>Women stand a far better chance of learning to program when they are in a non-intimidating environment where they don't have to put up with a bunch of condesce

>Women stand a far better chance of learning to program when they are in a non-intimidating environment where they don't have to put up with a bunch of condescending jerks (take your pick): staring at them, competing with them, putting them in "their place", patronizing them. Hidden in that is the subtle assumption that women need to be protected. Particularly in the clause "competing with them," I find protectionism evident. Now, I'm not saying these groups shouldn't exist, or that they're wrong, or that a group of mostly men can and often does create a hostile environment for women. But your phrasing makes me uncomfortable, internally, as if I feel you're not quite leery enough of how much you're using sexism to combat sexism. There is nothing wrong with that, it is very pragmatic and a good chunk of the 'ism' reasoning behind affirmative action (which I generally support). But "Reverse the roles, and this would be just as true" is essentially saying "If men were women and women were men, we'd still be playing with standard gender roles, so it's fair!" which doesn't quite compute.