4 ms·

The industry is sexist. That's the answer. No more, and no less than other industries. If it's not more sexist than other industries, then that can't be the re

The industry is sexist. That's the answer. No more, and no less than other industries. If it's not more sexist than other industries, then that can't be the reason why there are fewer women. They call it a pipeline problem when it's really a willingness problem. If they took it seriously they'd already have a solution. Please enlighten us with the solution that will produce an equal ratio of men and women when 80% of CS graduates are men.

vinceguidry 6y ago
I've got one reply left in me before I bow out of this discussion. > Please enlighten us with the solution that will produce an equal ratio of men and women when 80% of CS graduates are men. It's very simple. Exceedingly simple. So simple you'll wish you'd have thought of it, and if you think hard about it after I explain it you'll see your own sexism in why you didn't. Here it is. The solution is to drop the ridiculous credentialism that's infected the field. You do not need a CS degree to contribute usefully and advance a career in this field. You can have a CS degree and still be largely useless compared to someone without. I do not have a CS degree. I do not have ANY degree. Yet I make more money than many of my peers in my job market. Guess which race and gender I am, no prizes for getting it right the first time. Systemized racism and sexism are why companies won't usefully invest in the careers of minorities, and why they invested in mine even without the proper 'stuff'. It's elitism, pure and simple. Go ahead and come up with all your reasons. Those reasons support and continue elitism. They're excuses. And that's my last reply on this topic, I hope more HNers start picking up the torch. Because talking about this shit to people who aren't really interested in the topic more than they just want it to go away makes me unreasonably mad and that's no way to contribute usefully to the discussion.
- dnissley 6y ago
  I'm confused by this argument re: credentialism because I can't think of a high paying career with less credentialism than being a software engineer. And yet the gender imbalance is larger here than in way more credentialist careers -- see law, medicine, etc.
- ryan93 6y ago
  There are lots of people in software with no CS or elite credentials. Are any where close to 50% of those people women?
- arcsin 6y ago
  This thread is a really good example of why people like SSC. Personally I have no problem believing biases against minorities exist in this industry. And to whatever extent it does exist I support trying to fix that. But then the discussion starts to get heated and people start saying things that stop making logical sense to me with the implication that if it doesn't make logical sense to me then I'm a racist, sexist or whatever. Someone in this thread asked how it's not a pipeline problem if 80% of graduating CS students are male, and your response is to just stop caring about CS degrees. But how does that make sense unless you think that there is an equally disproportionate ratio of uncredentialed yet qualified women programmers? And frankly the rhetorical techniques you're using here feel dishonest, implying that if I don't accept your argument then either I didn't think hard enough about it or I'm sexist. Or the "this is my last reply on this topic". If people have genuine questions why not answer them? And after seeing this kind of discourse so many times there is such a sense of relief when someone is willing to say "let's look at the truth even if it's an inconvenient one" because to come up with a good solution you have to start with what's actually true right? For a lot of people that's what SSC represents and that's why they feel so strongly about defending it.
  - h0l0cube 6y ago
    I'll try to steel-man the OP's argument. The notion that there's both a biological component and a sexism component to the statistical divergence between equal-sex representation in CS, should not be contradictory. OTOH, if someone is primed with an argument about the biological component, they might behave differently when encountering a female peer. So, for instance, there's a psychological component to reading Damore's memo, and even the most objective of minds are vulnerable to a subconscious bias. Furthermore, a genuinely sexist person could easily shield themselves with this argument to justify conscious and biased sexual discrimination.
robin21 6y ago
Good read: https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/ https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-resu... Basically comes down to personal computer games marketed to boys in the 80s. > Advertisers sold games to boys because boys were the ones buying them https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/ https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-resu... So there we have it. Girls didn't have access to computers so they were less skilled when coming to college, and the intro courses prioritized prior coding skills, and they didn't have them, lost confidence, abandoned industry. So its actually rationale explanation, and really not sexism (shock!). What did girls do while boys were gaming? If a girl had a brother in a household with a computer, why didn't they use it? Was it sexist parents / gender stereotyping? If women want to code, all they have to do is...code. It really doesn't make sense to blame men here.

vinceguidry 6y ago

I've got one reply left in me before I bow out of this discussion. > Please enlighten us with the solution that will produce an equal ratio of men and women when 80% of CS graduates are men. It's very simple. Exceedingly simple. So simple you'll wish you'd have thought of it, and if you think hard about it after I explain it you'll see your own sexism in why you didn't. Here it is. The solution is to drop the ridiculous credentialism that's infected the field. You do not need a CS degree to contribute usefully and advance a career in this field. You can have a CS degree and still be largely useless compared to someone without. I do not have a CS degree. I do not have ANY degree. Yet I make more money than many of my peers in my job market. Guess which race and gender I am, no prizes for getting it right the first time. Systemized racism and sexism are why companies won't usefully invest in the careers of minorities, and why they invested in mine even without the proper 'stuff'. It's elitism, pure and simple. Go ahead and come up with all your reasons. Those reasons support and continue elitism. They're excuses. And that's my last reply on this topic, I hope more HNers start picking up the torch. Because talking about this shit to people who aren't really interested in the topic more than they just want it to go away makes me unreasonably mad and that's no way to contribute usefully to the discussion.

dnissley 6y ago
I'm confused by this argument re: credentialism because I can't think of a high paying career with less credentialism than being a software engineer. And yet the gender imbalance is larger here than in way more credentialist careers -- see law, medicine, etc.
ryan93 6y ago
There are lots of people in software with no CS or elite credentials. Are any where close to 50% of those people women?
arcsin 6y ago
This thread is a really good example of why people like SSC. Personally I have no problem believing biases against minorities exist in this industry. And to whatever extent it does exist I support trying to fix that. But then the discussion starts to get heated and people start saying things that stop making logical sense to me with the implication that if it doesn't make logical sense to me then I'm a racist, sexist or whatever. Someone in this thread asked how it's not a pipeline problem if 80% of graduating CS students are male, and your response is to just stop caring about CS degrees. But how does that make sense unless you think that there is an equally disproportionate ratio of uncredentialed yet qualified women programmers? And frankly the rhetorical techniques you're using here feel dishonest, implying that if I don't accept your argument then either I didn't think hard enough about it or I'm sexist. Or the "this is my last reply on this topic". If people have genuine questions why not answer them? And after seeing this kind of discourse so many times there is such a sense of relief when someone is willing to say "let's look at the truth even if it's an inconvenient one" because to come up with a good solution you have to start with what's actually true right? For a lot of people that's what SSC represents and that's why they feel so strongly about defending it.
- h0l0cube 6y ago
  I'll try to steel-man the OP's argument. The notion that there's both a biological component and a sexism component to the statistical divergence between equal-sex representation in CS, should not be contradictory. OTOH, if someone is primed with an argument about the biological component, they might behave differently when encountering a female peer. So, for instance, there's a psychological component to reading Damore's memo, and even the most objective of minds are vulnerable to a subconscious bias. Furthermore, a genuinely sexist person could easily shield themselves with this argument to justify conscious and biased sexual discrimination.

robin21 6y ago

Good read: https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/ https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-resu... Basically comes down to personal computer games marketed to boys in the 80s. > Advertisers sold games to boys because boys were the ones buying them https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-result-of-computer-game-marketing-20-years-ago/ https://qz.com/911737/silicon-valleys-gender-gap-is-the-resu... So there we have it. Girls didn't have access to computers so they were less skilled when coming to college, and the intro courses prioritized prior coding skills, and they didn't have them, lost confidence, abandoned industry. So its actually rationale explanation, and really not sexism (shock!). What did girls do while boys were gaming? If a girl had a brother in a household with a computer, why didn't they use it? Was it sexist parents / gender stereotyping? If women want to code, all they have to do is...code. It really doesn't make sense to blame men here.