20 ms·

What Really Keeps Women Out of Tech

• dang 11y ago
  This is a solid article that deserves a reasonable discussion, so we've turned off flags on it. Please keep the thread substantive and respectful.
  • douche 11y ago
    So, this is unflaggable and should be discussed, but is buried on the fifth page? Is there something in the ranking algorithm that is dinging it, over other older posts with fewer up-votes?
  • belovedeagle 11y ago
    I didn't get a reply last time I asked this in the same circumstances, but... Will you also be flag-protecting articles which take different viewpoints? I ask because I've never seen a thread on any other topic or expressing any substantially different view on this topic have flags turned off, but perhaps that's just observation bias on my part.
• jkyle 11y ago
  Computer Science is now the top major fro women at Stanford. [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10366681 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10366681
• ElComradio 11y ago
  I see this as an echo of the makers and takers debate. "Give me a job." "MAKE me feel comfortable." "I am at your mercy." ... This the subtext I read. Other people want to create their own world; when someone tells them no or gets in their way, the attitude is "fuck you" not "change to accommodate me." This reaction may be biologically ingrained as a difference in the sexes; I am not sure- But I rarely, if ever, come across articles about women who have been fed up with some job and formed their own companies with other fed up women and strove to put their former coworkers/employers out of business, whereas for hackers "I'll show you!" seems a very common motivator. We should be trying to give women (and men) more confidence, integrity and fortitude, and quit with the shaming and guilt tactics.
  • Itaxpica 11y ago
    http://www.tableflip.club/ http://www.tableflip.club/
    • ElComradio 11y ago
      That's the right attitude. Of course, once their companies grows to a certain size they will be forced by law to diversify their workforce and then they are back in the same situation. Not the case? Then this problem isn't as endemic as it's being portrayed.
  • pgeorgi 11y ago
    > But I rarely, if ever, come across articles about women who have been fed up with some job and formed their own companies with other fed up women and strove to put their former coworkers/employers out of business http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1168182/Catfights-handbags-tears-toilets-When-producer-launched-women-TV-company-thought-shed-kissed-goodbye-conflict-.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1168182/Catfights-... It wasn't in IT, but it happened for many of the same reasons as stated here. The outcome is just one of several possibilities, and the media field may be more prone to have divas (although IT has too many divas of all sexes, IMHO), so I'm curious how the tableflip subculture will fare (hopefully much better).
    • ElComradio 11y ago
      This is the thing, though. We are being told that it's just crappy for women in tech; we should be seeing female web devs, mobile devs, devops, product people, etc. banding together and doing things Their Way, and reading a bunch of glowing articles about how much better things are now, and how that creepy old boss who stared at their boobs a lot wishes he was nicer, and that kind of thing. I am unaware of an example of this actually happening, so it makes me very skeptical this is as big of a problem as we are being told.
• zamalek 11y ago
  We've known this for a while, it boils down to: barbies. Fixing this problem is really, really hard. Assuming I gave my daughters equal access to both barbies and chemistry kits, which would they choose? Kids want to fit in with their friends. Boy nerds get beaten up, girl nerds get ostracised. What does that lead to? The child choosing their gender stereotype (applies both ways) so that they can fit in. It's what the herd is doing and results in girls avoiding engineering and boys avoiding, say, nursing. It's a systemic disease and is highly contagious. One possible solution is an elementary school where the entrance requirement is determined by the parents: girls get barbies AND chemistry kits. Boys get toy cars AND sewing kits. Their social group shouldn't be determined by gender, rather interest.
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  • uiwei09 11y ago
    "Boys get toy cars AND sewing kits." So to fix problems you would screw Boys aka male gender ? How much retard are you ?
    • dang 11y ago
      We've banned this account for breaking the HN guidelines.
      • wtbob 11y ago
        Did he actually say something terrible, or did he just commit a thoughtcrime in public? In this sort of discussion, one never knows. I didn't see the original comment, so I have no idea. But, given the context of this discussion, I am concerned that there is a decent possibility that he wrote something not outrageous, but simply contrary to the current received wisdom of young Bay Area Californians.
        • patio11 11y ago
          You can see the comment by turning on show dead in your profile. I'll save you the trouble: it adds nothing to the discussion then uses a slur.
• Mithaldu 11y ago
  So the salient point to me seem to be: Girls are put off by how computer culture styles itself in nerdy ways. Ok, i can kind of get that. On the other hand, i don't like it much because she seems to be saying "hiding positive expressions about things you like could be helpful". I'm all for increasing diversity, but that should happen by bringing in more things and widening horizons. If that means "Sex and the City", then yes, please. The article does also kind of lose its red thread when she compares offputting styling with outright attacks against her. Maybe she's trying to be less contentious by not outright calling them out as bullshit that should get people shitcanned by HR. But really, that's what should be said about that, not comparisons with star wars posters. All that said, i like the bit she mentions at the end, about introducing computing earlier. If done emphatically it can have a real chance of leveling the playing field.
  • gaius 11y ago
    i don't like it much because she seems to be saying "hiding positive expressions about things you like could be helpful" Quite. The person who happens to like sci-fi isn't motivated by excluding anyone; they like it because they like it and will share their enthusiasm with anyone. Has that person intentionally done something wrong? And if not why should they be censured for it? That is the elephant in the corner of the room here. There is no conspiracy to keep women out of tech, never has been, and demonizing decent people for innocent things, doesn't ultimately help anyone.
    • Rusky 11y ago
      It's not so much the fault of any individuals, as it is just a difficult situation overall. Ideally there would be both sci-fi enthusiasts as well as enthusiasts of other topics, so that more people can find common interests.
    • mcguire 11y ago
      "The person who happens to like sci-fi isn't motivated by excluding anyone; they like it because they like it and will share their enthusiasm with anyone." You sure about that? I know quite a few people who are seemingly only interested in science fiction and gaming it its various forms and aggressively disinterested in anything else. Maybe you know some, too: people who use terms like "sports ball" and whatever the current incarnation of "mundane" (as a noun) or "muggle" is. Believe me, it's no more appealing than hanging with a group of, say, serious football fans (for the appropriate value of "football"). I don't feel the need to demonize anyone, but decent people doing what they feel are innocent things can successfully masquerade as a conspiracy for as long as you care to watch.
• gaius 11y ago
  if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines This would seem to be a bit of a bait-and-switch... If you aren't interested in "computer parts and tech magazines" then what exactly is it about computing that makes you want to do it? "For the money" is a valid answer of course, a job's a job for most people, but let's call a spade a spade.
  • VLM 11y ago
    Its a prop for being low social status. If they wanted masculinity instead of low social status, they would have used football posters and GQ magazine for props in their thought experiment. I'm not quite sure what a prop would be for low social status women.
    • hueving 11y ago
      >Its a prop for being low social status. Its a prop for having a functioning brain. Other than the star wars and science fiction stuff (which I haven't seen at any tech companies I've worked at here in the bay), the rest of the props indicate that you have a genuine intellectual interest in the field. We don't make fun of NASA for decorating their offices with space paraphernalia or claim it means a low social status. Frankly I'm not interested in people coming into this field who are stupid enough to think that people genuinely excited about what they do have a "low social status".
    • gaius 11y ago
      Do you mean "prop" as in holds something up or "prop" as in, a thing from a scene in a movie? Because I am having some difficulty in parsing your comment.
      • coke12 11y ago
        A "prop" as in a piece of scenery used in a play or movie. In this case nerdy posters are used as props to give a certain vibe.
• williesleg 11y ago
  The real question is what keeps men out of women? Sites like nytimes.
• sonabinu 11y ago
  I know I am in a great work place when I don't know all the characters in Star Wars but still feel included.
  • lechuga 11y ago
    greedo shot first
  • wahsd 11y ago
    I have to admit, I'm kind of sick and tires of this fanatic mania of an obsession with fantasy stories. It's like some retarded fixation. It's so obsessive and annoying when someone makes a trite star wars reference and everyone laughs or feels compelled to laugh
• jug5 11y ago
  Their desire to not work in technology keeps them out of tech.
• jkyle 11y ago
  Upon hearing de Blasio's announcement, my initial reaction was mandatory programming classes for high school is as unnecessary as mandatory calculus. After reading the article, I'd update that opinion. I still don't feel it should be mandatory for a basic High School degree, but perhaps forming a track for college bound students that includes programming (and calculus, AP english, etc.) and requiring that track to graduate with honors would be a good positive incentive. Programming & algorithms is a pretty advanced academic topic. Requiring it for graduation would set up a lot of students to fail or become disillusioned with what education has to offer them. Much like if Calculus were required.
  • jonesb6 11y ago
    My high school had an abhorrently bad AP CS program. The teacher was a hobbyist who had no business teaching the subject and in fact turned off the majority of the students to CS, especially the girls. I fear anytime we make something mandatory in American education it will only exasperate the terrible education system that we have and ultimately do more harm then good.
• pavornyoh 11y ago
  > What really keeps women out of Tech? It is because they don't want to be there. The opportunity is there for everyone to take thus men and women. I actually think women have an advantage in this space and it is up to them to see it and advantage of it. As a woman, I am tired this. If you want it, go and get it. There shouldn't be any special treatment. Prove you deserve to be at the table, prove you deserve to be there based merits etc.. Not because of gender, race etc. People are going to wonder why this conclusion? Because when people see you as a women trying to achieve something, a lot are willing to help and push you. Don't moan about it, go ahead and just get into Tech if you want it that bad.
  • dang 11y ago
    This is too generic a comment to count as substantive discussion. It would be better if it engaged with the specific content of the article. Edit: When I posted this, the comment consisted entirely of its first paragraph.
    • pavornyoh 11y ago
      @Deng, My point is Women are every bit as talented, smart, and tenacious as men. The focus on women is good in that there are women that just need to go for it - reference to the article however broad my initial response was.
  • brc 11y ago
    I tend to agree with this. For whatever reason, girls just don't like the work. When I stated studying, the ratio was 50:50 split. By graduation time, it was down to 80:20 as he girls transferred into different courses or dropped out. I was friends with many - as they changed or dropped out they all said they don't like the subject matter or the type of work. By the time we all started working, it was further down to 90:10. My office recruited a lot of female grads, we had a female department head who positively discriminated. One of my first mentors was female. In that respect I think my early experience was atypical. But they kept dropping out as time went on, transferring into different streams/jobs. There are some things that need to be done - particularly at helping parents understand their school age girls like of STEM - but ultimately I don't think it's worth trying to socially engineer and entire field to be 50:50 when you'll struggle to find that many women who want to study it, learn it and work in it for decades.
• JesperRavn 11y ago
  This was a very well written and balanced article. I want to contribute a reason why I think that many men in tech hold back from fully endorsing this viewpoint. The reason is that there is a very fine line between saying that you don't have to be nerdy to be in tech, and failing to acknowledge that in general being nerdy is a disadvantage in society, and many people found a refuge in tech where they were mocked and often bullied outside[0]. To fail to acknowledge this is to risk promoting the same negative attitudes towards nerds within tech, as exist outside it. So I would say that we should all encourage tech to be as open an welcoming as possible, and to avoid any implication that you have to have a certain personality, appearance or interests to succeed in tech. But we shouldn't dismiss the traits of people who currently are overrepresented in tech as a "stereotype", much less a "negative stereotype". I also don't think this is what the author was suggesting. As the article says, "stereotypes are only partly true, and women who actually take classes in computer science don’t hold the same prejudices as women who get their ideas from pop culture." [0] E.g. see http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/08/programming-saved-me-from-bullying http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/mar/08/programmin...
  • tptacek 11y ago
    Speaking as a nerd who grew up in the early 1990s: persecuted nerds do not have the right to (in any way) cordon off computer science as a refuge for their culture. But a lot of male nerds think they do!
    • makomk 11y ago
      Do persecuted non-nerds have the right to (in any way) cordon off computer science as a refuge free from nerdiness? Because that's what articles like these seem to be suggesting we'd need to do, by saying that nerd social cues like Star Wars and geeky T-shirts are excluding women.
      • tptacek 11y ago
        I think that's an overwrought reading of the article, for two reasons: first, the article isn't prescriptive about Star Wars, and second, it's reporting simple facts; whether you feel comfortable about it or not, nerd culture's coupling with software development does alienate potential entrants to the field. But let's not bother deploying dueling readings from the article, and instead see how much you and I actually disagree: I do not in fact think it's reasonable to suggest that individual software developers should avoid nerd signifiers to avoid alienating people. I feel safe presuming we agree about that. Do you feel like it's reasonable for companies to avoid aggressive identification with nerd culture? To not ask candidates what their favorite Star Wars movie is, or to try to balance out outings and fringe benefits so they only appeal to sci-fi fandom?
• briholt 11y ago
  > female students are more interested...if they are shown a classroom...decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor > If the actor wore a T-shirt that said “I CODE THEREFORE I AM” and claimed to enjoy video games, the students expressed less interest in studying computer science than if the actor wore a solid shirt and claimed to enjoy hanging out with friends So all we need to do is overhaul computer science's anti-women culture is remove computer magazines, computer parts, computer games, futurism, and coding.
  • wtbob 11y ago
    > So all we need to do is overhaul computer science's anti-women culture is remove computer magazines, computer parts, computer games, futurism, and coding. Best comment on this submission IMHO. Making a subject more welcoming to folks who aren't actually interested in it just seems ridiculous. I wouldn't want a physician who doesn't actually care about bodies and biology; I wouldn't want my care designed by someone who isn't really into reliability, moments and materials; why would I want software written by someone who doesn't hunger and thirst to manipulate symbols and code?
• hueving 11y ago
  This article is discursive. It talks about modern issues we need to deal with (current image of computer scientists), but then goes into an outdated story of direct harassment she received at Oak Ridge. The latter is irrelevant to discussion at hand.
• drakonka 11y ago
  "female students are more interested in enrolling in a computer class if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines." The "neutral decor" sounds awfully boring for a computer classroom. I love art, nature posters, coffee, and plants; but when I imagine a computer classroom in both of these styles the former is infinitely more appealing.
  • MollyR 11y ago
    I don't really understand why they think all females hate star wars. I love it, I even had a Darth Vader 3d puzzle. I also know a lot of women who like star wars, anime, and "geeky" stuff. It really sounds like they want to remove nerd culture from the tech industry.
• rayiner 11y ago
  I had a hard time with this when I was in software, because I didn't enjoy video games or sci-fi or a lot of the things my coworkers did. I have nothing against those things, but I feel like in the industry it's pretty common to adopt these things into the work culture instead of trying to keep the workplace more neutral. I would liken it to working at an office where everyone is really into sports. I'll watch the occasional college football game, but I'd be pretty alienated working at an office with sports stuff hanging on the walls where people expected you to watch the game every weekend in order to fit in.
  • greggman 11y ago
    I 100% want more women in tech so this is only a comment on the star wars posters side of the thing making video games is/requires programming so there's bound to a be a large overlap in programmers who are interested in video games. Sci-fi inspires lots of people to get into programming. From wanting to create R2-D2 and C3PO to wanting to create projected holograms, wanting to create tricorders, computers that can take voice commands, touch surfaces, fancy new interfaces, virtual reality, AI, and many other topics touched on in sci-fi that are all directly related to programming. Sports are not directly related and do not directly inspire most jobs but sci-fi does directly inspire many programmers to program and probably many other STEM careers. video games also inspire many programmers to program since video games are programming.
• bjornstjerne 11y ago
  > In fact, Dr. Cheryan’s research shows that young men tend not to major in English for the same reasons women don’t pick computer science: They compare their notions of who they are to their stereotypes of English majors and decide they won’t fit in. I wonder how long it will take for humanities departments to adopt a more inclusive culture? Why must our obsessive hand-wringing be be reserved exclusively for computer science and engineering, which are mostly hidden and do not set the wider cultural narrative (for the most part).
  • gaius 11y ago
    Why must our obsessive hand-wringing be be reserved exclusively for computer science and engineering, which are mostly hidden and do not set the wider cultural narrative Because now there's money in it. No-one cared about this when the IT department was at the bottom of the corporate pecking order. No-one cares that refuse collection is almost exclusively male, but that's a job of real social importance...
  • DanBC 11y ago
    Not sure about universities but both nursing and teaching have several campaigning groups to get more men in.
  • ilaksh 11y ago
    As a white male who was at one time considering a double-major in Computer Science and English (it was a dumb idea for me for several reasons) and who therefore attended both English and Computer Science classes, I think the other issue that was mentioned in the article is more immediate. Which is that just the sheer numbers of male students or female students in particular subjects is overwhelming. For example, in my American Lit class, there were literally three male students including me. The funny thing in that class was that at least half of the subject matter was basically about how the white male was evil. But I definitely didn't fit in there, even without the subject matter. And its not that the girls treated me differently, they didn't -- but I knew I was different. Because I was surrounded by girls. So I think that just the fact of the momentum of having lopsided student counts of males versus females has a huge effect. People do need to fit in and being with people who are really just like them is a big part of that. I think the stereotypes do have a big impact too, but its a double-whammy -- even when girls might not really be influenced by the stereotype, the reality of being the only female or one of a small group of females surrounded by young men in their classes will make them question their place. So I think the social dynamics have more to do with it than people realize and I think this is a good article.
• mwhuang2 11y ago
  I'm a hardcore fan of My Little Pony. Gender stereotypes mean nothing to me.
  • Mz 11y ago
    Yet, it appears that you will assume that we will assume that you are male. Why? Because you are on HN? Is this not buying into gender stereotypes? (I am a woman. I am sometimes referred to as "he" on HN. I am quite open about my gender and it is specified in my profile. But the default assumption here is that anyone talking must be male -- because tech. This is accepting a stereotype.)
    • rewqfdsa 11y ago
      Let's suppose that most HN readers are men. There's no obvious gender signaling in your username. (It's two letters long, after all.) What's wrong with someone using the male pronoun as a default until being corrected? Do you expect commentators to read a user's profile before choosing a pronoun for that user? That would be a big efficiency loss for no real benefit. It's unfortunate that this default bothers you, but it's not the responsibility of anyone to prevent offense-taking on the part of another.
      • Mz 11y ago
        It doesn't hurt my feelings. It does, however, make it harder for most women to participate here. The correct way to handle it is to either find out my gender or speak as if you do not know what it is instead of assuming I am male. If you do not know my gender, it takes very little effort to speak in a way that admits you do not know it: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-fool-believes.html http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/04/what-fool-be...
        • rewqfdsa 11y ago
          > It does, however, make it harder for most women to participate here I've seen many people make this claim, but I haven't seen anyone back it up with evidence. What do you mean by "harder"? Do you mean "more difficult"? In what way? Right now, I believe claims that tiny linguistic differences create meaningful barriers to female participation in technology are all specious. I could be convinced otherwise, but have seen no evidence that might move me. > If you do not know my gender, it takes very little effort to speak in a way that admits you do not know it English is not structured to be gender-neutral. I'm not going to use awkward circumlocutions to avoid the possibility of offending someone.
• rewqfdsa 11y ago
  This gem is in the comments: > The average programmer spends only about 30 percent of his/her time working alone. That's nowhere close to my figure. In fact, I can pretty much _only_ program alone. Individual investigation and discovery is most of the fun in the field.
  • douche 11y ago
    There's a lot of faffing about and bike-shedding that occurs in the other 70% of the time, but very little work gets done.
  • jonesb6 11y ago
    Not trying to create a positive feedback loop here, but I concur. My personal experience could point to as much as 95% of "programming" time being entirely independent once taken into account: reading articles/guides/tutorials, debugging, "playing around with" new tools/languages/frameworks.
    • rileymat1 11y ago
      I suspect that it varies by environment. I have worked in environments where it is 95% alone and other environments where it is 95% collaboration. Some places actually do "pair programming".
  • tptacek 11y ago
    Software developers are not unique in spending lots of working time alone. Plenty of other careers, virtually all of them with something closer to gender parity, demand extensive, solitary contemplation.
• lexcorvus 11y ago
  Over and over, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues have found that female students are more interested in enrolling in a computer class if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines. "Tech" isn't a single thing. If you want to make non-geeky spaces for tech, go ahead and do it. But lots of geeks do like tech, and they understandably make geeky environments. Why can't everyone, as the bumper sticker helpfully puts it, coexist? I think they can. But I also think that the association of geekiness with tech isn't a random quirk of history, but rather indicates a common origin. The kind of personality and psychological profile that predisposes one to an interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics also predisposes one to geekiness. Moreover, geekiness isn't gender-blind: men are simply more likely than women to be geeks. Indeed, people on the autistic spectrum are especially likely to be geeks, and the overrepresentation of males among autistics is incontrovertible. [1] There's nothing wrong with creating non-geeky tech spaces that cater to non-geeks (male and female alike)—indeed, I think it's an excellent idea, and not only because it's generally more welcoming to women—but let's also let geeks be geeks. [1]: http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/introduction/gender-and-autism.aspx http://www.autism.org.uk/about-autism/introduction/gender-an...
• 0x49 11y ago
  if i wanted to become a hair stylist (an occupation primarily done by women), i would need to accept a culture that was different than my own...so why cant the same happen with geek culture? The article also goes into many stereotypes and many women arent going into computer science based on these perceived sterotypes. If we were talking about any other group, the words "racist", "sexist", Or "bigot" would be thrown around and used to describe the group not accepting the culture. This is a tell-tale sign that it is a power-play move to gain control over another group of people. I also thought that we were supposed to be accepting of everyones culture. Does this only apply to the privileged few???
  • tptacek 11y ago
    Because two wrongs don't make a right.
    • oldmanjay 11y ago
      I want to be clear, is the original wrong here geek culture? The context is a bit tricky and I'm having trouble unpacking this.
      • tptacek 11y ago
        No: the comment was dramatically edited after I responded to it. You're not missing anything.
        • oldmanjay 11y ago
          thanks! I assumed since you generally make clear sense something must have gone wrong.
• natvod 11y ago
  Ok so I'm a girl who codes/programs and I'm my take on the issues she raised: Stereotypes about STEM fields putting girls off I can only talk about my own experience but I saw very few negative stereotypes about STEM fields growing up. Definitely not enough to put off girls. However, while I did start coding at a young age, I didn't apply my skill to a work/business purpose until my twenties. Why? I think this issue affects both genders actually. I was simply never exposed to people or situations that showed me you could built really cool projects/businesses with code. I never encountered anyone/anything until ~20 that inspired me to take it seriously. Maybe it has something to do with my gender but I think a lot of people these days are being forced way too early to commit to an education/work track without being given to chance to explore what their options are. It's hard to discover you like a topic by learning it a classroom. I think co-ed / internship programs at a much younger age will help a lot. It definitely would have helped me discovered my true passions younger. About being feminine I don't feel un-feminine in any environment where there are more guys than girls. Rather, I think the problem is, the professional/business world as a whole rewards and values masculine traits (competitiveness, talking highly of yourself and accomplishments, etc.) much more than feminine ones. Even in dress, women are encouraged to dress like a man (power suits, solid colors, etc.) in professional settings to be taken seriously. Thus as a girl, you're forced to act more masculine to achieve business goals. But it's hard to suppress your natural state of being. Additionally girls are still expected to (and want to) act feminine in their personal relationships so women "who want to have it all" have to toggle back and forth between being masculine and feminine. It can be exhausting.
  • ronjouch 11y ago
    For non-native speakers wondering like me, urbandictionary says STEM = Science, Technology, Engineering, Math
  • Lost_BiomedE 11y ago
    Good post. As a male, I have the same issues that you have in your last three paragraphs. I am masculine but do not feel the need or desire to spray alpha maleness constantly. When the pendulum swings back to sales reps having to perform to eat, I think much of that will settle down a bit.
• dclowd9901 11y ago
  > Over and over, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues have found that female students are more interested in enrolling in a computer class if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines. Sans the "general interest magazines" (so vanilla, it makes me want to barf), this sounds like a rather pleasant work environment. I'm so used to working in a dark cave with Boba Fett stand-ups everywhere, it'd be nice to work in a place with more greenery, natural tones and airiness. Nest's offices were a lot like this, and were one of the factors I liked about working there.
  • rewqfdsa 11y ago
    Let's suppose I worked at a desk next to yours, and one day, I brought in an elaborate lego Millennium Falcon to put next to my monitor. Would you support a policy that required me to remove this icon of geekdom in the name of making the workspace more welcoming for women?
    • dclowd9901 11y ago
      I wouldn't require any sort of thing, but given a decor of clean lines, natural colors and greenery, I'd definitely question your aesthetics.
    • mindcrime 11y ago
      Here's a thought: If we, as an industry, started to move away from this "everyone in one big shared bullpen" / open-plan model, and started giving people individual offices again, would that make things better? Because now, you, as, say, a female programmer, are free to decorate your office in pink and with "Sex In The City" posters, and issues of Cosmo or whatever (if that's what floats your boat) while your co-worker can have Doctor Who and Star Wars posters, and electronics magazines, blah, blah (or vice versa). Personally I think that one of the best way to accomodate the uniqueness that makes us all individuals, is to embrace that individual nature and give people solo offices. Of course, that's not the only reason I advocate for private offices, but it's hard not to think that it would help in this regard as well.
• vacri 11y ago
  > Yet I wonder how many young men would choose to major in computer science if they suspected they might need to carry out their coding while sitting in a pink cubicle decorated with posters of “Sex and the City,” with copies of Vogue and Cosmo scattered around the lunchroom. Vogue and Cosmo!? As a 'feminine' counterpoint to the supposedly masculine 'computer parts' and 'tech magazines'!? This is "Science. It's a Girl Thing"[1] all over again: "To get women into STEM, you have to show makeup and fashion". Fuck this view of fashion being a fundamental part of the female psyche. The article has some good points in it, but I think it overplays "women like fashion" and underplays "my computer time was gatekept by sexist arseholes". [1]https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Science+it%27s+a+girl+thing https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=Science+it%27s+...
• yummyfajitas 11y ago
  Is it true that there is a "rise of pop-culture portrayals of scientists as white or Asian male geeks"? I've seen a little bit of TV this year - every hacker I saw was female, and most were goths. Doing a google search of "top TV 2014" and looking up the ones that are likely to have a hacker as a character, I discover "Arrow" (female hacker), NCIS (female hacker), 24 (female hacker), Criminal Minds (female hacker), Person of Interest (male and female hacker), Agents of Shield (female hacker) and The Strain (female hacker). Why do we believe that pop culture portrays scientists or computer people this way at all?
  • mpweiher 11y ago
    NCIS LA: Female hacker -> cool. Male hacker -> bumbling idiot.
    • bduerst 11y ago
      That was probably just the writers trying to use an inverted trope: http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InvertedTrope http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/InvertedTrope
      • mpweiher 11y ago
        What's inverted about "bumbling idiot male hacker"?
        • robwilliams 11y ago
          >a trope that typically applies to males is applied to a female character, or the other way around (Gender-Inverted Trope) If the trope is "basement dwelling male nerd = good hacker" then they're inverting it and making the female a good hacker.
          • mpweiher 11y ago
            They're both excellent hackers. In addition, she is cool, whereas he is a bumbling idiot responsible for comic relief.
• maus42 11y ago
  >Over and over, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues have found that female students are more interested in enrolling in a computer class if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines. Art and nature posters, plants and general-interest magazines do not sound neutral to me.
• forgottenpass 11y ago
  Am I the only one here that finds more issue with the open secret embedded throughout this article? The article is written from an assumption that we're powerless to overcome the desire to brand ourselves by the outward facing image of our chosen interests. I should be careful not to state I'm not taking the position covered by the well-worn pre-rebuttal in the article. I'm not scoffing at this phenomenon. It's real and I'm wondering: why aren't we trying to make kids immune to it? Instead all I see is people that want to exploit it and steer people into selecting careers such that the superficial representation found on a spreadsheet makes the commentariat happy. e: It just comes across as working to makes your metrics look good, without reaching the underlying goals the metrics are less-than-perfect at measuring. If there really are societal issues keeping people that would have otherwise entered a "tech field" out, shouldn't fixing it be about helping everyone overcome the obstacles in achieving that step of self-actualization? Instead I just see social engineering designed to balance the gender ratio.
  • rewqfdsa 11y ago
    The basic dogma of the modern activist is that reality follows language and culture, which implies that if activists can only adequately police language and fiction, real life will eventually match their desires. The world doesn't work that way, and activists efforts in this area are doomed to produce only frustration and an inevitable backlash, the beginnings of which we're now seeing.
  • majormajor 11y ago
    Well I'd say changing human behavior is harder than changing perceptions. And most of the article (outside of the behavioral bit about the sexism she experienced, which is unfortunately a harder problem) is therefore focused on perceptions, which seems very justifiable given this bit: "As Dr. Cheryan points out, stereotypes are only partly true, and women who actually take classes in computer science don’t hold the same prejudices as women who get their ideas from pop culture." So the male nerd culture aspects inside the system aren't as offputting as however the current popular stereotypes make them out to be. Sounds like there are some lower hanging fruit than changing people's desires. (As to why we'd want to fix it in the first place... I don't know many tech companies right now that are satisfied with the size and depth of the talent pool. Getting more education to more people to become potential candidates could only help with that, and increased demand for a major tends to increase department size, so I don't think it's a zero-sum game with males losing out here. More people with at least a cursory or exploratory level of education in science could eventually lead to better policy around it, etc, too.)
• natmaster 11y ago
  Female students are more interested in enrolling in CS if they think it doesn't involve computers or science... maybe instead of trying to trick them encourage them to like computers and science? If you think solving problems by looking pretty rather than thinking is 'being female' then you don't think being a Computer Scientist is very 'female'. (Obviously I think being female is orthogonal to such concerns.)
• nn3 11y ago
  It started off well, until she started talking about mainframes. So her experience is from the 80ies? Sounds like bleeding edge commentary.
• omonra 11y ago
  I don't get something. There seems to always has been a problem of diversity in tech. Yet US has done just ok with males (white and asian) doing this stuff. Ie better than anybody else in the world. Why is this a problem (something the writer - who is a literature professor, by the way) considers a given? Is there any proof that increased diversity has any effect (except employment opportunities for the otherwise underrepresented)?
  • InclinedPlane 11y ago
    How is it possible that you don't see the problem in this line of reasoning? Do you really not? Edit: honestly, I'm curious how this mindset comes about. How is it possible to ignore the importance of people being given the opportunity to work wherever they are capable? How is it possible to ignore the impact of being denied access to an incredibly lucrative and glamorous industry? How is it possible to ignore the many ramifications that has on lives and livelihoods? How would you feel if you were kept out of the tech industry? Would you be placated by sentiments that the industry was seemingly "doing just fine" without you?
    • TickleMeHellNo 11y ago
      This comment contributes a lot to the conversation.
    • PostOnce 11y ago
      I think the idea is that women CAN get into compsci if they want to or are interested, it's just that on average, they appear not to be? It sort of feels like saying there aren't enough people named Gavin in compsci. Why do we need people named Gavin? If Gavin wants to do compsci, that's cool, but if not, then he can go do whatever makes him happy? The point is, we don't need _person type X_ simply for the sake of an equal number of all types of people. Unequal numbers/types of people don't necessarily mean they're being kept out, that doesn't follow. There aren't enough male hairdressers? There aren't enough female linesmen? There aren't enough Democrats named Duane? Whether or not this is true I don't know, I just consider this the popular sentiment. I could be an elementary school teacher as a male, I'm just not inclined to. I don't feel kept out.
• Myrmornis 11y ago
  > Yet I wonder how many young men would choose to major in computer science if they suspected they might need to carry out their coding while sitting in a pink cubicle decorated with posters of “Sex and the City,” with copies of Vogue and Cosmo scattered around the lunchroom. In fact, Dr. Cheryan’s research shows that young men tend not to major in English for the same reasons women don’t pick computer science: They compare their notions of who they are to their stereotypes of English majors and decide they won’t fit in. The thing is that computer science and english lit are not exchangeable. In fact, if computer science were done in pink cubicles adorned with the above-mentioned purportedly feminine accoutrements, men and women would still do computer science, because it would still be critical to technological advance and modern economies in a direct, and remunerated, way which English Lit is not.
  • kmicklas 11y ago
    How is this relevant at all?
    • Myrmornis 11y ago
      It is a response to a passage quoted from the article under discussion in this thread on hacker news, an internet site that is structured around discussion of articles.
• pervycreeper 11y ago
  Here is a page linking the writeups of the studies that were referenced in the article. https://faculty.washington.edu/scheryan/research.htm https://faculty.washington.edu/scheryan/research.htm One question which perhaps should be made explicit: Who ought to be responsible for remedying the negative stereotypes that young women hold about computer programmers and STEM workers? And who is affected most negatively by attitudes such as they hold? Maybe creative writing profs can play a role by writing some stories that make STEM sound more enticing.
  • pkinsky 11y ago
    I don't see any indication that these studies have been successfully reproduced. Do you know if these results have been independently verified?
    • pervycreeper 11y ago
      There are a few hundred citations to sort through, but it looks like they are just building on these conclusions. Keep in mind that they were published very recently, and psychology has less of an emphasis on reproducing studies than, say physics, for instance. IOW, I have no clue. Haven't read the papers either. Looks like a bunch of copy + paste from SPSS/SAS, plus a little polemical rhetoric, like most social science papers. I find such to be tiring to read closely as a consequence (so I don't).
  • deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
• ken47 11y ago
  Does anyone else feel that targeted statistical studies would advance this discussion far more than yet another anecdote? The state of understanding of this situation could be much improved. And yet, despite how strongly people feel about this issue, the studies are still sparse to non-existent.
  • finance-geek 11y ago
    I'm only half-joking here -- I wonder if the n value is too small for statistical significance?
• duaneb 11y ago
  No matter who you are, applying broad strokes to the industry is going to paint many incorrectly. The idea that there is one factor that "really" keeps women out of tech implies that the other reasons are false. In reality, it is very subjective. I would also have been put off by her experience with pressure to "act like a man" and I'm a man. But, just as anecdotally, I only encountered this once: the cs department of umass. Every job I've held has been much more diverse in terms of interests than one would think reading this article. Perhaps not speaking for huge swathes of people based on anecdotal evidence would lead to better insights. I see the hiring pipeline as a problem. A college professor might see high school as the problem. The high school might see the parents as the problem. The parents might see society as the problem. Etc etc. In reality, there are so many opportunities to become persuaded or dissuaded the idea that one dominates requires extraordinary evidence. Personally, I'm a queer, anti-authoritarian, emotional, book worm nerd. I feel repulsed by nerd/tech culture several times an hour. It's honestly embarrassing to be associated with it. If ONLY that were the only problem.
  • hackuser 11y ago
    > The idea that there is one factor that "really" keeps women out of tech implies that the other reasons are false. There could be a few factors that account for the vast majority.
    • duaneb 11y ago
      Sure. But this is still all speculation, and it strikes me as harmful to portray it as a reality.
      • deleted 11y ago
        [deleted]
    • pgeorgi 11y ago
      So it's okay if we only throw 30% of women (or whatever other underrepresented group is optimized for) under the bus because they're not like the others? Isn't "just behave like the others (to succeed)" exactly what we're trying to get rid of?
• seansmccullough 11y ago
  The real issue is that our society tells girls it's more important to be attractive and have lots of friends, instead of being smart and intelligent. The posters aren't the problem, the pipeline is, and the pipeline starts with parents.
  • seansmccullough 11y ago
    And America's general anti-intellectual culture. Basically, the idea that it's not "cool" to be smart. Also, society generally socialized boys to be more independent (hence making it easier to ignore anti-intellectualism).
  • solofounder2 11y ago
    but then individuals like Amelia Earhart, Jane Goodall, and Maria Mayer (to name a few) come along and inspire a generation of young women. Maybe the problem is that we simply don't have a worldwide recognized women's role model for Tech yet. Hell there are only a handful of male ones.. people like Gates, Jobs & Wozniacki, Zukerberg, Knuth, Kay, Turing, etc.. inventors of programming languages, famous tech authors (W. Richard Stevens, Sussman & Abelson, etc).. they're pretty much all men. I think that eventually this will change.
  • astrange 11y ago
    Are you sure being attractive and having lots of friends isn't a better life strategy than being really intelligent? It gets you laid way more often. (Not that either of those are strategies really.)
• gdubs 11y ago
  One thing I noticed / learned about when we had our child is that we are all social creatures. We yearn to be with others like ourselves and to fit in. It's an incredibly strong pull, and the attitude of "if they really were interested, they'd be interested" that is prominent here greatly underestimates how strong our desire to fit in is. In poor neighborhoods, few rise out of their situations to become scholars and professionals. Do we believe it is because they don't want to? Or is it because the social currents -- the pull to fit in, sell drugs, check out, be cool -- are too strong? We have deeply evolved social genes, and our fear of being alienated trumps a lot of things. Unconscious bias is real. You can take a test and see for yourself. We think we view the sexes, other races, other tribes as we view ourselves. But the fact is we're deeply biased. It is ingrained. So, we might not be best suited to say whether our tribe is inclusive -- we probably couldn't give an objective answer if we tried. But what we can do is make a better attempt to be more inclusive of ideas; especially the ones that make us uncomfortable.
  • T2_t2 11y ago
    > We yearn to be with others like ourselves and to fit in. The idea is that this is what "keeps people out". Surely, the flip side is true, and people are defined / made happy by the same notions. People in the west are so far up Maslow's hierarchy of needs, that we've stopped caring about the basics of life. Specifically, of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#/media/File:MaslowsHierarchyOfNeeds.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs#... we no longer choose a job that gives us food, shelter or safety (the first two), and instead we choose jobs based on how well it provides us with love/belonging, esteem and self-actualisation. That is why young people choose jobs less and less with money as the sole or even primary determinant. If this is the case, that people are choosing professions that help them feel self-actualised or belonging, no matter what tech does, or what Public Relations, Child-care workers or predominantly female dominated occupations do, is less important that the people it attracts / already has attracted. And these same sorts of people will dominate, as this belonging and fitting in becomes increasingly entrenched, and snowballs on itself like runaway recurssion. That seems, to me, the logical conclusion of slight biological gender differences combined with a rise up the pyramid of needs, which lessens the pressure of the former two to create cultures that trump biology. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE is a documentary about Scandinavia's attitude to gender relations, and the whole series is brilliant, and shows that gender separation is, if not inevitable, certainly understandable.
• Nickersf 11y ago
  "To make computer science more attractive to women, we might help young women change how they think about themselves and what’s expected of them. But we might also diversify the images of scientists they see in the media, along with the décor in the classrooms and offices in which they might want to study or work." No. I don't expect liberal arts and women's studies departments, and the home decorating industry to adapt a more masculine culture. I don't see CS and the tech industry as this uber masculine frat bro jock culture anyways. This is ridiculous. Let people make their own choices instead of dictating how people should act constantly.
• kisstheblade 11y ago
  One question. Why is it important to make, quote: "computer science more attractive to women..."? I mean I get that the sex discrimination stuff and treatment of women we read here on hacker news is bad and of course it would help if there were more women in tech. But other than that, if you think of the women in general and not some "diversity would be good" (which it probably would be), why the worry? Why aren't we as worried that not enough men show interest in being nurses or kindergarten teachers or social workers? I know from experience that it would be very important to get a more "balanced" look at things in those fields. Are we still treating women as little girls who we need to be worried about because they "only like superficial things and nail polish" and can't really take care of themselves unless we make changes so that "important stuff" is more attractive to them? I think this is a very patronizing attitude, and dismissing the stuff some women may find more interesting than "hard sciences"
  • dfabulich 11y ago
    This is the top voted comment right now, but I'm struggling to understand it. You grant (at least for the sake of discussion) that more women would help with the tech industry's sex discrimination problems, and that diversity itself would "probably" be good. But then you ask, "but other than that, why is it important?" It makes no sense to disregard sex discrimination and diversity when considering whether this topic is important. Sex discrimination and diversity are themselves already important. It's like asking about the benefits of exercise, setting aside the health benefits and psychological benefits. > Why aren't we as worried that not enough men show interest in being nurses or kindergarten teachers or social workers? People do worry about those topics, but we mostly talk about tech here on Hacker News.
  • davmre 11y ago
    The greedy answer: because systematically discouraging 50% of the brainpower of the human species from entering one of our most productive and simultaneously short-staffed occupations is bad for technological progress and the growth of global wealth. The humanist/utilitarian answer: because computer science is intrinsically awesome and rewarding, so global utility is maximized by ensuring that anyone who might be interested has an unimpeded path towards experiencing that awesomeness.
• sjukfan 11y ago
  Mmm, yeah... could you guys try to not be so nerdy? That would be great. And no jokes about PC load letter.
• sakopov 11y ago
  To sum this up, men in software engineering are like a bunch of children and expect everyone around them to be exactly the same. I couldn't agree more. I'd wager that most software companies (all i've worked for) have no sense of work etiquette because a lot of engineers are in some sort of la-la land where you don't have to grow up and the smarter you are the more you get to act as an odd, grown child. Is anybody really surprised that this is driving women away? It would be interesting to know how this compares to professional engineers (mechanical, electrical etc) and the environments they work in. I'd be shocked if the same level of immaturity passes there.
• tete 11y ago
  Stereotypes are putting me off too - I am a male. Not sure if this can really explain why there is fewer women in tech. At the local university where I was a bit involved into the whys of fewer women it seems to be that interestingly enough it seems to be related to friends and family of someone entering IT. If friends and family come up with questions like "But aren't there mostly men" and "Aren't to all video game nerds" or similar, then those stereotypes affect people and especially women, cause they are usually the target of such statements way more when deciding whether to study at a certain university. So it's social expectations of others. I think if one wants to study computer science then it's not that much of a deal. After all students in general have a lot of room for stereotypes. Women in communication, men in medicine and students in general have stereotypes applying to them that many people simply don't identify with at all. I think if that would be having such a huge effect then there would be way fewer students overall.
• sfRattan 11y ago
  > Over and over, Dr. Cheryan and her colleagues have found that female students are more interested in enrolling in a computer class if they are shown a classroom (whether virtual or real) decorated not with “Star Wars” posters, science-fiction books, computer parts and tech magazines, but with a more neutral décor — art and nature posters, coffee makers, plants and general-interest magazines. That last part sounds so banally corporate. And later in the article the author suggests we redecorate many/most programming spaces, academic and professional, into banal corporate farms like every other soul-crushing workplace. The best high school teachers I remember were the ones to fill their classrooms with zany stuff related to their subject/field. Creatures from Disney's Hercules in a Latin classroom. Ancient Roman coins, sorted on a timeline by metallurgic debasement and inflation, in an economics classroom. A wall of student painted musical posters in a theater/dance classroom. Is telling those teachers, "no, you can't decorate your classroom the way you want; it must look like the front office of ACME business park tenant," really the answer? Or is it reforming our education system, especially high school, into an institution that discourages conformity? Or at least doesn't punish nonconformity?
  • pgeorgi 11y ago
    I guess Star Wars and (much of SciFi) has no strong tie to a computer class except for a certain subcultural influence not shared universally (and so they don't _need_ to be part of the class room). But if the computer class isn't just a editor/spreadsheet/media class (which is okay, and maybe even important, but not "computer"), having computer parts and tech magazines around (within reason) provide a relatively realistic representation of what the field is about. To me that paragraph read as "computer class is okay when it has nothing to do with computers" - which I think is sad. But then the description is so non-descript, that it's hard to tell what kind of images they provided. If the "computer parts and magazines" version looked like http://moo.acadiau.ca:7000/865 http://moo.acadiau.ca:7000/865, that may indeed not be very attractive. (Also: coffee makers in class rooms? yuck. I wouldn't want to be in a class that smells like coffee all the time)
    • sfRattan 11y ago
      The "Star Wars" reference is really just an insinuation that geek culture signals social suicide to conformist high schoolers. But geek culture also signals passion. My objection is really that mandating bland décor in the name of some "ambient sense of belonging" discourages passionate teachers, however their offbeat classroom decorating may or may not relate absolutely to the field. And the system already discourages passionate teachers in countless ways. We don't need one more nail in the coffin for love of learning and those who encourage it.
• briandear 11y ago
  There's a "gender problem" in public relations as well as in mental health counseling professions. The vast majority of professionals in those fields are women. I'm not sure I understand why that "problem" isn't warranting a New York Times story. In a great many PR and Marcom departments there's a very real bias against men. So much ink is being used on the STEM and women issue but oddly such "diversity" isn't quite important when the straight male is consistently marginalized in certain fields. How many straight male hairdressers do you know? How about makeup artists? Male kindergarten teachers? How about straight male fashion buyers or merchandisers or designers? How many men work at the cosmetics counter at Saks Fifth Avenue? Is there any concept that men and women might actually be different and thus drawn to different interests? Obviously there's crossover and not everyone fits the mold but should we be trying to shoehorn the video game introvert into public relations and the outgoing fashionable social butterfly into particle physics? I don't doubt that there is a gender disparity in many professions, but my honest question is whether it's actually a 'problem.' If girls (or boys) are being denied their passion because of discrimination, then yes, absolutely, but if we're just sitting around complaining because more boys like computers and more girls like public relations, then it seems like a silly thing to worry about. More girls like to play with dolls and more boys like to play with sticks and pretend they're laser guns. That's a fact. If a girl wants to play with a laser gun stick (or a boy with dolkls,) then I'm all for it, but just achieving diversity just to please some statistian or some gender studies professor is to deny that biology does, in fact have an influence on behavior and choices. I know that in some feminist circles, that idea is blasphemous, but reality doesn't really care about what some adjunct professor thinks. Trying to "feminize" computers or make it less "nerdy" (i.e. Changing the Code Therefore I am shirt) is ridiculous and actually insulting. There are plenty of girls that like Star Wars, "nerdy" things and math and science. Just because that type of girl is a minority doesn't mean there's some kind of conspiracy.
• bsder 11y ago
  Unfortunately for the author, the numbers simply don't support the narrative she wishes to paint: > The percentage of women studying computer science actually has fallen since the 1980s. Dr. Cheryan theorizes that this decline might be partly attributable to the rise of pop-culture portrayals of scientists as white or Asian male geeks in movies and TV shows like “Revenge of the Nerds” and “The Big Bang Theory.” CS degrees took a huge jump from 5,000 per year in 1975 with 18% being women to 39,000 per year in 1985 with 37% being women. Perhaps she should ask what caused that. I'll tell you what--Punchcards, COBOL and the PDP/Vax. Suddenly everybody put their accounting systems on computers, and you needed people who could program them or feed them data. And that required keyboard skills--which were taught to women because every high school had secretarial classes (typing/shorthand/dictation). And, right around when the decline started happening (1984/1985), those secretarial programs all got wiped out. Perhaps if we start training women to be secretaries again, we'll fix the CS enrollment problem (CAUTION: I'm being sarcastic here about drawing stupid conclusions that fit your desired narrative). In addition, if you look at Master's degrees awarded, you find that the percentage of women earning Master's in CS is about 28% and has bounced around that number since 1985 and been around 30% since 2001. The percentage of PhD's going to women in CS has been gradually increasing every year since 1977 or so and stands at 21% in 2010. These aren't the statistics for a field women are having difficulty entering (take a look at electrical engineering for that ...). The fact that female CS undergraduate percentages crashed in 2005 is a bit concerning (similar downblip in EE--wonder what the issue is), but that should be a local cause that should be discoverable rather than systemic. References: http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/content.cfm?pub_id=4266&id=2 http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/content.cfm?pub_id=42... http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/pdf/tab33.pdf http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/nsf13327/pdf/tab33.pdf
• cLeEOGPw 11y ago
  The first sentence of the article is a claim without any substance and the rest on the article builds on it. Regarding "gender diversity", I know for sure that construction, road works, automechanic, welding, mining and many other fields have "overrepresented men problem", while teacher, nurse have "overrepresented women" problem, so why focus on technology sector which is pretty good compared to those? The answer is simple - personal monetary gain. Women see technology sector rise in terms of wages during recent years, and feminism, a.k.a "women labor union", are using their influence to gain unfair advantages for women in that particular profitable spot. They have already reached quite good results in divorce and alimony laws, so we can't underestimate them now. This trend that puts women (and in some cases minorities) in front of others have to be killed once and for all. Can someone from US write their senators to create a law that forbids any kind of discrimination or PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT based on gender and race? That law would be enough to basically kill feminism in terms of legal rights at least.
  • DanBC 11y ago
    > I know for sure that construction, road works, automechanic, welding, mining and many other fields have "overrepresented men problem", while teacher, nurse have "overrepresented women" problem, Each of those have industry and education groups dedicated to changing the disparity.
  • varjag 11y ago
    > Regarding "gender diversity", I know for sure that construction, road works, automechanic, welding, mining and many other fields have "overrepresented men problem", while teacher, nurse have "overrepresented women" problem, so why focus on technology sector which is pretty good compared to those? I am in Norway, and men are hardly underrepresented in teaching and nursery here. I also visit tunnels under construction due to my work sometimes, and can't say a girl in reflex and hard hat is that uncommon sight. They are still under-represented in STEM overall, however. Not sure what the conclusion is here, but it is probably not the one you are trying to make.
• dennisgorelik 11y ago
  This article raises an interesting question, but then give no good answer to it. The actual answer is that women generally like modern programming noticeably less than men do. Women are better at nurturing and maintenance. Men are better with handling abstract concepts and solving deep problems by having narrow focus. Before computers became mainstream (prior to ~1980) typical programming job was more about nurturing and maintenance. Typical women skills were a good match for programming back then. However what programmers did back then in 1960es-1970es is now covered by ~electronic spreadsheets. Modern programming is much deeper and more focused than it was 35+ years ago, so most women prefer moving to other professions. In spite of affirmative action that tries to attract women to tech.
• deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
• throwawaygeu 11y ago
  "Computer scientists and engineers are going to be designing the future that everyone inhabits. We need women and minorities to enjoy an ambient sense of belonging in those professions if the future they create is going to be one in which all of us feel at home" Oh how tired I am of this tech ignorant BS "argument" - "women use tech too, so we need women designing tech for women" or "women need representatives in politics too!"... Listen crefully - technology is created so that everyone could use it without man/woman distinction. If product is created specifically for women by 100% man team then they WILL CONSULT WITH THEM WHILILE ON IT OR GET FEEDBACK LATER. You know why? Of course you don't - not doing what your target demographics want is suicide. That hawing said - women are majority so their influence is huge on tech. Same woth politics - good polititian doesn't just represent one group, they strike ballance to help everyone.
• EdSharkey 11y ago
  I had a run-in with a woman on my team. We disagreed on the design for a module she had just implemented. It wasn't going to meet the requirements, I argued. She disagreed - it'd be fine. Many times we sat in front of her code, I took her through exactly how her design was failing. You know that extra 250msec mental processing time where you see it click in their heads when they realize they were wrong or had a faulty assumption? There were like 3 of those times sitting with her, and she always changed the subject or insulted me for not understanding what she was trying to do - end of discussion. Other team members backed me up from time to time when the issues I was raising were serious enough, I wasn't completely alone. There were other communications breakdowns, she NEVER requested anyone to pair with her, never did any design work nor discussed with the team what she was going to develop that sprint, was frustrated and defensive when her PR's were full of criticisms (primarily from me.) I was vocal, I was dissatisfied with her performance and did not keep it a secret, and I was demanding the same level of excellence from her as from anyone else on the team. This went on for about two weeks ... and then she cried to the boss. Told him she thought she might have to quit the company over the altercations with me. So, they gave me the official sit down reprimand. There was no interest hearing in my side of the story, not that it would matter the way HR is structured. And, I got the distinct feeling they started keeping a file on me to try and get me canned. My reaction to this, so as to keep my sweet job and food on the table, was to be just one more go-with-the-flow, smiley-faced, that-all-sounds-good kind of guy. No more confrontation trying to get the best out of people. Life is really nice now, I don't have to care. My work is still good, but I'm just doing as I was told and cashing my paycheck now. Any actual love and passion for the work now goes into my hobby projects, and I don't work late anymore. Soon after all this blew over, the bosses remarked cynically that I was working so well with this woman, like it was surprising that I could turn off combat mode so easily/at all! I just smile and laugh meekly, "yeah, we're working well together. It's all so great" as I choke back the bile. God help that woman if she ever needs help and I'm the only one to give it. I've had to endure team dynamics 10x worse in my career than what she experienced with me and I didn't rat out the other guy. I cannot countenance such disloyalty. The team must resolve its differences internally and not go informing on each other at the drop of a hat! Anyhow, we are still on the same team, (thanks management!), and I casually try to avoid pairing with her most of the time and smile with gritted teeth when we do have to work together. When I see her make a mistake, I don't point it out and just laugh to myself about it. I will outlast her but she has definitely put a damper on my moving into a lead role unless I switch departments.
• torkable 11y ago
  SO we need to get rid of the computers and programming books in the programming classes so women like to program. Genius.