4 ms·

> I can't speak about Canada, but in the US, personal anecdotes aside, 60% of college graduates are women. The gender gaps under discussion are specific to com

> I can't speak about Canada, but in the US, personal anecdotes aside, 60% of college graduates are women. The gender gaps under discussion are specific to computer science [1]. That more and more women have been (a) going to college and (b) getting into STEM with the exception of computer science is why this is so interesting to debate. [1] 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-...

leereeves 9y ago
I'm aware that some people are trying to limit the scope of the discussion, and yet, I wonder why no one cares about the young men who are now at a disadvantage.
- malyk 9y ago
  Young men aren't at a disadvantage at all. They are still greatly advantaged, just to a very slightly lesser degree than before. It's like a basketball game where a team was ahead by 45 points at the half. Now they are ahead by "only" 25 points, but somehow they are now at a disadvantage? Certainly they aren't winning by as much, but they are still winning by a significant margin. That's the situation we are in in the tech world.
  - leereeves 9y ago
    And in the larger world? What data are you relying on that suggests young men are advantaged? I've just cited two very significant statistics that suggest otherwise.
    - unityByFreedom 9y ago
      Leadership positions are dominated by men. Young men have a higher likelihood of landing those roles. That could also explain why fewer men attend college. They don't need as many credentials to land higher ranked positions.
      - manfredo 9y ago
        Elite positions are disproportionately occupied by men, but so are the positions at the lowest rungs on the social ladder. Men make up 93% of chief executive officers at large companies[1], but they also make up about the same percentage of the prison population (91%) [2]. Men disproportionately occupy both ends of success and failure. On the note of education, men may not need credentials to achieve comparatively well paying jobs, but this comes with other trade-offs. For instance men make up 93% of occupational deaths[3] in the U.S. The tendency for to reach better paying jobs without the same educational attainment may not necessarily a sign of privilege so much as social pressure to take high-risk jobs for more pay. Ultimately, things like privilege are subjective and heavily based on moral weightings. Does being more likely to be killed on the job offset a higher pay? Is being more likely to end up as a CEO offset being more likely to end up behind bars? These are moral - not factual - questions, so there's as many right answers are there are people on this planet. [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-in-leadership-fortune_us_57cfe23ce4b06a74c9f191cd http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-in-leadership-fort... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_fatality#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_fatality#Gender
        dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Elite positions are disproportionately occupied by men, but so are the positions at the lowest run on the social ladder. Men make up 93% of chief executive officers at large companies[1], but they also make up about the same percentage of the prison population (91%) [2] It's not unknown for destitute people in America to deliberately try to get sent to prison for better support; it's not the lowest rung on the ladder, counterintuitive—and perverse—as that may be.
        unityByFreedom 9y ago
        Were these rates very different before women worked, or before they voted? I have a feeling men have always made up a significant portion of the prison population. This isn't a zero-sum game. Helping women get placement in the workplace doesn't mean men won't get jobs. And, it certainly doesn't mean that we will stop supporting young men stay out of prison. The idea is that as we become a more inclusive society we can all have more freedom to do what we want to do.
- unityByFreedom 9y ago
  >>> 60% of college graduates are women >> The gender gaps under discussion are specific to computer science > I'm aware that some people are trying to limit the scope of the discussion "Trying to limit the scope" ? This post is about tech's approach to diversity. You are the one moving the goalposts. Besides, this is clearly a continuation of the conversation Damore started. I believe Damore limited the scope to computer science because he found research indicating (1) women were more interested in people than things, and (2) programming is more thing-oriented. Given that his cited research is under a good degree of scrutiny, broadening the scope to the suitability of women or men to all fields would require significantly more evidence. > I wonder why no one cares about the young men who are now at a disadvantage. The young men are only at a disadvantage if you believe women are biologically inferior or less-inclined towards certain occupations. As yet, there isn't any evidence that is true. There is a lot of evidence showing that if we remove socialized barriers, like letting women attend university, then their participation rate in male-dominated activities increases. I am unaware of any barriers to young men attending university. In fact, I believe I was a beneficiary of affirmative action, as my grades were slightly lower than the normal for my college, and our school's female-male ratio was 60-40 or more.
- urahara 9y ago
  Because in the discussion of a highly disadvantaged group (gender or a minority) what matters is how to provide this group with rightfully equal opportunities, not how to widen the gap by looking how to give more advantages to already extremely privileged one.
xiaoma 9y ago
The gap is very relevant. There are literally hundreds of thousands more young men without degrees joining the labor market and few professions other than military, software and sales remain promising routes to a middle class life in the US for someone without a degree. Many thousands of men without degrees are turning to software as the best hope for their future (and possibly that of their families). How could this possibly not have an effect on the composition of applicant pools for software positions?

leereeves 9y ago

I'm aware that some people are trying to limit the scope of the discussion, and yet, I wonder why no one cares about the young men who are now at a disadvantage.

malyk 9y ago
Young men aren't at a disadvantage at all. They are still greatly advantaged, just to a very slightly lesser degree than before. It's like a basketball game where a team was ahead by 45 points at the half. Now they are ahead by "only" 25 points, but somehow they are now at a disadvantage? Certainly they aren't winning by as much, but they are still winning by a significant margin. That's the situation we are in in the tech world.
- leereeves 9y ago
  And in the larger world? What data are you relying on that suggests young men are advantaged? I've just cited two very significant statistics that suggest otherwise.
  - unityByFreedom 9y ago
    Leadership positions are dominated by men. Young men have a higher likelihood of landing those roles. That could also explain why fewer men attend college. They don't need as many credentials to land higher ranked positions.
    - manfredo 9y ago
      Elite positions are disproportionately occupied by men, but so are the positions at the lowest rungs on the social ladder. Men make up 93% of chief executive officers at large companies[1], but they also make up about the same percentage of the prison population (91%) [2]. Men disproportionately occupy both ends of success and failure. On the note of education, men may not need credentials to achieve comparatively well paying jobs, but this comes with other trade-offs. For instance men make up 93% of occupational deaths[3] in the U.S. The tendency for to reach better paying jobs without the same educational attainment may not necessarily a sign of privilege so much as social pressure to take high-risk jobs for more pay. Ultimately, things like privilege are subjective and heavily based on moral weightings. Does being more likely to be killed on the job offset a higher pay? Is being more likely to end up as a CEO offset being more likely to end up behind bars? These are moral - not factual - questions, so there's as many right answers are there are people on this planet. [1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-in-leadership-fortune_us_57cfe23ce4b06a74c9f191cd http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/women-in-leadership-fort... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_St... [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_fatality#Gender https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupational_fatality#Gender
      - dragonwriter 9y ago
        > Elite positions are disproportionately occupied by men, but so are the positions at the lowest run on the social ladder. Men make up 93% of chief executive officers at large companies[1], but they also make up about the same percentage of the prison population (91%) [2] It's not unknown for destitute people in America to deliberately try to get sent to prison for better support; it's not the lowest rung on the ladder, counterintuitive—and perverse—as that may be.
      - unityByFreedom 9y ago
        Were these rates very different before women worked, or before they voted? I have a feeling men have always made up a significant portion of the prison population. This isn't a zero-sum game. Helping women get placement in the workplace doesn't mean men won't get jobs. And, it certainly doesn't mean that we will stop supporting young men stay out of prison. The idea is that as we become a more inclusive society we can all have more freedom to do what we want to do.
unityByFreedom 9y ago
>>> 60% of college graduates are women >> The gender gaps under discussion are specific to computer science > I'm aware that some people are trying to limit the scope of the discussion "Trying to limit the scope" ? This post is about tech's approach to diversity. You are the one moving the goalposts. Besides, this is clearly a continuation of the conversation Damore started. I believe Damore limited the scope to computer science because he found research indicating (1) women were more interested in people than things, and (2) programming is more thing-oriented. Given that his cited research is under a good degree of scrutiny, broadening the scope to the suitability of women or men to all fields would require significantly more evidence. > I wonder why no one cares about the young men who are now at a disadvantage. The young men are only at a disadvantage if you believe women are biologically inferior or less-inclined towards certain occupations. As yet, there isn't any evidence that is true. There is a lot of evidence showing that if we remove socialized barriers, like letting women attend university, then their participation rate in male-dominated activities increases. I am unaware of any barriers to young men attending university. In fact, I believe I was a beneficiary of affirmative action, as my grades were slightly lower than the normal for my college, and our school's female-male ratio was 60-40 or more.
urahara 9y ago
Because in the discussion of a highly disadvantaged group (gender or a minority) what matters is how to provide this group with rightfully equal opportunities, not how to widen the gap by looking how to give more advantages to already extremely privileged one.

xiaoma 9y ago

The gap is very relevant. There are literally hundreds of thousands more young men without degrees joining the labor market and few professions other than military, software and sales remain promising routes to a middle class life in the US for someone without a degree. Many thousands of men without degrees are turning to software as the best hope for their future (and possibly that of their families). How could this possibly not have an effect on the composition of applicant pools for software positions?