3 ms·

Stop forcing things. I agree that having a diverse workforce is beneficial for everyone, the company, the workforce, and to some extent society, but this isn't

by ghusto 3y ago

Stop forcing things. I agree that having a diverse workforce is beneficial for everyone, the company, the workforce, and to some extent society, but this isn't the way to go about it. If there aren't any woman to hire in tech roles, find out why that is and tackle _that_ problem. Assuming of course it's a problem, which is an assumption we're sweeping under the rug. Culturally, we're pushing woman away from tech. On the other hand, it is a given in neural science that — oversimplification warning — men like "things", and woman like "people". It's not surprising then that there are more men in work that involves "things". An initiative like this does nothing but foster resentment and push-back. No amount of downvotes will change facts.

politelemon 3y ago
The initiative you're being dismissive of is what emerged from "find out why that is and tackle _that_ problem". There are systemic barriers in place, which are being ignored because it makes the discussion uncomfortable. That's the purpose of promotional groups. They exist to point out those things and help us move past it. Forget tech for a moment and consider any other civil rights that we take for granted today that we wouldn't have x years ago. If addressing it causes "resentment and push-back" consider reflecting on your own biases first. It is very likely the issue is there.
janalsncm 3y ago
> men like "things", and woman like "people". It's not surprising then that there are more men in work that involves "things" Whenever we encounter broad, overarching theories like this our brains immediately jump to things which might confirm it. Our brains love creating simple rules which explain complex phenomena. But if we really want to understand what is true, we need to think explicitly about 1) what is the hypothesis which is being offered and 2) what counterexamples might there be to disprove it. A theory becomes stronger after withstanding counterexamples, not weaker. So this hypothesis is that the lack of women in tech in the US is fundamentally biologically driven, rather than culturally driven. Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture? > No amount of downvotes will change facts. I’m with you there. That begs the question: what are the facts?
- readthenotes1 3y ago
  "Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture?" Apparently. You can probably find more, but for example https://theculturetrip.com/europe/sweden/articles/swedish-teens-choose-careers-based-on-gender-roles-according-to-science https://theculturetrip.com/europe/sweden/articles/swedish-te...
- ghusto 3y ago
  > Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture? Agreed, that's a good way to get closer to the truth. I'm afraid I don't know, but at least in my own experience it is also true in Malaysian, Indian, French, German, Spanish, Japanese, and I'm sure more cultures that I can't think of off the top of my head. Again, this is from my _personal_ observations, but it's 100%, which has been enough for me not to dig any further and conclude it's true. The next point would be why. Is it purely biological, purely cultural, or a mixture? I've explained why I think it's mostly biological, but happy to be proven wrong. >> No amount of downvotes will change facts. > I’m with you there. That begs the question: what are the facts? I was referring to the "woman like people, men like things" fact. There are lots of studies on this, and their conclusions are often dismissed as sexist. To have a happy society, we need to agree that "equal" does mean "the same".
  - Apocryphon 3y ago
    > which has been enough for me not to dig any further and conclude it's true That might be good enough for you, but that's not good enough for society in the least- either in terms of fostering change, or simply in terms of studying a sociological phenomenon. Anecdotally, I don't think that's true about Indian culture at all, and I don't believe it's true in Russia and other former Eastern Bloc countries, nor in Chinese culture. Not to mention, it's rather ham-fisted to conflate nationality with culture, as all countries are made up of myriads of subcultures. > There are lots of studies on this, and their conclusions are often dismissed as sexist. Post them if you've got them.
    - 3y ago
unclebucknasty 3y ago
>Stop forcing things >this isn't the way to go about it. What do you mean? AFAICT from the article, they were a nonprofit that provided support and training for women in (or interested in) coding. From the article: Beyond that, she describes a "camaraderie of other women that are interested in the same things I'm interested in," and got career advice from other participants at the WWC events. As well as networking events and speakers, she also benefitted from events geared towards learning new skills. Seems pretty reasonable and positive. What am I missing? What's being forced?

by ghusto 3y ago

politelemon 3y ago

The initiative you're being dismissive of is what emerged from "find out why that is and tackle _that_ problem". There are systemic barriers in place, which are being ignored because it makes the discussion uncomfortable. That's the purpose of promotional groups. They exist to point out those things and help us move past it. Forget tech for a moment and consider any other civil rights that we take for granted today that we wouldn't have x years ago. If addressing it causes "resentment and push-back" consider reflecting on your own biases first. It is very likely the issue is there.

janalsncm 3y ago

> men like "things", and woman like "people". It's not surprising then that there are more men in work that involves "things" Whenever we encounter broad, overarching theories like this our brains immediately jump to things which might confirm it. Our brains love creating simple rules which explain complex phenomena. But if we really want to understand what is true, we need to think explicitly about 1) what is the hypothesis which is being offered and 2) what counterexamples might there be to disprove it. A theory becomes stronger after withstanding counterexamples, not weaker. So this hypothesis is that the lack of women in tech in the US is fundamentally biologically driven, rather than culturally driven. Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture? > No amount of downvotes will change facts. I’m with you there. That begs the question: what are the facts?

readthenotes1 3y ago
"Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture?" Apparently. You can probably find more, but for example https://theculturetrip.com/europe/sweden/articles/swedish-teens-choose-careers-based-on-gender-roles-according-to-science https://theculturetrip.com/europe/sweden/articles/swedish-te...
ghusto 3y ago
> Put in this way, we should naturally ask the question, are women in all cultures as averse to computers as in American culture? Agreed, that's a good way to get closer to the truth. I'm afraid I don't know, but at least in my own experience it is also true in Malaysian, Indian, French, German, Spanish, Japanese, and I'm sure more cultures that I can't think of off the top of my head. Again, this is from my _personal_ observations, but it's 100%, which has been enough for me not to dig any further and conclude it's true. The next point would be why. Is it purely biological, purely cultural, or a mixture? I've explained why I think it's mostly biological, but happy to be proven wrong. >> No amount of downvotes will change facts. > I’m with you there. That begs the question: what are the facts? I was referring to the "woman like people, men like things" fact. There are lots of studies on this, and their conclusions are often dismissed as sexist. To have a happy society, we need to agree that "equal" does mean "the same".
- Apocryphon 3y ago
  > which has been enough for me not to dig any further and conclude it's true That might be good enough for you, but that's not good enough for society in the least- either in terms of fostering change, or simply in terms of studying a sociological phenomenon. Anecdotally, I don't think that's true about Indian culture at all, and I don't believe it's true in Russia and other former Eastern Bloc countries, nor in Chinese culture. Not to mention, it's rather ham-fisted to conflate nationality with culture, as all countries are made up of myriads of subcultures. > There are lots of studies on this, and their conclusions are often dismissed as sexist. Post them if you've got them.
  - 3y ago

unclebucknasty 3y ago

>Stop forcing things >this isn't the way to go about it. What do you mean? AFAICT from the article, they were a nonprofit that provided support and training for women in (or interested in) coding. From the article: Beyond that, she describes a "camaraderie of other women that are interested in the same things I'm interested in," and got career advice from other participants at the WWC events. As well as networking events and speakers, she also benefitted from events geared towards learning new skills. Seems pretty reasonable and positive. What am I missing? What's being forced?