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

On being a girl in computer science - a confession

zanytomato.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 305 posts

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#221

Post by eli_gottlieb »

cletus wrote: post #102

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?" Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe…

Ok, I just want to speak the hell up right now.

I have seen misogyny in the workplace. It really does exist, and there really is an Old Boys Club culture in some workplaces.

So step one to lowering the barriers of entry to women is to stop speaking of or treating women like negligible trivialities.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#222

Post by LockeWatts »

klibertp wrote: post #213
LockeWatts wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 1. high male/female ratio + blind meritocracy => self-sustaining male culture Based on what, the assumption that women are self-selecting against wanting to be programmers due to it being a male dominated profession? In that case, the action should be taken to promote CS education and inclusion at the preparatory level. Creating a bias away from the meritocracy at the hiring stage is still discriminatory and result…

"Creating a bias [...] results in an overall lower skill level" Yes, but again, that is meant a only a temporary solution; as something that will correct the abnormal situation we have now and then will go away. "You're basically telling multiple generations of men that it's okay for them to be discriminated against for their entire life due to something that their fathers or grandfathers did" Isn't that ok? Every si…

>Isn't that ok?

No, why in the hell would that be okay? What makes one act of discrimination better than the other?

>Every single time I think about this issue I feel guilty as hell just for being male. Every time I see a cultural norm that discriminates women I feel a bit responsible for it - and these bits accumulate quickly. I'm ready to be discriminated against to some extent if it's going to help; it's not because I want someone to make effort in my place but because I know that my effort alone is not sufficient.

Congratulations, your internalization of guilt and willingness to be discriminated against does not extend to me, and you have no right to tell me that it should.

I'm not responsible for the crap that happened in the past, and I'm not okay with being told that I should bear the consequences of poor decisions made before my time.

>Also, multiple generations is not that long a time. Twenty, maybe thirty years and it would be over - society evolves quite fast nowadays, we don't need to wait for centuries - like women had to.

Twenty or thirty years is the prime working window of my life. It's difficult enough, thanks.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#223

Post by Tichy »

cletus wrote: post #102

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?" Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe…

I never heard of the judgmental stereotype. Anyway, I notice that you seem to also tend to believe that CS is somehow hostile to women because the people in it are not social enough or whatever.

I just want to put forward another idea: what if CS isn't attractive to women because it is not really an attractive job and women have better options? Think about it, really! Is CS attractive? It is cool to create cool things with computers, but the job reality is usually vastly different. Watch "Office Space" (everybody in IT should). Think about cubicles, or offices in the basement. Think about being glued to a computer screen all day, with little physical exercise. Think about inane specifications, hundreds and hundreds of pages long. Think about Dilbert.

Perhaps being a nanny or a nurse is more fun after all, at least if you care a lot about social interactions (and I don't men because men in CS are not sociable, but because being glued to a screen isn't sociable). Where do the "better options" come in? Nurses and nannies don't earn as much money as IT specialists, but women don't need so much money. They tend to be the supplemental earners in a family, not the main breadwinners. Simple as that.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#224

Post by mich41 »

obstacle1 wrote: post #188
rayiner wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you have in CS now isn't "blind meritocracy." If the male culture is turning away qualified women, you don't have a meritocracy.

> If the male culture is turning away qualified women Is there any evidence that this is happening?

Dunno. But OTOH, I've sure seen unqualified women being hired "to counter gender inequality".

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#225

Post by eLobato »

edmccard wrote: post #174
gonehome wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's a little more insidious than that. It refocuses the issue to gender and suggests you're special in tech not because of what you've done or want to do, but simply because of what you are. I think this devalues the accomplishments by focusing on an unimportant aspect. It subtly suggests (unintentionally) that girls can't make it on their own and require this extra help - which I think reinforces the sexist…

>It refocuses the issue to gender and suggests you're special in tech... I think one of the purposes of these kinds of separate events is to make it so that women in tech are not "special". >I think this devalues the accomplishments by focusing on an unimportant aspect. Unimportant to you, maybe, but not to the people who face barriers because of their gender. To make an analogy, is the success of some African-Americ…

So the idea is to create special events for women in tech so that they are not special any more? Honestly I see that argument as flawed.

Gender issues do come into play when you segregate people like this. Some women like to go to these events, some don't. Have you ever thought about how do men feel? Or just because they are generally in a different position it doesn't matter if they're discriminated against?

This thing sounds to me like trying to justify robbing a thief, one automatically becomes a thief after doing it no matter how much sugar you want to use to coat the action.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#226

Post by mich41 »

jfoster wrote: post #111
cletus wrote: post #102

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?" Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe…

If males and females think differently, CS is missing out on some unique perspectives by not having more females involved in the field. Barriers or not, less gender imbalance could enrich the the field.

I've seen some women in CS, maths and software dev. Those who were doing their jobs well were hardly doing anything differently than men who were doing their jobs well. The only women or men "thinking differently" were clowns trying to show off.

I don't care if I work with women as long as they are doing their job instead of talking how their presence enriches the team and whole Universe. Unfortunately, the letter are the kind attracted by "gender equility" propaganda.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#227

Post by TheZenPsycho »

Tichy wrote: post #223
cletus wrote: post #102

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?" Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe…

I never heard of the judgmental stereotype. Anyway, I notice that you seem to also tend to believe that CS is somehow hostile to women because the people in it are not social enough or whatever. I just want to put forward another idea: what if CS isn't attractive to women because it is not really an attractive job and women have better options? Think about it, really! Is CS attractive? It is cool to create cool thing…

>Nurses and nannies don't earn as much money as IT specialists, but women don't need so much money. They tend to be the supplemental earners in a family, not the main breadwinners. Simple as that.

oof, really? That's what you think about women? wow.

Reverse the gendered nouns about that. How would you feel, as a man, if someone said something like that about your entire gender?

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#228

Post by mich41 »

d0mine wrote: post #165
LockeWatts wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So your dichotomy about "meritocracy" is short-sighted. There is nothing "meritocratic" about indulging male culture to keep a field male-dominated. Indeed, that's anti-meritocratic I don't see how a blind meritocracy is indulging male culture. Isn't the whole point of a meritocracy the idea that the only thing it cares about is performance?

You are ignoring initial conditions. I understand rayiner's comment as: 1. high male/female ratio + blind meritocracy => self-sustaining male culture 2. affirmative action as a temporary kludge to shift male/female ratio 3. lower male/female ratio + blind meritocracy => self-sustaining new equilibrium That is after affirmative action stops; it is not necessary that the system returns to old high male/female state.

So what's meritocratic in abandoning (even temporarily) meritocracy to move from a meritocratic equilibrium to a meritocratic equilibrium?

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#229

Post by vacri »

cletus wrote: post #102

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?" Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe…

"are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?" is a subset of "why aren't there more women in CS?"; they're asking the same thing.

Re: On being a girl in computer science - a confession

#230

Post by MrScruff »

d0mine wrote: post #165
LockeWatts wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>So your dichotomy about "meritocracy" is short-sighted. There is nothing "meritocratic" about indulging male culture to keep a field male-dominated. Indeed, that's anti-meritocratic I don't see how a blind meritocracy is indulging male culture. Isn't the whole point of a meritocracy the idea that the only thing it cares about is performance?

You are ignoring initial conditions. I understand rayiner's comment as: 1. high male/female ratio + blind meritocracy => self-sustaining male culture 2. affirmative action as a temporary kludge to shift male/female ratio 3. lower male/female ratio + blind meritocracy => self-sustaining new equilibrium That is after affirmative action stops; it is not necessary that the system returns to old high male/female state.

Axiom 1 is very debatable. Other fields, for example veterinary science, have switched from male dominated to female dominated in a generation with no affirmative action involved.

https://hardnewscafe.usu.edu/?p=6581

Post reply on HN