote about pink ribbon marketing last year in

Susan B. Komen for the Cure Criticism Leads to Fallout for Brands

The organization Breast Cancer Action launched Think Before You Pink in 2002 to serve as a watchdog over the pink movement. It calls for action to combat "pinkwashing": the practice of allying with the cause through pink promotions on the very products that contain ingredients linked to cancer. Barbara Brenner, executive director of Breast Cancer Action, states, "Shoppers need to know how much of their money is really going to breast cancer and what's in these products." By drawing the public's attention to the hypocrisy of these companies, Think Before You Pink has succeeded in pressuring Avon to change the formulation of some cosmetics and in getting Yoplait yogurt to go rBGH-free.

For some further reading on this approach, available online, see 
http://m.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2012/10/what-color-is-your-breast-cancer/263459/
http://www.newsweek.com/blogs/the-human-condition/2009/10/13/seeing-red-in-pink-products-one-woman-s-fight-against-breast-cancer-consumerism.html
http://brenna09.wordpress.com/2009/10/26/breast-cancer-awareness-month-does-the-pink-ribbon-take-cause-marketing-too-far/

Any other plain Janes?

Among Charlotte Bronte's claim to fame is her success in going against the grain of beautiful heroines. While her juvenilia did feature the standard beautiful type, in her two most popular novels, Jane Eyre and Villette, (The Professor also features a small and plain heroine, though she is not the central character of the book and is not as well delineated as her later heroines) her heroines fascinate based on what's inside rather than what's outside. They proved her capable of what she promised her sisters, " I will show you a heroine as plain and as small as myself, who shall be as interesting as any of yours." 


I was thinking about this now because it seems to me that literature (and films or television adaptions) are still peopled by beautiful heroines. If the girl was born plain, all she has to do is get the right dress, hair style, and makeup (perhaps also eyebrow shaping) to appear as the beauty she was meant to be.  Typically the one who appears mousy just sheds her glasses, shakes out her hair and gets the right dress to get noticed. 


In contrast, Jane Eyre resists that convention of the ugly duckling blossoming into a swan. When Rochester attempts to buy her gorgeous gowns and jewels, she does not feel the elation that girls typically exhibit when donning such lovely things. Instead, she feels her cheeks burn.  


There is also an interesting take on dressing up in  for Lucy Snowe, the heroine of Villette.  Normally, she dresses in shadowy colors and stays in the background, but on one night she dares to wear pink and spots herself in the mirror as if she had come upon a stranger. But the dress (italicized for the central role it plays in so many Cinderella type stories) does not win her the attention of the man she adores who is smitten by a superficial beauty until he turns his attention to another whose beauty is less showy but is still distinguished from the plainness of the heroine. 


I'm wondering: do any other novel achieve a heroine who does manage to captivate someone in a romantic sense even though she remains  plain? 

GPS, gender, and finding your way

I intend to post my thoughts on the book Pink Brain, Blue Brain, and wanted to first provide some background to some earlier looks on gender differences as background. Back in 2005 I published the following piece on the differences between men and women with respect to asking for directions. The fact that many people now have access to GPS either built into their cars or on their mobile devices now allows both men and women to ascertain their route by asking a device rather than another person. However, the gender dynamics are still in effect, particularly in work situations in which women still earn less than men and in which men still hold over 90% of the  top positions.

Note: of related interest: http://www.bps-research-digest.blogspot.co.uk/2008/11/how-to-give-directions.html

Why Don’t You Just Ask for Directions?     

Picture this:  You are on your way someplace that takes you through a neighborhood you don’t know.   What you read on your directions does not correspond to the streets you see in front of you.  You realize that you must have made a wrong turn.  What do you do next?  If you are a woman, odds are that you will try to call to someone or pull over in a gas station and ask for directions. But if you are a man, you will pull out a map to attempt to pinpoint your location and figure out how to get back on the road you were supposed to be on.  If you are a male driver accompanied by a woman, you may be pestered by companion as she urges you to ask someone how to go, especially if you had to check the map several times.  After numerous unsuccessful attempts to find the way on your own, you may grudgingly comply.  Who is the sensible one here, the man or the woman?  The answer is not so clear.  While the woman may succeed in getting on the right road faster by asking someone, she may also be given the wrong directions.   The man who tries to find the way himself may not always prevail, but he takes pride in not needing to turn to others for help.

            The stereotype that men never want to ask for directions is one that is well founded.  In her book, Talking from 9 to 5 (New York:  William Morrow and Co., 1994), Dr. Deborah Tannen recounts the story of one man’s refusal to admit he was lost, even when there was a real threat to his life and that of his daughter.   He was flying a private plane that was running out of gas and didn’t know exactly where the landing strip in the area was.  His daughter urgently called out, “’Daddy!  Why don’t you radio the control tower and ask them where to land?’” Of course, she meant that he should do just that but did not want to command her father.  Yet, he answered the question she expressed, saying, “’I don’t want them to think I’m lost’” (Tannen,Talking.25). 

While that is an extreme example, it is telling of the lengths men will go to maintain the appearance of being in control of the situation.  Yes, men do prove more adept at the spatial skills involved in using maps and more inclined to taking stock of their position with respect to compass points than women.  It is also true that women generally identify better with verbal directives than visual-spatial ones.  However, the difference in approach between men and women is not just due to gender differences in skills.   As Tannen explains, men’s refusal to ask directions stems from their concern to maintain their image as capable and independent drivers.  Asking for assistance undermines their status as self-sufficient individuals.   In contrast, women in the same situation prove to be only concerned with getting to their destination.  As women, generally, do not feel they have to prove themselves as navigators, they do not hesitate to seek assistance from others to attain their goal. 

            What is striking about this particular gender division is that it “runs counter” to the usual perception of the difference between “male and female styles.” The stereotyped view is that men are task oriented, “focused on information,” whereas women are more process oriented, and “sensitive” to the effects of their communication (Tannen, Talking 27).  As Audrey Nelson reports in You Don’t Say:  Navigating Nonverbal Communication Between the Sexes (New York:  Prentice Hall, 2004), her survey results indicates that women are perceived to “’have a clear perception of the total picture of communication’” (Nelson 22).   However, that perception is out of the picture when it comes to asking for directions.  Rather than being process oriented and sensitive to the connotations of seeking information from others, they are completely focused on the task of getting to their destination.  In light of that, turning to someone else for information makes sense, for it is an efficient means to the end of getting where you wish to go. In the situation of finding one’s way, “the women who ask questions are more focused on information, whereas the men who refrain from doing so are more focused on interaction – the impression their asking will make on others.   In this situation, it is the men who are more sensitive to the impression made on others by their behavior (Tannen, Talking 28). 

Men recognize that in asking directions that they are putting themselves at a disadvantage vis-à-vis the person who grants them the information.  Tannen explains in  You Just Don’t Understand:  Women and Men in Conversation. (New York:  William Morrow and Co.,1990): “When you offer information, the information itself is the message.  But the fact that you have the information, and the person you are speaking to doesn’t, also sends a metamessage of superiority. . . . the one who has more information is” in a superior position  “by virtue of being more knowledgeable and competent.  From this perspective, finding one’s own way is an essential part of the independence that men perceive to be a prerequisite for self-respect.”  It is always better to give than to receive if the object in question is information because the giver demonstrates his superior status based on the wealth that most valuable commodity of all -- knowledge. “Insofar as giving information frames one as the expert, superior in knowledge, and the other as uninformed, inferior in knowledge, it is a move in the negotiation of status”   (Tannen, You Just Don’t Understand 62, 63).  The one who bestows knowledge has a one-up position over the one who must ask for it.  So if you do not want to enter into the inferior position, you want to be the one telling, not the one asking.  Resolving your logistical confusion through the aid of maps in your own possession rather than other people allows you to show not only mastery of navigational skills, but, more importantly, self-sufficiency.  You do not open the way for another to bestow information upon you and thus keep your status intact. 

While you may think it doesn’t matter how you end up getting back on route, so long as you get there, the male concern for image maintenance is advantageous in situations in which they are in fact being assessed.  The difference in approach between men and women has significant ramifications for the world of work.  As Tannen explains in Talking from 9 to 5, female conversational styles can make them appear less competent than their male coworkers.  Of course, there are the factors of quality of voice and body language conveyed by one’s stance.  Yet, another reason why women sometimes fail to make the favorable impression they need to is that they ask questions, seeking explanations from others.  Some women even ask questions about simple processes that they do in fact understand because they intend the questions as conversational openers, a form of small talk.  What they don’t always realize is their questions may be used against them as evidence of their lack of knowledge.   In contrast, men who are conscious that the questions are perceived to indicate ignorance, tend to refrain from asking.  They can then either look the answer up themselves, or, more dangerously, proceed in real, albeit masked, ignorance just as they may continue down the wrong road without asking directions.  In the world of work, the male strategy is more effective in presenting the right impression of competence.  Self-assurance can yield more rewards than honestly working at getting the right answers.  Ultimately, there is real logic to the apparent madness of not asking directions, and there is a lesson for females to learn from the male method.