4 ms·

A few questions: What does it mean to "leave the field"? Does that mean to no longer practice low-level work or to leave the industry entirely for another indu

A few questions: What does it mean to "leave the field"? Does that mean to no longer practice low-level work or to leave the industry entirely for another industry? If it is the former, does moving into management or another complementary area (like moving from engineering to product management) qualify as leaving the field? So what I've always been curious about is what percentage of women leave other fields? It would be nice to have numbers to compare it to there. Also, what percentage of men leave the field? If "leaving the field" is defined as no longer actively practicing software engineering and instead doing more human contact work (like managing), then I would expect a significant number of men to leave the field at all. I'm not trying to dismiss the number out of hand, but merely demonstrate that it's a useless figure to bandy about with context or comparison.

ozim 11y ago
There was article on HN some days ago maybe even weeks which was showing IT compared to other fields. It was about how many women work in field and for IT it was lot less than other. It was showing percentage in years so in 80's there was a lot more women in IT than now. Sorry but cannot find article, maybe someone will have link.
- malandrew 11y ago
  I'm also generally curious about the figures for men in female dominated industries. I'm a senior software engineer now, but I graduated with a degree that would have had me working in an industry that was overwhelmingly female (fashion). I think it's like 95% female. Most of my classmates were female. I didn't go into that industry because other opportunities cropped up and because that industry doesn't pay anyone, man or woman, well and you're expected to work for years for very little to get anywhere career-wise. Not once during school or after it did I feel disadvantaged in a school/work environment where I was very much a minority (straight cis male). I have been unable to find any figures, but I suspect that fashion was an industry that had a lot more men working in it up until the 1980s. http://amfi.nl/boys-fashion-industry-gender-ratio/ http://amfi.nl/boys-fashion-industry-gender-ratio/
  - ousta 11y ago
    I worked in the web advertisement on a big fashion account in a 80% female team. the PM was promoting women just because they are women and she even wanted to hire some support engineer interviewed her and seeing that she had a good feeling because she was in a similar feminist assocation than her she hired her as a regional project manager with double pay and they hired a support engineer in india. trust me. the environment we are making women and feminism grow in is insane for men as for women and against work ethics.
    - malandrew 11y ago
      Strangely, I'm not terribly bothered by your story because an attitude like that strongly held means there is little to no chance I'd end up in such a toxic environment for me. This big upside is that it saves the time and energy possibly I would have invested in a place that is going to suck. As I grow older I've learned it's not merely enough to know where you want to want. You also need to know where you don't want to work. Extreme overtly environments like that make that choice really simple. There will always be people workplaces where such bigotry thrives. We should minimize how common such workplaces are. At the same time, there is a benefit of have a few workplaces here and there that attract and retains such people because it keeps those people from entering the labor market and being employed at a company with men and women who would rather not deal with such bigoted bullshit.
rmc 11y ago
> What does it mean to "leave the field"? You can read it in the linked article: http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ * "716 women who left tech" * "I have collected stories from 716 other women who have left the tech industry" * "Of the 716 women surveyed, 465 are not working today." * "Two-hundred-fifty-one are employed in non-tech jobs, and 45 of those are running their own companies. A whopping 625 women say they have no plans to return to tech Which strongly implies "left the industry", not "moving to product management" or "managing". 2/3s of them aren't working at all, not "promoted to management"
- malandrew 11y ago
  How do they make a living if they aren't working at all? That seems like a shockingly high figure of people who have the means to avoid any sort of labor productivity. I can only conclude that "are not working today" is loosely defined or that these people were unfit for working at all, since someone that has the means to quit work and not have to look for other work elsewhere probably hasn't lead a very rigorous labor existence. Also, this appears to be study of only the ones that left. I'm certain I could find 716 men that left the tech industry too, and come up with a set of reasons why they left. Looks like a classic case of selection bias. There doesn't appear to be one women who stayed in the industry in that study. Does that mean I should conclude from this study that 100% of women leave tech? Simply put, you need to survey more than just those that left. That study comes across as far more biased than the biases it's trying to combat. It's far more interesting to discuss base rates. Start with a sample of women in tech, follow them over n-years (you can get a good representative sample by choosing different cohorts like those that are recent grads to those with 5-10 years industry experience) and do the same with men. After 2-3 years check out how many from from each gender from that sample have left the industry. Interview them to find out why. My ex was a documentary filmmaker interested in social causes and whatnot and I've seen how the sausage is made firsthand and know how data and statistics are twisted to support an agenda. Good statistics that strive to be impartial almost never produces numbers as "story-worthy" as the ones from that study, which means you need to question the numbers presented and also ask which figures were conveniently omitted.

ozim 11y ago

There was article on HN some days ago maybe even weeks which was showing IT compared to other fields. It was about how many women work in field and for IT it was lot less than other. It was showing percentage in years so in 80's there was a lot more women in IT than now. Sorry but cannot find article, maybe someone will have link.

malandrew 11y ago
I'm also generally curious about the figures for men in female dominated industries. I'm a senior software engineer now, but I graduated with a degree that would have had me working in an industry that was overwhelmingly female (fashion). I think it's like 95% female. Most of my classmates were female. I didn't go into that industry because other opportunities cropped up and because that industry doesn't pay anyone, man or woman, well and you're expected to work for years for very little to get anywhere career-wise. Not once during school or after it did I feel disadvantaged in a school/work environment where I was very much a minority (straight cis male). I have been unable to find any figures, but I suspect that fashion was an industry that had a lot more men working in it up until the 1980s. http://amfi.nl/boys-fashion-industry-gender-ratio/ http://amfi.nl/boys-fashion-industry-gender-ratio/
- ousta 11y ago
  I worked in the web advertisement on a big fashion account in a 80% female team. the PM was promoting women just because they are women and she even wanted to hire some support engineer interviewed her and seeing that she had a good feeling because she was in a similar feminist assocation than her she hired her as a regional project manager with double pay and they hired a support engineer in india. trust me. the environment we are making women and feminism grow in is insane for men as for women and against work ethics.
  - malandrew 11y ago
    Strangely, I'm not terribly bothered by your story because an attitude like that strongly held means there is little to no chance I'd end up in such a toxic environment for me. This big upside is that it saves the time and energy possibly I would have invested in a place that is going to suck. As I grow older I've learned it's not merely enough to know where you want to want. You also need to know where you don't want to work. Extreme overtly environments like that make that choice really simple. There will always be people workplaces where such bigotry thrives. We should minimize how common such workplaces are. At the same time, there is a benefit of have a few workplaces here and there that attract and retains such people because it keeps those people from entering the labor market and being employed at a company with men and women who would rather not deal with such bigoted bullshit.

rmc 11y ago

> What does it mean to "leave the field"? You can read it in the linked article: http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ http://fortune.com/2014/10/02/women-leave-tech-culture/ * "716 women who left tech" * "I have collected stories from 716 other women who have left the tech industry" * "Of the 716 women surveyed, 465 are not working today." * "Two-hundred-fifty-one are employed in non-tech jobs, and 45 of those are running their own companies. A whopping 625 women say they have no plans to return to tech Which strongly implies "left the industry", not "moving to product management" or "managing". 2/3s of them aren't working at all, not "promoted to management"

malandrew 11y ago
How do they make a living if they aren't working at all? That seems like a shockingly high figure of people who have the means to avoid any sort of labor productivity. I can only conclude that "are not working today" is loosely defined or that these people were unfit for working at all, since someone that has the means to quit work and not have to look for other work elsewhere probably hasn't lead a very rigorous labor existence. Also, this appears to be study of only the ones that left. I'm certain I could find 716 men that left the tech industry too, and come up with a set of reasons why they left. Looks like a classic case of selection bias. There doesn't appear to be one women who stayed in the industry in that study. Does that mean I should conclude from this study that 100% of women leave tech? Simply put, you need to survey more than just those that left. That study comes across as far more biased than the biases it's trying to combat. It's far more interesting to discuss base rates. Start with a sample of women in tech, follow them over n-years (you can get a good representative sample by choosing different cohorts like those that are recent grads to those with 5-10 years industry experience) and do the same with men. After 2-3 years check out how many from from each gender from that sample have left the industry. Interview them to find out why. My ex was a documentary filmmaker interested in social causes and whatnot and I've seen how the sausage is made firsthand and know how data and statistics are twisted to support an agenda. Good statistics that strive to be impartial almost never produces numbers as "story-worthy" as the ones from that study, which means you need to question the numbers presented and also ask which figures were conveniently omitted.