3 ms·

The Seattle Times did a nice job here of presenting viewpoints from women Computer Scientists at different points in their careers.

by lph 8y ago

geebee 8y ago
I agree. I am disappointed with the headline, though. The headline reads: "A UW professor argued that women don’t want to code. What do women computer scientists have to say?" The sub headline reads: "Six women computer scientists from the University of Washington respond to an essay about why women don’t pursue computer science as often as men." In some ways, I think that misrepresenting these headlines can be harmful. A young woman considering CS who reads the headline might conclude that a professor at UW things that women, across the board, are uninterested in the CS major. If she reads the sub-headline, she might conclude that he believes that fewer of the top students will be women, but that certainly some of them will be. I can't say that the second is welcoming, but it's a very, very different statement from the first.
- closetohome 8y ago
  Seems like a dangerous bias for a teacher to have. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy as he makes sure his female students don't rise to the top of the class.
  - geebee 8y ago
    Does he, though? That's a stretch. If someone believes that 20% of the elite computer scientists will be women, why does it follow that he would not have confidence in the women who take his class? For instance, suppose about 20% of his class is women. He's not saying that this 20% of his class shouldn't be there, or won't rise to the top. He is saying that it may not be productive to even out this ratio. Plenty to disagree with and object to in that thesis. But that is very different from not believing in the women who take his class, and it is utterly different from sabotaging the women in his class (making sure they don't rise to the top). I want to be very clear in this comment and elsewhere that I believe that there is plenty to object to in the claim that 20% represents some kind of natural plateau. My position is that we need to accurately represent the point of view that we are debating.
    - manicdee 8y ago
      If you want to accurately represent the point of view being debated you need to consider the motivations and insinuations surrounding the 20% number, rather than performing semantic onanism with the ratio itself.

The Seattle Times did a nice job here of presenting viewpoints from women Computer Scientists at different points in their careers.

by lph 8y ago

The Seattle Times did a nice job here of presenting viewpoints from women Computer Scientists at different points in their careers.

geebee 8y ago

I agree. I am disappointed with the headline, though. The headline reads: "A UW professor argued that women don’t want to code. What do women computer scientists have to say?" The sub headline reads: "Six women computer scientists from the University of Washington respond to an essay about why women don’t pursue computer science as often as men." In some ways, I think that misrepresenting these headlines can be harmful. A young woman considering CS who reads the headline might conclude that a professor at UW things that women, across the board, are uninterested in the CS major. If she reads the sub-headline, she might conclude that he believes that fewer of the top students will be women, but that certainly some of them will be. I can't say that the second is welcoming, but it's a very, very different statement from the first.

closetohome 8y ago
Seems like a dangerous bias for a teacher to have. It's a self-fulfilling prophecy as he makes sure his female students don't rise to the top of the class.
- geebee 8y ago
  Does he, though? That's a stretch. If someone believes that 20% of the elite computer scientists will be women, why does it follow that he would not have confidence in the women who take his class? For instance, suppose about 20% of his class is women. He's not saying that this 20% of his class shouldn't be there, or won't rise to the top. He is saying that it may not be productive to even out this ratio. Plenty to disagree with and object to in that thesis. But that is very different from not believing in the women who take his class, and it is utterly different from sabotaging the women in his class (making sure they don't rise to the top). I want to be very clear in this comment and elsewhere that I believe that there is plenty to object to in the claim that 20% represents some kind of natural plateau. My position is that we need to accurately represent the point of view that we are debating.
  - manicdee 8y ago
    If you want to accurately represent the point of view being debated you need to consider the motivations and insinuations surrounding the 20% number, rather than performing semantic onanism with the ratio itself.