4 ms·

I don't disagree with the thesis of the article, but the creators of the ENIAC were given no mention and they skipped right to the 'computer girls' as if they w

by DKnoll 11y ago

I don't disagree with the thesis of the article, but the creators of the ENIAC were given no mention and they skipped right to the 'computer girls' as if they were fully responsible for it's genesis.

jonathankoren 11y ago
Because the article isn't about the ENIAC at all. It's about how programming transitioned from being a menial (and thus women's) job, to a prestigious (and thus male) job.
- DKnoll 11y ago
  Programming was a 'women's job' at the time because men were intended for combat. It's exactly the same reason women were working in factories which, in peacetime, was traditionally a men's job. This is not to say that it was right, but at the same time it wasn't due to lesser ability... it was because they were still at home and not delivering the munitions whose trajectory they were calculating. I would like to add that suggesting that the majority of programmers were/are the 'majority' (in a societal sense) in the west is also disingenuous. It seems a bit self-serving for the author to not mention that technology, even at the time, was a place where many homosexual but otherwise 'socially-awkward, white, male programmers' thrived and made incredible bounds. If you think women suffered from marginalisation in the 40s and 50s (they did)... imagine being a homosexual. Whether the article is about the ENIAC or not, you need to consider all facts when you make a factual statement, even if they do not serve your thesis. Edit: sorry if I'm a bit passionate about this... I wrote my grade 5 speech on the ENIAC and I've always held the men and women who designed and operated it in incredibly high esteem. Some crazy old man said something once about 'standing on the shoulders of giants' and I feel that is very relevant when discussing the ENIAC.
  - jonathankoren 11y ago
    The facts don't back this up the assertion that this was an inherently transitory effect. Women fell out of computer science starting 1985, and hasn't gained any year since.[0] Turing was prosecuted as soon as his usefulness in the war effort ended, so I don't think they made that many bounds. And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks? They weren't anywhere in programming, and sadly still aren't. [0] http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-...
    - DKnoll 11y ago
      I don't know if I should be disturbed or amused that you were willing to say "And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks?" under your real name. It says a great deal about your motives when you speak facetiously about the struggle of others as if it's just a trump card to be used in debate. I could digress into a rant about academics here but I'll hold my tongue and let you use your imagination.
      - jonathankoren 11y ago
        My point was that it sucks for all oppressed groups, but trying to say, "yeah but this other group has it worse," or even, "but why isn't this other group mentioned" isn't helpful to any group. It's like showing up at an event to fight cancer, and complaining that and heart disease isn't getting its due. Yes, heart disease is important too, but that's not why we're here.
        DKnoll 11y ago
        What I questioned is why the author misrepresented who actually developed the ENIAC through vague wording and omission. You can be wrong on the details and still ultimately be right. I wasn't trying to start a 'who has it worse' pissing contest, I was pointing out that making a broad generalisation about all white men is discriminatory and unfair... a bit ironic for an article discussing discrimination against women. There are people in all ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations and classes that have faced adversity, you can't use someone's demographic to determine how much. Turing probably looked like your average socially awkward, white, male programmer up until he was chemically castrated and killed himself. Using the term 'socially awkward' seems more like a schoolyard taunt than an unbiased description of a demographic... especially when similarly alienating treatment is what caused many to want an escape and persue computers in the first place. The shallow see awkwardness, but others recognise it as the detachment and eccentricity that often accompanies intellect. Showing up to an event to fight cancer will have null effect unless you're doing research or dropping off a cheque anyway, so what's the harm in bringing up heart disease while you're there?
    - 11y ago
- rimantas 11y ago
  There are plenty of menial jobs dominated by men these days, somehow nobody talks about them.

by DKnoll 11y ago

I don't disagree with the thesis of the article, but the creators of the ENIAC were given no mention and they skipped right to the 'computer girls' as if they were fully responsible for it's genesis.

jonathankoren 11y ago

Because the article isn't about the ENIAC at all. It's about how programming transitioned from being a menial (and thus women's) job, to a prestigious (and thus male) job.

DKnoll 11y ago
Programming was a 'women's job' at the time because men were intended for combat. It's exactly the same reason women were working in factories which, in peacetime, was traditionally a men's job. This is not to say that it was right, but at the same time it wasn't due to lesser ability... it was because they were still at home and not delivering the munitions whose trajectory they were calculating. I would like to add that suggesting that the majority of programmers were/are the 'majority' (in a societal sense) in the west is also disingenuous. It seems a bit self-serving for the author to not mention that technology, even at the time, was a place where many homosexual but otherwise 'socially-awkward, white, male programmers' thrived and made incredible bounds. If you think women suffered from marginalisation in the 40s and 50s (they did)... imagine being a homosexual. Whether the article is about the ENIAC or not, you need to consider all facts when you make a factual statement, even if they do not serve your thesis. Edit: sorry if I'm a bit passionate about this... I wrote my grade 5 speech on the ENIAC and I've always held the men and women who designed and operated it in incredibly high esteem. Some crazy old man said something once about 'standing on the shoulders of giants' and I feel that is very relevant when discussing the ENIAC.
- jonathankoren 11y ago
  The facts don't back this up the assertion that this was an inherently transitory effect. Women fell out of computer science starting 1985, and hasn't gained any year since.[0] Turing was prosecuted as soon as his usefulness in the war effort ended, so I don't think they made that many bounds. And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks? They weren't anywhere in programming, and sadly still aren't. [0] http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding http://www.npr.org/sections/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-...
  - DKnoll 11y ago
    I don't know if I should be disturbed or amused that you were willing to say "And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks?" under your real name. It says a great deal about your motives when you speak facetiously about the struggle of others as if it's just a trump card to be used in debate. I could digress into a rant about academics here but I'll hold my tongue and let you use your imagination.
    - jonathankoren 11y ago
      My point was that it sucks for all oppressed groups, but trying to say, "yeah but this other group has it worse," or even, "but why isn't this other group mentioned" isn't helpful to any group. It's like showing up at an event to fight cancer, and complaining that and heart disease isn't getting its due. Yes, heart disease is important too, but that's not why we're here.
      - DKnoll 11y ago
        What I questioned is why the author misrepresented who actually developed the ENIAC through vague wording and omission. You can be wrong on the details and still ultimately be right. I wasn't trying to start a 'who has it worse' pissing contest, I was pointing out that making a broad generalisation about all white men is discriminatory and unfair... a bit ironic for an article discussing discrimination against women. There are people in all ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations and classes that have faced adversity, you can't use someone's demographic to determine how much. Turing probably looked like your average socially awkward, white, male programmer up until he was chemically castrated and killed himself. Using the term 'socially awkward' seems more like a schoolyard taunt than an unbiased description of a demographic... especially when similarly alienating treatment is what caused many to want an escape and persue computers in the first place. The shallow see awkwardness, but others recognise it as the detachment and eccentricity that often accompanies intellect. Showing up to an event to fight cancer will have null effect unless you're doing research or dropping off a cheque anyway, so what's the harm in bringing up heart disease while you're there?
  - 11y ago
rimantas 11y ago
There are plenty of menial jobs dominated by men these days, somehow nobody talks about them.