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

Girls and Software

linuxjournal.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 434 posts

Re: Girls and Software

#261

Post by facepalm »

selmnoo wrote: post #105
facepalm wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Girls don't get barbies thrown at them, they beg for them. The are expensive, too.

Not if they never find out that there exist things called "barbies". We never introduced our girls to barbies or anything -- only cars, legos, etc. etc. and they're more than happy with them. I think barbies dolls should be outright banned. Why're we teaching our children to worry about their looks at such a young age? That's what barbie dolls are -- "pretty woman", woman with obnoxiously pretty dresses, lipsticks, e…

Maybe Barbie doesn't teach them to worry about looks, but lets them relax about it? Barbie is pretty, after all. Like boys playing with batman figurines, they have a powerful actor that can do anything they want.

I don't want to defend them. I always chided my sister for playing with barbies, but she enjoyed it. She grew up to be a normal, non-pink woman with a serious occupation, so the damage from playing with barbies seems to have been limited.

Re: Girls and Software

#262

Post by sillysaurus2 »

einhverfr wrote: post #249
sillysaurus2 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It depends. There is no strict requirement onto starting at the early age. Yes, there is a correlation, but no strict requirement. You'll be excluded by 22 if you haven't started early. Excluded by whom? By nature. It was no accident that Zuck developed Facebook only after years of being a hacker, and that he also developed it while he was relatively young. By 22 you start to take on responsibilities which hinder you…

I started programming at 8. I gave up on it at 16. Picked it up again in my mid 20's. Responsibilities are an issue, (and this is especially an issue for women, who, if they want to have a family can't wait as long as men can), but it isn't the only one. One thing that I think is pretty clear is that as we age, our thought processes change. This is something we don't like to talk bout because because it brings up spe…

This is a great comment and has changed my perspective somewhat. Thank you.

Re: Girls and Software

#263

Post by einhverfr »

sillysaurus2 wrote: post #262
einhverfr wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I started programming at 8. I gave up on it at 16. Picked it up again in my mid 20's. Responsibilities are an issue, (and this is especially an issue for women, who, if they want to have a family can't wait as long as men can), but it isn't the only one. One thing that I think is pretty clear is that as we age, our thought processes change. This is something we don't like to talk bout because because it brings up spe…

This is a great comment and has changed my perspective somewhat. Thank you.

BTW, I am pretty sure my grandmother didn't pick up coding until at least in her 30's. Could she have written a device driver? Probably not. Did she write nuclear physics simulations in Fortran? Yep.

Re: Girls and Software

#264

Post by dropit_sphere »

jseliger wrote: post #110
krstck wrote: post #51

Oooh, this was an icy stab right at the core. She's completely right: >Dump her in a situation that operates on different social scripts than she's accustomed to, full of people talking about a subject she doesn't yet understand. Then tell her the community is hostile toward women and therefore doesn't have enough of them, all while showing her off like a prize poodle so you can feel good about recruiting a females T…

When I became a teenager, I got wind that it wasn't something "cool" and got spooked. For someone as insecure as I was, having a hobby that I couldn't really "explain" to normal people was embarrassing. When I was a teenager, coding or being technical in general wasn't cool either, and most of the people who were involved were or at least seemed insecure and embarrassed. Perhaps the climate in middle / high schools h…

The reproductive system in its uncivilized state is a winner-take-all system; polygyny is much more common than polyandry. As such, it is not enough to be in the middle of the pack as a man; one must excel.

Guys are more tolerant of low social status the way that ML algorithms ignore noise: they're hoping that those currently at the top of the pack are at a local maximum, and they're willing to tolerate being low-status in exchange for the hope of finding a greater maximum at some distance. (http://calculatedbravery.wordpress.com/2014/01/16/what-mascu...)

Re: Girls and Software

#265

Post by rimantas »

superuser2 wrote: post #12

>Parents are warned to keep kids off the computer This point cannot be overstated. I'd never have been a hacker without vast quantities of unsupervised, unfiltered internet time around age 9-12. The largest enabling step for me was when I got my own laptop which I was free to break (software-wise) and free to take into my room so I could focus away from the distracting noises of the kitchen/living room. Much of even…

  > This point cannot be overstated.
Oh, it surely can. I got the first my own PC when I was ~24. I had no access to computers till I was almost 18. However I was very curious about them, I learned to program (with pseudo code) without them and I am still much more curious and willing to learn than many of programmers half my age.

It is interest what counts. As they say, one man can lead a horse to the river but even forty won't be able to make it drink.

Re: Girls and Software

#266

Post by Dewie »

HedgeMage wrote: post #148
scott_s wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What I'm trying to describe is the "by 20, it's too late to make a hacker" sentiment, which I do hear people say. So if I did have these qualities, and we're going to identify them after we've already established that I am a hacker, then it must be true that lots of other people also have these qualities, but did not become hackers. My point: the notion that good hackers must be hacking on, and tinkering with, comput…

Actually, I made it a point to explain that it doesn't have to be computers... "Even if they lacked computers, they were taking apart alarm clocks, repairing pencil sharpeners or tinkering with ham radios. Some of them built pumpkin launchers or LEGO trains." There are many early maker/hacker experiences that don't require access to or interest in computers. The point was that, at some point early on, every hacker (m…

I don't think I ever fixed, made or was curious about such things when I was a child. So I guess I'll just have to accept my fate of becoming a corporate programming drone that hackers will secretly or not so snicker at for being so clueless and unproductive, and to become unemployable or change careers at 40 because of my relative lack of passion for the craft. At least I've been warned.

Re: Girls and Software

#267

Post by watwut »

herokusaki wrote: post #176
dev1n wrote: post #67

Growing up watching shows like "Dexter's Laboratory" and "Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius" definitely shaped me as a child into the tech freak I am today. Girls getting barbies thrown at them when they are 12 does not help put girls into the tech sector. We need television shows like "Diane's Laboratory" or "Jennifer Neutron Girl Genius" to get girls interested in tech. Hit 'em when they're young.

> Girls getting barbies thrown at them when they are 12 As I understand it, Goldie Blox was founded precisely to provide an alternative to that. They already have a product out. I wonder how well they'll do.

It is just marketing. Goldie Blox is just expensive and not much flexible toy.

Re: Girls and Software

#268

Post by neilparikh »

ucarion wrote: post #172
stefantalpalaru wrote: post #42

> Last year, his school offered a robotics class for girls only. When my son asked why he couldn't join, it was explained to him that girls need special help to become interested in technology, and that if there are boys around, the girls will be too scared to try. And that's why we can't use sexism to fight sexism (or mistakenly enforce the same composition of the general population on self-selected subsets).

I disagree. As a high schooler, I know many intelligent and creative young women who don't want to do robotics or programming because of the people in those fields. High school boys in tech are much more likely to be misogynistic and socially inept than other high schoolers are. They make girls uncomfortable (they make me uncomfortable too, and I'm not event the subject of their creepiness), and this discourages girl…

> High school boys in tech are much more likely to be misogynistic and socially inept than other high schoolers are.

Speaking from the perspective of a current high schooler in tech, this is untrue. I organize the math club, and robotics club.

The gender ratio for the math club is 50:50 (4 female members, 4 male), while the robotics club has a ratio of around 33:66 (around 5 female, 10 male). I have seen few, if not none instances of sexism in these clubs.

The kids in these clubs are not really "in tech", but they are interested in science and math, which are similar fields to tech (and I suspect that their is overlap between science/math interest and programming/CS interest).

Now, your claim of them being socially inept has some truth to it, but these kids rarely have negative intentions behind their "social slip-ups".

Re: Girls and Software

#269

Post by watwut »

dev1n wrote: post #67

Growing up watching shows like "Dexter's Laboratory" and "Jimmy Neutron Boy Genius" definitely shaped me as a child into the tech freak I am today. Girls getting barbies thrown at them when they are 12 does not help put girls into the tech sector. We need television shows like "Diane's Laboratory" or "Jennifer Neutron Girl Genius" to get girls interested in tech. Hit 'em when they're young.

Neither Barbie at 12 nor doll and cooking set at 2 will cause your daughter to be stupid. The same way as boys do not grow to be violent jerks for having access to wooden sword and action figure.

Being socialized into thinking that Barbie is the only thing she can play with or into thinking that she can not figure technical stuff so there is no point in trying anyway will do it.

It is more about your general attitude then about plastic mold that was used for toy.

Re: Girls and Software

#270

Post by d4rti »

spikels wrote: post #125
timr wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"My point here is that you become what you invest time in becoming. If you want to ascend to elite-level hackerdom, then you almost have to put things like attractiveness and popularity on the back burner." No, you really don't. You believe this because it's what you've seen around you, but that's a selection bias. Someone else on this thread pointed out that Von Neumann was an exceptionally stylish guy, but he's far…

Specialization is almost entirely responsible for all the gains in our standard of living since the stone age. This includes almost every technological advance. Heinlein is wrong on this and a specialist himself: a writer who requires other specialists to meet his every basic need (water, food, shelter...). Don't dismiss specialization as it is the key to both past and future success.

Additionally the line is spoken by a character who lives for over 2000 years.[1]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lazarus_Long

Post reply on HN