I am 31 years old. When I went to college in 1999, jobs which were considered to be high-status and high-pay: medical doctor, lawyer, engineer (I almost hesit

I am 31 years old. When I went to college in 1999, jobs which were considered to be high-status and high-pay: medical doctor, lawyer, engineer (I almost hesitate to include it because American society doesn't bludgeon you with the "engineers are all rich" meme like it does with doctors and lawyers. Computer programmer is not one of them. In fact, we were constantly being told by the media that the future for programmers was bleak due to outsourcing. The point I am making is that medical school and law school are viewed societally as risk-free, guaranteed paths to wealth. This is of course turning out to be a myth for law school. They are huge magnets for smart people who are following the standard path of university to job. The "not enough women in tech" concept never took off until tech became consistently viewed as a high-status job. The vast majority of construction workers and mechanics are men, but you don't see a huge societal uproar about it. This is because these positions are low status in our society. I can't find a male teacher in my son's elementary school, and yet a highly talented male teacher I know was turned down for a position at his school which was given to a young woman. While this issue (including the self-reinforcing feedback loop that deters men from becoming elementary teachers) has been well documented and discussed in niche circles, its not something that graces the cover of newspapers and magazines like the women in tech issue does. Now that tech is a high status job, instead of just a high pay job, this will correct itself just like it did for law firms and medical practices. I can tell you this: anyone who thinks that artificially shrinking the pool of experts which you can pick to speak at a conference won't affect the quality of the presentations is deluding themselves.