3 ms·

I strongly disagree with the claim that there is no gender difference (implied by what you wrote) and that imbalance in gender representation is 100% due to soc

by chmike 9y ago

I strongly disagree with the claim that there is no gender difference (implied by what you wrote) and that imbalance in gender representation is 100% due to social blocking. When I was a student in computer science more than 30 years ago, in our class of more than 30 students there was only one female. There was no entrance selection or any filter or money involved (not in USA). We are dealing with overlapping gaussians. Girls and boys are today educated without making a difference through all their childhood, and I think that this may give the false impression to them that there is no difference. But whoever had children or has seen many children will see that some differences in behavior and interest are blattan and can't be socially induced. I do not deny that blocking MAY exist and some men are sexists, I have seen such discusting behavior. I considr them disfunctional. But this is not 100% the cause of gender imbalance in tech. There is no blocking to contribute to OSS, and good programmers get hired regardless of gender. You should read back the [Donner Kruger effect](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning–Kruger_effect) to remind you of you own bias when evaluating your competence.

grey-area 9y ago
I strongly disagree with the claim that there is no gender difference I sincerely don't think that anyone is proposing that there is no difference between men and women, the discussion is over the extent of the differences. We are dealing with overlapping gaussians. The question is the extent of the overlap. If the overlap is very close on many abilities, men exceed women on some (like say maths), and women exceed men on some others required for a programming job (like say, empathy), then you'd expect distribution of jobs to be around 50% with slight variations. There is no indication that they vary by the amount required to explain the disparity of jobs in tech, indeed, this is easily refuted by looking at the number of women in technical jobs in the US in the 70s. PS It's Dunning-Kruger
- bluecalm 9y ago
  >>indeed, this is easily refuted by looking at the number of women in technical jobs in the US in the 70s. You could make your point stronger if you propose an explanation to what changed since then. It's very unlikely that men (and society in general) become more sexist, if anything we have made a lot of progress. I can tell you what the opposing side says though. They say women had little choice back then and just did what was needed. Today women have more choice, freedom and there is less discrimination so they feel free to pursue what is interesting to them which is not tech more often than in case of men.
  - WaxProlix 9y ago
    "You make your counterexample stronger by giving your opponents, who have proven they are uninterested in actual debate, something else to latch on to in order to try to make you look wrong or stupid" Seems like a bad tack to me - staying on topic is good enough for this kind of corrective comment.
  - jamespo 9y ago
    One theory is the strong marketing of 8-bit home microcomputers towards boys
    - ThomPete 9y ago
      And because boys are more interested in things... ?
camgunz 9y ago
> Girls and boys are today educated without making a difference through all their childhood, and I think that this may give the false impression to them that there is no difference. You should really just google 'gender difference education' and you'll see there's dozens and dozens of papers that say education is very gendered. The experience of girls in pre-college (and college too for what it's worth) is very different from that of boys. > I do not deny that blocking MAY exist and some men are sexists... [b]ut this is not 100% the cause of gender imbalance in tech. The "percentage" thing is something that comes up in global warming discussions too; people will ask "what percentage of global warming is caused by humans", and because the issue is extraordinarily complex, the answer comes out sounding like equivocation. You're probably right, social cues are probably not 100% the cause of the gender gap in tech. But the issue is complex; it's not like you're gonna see a pie-chart of simple gender gap explanations and then say, "we'll just 'allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive' and crank up pair programming and part time work; that should cover 80% of it". You can get complex reasons though, i.e. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/14/many-women-in-stem-fields-expect-to-quit-within-five-years-survey-finds https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/14/many-women-i.... But good luck fixing "balancing work-life responsibilities" and "workplace culture"; those are complex issues that deal with early education, social and cultural expectations of women (and men), federal and state social policies and workplace policies, politics, and deep-seated gender roles. There's not really a knob you can turn to fix this stuff, and that's why we don't use percentages to talk about it.
wpietri 9y ago
Was the magical land you come from one without a history of patriarchy and sexism stretching back centuries? P.S., it's "Dunning-Kruger", genius.

by chmike 9y ago

grey-area 9y ago

I strongly disagree with the claim that there is no gender difference I sincerely don't think that anyone is proposing that there is no difference between men and women, the discussion is over the extent of the differences. We are dealing with overlapping gaussians. The question is the extent of the overlap. If the overlap is very close on many abilities, men exceed women on some (like say maths), and women exceed men on some others required for a programming job (like say, empathy), then you'd expect distribution of jobs to be around 50% with slight variations. There is no indication that they vary by the amount required to explain the disparity of jobs in tech, indeed, this is easily refuted by looking at the number of women in technical jobs in the US in the 70s. PS It's Dunning-Kruger

bluecalm 9y ago
>>indeed, this is easily refuted by looking at the number of women in technical jobs in the US in the 70s. You could make your point stronger if you propose an explanation to what changed since then. It's very unlikely that men (and society in general) become more sexist, if anything we have made a lot of progress. I can tell you what the opposing side says though. They say women had little choice back then and just did what was needed. Today women have more choice, freedom and there is less discrimination so they feel free to pursue what is interesting to them which is not tech more often than in case of men.
- WaxProlix 9y ago
  "You make your counterexample stronger by giving your opponents, who have proven they are uninterested in actual debate, something else to latch on to in order to try to make you look wrong or stupid" Seems like a bad tack to me - staying on topic is good enough for this kind of corrective comment.
- jamespo 9y ago
  One theory is the strong marketing of 8-bit home microcomputers towards boys
  - ThomPete 9y ago
    And because boys are more interested in things... ?

camgunz 9y ago

> Girls and boys are today educated without making a difference through all their childhood, and I think that this may give the false impression to them that there is no difference. You should really just google 'gender difference education' and you'll see there's dozens and dozens of papers that say education is very gendered. The experience of girls in pre-college (and college too for what it's worth) is very different from that of boys. > I do not deny that blocking MAY exist and some men are sexists... [b]ut this is not 100% the cause of gender imbalance in tech. The "percentage" thing is something that comes up in global warming discussions too; people will ask "what percentage of global warming is caused by humans", and because the issue is extraordinarily complex, the answer comes out sounding like equivocation. You're probably right, social cues are probably not 100% the cause of the gender gap in tech. But the issue is complex; it's not like you're gonna see a pie-chart of simple gender gap explanations and then say, "we'll just 'allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive' and crank up pair programming and part time work; that should cover 80% of it". You can get complex reasons though, i.e. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/14/many-women-in-stem-fields-expect-to-quit-within-five-years-survey-finds https://www.theguardian.com/science/2015/dec/14/many-women-i.... But good luck fixing "balancing work-life responsibilities" and "workplace culture"; those are complex issues that deal with early education, social and cultural expectations of women (and men), federal and state social policies and workplace policies, politics, and deep-seated gender roles. There's not really a knob you can turn to fix this stuff, and that's why we don't use percentages to talk about it.

wpietri 9y ago

Was the magical land you come from one without a history of patriarchy and sexism stretching back centuries? P.S., it's "Dunning-Kruger", genius.