4 ms·

Oh, the gap isn't anywhere near as big as 10%. Men and women differ by only a few points on average when you test for mathematical ability. The problem is that

by thras 17y ago

Oh, the gap isn't anywhere near as big as 10%. Men and women differ by only a few points on average when you test for mathematical ability. The problem is that ability is distributed along a Gaussian. Small differences in the norm make for huge differences in the tails. So everybody can balance their check book about the same, but don't expect any women to win the Fields medal within the next millennium. Now, the female dislike of programming jobs goes beyond this tail effect. I think that as a big a problem is that programming is not a socially rewarding occupation, and women like socializing.

wheels 17y ago
Now, the female dislike of programming jobs goes beyond this tail effect. I'd say it goes so far beyond that effect to render it pretty much meaningless. This discussion wasn't about who's more likely to win a Fields Metal, it's about women in programming. The gap between winning a fields medal and being a competent programmer is ginormus. Assuming I read you correctly, we'd both agree that there's not a strong correlation between the percentage of men and women with the basic mathematical ability to be programmers and the percentage of men and women who in fact are programmers. I think the real answer lies in some mix of actual physiological differences between men and women and roles that are engendered by society. Given the number of roles that people were sure of 50 years ago that women couldn't do that they are now debunked (as politicians, executives, doctors, lawyers) I tend to err on the side of the latter. This is especially poignant in the country where I live (Germany) where the Chancellor is a woman with a PhD in quantum chemistry.
- thras 17y ago
  Well, if you'd like to apply actual numbers to the discussion, take a look here: http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math.htm http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math.htm He comes up with an expected upper bound of 29% participation in the technical workforce by women given current best measurements of sex differences.

by thras 17y ago

wheels 17y ago

Now, the female dislike of programming jobs goes beyond this tail effect. I'd say it goes so far beyond that effect to render it pretty much meaningless. This discussion wasn't about who's more likely to win a Fields Metal, it's about women in programming. The gap between winning a fields medal and being a competent programmer is ginormus. Assuming I read you correctly, we'd both agree that there's not a strong correlation between the percentage of men and women with the basic mathematical ability to be programmers and the percentage of men and women who in fact are programmers. I think the real answer lies in some mix of actual physiological differences between men and women and roles that are engendered by society. Given the number of roles that people were sure of 50 years ago that women couldn't do that they are now debunked (as politicians, executives, doctors, lawyers) I tend to err on the side of the latter. This is especially poignant in the country where I live (Germany) where the Chancellor is a woman with a PhD in quantum chemistry.

thras 17y ago
Well, if you'd like to apply actual numbers to the discussion, take a look here: http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math.htm http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/math.htm He comes up with an expected upper bound of 29% participation in the technical workforce by women given current best measurements of sex differences.