6 ms·

This directly relates to us in tech. Specifically, there is a huge push to reach out to women and girls in CS. I am not opposed to females in CS at all. I wi

This directly relates to us in tech. Specifically, there is a huge push to reach out to women and girls in CS. I am not opposed to females in CS at all. I will encourage males and females alike to pursue it, because I see CS as the great equalizer; the only thing that matters is what you produce. What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. Given the dichotomy defined by their stated purpose, they are actively dismissive of men (boys). That is wrong. I don't care about the men/women ratio. People will choose whatever path they enjoy and want to work at. I do care very strongly, though, about treating people equally. If I say this publically, then I, too, will be ostracized. That is why this article is so very important!

chrisdbaldwin 11y ago
Look into the gender paradox.
bobwise 11y ago
Do "Women in Tech" conferences and workshops help to close the gender gap by actively working against the legacy of a male-dominated industry, the same way affirmative action works against the historical disadvantage of minorities?
vezzy-fnord 11y ago
I see CS as the great equalizer; the only thing that matters is what you produce. Say's law does not apply to CS, which is largely a demand-side field with strictly ordinal utility functions and evaluation criteria that are not necessarily technical. As such, what you produce is not innately "the great equalizer".
- coreyp_1 11y ago
  I'm not referencing Say's law. I'm referring to the very real phenomenon that I experienced as a freelancer, in which nobody cared to know anything about me other than whether or not I could get the job done. It was about skill. And, since many of my jobs were entirely remote, I assume that they never knew my gender (or whether or not I was wearing pants on Friday, but that is another discussion). In the Open Source community, most interactions are online through forums, issue queues, etc. Gender is rarely implied. In this situation, all that matters is what you produce. In academia, publishing does not rely on gender. Many times, the reviews of your work are double-blind, so that there is no identifying information at all. Therefore, I stand behind my statement, that CS is the great equalizer, and the only thing that matters is what you produce.
marknutter 11y ago
I agree completely, and am publicly willing to do so because I'm not willing to live in a future where I can't publicly disagree with someone. Why is it technology, specifically, that needs to be equalized? Because it's currently trendy? Because there's a lot of money in it? Is money all that matters? Why aren't we as interested in getting, say, more men into nursing, considering there a lot of underemployed, undereducated men in the US who have to work blue collar or service industry jobs to scrape by while women dominate that very lucrative and stable field? It makes absolutely no sense to me and I agree with the parent commenter that CS is intriguing to me precisely because it's such a great equalizer. Your code speaks for you, not your gender, race, or creed. I also don't see a lot of "Women in Pro Football" groups, either, even though that's an incredibly lucrative and prestigious profession. The whole thing is bonkers, and this is coming from someone who has two daughters (who are free to pursue whatever profession they like).
- rm999 11y ago
  >Why aren't we as interested in getting, say, more men into nursing... I also don't see a lot of "Women in Pro Football" groups This is seriously your argument? That's so fatalistic: this is the way things are, so this is the way things will be. You're also arguing a very "us" vs "them" mentality, which is what makes professions gendered to begin with. >CS is intriguing to me precisely because it's such a great equalizer You're ignoring the social aspect. Women are often discouraged from tech early on, which makes the profession more male-dominated, which makes women feel less comfortable, etc.
  - marknutter 11y ago
    > This is seriously your argument? That's so fatalistic: this is the way things are, so this is the way things will be. You're also arguing a very "us" vs "them" mentality, which is what makes professions gendered to begin with. Yeah, seriously. It's my argument. Did I not sound serious enough? Are you addressing the content within my argument or the tone of my argument? I'm not being fatalistic, I'm genuinely asking those questions. I have a lot of male friends who didn't go into tech or nursing who are really struggling. One might go as far as to say they were "actively discouraged from nursing early on" while my female acquaintances happily slid into comfy and lucrative nursing positions. Yet, not once have I heard of or seen advertisements for Men in Nursing conferences or groups. I'm not making this "us" vs "them" as much as you want to frame my argument that way, and even if I did you'd have to explain why you think that leads to gendered professions. > You're ignoring the social aspect. Women are often discouraged from tech early on, which makes the profession more male-dominated, which makes women feel less comfortable, etc. Again, I could make the same (bad) argument by replacing "women" with "men" and "tech" with "nursing". Unless you're also willing to admit the problem exists there and needs to be dealt with, then I'm not sure we have much more to discuss. If however, you do think the gender imbalance in the field of nursing is a problem, then I need to be educated as to why it's a problem. I've heard arguments about why we need to get more women in tech, but they've never made a whole lot of sense to me. You know what we need more of in tech? People. Period. Far too few people chose CS as their field of study and as such there's a huge mismatch between supply and demand. If your mission is to increase the volume of people in tech, regardless of their race, gender, age, or creed, then count me in and how can I help? edit: accidentally a word
Retra 11y ago
>I don't care about the men/women ratio. I don't care about clothing styles, but if you dress very strangely, I'll judge you just the same. You know why? It's because dressing strangely means you do care about style, and even though I don't care about style, I do care about priorities, and I might find your prioritizing of style to be counter-productive and off-putting. So yeah, I actually do care about style, because it matters. >What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. Given the dichotomy defined by their stated purpose, they are actively dismissive of men (boys). That is wrong. And right now, you are not focussing on technology, but on gender issues. So you're a hypocrite. You care enough about gender to voice an opinion, but only to lash out at others who dare to have an opinion? People have different priorities from you. Some people want a safe, encouraging work/hobby community. Some people want role models. Who are you to say they shouldn't work to create those, and instead work to get what you want? And what do you care that someone holds a conference you wouldn't even go to? >If I say this publically, then I, too, will be ostracized. Have you considered the possibility that you are actually wrong about what you believe? How do you know you're not rationalizing where your feet are by measuring where your shoes are?
- xenihn 11y ago
  >I don't care about clothing styles, but if you dress very strangely, I'll judge you just the same. That is a direct contradiction. You acknowledge as much right after. What's even the point of writing this and posting it? >And right now, you are not focussing on technology, but on gender issues. So you're a hypocrite. You care enough about gender to voice an opinion, but only to lash out at others who dare to have an opinion? You either ignored his point or completely misunderstood it. I can't tell which. Then you also made a strawman. >People have different priorities from you. Some people want a safe, encouraging work/hobby community. Some people want role models. Who are you to say they shouldn't work to create those, and instead work to get what you want? Ok, I'm wondering if maybe English isn't your first language and something is getting lost in translation here. Your points just...make absolutely no sense. It's like you're responding to a fictitious argument that you've constructed in your mind. Anyways, responding to that bit: So different priorities means, to you, that it's fair to disenfranchise a group? You think that it's preferable to raise one group up at the expense of another, as opposed to striving for equality? I get very serious "your rights end where my feelings begin" vibes from your way of writing. >Have you considered the possibility that you are actually wrong about what you believe? Have you?
noxToken 11y ago
>What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. That's the problem though. Sometimes you need to give special attention to a group to ensure that their abilities and accomplishments are seen. You may not personally have this problem, but there are members of the "old guard" that do. I surmise solely from this comment that you do your best to ensure that members of your team are the best regardless of physical differences. Again, this is why you aren't inherently the problem. The problem is people like a professor I had. He has published papers, an incredible work history, and he has rubbed elbows with a few CS people renown for their work. He made off-handed comments like, "First exam is in two weeks. Ladies, please don't wait until the day before to cram." He probably doesn't mean anything malicious by the comment, but that its an off-putting comment nonetheless. Another parallel would be the military. There are lots of females in the military, but one of the gross sentiments among males when encountering staff NCO females is, "How many people did she have to blow to pick up staff?" It's comments like those, some of the "bro culture", and general "CS is for guys" attitude that gives reason for women's conferences. The majority is always in focus on a grand scale. It's easy to feel like certain people are getting special treatment when Group-X Conference specifically targets a group. The purpose, though admittedly they can miss the mark, is to avoid systematic exclusion or opposition that prevents entry or ignores their contribution.
- coreyp_1 11y ago
  I'm a grad student (already have my masters, 3rd year into PhD). I've only had one CS prof make a gender-related disparaging comment, and he was talked to privately, and his contract was not renewed at the end of the semester (that was not his only indiscretion). I have never seen anyone question (publicly or privately) a student's or professor's abilities and achievements, regardless of gender, unless they were otherwise underperforming. Furthermore, in those situations, sexual activity was never implied, but nepotism was. As for these "women" conferences, I have a colleague who has attended 3 conferences in the past year (on the University's dime) just because of her gender (she was not presenting). I have attended 0 conferences. I was not even able to attend a conference in which my paper was accepted (my advisor presented in my place) because there was not enough funds for travel. And yet, when I speak out, I'm the bad guy...
astroalex 11y ago
I might agree that "CS is the great equalizer" if everyone is given an equal opportunity to pursue it. But I don't think they are. Boys are given the focus by default: just watch any Hollywood movie with a "hacker" -- are they a man or a woman? I believe girls are taught from a young age that CS isn't for them. How many potentially brilliant female computer scientists are we missing out on as a society because our media and culture barrages them with images of male programmers? It's in my selfish interest as a white male to promote CS among underrepresented groups -- because one of them might come up with the next innovation that changes my life. But they don't get the chance, because they're told they can't be programmers. That's why I think outreach focused on young minorities & girls is important.
- coreyp_1 11y ago
  What movies/tv shows are you watching? Try Supernatural. Try the old movies from the 90's like Hackers and The Net. Even the Matrix. All of them featured women hackers as well as men. I was not given "the focus" by default. My Jr. High and High School did not have a CS program at all. I taught myself how to program (Pascal and Assembly) by READING BOOKS, because we lived in a rural area and dial-up internet is slow! Is it so wrong to believe that if I can do it, so can others, regardless of their gender? Maybe I have a higher confidence in women than they do!
- gluelogic 11y ago
  Movies about hackers came after hackers had existed for a while. They were mostly male and so it makes sense that that is who would be cast to play those roles. Anyway, Acid Burn and Trinity are iconic Hollywood hacker characters.
- ps4fanboy 11y ago
  I was the only kid at my school who was interested in computers and was actively bullied because of it, I will never understand this narrative of privilege and encouragement, it really doesn't fit with my experiences or the experiences of my peers.
- thelastguy 11y ago
  >How many potentially brilliant female computer scientists are we missing out on as a society because our media and culture barrages them with images of male programmers? Something very wrong with this. Why do those potentially brilliant computer scientist have to be female? Why can't they be male? Are you saying that males are not as brilliant as females? In fact, why does the gender of those potentially brilliant scientists even matter? As long as those scientists are brilliant, why does their gender matter?
kelukelugames 11y ago
Look at your upvotes, HN will not ostracize you. People here are predominately male and white. No need to have a victim complex. However, I encourage you to understand why women attend these conferences. It's easy to write off everyone else as being irrational, but that just makes us narrow minded.
naturalrecursin 11y ago
My university has about 60/40 split between women and men, so yea women are the majority by a lot. In our CS department though it is something like 70/30 men to women. I kid you not that I get emails every week discussing the next fundraiser/meeting on promoting women in tech. We even have a "focus on women in technology" committee. And no there is not a single peep about promoting men in any of the other faculties. For some reason the gender gap in technology is way more important then any other gender gap but no one ever gives a reason as to why.

chrisdbaldwin 11y ago

Look into the gender paradox.

bobwise 11y ago

Do "Women in Tech" conferences and workshops help to close the gender gap by actively working against the legacy of a male-dominated industry, the same way affirmative action works against the historical disadvantage of minorities?

vezzy-fnord 11y ago

I see CS as the great equalizer; the only thing that matters is what you produce. Say's law does not apply to CS, which is largely a demand-side field with strictly ordinal utility functions and evaluation criteria that are not necessarily technical. As such, what you produce is not innately "the great equalizer".

coreyp_1 11y ago
I'm not referencing Say's law. I'm referring to the very real phenomenon that I experienced as a freelancer, in which nobody cared to know anything about me other than whether or not I could get the job done. It was about skill. And, since many of my jobs were entirely remote, I assume that they never knew my gender (or whether or not I was wearing pants on Friday, but that is another discussion). In the Open Source community, most interactions are online through forums, issue queues, etc. Gender is rarely implied. In this situation, all that matters is what you produce. In academia, publishing does not rely on gender. Many times, the reviews of your work are double-blind, so that there is no identifying information at all. Therefore, I stand behind my statement, that CS is the great equalizer, and the only thing that matters is what you produce.

marknutter 11y ago

I agree completely, and am publicly willing to do so because I'm not willing to live in a future where I can't publicly disagree with someone. Why is it technology, specifically, that needs to be equalized? Because it's currently trendy? Because there's a lot of money in it? Is money all that matters? Why aren't we as interested in getting, say, more men into nursing, considering there a lot of underemployed, undereducated men in the US who have to work blue collar or service industry jobs to scrape by while women dominate that very lucrative and stable field? It makes absolutely no sense to me and I agree with the parent commenter that CS is intriguing to me precisely because it's such a great equalizer. Your code speaks for you, not your gender, race, or creed. I also don't see a lot of "Women in Pro Football" groups, either, even though that's an incredibly lucrative and prestigious profession. The whole thing is bonkers, and this is coming from someone who has two daughters (who are free to pursue whatever profession they like).

rm999 11y ago
>Why aren't we as interested in getting, say, more men into nursing... I also don't see a lot of "Women in Pro Football" groups This is seriously your argument? That's so fatalistic: this is the way things are, so this is the way things will be. You're also arguing a very "us" vs "them" mentality, which is what makes professions gendered to begin with. >CS is intriguing to me precisely because it's such a great equalizer You're ignoring the social aspect. Women are often discouraged from tech early on, which makes the profession more male-dominated, which makes women feel less comfortable, etc.
- marknutter 11y ago
  > This is seriously your argument? That's so fatalistic: this is the way things are, so this is the way things will be. You're also arguing a very "us" vs "them" mentality, which is what makes professions gendered to begin with. Yeah, seriously. It's my argument. Did I not sound serious enough? Are you addressing the content within my argument or the tone of my argument? I'm not being fatalistic, I'm genuinely asking those questions. I have a lot of male friends who didn't go into tech or nursing who are really struggling. One might go as far as to say they were "actively discouraged from nursing early on" while my female acquaintances happily slid into comfy and lucrative nursing positions. Yet, not once have I heard of or seen advertisements for Men in Nursing conferences or groups. I'm not making this "us" vs "them" as much as you want to frame my argument that way, and even if I did you'd have to explain why you think that leads to gendered professions. > You're ignoring the social aspect. Women are often discouraged from tech early on, which makes the profession more male-dominated, which makes women feel less comfortable, etc. Again, I could make the same (bad) argument by replacing "women" with "men" and "tech" with "nursing". Unless you're also willing to admit the problem exists there and needs to be dealt with, then I'm not sure we have much more to discuss. If however, you do think the gender imbalance in the field of nursing is a problem, then I need to be educated as to why it's a problem. I've heard arguments about why we need to get more women in tech, but they've never made a whole lot of sense to me. You know what we need more of in tech? People. Period. Far too few people chose CS as their field of study and as such there's a huge mismatch between supply and demand. If your mission is to increase the volume of people in tech, regardless of their race, gender, age, or creed, then count me in and how can I help? edit: accidentally a word

Retra 11y ago

>I don't care about the men/women ratio. I don't care about clothing styles, but if you dress very strangely, I'll judge you just the same. You know why? It's because dressing strangely means you do care about style, and even though I don't care about style, I do care about priorities, and I might find your prioritizing of style to be counter-productive and off-putting. So yeah, I actually do care about style, because it matters. >What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. Given the dichotomy defined by their stated purpose, they are actively dismissive of men (boys). That is wrong. And right now, you are not focussing on technology, but on gender issues. So you're a hypocrite. You care enough about gender to voice an opinion, but only to lash out at others who dare to have an opinion? People have different priorities from you. Some people want a safe, encouraging work/hobby community. Some people want role models. Who are you to say they shouldn't work to create those, and instead work to get what you want? And what do you care that someone holds a conference you wouldn't even go to? >If I say this publically, then I, too, will be ostracized. Have you considered the possibility that you are actually wrong about what you believe? How do you know you're not rationalizing where your feet are by measuring where your shoes are?

xenihn 11y ago
>I don't care about clothing styles, but if you dress very strangely, I'll judge you just the same. That is a direct contradiction. You acknowledge as much right after. What's even the point of writing this and posting it? >And right now, you are not focussing on technology, but on gender issues. So you're a hypocrite. You care enough about gender to voice an opinion, but only to lash out at others who dare to have an opinion? You either ignored his point or completely misunderstood it. I can't tell which. Then you also made a strawman. >People have different priorities from you. Some people want a safe, encouraging work/hobby community. Some people want role models. Who are you to say they shouldn't work to create those, and instead work to get what you want? Ok, I'm wondering if maybe English isn't your first language and something is getting lost in translation here. Your points just...make absolutely no sense. It's like you're responding to a fictitious argument that you've constructed in your mind. Anyways, responding to that bit: So different priorities means, to you, that it's fair to disenfranchise a group? You think that it's preferable to raise one group up at the expense of another, as opposed to striving for equality? I get very serious "your rights end where my feelings begin" vibes from your way of writing. >Have you considered the possibility that you are actually wrong about what you believe? Have you?

noxToken 11y ago

>What I can't stand are these "Women in technology" conferences and workshops to "close the (gender) gap". Why? Because if you focus on one group, then you are actively not focusing on another. That's the problem though. Sometimes you need to give special attention to a group to ensure that their abilities and accomplishments are seen. You may not personally have this problem, but there are members of the "old guard" that do. I surmise solely from this comment that you do your best to ensure that members of your team are the best regardless of physical differences. Again, this is why you aren't inherently the problem. The problem is people like a professor I had. He has published papers, an incredible work history, and he has rubbed elbows with a few CS people renown for their work. He made off-handed comments like, "First exam is in two weeks. Ladies, please don't wait until the day before to cram." He probably doesn't mean anything malicious by the comment, but that its an off-putting comment nonetheless. Another parallel would be the military. There are lots of females in the military, but one of the gross sentiments among males when encountering staff NCO females is, "How many people did she have to blow to pick up staff?" It's comments like those, some of the "bro culture", and general "CS is for guys" attitude that gives reason for women's conferences. The majority is always in focus on a grand scale. It's easy to feel like certain people are getting special treatment when Group-X Conference specifically targets a group. The purpose, though admittedly they can miss the mark, is to avoid systematic exclusion or opposition that prevents entry or ignores their contribution.

coreyp_1 11y ago
I'm a grad student (already have my masters, 3rd year into PhD). I've only had one CS prof make a gender-related disparaging comment, and he was talked to privately, and his contract was not renewed at the end of the semester (that was not his only indiscretion). I have never seen anyone question (publicly or privately) a student's or professor's abilities and achievements, regardless of gender, unless they were otherwise underperforming. Furthermore, in those situations, sexual activity was never implied, but nepotism was. As for these "women" conferences, I have a colleague who has attended 3 conferences in the past year (on the University's dime) just because of her gender (she was not presenting). I have attended 0 conferences. I was not even able to attend a conference in which my paper was accepted (my advisor presented in my place) because there was not enough funds for travel. And yet, when I speak out, I'm the bad guy...

astroalex 11y ago

I might agree that "CS is the great equalizer" if everyone is given an equal opportunity to pursue it. But I don't think they are. Boys are given the focus by default: just watch any Hollywood movie with a "hacker" -- are they a man or a woman? I believe girls are taught from a young age that CS isn't for them. How many potentially brilliant female computer scientists are we missing out on as a society because our media and culture barrages them with images of male programmers? It's in my selfish interest as a white male to promote CS among underrepresented groups -- because one of them might come up with the next innovation that changes my life. But they don't get the chance, because they're told they can't be programmers. That's why I think outreach focused on young minorities & girls is important.

coreyp_1 11y ago
What movies/tv shows are you watching? Try Supernatural. Try the old movies from the 90's like Hackers and The Net. Even the Matrix. All of them featured women hackers as well as men. I was not given "the focus" by default. My Jr. High and High School did not have a CS program at all. I taught myself how to program (Pascal and Assembly) by READING BOOKS, because we lived in a rural area and dial-up internet is slow! Is it so wrong to believe that if I can do it, so can others, regardless of their gender? Maybe I have a higher confidence in women than they do!
gluelogic 11y ago
Movies about hackers came after hackers had existed for a while. They were mostly male and so it makes sense that that is who would be cast to play those roles. Anyway, Acid Burn and Trinity are iconic Hollywood hacker characters.
ps4fanboy 11y ago
I was the only kid at my school who was interested in computers and was actively bullied because of it, I will never understand this narrative of privilege and encouragement, it really doesn't fit with my experiences or the experiences of my peers.
thelastguy 11y ago
>How many potentially brilliant female computer scientists are we missing out on as a society because our media and culture barrages them with images of male programmers? Something very wrong with this. Why do those potentially brilliant computer scientist have to be female? Why can't they be male? Are you saying that males are not as brilliant as females? In fact, why does the gender of those potentially brilliant scientists even matter? As long as those scientists are brilliant, why does their gender matter?

kelukelugames 11y ago

Look at your upvotes, HN will not ostracize you. People here are predominately male and white. No need to have a victim complex. However, I encourage you to understand why women attend these conferences. It's easy to write off everyone else as being irrational, but that just makes us narrow minded.

naturalrecursin 11y ago

My university has about 60/40 split between women and men, so yea women are the majority by a lot. In our CS department though it is something like 70/30 men to women. I kid you not that I get emails every week discussing the next fundraiser/meeting on promoting women in tech. We even have a "focus on women in technology" committee. And no there is not a single peep about promoting men in any of the other faculties. For some reason the gender gap in technology is way more important then any other gender gap but no one ever gives a reason as to why.