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

The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 630 posts

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#391

Post by coldtea »

foldr wrote: post #216
TulliusCicero wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> As to the men being jerks/toxic etc argument. Are there times when that is true? Absolutely. But, men do not have a monopoly on being jerks I'd say the bigger point against the idea that women aren't in CS purely* because of men being sexist, is that this implies that male doctors and lawyers in the 60's and 70's were less sexist than male engineers of today. Does anyone actually believe this? * of course, it may s…

>this implies that male doctors and lawyers in the 60's and 70's were less sexist than male engineers of today. I don't see how it implies this. The more relevant question is whether STEM has higher levels of sexism than other similarly attractive fields.

>I don't see how it implies this

In the sense that if sexism is the major force that prevented women from going into IT, then the much higher sexism of doctors and lawyers in the 60s and 70s would have prevented women from going into those fields too. But women were far more in those fields then, than they are in IT now.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#392

Post by satokema »

foldr wrote: post #389
zarkov99 wrote: post #369

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you cannot guess what the numbers should be then how would you know the problem is fixed? Or even if there is any problem at all?

First of all, note that this argument works both ways. You also can’t put exact numbers on how many women we’d expect there to be in the industry in the absence of any sexism whatever. So how do you know that there’s no problem? But actually, the question is quite easy to answer for me. I am more interested in sexism per se than in the gender distribution. When women in the industry infrequently report that they are…

> When women in the industry infrequently report that they are experiencing sexism, then I’ll consider that we’re well on the way to solving the problem.

This is the fox guarding the henhouse. There is no incentive for women to ever stop crying "sexism!" if this is the criterion in use.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#393

Post by coldtea »

foldr wrote: post #270
TulliusCicero wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How could it not imply it? That's when women started entering those fields en masse and really increasing their numbers. Going by the "the problem is men being sexist" reasoning, that they were able to do this successfully implies that the lawyers and doctors in charge then were less sexist than engineers today.

It does not imply this, because it's likely to be relative rather than absolute levels of sexism that are relevant.

>because it's likely to be relative rather than absolute levels of sexism that are relevant

Relative to what? IT remains less sexist relative to doctors and lawyers, so...

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#394

Post by chongli »

octokatt wrote: post #386
chongli wrote: post #358

Earlier quoted context omitted.

more than a little convenient that the male-chosen professions seem to generally pay significantly more It’s not a coincidence at all. Men place a higher priority on pay to the exclusion of all else, when choosing a career, than do women. Women are much more likely to choose careers with flexible working hours, benefits, and the potential to help other people (positive externalities). When you look at it this way, it…

Given women are usually called upon to take more time to do unpaid labor like child-rearing, elder care, and holiday preparation, the fact women choose a flexible schedule is a result of societal expectations, and should be ruled out as a causal link. Because, on average, men are given a lot less social pressure to "be there", they can more often take high-pressure jobs. Then the high pressure becomes a status symbol…

Women aren't just "called upon" to do child rearing, it's a huge part of their biology. In addition to giving birth and developing a strong maternal bond, women breastfeed their children which is not as convenient at work.

And as for high-powered careers being a status symbol, I would offer that a man's socioeconomic status is a major component in attraction for women. The reverse is true to far less of an extent. The stats on dating apps bear this out.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#395

Post by throwaway8548 »

manfredo wrote: post #347
throwaway8548 wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> the kind of differences in performance and achievement that would be explained by psychological and physiological differences between men and women That's a bit of circular reasoning though. - Look how men and women behave differently! - But why do they behave differently? - Because they're different. - How do you know that? - Because they behave differently. It's not logically consistent and doesn't answer anythin…

> That's a bit of circular reasoning though. > - Look how men and women behave differently! > - But why do they behave differently? > - Because they're different. > - How do you know that? > - Because differences are observed at birth, are relatively consistent across countries with vastly different cultures, and the differences in behavior are observed even when raising children in a controlled environment free of g…

> Because differences are observed at birth, are relatively consistent across countries with vastly different cultures,

I mean the article literally says different countries/cultures see vastly different results.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#396

Post by tathougies »

tptacek wrote: post #383
tathougies wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The analogy that programmers “build things” is just that—your typical programmer is certainly not cut out to be a construction worker. Building things is not just construction though. I mean, your average clock maker is not qualified to plumb a bathroom, but that doesn't mean he's not making things. I don't have an opinion on this, but the idea that programmers aren't building something is a bit silly.

Programmers build things the same way garment-makers build things with sewing machines and needles. Construction worker may do even less engineering design work than garment-makers do.

Right... garment workers do build things. That's the point.... building is not just making structures. It's production in general.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#397

Post by chrisco255 »

briandear wrote: post #352
CydeWeys wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And lots of people are investing lots of time and effort into trying to fix that problem in education, healthcare, etc.

> And lots of people are investing lots of time and effort into trying to fix that problem Are they? I worked in the mental health space for over 10 years and almost 80% of therapists are women -- and a vast majority of those are white women. There hasn't been any significant movement to "fix" that despite a very compelling argument that finding a therapist who is a good match to a patient is fundamental to the succe…

This is generally a great summary. We have near full employment right now, so that means in order to pull more women into engineering, you'd have to fill those industries the women are coming from with equally talented men.

In other words, you'd effectively be taking would-be male engineers and converting them into nurses and teachers. And vice versa. The number of people that consider those fields a toss up is vanishingly small. They require completely different skill sets.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#398

Post by throwaway8548 »

m0zg wrote: post #322
throwaway8548 wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

- Because women are discriminated against - How do you know that? - Because women told us!!

Women have unrealistic expectations sometimes. Elsewhere in this comment section someone (you?) mentioned that men are "unaccommodating" to women. But men _are_ in fact more accommodating to women nowadays than to _other men_. How do we know this? _Because men told us_! You're asking for special treatment and you don't even realize it.

> But men _are_ in fact more accommodating to women nowadays than to _other men_

This is not about generic workplace disagreements. Yes, those happen all the time.

> How do we know this? _Because men told us_!

I know that's tongue in cheek and only half serious but I'll reply anyway.

Even if 99% of men are more accommodating, that 1% would still make employment unbearable. After 10 years you probably met a few dozen assholes and just want to quit the industry because it's not worth it.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#399

Post by foldr »

TulliusCicero wrote: post #354
foldr wrote: post #277

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not saying that law and medicine are perfect. But they were once just as stereotypically male as tech is now, and yet have radically shifted their gender balance. Fifty years ago people would no doubt have told you that women just weren't interested in becoming lawyers or doctors. Now a majority of attorneys in the US are women, and more women are enrolling in medical school than men.

> But they were once just as stereotypically male as tech is now, and yet have radically shifted their gender balance. You say this as if the fields themselves decided, but it could just as easily be that women pushed in harder. > Fifty years ago people would no doubt have told you that women just weren't interested in becoming lawyers or doctors. Again, what was the difference? You've suggested a relative difference…

I think you are reading a lot into my comment that isn't there. I don't know exactly why women fifty years ago made the decisions that they did. You don't, either.

Re: The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM (2018)

#400

Post by foldr »

coldtea wrote: post #391
foldr wrote: post #216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>this implies that male doctors and lawyers in the 60's and 70's were less sexist than male engineers of today. I don't see how it implies this. The more relevant question is whether STEM has higher levels of sexism than other similarly attractive fields.

> I don't see how it implies this In the sense that if sexism is the major force that prevented women from going into IT, then the much higher sexism of doctors and lawyers in the 60s and 70s would have prevented women from going into those fields too. But women were far more in those fields then, than they are in IT now.

I don't follow this argument. Levels of sexism in the 60s and 70s are irrelevant to decisions that women are making in the present.
Post reply on HN