<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe, but you seem to interpret a lot of posts as an attack on non-STEM majors when they aren’t even arguing the importance of STEM. For instance, when I and others have said that math olympiad winners should be admitted everywhere, you got all bent out of shape as if this was an attack on non-STEM pursuits. Clearly, there are other arguments as to why someone might say a math olympiad winner should get into any college, the most obvious one being that it is likely that a math olympics winner would be within the top X of math majors being selected or Y technical majors for the typical (X,Y) of math/technical majors that colleges admit. Or to contrast one of your recent statements, they should be more than a longshot to get in a top 20 university. </p>
<p>As for the “stereotypical geeky STEM major,” it seems that for many the threshold for crossing into geek territory is defined by one’s own level of talent and commitment. People who perform less academically than you are limited intellectually and/or not disciplined; those who perform better are geeks who are limited because they are too focused on academics. I saw this particular conceit at MIT. </p>
<p>Relax, us “STEMmies” won’t take away your lipstick like they wanted to do in college.</p>