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

When Women Stopped Coding

npr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 190 posts

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#101

Post by jamesaguilar »

waterlesscloud wrote: post #90
jamesaguilar wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The views in that comment are completely unsubstantiated. There was no evidence presented that "data processing" was ever taught as part of or categorized as computer science. In fact, later comments debunk that viewpoint. Also worth noting that the person who wrote that subscribes to the Men Going Their Own Way movement [1] (his username is thrownaway_MGTOW), which while not an outright debunking of his claims, shou…

Regardless of the source of the comment, it would be interesting to have the source data to know exactly what they're classifying as "Computer Science" programs. That term has certainly increased in usage over the last several decades, and was not always in use in the decades prior to the 1980s. So what did the study use in its place? That's a valid question regardless of who raised it.

Sure, but "we don't know, therefore let's provisionally go the MRA's unsourced claims," is not a sound interim position.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#102

Post by [deleted] »

jamesaguilar wrote: post #59
wyager wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>zero evidence presented, He posted some evidence. Not a lot, but some. More than his detractors here have posted so far. There's also more in that reddit thread, it looks like. I'm not saying he's right, but it does no one any favors to slam someone instead of refuting their argument.

He posted a link to an n-gram search, which is like me posting a picture of a flower to prove that the sky is blue. The data cited is not germane to the quesiton. To wit: one would expect that n-gram search to look the same whether or not data processing was a CS subdiscipline, because data processing dropped in relevance as digital systems became the primary source of truth. Therefore, it is not evidence either way…

[deleted]

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#103

Post by kasey_junk »

drcross wrote: post #74
kasey_junk wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "aren't interested" hypothesis would also need to explain why the physical sciences haven't had the same decline in involvement as computer science nor why there is a specific decline in participation in computer science but not in the other categories. I don't think anyone is afraid to suggest that girls aren't interested in the field, it's just that it is a very unsatisfying answer and it doesn't really make se…

|it doesn't really make sense to generalize about more than half the population. It does in the context of gender. Sure there are outliers but men and women are generally interested in different things. To deny this is to fail to realise a huge aspect of human behaviour.

A) I'd love to see a citation about the differences in interest between sexes (or genders for that matter).

B) Even if there is a difference for some statistically significant degree, given the population we are talking about the outliers can matter a tremendous amount (for instance if "only" 20% of women are interested in computers but are forced out due to culture, that is on the order of 30 million humans).

C) Even if there aren't massive amounts of outliers, gender interest continues to not explain why the computer sciences participation decreased over time and other technology professions didn't.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#104

Post by JoeAltmaier »

nether wrote: post #86
crusso wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"They were marketed almost exclusively to boys" Back before anyone was really marketing computers in any mainstream way, I remember gathering around the few that were available in the school library or in a math teacher's classroom. The only people interested EVER were boys. It had nothing to do with marketing.

Which came first, tool-toy companies interested in boys, or boys interested in them?

Maybe it doesn't matter. Once a group becomes predominantly one culture, it rapidly slides to that corner of the culture space. Lots of reasons - people hire people they feel comfortable with. People value people they understand more, regarding them as more intelligent or harder working.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#105

Post by vorg »

nathan_long wrote: post #2

This story makes a compelling case that women stopped programming because - 1. Computers started being sold as consumer products - 2. They were marketed almost exclusively to boys - 3. Boys played with computers and learned about them, while girls were made to feel that computers weren't for them - 3. Men showed up to college with more computer experience - 4. Women felt they must not be "naturally good" at computers…

I would add:

6. Males are far more likely to enter jobs they're not suitable for

Of all the "programmers" without any aptitude that seem to plague corporate IT departments, virtually none of the ones I've come across have been female. If you take out these frauds when counting programmers, then the gender balance in many IT departments becomes more like the early 1980's. Added: When programming became a perceived status job, the frauds turned up to cheat aptitude tests, lie on their CV about experience and studies, and what not.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#106

Post by Dewie »

stdgy wrote: post #64
istorical wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? Don't really follow your logic. My hypothesis is that women (specifically teenage girls) just aren't interested in the field / profession so they decide not to study it in school or search for jobs in the field. Perhaps this is because they are discouraged from trying it by their teachers or media, perhaps its because they don't have the confidence to believe they'll succeed, perhaps they think it's not cool, pe…

What does 'not interested' connote? And how do you frame it? Consider these two statements: 1) The female sex is intrinsically(biologically) uninterested in Computer Science. 2) Girl's are raised in an environment that pushes their interest away from Computer Science. In each statement, girls are not interested in Computer Science. But the first statement carries a tremendous amount of baggage with it, and comments o…

Why is the first claim more 'fantastic' than the second? Why are nurture-arguments so often viewed as perfectly innocuous and impartial, while nature-arguments are viewed as so controversial?

Throwing around unsubstantiated claims about how "society molded them into who they are" seems like a very fantastic claim to me. And I see a lot of that kind of argument going around.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#107

Post by pjc50 »

nostromo wrote: post #94
nathan_long wrote: post #2

This story makes a compelling case that women stopped programming because - 1. Computers started being sold as consumer products - 2. They were marketed almost exclusively to boys - 3. Boys played with computers and learned about them, while girls were made to feel that computers weren't for them - 3. Men showed up to college with more computer experience - 4. Women felt they must not be "naturally good" at computers…

"They were marketed almost exclusively to boys" You mean exactly like chemistry sets? Yet chemistry is the most equal major in terms of gender of graduates. I like Planet Money, but this story is unconvincing.

Chemistry sets went the other way and have almost entirely gone out of fashion due to health and safety issues.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#108

Post by ElComradio »

fnordsensei wrote: post #96
ElComradio wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's too bad. I wish things were easy for you, like they were for me, when my peers were cheering me on to learn how to program and I was super popular because of it. Everything was a cake walk, and I learned that if society is in the slightest way against what you are doing, it's impossible to accomplish, so I'm really glad I wasn't driven out of the field that interested me.

Belittling another person for their experiences in the manner you just did comes across as arrogant and insensitive. First of all, if you have something to say, say it plainly instead of wrapping it up in passive agressive bullshit. Secondly, when you've stripped it of outward bullshit and realized how pointless it is, consider not posting it at all.

You are reading in hostile intent where none exists.

I'll clarify my original post: Letting people drive you out of a field that you are passionate about is bad.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#109

Post by drzaiusapelord »

inmygarage wrote: post #21

I am a female born in 1983 and have always been deeply interested in computers, but have nonetheless felt inexplicably out of place for it. I was in advanced math classes my entire life and placed out of calculus in college. I took a summer programming class at a different university in 2000 and fell in love with programming. But when I got back to school, I took another CS class that was exactly as described in this…

>I can't quite articulate the feelings of isolation and frustration I felt in that class

Male nerd here. My god, I couldn't get along with 90% of my class. They all seemed to be disagreeable in a "technically correct is the best kind of correct" way, but also with lots of arbitrary fanboyism and a complete lack of basic social skills or outside interests. Not to mention the petty competitiveness and complete lack of any team player skills, and usually a huge amount of attitude dismissing these types of skills as useless.

Meh, I suffered through it (and through many coworkers of this type) as the price of business.

I'm not sure why women assume its all roses for men in these fields and classes. I dislike jerks as much as you. Heck, when we do hiring, we aim for social and inter-personal skills first and technical skills last. Its easy to find a difficult non-team player misanthrope who knows x, y, z. He's just hell to work with. I'll take the easier to work with the person who knows just x and can eventually learn y and z.

Also, this female dominated computer industry of 1970s and 80s has been shown to be something of a myth. A lot of those degrees and jobs weren't programming heavy and in practice were mere data entry or computer operator jobs, not necessarily coding. As the industry changed and those jobs moved towards administrative categories so did the women with them. IT departments dont have a team of data entry specialists anymore. They're put elsewhere, or have been eliminated altogether. If anything we have more female coders, who actually code, than ever.

Re: When Women Stopped Coding

#110

Post by onewaystreet »

nostromo wrote: post #94
nathan_long wrote: post #2

This story makes a compelling case that women stopped programming because - 1. Computers started being sold as consumer products - 2. They were marketed almost exclusively to boys - 3. Boys played with computers and learned about them, while girls were made to feel that computers weren't for them - 3. Men showed up to college with more computer experience - 4. Women felt they must not be "naturally good" at computers…

"They were marketed almost exclusively to boys" You mean exactly like chemistry sets? Yet chemistry is the most equal major in terms of gender of graduates. I like Planet Money, but this story is unconvincing.

A shift happened where computing was seen as something girls didn't do. If not marketing then what caused it? (IMO it started when computing became synonymous with math, if people thought girls couldn't do math then they also couldn't be good with computers).
Post reply on HN