> If you look back at that graph, there must be some force that's pushing that red line down. Very possibly, but not necessarily. It's hard to judge the existe

> If you look back at that graph, there must be some force that's pushing that red line down. Very possibly, but not necessarily. It's hard to judge the existence of causation from a correlation in one aspect of this issue. Here is a larger chart, showing multiple fields: http://gasstationwithoutpumps.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/percent-bachelors-degrees-women-usa.png?w=873&h=907 http://gasstationwithoutpumps.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/pe... You can see the same dips in CS here as in the first graph. However, two other things pop up: 1. The % of women in engineering rises slowly, and the % in CS basically drops _to match it_. This raises the question: is engineering odd in its slow rise, or is CS odd in its initial rise and then fall? Or are both odd? Is it a coincidence they end up around the same place, or not? 2. Large rises occur in some other occupations, well over the 50% mark. Should we be interested in what caused the large rise in biology or psychology, for example? It might be meaningful, but it might not be. There are jumps and changes in all fields, not just CS - perhaps some have significant causes, perhaps some are just side effects (increases in one field must be to the detriment of others)? Overall, the data leaves us with far more questions than answers, I think.