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

Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

quillette.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 536 posts

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#391

Post by zxxon »

jenthoven wrote: post #372
zxxon wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> ...the truth is that they have beautiful offices, close-knit teams, a lifestyle with time for friends, a lot of influence, and a huge impact on real people’s lives through the software they create. That's not "the truth", that's your experience in the amusement park that has been created for the pampered developers of the current dotcom bubble at companies like Google. Enjoy it while it lasts. Regardless of gender…

Fair, I apologize for generalizing. You're right that Google is an outlier in this way. But I still think that there's a perception that CS is more anti-social than it actually is, and a perception that other professions are more social than they actually are.

In my experience, programmers are generally less socially inept than people would think, while people in most other professions are less socially adept than they think they are.

The thing is, some programmers really are socially inept and CS work is one of their last refuges. That includes a bunch of socially inept women, too! Let's not disturb their natural habitat by bringing all these overly social people in, those will thrive in many other places as well.

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#392

Post by pron »

jeffreyrogers wrote: post #386
pron wrote: post #171

> Many academics in the modern world seem obsessed with the sex difference in engagement with science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) fields. Or rather they are obsessed with the fact that there are more men than women in some of these fields. ... Proponents of these theories and their activist followers believe that some significant proportion of the sex differences in STEM fields – but curiously on…

But what if the under-representation is due to women not being as interested in the field?

First, why are they less interested? Second, like I said, the problem is an overall unfair distribution of power. I find it very hard to believe that women are so uninterested in all professions that confer power to the point that they're willing to give up power (and therefore freedom) to not practice them.

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#393

Post by collyw »

meuk wrote: post #282
tptacek wrote: post #152

Once again: compared to other STEM fields, women participate less in CS than any other field except physics. By double digits percentage more in mathematics PhDs. Statistics is almost 50/50. Several rigorous earth sciences fields --- chem and biochem, for instance --- have 50% or greater female participation. One thing all these fields have in common is that they are more intellectually rigorous and harder to succeed…

Artificial? I would say cultural. I would surely like there to be more women in CS. There are literally no women at my office, and the only women I met for the last six months are from HR. I am single, and so is about 50% of my coworkers - this is not a particularly good position to be in on the 'relationship market'. On the other hand, I can't blame women for not wanting my job. IT has a reputation for attracting wh…

How many men were in the HR department? In my experience its almost all female.

No one has ever suggested that I shouldn't or can't go into HR. It just doesn't interest me.

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#394

Post by losvedir »

tptacek wrote: post #152

Once again: compared to other STEM fields, women participate less in CS than any other field except physics. By double digits percentage more in mathematics PhDs. Statistics is almost 50/50. Several rigorous earth sciences fields --- chem and biochem, for instance --- have 50% or greater female participation. One thing all these fields have in common is that they are more intellectually rigorous and harder to succeed…

Where are you getting your stats? The last time I saw someone assert this on HN I looked into it but didn't find that[0] - CS was about equal to MechE, EE, Aero Astro.

edit: nvm, I misread. You lump MechE (and I'd guess EE) with CS, and I think are pointing out they're in the 15-20% range as opposed to the other engineering disciplines mostly around 30%. I incorrectly thought you were saying the other fields were around 50%.

[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14957013

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#395

Post by biofox »

edna314 wrote: post #281
biofox wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am completely committed to removing biases and discrimination that stand in the way of competent people, but I find the idea of equality of outcome for its own sake to be deeply troubling. It moves the discussion away from systemic biases, and to an artificial metric that has little relation. A simple example of why equality of outcome might be undesirable is this: people don't like doing jobs they find unfulfillin…

> idea of equality of outcome for its own sake It's not for its one sake. It's for peace in the society. > Should nursing training and culture be manipulated to be more appealing to people like me? I would only want that if it were beneficial for the nursing profession itself. Have you tried it? I think it's not really reasonable to assume that humans are made to do exactly one thing. It's more of a necessary convent…

I worded my comment poorly. You're right... the number in not artificial. And I agree with your point on humans being capable of many things.

I want to live in a society where people can make a living doing things they enjoy and are good at. My concern is that quotas for outcomes (rather than things that more directly measure discrimination) might end up achieving the opposite: on one hand encouraging people into positions that are not a good fit for them, through external incentives, while at the same time removing opportunities from others who would prefer them.

Shouldn't measures of workplace satisfaction matter a hell of a lot more than the number of women on the board?

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#396

Post by jancsika »

> Many academics in the modern world seem obsessed with the sex difference in engagement with science, technology, mathematics, and engineering (STEM) fields. Or rather they are obsessed with the fact that there are more men than women in some of these fields. There is particular concern about the lack of women in prestigious STEM fields, such as Ph.D.-level faculty positions, but surprisingly there is no concern about the under-representation of women in lower-level technical jobs, such as car mechanics or plumbing.

Obsessed as in "doing science on socially relevant topics?"

> These differences are socially important because these tend to be prestigious occupations, and practically important because the different numbers of men and women in these fields contribute, in part, to the sex difference in earnings.1

So... "doing science on relevant topics."

Why misrepresent that as an "obsession?"

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#397

Post by jeffreyrogers »

pron wrote: post #392
jeffreyrogers wrote: post #386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But what if the under-representation is due to women not being as interested in the field?

First, why are they less interested? Second, like I said, the problem is an overall unfair distribution of power. I find it very hard to believe that women are so uninterested in all professions that confer power to the point that they're willing to give up power (and therefore freedom) to not practice them.

I've worked in the finance industry and the tech industry, both industries where women are underrepresented. These industries would love to employ more women. When I worked in finance the recruiters spent a ton of effort trying to get women to apply, but they couldn't get anywhere close to 50/50 in terms of number of applicants. Maybe women (on average, not outliers obviously) value other things more than power? At least in finance it's incredibly demanding to be at the top. The work is consuming and if you aren't willing to put in the time someone else will and will take your job. It isn't really compatible with a traditional family life.

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#398

Post by MistahKoala »

Cthulhu_ wrote: post #294
MistahKoala wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Casual lay observer here (i.e., don't treat this as coming from a position of being deeply informed). The phenomenon you describe sounds similar to the 'Nordic gender paradox' (or variations of the term). It's been a while since I last touched on it and I can't easily find a source worth pointing to - at least, one that hasn't been presented through a political lens - and academic names on the subject don't come to m…

What you mention is also referred to in the article itself, and it does make sense - true emancipation and gender equality is IMO more about equal opportunity, and the freedom to choose. The push towards getting more women in STEM and specifically CS feels like it tries to take that freedom away in a sense; you SHOULD pick CS, here's all the money we're investing in getting women to work for us.

> What you mention is also referred to in the article itself

Admittedly, I'm yet to read it (Pocketed it for later).

I assume I agree with your sentiment about what equality means and what its relationships with freedom and liberty are - it's just not something that can easily be said in the open without running the risk of having to defend it or attracting pariah status. I don't really want to say much more on the matter here beyond that (it's mostly a draining experience).

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#399

Post by zxxon »

door2 wrote: post #368
rvo wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is the flip side too. I wouldn't want to be known as the diversity hire. I want to be judged on my work and my skills. Not on what chromosomes I carry or what my melenin level is. The more we keep framing things in the context of hiring to meet gender based quotas, the more people will see us as diversity hires. I would hate that more than knowing someone doesn't like me because of my gender because that person…

Maybe that’s the problem of sexist and racist white men who can’t believe that a woman or PoC could possibly be here based on merit and always treat them with suspicion. It’s not the fault of people trying to fix the problem.

If someone literally gets hired over some white dude by "virtue" of their gender and/or race, then they aren't there by merit. That's exactly what some ideologically (or PR) driven HR departments do. The suspicion is entirely warranted.

The thing is, such practices also damage the self-image of the hire in question. Am I being hired for my abilities, or for being a number in some statistic?

Re: Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies

#400

Post by collyw »

Caveman_Coder wrote: post #285
meuk wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Artificial? I would say cultural. I would surely like there to be more women in CS. There are literally no women at my office, and the only women I met for the last six months are from HR. I am single, and so is about 50% of my coworkers - this is not a particularly good position to be in on the 'relationship market'. On the other hand, I can't blame women for not wanting my job. IT has a reputation for attracting wh…

> "I would surely like there to be more women in CS. There are literally no women at my office, and the only women I met for the last six months are from HR. I am single, and so is about 50% of my coworkers - this is not a particularly good position to be in on the 'relationship market'." The workplace shouldn't be your dating pool...

A large amount of relationships start at work, so I think its unfair to say that.
Post reply on HN