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

The power of role models

commandcenter.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 380 posts

Re: The power of role models

#281

Post by spangry »

tptacek wrote: post #279
spangry wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it's a non-factual claim that there is a significant degree of horizontal occupational gender segregation in pretty much every advanced economy. A random search using terms similar to those above yields the following: http://imgur.com/a/lcHPU The segregation seems to follow a pretty stereotypical pattern: men cluster is occupations concerned with abstract, impersonal systems or that revolve around physi…

Three responses. 1. I'm not sure it's surprising, let alone a rebuttal, to observe that there's significant gender disparity in most industrialized economies. In fact, it can be the case that the US leads the world in gender parity (in fact: I think this might be likely) and still simultaneously be the case that there are structural biases against women. Why would we expect to see wildly diverging outcomes in differe…

Addressing your responses:

1. Unless I've misunderstood, the original assertion was that the gender gap is present in many engineering professions. I'm not clear on what facts you are relying on, but the data I've seen (and linked to) seems to bear this observation out. Such an observation is not at odds with your assertion that there are 'structural biases' against women.

And if I has to guess, to put it bluntly, I suspect China was not included as their official statistics on any remotely economic matter are highly suspect. Additionally, there are quite disparate outcomes among countries. On no measure of gender workforce equality is the US in the lead, at least according to the data in the linked study. The US is better than most on vertical inequality (i.e. wage gaps within the same occupational groups) but roughly average on horizontal inequality (i.e. occupational gender segregation). The US is closest to South Africa in these respects.

2. I don't have much to say here really. I guess part of this might come down to what one subjectively defines as a 'high status' profession. I don't really have an opinion here, so I defer to yours.

3. I don't recall saying that that study I linked to rebuts your point of view. I linked to the study because it's fairly comprehensive, informative, and seems to have a sound methodology. The data analysed is fairly credible too: large cross country social surveys and Census data. I'm not sure where R^2 comes into this, as the authors are not constructing a predictive model. Rather, they're simply calculating observational statistics.

And I'm not asking you to concede that the debate should shift into some kind of weird, abstract mathematical exercise. But if you refuse to even glance at some of the data put forward (or any data really), preferring some nebulous facts that you haven't actually presented, then I'm afraid you're likely to have a hard time convincing people who don't already agree with you.

Re: The power of role models

#282

Post by tptacek »

throwaway399 wrote: post #280
tptacek wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neuroscience, molecular biology, chem, stat, even pure math all have saner gender balance than computer science; some, like molecular biology, even have slightly more women than men. I think it's going to be difficult to compose an argument for how computer science could be intrinsically better suited to men in a way that didn't also apply to other popular hard-science fields.

The nature of the work in all of these fields is different. My point is that women are not less qualified, but just less interested in a career of doing the kind of work software engineers do. It is very very different from applied math and statistics. Neuro/molecular/chem ~= biology and is similar to each other for the most part. women are underrepresented in almost all major engineering fields. It's not like the ma…

There was no set of comparable fields I could give where you wouldn't be able to provide some kind of distinction as if it was determinative, but at some point the argument gets so finicky that it becomes tautological. Science, but nothing biological, even if it requires organic chem and computational models. And not astronomy. Only physics, even though only a tiny minority of CS practitioners have physics training. Math, sure, but not abstract maths, or statistics, even though stat is the most important math for programming.

One suspects that if there was some subfield of programming, like distributed systems, that had 45/65 female/male, there'd be an elaborate justification for how that programming discipline was so different from the rest of programming that any comparisons to it were invalid (and, in fact, I've noticed at academic crypto conferences that women are much more common than in the rest of CS, so maybe that's an example).

Again, this is what it means for an argument to be a special pleading: we're required to accept an obstacle course of criterion that ignores the simplest, most plausible comparisons.

Re: The power of role models

#283

Post by skookumchuck »

SwellJoe wrote: post #276
skookumchuck wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll make a general comment not specific to any group. When I hear a person produce a long list of excuses, blaming others or circumstance, never once taking responsibility for any decisions, adamantly denying that they had any hand in their fate, I know where the problem lies. Just remember the story of Douglas Bader, who had both legs amputated, and was told he was going to die of his wounds, then told he'd never w…

> I'll make a general comment not specific to any group. When I hear a person produce a long list of excuses, blaming others or circumstance, never once taking responsibility for any decisions, adamantly denying that they had any hand in their fate, I know where the problem lies. So, you believe that assertion applies to women in tech, since that is who we're talking about?

I specifically said it does not apply to any group. It applies to individuals. Individuals in this country to a very large extent choose whether they will be winners or losers. Are there bad bosses, toxic work environments, sexist men? Of course there are.

Do women need permission, encouragement, and money from men in order to succeed? Nope. Suggesting otherwise is patronizing and taints the success of those who do succeed.

Women have started companies in the US for 200+ years. The idea that somehow they can't start tech companies, and run them as they see fit, is ludicrous.

Re: The power of role models

#284

Post by discombobulate »

tptacek wrote: post #282
throwaway399 wrote: post #280

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The nature of the work in all of these fields is different. My point is that women are not less qualified, but just less interested in a career of doing the kind of work software engineers do. It is very very different from applied math and statistics. Neuro/molecular/chem ~= biology and is similar to each other for the most part. women are underrepresented in almost all major engineering fields. It's not like the ma…

There was no set of comparable fields I could give where you wouldn't be able to provide some kind of distinction as if it was determinative, but at some point the argument gets so finicky that it becomes tautological. Science, but nothing biological, even if it requires organic chem and computational models. And not astronomy. Only physics, even though only a tiny minority of CS practitioners have physics training.…

Do you believe the following statements are true?

1) Men & women have differently structured brains.

2) Different brains result in different behaviour.

Re: The power of role models

#285

Post by dang »

nielsabel wrote: post #153

“Science has been done without women for centuries, and it obviously worked.” – Luboš Motl Can we please just stop all this PC bullshit. Robo Pike obviously doesn't realize that the reason these women attending that meeting are so excellent is because there are so few of them. I.e. only those survived/came so far who have actual skills. The same goes for computer science. The women who are really skilled and who real…

This aggressive rant crosses the line on HN. If you can't contain your anger enough to post substantively and with respect for opposing views, you're not welcome to post here. It's not in your interest to do this anyhow, since it undercuts everything you're saying.

Re: The power of role models

#286

Post by [deleted] »

tbirdz wrote: post #107
skywhopper wrote: post #12

Programming used to be a field with significant numbers of women, including true pioneers like Grace Hopper. IIRC, female computer science majors peaked in the 80s, and have been declining since. Even with those low numbers these days, a lot of women who are interested in programming and computer science are chased away early on, or they quickly move into more welcoming fields. So it's true that among senior staff, w…

>Rob is right that role models are important. I've heard this thought expressed a lot, but I have to ask a genuine question: Does anyone here really have any role models that were influential to their interest in the field? I'm a man, so maybe it is different for women. But I never really had any role models in programming that I looked up to/wanted to emulate. Personally, I was always interested in computers, softwa…

[deleted]

Re: The power of role models

#287

Post by gone35 »

tbirdz wrote: post #107
skywhopper wrote: post #12

Programming used to be a field with significant numbers of women, including true pioneers like Grace Hopper. IIRC, female computer science majors peaked in the 80s, and have been declining since. Even with those low numbers these days, a lot of women who are interested in programming and computer science are chased away early on, or they quickly move into more welcoming fields. So it's true that among senior staff, w…

>Rob is right that role models are important. I've heard this thought expressed a lot, but I have to ask a genuine question: Does anyone here really have any role models that were influential to their interest in the field? I'm a man, so maybe it is different for women. But I never really had any role models in programming that I looked up to/wanted to emulate. Personally, I was always interested in computers, softwa…

Does anyone here really have any role models that were influential to their interest in the field?

Yes.

Re: The power of role models

#288

Post by Shubley »

stale2002 wrote: post #269
Oxitendwe wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The women in tech pipeline is a leaky, toxic pipeline that results in talented women being driven out of the industry. I'd be very interested to see some evidence of this. How many women leave, at what stage in their career path do they leave, where do they go after they've left, and how do you know that their unfair treatment is responsible?

You can figure out the reason that they left by asking them. This isn't something that is controversial. There is lots of research into this. https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/the-real-reason-wome... http://news.mit.edu/2016/why-do-women-leave-engineering-0615 http://alltogether.swe.org/2016/04/real-reason-women-leave-s... Are just a couple, actually published research attempts that I found with a 2 minute goog…

People don't give (or often even know) the real reasons they do things.

Steeped in a culture of sexism accusations, it's not surprising that you'd hear reports of sexism from women leaving the industry.

A man doing the exact same thing (and many men do leave tech) would say their boss was an asshole, or they hated the hours, or whatever. Women are prodded and trained to interpret exactly the same circumstances as sexism.

Of course this doesn't mean there isn't sexism. But it does mean that you can't just "figure out the reason that they left by asking them".

Re: The power of role models

#289

Post by Shubley »

afarrell wrote: post #88
skookumchuck wrote: post #66

The article suggests that power in computing is something men have to give. It isn't. Computing is a market based economy. Anyone can start a computing company, and run it as they please. I.e. women can start computing companies, and hire women. Women do not need permission from men to do this, nor do they need favor from men.

But they do need capital.

Not really; I've got a multimillion dollar company started with personal savings.

And even leaving aside companies - it doesn't cost anything to contribute to FOSS projects.

Re: The power of role models

#290

Post by Shubley »

geofft wrote: post #274
said wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you believe the vast physical differences between men and women end at the brainstem? Do you believe the flood of sex hormones during puberty don't result in different mental tendencies, including tolerances to rejection? Do you believe the different ratios of neurotransmitters between men and women across all cultures and haplogroups are a result of culture? Before we explicitly institutionalize discrimination ag…

I certainly believe there are physical differences between (biological) men and women, in aggregate across men and women. I do think that the standard deviation is very high, though; I don't think that the vast physical differences make all men more suited to a task than all women, any more than all men are taller than all women. And I think that defining particular "mental tendencies" as favorable or unfavorable to…

Let's compare this to height as you did.

Because of how gaussian distributions work, the differences at the outlying values are huge even for small differences in the average.

For example, men are taller than women in general, but of course some men are taller than some women.

But at the extreme heights, the ratio between men and women becomes stagger. At 6 feet tall, men outnumber women 30:1. At 6'3", 2000:1.

Now apply this to tech. If we imagine a relatively elite job, like being a professional programmer with significant responsibility, that is the kind of thing only someone at the extreme end of the bell curve of tech-proclivity is going to do. But because of the way gaussians work at extreme values, even if women on average have similar tech-proclivity to men, at that high level the ratio of men:women could be huge.

All this could just be due to a simple misunderstanding of the math of a bell curve distribution and how it works at the ends of the spectrum.

Post reply on HN