9 ms·

It sounds like informing everyone that these options exist is part of creating a more equal opportunity. If two people didn't have the same information for avai

It sounds like informing everyone that these options exist is part of creating a more equal opportunity. If two people didn't have the same information for available options then there wasn't an equal opportunity.

jimbokun 7y ago
I'm not following you. Girls don't know that there's such a thing as programming or Computer Science degrees?
- izzydata 7y ago
  If they aren't convinced it is a real option than they didn't have the same opportunity. Either way it isn't a problem that can be solved by pushing people into the field to create a more equal ratio.
- jayd16 7y ago
  It's about internalizing the idea that it's a feasible choice you give actual thought to.
  - jimbokun 7y ago
    How to distinguish between "I didn't know that was a feasible choice for me" and "I know what programming is like and I don't want to do that as a career"? How many girls and women fall into each category?
    - jayd16 7y ago
      I'm not sure I understand the question. As phrased I think you have a natural understanding of the difference. Are you asking how we measure that nationally?
      - jimbokun 7y ago
        I mean what are the relative sizes of those two groups, maybe worded it awkwardly.
    - Impossible 7y ago
      The majority of people fall into the first category, regardless of sex. There are a lot of people who with exposure might consider software development as a career, but didn't think of it as an option. For various historical reasons (exposure to programmable computers, video games, adults that can explain or teach programming, access in school, peers that program, role models, etc) the people that tend to realize programming is a career option and understand what that career might entail tend to be white and asian males. That isn't to say there aren't many white and asian males that also don't know programming is a career option. Now that "tech" is so important and lucrative I'm sure this is changing to some extent, but this is a recent trend that's probably 5 years old at most. Tech wasn't viewed the same as it was now in 2012-2014 and felt like a much more risky and inaccessible field. Now it looks a lot more like any other high paying corporate job.
      - jimbokun 7y ago
        5 years old? Are you joking? The Dot Net bubble in the 90s was arguably the biggest news story of the decade. Everyone knew there was tons of money to be had in tech, and stories of people landing jobs at startups after learning a little bit of HTML.
        Impossible 7y ago
        I'm aware of the dot com bubble. My point wasn't that people weren't making money, my point is tech looked risky and new, especially the web based companies that dominate now. Microsoft, IBM, Oracle etc were stable jobs but they were for engineers/nerds. There was money to be made back then of course but money isn't the only thing that makes jobs attractive. Social and cultural status and stability are important as well. A doctor is a safe, high paying, high status job. Tech is only just now starting to look that way to mainstream people.
mixmastamyk 7y ago
I remember high-school guidance counsel lists being dominated by things like "actuarial" and "insurance salesman." After reading that I would have rather worked in a restaurant my whole life. Absolutely had no clue what to go into and they didn't help much. Perhaps they were at a greater disadvantage because the internet revolution was about to hit.
tenpies 7y ago
I just hate that the emphasis seems to be strictly based on careers with high income. There is no focus spreading equality or equity or informing everyone when the career is about social good, life satisfaction, or blunt quality of life.
- zarkov99 7y ago
  Yes, don't forget all the shitty careers, with long hours, danger, and significant health hazards. Not much equality of outcome on those either. Somehow no one is claiming sexism is the cause of disparity for those.
  - foldr 7y ago
    Actually, a lot of people are saying that sexism is the cause of disparity in those cases. It's a commonplace observation that sexism harms men as well as women. Historically, the professions you're alluding to have been closed to women by men. So for example, the reason that women couldn't serve in the military until relatively recently is not that women used their power and influence within society to get a pass on military service. Rather, it's that men didn't want to let women serve.
    - zarkov99 7y ago
      Really? Below is a list of the top 8 most dangerous jobs in the US. Which ones do you think would have equal gender representation if there was no sexism? 1 - Logging workers 2 - Fishers and fishing workers 3 - Aircraft pilots and flight engineers 4 - Roofers 5 - Refuse and recyclable material collectors 6 - Structural iron and steel workers 7 - Truck drivers 8 - Farmers, ranchers and agricultural managers
      - foldr 7y ago
        That list is obviously a bit whack (how can being a pilot possibly be the third most dangerous job in the US?) But yeah, many of those jobs have a skewed gender distribution in significant part due to sexist stereotypes.

jimbokun 7y ago

I'm not following you. Girls don't know that there's such a thing as programming or Computer Science degrees?

izzydata 7y ago
If they aren't convinced it is a real option than they didn't have the same opportunity. Either way it isn't a problem that can be solved by pushing people into the field to create a more equal ratio.
jayd16 7y ago
It's about internalizing the idea that it's a feasible choice you give actual thought to.
- jimbokun 7y ago
  How to distinguish between "I didn't know that was a feasible choice for me" and "I know what programming is like and I don't want to do that as a career"? How many girls and women fall into each category?
  - jayd16 7y ago
    I'm not sure I understand the question. As phrased I think you have a natural understanding of the difference. Are you asking how we measure that nationally?
    - jimbokun 7y ago
      I mean what are the relative sizes of those two groups, maybe worded it awkwardly.
  - Impossible 7y ago
    The majority of people fall into the first category, regardless of sex. There are a lot of people who with exposure might consider software development as a career, but didn't think of it as an option. For various historical reasons (exposure to programmable computers, video games, adults that can explain or teach programming, access in school, peers that program, role models, etc) the people that tend to realize programming is a career option and understand what that career might entail tend to be white and asian males. That isn't to say there aren't many white and asian males that also don't know programming is a career option. Now that "tech" is so important and lucrative I'm sure this is changing to some extent, but this is a recent trend that's probably 5 years old at most. Tech wasn't viewed the same as it was now in 2012-2014 and felt like a much more risky and inaccessible field. Now it looks a lot more like any other high paying corporate job.
    - jimbokun 7y ago
      5 years old? Are you joking? The Dot Net bubble in the 90s was arguably the biggest news story of the decade. Everyone knew there was tons of money to be had in tech, and stories of people landing jobs at startups after learning a little bit of HTML.
      - Impossible 7y ago
        I'm aware of the dot com bubble. My point wasn't that people weren't making money, my point is tech looked risky and new, especially the web based companies that dominate now. Microsoft, IBM, Oracle etc were stable jobs but they were for engineers/nerds. There was money to be made back then of course but money isn't the only thing that makes jobs attractive. Social and cultural status and stability are important as well. A doctor is a safe, high paying, high status job. Tech is only just now starting to look that way to mainstream people.

mixmastamyk 7y ago

I remember high-school guidance counsel lists being dominated by things like "actuarial" and "insurance salesman." After reading that I would have rather worked in a restaurant my whole life. Absolutely had no clue what to go into and they didn't help much. Perhaps they were at a greater disadvantage because the internet revolution was about to hit.

tenpies 7y ago

I just hate that the emphasis seems to be strictly based on careers with high income. There is no focus spreading equality or equity or informing everyone when the career is about social good, life satisfaction, or blunt quality of life.

zarkov99 7y ago
Yes, don't forget all the shitty careers, with long hours, danger, and significant health hazards. Not much equality of outcome on those either. Somehow no one is claiming sexism is the cause of disparity for those.
- foldr 7y ago
  Actually, a lot of people are saying that sexism is the cause of disparity in those cases. It's a commonplace observation that sexism harms men as well as women. Historically, the professions you're alluding to have been closed to women by men. So for example, the reason that women couldn't serve in the military until relatively recently is not that women used their power and influence within society to get a pass on military service. Rather, it's that men didn't want to let women serve.
  - zarkov99 7y ago
    Really? Below is a list of the top 8 most dangerous jobs in the US. Which ones do you think would have equal gender representation if there was no sexism? 1 - Logging workers 2 - Fishers and fishing workers 3 - Aircraft pilots and flight engineers 4 - Roofers 5 - Refuse and recyclable material collectors 6 - Structural iron and steel workers 7 - Truck drivers 8 - Farmers, ranchers and agricultural managers
    - foldr 7y ago
      That list is obviously a bit whack (how can being a pilot possibly be the third most dangerous job in the US?) But yeah, many of those jobs have a skewed gender distribution in significant part due to sexist stereotypes.