5 ms·

The one male nurse I know did feel the need to post in facebook upon graduation that he felt being a male nurse was manly. Being a male in a mostly female envir

The one male nurse I know did feel the need to post in facebook upon graduation that he felt being a male nurse was manly. Being a male in a mostly female environment is an advantage for him, though. He is physically stronger, yes, but, often, patients think he is a doctor and will take his direction without question in situations that female nurses find difficult. Being a female developer in gives me a disadvantage. If I am mistaken for anything, it is a graphic designer, a secretary, an assistant or an intern. Positions that are typically male are generally considered higher positions. When a man takes on a typically female position, they feel the need to prove the position to be 'manly'. When a female takes on a typically male position, they feel the need to prove themselves to be 'manly'.

Peroni 14y ago
Being a female developer gives you a disadvantage by being mistaken for another, equally respectable professional. Being a female developer gives you an advantage by having employers instantly agree to interview you in the hopes that your talent is enough to warrant a place on their team and simultaneously help dilute the male dominance in their company.
- mimiflynn 14y ago
  The point is that I am never assumed to be a developer. I don't know of any developer having a hard time finding interviews right now, btw. The industry is in desparate need of more developers.
- mnicole 14y ago
  > Being a female developer gives you an advantage by having employers instantly agree to interview you Wrong. > in the hopes that your talent is enough to warrant a place Offensive. The gate swings both ways here; getting an interview as a woman isn't any easier than getting one as a man at any place worth working in this industry, especially right now when the demand for quality is high. If they're lowering standards for their female candidates, that hurts the business and the people alike. Etsy is doing it because they know they can ramp those engineers up with their existing staff without putting their business at risk, so more power to them if they're able to solve both problems at once and have it work to their (and everyone's) advantage long-term. If a company does it for the sole purpose of trying to balance things out without consideration of how it could affect both production and morale, they'll sabotage themselves and further underscore the argument that women aren't as competent to begin with.
  - papsosouid 14y ago
    >The gate swings both ways here; getting an interview as a woman isn't any easier than getting one as a man at any place worth working in this industry, especially right now when the demand for quality is high. If they're lowering standards for their female candidates, that hurts the business and the people alike. Your second statement does not follow from the first. If we get 10 resumes of people who seem competent, any of them is likely to be fine. The ones who get interviewed are the ones who get hired. The fact that company policy is "all female applicants are to be interviewed" means we hire more women. Our standards aren't lowered as a result, we still don't hire incompetent women. The effect on the company isn't to lower standards, it is just to hire more women. The effect on women who apply is that they are far more likely to get a job than a man who applies.
    - mnicole 14y ago
      The argument was not written as "10 resumes come in, any women in those 10 are guaranteed an interview." It was "Women get interviewed no matter what." Even if the intent means well, these types of threads are cluttered with resentment of these practices. If I knew that I was being interviewed because it was company policy to do so even if my skillset would have landed me there anyway, I'd feel weird about it.
      - papsosouid 14y ago
        >It was "Women get interviewed no matter what." Which is precisely what we do, and precisely what I said we do. >Even if the intent means well, these types of threads are cluttered with resentment of these practices Why shouldn't they be? >I'd feel weird about it. I don't blame you, I would too. The companies making these decisions aren't concerned about how you feel about it though, they are concerned about appearing to be "the good guys" in the eyes of the people who are making an issue out of gender balance.
        mnicole 14y ago
        Right. It's offensive to me that this is happening and I'd be concerned that my colleagues would be resentful that I had it easier than their male counterparts in getting through the door.
fps 14y ago
| Positions that are typically male are generally considered higher positions. Or lower ones. Men make up 76% of the homeless, and 60% to 70% of the unemployed in America. They also make up 92% of worker deaths. It's not a conspiracy. Men take more risks, and are more frequently rewarded or punished for them. Even within a profession such as programming this is true. Our society values people who take risks, because those people stand out.

Peroni 14y ago

Being a female developer gives you a disadvantage by being mistaken for another, equally respectable professional. Being a female developer gives you an advantage by having employers instantly agree to interview you in the hopes that your talent is enough to warrant a place on their team and simultaneously help dilute the male dominance in their company.

mimiflynn 14y ago
The point is that I am never assumed to be a developer. I don't know of any developer having a hard time finding interviews right now, btw. The industry is in desparate need of more developers.
mnicole 14y ago
> Being a female developer gives you an advantage by having employers instantly agree to interview you Wrong. > in the hopes that your talent is enough to warrant a place Offensive. The gate swings both ways here; getting an interview as a woman isn't any easier than getting one as a man at any place worth working in this industry, especially right now when the demand for quality is high. If they're lowering standards for their female candidates, that hurts the business and the people alike. Etsy is doing it because they know they can ramp those engineers up with their existing staff without putting their business at risk, so more power to them if they're able to solve both problems at once and have it work to their (and everyone's) advantage long-term. If a company does it for the sole purpose of trying to balance things out without consideration of how it could affect both production and morale, they'll sabotage themselves and further underscore the argument that women aren't as competent to begin with.
- papsosouid 14y ago
  >The gate swings both ways here; getting an interview as a woman isn't any easier than getting one as a man at any place worth working in this industry, especially right now when the demand for quality is high. If they're lowering standards for their female candidates, that hurts the business and the people alike. Your second statement does not follow from the first. If we get 10 resumes of people who seem competent, any of them is likely to be fine. The ones who get interviewed are the ones who get hired. The fact that company policy is "all female applicants are to be interviewed" means we hire more women. Our standards aren't lowered as a result, we still don't hire incompetent women. The effect on the company isn't to lower standards, it is just to hire more women. The effect on women who apply is that they are far more likely to get a job than a man who applies.
  - mnicole 14y ago
    The argument was not written as "10 resumes come in, any women in those 10 are guaranteed an interview." It was "Women get interviewed no matter what." Even if the intent means well, these types of threads are cluttered with resentment of these practices. If I knew that I was being interviewed because it was company policy to do so even if my skillset would have landed me there anyway, I'd feel weird about it.
    - papsosouid 14y ago
      >It was "Women get interviewed no matter what." Which is precisely what we do, and precisely what I said we do. >Even if the intent means well, these types of threads are cluttered with resentment of these practices Why shouldn't they be? >I'd feel weird about it. I don't blame you, I would too. The companies making these decisions aren't concerned about how you feel about it though, they are concerned about appearing to be "the good guys" in the eyes of the people who are making an issue out of gender balance.
      - mnicole 14y ago
        Right. It's offensive to me that this is happening and I'd be concerned that my colleagues would be resentful that I had it easier than their male counterparts in getting through the door.

fps 14y ago

| Positions that are typically male are generally considered higher positions. Or lower ones. Men make up 76% of the homeless, and 60% to 70% of the unemployed in America. They also make up 92% of worker deaths. It's not a conspiracy. Men take more risks, and are more frequently rewarded or punished for them. Even within a profession such as programming this is true. Our society values people who take risks, because those people stand out.