Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

themacro.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 329 posts

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#131

Post by deciplex »

andrepd wrote: post #124
_1qd4 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In Ontario, male teachers are not allowed to take children to the washroom, even if the child is a boy. This is a problem because if a child with a disability needs to use the washroom, he needs to wait until a female staff member is available. I understand why men would drop out of the school system. Before you even start, you're already considered a predator.

I hardly think that particular case (abhorrent and indefensible though it is) is indicative of the statu quo.

Any reason for that? I mean, it's anecdotal evidence, sure, but it's not the first time I've heard such a story about how men are treated in the teaching profession. It's only one data point, but even a single data point is superior to the no data points you've countered with.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#132

Post by rayiner »

gshulegaard wrote: post #108
rayiner wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I am a libertarian so ultimately I believe that everyone should be free to make their own decisions even if there are gender preferences at play. Not saying there aren't issues, but simply saying, "X is anti-women, because only Y% are female," is academically dishonest. It's not academically dishonest, it's the application of a reasonable epistomological presumption: we presume that observations are not caused by b…

> "we presume that observations are not caused by biological differences without concrete evidence of those differences. The corollary to that is that disparities in outcome are prima facie evidence of disparities in opportunity." Ummm...the first part is fine, the corollary reasoning is what is academically dishonest. Prima facie is not academically acceptable when determining causal relationships in statistics. The…

The corollary follows from the first part because of the nature/nurture dichotomy. It's either biological, or sociological. If you presume it's not the former, unless we have evidence thereof, we must presume it's the latter. What else could it be?

Also, what is acceptable for proving a causal relationship in a statistical sense is not coextensive with what's academically honest. In the real world people have to make decisions and set policies based on imperfect information. Requiring premises underlying those policies to be proven with scientific certainty before condoning political action just establishes a default policy of preserving the status quo.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#133

Post by slackstation »

ps4fanboy wrote: post #81
throwaway293810 wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> you might as well just stay home But why does it have to be the woman who stays home? Why is this just the tacit assumption? I'd love to see not just solid support for moms at work, but solid support / encouragement for dads at home: paternity leave up-to-par with maternity leave, a normalization and acceptance of stay-at-home dads where desired, etc. It's kind of amazing how prevalent the assumption is that childr…

Because women dont want to marry men who want to be primary stay at home dads, some do, but I have never met a woman who wants that. Most of the women I speak to when asked think its a little bit funny.

Women tend to prefer men that are higher status than themselves. For a working woman (especially one in tech that earns alot) they tend find partners who are also employed.

This makes a dichotomy where if a man makes $100k+ in most places in the US, they can one-income support a family. Where as women tend not to look favorably to men who take time off of to stay at home.

Women's desire for high status men is something that comes to us from being primates. It's at best a mixture of nature and society. Even if we had a radically egalitarian society, there is a part of many couples that would be unsettled by it.

All that said, there is nothing about that should stop women from pursuing careers in tech. Of all work, ours is one that is really friendly to working remotely and with flexible hours.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#134

Post by dopamean »

reednj wrote: post #123
wpietri wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason women dominate in certain fields is that those fields were generally seen as less important, so women were pushed into them. E.g., doctors were men, women were nurses, and there was an enormous pay and prestige difference between the two. (Hint: it did not favor the nurses.) If you're interested in learning more, researching "pink ghetto" will get you started.

80% of people working in PR are women. Is that a pink ghetto as well?

Definitely.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#135

Post by andrepd »

deciplex wrote: post #131
andrepd wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hardly think that particular case (abhorrent and indefensible though it is) is indicative of the statu quo.

Any reason for that? I mean, it's anecdotal evidence, sure, but it's not the first time I've heard such a story about how men are treated in the teaching profession. It's only one data point, but even a single data point is superior to the no data points you've countered with.

Well, all of the schools that do not enforce such a ridiculous rule are my data points. So unless you suggest there are more schools enforcing that rule than not, then I have more data points, so I win. Right?

The truth is that that anecdote brings no value whatsoever to the discussion.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#136

Post by douche »

sp332 wrote: post #66
saiya-jin wrote: post #64

is it really true that women don't get promoted in engineering as much? that's a honest question, the only few I've met did not aspire for higher and higher positions intensively, rather enjoyed what they were doing (that could be said about most of the guys too). I am all for equal situations for both genders, but my assumption was that we already +-have it in western societies, thus such a move would make guys actu…

http://i.imgur.com/reUNxYu.png Definitely something odd going on in computer science.

The inflection point is right about when consumer PCs (personal computers in general, not wintel specifically) became a thing. What are consumer PCs used for, when they aren't being used productively? Gaming, and kids who like games trying to learn how to make their own games (particularly in the pre-web 2.0 era... Web 2.0, remember that?). And ultimately, who was the main consumer of PC gaming? 12-25 year old boys and men.

Then you've got a decline in the wake of the Dot-Com bust. One has to wonder if the gains in the other fields of study cannibalized high-aptitude women who might have gone into CS.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#137

Post by gaylemcd »

reednj wrote: post #123
wpietri wrote: post #122

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason women dominate in certain fields is that those fields were generally seen as less important, so women were pushed into them. E.g., doctors were men, women were nurses, and there was an enormous pay and prestige difference between the two. (Hint: it did not favor the nurses.) If you're interested in learning more, researching "pink ghetto" will get you started.

80% of people working in PR are women. Is that a pink ghetto as well?

And PR is not very well paid.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#138

Post by andrepd »

nostrebored wrote: post #128
andrepd wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying it's true that biological sex creates certain predispositions, but it's also not unreasonable. The people who dogmatically deny it outright are as bad as the people who strongly affirm such differences despite lack of evidence.

Would you say the same about any other causal relationship? Are there any implications of it that don't perpetuate the idea that women are intellectually inferior? That don't shift the burdens of emotional labor and child rearing onto children? The idea is so obviously sexist...

How do you mean? A common stereotype is that men are aggressive while woman are kinder and gentler (the former true to some extent because of testosterone). Surely that's a good trait, so not all stereotypes disfavour women? Point being, recognizing differences between the sexes (which it exists in areas such as the aforementioned aggressiveness, or in kids where you can see boys are more restless and prone to suffer ADHD, but almost certainly not in intellect like you suggest) is not "so obviously sexist". It's the reality.

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#139

Post by gaylemcd »

H0n3sty wrote: post #117

What would people think if the genders were reversed and this institution was discriminating against women and only helping men? Women have a far larger presence in other fields like biology and education, but you don't see new organizations popping up every other month to change that in favor of men. Discrimination like this should be illegal.

So you mean if you totally changed the context? Gee, for this completely different situation that really has little to do with this one, yes people would be offended.

But, you know, the context and implications are so completely different. What's your point?

Re: Women Who Code (YC S16) helps female engineers level up in their careers

#140

Post by bravura »

andrepd wrote: post #125
TeMPOraL wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Westerners seem to have a serious distrust in men when it comes to young children. A woman talking to kids in a park is most obviously a mom. A man talking to kids in a park is most obviously a paedophile.

At least where I come from I do not feel that in the slightest.

Trans-men report the opposite:

http://time.com/transgender-men-sexism/

'Most trans men I spoke to also identified another commonality: Once they transitioned [from female to male], walking became easier, but talking became harder. To be more specific: walking home after dark felt easier, casually talking to babies, strangers and friends felt harder.

“I have to be very careful to not be staring at kids,” says Gardner. “I can look at a mom and her baby, but I can’t look for too long. I miss being seen as not a threat.” Ditto for kids on the playground and puppies, multiple guys said.'

Post reply on HN