How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution • Hacker News Board

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#171

Post by naasking » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:33 PM UTC

tptacek wrote: post #120

rhapsodic wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Second, nerds can do a perfectly effective job pushing women out of the profession without being aggressive or having social power. We do a lot to gender the profession in ways that has little to do with the work. Think about all the references to hiring "cowboy coders" and "code ninjas." We emphasize hiring the lone gunman coder who learned to code in their basements, while the job actually is highly collaborative…

So, they're engaged in other STEM fields at 2x-3x the extent they're engaged in CS, despite the fact that those other fields are often more intellectually rigorous and challenging and despite the fact that most of those fields are dominated by computers and software --- in fact, many of them are even more challenging from a CS perspective than computer science itself as it is practiced in the industry, which is mostl…

What other STEM fields are you referring to?

Using CS as a tool to solve other problems is a different proposition than the study of CS itself. I don't see why they'd have to be connected in people's minds in the way you're suggesting.

For instance, undergrad math enrollment is almost at gender parity, but postgraduate math study has similar gender ratios to CS. This is because you need an undergraduate degree for teaching and other careers, and so the interest in pursuing math for maths sake appears to be much lower among women. This could be for a number of reasons, some of which might be fixable to improve ratios, but some may be innate.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#172

Post by Boothroid » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:39 PM UTC

abalone wrote: post #84

belorn wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> did the work materially change? I don't think that's the case at all How much money was the computer programming industry creating 1950 vs 1980. In the memo, one of the larger points was that men are exceptional pushed/forced/heavy incentivize by society towards high paying jobs. Would you argue that this claim is false?

> men are exceptional pushed/forced/heavy incentivize by society towards high paying jobs This is a very curious way of explaining how men end up with most of the money and power. They're forced to do it! A perhaps plausible alternative theory: once jobs become high paying, men campaign to recast it as "men's work". This theory is supported by the true history of our profession, succinctly reviewed by this article.

All things being equal women prefer men that can provide for them and their offspring, thus selective pressure for men that can provide, thus drive to accumulate resources. All clear now?

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#173

Post by pron » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:40 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #169

pron wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the point. The term "sexist" itself, at least in its scholarly meaning, does not imply intent. Sexism is a feature of a social structure where women are granted significantly less power than men. The prevailing hypothesis -- which has a lot of supporting evidence -- is that we are all sexist, men and women alike, merely by virtue of being socialized in a sexist society. When people first discovered microbe…

While that would be a nice narrative, I don't think it matches reality. If it did, the people outraged by apparent sexism would be trying to educate the sexists instead of getting them fired. Certainly such people exist, but they're drowned out by the outrage machine that's trying to take away their livelihood.

I find it funny how the few of men whose livelihood may have been affected by unfair allegations is compared to the millions of women who are harassed while earning their livelihood and/or pushed away from earning one, every year, for centuries. Frankly, I'm amazed at how level headed the "outrage machine" is given at how much bigger the real outrage should have been. Also, those who want or are willing to be educated have plenty of resources at their disposal. The evidence is so overwhelming that there can be few if any those who are exposed to it and yet remain unconvinced. At this point, it's mostly diehards that are left, and the reason they are left is precisely because they don't want to see the evidence. Dawkins doesn't really think he can educate all evolution deniers on apparent evolution, and we don't think we can educate all those who wish to perpetuate sexism.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#174

Post by naasking » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:40 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #78

deepnotderp wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

http://quillette.com/2017/08/07/google-memo-four-scientists-... http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

Both are conservative publications, which is fine, but: There are certainly some researchers, like those in the first article, who agree with Damore's position, but they are by far the minority; if you're interested in the subject, I suggest you at least read some research written by the majority opinion. The second link is written by a non-expert, and therefore does not constitute a scholarly opinion at all. I occas…

> There are certainly some researchers, like those in the first article, who agree with Damore's position, but they are by far the minority;

This is a pretty wild claim. I'm not aware of any surveys or polls of social scientists on these topics, the way we've done surveys on, for instance, climate change. How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition? If you have a link to such a survey, I'd love to see it.

Also, calling those sites "conservative" is grossly inaccurate. You're just trying to spin the evidence they present as biased.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#175

Post by pron » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:48 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #174

pron wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both are conservative publications, which is fine, but: There are certainly some researchers, like those in the first article, who agree with Damore's position, but they are by far the minority; if you're interested in the subject, I suggest you at least read some research written by the majority opinion. The second link is written by a non-expert, and therefore does not constitute a scholarly opinion at all. I occas…

> There are certainly some researchers, like those in the first article, who agree with Damore's position, but they are by far the minority; This is a pretty wild claim. I'm not aware of any surveys or polls of social scientists on these topics, the way we've done surveys on, for instance, climate change. How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition? If you have a link…

> How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition?

Umm, because I studied history in grad school for a few years? It's not "any given proposition", but the well-accepted, long-ago-established fact that social policy has marginalized women from positions of power for centuries, and continues to do so (although to a lesser extent, due to political action).

> If you have a link to such a survey, I'd love to see it.

But you don't really. That information is available within minutes on Wikipedia and Google Scholar. If you were truly interested in the consensus opinion, you would have found it by now. If you're too lazy, I've posted some links on this page for the sake of others who care so deeply about this issue yet couldn't be bothered to read the Wikipedia page on sexism or the top hit on Google Scholar for women in tech.

> Also, calling those sites "conservative" is grossly inaccurate.

OK, now I know you're joking.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#176

Post by naasking » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:56 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #175

naasking wrote: post #174

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are certainly some researchers, like those in the first article, who agree with Damore's position, but they are by far the minority; This is a pretty wild claim. I'm not aware of any surveys or polls of social scientists on these topics, the way we've done surveys on, for instance, climate change. How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition? If you have a link…

> How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition? Umm, because I studied history in grad school for a few years? It's not "any given proposition", but the well-accepted, long-ago-established fact that social policy has marginalized women from positions of power for centuries, and continues to do so (although to a lesser extent, due to political action). > If you have a l…

Number of citations on Google scholar says nothing about the quality of that scholarship, and so says nothing about how many social scientists accept any given position. And your study of history is hardly relevant to the status of these topics now, at best, you might be able to claim that you knew what the prevailing opinion was at some point.

So basically you have nothing, which is what I figured.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#177

Post by imron » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 12:57 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #62

k__ wrote: post #7

I don't understand this whole thing. Until recent years all developers I met were socially awkward men, me included. These are not the kind of people I would attribute any power to "crowd out" anyone. To me it seemed that they started doing computer stuff, because no one, including women, wanted to have anything to do with them. The "cool", way more aggressive, kids wanted to do sales, law, finance, management and st…

A couple of things. 1. Programming didn't start in the 80s or 90s. It started in the 40s-50s, and we've been doing it for seventy years now. When you were (by your own admission) a socially awkward boy interested in PCs, there were 50-year-old professional programmers working in banks, defense, aerospace and other industries whose programming culture was very different, because they didn't have computers at home at a…

> 1. Programming didn't start in the 80s or 90s. It started in the 40s-50s,

Programming in the 40s and 50s was very different from programming in the 80s or 90s and it's disingenuous to conflate them or suggest that they are the same.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#178

Post by pron » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 1:04 PM UTC

naasking wrote: post #176

pron wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How could you possibly know what proportion of social scientists accept any given proposition? Umm, because I studied history in grad school for a few years? It's not "any given proposition", but the well-accepted, long-ago-established fact that social policy has marginalized women from positions of power for centuries, and continues to do so (although to a lesser extent, due to political action). > If you have a l…

Number of citations on Google scholar says nothing about the quality of that scholarship, and so says nothing about how many social scientists accept any given position. And your study of history is hardly relevant to the status of these topics now, at best, you might be able to claim that you knew what the prevailing opinion was at some point. So basically you have nothing, which is what I figured.

Dude, do you really think that I thought there was any chance you would have a different conclusion out of this discussion? See, you're already dismissing studies that you haven't even bothered to look at, and still haven't even read the most basic Wikipedia pages on the topic. Actually, "I" have mountains of incontrovertible evidence, which, like Dawkins's fossils, are available for all to see. The only reason you can still doubt this is if you don't want to learn the subject, and there is absolutely nothing I say that can make you interested at this point.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#179

Post by naasking » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 1:06 PM UTC

pron wrote: post #173

naasking wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While that would be a nice narrative, I don't think it matches reality. If it did, the people outraged by apparent sexism would be trying to educate the sexists instead of getting them fired. Certainly such people exist, but they're drowned out by the outrage machine that's trying to take away their livelihood.

I find it funny how the few of men whose livelihood may have been affected by unfair allegations is compared to the millions of women who are harassed while earning their livelihood and/or pushed away from earning one, every year, for centuries. Frankly, I'm amazed at how level headed the "outrage machine" is given at how much bigger the real outrage should have been. Also, those who want or are willing to be educate…

Your analogy to evolution is a textbook false equivalency. That you think the evidence for your narrative is as strong as the evidence for evolution is frankly absurd.

And your patent acceptance that outrage is a legitimate response to these scenarios highlights exactly the problem with how this has been playing out. Suddenly your comparison to Dawkins falls apart quite spectacularly.

Re: How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution

#180

Post by pron » Mon, Aug 21, 2017, 1:07 PM UTC

imron wrote: post #177

pron wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A couple of things. 1. Programming didn't start in the 80s or 90s. It started in the 40s-50s, and we've been doing it for seventy years now. When you were (by your own admission) a socially awkward boy interested in PCs, there were 50-year-old professional programmers working in banks, defense, aerospace and other industries whose programming culture was very different, because they didn't have computers at home at a…

> 1. Programming didn't start in the 80s or 90s. It started in the 40s-50s, Programming in the 40s and 50s was very different from programming in the 80s or 90s and it's disingenuous to conflate them or suggest that they are the same.

True, programming back then was much more mathematical and required stronger analysis skills and rigor.