5 ms·

>If everything goes well, in the future we will have a balance of gender in the tech industry. Why are you so sure of this? What if the natural balance is 80%

>If everything goes well, in the future we will have a balance of gender in the tech industry. Why are you so sure of this? What if the natural balance is 80% male? There are many industries where this is the case. Even if businesses become increasingly discriminatory against male applicants, it isn't going to change that those who spend time learning the requisite skills are more likely to be men.

peterwwillis 11y ago
First off, there is no natural balance to an industry, because they aren't natural. They do have norms, though. Second, saying tech businesses are going to become 'increasingly discriminatory' against men is like saying that after desegregation and the civil rights movement we got 'increasingly discriminatory' against white people sitting in the front of a bus. Third, there's no scientific/factual basis for why men might spend more time learning tech skills. It's not like 80% of men around the world sit around all day thinking about debugging kernel drivers. More than likely it's social conditioning and gender stereotypes that lead to the impression that men are simply more interested in, or better at, technology-related skills. If you don't believe in gender stereotype, imagine if your mother taught your sister how to work on the family car, and told you to go back inside and play with your tea set because your pretty clothes might get dirty, and that this happened when your brain was still forming a very early world view.
- reefoctopus 11y ago
  Replace natural balance with equilibrium if the term natural makes you uncomfortable. My point is that there are innate differences between men and women, and these are reflected in their preferences for different types of work. There is a reason there are more women than men in nursing, that there are more male plumbers than female, and wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so. >Second, saying tech businesses are going to become 'increasingly discriminatory' against men is like saying that after desegregation and the civil rights movement we got 'increasingly discriminatory' against white people sitting in the front of a bus. The difference between my example and yours is that nobody is preventing women or minorities from applying or working in the desired positions. Nobody has legislated away their rights. The position you're advocating is quite similar to segregation. White men are only allowed on the "bus" after the front fills up with women. There are many evolutionary reasons why men might spend more time building tools. I've noticed that it is politically acceptable to say that women make better caretakers or that they are more sociable, but that it is no longer politically acceptable to do the same with positive traits in regards to men. To address your last point - "In 2002, Gerianne M. Alexander of Texas A&M University and Melissa Hines of City University in London stunned the scientific world by showing that vervet monkeys showed the same sex-typical toy preferences as humans. In an incredibly ingenious study, published in Evolution and Human Behavior, Alexander and Hines gave two stereotypically masculine toys (a ball and a police car), two stereotypically feminine toys (a soft doll and a cooking pot), and two neutral toys (a picture book and a stuffed dog) to 44 male and 44 female vervet monkeys. They then assessed the monkeys’ preference for each toy by measuring how much time they spent with each. Their data demonstrated that male vervet monkeys showed significantly greater interest in the masculine toys, and the female vervet monkeys showed significantly greater interest in the feminine toys. The two sexes did not differ in their preference for the neutral toys." Wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so.
  - peterwwillis 11y ago
    > Wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so. Truer words were never spoken.
  - vtech325 11y ago
    Except that's not the whole picture: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-ca... The natural state of tech industry is far from what your proposing.
allemagne 11y ago
>What if the natural balance is 80% male? There are many industries where this is the case. All genders, races, nationalities, and other protected classes having the same innate skills for white-collar jobs is solidly the null hypothesis. Let's see some extraordinary evidence for the alternative before abandoning it as our working assumption.
- reefoctopus 11y ago
  Your argument refutes a position I didn't take. Preference plays a role. Also, there is evidence that preferences differ between the genders and are not entirely due to social, political, or cultural reasons.
  - allemagne 11y ago
    The argument holds true for innate preferences as well. It's one thing to argue that some preferences are innate in men versus women, another thing to prove that these preferences would cause women or men to avoid tech more than their counterpart on average in a vacuum, and a particularly extraordinary thing to prove that the "optimal equilibrium of gender" in tech is significantly different than 50/50 because of both of the above.
    - reefoctopus 11y ago
      It would be difficult to prove any "optimal equilibrium of gender" even one of 50/50. Of course, those who strive for equality of opportunity aren't trying to institutionally force their optimal equilibrium of gender on anyone else. We accept that preferences play a role as to who ends up working in a particular sector, and those preferences may differ from our ideal.

peterwwillis 11y ago

First off, there is no natural balance to an industry, because they aren't natural. They do have norms, though. Second, saying tech businesses are going to become 'increasingly discriminatory' against men is like saying that after desegregation and the civil rights movement we got 'increasingly discriminatory' against white people sitting in the front of a bus. Third, there's no scientific/factual basis for why men might spend more time learning tech skills. It's not like 80% of men around the world sit around all day thinking about debugging kernel drivers. More than likely it's social conditioning and gender stereotypes that lead to the impression that men are simply more interested in, or better at, technology-related skills. If you don't believe in gender stereotype, imagine if your mother taught your sister how to work on the family car, and told you to go back inside and play with your tea set because your pretty clothes might get dirty, and that this happened when your brain was still forming a very early world view.

reefoctopus 11y ago
Replace natural balance with equilibrium if the term natural makes you uncomfortable. My point is that there are innate differences between men and women, and these are reflected in their preferences for different types of work. There is a reason there are more women than men in nursing, that there are more male plumbers than female, and wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so. >Second, saying tech businesses are going to become 'increasingly discriminatory' against men is like saying that after desegregation and the civil rights movement we got 'increasingly discriminatory' against white people sitting in the front of a bus. The difference between my example and yours is that nobody is preventing women or minorities from applying or working in the desired positions. Nobody has legislated away their rights. The position you're advocating is quite similar to segregation. White men are only allowed on the "bus" after the front fills up with women. There are many evolutionary reasons why men might spend more time building tools. I've noticed that it is politically acceptable to say that women make better caretakers or that they are more sociable, but that it is no longer politically acceptable to do the same with positive traits in regards to men. To address your last point - "In 2002, Gerianne M. Alexander of Texas A&M University and Melissa Hines of City University in London stunned the scientific world by showing that vervet monkeys showed the same sex-typical toy preferences as humans. In an incredibly ingenious study, published in Evolution and Human Behavior, Alexander and Hines gave two stereotypically masculine toys (a ball and a police car), two stereotypically feminine toys (a soft doll and a cooking pot), and two neutral toys (a picture book and a stuffed dog) to 44 male and 44 female vervet monkeys. They then assessed the monkeys’ preference for each toy by measuring how much time they spent with each. Their data demonstrated that male vervet monkeys showed significantly greater interest in the masculine toys, and the female vervet monkeys showed significantly greater interest in the feminine toys. The two sexes did not differ in their preference for the neutral toys." Wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so.
- peterwwillis 11y ago
  > Wishing for a different reality doesn't make it so. Truer words were never spoken.
- vtech325 11y ago
  Except that's not the whole picture: http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-careers/ http://www.pbs.org/newshour/making-sense/truth-women-stem-ca... The natural state of tech industry is far from what your proposing.

allemagne 11y ago

>What if the natural balance is 80% male? There are many industries where this is the case. All genders, races, nationalities, and other protected classes having the same innate skills for white-collar jobs is solidly the null hypothesis. Let's see some extraordinary evidence for the alternative before abandoning it as our working assumption.

reefoctopus 11y ago
Your argument refutes a position I didn't take. Preference plays a role. Also, there is evidence that preferences differ between the genders and are not entirely due to social, political, or cultural reasons.
- allemagne 11y ago
  The argument holds true for innate preferences as well. It's one thing to argue that some preferences are innate in men versus women, another thing to prove that these preferences would cause women or men to avoid tech more than their counterpart on average in a vacuum, and a particularly extraordinary thing to prove that the "optimal equilibrium of gender" in tech is significantly different than 50/50 because of both of the above.
  - reefoctopus 11y ago
    It would be difficult to prove any "optimal equilibrium of gender" even one of 50/50. Of course, those who strive for equality of opportunity aren't trying to institutionally force their optimal equilibrium of gender on anyone else. We accept that preferences play a role as to who ends up working in a particular sector, and those preferences may differ from our ideal.