I would have thought it might be the residual effect of academia being dominated by males for a long time–not just in sciences but across the board. I was in grad school in the humanities in the 90s, and the English department was mostly composed of male professors. It was a different time, but we move ahead by degrees, and change happens gradually.
As for joining iNat, since it’s very much removed from my field, I was mostly worried about appearing deeply and profoundly dumb. I couldn’t say if that fear is also gender-related or just “me-related.” I’m glad I took the chance. :) It has been fun.
The “primary goal in operating iNaturalist is to connect people to nature” (from the iNat home page). I think that exploring whether or not that goal is being accomplished for all potential participants is worthwhile. Does the way iNat operates discourage some people from participating? Are females less inclined than males to participate or remain active on the site for some reason? Do they actually participate less than males or is this a false premise?
I don’t know – I haven’t seen any evidence that iNat discourages involvement by anyone (quite the opposite) but the questions are worth asking if only to identify ways the website might be improved.
Incidentally, I work in wildlife management and I’ve personally seen the transition from a truly male-dominated work environment to one where the genders are close to equal. Progress does happen although sometimes so gradually that we have to make an effort to notice.
@karen33317
i obviously dont hold it against the many male acquaintances ive made on here, but i am sometimes acutely aware of the demographic difference. guys, guys, guys, so many guys! whats up with that!
while jwidness only stated in the original post “why is there a trend ive noticed?” which is entirely neutral and someone could say something similar about anything - maybe ive noticed that people on inaturalist skew toward autism and related disorders and wondered about the implications of that out of curiosity (i just made this up, but you know what im getting at i hope)
BUT!!! although the original post didnt say much about gender dynamics, if you read anything on this thread its clear that some people feel that sometimes, there are gender differences, such as but not limited to women in science sometimes being sidelined.
i really have no idea what compelled you to make a comment saying “who cares” and then do it again when there was literally a discussion about the thing in question. who cares? you can literally count them and see their usernames.
well, anyway, i mostly wanted to just see people’s takes here, because i know theres been a real push to get girls interested in pursuing scientific fields for their education and careers (a while ago i looked in on what girl scouts are up to nowadays and theyre making a push i see, new programs and stuff) and i feel like a potential gender disparity on inaturalist could point to more than a lack of girls pursuing science formally (its not for everyone!), but a lack of participation at even a recreational level. which wouldnt surprise me at all…
i dont think the site has much, if any fault for any gender disparity. i think women may be less attracted to inaturalist only in that they may be less attracted to the whole thing to begin with. you can be entirely anonymous on this site. and like, yeah, mansplaining happens, but its not at all the default communication here - when i see it, i think “what the hell is that guys problem??” because at least my experience has been that when a lot of men explain things on here, its full of useful information that is welcome, like a real person speaking to a real person, and not redundant condescending nonsense. just… as long as men are more comfortable and open to being engaged in science than women are, there are going to be more men in those spaces than women even when institutional and/or interpersonal misogyny is not so much an issue.
Fun topic! Thanks (those above) for contributing. I like the “Who cares?” answer best. In college, the science building with my department had two bathrooms on each floor in the 1970s, both men’s rooms on odd numbered floors and one for women on even numbered floors. I guess the men were just the odd ones. Seriously, gender bias has a long history in science and I’m sure someone has written papers on the topic. (Why are boys considered good at math and could not take “home-economics” in my day?) Fortunately, some of us in the world are allowing the world to change around us without freaking out; I won’t comment more than this phrase on American politics because it speaks for itself. I’d hide my name too but I’m too well known already said this male!
EDIT: To clarify, I think this is an important topic for discussion. I just wanted to know what OP thinks, even if their current thoughts are not satisfactory.
EDIT 2: It seems ~20 of the respondents in this thread are males trying to explain a disparity where they are the majority.
The person that introduced me to iNat was a woman. The iNaturalist Explorers guided nature walks seem to be roughly equal splits. Children seem to be more female than male.
5 of the top 8 observers in my area are female.
Men do seem to dominate IDing in my area. I won’t say anything about men spending long hours looking at photos on the internet.
My impression here in NZ is that there is a pretty even representation of both sexes at every level and area of iNat. I look at my tag lists for certain taxa, and only one (moths) stands out as being male dominated.
[edit: Actually, I thought maybe the “people I’m following” would give a good representation, and it turns out I am following 24 females out of 83 total, so maybe it is a thing afterall!]
As someone who fields a lot of flagged comments I’m going to kindly request we don’t share examples here. These types of things are almost always better first addressed one on one with the person (and actually often a point of confusion about how iNaturalist works in the first place).
I don’t see directing a lot of traffic to invite additional comments or judgment being very productive. So if you find people being impolite/condescending/judgemental in the way they explain their IDs or whatever on iNat, please flag the content or reach out directly to help@inaturalist.org
My wild-ass guess: autism spectrum disorders (and subclinical features) are much more frequent among men than women
Common misconception, but it’s not true! Autism is diagnosed more often in men than women, for a whole host of factors. But as diagnostic sensitivity improves, autistic women are being recognised when they would previously have never been diagnosed. The gender skew is decreasing all the time and it’s most likely equal in reality.
I definitely do agree that prolific iNatters are probably more likely to be autistic than the general population! There’s just no reason that has any link with gender. :D
Who cares? That’s a varied question but in this case, people only care out of curiosity, not because they want to take a stance against bias, or otherwise act against it.
I don’t have a ton to add to the conversation but I will say this: I am literally the ONLY person I know with any interest in this! I’m a woman working in an office of almost all women and sometimes I force them to look at a pic I’m particularly proud of, often taken during a break, since our office is surrounded by some really good spots for plant and insect observations. No one cares (but they indulge me).
But on the other hand, I don’t know any men who are interested in this either. When I first got into the hobby about 10 years ago, I was still on Facebook and would post pics there but there was little interest in it from anyone. Somehow I only discovered iNaturalist this year, but it’s been a great place to add some of the older observations. The person I interact with here the most is also a woman and is fairly close to my area. I have a brother who is somewhat interested and will send his observations to me sometimes for assistance since he moved to a different state, but he’s not interested enough to join.
I learned to love botany and entomology years ago as a Biology major and I love to be outdoors and to garden.
I assume if there really is a gender discrepancy (which does not matter to me at all), it’s because this activity tends to attract more men than women, but I don’t have anything from real life to back that up. Kind of like how there are undoubtedly lots of men who knit and crochet, but that activity tends to lean female, from what I’ve observed. Shrug.
I think it needs to be clear what we are talking about. Should it matter the gender of someone who wants to participate here? No, definitely not, all should be welcome. Does it matter if there are barriers to access that disproportionately affect a gender or other similar group? Yes, of course that matters. we want an inclusive community.
Another idea based on anecdotal experience: iNat is very photo-based, and on group field trips I’ve been on (mostly birding and diving), it’s been usually mostly men with big camera rigs.
i think it’s herd behaviour. If you have a party and all the women are in a group talking, and all the men in another group, when a man walks in he will tend to head to the guys group, and a women would head to the womens group. There are exceptions, but it’s instinct to group or herd towards like…
Yes, men with oversized telephoto lenses. Boys and their toys. That does seem to be common. (I say as one who developed tendonitis and rotator cuff injury from the one I haul around.)