49 ms·

Sorry, but boys have strong desires to master any technical topics around them that appear important. You kinda lost me at this point I am afraid; this is just

by ErrantX 16y ago

Sorry, but boys have strong desires to master any technical topics around them that appear important. You kinda lost me at this point I am afraid; this is just entirely inaccurate. Certainly there is a prevelance in the male population for technical topics, but it is only a generality, most are averagely interested. The young boy your describe would likely find little interest in most of the other boys, not just the girls :) Females make connections with others, and more generally get acceptance in groups, by gossip where they express their feelings. Boys are taught to keep their feelings suppressed as in "How you feel about it is just irrelevant.". So, what the boy is trying to give the girl is not really girl gossip and, thus, is not liked by the girl. Males make connections by sharing information, especially, neat, cool, technical information Horribly simplistic analysis. Males mostly communicate via gossip too; which is the "neat, cool" part (you probably just don't see it as gossip, but it really is). The "technical information" is undeserving of it's equal share in that sentence - how often do you share technical information with your wider group of male friends. I chat about girls, life, politics, moans and whinges etc. no one would be interested in what I was programming earlier :) She's a girl, knows that she's a young women, and is reluctant to interact with males her age or older without a good reason Girls and boys do spend a lot of time apart at that age. But in groups they spend a lot of time together. a girl cares at all unless, say, being able to give a description will get the her something else she wants, say, an A, and thus praise and approval from others, on a test in middle school general science. This is just hilarious ;) Conclusion: You will get boys such as you describe; but they will be in the vast vast minority, and their excitement is as boring to most of the boys as the girls. The reaction to them is not as simple as you make out, and says absolutely zero about the future careers, interests and motivations of females. I feel you are over simplifying - and that is the main problem with your analysis.

HilbertSpace 16y ago
A simple resolution for the question of this thread is easy: For now, girls tend to pursue what girls do and know that computer science (CS) is for boys and not part of what girls do. So, girls try to avoid CS in college. When they try CS in college, mostly they don't like it. Why don't they like it? Girls are (1) much more emotional than boys, (2) much more social, (3) eager to get praise, acceptance, and approval from others from work that "helps people" in the sense I explained (essentially volunteer work to help suffering people), e.g., one of the daughters of Bush 43 went to Ethiopia, and (4) better at, and more strongly seek, human to human contact. So, on these criteria, girls see that CS is so detailed and technical it seems (1) emotionally cold, (2) not very social, (3) not good for work that "helps people", and (4) not good for human to human contact. So, many girls who try CS soon conclude that they don't like it. For the future, girls who do not want to concentrate on being mommies, unlike for nearly all of history, will be able to so not concentrate and, thus, on average will be removing their genes from the gene pool. What will be left will be genes of women especially determined to be good as mommies and even less interested in CS. You missed it with my: "He's all fired up about the technical topic. Sorry, but boys have strong desires to master any technical topics around them that appear important. In part there is a lot of innate curiosity." Then for my "I'll let you justify that yourself" you didn't! The "technical topics" here are not yet nearly all that would be popular on Hacker News. Instead the topics are whatever are "around them" (the boys as they grow up). So, depending on what they see in their family, adults' careers, neighborhood, community, etc., the topics might be about cars, cattle raising, household electricity, operation of a commercial pizza oven, cardiology, roasting pastrami, trading foreign currencies, computing, etc. Why? The usual explanation is that the boys know that they are small versions of men, that men take competency in their careers very seriously, that they, the boys, do not have such competency, feel vulnerable and out of control from the lack of competency, and, thus, as part of growing up into such competency are eager to soak up everything that is relevant they can. That's the standard explanation. Although you didn't 'get it' the first time I explained it, didn't work it out for yourself, I believe you can understand this point. For whatever reasons, you are straining to disagree with what I wrote. I remember a girl in the fifth grade: Her handwriting was good, and mine, as is common for boys at that age, was poor. So, she looked at my paper and said that she couldn't read it. So, I copied the paper again in block letters, and again she said she couldn't read it. I copied it again in larger, extremely clear block letters, and she gave the same answer. Of course, she was lying and having fun manipulating. You are doing much the same. Enjoy the games of fifth grade girls.
- ErrantX 16y ago
  Of course, she was lying and having fun manipulating. You are doing much the same. Enjoy the games of fifth grade girls. That's... a terrible piece of rhetoric... :( I don't see how I can explain that what you are saying appears to be founded in stereotype and a lack of understanding. So, I guess the argument is over, except to say: Don't overthink things, and don't oversimplify. Your point #3, for example, is based on so little fact and on so much on prejudice. I actually think what you could have done is observed the somewhat socially inept computer geek stereotype; and extrapolated the direct opposite as "how girls are". There is a lot of commonality between male and female phsyc - and many differences. At a young age both those extremes are amplified. the topics might be about cars, cattle raising, household electricity, operation of a commercial pizza oven, cardiology, roasting pastrami, trading foreign currencies, computing, etc. I encourage you to work with teenage boys and try to engage with them on topics like these. Nowadays it is not at all common to find a kid who has such interests; computer games, girls, sports and food (i.e. "gossip") are much more common. will be able to so not concentrate and, thus, on average will be removing their genes from the gene pool Essentially you are saying that... girls who do technical careers won't be as able (or be suited) to procreate and so future women will be genetically pre-disposed to motherhood? Do you have any idea how genetics works, for a start? I'd love to read your work on isolating the genes related to good motherhood and proficiency in technical topics and your research into how they interrelate within the population... ;) Why? The usual explanation is that the boys know that they are small versions of men, that men take competency in their careers very seriously, that they, the boys, do not have such competency, feel vulnerable and out of control from the lack of competency, and, thus, as part of growing up into such competency are eager to soak up everything that is relevant they can. That's the standard explanation. Although you didn't 'get it' the first time I explained it, didn't work it out for yourself, I believe you can understand this point. Standard explanation? Really? Find me a kid that, at age 15, is concerned about his competency in relation to a future career. Now, I could agree they would be concerned about competency in areas their social peers are strong; say football. In fact; I will make it easier. Find me some peer reviewed material that identifies this as a standard explanation For whatever reasons, you are straining to disagree with what I wrote. It's really not hard :) although we seem to have gotten off track from the main topic, which I thought was your theory of little girls being pre-disposed to sharing & caring and not interested in technical topics because of genetics.

by ErrantX 16y ago

HilbertSpace 16y ago

A simple resolution for the question of this thread is easy: For now, girls tend to pursue what girls do and know that computer science (CS) is for boys and not part of what girls do. So, girls try to avoid CS in college. When they try CS in college, mostly they don't like it. Why don't they like it? Girls are (1) much more emotional than boys, (2) much more social, (3) eager to get praise, acceptance, and approval from others from work that "helps people" in the sense I explained (essentially volunteer work to help suffering people), e.g., one of the daughters of Bush 43 went to Ethiopia, and (4) better at, and more strongly seek, human to human contact. So, on these criteria, girls see that CS is so detailed and technical it seems (1) emotionally cold, (2) not very social, (3) not good for work that "helps people", and (4) not good for human to human contact. So, many girls who try CS soon conclude that they don't like it. For the future, girls who do not want to concentrate on being mommies, unlike for nearly all of history, will be able to so not concentrate and, thus, on average will be removing their genes from the gene pool. What will be left will be genes of women especially determined to be good as mommies and even less interested in CS. You missed it with my: "He's all fired up about the technical topic. Sorry, but boys have strong desires to master any technical topics around them that appear important. In part there is a lot of innate curiosity." Then for my "I'll let you justify that yourself" you didn't! The "technical topics" here are not yet nearly all that would be popular on Hacker News. Instead the topics are whatever are "around them" (the boys as they grow up). So, depending on what they see in their family, adults' careers, neighborhood, community, etc., the topics might be about cars, cattle raising, household electricity, operation of a commercial pizza oven, cardiology, roasting pastrami, trading foreign currencies, computing, etc. Why? The usual explanation is that the boys know that they are small versions of men, that men take competency in their careers very seriously, that they, the boys, do not have such competency, feel vulnerable and out of control from the lack of competency, and, thus, as part of growing up into such competency are eager to soak up everything that is relevant they can. That's the standard explanation. Although you didn't 'get it' the first time I explained it, didn't work it out for yourself, I believe you can understand this point. For whatever reasons, you are straining to disagree with what I wrote. I remember a girl in the fifth grade: Her handwriting was good, and mine, as is common for boys at that age, was poor. So, she looked at my paper and said that she couldn't read it. So, I copied the paper again in block letters, and again she said she couldn't read it. I copied it again in larger, extremely clear block letters, and she gave the same answer. Of course, she was lying and having fun manipulating. You are doing much the same. Enjoy the games of fifth grade girls.

ErrantX 16y ago
Of course, she was lying and having fun manipulating. You are doing much the same. Enjoy the games of fifth grade girls. That's... a terrible piece of rhetoric... :( I don't see how I can explain that what you are saying appears to be founded in stereotype and a lack of understanding. So, I guess the argument is over, except to say: Don't overthink things, and don't oversimplify. Your point #3, for example, is based on so little fact and on so much on prejudice. I actually think what you could have done is observed the somewhat socially inept computer geek stereotype; and extrapolated the direct opposite as "how girls are". There is a lot of commonality between male and female phsyc - and many differences. At a young age both those extremes are amplified. the topics might be about cars, cattle raising, household electricity, operation of a commercial pizza oven, cardiology, roasting pastrami, trading foreign currencies, computing, etc. I encourage you to work with teenage boys and try to engage with them on topics like these. Nowadays it is not at all common to find a kid who has such interests; computer games, girls, sports and food (i.e. "gossip") are much more common. will be able to so not concentrate and, thus, on average will be removing their genes from the gene pool Essentially you are saying that... girls who do technical careers won't be as able (or be suited) to procreate and so future women will be genetically pre-disposed to motherhood? Do you have any idea how genetics works, for a start? I'd love to read your work on isolating the genes related to good motherhood and proficiency in technical topics and your research into how they interrelate within the population... ;) Why? The usual explanation is that the boys know that they are small versions of men, that men take competency in their careers very seriously, that they, the boys, do not have such competency, feel vulnerable and out of control from the lack of competency, and, thus, as part of growing up into such competency are eager to soak up everything that is relevant they can. That's the standard explanation. Although you didn't 'get it' the first time I explained it, didn't work it out for yourself, I believe you can understand this point. Standard explanation? Really? Find me a kid that, at age 15, is concerned about his competency in relation to a future career. Now, I could agree they would be concerned about competency in areas their social peers are strong; say football. In fact; I will make it easier. Find me some peer reviewed material that identifies this as a standard explanation For whatever reasons, you are straining to disagree with what I wrote. It's really not hard :) although we seem to have gotten off track from the main topic, which I thought was your theory of little girls being pre-disposed to sharing & caring and not interested in technical topics because of genetics.