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

191–200 of 305 posts

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

#191

Post by [deleted] »

AdrianRossouw wrote: post #89
ufmace wrote: post #78

The attitudes in this thread seem a little disturbing to me. Let me illustrate with a different example: There are a number of other fields that are consistently dominated by women in the way that programming and CS are by men. Teaching, especially at the elementary-school level and younger, nursing, HR, administrative assistants, and others. Why is there no effort to bring more men into these fields? Is there some "…

Being a male elementary school teacher can be a very dangerous career choice in the era of "stranger danger" and the like. And I think that the conversation focuses on programming here, but there is a genuine issue with girls being disinterested in STEM careers. There's a chance that the world is missing out on the next female einstein, because she became a nurse instead of being encouraged to follow her dreams.

[deleted]

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

#192

Post by mrxd »

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…

> Personally I believe that gender imbalance in this (and other) professions is only indirectly related to gender.

History disagrees with you. In the 1960s, programming was considered to be "women's work", like typing, filing and other clerical duties, while men did the engineering bit of actually building the machines. But people began to realize that software was difficult and important, so they decided women had to go.

Women were eliminated from the professional by the creation of personality and aptitude tests that were supposed to evaluate whether someone would be good at programming. They invented the idea that being anti-social was associated with programming skill, which is where today's stereotype of the loner computer geek comes from.

They also distributed the answers to the aptitude tests within all-male fraternities and clubs.

If you believe in a meritocracy that is blind to gender, then you should be in favor of increasing women in the profession. All men who have any pride in their skills should be embarrassed by the lying and cheating that made us the dominant gender in the field.

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

#193

Post by LockeWatts »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #179
LockeWatts wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

First, nothing is necessarily wrong, as that would imply an absolute rather than relative morality. All morality is relativistic. Secondly, I would argue that your list, from my point of view, denoted 'racism, sexism, etc' is more rigorously defined as 'discriminating based on anything other than merit'. Given that assumption, discrimination by race or sex for any reason would be wrong. With those premises, I stand b…

And I would have to reject those premises.

On what basis?

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

#194

Post by obstacle1 »

hackinthebochs wrote: post #24

The problem with this type of the thinking is the same thing you see when it comes to racism in general: "If we just stop mentioning it, it will go away", "programs to counter racism are racist", etc. Not talking about racism/sexism etc will not make it go away. Kids are very perceptive, they notice the apparent differences in acceptable behavior very early on; they are internalizing it subconsciously whether we brin…

>Girl-centric CS activities are an appropriate way of counteracting these pervasive gender stereotypes.

This is pretty much the exact opposite of what needs to happen. We want to eliminate gender discrimination, so let's single out people of a single gender, tell them they're different and that they need CS events just for them, and watch the problem disappear. And while we're at it let's also disparage The Other gender (because surely, there are only two) by implicitly discouraging them from attending the event. Then when it comes time to enter the workforce these two strata we've created will surely integrate seamlessly, creating a more livable and productive world for all of us. Yes, that is how it will happen.

What we need are gender-neutral CS events that we encourage all people to attend. Recruit women aggressively to attend, fine -- but not on the basis that they are women. Rather, on the basis that they might like CS and the things that happen at said event.

I fail to see how we are going to combat gender discrimination by reinforcing gender stereotypes.

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

#195

Post by minamea »

mitchty wrote: post #145
minamea wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I believe what's morally wrong is morally wrong and should not be done. Someone could speculate that the US would be better off with the cheap labour of slaves but that's morally wrong so we'll stop doing it period. I don't care why you're hiring a gender over another. In my humble opinion it's wrong and should stop.

That is a bit too one sided for my tastes. Concerte example time: If you're a hiring manager and have 4 white males on a team, do you really need another white male? Probably not, is it morally wrong to want a female on the team or say a non white male? I cannot see why it would be. Especially when we now know based on current research that even if the candidate is technically worse than another, the overall team ben…

Sexism is wrong because this kind of discrimination is immoral. Women should be able to do whatever they want and are capable of doing for a career, not just what the men around them want them to do. This is a moral debate before it is a debate about maximizing performance. Sexism is as wrong as religious discrimination and racism (hence the analogy with slavery).

Suppose a case where a men-only field led to better performance, would you not think that it is morally correct to exclude women in this case? And that's besides the point: I don't think we should encourage women to go into CS because it makes CS better, I think we should encourage women to go into CS to let them know if that's what they want to do they can and they'll be welcome and they'll have a better life like that.

If I was a hiring manager I would want to have more women on my team, but I would not feel very good about myself turning down a man more qualified for a woman for no reason other than his gender. What if I'm Apple and I just destroyed this man's lifelong dream of working for Apple? Hiring should be based on merit, and nothing else. What's next? Hiring people from different religions because the team will benefit from the different viewpoints? So if you followed a religion you'd be more likely to get hired. I don't agree with that.

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

#196

Post by newnewnew »

kaa2102 wrote: post #164
newnewnew wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is racism just about white privilege, though? In America, ethnic Indians and east Asians outperform all other ethnic groups on a host of metrics - income, criminality, education, and etc. Isn't there a huge Asian privilege in America that nobody is talking about? Why don't we talk about the Asian/White achievement gap?

This isn't an apples to apples comparison. Asian Americans have never systematically disenfranchised white Americans. However, you bring up some interesting points but that I have a couple of issues with including probationary whiteness, survivor-ship bias, and performance vs. access. I don't think Asian Americans had to drink from the "colored" fountain. It's easier to win the game if you are allowed to play. In man…

Japanese and Chinese Americans have faced lots of historical obstacles, from anti-miscegenation laws to internment camps. Ever hear of the Chinese Exclusion Act? They still face a lot of stereotypes. There's a big culture and language divide between the cultures of South/East Asia and those of Europeans. I don't buy the idea that they are "probationary whites".

They just happen to be really, really good at what they do, on average, to the point where they outperform whites in majority-white nations. And in doing so, they falsify the hypothesis that achievement gaps are caused solely by majority-group racism.

Asians blow whites out of the water on SAT, MCAT, IQ, and other tests of achievement, aptitude, and ability. Even if there was a bias against asian names in the market place, Asians would probably overcome it just by being too good to ignore.

It's really hard for me to square leftist theories of racism with the data. To be successful in America, the best thing you can do is be born to Indian parents[1].

It is interesting that you mention immigrants. African immigrants to America are a high-achieving group, outperforming whites in income. So they manage to beat the stereotypes while African-Americans do not.

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_Un...

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

#197

Post by hackinthebochs »

jimzvz wrote: post #187
hackinthebochs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism, sexism, etc are necessarily wrong. However, discrimination is not necessarily wrong. Whether its wrong depends on the context and the motivations. I submit that this is a valid form of "discrimination".

Sexism is discrimination based on sex. Please look up the definition of sexism. No, it does not depend on the motivation or context, everyone who discriminates believes that their motives justify it but they don't. Your sexism is no different from anyone else's.

Sure, under the most simplistic definition devoid of any cultural context or connotation. But if you have to prune all meaning from the word to prove your point then perhaps your point is rather weak to begin with.

To put it another way: if your definition of sexism means that women-centric events designed to foster interest in an otherwise underrepresented field is considered sexist, then its your definition that is faulty.

Here's a definition that doesn't strip the salient context from it (dictionary.com)

1.attitudes or behavior based on traditional stereotypes of sexual roles.

2.discrimination or devaluation based on a person's sex, as in restricted job opportunities; especially, such discrimination directed against women.

It's amazing how these discussions always devolve into cherry-picking definitions and parsing language like a machine to prove respective points. If you have to resort to that, then just bow out gracefully as you are missing the point of the discussion altogether.

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

#198

Post by zallen »

bestlai wrote: post #168

I’ll just jump the shark. I feel sick and irritated today, so I won’t pretend political correctness. Fuck this feminist, sexist shit. First, I am the most orderly developer you could ever meet. My desk is absolutely clean. Everything has a well defined technical purpose there. Whenever I leave, those purposes cease to exist so I eagerly remove or put away those objects. I could walk in any day, pick up my desktop and…

It's not about you.

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

#199

Post by [deleted] »

LockeWatts wrote: post #172
hackinthebochs wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Racism, sexism, etc are necessarily wrong. However, discrimination is not necessarily wrong. Whether its wrong depends on the context and the motivations. I submit that this is a valid form of "discrimination".

First, nothing is necessarily wrong, as that would imply an absolute rather than relative morality. All morality is relativistic. Secondly, I would argue that your list, from my point of view, denoted 'racism, sexism, etc' is more rigorously defined as 'discriminating based on anything other than merit'. Given that assumption, discrimination by race or sex for any reason would be wrong. With those premises, I stand b…

[deleted]

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

#200

Post by hackinthebochs »

LockeWatts wrote: post #193
hackinthebochs wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And I would have to reject those premises.

On what basis?

>I would argue that your list, from my point of view, denoted 'racism, sexism, etc' is more rigorously defined as 'discriminating based on anything other than merit'.

My comment nextdoor describes my problem with these sorts of degenerate defintions: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5350842

Post reply on HN