3 ms·

You can take a look at [1] and the data there to see that 1 is the culprit, but only a piece of it. Women are pushed into less technical roles throughout their

You can take a look at [1] and the data there to see that 1 is the culprit, but only a piece of it. Women are pushed into less technical roles throughout their careers. Women with the same technical qualifications are significantly more likely to be managers than in a senior technical position. [1] http://gender.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Senior-Technical-Women-A-Profile-of-Success.pdf http://gender.stanford.edu/sites/default/files/Senior-Techni...

mpweiher 10y ago
How is it that women are always "pushed", i.e. passive? How about: women are more likely to go into less technical roles in their careers, possibly because they prefer them?
- nostrebored 10y ago
  Because your suggestion is similar to suggesting that black men in the south with PhDs just chose to be school teachers after the Civil Rights Act. Women themselves say that they feel pushed by their managers to go into management [1]. By winnowing everything down to personal choice and preference we remove any impetus to look into the root causes of disparity. EDIT: the same link is in my parent comment -- going back to your previous comment: "reading helps".
  - mpweiher 10y ago
    Gender studies isn't research, it's advocacy.
    - nostrebored 10y ago
      Did you even open the linked material? It's not "gender studies", it's a survey of highly experienced women in the field of computer science. Your comment is entirely tangential, it has no clash with any of the arguments that I've been making.
      - mpweiher 10y ago
        I had a cursory look, stopped when the old tired tropes about percent of population vs. percent in tech were pulled out. Then I looked at the URL: "gender.stanford.edu/...". Then I looked at the root of that URL, http://gender.stanford.edu/ http://gender.stanford.edu/: "The Clayman Institute for Gender Research" Pray tell how this is not gender studies? From the site: "Founded in 1974, the Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University creates knowledge and seeks to implement change to promote gender equality." Implement change. As I said: advocacy.

mpweiher 10y ago

How is it that women are always "pushed", i.e. passive? How about: women are more likely to go into less technical roles in their careers, possibly because they prefer them?

nostrebored 10y ago
Because your suggestion is similar to suggesting that black men in the south with PhDs just chose to be school teachers after the Civil Rights Act. Women themselves say that they feel pushed by their managers to go into management [1]. By winnowing everything down to personal choice and preference we remove any impetus to look into the root causes of disparity. EDIT: the same link is in my parent comment -- going back to your previous comment: "reading helps".
- mpweiher 10y ago
  Gender studies isn't research, it's advocacy.
  - nostrebored 10y ago
    Did you even open the linked material? It's not "gender studies", it's a survey of highly experienced women in the field of computer science. Your comment is entirely tangential, it has no clash with any of the arguments that I've been making.
    - mpweiher 10y ago
      I had a cursory look, stopped when the old tired tropes about percent of population vs. percent in tech were pulled out. Then I looked at the URL: "gender.stanford.edu/...". Then I looked at the root of that URL, http://gender.stanford.edu/ http://gender.stanford.edu/: "The Clayman Institute for Gender Research" Pray tell how this is not gender studies? From the site: "Founded in 1974, the Michelle R. Clayman Institute for Gender Research at Stanford University creates knowledge and seeks to implement change to promote gender equality." Implement change. As I said: advocacy.