5 ms·

Try this one: "Women just don't want to be in a high-profile, financially rewarding career with tons of growth potential, because their parents raised them to b

by meesles 11y ago

Try this one: "Women just don't want to be in a high-profile, financially rewarding career with tons of growth potential, because their parents raised them to be interested in what they thought 'proper ladies' should be interested, e.g. not tech." I think a large part of this problem is generational. As we see female numbers increase every year, eventually it'll reach some sort of equilibrium. It's like asking 20-30 years ago why there weren't more women in business. I think it was just because until it becomes a socially regular thing to see, only the exceptional will try to break through that glass ceiling. Like the article says, forcing inclusion of women who aren't interested or particularly good at the topic won't help anyone.

deleted 11y ago
[deleted]
- talmand 11y ago
  I think you are on a different subject than what the rest of this chain of comments seem to be talking about.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
scrollaway 11y ago
This is pretty much the issue. People keep trying to point the finger, blame somebody so that everything can be fixed. Feel-good finger-pointing indeed. But "women in tech" has a lot of factors and they're not the same worldwide (most of the articles talking about this are so incredibly US-centric, but that's another issue). There's hiring policies, positive discrimination, education choices, social factors, etc... You can't point the finger. Society evolved that way. If you stop giving a shit about gender, instead of focusing so much on it, you're a lot more likely to get results. What bothers me most is that it's not inherently wrong that there's a disproportionate % of male/females in a certain factor. There's also a disproportionally high amount of white people in Europe. Is that somebody's fault? Is it a problem? If some form of inequality is actually caused by a malevolant actor, then sure, you got someone to blame now and you have something to fix. Something concrete. Sometimes that's the case. But "women in tech" ratios are certainly not the result of sexism. And I find the lengths guys will go to to get more women involved in their sector creepy and revolting, more so than anything else.
- arrrg 11y ago
  This is magical thinking. If I just wish it to go away it will … sorry, that’s not how the world works. Past oppression, even if it didn’t exist anymore today (but it actually still does, so even that doesn’t work out!) extends from the past into the future! That’s what’s so devilish about it. You cannot just be gender/color/whateverblind and hope the problem will just go away. You have to actively work to make the world a better place.
  - scrollaway 11y ago
    > This is magical thinking. If I just wish it to go away it will … sorry, that’s not how the world works. And it's not what I said. I said caring so much about gender just serves to reinforce the problem. You're more likely to get results ignoring it than focusing SO MUCH on it and forcing quotas. The article explains why really well. But yeah, well done on disregarding the rest of my post. I don't know why I bother writing more than 140 characters if it's just to get cherry-picked.
    - arrrg 11y ago
      But that’s exactly what I say! You are engaging in magical thinking. Wishing the problem to go away won’t make it so! Really not, that’s not how the world works and that’s not how past oppression extends into the now. You have to care about this and think about this deeply. I also agree that quotas are a dirty and inelegant solution and I always love to hear alternate approaches (e.g. two-phase selection process including first a call for papers plus targeted outreach followed by a blind review phase), but the point is you have to think deeply about the problem and actually engage with it deeply. It’s a hard problem – just wishing it to go away won’t make it so. That’s magical thinking. You have to think about it more not less. Also, quotas, while a very dirty solution, are to my mind a hell of a lot better than status quo. But as I said, I’m sure it’s possible to do better than quotas – but not by just ignoring the problem.
      - scrollaway 11y ago
        You're reading something in what I write which isn't actually there. It's possible you're either looking for a wrong opinion to correct, or it's possible I'm just really bad at explaining myself. I did read what I wrote again and nowhere do I say that we should all just "wish" the problem away. Please try to read everything in context.
rayiner 11y ago
The percentage of CS degrees awarded to women has fallen by half since the 1980's.

by meesles 11y ago

deleted 11y ago

[deleted]

talmand 11y ago
I think you are on a different subject than what the rest of this chain of comments seem to be talking about.
deleted 11y ago
[deleted]

scrollaway 11y ago

This is pretty much the issue. People keep trying to point the finger, blame somebody so that everything can be fixed. Feel-good finger-pointing indeed. But "women in tech" has a lot of factors and they're not the same worldwide (most of the articles talking about this are so incredibly US-centric, but that's another issue). There's hiring policies, positive discrimination, education choices, social factors, etc... You can't point the finger. Society evolved that way. If you stop giving a shit about gender, instead of focusing so much on it, you're a lot more likely to get results. What bothers me most is that it's not inherently wrong that there's a disproportionate % of male/females in a certain factor. There's also a disproportionally high amount of white people in Europe. Is that somebody's fault? Is it a problem? If some form of inequality is actually caused by a malevolant actor, then sure, you got someone to blame now and you have something to fix. Something concrete. Sometimes that's the case. But "women in tech" ratios are certainly not the result of sexism. And I find the lengths guys will go to to get more women involved in their sector creepy and revolting, more so than anything else.

arrrg 11y ago
This is magical thinking. If I just wish it to go away it will … sorry, that’s not how the world works. Past oppression, even if it didn’t exist anymore today (but it actually still does, so even that doesn’t work out!) extends from the past into the future! That’s what’s so devilish about it. You cannot just be gender/color/whateverblind and hope the problem will just go away. You have to actively work to make the world a better place.
- scrollaway 11y ago
  > This is magical thinking. If I just wish it to go away it will … sorry, that’s not how the world works. And it's not what I said. I said caring so much about gender just serves to reinforce the problem. You're more likely to get results ignoring it than focusing SO MUCH on it and forcing quotas. The article explains why really well. But yeah, well done on disregarding the rest of my post. I don't know why I bother writing more than 140 characters if it's just to get cherry-picked.
  - arrrg 11y ago
    But that’s exactly what I say! You are engaging in magical thinking. Wishing the problem to go away won’t make it so! Really not, that’s not how the world works and that’s not how past oppression extends into the now. You have to care about this and think about this deeply. I also agree that quotas are a dirty and inelegant solution and I always love to hear alternate approaches (e.g. two-phase selection process including first a call for papers plus targeted outreach followed by a blind review phase), but the point is you have to think deeply about the problem and actually engage with it deeply. It’s a hard problem – just wishing it to go away won’t make it so. That’s magical thinking. You have to think about it more not less. Also, quotas, while a very dirty solution, are to my mind a hell of a lot better than status quo. But as I said, I’m sure it’s possible to do better than quotas – but not by just ignoring the problem.
    - scrollaway 11y ago
      You're reading something in what I write which isn't actually there. It's possible you're either looking for a wrong opinion to correct, or it's possible I'm just really bad at explaining myself. I did read what I wrote again and nowhere do I say that we should all just "wish" the problem away. Please try to read everything in context.

rayiner 11y ago

The percentage of CS degrees awarded to women has fallen by half since the 1980's.