4 ms·

The problem with women's groups in technology is that there are very few women in tech to join the groups. And I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/haras

The problem with women's groups in technology is that there are very few women in tech to join the groups. And I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/harassment is the reason women aren't going into tech careers. http://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/chalabi-datalab-flightattendants-2.png http://espnfivethirtyeight.files.wordpress.com/2014/10/chala...

mixologic 12y ago
How would you explain that there used to be more women than men as programmers? (http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/researcher-reveals-how-%E2%80%9Ccomputer-geeks%E2%80%9D-replaced-%E2%80%9Ccomputergirls%E2%80%9D http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/researcher-reveals-how-...) What do you think changed?
- Estragon 12y ago
  > I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/harassment is the > reason women aren't going into tech careers. > How would you explain that there used to be more women than men > as programmers? The women who went into "programming" back then for the most part played a role somewhat similar to the role a compiler does for modern programmers, and so the fact that it seemed like an attractive role to some women of that era has very little bearing on its appeal now. At that time "programming" meant the relatively unskilled job of translating someone's detailed pseudocode onto punch cards or worse. The need for such unskilled labor diminished as the abstractions and automation improved. Ensmenger speaks for himself about his research on this in the following article: Goldstine and von Neumann spelled out a six-step programming process: (1) conceptualize the problem mathematically and physically, (2) select a numerical algorithm, (3) do a numerical analysis to determine the precision requirements and evaluate potential problems with approximation errors, (4) determine scale factors so that the mathematical expressions stay within the fixed range of the computer throughout the computation, (5) do the dynamic analysis to understand how the machine will execute jumps and substitutions during the course of a computation, and (6) do the static coding. The first five of these tasks were to be done by the "planner," who was typically the scientific user and overwhelmingly was frequently male; the sixth task was to be carried out by coders. Coding was regarded as a "static" process by Goldstine and von Neumann -- one that involved writing out the steps of a computation in a form that could be read by the machine, such as punching cards, or in the case of the ENIAC, plugging in cables and setting up switches. Thus, there was a division of labor envisioned that gave the highest-skilled work to the high-status male scientists and the lowest-skilled work to the low-status female coders. As the ENIAC managers and coders soon realized, however, controlling the operation of an automatic computer was nothing like the process of hand computation, and the Moore School women were therefore responsible for defining the first state-of-the-art methods of programming practice. http://womensenews.org/story/books/120323/women-were-first-computer-programmers?page=0,1 http://womensenews.org/story/books/120323/women-were-first-c... This one story -- about a small group of women chosen for their exceptional capability as human "computers" who previously calculated by hand numerical tables like the ones the ENIAC was designed to calculate -- has been spun into a narrative suggesting that women dominated early software development. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I don't think Engsmenger sees it that way. He says elsewhere that "Although many of the earliest programmers were women, by the beginning of the 1960s programming was generally considered a male profession. Certainly the elite ranks of ‘‘systems men’’ [i.e., those responsible for what we would today consider software design] were, quite literally, men." http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/nensmeng/files/ensmenger2003.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/nensmeng/files/ensmenger2003.p... Of course, all of this shows that male chauvinism (and very very very probably harassment too) has always been a huge problem for women who wanted to participate in this field, but the idea that "there used to be more women than men as programmers" just isn't true, at least as we understand the word "programmer" today, and the evidence it's based on has no bearing on why women aren't entering tech fields today.
smtddr 12y ago
>>And I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/harassment is the reason women aren't going into tech careers. Then you're wrong - http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/
- ObviousScience 12y ago
  That article doesn't actually claim it's discrimination. Rather, it complains that women don't get enough positive discrimination (ie, discrimination in their favor or against men). > Some women felt that their work environments were discriminatory, but most reported something milder: the simple discomfort of not fitting in in an otherwise homogenous setting. That is, the only actionable thing that it suggests is that you should preferentially hire women so they don't feel so lonely, not that there is any actual discrimination to address.
- tzs 12y ago
  That article has serious problems. It is basing much of its analysis on the idea that the pipeline into tech no longer is highly unbalanced. The sources cited by the article actually show that this is not correct--the pipeline is still very unbalanced.
  - hypatiadotca 12y ago
    The pipeline is unbalanced, yes, but the meat of the article is in how it surveys the reasons women leave.
    - LyndsySimon 12y ago
      The number of females entering tech is a fraction of the number of males. Therefore even eliminating all harassment of females would not bring us closer to equal representation. That's not to say we shouldn't work to eliminate this treatment or an attempt to minimize it in any way, of course. What I believe we should ask ourselves is this: "Is the tech community responsible for the fact that far fewer females see this industry as a reasonable and viable career path?" Until we can answer that question with a confident "nope", then the social conversation around feminism and its role in our community need not be settled. We can work toward a more equal future without addressing the underlying philosophical and political motivations for doing so. Free individuals, voluntarily working together to achieve a common goal. That's what it's all about, people. Forget the lables, find something in common with your neighbors, and make it happen.
LyndsySimon 12y ago
"The" reason? Certainly not. There are far fewer girls getting exposed to tech early in their education. Far fewer girls see tech in general as a viable career path. "A" reason? Absolutely. Other commenters have have linked to specific incidents where female tech employees have left jobs and even left the industry as a result of they way there were treated. I don't say this to downplay your position - which I understand to be that there are in fact other factors driving the gender ratio is tech. I assert without reservation that treatment of women in our industry is not the primary factor causing the imbalance. In my opinion, the social conversation within our community is toxic to both sides. I try very hard not to become involved in it. That said, my own political views lead me to see individuals as individuals first and foremost, to treat others in a way that encourages cooperation, and to engage with my peers in voluntary and mutually beneficial ways. In almost every way that I've been able to objectively nail down, I am a feminist. I just don't share some of the viewpoints of the particular variant that is vocal in our community. That's fine. I've worked both online and in person with many people whose beliefs in this matter differ from mine. Human beings are perfectly capable of identifying areas of common interest and working together to improve both of their positions, however incompatible their desires end states happen to be. I try to share my own values by working with young people and encouraging them to see tech as a valuable and valid career path - and as a passion that's worth pursuing regardless of their profession. There are many people who don't see it that way, for reasons that vary depending on their background. My sincere belief is that a world where every young person sees tech as an option is superior to today's world, where a large portion of children and young adults see it as inaccessible or unworthy of their attention. You don't have to self-identify as a feminist (or anything else) to share that belief :)

mixologic 12y ago

How would you explain that there used to be more women than men as programmers? (http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/researcher-reveals-how-%E2%80%9Ccomputer-geeks%E2%80%9D-replaced-%E2%80%9Ccomputergirls%E2%80%9D http://gender.stanford.edu/news/2011/researcher-reveals-how-...) What do you think changed?

Estragon 12y ago
> I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/harassment is the > reason women aren't going into tech careers. > How would you explain that there used to be more women than men > as programmers? The women who went into "programming" back then for the most part played a role somewhat similar to the role a compiler does for modern programmers, and so the fact that it seemed like an attractive role to some women of that era has very little bearing on its appeal now. At that time "programming" meant the relatively unskilled job of translating someone's detailed pseudocode onto punch cards or worse. The need for such unskilled labor diminished as the abstractions and automation improved. Ensmenger speaks for himself about his research on this in the following article: Goldstine and von Neumann spelled out a six-step programming process: (1) conceptualize the problem mathematically and physically, (2) select a numerical algorithm, (3) do a numerical analysis to determine the precision requirements and evaluate potential problems with approximation errors, (4) determine scale factors so that the mathematical expressions stay within the fixed range of the computer throughout the computation, (5) do the dynamic analysis to understand how the machine will execute jumps and substitutions during the course of a computation, and (6) do the static coding. The first five of these tasks were to be done by the "planner," who was typically the scientific user and overwhelmingly was frequently male; the sixth task was to be carried out by coders. Coding was regarded as a "static" process by Goldstine and von Neumann -- one that involved writing out the steps of a computation in a form that could be read by the machine, such as punching cards, or in the case of the ENIAC, plugging in cables and setting up switches. Thus, there was a division of labor envisioned that gave the highest-skilled work to the high-status male scientists and the lowest-skilled work to the low-status female coders. As the ENIAC managers and coders soon realized, however, controlling the operation of an automatic computer was nothing like the process of hand computation, and the Moore School women were therefore responsible for defining the first state-of-the-art methods of programming practice. http://womensenews.org/story/books/120323/women-were-first-computer-programmers?page=0,1 http://womensenews.org/story/books/120323/women-were-first-c... This one story -- about a small group of women chosen for their exceptional capability as human "computers" who previously calculated by hand numerical tables like the ones the ENIAC was designed to calculate -- has been spun into a narrative suggesting that women dominated early software development. Nothing could be further from the truth, and I don't think Engsmenger sees it that way. He says elsewhere that "Although many of the earliest programmers were women, by the beginning of the 1960s programming was generally considered a male profession. Certainly the elite ranks of ‘‘systems men’’ [i.e., those responsible for what we would today consider software design] were, quite literally, men." http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/nensmeng/files/ensmenger2003.pdf http://homes.soic.indiana.edu/nensmeng/files/ensmenger2003.p... Of course, all of this shows that male chauvinism (and very very very probably harassment too) has always been a huge problem for women who wanted to participate in this field, but the idea that "there used to be more women than men as programmers" just isn't true, at least as we understand the word "programmer" today, and the evidence it's based on has no bearing on why women aren't entering tech fields today.

smtddr 12y ago

>>And I highly doubt that male chauvinism/sexism/harassment is the reason women aren't going into tech careers. Then you're wrong - http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/

ObviousScience 12y ago
That article doesn't actually claim it's discrimination. Rather, it complains that women don't get enough positive discrimination (ie, discrimination in their favor or against men). > Some women felt that their work environments were discriminatory, but most reported something milder: the simple discomfort of not fitting in in an otherwise homogenous setting. That is, the only actionable thing that it suggests is that you should preferentially hire women so they don't feel so lonely, not that there is any actual discrimination to address.
tzs 12y ago
That article has serious problems. It is basing much of its analysis on the idea that the pipeline into tech no longer is highly unbalanced. The sources cited by the article actually show that this is not correct--the pipeline is still very unbalanced.
- hypatiadotca 12y ago
  The pipeline is unbalanced, yes, but the meat of the article is in how it surveys the reasons women leave.
  - LyndsySimon 12y ago
    The number of females entering tech is a fraction of the number of males. Therefore even eliminating all harassment of females would not bring us closer to equal representation. That's not to say we shouldn't work to eliminate this treatment or an attempt to minimize it in any way, of course. What I believe we should ask ourselves is this: "Is the tech community responsible for the fact that far fewer females see this industry as a reasonable and viable career path?" Until we can answer that question with a confident "nope", then the social conversation around feminism and its role in our community need not be settled. We can work toward a more equal future without addressing the underlying philosophical and political motivations for doing so. Free individuals, voluntarily working together to achieve a common goal. That's what it's all about, people. Forget the lables, find something in common with your neighbors, and make it happen.

LyndsySimon 12y ago

"The" reason? Certainly not. There are far fewer girls getting exposed to tech early in their education. Far fewer girls see tech in general as a viable career path. "A" reason? Absolutely. Other commenters have have linked to specific incidents where female tech employees have left jobs and even left the industry as a result of they way there were treated. I don't say this to downplay your position - which I understand to be that there are in fact other factors driving the gender ratio is tech. I assert without reservation that treatment of women in our industry is not the primary factor causing the imbalance. In my opinion, the social conversation within our community is toxic to both sides. I try very hard not to become involved in it. That said, my own political views lead me to see individuals as individuals first and foremost, to treat others in a way that encourages cooperation, and to engage with my peers in voluntary and mutually beneficial ways. In almost every way that I've been able to objectively nail down, I am a feminist. I just don't share some of the viewpoints of the particular variant that is vocal in our community. That's fine. I've worked both online and in person with many people whose beliefs in this matter differ from mine. Human beings are perfectly capable of identifying areas of common interest and working together to improve both of their positions, however incompatible their desires end states happen to be. I try to share my own values by working with young people and encouraging them to see tech as a valuable and valid career path - and as a passion that's worth pursuing regardless of their profession. There are many people who don't see it that way, for reasons that vary depending on their background. My sincere belief is that a world where every young person sees tech as an option is superior to today's world, where a large portion of children and young adults see it as inaccessible or unworthy of their attention. You don't have to self-identify as a feminist (or anything else) to share that belief :)