3 ms·

> So, they're engaged in other STEM fields at 2x-3x the extent they're engaged in CS... That statement is so broad as to render it utterly meaningless. I don't

> So, they're engaged in other STEM fields at 2x-3x the extent they're engaged in CS... That statement is so broad as to render it utterly meaningless. I don't doubt it applies to medicine, for example. But does it apply to automotive or mining engineering? And even if it did apply to every non-CS STEM field, that still would not preclude the possibility that women, as a group, are simply not as interested in CS to the same extent men are.

tptacek 9y ago
Earth sciences. Chemistry. Biochemistry. Math (for Christ's sake). Astronomy. Statistics. Evolutionary biology. Neuroscience. Molecular biology. All double-digits better (some have actual parity) in female representation than computer science, which shares its gender disparity distinction with only two other (generally defined) STEM fields: ee/mech engineering and physics. Nobody is disputing that women are less interested in working in CS than men. They clearly are. What is obvious to some of us is that the reason for that disinterest is that the field is hostile to them. It is hard to explain otherwise how something like three times as many women might obtain post-graduate mathematics degrees --- a pursuit that is more intellectually demanding and less lucrative than computer science, which routinely pays six-digit salaries to people immediately out of school simply to wire database rows up to HTML tables.
- rhapsodic 9y ago
  > They clearly are. What is obvious to some of us is that the reason for that disinterest is that the field is hostile to them. Oh yes, hostility manifested by half-century old magazine ads or phrases like "cowboy coder." If they're allowing their career paths to be altered by innocuous stuff like that, or what a teacher might have told them, I don't think they want it that badly. There are no qualified women banging on the door of the software development profession demanding to be let in. The door is wide open to them, and it always has been.
  - tptacek 9y ago
    No, sorry, I'm not going to play Calvinball. You directly challenged a statement I made upthread, and now that I've taken the time to clarify it, you've decided to respond to an earlier comment I didn't write. If you'd like to keep discussing this with me, you're going to either have to rebut what I said, or acknowledge it.
    - rhapsodic 9y ago
      > No, sorry, I'm not going to play Calvinball. You directly challenged a statement I made upthread Could you clarify? In every one of my replies to you in this thread, the part I quoted came directly from the post (of yours) to which I replied. And where did I directly challenge any of your statements? I think you have me mixed up with someone else who responded to you.
      - tptacek 9y ago
        You claimed that my statement about greater female participation in what turns out to be most of the rest of the stem fields was "so broad as to be meaningless". I responded in greater detail. You re-rebutted Rayiner's original comment without acknowledging mine. Acknowledge it or rebut it; don't pretend you didn't see it.
        rhapsodic 9y ago
        > You claimed that my statement about greater female participation in what turns out to be most of the rest of the stem fields was "so broad as to be meaningless". I responded in greater detail. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that you thought naming a handful of other STEM fields along with a rough participation ratio made your premise any more meaningful. You seem to think that, from the fact that women participate in other STEM fields at a greater rate than CS, you can infer the reason they aren't well-represented in software development. To you, it's "obvious" that "the field is hostile to them." And others who share your view have defined "the field" so broadly as to include boys in jr. high school computer clubs. Well, to me at least, it's "obvious" that your logic there is faulty.
- JamesBarney 9y ago
  tptacek I agree with you that software needs more women, I think it would be good for women, and good for software. And contrary to that recent memo I think we should do more to encourage women to join CS. I think it's really important to get the cause right because if we fix the wrong problem we'll be spinning our wheels instead of getting women to join tech. And I haven't been entirely convinced the gender gap is due to sexism and hostility in the workplace because what my female friends and developers say doesn't jive with that theory. When I ask my female friends, who are very smart and would kick ass as developers, "why don't wanna you wanna join programming? Pay is great you could double your salary in two years", they usually say something along the lines of "I don't think I'd like it" or "sounds boring to sit in front of a computer all day". And when I've heard my female friends talk about leaving programming its never been because someone made a slightly sexist comment once every couple of months. They all talked about how that was annoying but didn't really bother them. But they usually said that sometimes they fantasize about a job where they get to work with people more, and make a positive impact one they could see like therapy and teaching. (granted the female developers I know work for large companies with powerful HR departments so the level of sexism probably isn't representative of the startup scene) I'm curious if you've had a very different experience. Do the women in your life like to program but have been turned off from doing it professionally because of perceived or actual hostility and sexism in the workplace? What resources(ideally empirical) would you recommend to convince someone who was skeptical but open minded to the hostility hypothesis that it's true? Do you think this hypothesis is tentative but likely or do you think the evidence is so overwhelmingly in support of this hypothesis that it's an open and shut case?

tptacek 9y ago

Earth sciences. Chemistry. Biochemistry. Math (for Christ's sake). Astronomy. Statistics. Evolutionary biology. Neuroscience. Molecular biology. All double-digits better (some have actual parity) in female representation than computer science, which shares its gender disparity distinction with only two other (generally defined) STEM fields: ee/mech engineering and physics. Nobody is disputing that women are less interested in working in CS than men. They clearly are. What is obvious to some of us is that the reason for that disinterest is that the field is hostile to them. It is hard to explain otherwise how something like three times as many women might obtain post-graduate mathematics degrees --- a pursuit that is more intellectually demanding and less lucrative than computer science, which routinely pays six-digit salaries to people immediately out of school simply to wire database rows up to HTML tables.

rhapsodic 9y ago
> They clearly are. What is obvious to some of us is that the reason for that disinterest is that the field is hostile to them. Oh yes, hostility manifested by half-century old magazine ads or phrases like "cowboy coder." If they're allowing their career paths to be altered by innocuous stuff like that, or what a teacher might have told them, I don't think they want it that badly. There are no qualified women banging on the door of the software development profession demanding to be let in. The door is wide open to them, and it always has been.
- tptacek 9y ago
  No, sorry, I'm not going to play Calvinball. You directly challenged a statement I made upthread, and now that I've taken the time to clarify it, you've decided to respond to an earlier comment I didn't write. If you'd like to keep discussing this with me, you're going to either have to rebut what I said, or acknowledge it.
  - rhapsodic 9y ago
    > No, sorry, I'm not going to play Calvinball. You directly challenged a statement I made upthread Could you clarify? In every one of my replies to you in this thread, the part I quoted came directly from the post (of yours) to which I replied. And where did I directly challenge any of your statements? I think you have me mixed up with someone else who responded to you.
    - tptacek 9y ago
      You claimed that my statement about greater female participation in what turns out to be most of the rest of the stem fields was "so broad as to be meaningless". I responded in greater detail. You re-rebutted Rayiner's original comment without acknowledging mine. Acknowledge it or rebut it; don't pretend you didn't see it.
      - rhapsodic 9y ago
        > You claimed that my statement about greater female participation in what turns out to be most of the rest of the stem fields was "so broad as to be meaningless". I responded in greater detail. Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't realize that you thought naming a handful of other STEM fields along with a rough participation ratio made your premise any more meaningful. You seem to think that, from the fact that women participate in other STEM fields at a greater rate than CS, you can infer the reason they aren't well-represented in software development. To you, it's "obvious" that "the field is hostile to them." And others who share your view have defined "the field" so broadly as to include boys in jr. high school computer clubs. Well, to me at least, it's "obvious" that your logic there is faulty.
JamesBarney 9y ago
tptacek I agree with you that software needs more women, I think it would be good for women, and good for software. And contrary to that recent memo I think we should do more to encourage women to join CS. I think it's really important to get the cause right because if we fix the wrong problem we'll be spinning our wheels instead of getting women to join tech. And I haven't been entirely convinced the gender gap is due to sexism and hostility in the workplace because what my female friends and developers say doesn't jive with that theory. When I ask my female friends, who are very smart and would kick ass as developers, "why don't wanna you wanna join programming? Pay is great you could double your salary in two years", they usually say something along the lines of "I don't think I'd like it" or "sounds boring to sit in front of a computer all day". And when I've heard my female friends talk about leaving programming its never been because someone made a slightly sexist comment once every couple of months. They all talked about how that was annoying but didn't really bother them. But they usually said that sometimes they fantasize about a job where they get to work with people more, and make a positive impact one they could see like therapy and teaching. (granted the female developers I know work for large companies with powerful HR departments so the level of sexism probably isn't representative of the startup scene) I'm curious if you've had a very different experience. Do the women in your life like to program but have been turned off from doing it professionally because of perceived or actual hostility and sexism in the workplace? What resources(ideally empirical) would you recommend to convince someone who was skeptical but open minded to the hostility hypothesis that it's true? Do you think this hypothesis is tentative but likely or do you think the evidence is so overwhelmingly in support of this hypothesis that it's an open and shut case?