Slashdot Mirror


Fedora Welcomes Women to FOSS

nman64 writes "The Fedora Project, the project behind the Fedora Core Linux distribution, has introduced Fedora Women, a program to reach out to women who are interested in using and contributing to Fedora Core. This follows in the footsteps of LinuxChix, Debian Women, and Ubuntu Women and is part of a larger trend to support women in the FOSS world. At present, women are believed to make up only about 1.5% of the FOSS community. Is that finally set to change?"

339 comments

  1. My only thoughts on this... by Rude+Turnip · · Score: 3, Funny

    This thread is useless without pics.

    1. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To summarize: oxymorons.

    2. Re:My only thoughts on this... by mobby_6kl · · Score: 3, Funny

      FreeBSD wins so far with this

    3. Re:My only thoughts on this... by nametaken · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? Something tells me that on the 1-10 scale, they average somewhere near male linux geeks. I mean, they're more likely to build the webserver for the porn site than feature on it. :)

    4. Re:My only thoughts on this... by plate+of+felt · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Hey! Some of us do both!

    5. Re:My only thoughts on this... by westlake · · Score: 4, Insightful
      This thread is useless without pics.

      First post. First joke. And in six words you sum up every stereotype of the Geek.

    6. Re:My only thoughts on this... by kryten_nl · · Score: 1

      geekgangbangs.com doesn't count ....

      --
      For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
    7. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Etnie · · Score: 1

      My thoughts exactly. I read it as "Women of FOSS" and thought Playboy had come up with another wacky pictorial idea.

    8. Re:My only thoughts on this... by mad_minstrel · · Score: 1

      Well if there were pics the women would be wearing fedoras anyway...

      --
      May the source be with you.
    9. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 0

      Every one of those cheesecake shots should be emblazoned 'photoshop tweaks dig linux' or something like that.

    10. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Xemu · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This thread is useless without pics.

      Comments like this is exactly why women stay out of computing, that women programmers are reduced to their sex. Nobody would dare to make sexist jokes about male programmers!

      --
      Tell your friends about xenu.net
    11. Re:My only thoughts on this... by wixardy · · Score: 1
      women programmers are reduced to their sex

      if you're dividing up into groups of "women" and "men" then is it not you who are reducing programmers to their sex?

      also its pretty hard to find any male sexist oriented jokes. --wix
    12. Re:My only thoughts on this... by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      Why are women so ashamed of their sex that the mere mention of it is a "reduction?"

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    13. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think it's not just women programmers that are reduced to their sex...

      By the way, it seems that Slashdot users are more than happy to joke about male programmers, nerds, or whatever.

    14. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Poppler · · Score: 1
      Why are women so ashamed of their sex that the mere mention of it is a "reduction?


      Perhaps it's because we've drilled it into their heads for thousands of years that sex is something to be ashamed of.
      --
      What's the ugliest part of your body? Some say your nose, some say your toes, but I think it's your mind. -Zappa
    15. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Fnkmaster · · Score: 0

      Finally, a BSD chick that's *actually* hot.

    16. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Alexandra+Erenhart · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My thought exactly. The mere idea of doing a "Women " is sexist. I prefer being one more of the crowd (in this kind of things) than being separated for something "women only". I've always thought that equality will be achieved when, besides the "International Women's day" there will be some "International Men's day". We have differences, but we're equal in rights. Stop with the separation!!

      I'm a woman btw. Just in case someone was wondering.

    17. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Alexandra+Erenhart · · Score: 1

      The mere idea of doing a "Women " is sexist

      That should have been "Women (instert some activity here)", but the post ate that part. Must have been the brackets.

    18. Re:My only thoughts on this... by paulmer2003 · · Score: 1
      This thread is useless without pics.

      First post. First joke. And in six words you sum up every stereotype of the Geek.

      Not really, its simply human nature....
    19. Re:My only thoughts on this... by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      You mis-spelled "man"

    20. Re:My only thoughts on this... by nametaken · · Score: 1


      Please excuse me while my head explodes.

    21. Re:My only thoughts on this... by plate+of+felt · · Score: 1

      sorry.. i have a tendency to cause that.

    22. Re:My only thoughts on this... by ArikTheRed · · Score: 1

      I just assumed you were advocating gay love or something.

    23. Re:My only thoughts on this... by brianosaurus · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I think you misunderstood.

      Without pictures, most slashdot readers don't know what a "women" is. While there was occasionally a female in my CS classes (a while back, so maybe times have changed, but if that 1.5% number is right not much has changed), we never had the need for the plural of the word.

      And, uh, comments like yours are exactly why men think women are uptight [REDACTED] with no sense of humor. But whatever... just means more good jobs for us. Besides, making sexist jokes about men is gay. (OH NO I DI-INT!!! See, that's funny. ;)

      --
      blog
    24. Re:My only thoughts on this... by senatorpjt · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Nobody would dare to make sexist jokes about male programmers!

      I hear them all the time. They usually go in the opposite direction, about how they're all losers that can't get laid.

      The best way to get women to is to point out that if they get involved with FOSS, they WILL get laid with no effort, no matter how repulsive they are, just due to the odds.

    25. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 2, Insightful
      You mis-spelled "man"

      You misspelled "boy".

    26. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Saeger · · Score: 1

      You misspelled "hypocrite" || "gay".

      --
      Power to the Peaceful
    27. Re:My only thoughts on this... by amliebsch · · Score: 0, Troll

      The best way to get women to is to point out that if they get involved with FOSS, they WILL get laid with no effort, no matter how repulsive they are, just due to the odds.

      Oh, come one. We all know that no women anywhere wants to have sex with anyone and to titillate us with any thoughts otherwise is just bogus.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    28. Re:My only thoughts on this... by xdotx · · Score: 1

      mod parent +1, Funny

      --
      Our wealth breeds emptiness
    29. Re:My only thoughts on this... by a+whoabot · · Score: 0, Troll

      This is a well-documented fact.

      Women do not like to have sex. They only do it to gain some advantage.

      This is why smart guys don't stare at hot women, because they know nothing can come of it except sexual frustration.

      This is also why men suffer so many mental disorders. Because of the not-so sublimated frustration of never getting what they really want without some major strings attached. They all dream of sexual experiences with beautiful women but they can never get it unless they pay the price. And this is where pornography comes in.

    30. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Magic5Ball · · Score: 1

      Girl in picture: "What's an operating system?"

      --
      There are 1.1... kinds of people.
    31. Re:My only thoughts on this... by nova20 · · Score: 1

      That's because us guys make big enough jokes of ourselves.

      But seriously... have you never heard of e-penis? Isn't that somewhat a sexist joke toward men arguing that geeks with a lot of technical knowledge/know-how have small (real life) penises? It's not e-breasts or e-vagina (though I don't know how that last one would work).

      What about all the jokes about male geeks that don't get any 'tang because they'd rather play with their computer and/or look at virtual porn? I haven't seen many jokes of that type applied to female geeks. ...but then again, you're right. There are more sexist jokes about female geeks than male geeks.

      The simple fact of the matter is that there are more sexist jokes about women because it's considered out of the ordinary for a geek to be female. In other words, there's more inherent humor in being a female geek than being a male geek.

    32. Re:My only thoughts on this... by eliot1785 · · Score: 1

      Actually, women in general can get laid with no effort. There is always a man willing to go for it, and usually a woman who is looking for sex only can find a more attractive mate than a man looking for sex only. Or at least, so says Stephen Pinker's "The Human Mind." Interesting take.

    33. Re:My only thoughts on this... by eliot1785 · · Score: 1

      This sounds like a job for... Larry Summers!

    34. Re:My only thoughts on this... by dbIII · · Score: 1
      This thread is useless without pics.
      The Australian Computer Society tried this with a "geek girl" calander - and they certainly didn't come out of it smelling like roses.
    35. Re:My only thoughts on this... by morie · · Score: 1

      Right, that's the way to charm a woman:

      "You are one ugly lady, but I know someone even uglier, and he is quite desperate, so if you just join the FOSS movement, you can get laid"

      Hint: women do not like desperate men.

      --
      Sig (appended to the end of comments I post, 54 chars)
    36. Re:My only thoughts on this... by mkw87 · · Score: 1

      I would love to play around with her box........FreeBSD box that is.

      --
      Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling a pig in mud. Soon, you realize the pig is dirty, and he likes it.
    37. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      Nobody would dare to make sexist jokes about male programmers!

      Nobody would dare to berate males in popular entertainment!

    38. Re:My only thoughts on this... by fbjon · · Score: 1

      Men don't like desperate women either, but usually don't think twice.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    39. Re:My only thoughts on this... by fbjon · · Score: 1
      I see your daemon and raise you a more relevant random googlation.

      Short backslash preview for new readers of some of the comments below:

      This random quick-recap brought to you by your friendly recapper, second time and running, I have prior art on Backslash.

      Carry on.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    40. Re:My only thoughts on this... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      relevant links: ... OpenBSD mailing list

      Oh please. A female complained in the OpenBSD mailing list, about the wording describing one of the OpenBSD t-shirts for women on the OpenBSD site. Theo replies that they were trying to be funny and then the wording was changed by a dev. The female received some private emails of a nasty, perhaps misogynistic nature, but she cannot remember who they were from and did not state that they were from any OpenBSD developers... so this is supposed to somehow reflect baddly on OpenBSD?

      Give me a break.

      Childishness comes from any and every mailing list, newsgroup, forum, etc. You name it. I have had misogynistic email sent to me once because I made some comment which was apparently ambiguous as to my gender. I am male and some idiot sends me anti-female email as if he thought I was female.

      It is everywhere and that incident in no way reflects baddly on the OpenBSD project.

      The only really unfortunate situation I witnessed in the OpenBSD mailing list by a dev, was in regards to Darren Reed. During a heated thread including Theo and Darren, Theo refered to Darrens sexuality and nationality (Australian) in a derrogatory manner. Theo has been childish on occasion, but I've never seen him make misogynistic statements.

      From Theo in the mailing list...

      I spend more than 8 hours of every single day of my life auditing code
      (and over the last week, 16+ hours a day), and here is some gay guy
      from Australia who spent all of Usenix in San Antonio years ago moping
      with droopy eyes after a very straight and girlfriended Mudge is not
      going to tell me that I am not doing enough, when Mudge and Casper and
      I and others were spending our time drinking beer and discussing
      classes of bugs in code (select(2) fd_set overflows, etc).

      ps. apologies to any of you who are gay; i am not saying anything about
              you. the story was simply to illustrate that when Darren came to
              a pure meeting of his intellectual peers, he completely failed to
              participate within the scope of such a meeting. He is ineffectual.


      The fact of the matter, is that Darren being gay has nothing to do with OpenBSD and him being Australian has nothing to do with the situation. Australia never needed to be mentioned like it mattered and the gay issue, is beside the point. If Darren were into ladies he could have easily had "droopy eyes" for a lady at the meet. Gay and Aussie are completely beside the point and should not have been mentioned.

      BTW, I LOVE OpenBSD and will continue to use it for what it is great for. Regardless of how many politically incorrect statements may be made from developers or even the leader of the project.

    41. Re:My only thoughts on this... by fbjon · · Score: 1
      some idiot sends me anti-female email as if he thought I was female.
      Right, and this is what allegely happens more in FOSS in general, which seems to be backed up by the statistics. That's the problem, not that OpenBSD specifically would be some haven of lady-haters, or other. That link was kinda lame though, I admit that (though I didn't put in in the thread originally).
      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
  2. Little confused about the membership requirements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Why exactly do they need a set of nude photos?

  3. Obligatory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What is this woman that they speak about?

    1. Re:Obligatory by Ithika · · Score: 1

      It's the upgrade to man. Less terse, so presumably a bit like info but hopefully a good deal easier to use. I always get lost using info.

  4. Artificial by trifish · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Why do you encourage or even force them? Let them decide naturally what they want to do. Women don't force use men to breast-feed either. Respect people's natural inclinations and interests.

    1. Re:Artificial by albalbo · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Interesting that you mention "force"; doesn't seem to me that Fedora Women forces women to be involved with Fedora.

      As for "why encourage", maybe you'd like to start to explain why Google's Summer of Code had zero women applicants, whereas Gnome's Women's Summer Outreach Programme had a great number of applicants, when the two programmes were basically the same.

      Claiming women's "natural inclination" or interest is to not participate in free software projects is about as sexist a viewpoint as you can possibly achieve.

      --
      "Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons
    2. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Claiming women's "natural inclination" or interest is to not participate in free software projects is about as sexist a viewpoint as you can possibly achieve."

      In fairness, he/she claimed no such thing. Please re-read.

    3. Re:Artificial by trifish · · Score: 1

      > In fairness, he/she claimed no such thing. Please re-read.

      Thanks.

    4. Re:Artificial by trifish · · Score: 1, Troll

      Claiming women's "natural inclination" or interest is to not participate in free software projects is about as sexist a viewpoint as you can possibly achieve.

      You do realize that there are differences between men and women? Biological and psychic. Women can give birth, men can't. Women also have different interests than men. Without any doubt, their interests and talents are given by thousands of years of evolution. Trying to "defeat" nature is ridiculous and actually a feminist approach.

    5. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How is the parent poster trolling I completely fail to understand. He just stated obvious and well known facts and his opinion on the facts.

      (Well very likely the meta-moderators will take care of this "moderator". Just wait when you recieve the message "your moderation was rated as unfair".)

    6. Re:Artificial by trifish · · Score: 2

      As for "why encourage", maybe you'd like to start to explain why Google's Summer of Code had zero women applicants

      That's easy to explain (and already was in the OP). It's because nobody encouraged women explicitly. They let them choose naturally. And the result was that girls didn't want to participate. They weren't interested. Do you get the point?

    7. Re:Artificial by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Exactly. They encouraged people to participate. That includes men and women. It's kind of says something when they have to specifically target women to get any response at all. In my software engineering program there was only about 6 girls. And half of them were there just cause they wanted to make a lot of money, not because they liked computers. I'm not sure why it's this way, but it just is. The same reason you see less men in Nursing or child care. It's not a bad thing, just that men and women like different things.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    8. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. There are natural differences between men and women. I just wonder why when you say this on Slashdot you are modded as troll.

    9. Re:Artificial by TheRaven64 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      In general, I hate this kind of thing. My university had a Women's Officer[1], but no male equivalent. When one of the candidates approached me at election time, I was told 'women make up 52% of the population, and we need to protect this minority.' In general, my feeling is that I don't want anyone doing things because there is an outreach program for them; if you're not going to do something because it's what you enjoy, then please don't bother. If women, or men, want to develop F/OSS then that's great. If they don't, then encouraging them to do so for the wrong reason really won't help.

      This is a special case, however. A community being less than 2% female is more than natural self-selection. I suspect that a number of women have tried to get involved, but been repulsed by the community. Look at this Slashdot article; the first post was a comment asking for pictures. Now, as someone who has been around Slashdot for a while, I can be fairly sure that this was meant in jest, but this is exactly the kind of thing that would make a woman interested in joining the community leave.

      There are, secretly, at least two women[1] who post on Slashdot. If you look at any thread where they make a reference to their gender, even indirectly, then you will see a huge number of 'wow, look! A girl!' posts. These are often followed by a load of accusatory posts ('you only hang out here because you have low self-esteem and you want to be fawned over by geeks'). It's small wonder that most of the female population of Slashdot tries hard not to draw attention to the fact.

      This kind of program is not intended to encourage women to participate in the geek community, so much as to prevent the ones who want to become involved from running away. This, I think, is a sensible objective.


      [1] Or FBI agents; it's difficult to tell on the Internet sometimes.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    10. Re:Artificial by linvir · · Score: 1, Interesting

      The point is that this kind of difference isn't necessarily natural. It's more likely to be cultural or social, meaning there's no good reason not to encourage them to participate.

      Mankind's tendency to assume that most traits are 'just natural' is where we got things like slavery and the holocaust from.

    11. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      [1] Or FBI agents; it's difficult to tell on the Internet sometimes.

      FBI agents are easy to spot. In a chat group the teen age girls all want to talk about school and boys. The FBI agents are the ones with posts like "I'm a 13 year old girl that is looking for a father figure that wants to transports me across state lines."

    12. Re:Artificial by shreevatsa · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Let them decide naturally what they want to do.

      Axiom 1: People do what they want to do.
      Axiom 2: It would help to have more people doing X.
      Corollaries of Axiom 2: (i) It would help to have more women doing X. (ii) It would help to have more men doing X. (iii) It would help to have more people from $ethnic_community doing X.
      From these, it follows (among other things): It would help if more women wanted to do X. In other words, it would help if women were encouraged to do X.
      Encouragement is never bad. If you (or enough people) feel that it would be good/useful to encourage men too, go ahead.

      Also, have you ever considered that "natural" inclinations may depend not only on biological/genetic/evolutionary factors but also on societal/psychological/community factors? Since we can't change the former, we try to change the latter and see if it makes a difference. Every group that decides it wants more women (or $ethnic_community, or whatever) is free to encourage more women (or ...) to join it. Have you considered that the reason there are very few women in field X might precisely be that it is considered "unnatural" for them to have inclinations towards it, and that if this perception were changed, more women might be naturally inclined towards it? Maybe we would also have more male nurses and more male teachers and more girls interested in mechanics and sports and ..., if there wasn't much societal prejudice? (I do not make any pronouncement on whether this would be a good thing or not, to avoid the sort of replies that this would otherwise inevitably get.)


      (In summary, maybe "natural" isn't so natural after all? Also, somewhat offtopic, see this and then this for something that would be "natural" once but seems very out-of-place today ;) )
    13. Re:Artificial by dasunt · · Score: 1
      There are, secretly, at least two women[1] who post on Slashdot. If you look at any thread where they make a reference to their gender, even indirectly, then you will see a huge number of 'wow, look! A girl!' posts. These are often followed by a load of accusatory posts ('you only hang out here because you have low self-esteem and you want to be fawned over by geeks'). It's small wonder that most of the female population of Slashdot tries hard not to draw attention to the fact.

      Have you considered the possibility that online communities tend to have a lot of flames, especially by bitter little trolls? Anyone who seperates themselves out from the crowd would probably attract the same flames.

    14. Re:Artificial by dasunt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      FWIW, I've been in (free beer, not OS) projects where the number of women make a sizeable percentage of the total number of people involved. But those projects were MUDS (text-based games which tend to rely on well-written descriptions).

    15. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Ah, yes, the Nazis. Whenever on the losing side of an argument, try and cast your opponent as sharing the views of the Nazis.

      Mankind's tendency to assume that most traits are 'just natural' is where we got things like slavery and the holocaust from.
       
      ::snickers:: Mankind's? MANKIND'S?! What kind of sexist pig are you!

      But seriously, slavery and the holocaust weren't exactly based on any real scientific data. No real tests were done to attempt to isolate race and religion from environmental factors.

      When it comes to gender, tests have been done that attempt to control all variables except gender. And it has been discovered, amazingly enough, that men and women generally have different instincts.

      That this is surprising to anyone who knows the words "estrogen" and "testosterone" is amazing. Men and women have different chemical makeups. Their brains function differently. Their hormones are different. Men and women are, amazingly enough, different! It should come as no surprise that men and women, by and large, have different interests.

      The leap from that conclusion to "women shouldn't" is a falacy. Just because most women aren't interested in computers doesn't mean that no women can be interested in computers. However, it does mean you shouldn't be surprised when a computer-related event fails to see any large interest from women. It's simple statistics.

      Trying to force anyone to be interested in things they simply aren't is morally wrong. There's nothing wrong with women statistically enjoying certain fields more than men. There's nothing wrong with men statistically enjoying certain fields more than women. It is natural and something that should be expected, not something that should be fought.

    16. Re:Artificial by zerblat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Also, women have long hair, men have short hair. Women wear skirts, men wear pants.

      --
      Please alter my pants as fashion dictates.
    17. Re:Artificial by albalbo · · Score: 0

      Uh; way to miss the point

      The question wasn't why SoC got zero responses. The question was why SoC got zero, when GNOME WSO got plenty.

      Eg., it's a comparison, not a comment about Google.

      --
      "Elmo knows where you live!" - The Simpsons
    18. Re:Artificial by linvir · · Score: 1
      Trying to force anyone to be interested in things they simply aren't is morally wrong...
      ....not something that should be fought

      You're using some very inappropriately strong words to describe what's being done here. Why is that? Are you scared of something?

      Traits and interests are not the same. Men and women have naturally different traits, that much is obvious. But interests? My favourite example here is skateboarding, as described in this essay (mirror).

      Describing the attitudes of male skaters towards women:

      they explained the lack of female participation as a natural inability or as a choice of women not to skate. It appeared that dominant ideology of sex- typed behavior was an assumption of these skaters
      ...
      Skaters expressed the assumptions that women either exclude themselves by choosing not to skate (act masculine) or that women naturally would not be interested in skating (in acting masculine)
      Sound familiar? That's probably because it's the exact same thing you're saying. And yet:
      Skateboarding is a typical female model of sport: it is cooperative, anti-competitieve, a means of self-expression, a means of self-control, it lacks rules, and it lacks a hierarchal structure. In addition, the skills involved are typically seen as feminine such as grace, coordination, and balance. It is not a sport that is based on muscle-bound power.

      Correlation does not imply cause. The fact that an interest or activity is male-dominated does not necessarily mean that it's a result of the differences between mens' and womens' natural traits.

    19. Re:Artificial by Planesdragon · · Score: 1

      Correlation does not imply cause. The fact that an interest or activity is male-dominated does not necessarily mean that it's a result of the differences between mens' and womens' natural traits.

      You know, not to sound too sexist, but women not being all that involved in skateboarding might owe more to their actual physical differences than anything else. I believe the "girls bouncing on trampolines" effect is at least as much a problem as anything else.

      After all, women can and do compete very well in snowboarding, which is not all that dissimiliar to skateboarding. The need for extra clothing might just be enough to make up for the GBOT effect.

      OTOH, maybe it's just a chicken-and-egg problem. Don't know.

    20. Re:Artificial by dzus · · Score: 1

      Well if I look around my CS engineering class, I'm positive they're not that interested with a ratio of 1/30.

    21. Re:Artificial by noamsml · · Score: 1

      GNOME let women choose whether they want to apply or not, too, but they got tons of applicants, why? Because programming community, and especially the FOSS community is alienting so women, and because society doesn't view programming as a "female" subject (I mean, really, when was the last time you saw a depiction of a female programmer in popular culture [and, moreover, of the times you did see women programmers in popular culture, how many of the times didn't involve some sort of hassle about the programmer's femininity?]). Thus, is seems less "natural" for women to go into programming projects, *especially* FOSS projects, whereas with a bit of encouragement you suddenly see that maybe there *are* female programmers, they just feel alienated by the programming (and especially FOSS) community.

    22. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Because in order to get to that class, they've had to put up with (in no particular order):
      • teachers telling them that girls don't like math, aren't good at math, don't like computers, aren't good at computers
      • peers calling them unfeminine, and saying they'll never get boyfriends, plus all of the above
      • parents telling them both of the above
      • being put on some kind of bizzarre pedestal once it becomes apparent that no, they do like math and computers, and they're actually good at them
      • a set of male geeks who think making sexist jokes is ok because everyone knows it's a joke
      • an environment where if they call someone on sexist speech, they're called humorless lesbians
      • another set of male geeks who's ego is threatened by the thought that a women might be a better geek, and who actively ignore, undermine and/or sabotage them
      • a (small but obnoxious) third set of male geeks who are misogynists, who actively want to keep women out of geek communities, and will take action to force them out
      • social isolation: the girls won't hang out with them because they're a geek, the geeks won't hang out with them because they're a girl

      Once you actually get into the industry, your coworkers are pretty good folks (at least the ones I've had). But there are way, way too many places like /. online where any story you show up in just HAS to have a subthread devoted to whether or not you're physically attractive, and whether or not the immature geek contingent would have sex with you.

      While I generally don't like separate spaces, because they're a form of discrimination, sometimes it's nice to have a place to go that doesn't put up with the general level of assholishness that seems to be accepted/fostered by male geeks online, and that has women you can vent with when you get sick of having to put up with it.
    23. Re:Artificial by djfiander · · Score: 1

      Oh, and to be a bit more concrete about this. Ask (a) the woman in your class about why there are so few of them and (b) make that same statement in front of any woman professor in your faculty, or even say it to your dean (who's probbably male). I bet your male dean will have some interesting things to say to you about your attitude.

      Make sure to report back.

    24. Re:Artificial by Ithika · · Score: 1

      In order to get to a university class only one thing is required — get the grades at school. Preferably in maths related subjects. I don't know about you, but most of the maths teachers (and all the good ones) at my school were women. The women took the top classes (including last two years) and the one men took the reprobates classes.

      At school there are no geeks. I would have been right in there if there were, but alas there was nothing really geeky about it. The girls were under far greater expectation of succeeding than the boys; and conversely if any boys did well it was far worse for them in reputation than it was for girls. Conscientiousness and hard work was expected of girls; immaturity was expected of the boys. I think this is true for all of the UK — that's the culture here, as terrible as it may seem. The trends in university entrance rates reflect this: the number of women entering uni is much greater.

      But that's not to suggest that I think the disparity between numbers of men and women in IT is not a problem. I just think the above interpretation doesn't follow from the facts. I know my girlfriend blames careers advice at her school for being sucky. They would only suggest medicine as a career path (because both her parents were medics). The wider field of biology and all of its excitement was not mentioned. I can imagine that would happen to plenty of other women who were otherwise excellent at maths or physics but didn't know what to do with themselves.

    25. Re:Artificial by bguzz · · Score: 1

      1. The Net
      2. Hackers
      3. Antitrust (maybe, it's been awhile since I've seen it)
      4. The Matrix
      5. Goldeneye (she was a bond girl, too, though, so it kinda cancels out...)

      If we're willing to expand to "science/tech" in general, then we add stuff like Stargate: SG1.

      I think it's a chicken-and-egg problem. Women don't want to hang out with groups of mostly men because of comments like the first post. Programs like Fedora Women, etc. have a shot at working because it's understood that the probability of winding up as the only woman in a room full of men is reduced. I wouldn't be amazed if the idea that "programming is a man's job" has relatively little, if anything, to do with it.

    26. Re:Artificial by senatorpjt · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Interesting that the programming field was originally almost exclusively comprised of women.

      Nothing can be done about the current situation, though. The community now is comprised of men who have for a large part had very little exposure to women, and don't know how to not offend them.

      And, maybe it's just another sexist thing to say, but women get offended way too easily. Most guys at work regularly insult each other far worse than I've ever heard a guy insult a woman. It's just joking around. Women don't seem to appreciate the cleverness of a good insult, though.

      Unfortunately, I have a lot of women where I work, and it's not as great as it sounds. You're always having to look over your shoulders before you say anything.

    27. Re:Artificial by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      I suspect that a number of women have tried to get involved, but been repulsed by the community. Look at this Slashdot article; the first post was a comment asking for pictures. Now, as someone who has been around Slashdot for a while, I can be fairly sure that this was meant in jest, but this is exactly the kind of thing that would make a woman interested in joining the community leave.

      Yeah. Slashdot would be fucking boring if we had to tailor all our banter to not offend women. Men that actually have opportunities to meet women usually do these sorts of things (playing with computers, fixing cars, golfing), to GET AWAY from women.

    28. Re:Artificial by almeida · · Score: 1
      As for "why encourage", maybe you'd like to start to explain why Google's Summer of Code had zero women applicants


      And maybe you'd like to check your facts. I personally know of at least one female applicant. In fact, she was selected for a project.

    29. Re:Artificial by Ztream · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Why do you encourage or even force them? Let them decide naturally what they want to do."

      Because men are already encouraged. We are encouraged from the moment we are born. Encouraged to pursue intellectual challenges, technical ability, and achievements. Women have traditionally been encouraged to look pretty and shut the fuck up, though this is luckily changing; but the subtle differences in encouragement are still very present, if you make a conscious effort to perceive them.

      I'm the oldest of 6 siblings; 3 boys and 3 girls. When I was small, my father and to a lesser degree my whole surrounding encouraged me to be creative with lego, to learn about logic and math, and to tinker with computers and eventually start programming. My first attempt at programming (at around the age of 8) was not successful. Still, I tried again a few years later.

      To the best of my knowledge, my oldest sister wasn't very much encouraged in these fields at all. It wasn't because my parents or society was evil or uncaring - it just didn't occur to them. My father has in more recent years to an extent started teaching my much younger sisters a thing or two about science. My 5-year-old sister has a vague idea of what macrophages are :).

      The point being that encouraging women to do technical or technically ideological stuff is just a counterweight to the enormous encouragement society already gives to men in these areas. By making such explicit and conscious efforts, it is hoped that it will affect the invisible balance in the long run.

    30. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      I just think the above interpretation doesn't follow from the facts.


      Depends on where you are. I can tell you that that interpretation follows the facts in at least some cases, because it's what I went through.

      At my secondary school 90% of the math and science teachers were men, and the women were assigned to teach the lower grades (9-10 at a school that was 9-12). The inverse was true for arts, languages, and social studies teachers, but the men still taught the higher grades, and were the department heads. No social expectations being telegraphed there. My (50+ year old, male) calculus teacher at one point said, and I quote "Women don't need to know math, so I usually don't bother helping them much but you're different." I was the only one in the class who saw anything wrong with that.

      My "career counsellor" tried pretty much everything she could to steer me away from computers into accounting or medicine (more fun: the career counsellors were all women, the principal, VP, and administrator were all male. No telegraphing there either.). She didn't give up until we did some tests that recommended careers based on interest/personality matching, and mine came back with "computer programmer" at a 95% match, with everything else at least 20% lower (or, in the case of medicine, 50% - doctor - and 80% - nurse - lower).

      To this day, I have female relatives who say things like "But men don't like women who (make more than they do | have men's jobs | are smarter than them)" at family reunions. Which is the same thing I heard from the girls back when I was in school. There's a LOT of pressure to do what will attract boys at that age, and a lot of girls handicap themselves in school because of it. Or to win points with the popular cliques.

      By and large the guys didn't care one way or the other (except the aforementioned asshole subset, one of whom stole the disk with my programming term project on it. Because I'd never back something like that up /eyeroll), but I wasn't terribly interested in the kind of stuff that interested them. Except for doom2. That was a lot of fun =) I'm pretty sure that 90%+ of the idiocy the girls were up to was completely off their radar, but no one ever said teens were smart. And it's not like they didn't have their own dumb teen tricks.

      As for general immature geek assholishness, I present this article's comments. Sure, there's lots of interesting stuff in here. Too bad there's so much garbage to wade through.

      If I hadn't had a very supportive father (he encouraged me to do what interested me, backed my mom off more than once, and was the one who signed off on all my electives when she wouldn't) there's a very good chance I would have given up, simply because I was tired of dealing with the shit.

      Change comes, but it comes slowly, and against great resistance sometimes.

      And small towns suck.
    31. Re:Artificial by nova20 · · Score: 1

      ...and how many slashdot threads start out with a joke about computer geeks in general? How many geeks have been flamed or ridiculed for some idea he/she had (or who he/she is)? Oh, is that why Computer Science is one of the fastest growing fields in the business?

      I do, however, feel there is some truth to this logic. Pardon my generalities as I amend your logic.

      Men have no problem laughing at themselves because we're ugly, lazy, and stupid... and we know it.

      Women are more self-concious, and have a harder time laughing at their own flaws. Incidentally, that's probably why more (good) stand-up comics are male.

      So...

      When a guy logs into slashdot (or his favorite geek site) and sees a joke at the expense of a group he belongs to, he laughs and goes on his merry way.

      When a girl logs into slashdot (or her favorite geek site) and sees a joke at the expense of a group she belongs to, she takes it a little more personally and is turned off.

      Does anyone else have similar theories?

    32. Re:Artificial by biz0r · · Score: 1

      Mod parent to the sky, this is so true. I would LOVE more women to be involved, I happened to date and almost MARRY one I met in CS in highschool (yea, some of us code weavers aren't completely inept with the opposite gender). But alas, most women just aren't interested in software development, let alone computers in general.

      --
      /* sig */
    33. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > [men are] ugly, lazy, and stupid... and we know it.

      I know that I'm probably ugly to most girsl and maybe sometimes lazy, but where did the stupid come from? What a moron you are making such overgeneralizing statements? YOU may be stupid. I'm not.

    34. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is probably the most moronic comment I have ever seen on slashdot. You completely missed the point cowboy.

    35. Re:Artificial by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But there are way, way too many places like /. online where any story you show up in just HAS to have a subthread devoted to whether or not you're physically attractive, and whether or not the immature geek contingent would have sex with you.

      So, in other words, no on both counts.

  5. It's not right to care. by r00t · · Score: 4, Insightful

    There are in fact a number of female kernel developers. They tend to go by their initials rather than revealing their first names. There is no bias if people can't even tell.

    Not that it should matter! If they like being developers, cool. If not, oh well.

    There is also Andrea, who is male. It's an Italian thing, OK?

    1. Re:It's not right to care. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Only the Italians can get away with that, because, as Del Boy said "You can't have an Italian poofter. It's a well-known biological fact." :)

    2. Re:It's not right to care. by mrcolj · · Score: 1

      >>There is no bias if people can't even tell. Don't Ask, Don't Tell. If it's good enough for our military; it's good enough for FOSS. From the same people who said, "Just because you're showering with a gay guy doesn't mean he's looking at you." Uh, yes it does... If you ask me, when politics enters, the purity of science leaves. No exceptions.

      --
      --Colin Jensen
      colinandbethany.com
    3. Re:It's not right to care. by Nightlily · · Score: 1

      So I would have to conceal my gender to be a kernel developer?

      If hiding my gender and worrying about people finding out that I'm a woman is the admission price to work on a well established open source project, count me out.

    4. Re:It's not right to care. by miro+f · · Score: 1

      didn't you get the memo? That's the admission price for slashdot too

      oh no, the hordes, they are coming!!

      *runs and hides*

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
  6. why by celardore · · Score: 0, Redundant

    Why on Earth is this needed? I'm all for equal opportunities and everything, but does further segregation of the sexes help any cause?

    Some things are always going to be *generally* one sex or the other. For example, men like mechanics and sports. Women like ponies and getting their nails done. Obviously not hard and fast examples.

    Men like to be nerds, women like to be in the real world more.

    1. Re:why by Directrix1 · · Score: 1

      I was with you up until that "real world" statement. Many aspects of the nerd world are far truer realizations of the "real world" than their pop cultured feeding tube counterpart.

      --
      Occam's razor is the blind faith in the natural selection of least resistance and in universal oversimplification. -- EF
    2. Re:why by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some things are always going to be *generally* one sex or the other. For example, men like mechanics and sports. Women like ponies and getting their nails done.

      If you're not trolling, that's an incredibly dumb thing to say. Maybe if people didn't have your bias it wouldn't be so difficult for women in sports and mechanics, say, to have such a hard time to be accepted. Nor would women who have no interest in ponies or getting their nails done have to become furious when meeting people like you. That you say "obviously not hard and fast examples" is no excuse, although it succinctly makes clear that you cannot actually provide such examples, making your post ironic as well as dumb.

      Sad all around.

    3. Re:why by pembo13 · · Score: 1

      Some assole is going to come around and say that you're trolling ignore them. Because you're right on point.

      --
      "Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
    4. Re:why by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      Maybe if people didn't have your bias it wouldn't be so difficult for women in sports and mechanics, say, to have such a hard time to be accepted.

      So true - I mean look at Danica Patrick, in a sport that includes engineering, and how she's been shunned and marginalized because she's a woman.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    5. Re:why by rawyin · · Score: 1
      Why on Earth is this needed? I'm all for equal opportunities and everything, but does further segregation of the sexes help any cause? Some things are always going to be *generally* one sex or the other. For example, men like mechanics and sports. Women like ponies and getting their nails done. Obviously not hard and fast examples.

      I agree with your question of why. While I don't think the generalizations are solid, the big question I see is why this needs to change? What's the obsession with balancing out sexes and races in activities? Does it truly matter if women aren't as interesting in FOSS development? Is something broken because they aren't as represented? Is a woman going to use linux different than a man? Of course not.

      It's far more important to woo people with diverse goals.

      • Graphics Developers
      • Cartographers
      • Mathematicians
      • CADD Engineers
      • Computer Gaming
      • Multimedia
      Is there some industry here which is toppled by women and thus not represented in FOSS development?

      I say let people do what they are happy doing.

      "Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law." -Crowley

    6. Re:why by nelovishk · · Score: 1

      I'd suggest you to read a bit about gender studies before assuming sexes are naturally inclined to something. Men like engineering, sports and such, and woman like pink, ponies and getting their nails done mostly because of a process known as socialization, not due to either sex's nature.

    7. Re:why by deltacephei · · Score: 1

      So true - I mean look at Danica Patrick, in a sport that includes engineering, and how she's been shunned and marginalized because she's a woman.

      Whatever you're referring to, it is not stopping her. Two recent 4th place finishes, 2005 Rookie of the Year and Danica just signed on to a top team for the next season: http://abcnews.go.com/Sports/wireStory?id=2234056. I wouldn't mark this shunned and marginalized.

    8. Re:why by amliebsch · · Score: 1

      I should have include "sarcasm" tags. Danica gets by a huge margin the most attention, and has probably the largest and loudest fan base in Indy car racing. I was using her as a rhetorical point to question the OP's conclusion.

      --
      If you don't know where you are going, you will wind up somewhere else.
    9. Re:why by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      -1 You're An Unfunny Douchebag

      (Posting anonymously because I'm moderating. Yes, I modded you down, too.)

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    10. Re:why by Risen888 · · Score: 1

      Ooops, missed the checkbox. Well, now you know I think you're an unfunny douchebag. But hey, I can't mod on this article anymore, so ain't we both content?

      --
      Hey, I finally got my first freak! Took you long enough!
    11. Re:why by crossmr · · Score: 1

      Regardless of acceptance, its been long proven that men and women equally trained result in men being better physically. Men are naturally stronger and more capable in the regards and no amount of "equality" is going to change that. I found this link long ago and have kept it all this time simply to illustrate this: http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:yBMaVtVEg68J:w ww.bobjust.com/womenincombat/+bob+just+women+in+co mbat&hl=en&gl=ca&ct=clnk&cd=1

      (site seems to be down, this is a google cache)

      The US army tried to get women up to the phsyical standards placed on the men for front line combat and from reading that it seems like an exercise in futility.
      While everyone can agree that everyone else should be treated equally, they need to snap out of it and realize that doens't mean we're all 100% equal in our abilities whether its potential or realized.

  7. Great by paulius_g · · Score: 1

    That's a really nice insensitive. I would sure wish that more women were involved in computing, and actually interested by it. Almost 80% of the woman I met use the computer just for chatting to their friends through instant messenging.

    Having a woman's touch on a software would be really great. I sure hope this project is a success and brings some great woman into OSS.

    1. Re:Great by xtracto · · Score: 1

      Almost 80% of the woman I met use the computer...

      Let me gess, your sisteer and her 3 friends use the computer to chat, but your mom doesnt.

      Uh, that'll sum ur 100% wont it :)

      --
      Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'
    2. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a really nice insensitive.

      Insensitive or nice -- make up your mind! :)

    3. Re:Great by Frankie70 · · Score: 1

      Having a woman's touch on a software would be really great.

      Having a woman touch a software programmer would be greater.

    4. Re:Great by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      Having a woman's touch on a software would be really great.

      What exactly do you mean by that? The rest of your comment makes sense, but what is 'a woman's touch' on software?

    5. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now that's a dream that won't come true, thank god.

    6. Re:Great by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      The rest of your comment makes sense, but what is 'a woman's touch' on software?

      Rather than error messages having an "OK" button, there would be a input box where you could talk about how you feel about the error.

    7. Re:Great by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I.E.

      private bool changeMood()
      {

      if (Period)
        grabBat();

      else {
        drawFlowers();
        gossip();

        if (Husband != null)
        {
            SubmitQuestion("Does this make me look fat?");
            Cry();
            Period = true;
        }
      }

      }

    8. Re:Great by morcego · · Score: 1
      Almost 80% of the woman I met use the computer just for chatting to their friends through instant messenging.


      Well, duh! Almost 80% of the people I meet use the computer just for things like that too, regardless of their sex. What is your point, exactly ?
      --
      morcego
  8. so offer members free chocolate at each meeting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ** where "free chocolate" is a matter of liberty, not price.

  9. This probably isn't set to change significantly by chatgris · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Having been in university for about 4 years, from observation, the number of women in CIS classes is usually about 2/50, 4%. (Except for the first year CIS classes that are mandatory for science students). Officially, the CIS department here is concerned since only 3.7% of the people graduating from the CIS program are women. Of the women in the department I know, (and I know most of them, it's not hard to when there are so few) there's only one of them that might be interested in working on an open source program. And these numbers come from a university that overall has one of the highest percentage of women enrolled in Canada (University of Guelph). It's almost all female in this university, when men are required for surveys CIS classes are specially targetted for participants.

    Given these figures, I really doubt that any shortage of women is due to sexism in FOSS projects... From what I can see, most people working in FOSS projects are generally fairly liberal anyways and accepting of women.

    Josh

    --
    Open Your Mind. Open Your Source.
    1. Re:This probably isn't set to change significantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obviously these universities need to implement equal opportunity standards for their comp sci courses. Keep kicking men out and letting women in free (grants, scholarships) until a nice 50-50 mixture.

      Why not? The law schools do it.

      (Half troll, half serious.)

    2. Re:This probably isn't set to change significantly by bzipitidoo · · Score: 1

      No one really knows why there aren't more women in CS. The usual hypotheses are that it's cultural, or it's innate. Since the innate hypothesis is politically incorrect, all the effort goes towards cultural investigations. Anyone who suggests otherwise had better be very very careful and not couch it in terms of superiority and inferiority of, perhaps, intelligence, as did Lawrence Summers, the ex-president of Harvard. I also think the majority of what evidence we have points towards innate differences, and that's why the efforts to find cultural reasons never quite ring right.

      For instance, there's the way men and women's elbow joints differ, which makes for different ways of throwing objects. It's tempting to say that men's arms are "better", a poor and incomplete conclusion. There must be some reason for this difference in elbow joints. Certainly, men have the better throwing arms, partly just because men are on average stronger. But there is no reason for one sex to have all around better arms than the other. There must be circumstances for which a woman's elbow is the better joint. Perhaps the women's elbow is more durable, or less fragile, or is more flexible, or energy efficent, making it better for some activity-- I think carrying of loads has been suggested. If elbows can differ, why can't brains differ between the sexes? No reason at all and in fact they do differ even before birth, and we behave differently because of it. Then it's only a little step further to suggest that therefore women and men are not going to be equally competent at everything. Not equal means men will be better at some things, and women will be better at other things. Sadly for us lonely male geeks, the differences seem to cause severe imbalances in CS and similar disciplines.

      But it's not just CS. Seems like there are less women involved in most things. Often, I count how many of each sex are present in whatever public area I happen to be at. The main place I've see more women than men is the shopping mall. Also, bank tellers and cashiers are more often women. Teachers, too. I imagine there are more women in medical professions, but as I so seldom visit, I don't know. But for most places, there are more men present. Places I thought might've been neutral aren't-- the subway and bus, on the road in cars, and at restaurants. Nightclubs and bars are always throwing "ladys' nights", and never "gentlemens' nights". There are the countless "duh" places where there are a lot more men, such as the military, sports, chess tournaments, and car meets. I am aware that being male, my sampling of locations is likely biased, but I wonder if women just plain and simple don't get out as much as men.

      I can see a number of advantages F/OSS would have for women. Much of it can be done from home even while caring for an infant. As to notions that women are put off by the persistent steroetypes and sexist attitudes, I agree with the parent. I don't believe that's the reason because CS has no monopoly on having placed such barriers. Many more women have joined other activities that used to be exclusively male, in spite of treatment as bad or worse than what women get in CS.

      --
      Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
  10. I'd like to think so by QuantumFTL · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'd like to think that more women will become involved with FOSS, although I'm not sure how exactly that will happen. There is still a huge gap in the numbers of men and women in CS programs, and there are other cultural factors, especially in the teenage years, that pressure females to not engage in "nerdy" activities like programming (which is seen to be asocial, even though FOSS development is quite social).

    On a more contraversial note, it seems to me that a lot of FOSS is driven by a very... male... obsessiveness. It is the experience of myself and my collegues that female programmers tend not to be "computer geeks," in the sense that when 5:00 rolls around, they are done programming for the day - no hobby coding, no /.ing, nothing. That does not mean it's true of all females, but even if a majority of female programmers are like this (which it seems to be), that's a huge chunk out of an already tiny share. Combine this with the fact that working women are still (somehow) expected by their husbands to do more of the housework and childcare... yeah I'm not so optimistic.

    Of course I, for one, would welcome our new female FOSS overlords, but I think that's probably a long way off.

    1. Re:I'd like to think so by dch24 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      This may not catch every woman in FOSS, but it provides them with a community. And if this is run by men, it is probably doomed. Then again, anonymity is something that women might value even more than men, for any reasons you can think of. And you're spot-on about FOSS progress coming from the obsessive streak in many men.

      There are some intangible benefits to contributing to FOSS which might attract some women, like developing a better resume or making professional connections. However, I don't think women will contribute under much of the rationale that men do: scratch an itch, bragging rights, altruism, or even stick-it-to-the-M$.

      These programs won't have a major effect on the percentage of women contributing to FOSS. (Is there even a good way of measuring that?) If men wanted to attract women to contribute, they would advertise. There are a lot of businesswomen in marketing. QED

    2. Re:I'd like to think so by Concertina · · Score: 1
      However, I don't think women will contribute under much of the rationale that men do: scratch an itch, bragging rights, altruism, or even stick-it-to-the-M$.

      Just curious. I agree with you on the other points ... but why do you think women wouldn't be motivated to contribute by a sense of altruism? I know it's the primary reason I contribute to open source. Have you ever volunteered? The volunteer movement is dominated by women.

      I consider it one of the great failings of most open source projects that the whole concept of "creating a community" and "contributing to the greater good" is underemphasized in favor of "stick it to M$" and proving your point by screaming loudly in all caps at the other developers until they acquiesce out of annoyance, just so you can get bragging rights. But maybe this, too, is on the verge of change :)

  11. No, it's not about to change by DavidinAla · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The underlying assumption of programs such as this is that women are too insecure or too intimidated to do something they want to do unless somebody sets up a program to cajole thing into feeling comfortable. That's nuts. Women do whatever they happen to enjoy -- as individuals -- and men do the same. Some people just can't get over the fact that vastly more men than women want to develop software (or create hardware or whatever). Why is this so threatening to them? Because it goes against their deep-seated belief that everyone is born identical and it's only culture that makes us want different things. That's bull and it's always been bull. Men and women are different in some key ways -- on AVERAGE. There are some very brilliant women who care deeply about IT work, but the vast majority don't. That's not going to change, even for the ones who are plenty bright enough to do it.

    If you think you need to set up programs to beg certain segments of the population that other people do because it's fun and exciting and rewarding to them, you're out of touch with reality about what makes people tick. Let the people who WANT to do technical work do it, whether they're men, women, black, white, pink or purple. It's about individual choice, not about counting numbers of certain groups.

    David

    1. Re:No, it's not about to change by WindBourne · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And yet, after KDE set up a site for women (by women), there was an increase in the number of women who participated. It is possible that it was due to the growth in KDE, but ....

      One last thing, Read the earlier postings. I think that if were a women, that I might get tired of the attitudes that are demonstrated here.

      --
      I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
    2. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Women do whatever they happen to enjoy -- as individuals
      Women enjoy working with other women.
    3. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Agreed 100%. As a straight guy, I'd love there to be way more women developers. But I think schemes like this are just pure sexist idiocy. "Hey, let's mollycoddle the poor little girls because they can't handle it when we treat them as equals". Fucking nonsense.

    4. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 1

      I still think that such programs, be they for OSS, or for a school, or for an apprenticeship are wrong by design.

      Why?

      Both women and men have the ability to choose what they want to do (restricted, of course, by their social class). Encouraging women (or men, for that matter) to do something which they aren't really interested in, brings the wrong people into such programs.

      People that have no natural interest into a topic. That doesn't mean that people attracted by such programs will always be inferior to naturally interested people - but it's more often than not the case.

      IT never is a 9-5 job. Doing more than 9-5 requires a real interest in whatever you're doing (and a work environment which appreciates your efforts). OSS specifically is *never* a 9-5 *just-in-for-the-money* kind of thing.

      Of course, we all know that there isn't a 50:50 split in technology jobs.

      Why?

      Because our society and our systems instills several values into our children. This is what makes nerds unpopular losers, and the quarterback a popular, well, uhm, quarterback. The same doctrine also applies to our interests.

      Of course, a valid follow-up question would be if this system is broken. I don't think so. Even if you're a "loser", you're not going to die because of lack of food or housing. Heck, you might even have better house or car than the "quarterback".

      So, this is my conclusion:

      If you don't like the results of our system, don't try to change the results. Try to change the system.

      But that would require actual effort.

    5. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The underlying assumption of programs such as this is that women are too insecure or too intimidated to do something they want to do unless somebody sets up a program to cajole thing into feeling comfortable. That's nuts. Women do whatever they happen to enjoy -- as individuals -- and men do the same. Some people just can't get over the fact that vastly more men than women want to develop software (or create hardware or whatever). Why is this so threatening to them? Because it goes against their deep-seated belief that everyone is born identical and it's only culture that makes us want different things. That's bull and it's always been bull. Men and women are different in some key ways -- on AVERAGE. There are some very brilliant women who care deeply about IT work, but the vast majority don't. That's not going to change, even for the ones who are plenty bright enough to do it.

      No doubt there are biological differences between men and women that entail different dispositions. However, there can also be little doubt that societal roles, exceptations and pressure are a large part of the equation. Your argument about women's natural disinclination towards things software related could just as well have been made (and was made!) 200 years ago regarding their aptitude and inclination towards, say, mathematics. But times change. Even so, you can see remnants of cultural biases even between different countries. Why do you think Eastern European countries have more than 50% female mathematicians while in the US the figure is not even half? Because men and women aren't born identical, or because cultural practices make women in the US uninterested in or intimidated by a career in math? I don't know the figures for software development, but I would guess that it shows similar tendencies. That is, it is far more common in Eastern European countries for women to be programmers than in the US. How could you possibly account for such differences except for with reference to cultural norms?

      I think I will never understand why people can only see one side of this issue. The radical feminists are wrong -- there are innate differences. But people like you are also wrong, because you don't know exactly how pronounced such differences are. Is the "natural state" to have 1.5% female programmers? 10%? 40%? You don't know, and most likely, you never will. Therefore your resistance to outreach programs of this sort must be based not on any actual fact, but more on and ungrounded belief in the idea that we have now reached the point where cultural biases amount for so little that there is no obstacle to people who want to pursue careers and interests outside stereotypical gender roles.

      Let me ask you this, in all sincerity: if you found one day that you weren't interested in computers anymore, but rather in, say, manicure, would you not feel at least a slight resistance towards the idea of devoting the rest of your life to something you know would be so far from the traditional conception of what a "man's man" is supposed to like? That "slight resistence" is what projects like Fedora Women tries to overcome.

    6. Re:No, it's not about to change by DavidinAla · · Score: 1

      Actually the answer to your question about Eastern European women is very easy. Until recently, women in those countries didn't have the CHOICE about what to pursue. They were steered by the state into whatever the state deemed the best use of their talents and intelligence. So what you're pointing to is a culture where people didn't have choice. They were forced into certain areas. Is that what you're advocating instead of individual choice? Odd argument.

      Of course, there are cultural things that reinforce tendencies. The vast majority of those truly interested in IT careers are men, but there are quite a few brilliant women who pursue technical careers anyway. If you beg women to work in IT, you'll move the percentages slightly, but WHY is this a good thing? Just let people do whatever the heck they WANT to do. There is no reason to care that different percentages of the sexes are attracted to different industries. The women who are truly interested in the tech world are going to get there. I doubt anybody ever begged Ellen Hancock not to be intimidated and "pretty please, come play with the boys." :-)

      As for your other question, I do whatever I'm attracted to. I've been a journalist, a consultant and a filmmaker. I'm not in IT full-time and don't want to be. If I had a serious interest in manicure tomorrow, I'd pursue it, because I don't care about gender roles. Some people (both men and women) ARE intimidated by cultural norms. So what? That's their decision.

      David

    7. Re:No, it's not about to change by DavidinAla · · Score: 1

      You seem to be misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying that you can't bump up the percentage of women (or left-handed people or albinos or Lutherans) working on a project by catering to them. I'm merely saying there is no reason to -- and that the people who care about a project or activity will find it by their own free will. We don't need to worry about recruiting to match any particular demographic mix.

      David

    8. Re:No, it's not about to change by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 1

      There are some very brilliant women who care deeply about IT work,

      Yes, but what does 'IT work' have to do with FOSS?

      When I hear 'IT' I think of paper clips, and the guy with the metal cart who can't seem to keep the toner cartrige current on the fricking LJ4 up on third floor. You know, office equipment, file clerks, mundane and boring tasks.

      When I think of FOSS it has nothing to do with luzers wheeling around Optiplexes on carts.

    9. Re:No, it's not about to change by NoTheory · · Score: 1

      See, the problem with debates like these, is that people polarize and jump to odd conclusions.

      While parent is right, there is variability of who just has some fundamental base level of interest in computers and geekery, there is still a vastly disproportionate number of men in computer science. The reason for this is cultural. And actually this thread is a fantastic demonstration of the problem. What's the first post? A request for pics. And then the remainder of the thread is littered with comments, labeled as 'funny', talking about female software developers as potential girlfriends.

      There is something deeply wrong with how geeks think about women, even if they acknowledge that women are every bit as average as men are. I don't think this is particularly surprising given the patriarchal views that western society presents to its children, but i think denying that it exists is a little much.

      I've seen a majority of my female friends who are every bit as qualfied as i am to code, give up because they think guy geeks are jerks. And i don't blame them (hell i agree that a lot of guy geeks are jerks). If you don't like the people who you're going to work with, i'd say it's pretty reasonable to change jobs, or even professions. (and really this is an issue that is amplified in education. If you have to sit through 4 years of people who make you uncomfortable on a daily basis, then wouldn't you think about choosing a different program to do a degree in, if there are other things that you would be just as happy doing? Once you're trained and have already chosen a path it can be harder to get out of, or easier to rationalize why you're in it, but while you're in college, there are a lot of options, and if one looks like it's going to be crap, most people will switch out of that program.)

      --
      There are lives at stake here!
    10. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      One last thing, Read the earlier postings. I think that if were a women, that I might get tired of the attitudes that are demonstrated here.

      If by "the attitudes demonstrated here" you mean the jokes that were made, I say "oh well". Juvenile or not, they're just jokes, and if someone takes themselves so seriously that they let something like that stop them from doing what they'd otherwise want to do, it's their attitude that needs examining.

    11. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually the answer to your question about Eastern European women is very easy. Until recently, women in those countries didn't have the CHOICE about what to pursue. They were steered by the state into whatever the state deemed the best use of their talents and intelligence. So what you're pointing to is a culture where people didn't have choice. They were forced into certain areas. Is that what you're advocating instead of individual choice? Odd argument.

      That's either the most pathetic misreading of a comment I've ever seen or you're being disingenuous. In Eastern Europe today and in the US today nobody is forced into anything. Yet there are as many female as male math majors there, while this is far from true in the US. Explain that "very easily".

      Of course, there are cultural things that reinforce tendencies. The vast majority of those truly interested in IT careers are men, but there are quite a few brilliant women who pursue technical careers anyway. If you beg women to work in IT, you'll move the percentages slightly, but WHY is this a good thing? Just let people do whatever the heck they WANT to do.

      In the muslim world, many people want to wear a burka. Why do you think that is? Do you think it is because wearing a burka is comfortable and warm, or do you think it is because it is because of social structures that make these people see the present circumstances as natural? Do you think burka wearing women in Iran are as happy as free Americans, even if they happen to say that they do it without being forced? Even extremely brutal things like mutilation of female genitals is usually advocated by women. They say they want it, and that they want their children to have it, in spite of it meaning several years of pain. Why? Look, the examples are endless. If you dispute that people can think they want things because society exerts pressure on them, this a travesty of a serious debate.

      As for your other question, I do whatever I'm attracted to.

      You must be incredibly naive to even think so.

      I've been a journalist, a consultant and a filmmaker. I'm not in IT full-time and don't want to be. If I had a serious interest in manicure tomorrow, I'd pursue it, because I don't care about gender roles. Some people (both men and women) ARE intimidated by cultural norms. So what? That's their decision.

      It's their decision to be intimitated? My God. I'm at a complete lack of words.

    12. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Err no matter how encouraging a program might be (without including monetary or some other tangible reward), it will never attract people who don't have at least some marginal interest in it. A program like this can only give the extra push to those people who were interested to begin with, but couldn't get into it for whatever reason (lack of time, lack of experience, lack of information, etc).

    13. Re:No, it's not about to change by giorgiofr · · Score: 2, Interesting

      WTF! You and I must be living in different worlds.

      they think guy geeks are jerks. And i don't blame them... sit through 4 years of people who make you uncomfortable on a daily basis

      Where the heck did you see that happening? My experience is that most geeks are shy guys who would do almost anything to get the attention of a normal girl. My geek friends and I always behave nicely to girls and when we are in a relationship we sometimes tend to smother them, even. I have NEVER seen a nerd behave rudely to a girl. Unless you consider being too anxious to be sociable a rude thing (certainyl it's not pleasant but it's not done out of rudeness). Even nerds who are not geeks, say, LotR nerds, follow this pattern. WRT to the years in college... Girls who study stuff like engineering here are *swamped* with men and they get to pick which ones they want.
      I think you're vastly exaggerating in your analysis. What you say might apply to girls who enter the military, or something, but definitely not IT.

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    14. Re:No, it's not about to change by 7crows · · Score: 1

      I agree completely. And this: The number of people with Asperger Syndrome who work in IT is disproportionately high when compared with other fields. More males are diagnosed with AS than females; the ratio is about 10 to 1. Draw your own conclusions. That said, I'm a female AND a technology director AND our system runs on open source AND I've been fighting this juvenile prejudice against women in IT for years. Frankly, the immature and degrading comments concerning women in IT are getting old. Get over yourselves.

    15. Re:No, it's not about to change by brianosaurus · · Score: 1

      Successful OSS projects attract a certain type of geek. They're very driven, often have egos (not making a judgement here... i'd put my ego up against the best of them ;), and don't necessarily take advice/suggestions/requests/criticism in the most constructive ways. While many men enjoy the verbal abrasiveness of support responses like, "RTFM, you f'ing twit! stop wasting my time", women are often turned away by such attitudes, particularly as beginners. Men, particularly geek men, don't always have the best social skills, especially the ones who spend most of their time alone coding in front of a computer and don't often have to talk to people in meatspace.

      While I think programs like "Fedora Chicks" (see.. i'm already being insensitive) aren't good because they fragment the groups arbitrarily based on something totally unrelated to programming, anything that might help get more women involved is a good thing. There's certainly nothing inherently male about software, and if the biggest barrier is our poor social skills then stuff like this might help. Ultimately it will be better to have everyone working on the same projects working together, but maybe "FOSS Women" can jump start the interested women on projects in a way that they can actually enjoy them. Once they're going and build their l33t sk1llz, they'll be better able to deal with the "Alpha Geeks".

      Maybe even the male geeks will have to change our attitudes to get involved in a Femme-ware Project (see... I can't help it).

      --
      blog
    16. Re:No, it's not about to change by snowgirl · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Both women and men have the ability to choose what they want to do (restricted, of course, by their social class). Encouraging women (or men, for that matter) to do something which they aren't really interested in, brings the wrong people into such programs.

      This is the premise that your entire argument rests upon, that women have the ability to choose what they want to do. When in fact, culture and society restricts us immensely in what we are expected to choose to do. Today, one would look at the high ratio of females to males in teaching, and indicate that as a natural division, since women are more likely to be caring for youth than men. But this flies in the face of evidence from the past, where women were expected NOT to be in a teaching role. During the past, a female teacher was almost unheard of, and faced serious disapproval for her choice! What has changed since? Societies attitudes about a woman being allowed to work in that position. Now, instead of being shunned for working as a teacher, it is expected, and often compelled, as it falls in line with our culture's expectations of gender roles.

      During a female's upbringing in our culture, she is discouraged from aggressive behavior, and directed towards a more indirect, submissive position. During a male's upbringing in our culture, he is expected to be aggressive, and take a dominant and controlling position. Even when their desired behavior is in direct conflict with these expectations. Almost without fail, men will poorly comply with a female's requests if they are made in a dominate manner, the female must literally coax action from her subordinates rather than having any ability to directly assert what needs to be done.

      This is most directly apparent by the difference in how females and males ask for things to be done. A female would ask, "I would like to have two lights placed over in that corner?" while a male would be able to assert, "Hey, put two lights in that corner."

      Your assertion that females are free to choose their best-suited field is simply wrong. We are not free to choose such things, and those girls who do choose to go into computer science are either mocked and thought less of, or if they are even remotely attractive, they are idealized and turned into objects of--most times unwanted--affection. You are clearly viewing the world from a very idealized point of view in your position as a man, yet you neglect the reality that is there.

      So long as our culture expects women to be submissive, we will never be able to assert our true desires.

      --
      WARNING! This girl exceeds the MAXIMUM SAFE standards established by the FDA for BRATTINESS
    17. Re:No, it's not about to change by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      this juvenile prejudice against women in IT

      Please tell me the last time you were denied an IT job or the ability to contribute in an OSS project because you were female.

    18. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Your assertion that females are free to choose their best-suited field is simply wrong. We are not free to choose such things, and those girls who do choose to go into computer science are either mocked and thought less of

      This wasn't my assertion at all. Iam not a native english speaker, so might've not written clearly what i meant to say.

      You said:
      So long as our culture expects women to be submissive, we will never be able to assert our true desires.

      I said:
      If you don't like the results of our system, don't try to change the results. Try to change the system.

      Isn't that basically the same point? Of course, changing the system in your own lifetime won't ever happen. Were stuck with what we have now.

      One thing iam sure of:

      Trying to fix the symptoms of our society (e.g. no equal distribution of gender in technology jobs), won't help.

      But in most societies, women and men aren't even the same on paper. Two interesting examples from swiss law:

      Military Service:
      Men have to do military service. Women don't have to.

      Rape:
      Men can "rape" a woman (according to law).
      A woman however, can't "rape" a man (according to law).

      Divorce:
      Only under special circumstances, the man is allowed to keep the children.
      (Woman agrees, woman has severe problems which would limit that, etc. pp.)

      As long as our societies have these problems, it's next to impossible to achieve equal gender rights. And that's also why iam opposed against all programs which try to fix the symptoms instead of the underlying cause.

    19. Re:No, it's not about to change by turtledawn · · Score: 1

      WRT to the years in college... Girls who study stuff like engineering here are *swamped* with men and they get to pick which ones they want.

      Why do you think that they want to pick? Geek guys do exactly that "smothering" thing that women interesting in engineering and computer science do not want to experience at all. Women with scientific impulses at this time tend to be self-confident and don't feel a need to have a guy around.

      --
      Uh, "if it looks roughly mouse-shaped according to my infra-red sensitive pit, eat it"? --Chris Burke 09-08-10
    20. Re:No, it's not about to change by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      My experience is that most geeks are shy guys who would do almost anything to get the attention of a normal girl.

      I've been seeing a lot of posts in this article about how insensitive, sexist, offensive, and rude the posts are here towards women. And, I'll bet that in real life, the people who wrote them are exactly like you describe. It's probably just compensation.

      That being said, all those guys should seriously consider how much it would suck if there were women all over the place here. They'd have no outlet.

    21. Re:No, it's not about to change by Ksisanth · · Score: 1

      If you're waiting for cultural expectations to change before asserting yourself, isn't that submissive? How can an expectation change when you're willing to deliver?

    22. Re:No, it's not about to change by ozbird · · Score: 1

      Women do whatever they happen to enjoy -- as individuals -- and men do the same.

      ... Which is why there are so few women in open source. The "lone coder" model may work for men, but obviously not for (most) women. I'm sure to reasons for this can be tied back to the ancient hunter/gatherer society model of humans - but who cares.
      If the way to get women involved in open source is to give them ponies, then give them ponies! The more people involved in open source, the better.

    23. Re:No, it's not about to change by Ztream · · Score: 1

      Yes, but this is kind of the problem, isn't it? They are still constantly and primarily seen as *women*, not as *people*. A lot of shy guys "who would do almost anything to get the attention of a normal girl" can make the normal girl feel uncomfortable too.

      I'm part of a small up-start company, and we have just hired (sort of) our first female programmer, who is a close friend of mine. Unfortunately my boss, trying to be nice, spoke a lot about hiring another female so my friend wouldn't "feel alone" and stuff like that, which pissed her off; she -- quite naturally -- wants to be part of *us*, in our social circle, not having her place in the company made more comfortable by hiring some kind of female friend.

      Sure, girls always have a need to be appreciated as girls, just as us guys (yeah, the 99% of slashdot readers) want to be appreciated as guys, but above that -- and especially in a semi-formal setting like a company or class or whatever -- they want to be appreciated as peers.

      A quote comes to mind: "Feminism is the radical notion that women are human beings." (Cheris Kramerae)

    24. Re:No, it's not about to change by Oniko · · Score: 2, Insightful
      If by "the attitudes demonstrated here" you mean the jokes that were made, I say "oh well". Juvenile or not, they're just jokes, and if someone takes themselves so seriously that they let something like that stop them from doing what they'd otherwise want to do, it's their attitude that needs examining.


      Hey, did you hear the one about the lazy black guy? Or the greedy Jew?


      Jokes can be indicative of the social mindset of a community. It's not that they're being taken too seriously, it's that they send the message that "people of type foo are not welcome here" and leave the person of type foo with a rather negative impression of the group that they might want to join.


      I love gaming. I love coding. I love teh intarwebs. But there are LAN parties where I've been asked shit like "So, whose girlfriend are you?". I've been in IRC channels or random forums where the person I've been having an intelligent conversation with makes a comment about "the bitch (they're) screwing not making dinner" or the perils of PMS or the stupidity of females in general. That sends a pretty clear message of who the "US" and the "THEM" are.


      I'm not any kind of 'crazy lesbo feminazi', if such things exist. I'm generally indifferent to "get more females into CS" programs because I'd rather get where I can on my own merit, although females who say they're unable to or shouldn't do math or CS due to their gender do exist and piss me the fuck off. I can drink/code/game with the guys, I'm the school ACM chapter prez, and I like this sort of shit too much to leave because of the (many, many) bad apples I've seen. But it'd be nice if the "GUYS ONLY CLUB LOL" signs were less prevalent.

    25. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Note that that only applies to women joining existing projects. In practice, we find that most open-source projects have a very small number of major developers, and then a bigger community that files bugs and tests and so forth. There's nothing to stop women from starting new projects, and in fact they may have an advantage in this area.

      Imagine, for a minute, if Linus was female. He wasn't really joining some open-source old-boys'-club, because there really wasn't much of one at the time. And yet today he's a dictator of sorts for everything under the umbrella of his project. If women wanted to write new programs, they'd be in a great position of power -- greater than their number alone would indicate, since initial developers are major developers, of whom there are fewer who wield more power.

      All of this assumes, of course, that "increasing the number of women writing open-source software" is a worthy goal. Why is it? Just because you're not sexist, I don't see how this follows. The people doing any particular job don't necessarily have to represent the exact fraction that they do in the general population. If you think that "Fedora for Women" is a good organization to have, then why not "Debian for Blacks", "Fedora for the Poor", "SUSE for Smokers", "Gentoo for the Obese", "Ubuntu for the Elderly", and so forth for all of the other social groups that are underrepresented in the open-source developer community?

      I see the formation of these women's groups as fighting fire with fire. The real problem is the attitude of many open-source developers, and segregation is merely a band-aid. It actually could make it worse for those of us who appreciate having women around. If this works out as they seem to want to, we'll need to start an "Male open-source developers who are not total jerks" group.

    26. Re:No, it's not about to change by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If this works out as they seem to want to, we'll need to start an "Male open-source developers who are not total jerks" group.


      Please do. The barrel-bottom low social requirements in IT online forums more than anything else is why women stay away in droves. It gets really grating dealing with immature assholes all the time, especially when the so-called "not total jerks" don't bother to call them out for it. Or better yet, when they stand up for the assholes on the rare occasions when the women do the calling (viz "it was just a joke", "jeez, get a sense of humor")

      Start policing the swamp, and women won't want separate communities. Until you do, don't blame us for thinking you're all troglodytes.
    27. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      Rape:
      Men can "rape" a woman (according to law).
      A woman however, can't "rape" a man (according to law).


      Dear Lucas84,

      You are on crack. Or optionally, I am an amerocentrist. But the point still stands.

      Sincerely,
      Concertina.

      ps. What's with the scare quotes around rape?
    28. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 1

      Thanks for your solid, and thoughtful argument.

      It really helps to understand your point of view.

    29. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      Why thank you. It was both solid and thoughtful. Shame you missed the point.

      kisses,
      Concertina

      ps. you still haven't answered my question about the scare quotes.

    30. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 1

      I have absolutely no idea where you're trying to go with this.

      Calling someone to be "on crack" isn't a point at all, even if you disagree with everything he said.
      Tell me what you don't like, or perceive different than i already stated. Iam willing to tell you why i have come to my position.

      My anticipation is (which might be completely wrong, as you aren't willing to tell me what you find so "cracky" about my opinion), that you don't think that men can be raped by women. While iam quite sure that this doesn't happen as often as the vice-versa, there are several documented cases (Try searching http://www.google.com/search?q=woman+rapes+man).

      I have no idea why you call " " "scare quotes", but i just used them to emphasize that i meant the definition as by law, and not as by urban slang.

    31. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      Girls who study stuff like engineering here are *swamped* with men and they get to pick which ones they want.


      Last I checked, people went to school to get an education, not to get married or pick up guys. Actually, I pitty the poor fool who marries their college sweetheart.

      So how do you think this attention would this NOT make them uncomfortable? What makes you think women want to be smothered? Should they still be grateful for the attention if they're gay?
    32. Re:No, it's not about to change by giorgiofr · · Score: 1

      Wowzer, way to accuse me of things I never said. In that sentence I was simply pointing out that an engineering faculty is not an unpleasant environment for girls because of the favorable ratio of men to girls. You wouldn't argue that no competition against you and lots of choice for you make for an unpleasant experience, would you? And in case you're simply "not interested" (=despise college sweethearts, gay, etc) then said ratio simply has NO effect on your happiness. So what's your problem?

      What makes you think women want to be smothered?

      The fact that they COMPLAIN that we're not kind enough to them and that THIS is the reason they don't like traditionally male-oriented courses of study? Which was, you know, the main subject of this thread...

      --
      Global warming is a cube.
    33. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      My point is very much NOT that men can't be raped by women. Of COURSE they can be!

      My point is that there is no law, in any country that I am aware of, that states that women are not to be charged as rapists. Please enlighten me if this is not the case, and tell me what backwards country I am missing from my reckoning.

      Oh, and sorry about the scare quotes thing. It's american slang for quoting something to make it seem fake or scary. I assumed that's what you were doing.

      concertina.

    34. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Switzerland (i also stated this in my original post).

      Iam from the german speaking part of switzerland, and the german term for rape is "Vergewaltigung".

      While women can be charged for "Sexuelle Nötigung" (sexual coercion, i hope this is the correct translation, see http://dict.leo.org/ende?lp=ende&lang=de&search=n% F6tigung), which has the same upper limit for a punishment (but not the same lower limit ) as rape, they can't be charged for rape itself.

      Here's the original text, right from the law:

      Vergewaltigung:
      http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/311_0/a190.html

      Now, as i researched this some more, i seen that i made a small, but important mistake.

      Vergewaltigung

      Wer eine Person weiblichen Geschlechts zur Duldung des Beischlafs nötigt, namentlich indem er sie bedroht, Gewalt anwendet, sie unter psychischen Druck setzt oder zum Widerstand unfähig macht, wird mit Zuchthaus bis zu zehn Jahren bestraft.

      My very rought translation, since it's "law german":
      Whoever makes a female person to have vaginal intercourse with them, by forcing them through either physical or psychological measures, are makes them unable to resist (through drugs, methinks), will be put into jail for up to then years.

      The important difference is the following. A woman CAN rape another woman according to law, but according to law, men can't be raped.

      Sexuelle Nötigung:
      http://www.admin.ch/ch/d/sr/311_0/a189.html

      So.. Hope this clears things up.

    35. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      Thanks, Lukas. That makes much more sense. What a ridiculous law.

      concertina

    36. Re:No, it's not about to change by lukas84 · · Score: 1

      So i can get rid of my crack pipe now?

    37. Re:No, it's not about to change by Concertina · · Score: 1

      Sure. As I said, I was being a bit Amerocentric :)

    38. Re:No, it's not about to change by pipka · · Score: 1

      Then how come in Finland and Malaysia over 60% of the IT industry (form the most technical to the most senior) are women? The fact is that in many societies women don't participate much in It and it is _cultural_, not genetic or whatever else people try to rationalise. If some people want to try to change the culture to give all people equal access to opportunity, then please go ahead.

      After all, the very spirit of FOSS is about an environment where great people can _be_ great. Regardless of any biases they may have to deal with in their home culture.

      Try reading this, look at some of the crap thrown at women in FOSS (specifically just for being women) and then realise that the opportunities are not even. Women groups in FOSS is needed now to address certain imbalances. I certainly think that our culture can evolve past needing it, but right now they are a good idea.

      --
      Freedom isn't just for geeks Software Freedom Day http://softwarefreedomday.org
    39. Re:No, it's not about to change by Eivind · · Score: 1
      This is the premise that your entire argument rests upon, that women have the ability to choose what they want to do.

      Yes. And it's a sound premise. Women do, infact, generally have the ability to choose what they want to do.

      Now, if they also gets to act on those wishes differ. As does it for men. Sometimes there's stuff blocking you from doing what you want to do. You may not be rich enough. Or pretty enough. Or have the rigth nationality. Or have the rigth sex.

      When in fact, culture and society restricts us immensely in what we are expected to choose to do.

      That noone *expects* you to do a certain thing is a very weak argument. There's a LOOOONG way between not-expecting something and *preventing* it. You may not *expect* that a random person you meet on the street talks 5 languages fluently. This in no way *prevents* him/her from doing precisely that.

      Sure. Lots of people (most people) choose to act in accordance with expectations. I agree with you that this is a large part of the reason why women today choose to become teachers whereas in the past they did not. (generally speaking, there's always going to be exceptions)

      But that turns it into a chicken and egg problem. Nobody expects something that is completely uncommon. Our expectations are shapes more by past experiences than by any other thing. In other words, it could very well be argued that the reason most people don't expect girls to grow up and become Ph.d in Comp.Sci is that so few girls have done exactly that. That is *not* the same as saying those who have nevertheless made that choice (such as my ex-girlfriend) have been discriminated against. On the contrary, on 9 out of 10 job-offerings in the area it'll *explicitly* be stated that given similar qualifications, females will be prefered.

      Almost without fail, men will poorly comply with a female's requests if they are made in a dominate manner, the female must literally coax action from her subordinates rather than having any ability to directly assert what needs to be done.

      I'm sorry. This doesn't match my experiences at all. Perhaps I live in a different culture than you do ? (Norway) I've had plenty of female teachers, professors, bosses. None of which had any more problem than the males simply stating what needs to be done, and have it respected. (as well as if coming from a male in the same position anyway)

      In a partnership dictating orders won't work. And arguably *shouldn't* work. Personally I tend to view those partnerships where one part (mostly the female) seem willing to blindly obey "orders" as dysfunctional. But maybe that's just me.

      Your assertion that females are free to choose their best-suited field is simply wrong.

      If so, you've not demonstrated it. Simply claiming that it's "not expected" won't cut it. By the way, everything you write applies equally to males. Do you think people "expected" me to stay at home for a year care for my son while my wife went working ?

      and those girls who do choose to go into computer science are either mocked and thought less of, or if they are even remotely attractive, they are idealized and turned into objects of--most times unwanted--affection.

      Unlike the boys in CompSci which are treated as attractive, outgoing, social, friendly, competitive and sexy? Stereotypes are just that, and I fail to see why thei're more relevant for girls than for boys.

      So long as our culture expects women to be submissive, we will never be able to assert our true desires.

      Which culture is that ? And why do you feel that being "expected" to act in a certain manner is the same as being forced to act in that manner ? Do you need to care what the general population "expects" ?

  12. So implicitely by Arthur+B. · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Women are less skilled, less talented and thus should be helped and encouraged to participate in FOSS...
    But if they are maybe it's not a good idea to do thay...
    And if they're not then why the need for affirmative action?

    Every discrimination is stupid.

    --
    \u262D = \u5350
    1. Re:So implicitely by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1
      Did you read the first post in this article? It was asking for pictures. Would you want to be a member of a group where the first thing people were interested in was your appearance, not your ability? Sure, the first post was probably a joke; you know that and I know that, but would a woman who was thinking of joining the community but didn't yet know it well?

      I wouldn't be at all surprised if a lot of women are interested in joining F/OSS communities, but are repulsed by the behaviour of the members. And it's not just women. I know of a few people who tried Linux or *BSD and were sent back to Windows by the 'STF n00b! RTFM' attitude of members of those communities.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:So implicitely by Arthur+B. · · Score: 1

      They're free to do as they want. The GPL can be used by anyone, they don't have to "join" anything.

      If I were a girl I would be more offended by an unnatural "Welcome, we don't act this way naturally but you're a girl so we'll try and be nice" attitude than a few stupid jokes.

      --
      \u262D = \u5350
    3. Re:So implicitely by a.d.trick · · Score: 1

      Because the reason that people go into one field or another is only partly due to their skills and intelligence. Feeling accepted as a person (and not just 'OMG!!1! it's a girl') and camaraderie is really important as well.

      Personally, if it has just been skills and such I probably would still be in pure math. But I enjoy computers more because of the social aspects (chatting on IRC, posting on slashot, mailing lists) and the people here are generally pretty intelligent and interesting to read. I'm an introvert, but that doesn't mean I'm dull or completely self-absorbed.

    4. Re:So implicitely by debiansid · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And if they're not then why the need for affirmative action?

      To account for all the brainwashing of women by the society over time making them believe that their only job is to take care of the household and satisfy their men.

      Take a look at all the jokes, the discrimination is still there and will remain until any affirmitive action is taken.
    5. Re:So implicitely by miro+f · · Score: 1

      to be honest I think affirmative action tends to cause people to think more about the segregation of the sexes. Although in the short term it does help improve the situation, in the long term what needs to be changed is people's attitudes. In my opinion affirmative action is simply drawing more attention to the fact that men and women are treated differently, when we should be doing the opposite, teaching the next generation of people to ignore the gender and concentrate on people as

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
    6. Re:So implicitely by debiansid · · Score: 1

      to be honest I think affirmative action tends to cause people to think more about the segregation of the sexes

      Very true. I understand that point too.


      in the long term what needs to be changed is people's attitudes

      Yes, but it's not at all that easy. In case of raceism/casteism it's possible that in such a large world people will some day forget about these differences if we do not highlight them. But in case of men and women the segregation will always be there, whether or not there is any affirmitive action doesn't matter.

      If we decide to get in women and train them (in FOSS for eg), they can go forward and tell the others how they enjoy it. It's basically like spreading the word. It would cause bad blood between men and women if there was a case of snatching the Mans apple to give to the Woman. But that's not the case here.

      The idea is, coax the women a little more to get them interested in the first place. Once that happens they're on the same playing field as the men. All these foundations are coaxing the women with their training programs.
  13. Why ? by JuicyBrain · · Score: 1

    I don't understand why we should PUSH to get women into FOSS or anywhere else in the world of IT. Not that I care... I mean, they are welcome but, isn't this the kind of thing you do just because you want to ? I never saw an urge to get boys interested in Barbie, did you ? Do we really NEED women that much in here ?

    1. Re:Why ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There was a drive by makers of dolls to get boys interested. They figured out they could sell the product if they just changed the name to "Action Figure" instead.
        Sometimes a change in perceptions is all that's needed to reap great benefits.

  14. PC by magetoo · · Score: 0
    Now I can have a truly PC PC. Finally!

    (Sigh..)

  15. This is news? by DesireCampbell · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Women are working on stuff? Holy cow!

    Am I the only one sick of this kind of 'news'?
    This just in: two more female workers signed up for oil drilling, bringing the total population of female oil drillers to 4, of the total population of 20,000
    Why does it matter what sex they are? The reason this is 'news' is because people want to hear stories about how women are being treated equally in the workplace. Women's rights are always easy news. You say, "Women have lagged behind men in [insert job] but are catching up thanks to [insert bullshit here]" and you sell newspapers/ad-space/FreeIPodsAndViagra.

    If you single out women for working in a specific job for no reason other than 'they're women' you aren't treating them as equals to men. You're treating them like freaks, like a sideshow.

    --
    Whoo, signature!
    DesireCampbell.com
    1. Re:This is news? by krmt · · Score: 1

      What's news about this is that a new organization launched, not that women are working on Fedora.

      --

      "I may not have morals, but I have standards."

    2. Re:This is news? by AdamTheBastard · · Score: 1

      It's a means to an end. Right now there isn't equality between men and women in this feild. Some people are trying to skew the inequality towards the women so they can catch up. Which they hope will put enough women in the field so that leaders can't get brownie points for chosing a women over a man for any given task. Once some kind of balance is restored the programs that sway the inequility NEED to be removed but we are no where near that point right now.

      I don't know if this is the morally right way or even the best way but it's one that happens all the time.

    3. Re:This is news? by Penguinoflight · · Score: 1

      Thank you for clearly pointing out what all the affirmative action chumps wish would just remain quiet.

      The tricky part about proving that an article is really interesting is, how do you show that the women are truely bringing better talent than was available before, and was it just the "affirmative action" that made it possible... which would make the women less than competitive.

      On the one hand, there will be many weak arguments stating that women are NOW successful because the stereotypes were overcome by affirmative action, but there's a stronger argument for women being hired simply to meet a quota. Neither behavior is really correct, and they counter each other so it is really best not to participate in either.

      --
      "And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
      1 John 4:14
    4. Re:This is news? by DesireCampbell · · Score: 1

      Sadly, the 'means to an end' argument is a terrible one. It tries to say that even if the methods used are terrible it's okay if the outcome is beneficial. Lots of scientific data was gained when Nazi* doctors experimented on children (like 'how long you survive with acid on your face') but we don't condone these actions.

      Yes, more women in more areas of work traditionally done by men would be beneficial to society as a whole (showing woman as just as capable as men is an important part in convincing people that woman are as good as men). But - and this is an important 'but' - the ends never, ever, justify the means. A great benefit from an evil deed still involves an evil deed.



      * yeah, yeah, I know Godwin's law says I lose now, but I'm just using it as an example no one will refute. I'm not saying affirmative action is like pouring acid on babies.

      --
      Whoo, signature!
      DesireCampbell.com
    5. Re:This is news? by miro+f · · Score: 1

      unfortunately, it's a problem without a short term solution

      people are still sexist so if you cut the affirmative action then you end up with people hiring men because they're men. If you put in the affirmative action then you end up with people hiring women because they're women. Either way in the short term you have problems.

      I think that affirmative action is more damaging in the long term, because it tends to get people thinking more about the differences between the sexes, and it causes more and more women to kick up a fuss if a man is hired over them, which will only get worse, in my opinion. I think most people (if not all) have gotten over the gender bias and won't hire a man over a woman because they think men are better, but they will hire a woman over a man so they don't get sued.

      Probably the best solution is let the people who want men hire men. Eventually they will all retire and be replaced with a new generation which hopefully won't be exposed to all this gender bias. Society as a whole has gotten over the issue and now it's just a few nutcases on either side who keep rocking the boat. Just ignore them and eventually we'll get back on course.

      --
      being vague is almost as cool as doing that other thing...
    6. Re:This is news? by AdamTheBastard · · Score: 1

      It took me a week but I finaly worked out my retort.

      There are cases where the end does justify the means. Medication is a means to an end. Some medication has aweful side effects but the good they do is enough that people will suffer the side effects. Radiation treatment, for example, is horrible but Cancer is worse.

    7. Re:This is news? by DesireCampbell · · Score: 1

      Well, such is true, but that example is different. Personal sacrifice is different from sacrificing others, or lying. Sacrificing myself for scientific research is one thing, but choosing another person to be harmed instead is wrong. We are allowed to make decisions regarding our own life, and not other's lives.

      That's all very easy to understand for things where the 'means' would involve pain or suffering or death, but what about more subtle 'means'?

      Like, here, where people are saying (and trying to make others believe) that getting women to work in these certain areas is more important than men working in these areas. They do this because they believe that enough people will agree with them so that, over all, women will be treated equally. But this is not right. This is not ethical. This method is working towards a goal that is not the same as the means being used.

      Remember: it's wrong to do anything that harms others - either specific people, or society as a whole. Inducing pain in others is just as bad as perpetuating lies - lies that enter the social consciousness degrade the evolution of society.

      Very simply, it's wrong to try for a certain outcome through disingenuous means. If you want women to be treated the same as men: then treat women the same as men - don't treat them better.

      --
      Whoo, signature!
      DesireCampbell.com
  16. ...and for FOSS women over 50 there is by Psykechan · · Score: 1

    For FOSS women over 50, there is always the Red Hat Soceity. (That's the Cheery Red Tomatoes for you Simpsons fans) Sorry, I couldn't resist.

    Seriously though, shouldn't Fedora contact them? At the very least they can cross promote each other.

  17. Interesting... Is this necessary? by slimjim8094 · · Score: 1

    Why are they actively reaching out to women? They don't actively reach out to men (specifically). If women want to do it, they will come. If they don't, they won't. They are wasting their time, because nobody new will help because of this reaching out campaign. Not being sexist, but most women probably don't think that cutting code is cool, and care too much about society. Us nerds don't care if other people call us recluse, geeks, nerds, whatever. We know we make a difference. I guess women don't feel that way, and need to be acknowledged.

    Damn. I just re-read that post and it sounded incredibly rude. Well, I don't mean to be, so sorry if I offend anyone. I can't think of a better way to say it.

    Disclaimer: IANAP (psychiatrist)

    --
    I have developed a truly marvelous proof of this comment, which this signature is too narrow to contain.
    1. Re:Interesting... Is this necessary? by LadyVirharper · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "Necessary"? Who knows. Good? Yes. I don't think you fellows realize/understand it, but women are indeed pretty social; social programs such as message boards and the like are what got me into IT in the first place, and it's really very irritating to make a post with a nick that's obviously female like mine and get some nitwit going, "Liar! You're not a girl, you're a 40 old man in your parents' basement!" or "Show me your boobies!" or whatever. A group for females provides a place for us to be girly geeks without the BS that's occasionally (sometimes more than occasionally) flung around here.

      And that's not to say we can't "take the heat" or whatever, any more then I could say you men ph34r the unicorns, and are wusses because of it ;) , just that it's nice to collaberate with girls occasionally, and I find there are more female geeks in social geekery settings, such as fan sites, message boards, etc. I'm working on website right now with one woman who is in the astronomy field.

      I know several other female geeks, too. They're not as rare as you think. We find one another.

      Anyway, social geeky things tend to draw more women. Therefore, groups for women developers could very well be a good thing, as it would provide a community, which is alluring. You guys talk about beer and sports and whatever while you work; why can't we crush on fictional book characters, squee when we're happy, and do whatever girlish things we want to do when we work? :p

      Of course, I'm only one woman, and all these opinions are my own. I only know my own motivations for working with computers. Any other women out there?

    2. Re:Interesting... Is this necessary? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. There's quite a few female geeks around. I play online text games like MUDs which are filled with a good number of geeks, both male and female. As to why more of those female geeks are not involved in stuff like the FOSS community, one look at any male dominated community explains why. That many girls in online geek communities resort to using nicknames that sound male simply to avoid the inevitable BS that goes with admitting to a lack of chromosome Y in these groups speaks volumes about the cause of the low number of girls in IT and stuff like that.
      I hang out on freenode with a handle I've had for many years.. which happens to sound male (unintentional when I created it but has since become useful). The one time I changed my nick to something feminine as a test, I got a flurry of unusual and definitely unwanted interest, even as far as getting tracerouted. Yeah.. I've stuck to my regular nick since then. It's nice to hang out with the guys (and gals!) to discuss geeky stuff, but it becomes less fun when you're treated differently just for having a different anatomy.
      A community for girls to get together and 'geek out' without having to worry about the crap that comes with being female in a mostly male group is very much in order.
      Posting anoncow because I don't post on slashdot enough to justify creating an account... too much effort.

    3. Re:Interesting... Is this necessary? by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      it's really very irritating to make a post with a nick that's obviously female like mine and get some nitwit going, "Liar! You're not a girl, you're a 40 old man in your parents' basement!" or "Show me your boobies!" or whatever.

      What is up with women choosing nicks that emphasize that they are female and complaining when guys comment?

      I don't see a lot of guys choosing nicks that point out they're male.

      I've found the best way for women to be accepted, at least on IRC, is to not announce being female. In fact, I seriously get irritated by women on IRC, because 90% of the time, they make it a severe point that EVERYONE must know they are female, and then they get offended when guys want to fuck them. Choosing a gender neutral nick (like, oh, let me look.. 95% of the people on the channel i'm on right now), and just being a regular without demanding immediate attention for having a vagina without any previous impression, if they find out your female you'll be accepted.

      Being a text-based medium, things have different impacts. Choosing an overtly feminine nick and immediately announcing being female is the real-life equivalent of wearing pasties. Don't get offended when guys start stuffing dollar bills in your panties.

    4. Re:Interesting... Is this necessary? by LadyVirharper · · Score: 1

      In fact, I seriously get irritated by women on IRC, because 90% of the time, they make it a severe point that EVERYONE must know they are female

      Two things:

      A) If I judged the male population by the trolls, I'd think you were all sex-crazed vulgar boozing morons with an IQ of -2. But I don't. Hopefully some males can return the favor and not judge women by the poorest examples.

      B) If everyone assumed you were a girl online, and you weren't, and you didn't want to pass as one, wouldn't you get irritated? Maybe yes, maybe no, depends on your temperment. People differ.

      Being a text-based medium, things have different impacts. Choosing an overtly feminine nick and immediately announcing being female is the real-life equivalent of wearing pasties. Don't get offended when guys start stuffing dollar bills in your panties.

      That's an absurd statement. I see plenty of people with masculine names, such as "Lord", or "Mike". Heck, even your "Senator" could be taken for masculine. Should I start jeering at you because you have male bits? Is putting "Commander" or "John" in your nick the same as putting on speedos and strutting your stuff as a gigalo? I would never harass a guy because his nick was masculine, even on the forums where the population is almost exclusively female and a real, live male is rare. Why should I expect that a male WOULD with me because I have a female nick?

      Basically, it's a respect thing. Lots of casual disrespect, even if it's in jest, gives a community a bad flavor, and makes the ones that would be jested about go underground, or not even join the community to begin with. In this case, women are often jested about in the computer geek community. And it's all in the open, for any lurkers to see. So any smart* neophyte geeky women would come across that, and say, "Screw you! This isn't worth my time." Then they join another group of people or find a hobby that's not as filled with moronic people. There's plenty of geeky things to do outside of IT that a brainy woman can pick up.

      (* Obviously, I'm not one of the smart ones, as I'm standing here with a virtual lightning rod on my head.)

      Anyway, this post's topic is mutating back to my original post, and I highly suspect I'm trying to build a castle on wave wet sand. ::pushes submit::

    5. Re:Interesting... Is this necessary? by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      If everyone assumed you were a girl online, and you weren't, and you didn't want to pass as one, wouldn't you get irritated?

      There is a concrete difference between actively passing as a member of the opposite sex and the issue not coming up. In any social forum, it's usually not long. I never had a problem with women correcting an assumption that they were male, it's when they immediately emphasize it, usually expecting special attention, that is irritating. It's the same difference between being "openly gay" and a "flaming queer". There's a difference between wearing something as a badge and acknowledging it as a matter of fact.

      I see plenty of people with masculine names, such as "Lord", or "Mike". Heck, even your "Senator" could be taken for masculine.

      I didn't say it doesn't happen, but it's definitely disproportionate. And, as far as "Senator" is concerned, 14% of senators are women, a lot more than programmers!

      Why should I expect that a male WOULD with me because I have a female nick?

      Because that's what males do. As unfortunate as it may be, it's a part of our society. And as much as people like to say that men are naturally aggressive, it's bullshit. Men HAVE to be aggressive because it's the only way to find out it a woman is interested. I don't know of any who actually enjoy trying to meet women. When I can go to a bar and have women come up and buy me drinks, point will be taken. If there was a similar expectation that women would pursue men the same way that men were expected to pursue women, there wouldn't be a problem to begin with - the lack of pursuit would be enough to indicate disinterest.

      Basically, it's a respect thing.

      I'd think you would know better, reading slashdot. The lack of respect has nothing to do with sexism. When I'm discussing an idea with a guy at work, I will readily say "That's fucking stupid," if I think the idea is stupid. The guy will take that as meaning that I think the idea is stupid, but it seems that women will take that as meaning "You're stupid because you're a woman, and he swore." It's not so much a lack of respect as it is the lack for the need to spare feelings. I've heard this argument made in a different context, as to why women "don't offer ideas in classes because they feel intimidated by men." It has nothing to do with being intimidated by men, and everything to do with being intimidated by being embarrassed. It goes back to the aggression thing. By having to make the moves on women, men get used to public humiliation and rejection on a regular basis. Honesty is never anyone's fault, but the inability to accept criticism is.

  18. You are a GENIUS! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I'd like to think that more women will become involved with FOSS, although I'm not sure how exactly that will happen. There is still a huge gap in the numbers of men and women in CS programs, and there are other cultural factors, especially in the teenage years, that pressure females to not engage in "nerdy" activities like programming (which is seen to be asocial, even though FOSS development is quite social).

    On a more contraversial note, it seems to me that a lot of FOSS is driven by a very... male... obsessiveness. It is the experience of myself and my collegues that female programmers tend not to be "computer geeks," in the sense that when 5:00 rolls around, they are done programming for the day - no hobby coding, no /.ing, nothing. That does not mean it's true of all females, but even if a majority of female programmers are like this (which it seems to be), that's a huge chunk out of an already tiny share. Combine this with the fact that working women are still (somehow) expected by their husbands to do more of the housework and childcare... yeah I'm not so optimistic.

    Of course I, for one, would welcome our new female FOSS overlords, but I think that's probably a long way off.

    I can see why you have a Cornell.edu address. You are fucking brilliant. Your post is one the most most brilliant attempts at Karma Whoring I have EVER seen! You go all PC (suporting women, F/OSS(which is PC on /.))!

    Fucking Brilliant! You Madam or Sir WILL be extremely succesful! And I'm a pathetic loser who's jealous.

  19. They only made TWO changes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A pink desktop background and the cigarette lighter has been replaced by a lipstick holder.

    1. Re:They only made TWO changes! by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1
      A pink desktop background and the cigarette lighter has been replaced by a lipstick holder.

      The pink desktop background, of course, replacing the wallpaper with a warrior woman wearing chain-mail armor carefully designed to protect her crotch and the nipples on her 44DDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD breasts.

  20. Really by Stephen+Tennant · · Score: 2

    the guys just want a date

    --
    I spend most of my time in bed, darling.
  21. disparity by geography and ethnicity by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OK, I'll bring it up again: most people who've been in a technical field for awhile notice that a much greater percentage of women from Asia and Eastern Europe (including Russia) seem to be interested in a career in science and engineering, following a technical track (i.e., not a manager, marketer, or doc writer), compared with American women for example. Why is that? Socialization undoubtedly accounts for some of it, but I'm not sure there's not a genetic basis as well.

    People like to do what they're good at relative to their fellow workers.

    1. Re:disparity by geography and ethnicity by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      The pay in engineering jobs smacks most others around - if you are from a poor Russian or Chinese family and they have scraped together money for training or university, is anybody sane going to do an arts degree? No - because there are few well paying jobs that don't require hard/unusual skills. Better to train in some engineering/science subject where there are shortages.

      The idea that women are just not interested in technology because of genetics seems silly to me. There's little evidence genetics can have such a precise effect. It's just the culture - why do not many men want to be nurses? Well they don't want other guys to think they're gay, it's a very feminine sort of environment. You know in primary schools in the UK they are desperately trying to attract men. Sometimes jobs just snowball like that and it's really hard to fix. But it's not likely to be genetic.

    2. Re:disparity by geography and ethnicity by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1
      Socialization undoubtedly accounts for some of it, but I'm not sure there's not a genetic basis as well.

      Sure. That says more about you than it does about genetics or gender differences.

    3. Re:disparity by geography and ethnicity by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

      I think most people in technical fields notice that a much greater percentage of PEOPLE from Asia and Eastern Europe seem to be interested in science and engineering.

      I'm in chemistry. The male/female ratio for american students is more equal than the american/foreign ratio. From what i've seen, US culture has a definite negative attitude towards these fields for BOTH males and females (only "losers" do them). You don't see a lot of Asians and Europeans taking bullshit liberal arts majors. Their cultures actually respect achievement, people aren't immediately dismissed as losers for displaying intelligence.

  22. Is that finally set to change? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 0, Troll

    Yes, I think it would coincide with the year of the Linux desktop

    1. Re:Is that finally set to change? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought that was funny. But they didn't ask for my opinion, sorry dude.

    2. Re:Is that finally set to change? by mobby_6kl · · Score: 1

      That's ok. Apparently this week is the "mod mobby_6kl -1 Troll" week. There are a bunch of posts in my comment history modded -1 Troll +1 Funny. The whole thing was probably started when I suggested that probably the current versions of GPL has "bugs" in them, that one got modded Troll instantly.

  23. No it won't by Espectr0 · · Score: 0

    At present, women are believed to make up only about 1.5% of the FOSS community. Is that finally set to change?

    As long as you keep creating special "women" foundations, this isn't going to change. Women are people just like us, why can't they be in the current foundations along men treated equally?

    You don't see a "Fedora Men" foundation.

    This is stupid.

    Face it, women are less attracted to IT than men, just like men are less attracted to fashion decoration than women.

    1. Re:No it won't by debiansid · · Score: 1
      Face it, women are less attracted to IT than men, just like men are less attracted to fashion decoration than women.
      Some of the best fashion designers in the world are Men. The best cooks in the world are men. Saying that women are less attracted "by nature" towards IT is stupid. A woman (or a man for that matter) will be inclined to a certain field/idea according to her (his) upbringing.
    2. Re:No it won't by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're right. Some of the best fashion designers in the world are men. Gay men.

  24. Women are more social by ReallyEvilCanine · · Score: 3, Interesting
    celardore is basically right. Women tend toward more social careers. Of course there are exceptions and there are women who choose fields which are more male-oriented by their nature (construction, military service) just as there are men who choose jobs traditionally held by women.

    Unlike some other fields, women aren't being kept out of programming through any sort of imposed discrimination. Anyone can learn to program and anyone who writes good code can participate, especially in FOSS. I've known female coders for more than 20 years, from the COBOL whiz when I was a sysop at the Department of $US_DEPT to a few people in my department at $MegaCorp today. Yes, they're a minority, but only out of choice. No one is telling women not to code. Code doesn't have genitalia. As long as it works who gives a rat's ass whether code was written by a man or a woman or even by Hugo the Incredible Coding Marmoset?

    1. Re:Women are more social by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Back in the day...waaaaay back, women were involved in Computing at a relatively equal ratio. The first programmer was a woman.

      Computing had no prestige back then. Nobody cared if women were in it because nobody really cared about it at all. Obviously it's not too hard or beyond their scope, and I don't think it's a 'social career' thing, either. Enrollment in Engineering and Mathematics is basically equal for men and women, and I wouldn't call either of those particularly 'social'. In fact, enrollment in nearly all sciences (at least at the University of Alberta, and I've heard from people looking into this sort of thing that the trend seems to hold most other places) shows nearly equal enrollment for the genders.

      Don't bring up these weak arguments. Jobs that have a small social element can be compensated for with a social life. I know female biologists, physicists and scientists of nearly every stripe. More importantly, I'm significantly more likely to hear about a woman making a significant scientific breakthrough in nearly every other field of science, but even meeting a female programmer is cause for excitement and amazement.

      These programs are necessary to show women that not all the men in this field are arrogant cocks, and we're not as badly socialized as the sweaty, loud, prototypical programmer that gets all the press would lead them to believe. I think there should be similar programs for men to encourage them into more 'feminine' jobs, like nursing. I haven't met a nurse yet that isn't excited about a male nurse in their class or on their ward. It's a hard, important job, with an unreasonably feminine image (and frankly, you've got better job security and higher pay being a nurse right out of school than being a programmer right out of school).

      Don't try and tell me that 'reverse discrimination' doesn't help the problem. Is it 'reverse discrimination' to put ramps in front of buildings because a portion of our population are confined to wheelchairs? There's a difference between equal treatment and identical treatment. Please try to understand the difference.

    2. Re:Women are more social by jimicus · · Score: 1

      I care. I've had to debug some of Hugo's work, and I can tell you we need fewer marmosets in this industry.

    3. Re:Women are more social by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      Don't try and tell me that 'reverse discrimination' doesn't help the problem. Is it 'reverse discrimination' to put ramps in front of buildings because a portion of our population are confined to wheelchairs?

      No, it's just a really stupid analogy. Everyone with a functioning brain will freely admit that there are some things handicapped people simply cannot do. This is the whole reason the are called handicapped. It's the meaning of the term, for fuck's sake! This is fundamentally difference that a male vs female situation, where females are fundmentally capable of performing the job, but choose not to.

      There's a difference between equal treatment and identical treatment.

      Myself and the supreme court disagree with you. Or would you mind if all female children were sent to "seperate but equal" schools? (Perhaps with the stated purpose of encouraging more of them to go into tech.)

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    4. Re:Women are more social by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Code doesn't have genitalia. As long as it works who gives a rat's ass whether code was written by a man or a woman or even by Hugo the Incredible Coding Marmoset?
      Do you code like a girl?
    5. Re:Women are more social by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      And like I responded to someone else, why don't they choose to? Something in the water? A prophecy? Plague and Doom o'er the land? What?

      It's a perfectly reasonable analogy. Someone in a wheelchair can drag themselves up the stairs. It's a hard climb, but physically possible. THEY JUST CHOOSE NOT TO.

      And why should they have to? Similarly, why should women have to put up with the crap of this male-dominated field? They don't feel welcome, so they don't put themselves through the strain of breaking through the crap -- dragging themselves up the stairs -- and go do something else. The really determined ones come in and make it anyway, just like a really determined person in a wheelchair would drag themselves up those stairs. The handicap isn't physical for women, we've just put the barrier up. It's up to us, the men, the people in control, to take the barrier down.

      And the Supreme Court of your country almost certainly agrees with me. Indentical treatment and Equal treatment don't mean the same thing, but it doesn't mean that they never intersect. A public school is an example of both identical and equal treatment at the same time. A ramp for a handicapped person is equal treatment by not treating two people identically. The person in a wheelchair is specifically taken into consideration in a different light than I am, since I can walk up stairs with no problem. This is equal, not identical.

    6. Re:Women are more social by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1

      It's a perfectly reasonable analogy.

      No its not. It's flat-out stupid and you really should have just dropped it.

      Someone in a wheelchair can drag themselves up the stairs. It's a hard climb, but physically possible.

      Actually many of them CAN'T. Period. They physically do not have the stength and ability to do so. This statement is simply false. Try visiting a nursing home sometime jackass. (I know jackass is a harsh word, but your statement is both disrespectful and ignorant.)

      THEY JUST CHOOSE NOT TO.

      Nope, you just choose to be batty. A cripple, physically unable to perform a certain task is in a vastly different situation, than a women with all the abilities and opportunities necessary to perform a certain task.

      And the Supreme Court of your country almost certainly agrees with me.

      You obviously don't have a clue what you're taling about here. I get the distinct impression that you know very little about SCOTUS. The words "seperate but equal" were chosen very deliberately by myself as they refer to a very specfic supreme court case in which it was decided that "sperate but equal" treament of black and whites was unconstitutional.

      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    7. Re:Women are more social by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      What if I made my case more specific? For instance, that of a person in a wheelchair with perfectly functional arms? I can make this restriction without any loss of generality, and now I fit your criteria just fine. The person can now successfully pull themselves up the stairs -- by definition.

      It's STILL entirely unreasonable to force a person that CAN do it to do it. It's not fair. It's discriminatory. It takes so little effort for us to put up a ramp to enable such a person to easily access a building. If I didn't put up a ramp and the person chose not to, I certainly wouldn't hold it against them. This is the same in this case. I don't hold it against women that decide to not join the ranks of us computer nerds. The psychological barrier to entry is something that they shouldn't have to overcome.

      'Seperate but equal' still isn't the same thing as what I'm talking about. You'll notice that their decision would have no bearing on my ramp example. It's OBVIOUS that a person in a wheelchair is being treated differently, but it's in order to give them equality that they wouldn't normally easily have access to. That ramp is for their benefit only, and by treating them different, we've made them equal to anyone on two legs. We're not treated identically -- stairs and ramps are not identical. But they ARE equal. Much like 4+6 = 10 and 5+5 = 10. The equations are hardly identical, but they ARE equal.

      I understand the point you're trying to make, but I think you're misunderstanding me. I don't like the 'seperate but equal' thing either, which is why I'm a strong supporter of equal marriage (something that I'm very proud of my country -- Canada -- for implementing).

      The difference is that schooling, for instance, doesn't need to be different for blacks and whites. They speak the same language, have the same eyes, ears, arms, legs and brains. If you taught them from behind a wall and never saw them, it wouldn't make any difference. That decision was made to end unfair segregation, and thus make everyone equal. (The subtext, which I'm sure you already understand, is that black schools never ACTUALLY would have been equal, so ending the seperation was actually the only way to ensure equal treatment. Or close to it.) Programs like the one that this thread are discussing aim to bring equality by ushering people in that normally wouldn't be there. A woman that rejects this field out of hand, or rejects OSS projects because she feels that she'll be outcast for her gender now has an opportunity to work in an environment that's more comfortable to her as a stepping stone to working with everyone else. This isn't to say that she isn't capable, merely apprehensive.

      (As an aside, your 'jackass' comment doesn't really bother me. I don't know you, and to be honest, it doesn't really matter what you think about me. However, resorting to name-calling isn't any way to win an argument, or even present your side of an argument. You could have easily left it out and still gotten your point across. It's nice that you feel strongly about this sort of thing; I do too, and it's people like us that make democracys strong. But don't fall into the politician's trap of trying to get a dig in at your opponent -- that's what's ruining our democracys right now. :P)

    8. Re:Women are more social by theLOUDroom · · Score: 1
      I can make this restriction without any loss of generality,

      Actually, your whole analogy goes right out the window when you do this.
      You were tring to make the argument that:
      1. our society provides special consideration for the handicapped
      2. that this is generally considered fair
      3. that being a woman is similar to being handicapped

      But now you're changing the definition of "handicapped" when you go to step three. It's called a bait-and-switch. Wheelchair ramps are not used solely by people who don't "need" them and your argument requires this to be true in order for the steps to connect properly.

      The subtext, which I'm sure you already understand, is that black schools never ACTUALLY would have been equal, so ending the seperation was actually the only way to ensure equal treatment. Or close to it.

      The decision was actually bigger than that. It was a decision that institutionalized discrimination inherently leads to unequal treatment. Seperate can't be equal.

      "In these days, it is doubtful that any child may reasonably be expected to succeed in life if he is denied the opportunity of an education. Such an opportunity, where the state has undertaken to provide it, is a right which must be made available to all on equal terms." -Earl Warren

      "Segregation was not unconstitutional because it might have caused psychological feelings of inferiority. Public school systems that separated blacks and provided them with superior educational resources making blacks "feel" superior to whites sent to lesser schools - would violate the Fourteenth Amendment, whether or not the white students felt stigmatized, just as do school systems in which the positions of the races are reversed. Psychological injury or benefit is irrelevant..." -Clarence Thomas


      And as a side note, your wheel-chair ramp example is broken on many other levels. One of the more obvious ones being that normal people use these ramps all the time. The ramps do not discriminate.

      However, resorting to name-calling isn't any way to win an argument, or even present your side of an argument.

      The name-calling is nothing but admonishment for being so crass as to make an offensive and disrespectful generalization about handicapped people. It's not support for an argument, it's a rebuke. It's me saying, "Hey, it's really offensive to imply that the reason handicapped people need ramps is beacuse they don't *want* to climb up there."
      Your statement was not just factually dead wrong, but ethically wrong as well.
      --
      Life is too short to proofread.
    9. Re:Women are more social by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Not at all. You seem to be overly concerned with just how incredibly handicapped my example person is. They're still handicapped if they have no legs and perfectly good arms. They, like any other person, would be able to operate a computer, hold a conversation and share a cup of coffee. I'm not comparing women to quadrapalegics, the mentally handicapped, or somebody confined to a hospital bed.

      Women are at a disadvantage, even today. Great strides have been made to level the playing field, and it's the closest that its ever been. I maintain that there's still a level of inequality that needs to be overcome, and letting things lie will not accomplish this. Women are not handicapped by their own inherent abilities; worse, they're handicapped by a sub-culture that seems immediately and inherently disrespectful, creating a hurdle that many women won't want to overcome. I know several women that have come through the Computing Science program at my University, and they almost universally did it by making sure to isolate themselves from the general student body, so they didn't have to put up with any nonsense.

      Maybe you're right about my example, and I stretched the metaphor a bit harder than it needed, but I don't feel that at its core, it's entirely incorrect. We make provisions for people all the time. The very young, the elderly, the generally infirm -- all these people get special consideration, though often it's just an acknowledgement that not everyone is the same. In my province, you're eligible to apply for a handicapped parking spot tag once you're over 60. It's an acknowledgement that even though you may be able to walk, it's not necessarily as easy for you as when you were younger.

      I still maintain that your 'admonishment' is essentially meaningless. Not only do I still not feel factually incorrect -- I don't think it's reasonable to expect handicapped people to drag themselves up stairs, and I said as much, even if they're technically capable of it -- but obviously you and I don't have the same ethical framework. At the moment, it appears that I support the ongoing equality movement more than you, so I could just as easily claim a moral high-ground. I'm not a puppy, and smacking me on the nose with a newspaper doesn't do anything. It's a waste of breath (or bits) and just makes you seem excitable and unable to fight a position on its merits, no matter how good your other arguments are.

      Incidentally, you STILL haven't answered my burning question, which I've repeated at least once: what causes women to not be interested in computing, when other, equally anti-social fields have no problems attracting them? Are you leaning towards sunspots, or something in the water?

  25. FFS... by dud83 · · Score: 1

    Only Debian seems to be on the right track here. The pages needs to be excessively pink! However even debian lacks the ponies. And possibly red hearts and roses...
    Because we all know that's what attracts women! *_*

  26. Communication patterns by coffeechica · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The numbers aren't going to change easily. Not as long as the FOSS world is dominated by men (and yes, this is where the snake bites its own tail).

    One example: my university classes used to overlap with those of CIS students a lot, and what I heard from the few female students there was that they found it hard to communicate with the men at times and often didn't really want to. Simply take a look at /. - very male communication patterns, enough to make it tricky at times to know whether to be insulted or not or whether to take something the way it is written or with a grain of salt. Women will often think more and also interpret communications in very different ways at times. So when being into FOSS means 1) getting into a stereotypically male area of interest and b) interacting with almost only men who on occasion seem to speak another language, I have to applaud those 1.5% for sheer guts.

  27. The true incentive for women by MrShaggy · · Score: 0

    OMG!!!!its ponies!

    --
    I have mod points and I am not afraid to use them.
  28. I once asked.... by Aeomer · · Score: 4, Funny

    I asked a work collegue 'why most women don't have hobbies?' She gave an answer I have heard many times - 'Woman don't need hobbies, we can create with our bodies. Men have hobbies to make up for their inability to give birth.' Then I stated 'But then why do any women have hobbies at all?' The answer stunned me 'Because they are barren, old, or gay.' So apparently, Open Source runs on testosterone. Never think women are more enlightened than men - they just disguise their stupidity better. ;-)

    1. Re:I once asked.... by CastrTroy · · Score: 1

      This makes a lot of sense. Men have an inate drive to be creative because unlike women, they are unable to create life. Even if you look at history, most of the famous writers, artists and musicians were men. I don't think it was all because of oppression. People do what they feel they want to do. I don't think we should try to be pushing people into doing things that they don't want to do. I saw enough unhappy people in university who were only in a certain program because their parents pushed them to do something, wasting not only their time, but lots of money in the process.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    2. Re:I once asked.... by linvir · · Score: 1
      Your co-worker ranks on the exact same level as men who seek to 'score' as many times as possible, in that she thinks that a fulfilling life means carrying out her gender's reproductive function. She is also a misandrist, as in the opposite of a misogenist, because she's prejudiced against men, at least according to her own twisted terms: "to make up for their inability..."

      Fortunately, her type probably only exists in the same proportions as the equivalent stupid men.

    3. Re:I once asked.... by ettlz · · Score: 1

      I think, perhaps, your colleague span you a yarn or two.
      Knowing full well you'd buy it.

    4. Re:I once asked.... by Retief-CDT · · Score: 0

      Nothing good has ever came out of a Woman.

      --
      Matt's addition to Occam's Razor:"The most simple answer is preferred by those that are simple."
    5. Re:I once asked.... by Guy+Harris · · Score: 1
      This makes a lot of sense.

      And, of course, if something sounds plausible, it must be true....

      Men have an inate drive to be creative because unlike women, they are unable to create life.

      Are you sure all men have an innate drive to be creative, rather than to, say, sit on the sofa and watch sports?

      I don't think we should try to be pushing people into doing things that they don't want to do.

      And where exactly is that happening here? The Wiki page for Fedora Women says:

      A large portion of the Fedora userbase is made up of women. They are often under-represented within the community, with many people not even realizing how big a share of the community they are. The Fedora Women program aims to improve that representation and to provide a forum for the women of the Fedora Community.

      I don't see any "HEY GIRLS CHECK THIS FEDORA CORE THING OUT!" message there - they speak of women already using Fedora.

      It also says:

      Women who are interested in working with the Fedora Project can work with Fedora Women to get started.

      Note the "who are interested" part.

    6. Re:I once asked.... by pixelfood · · Score: 1

      Most adult women who have children would love to find the time to sit down and scrapbook or do the crossword puzzle, but they are too busy running around working, doing errands, and taking care of the kids. I'm a college-aged girl, and I have plenty of hobbies. Then again, one of them is coding, so I might just be weird.

    7. Re:I once asked.... by 93+Escort+Wagon · · Score: 1

      "I asked a work collegue 'why most women don't have hobbies?"

      You don't sound like someone who interacts with women much (I know that sounds like a put-down, but I couldn't think of any better way to phrase it).

      Take a look at your local PBS station's listings for Saturday morning sometime. Want to know what the majority of shows will be in most markets? Sewing, knitting, quilting, needlepoint - HOBBIES that tend to be dominated by women.

      My wife has spent more on sewing machines than I have on computers, cameras and gardening combined. At my job, the women (plus one guy) have an old-fashioned knitting circle that meets over lunchtime once a week.

      Women have lots of hobbies!

      --
      #DeleteChrome
    8. Re:I once asked.... by wumpus188 · · Score: 1

      Thats one of stupidiest things I heard in my life.

    9. Re:I once asked.... by Aeomer · · Score: 1

      >> I think, perhaps, your colleague span you a yarn or two. >> Knowing full well you'd buy it. You would think/hope - but I think not. :-(

    10. Re:I once asked.... by Aeomer · · Score: 1

      I'm sure they would love to do other things now the 'giving-birth' bit is over.
      We are expecting our first in March next year - I'm expecting my OSS coding to go out the window about then. :-(

    11. Re:I once asked.... by Nightlily · · Score: 1

      Geeze, wonderful quote. (As a woman) I find her response insulting. I am much more than my uterus - thank you.

    12. Re:I once asked.... by tehcyder · · Score: 1
      Your co-worker ranks on the exact same level as men who seek to 'score' as many times as possible, in that she thinks that a fulfilling life means carrying out her gender's reproductive function.
      It has nothing to do with reproduction, trust me.
      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  29. Here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Here we go again, for yet another round of "I'm a guy, and I don't understand why this is needed" responses to one of these articles. Yeah, you're all right, the reason there aren't many women programmers is that women don't want to program or aren't suited to it. They also don't want higher education, and they don't want to work outside the home, and they don't want to vote, and they don't want to drive. And yes, they'd all love to post pictures of their boobies for you, if they only knew how to work these funny machines.

    1. Re:Here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you're all right, the reason there aren't many women programmers is that women don't want to program

      I don't know know many women who want to program, so yeah, I'll agree with you here.

      or aren't suited to it.

      This is your own personal addition. I don't see many posts that said women "aren't suited" to programming. They have 10 fingers and a brain, same as everybody else.

      They also don't want higher education, and they don't want to work outside the home, and they don't want to vote, and they don't want to drive.

      Wow, you really have a low opinion of women. Again, nobody said these things. Except for the first sentence, your post is basically nonsense.

      And yes, they'd all love to post pictures of their boobies for you, if they only knew how to work these funny machines.

      Take a moment and ask yourself, are you fighting stereotypes, or reinforcing them? Why are you so bitter?

    2. Re:Here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well how about this then: I'm female, and I don't think this is needed. Special programs geared at women just serve to segregate and remind everyone that there are few women. I personally find it insulting that people think I need special help or my own social club to "make it" in computing or to attract me to a project. Make it appealing for everyone, make it supportive for everyone, and you'll get good talent regardless of gender.

    3. Re:Here we go again... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because I am female and I've seen these posts so many many times. Now go back and read my post, understanding that. To quote myself, 'Here we go again, for yet another round of "I'm a guy, and I don't understand why this is needed' responses to one of these articles." Seen any responses like that in this thread yet? Today we're told that we don't want to program. Thirty years ago, we were told we didn't want to work. Eighty years ago, we didn't want to drive. One hundred years, to vote. Until recently, we "haven't wanted" higher education but now that women are coming into a slight majority there, "boys are being ignored". If history were to reverse and we had 1000 years of >90% females in political control and legal status and employment and higher education I wonder what the discussions on Slashdot would be like then.

  30. "Is that finally set to change?" by l3v1 · · Score: 1

    Is that finally set to change?

    Certainly not because Fedora thought it's time they jumped into the line. Generally I guess the number (around 2 percent) is just about right. Although during my university years, that is from ~4 to 9 years back, in IT this number at us was much higher, you can hardly meet women actually working for their living in the field.

    While I also - like others above - don't really think such "separation" of women related to linux is generally good, it might help some newbies to get involved by alleviating the fear that there are no other women involved, and that's good. Other than that, I'd guess it's pretty useless. But hopefully a girl will come around and tell us otherwise.

    --
    I am putting myself to the fullest possible use, which is all I can think that any conscious entity can ever hope to do.
  31. the sims2 by kryten_nl · · Score: 1

    I now of one way to get a lot more female linux users... being able to play the Sims2. My gf will switch from xp the same day that happens (without knowing about it for the first few months).

    --
    For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
  32. Re:Little confused about the membership requiremen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    the real question is why aren't you willing to provide them?

  33. You guys don't get it by Reverberant · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm looking at the comments so far and they seem to be broken up into two groups:

    • "We need naked pics" jokes (like this, this, and this); and
    • "Women aren't in tech because they choose not be in tech" as exemplified by this.

    Hasn't anyone ever thought that these two viewpoints might be related? That maybe the reason more women don't go into tech is cultural - not in the "women are more interested in nail polish than hard drives"-sort of way, but in the sense that they sick and tired of dealing with all the "oohh, titties!" comments that we men think is good natured humor, but gets old with women? Maybe, just maybe, if women (or minorities or the handicapped, etc) can be provided with a supportive environment, we'll find that women are interested in tech. Maybe we'll even find that some women can be really good at it.

    Let me put it another way. Everyone once in a while, a sports-related story pops up on Slashdot, and the comments inevitably drift toward stories of posters who have been pushed around by jocks in high school, so they now have a dim view of sports. Like us men making "titties" jokes, jocks would consider their messing with geeks to be good-natured humor. Imagine for a second that your exposure to sports came in a supportive environment (think affirmative action for geeks)- is it possible that this might have resulted in a more positive outlook towards athletics (especially sports like American football and basketball that involves a high degree of strategy as well as athletic talent)?

    It's not a matter of discrimination or taking something away from men. It's all about providing a supportive environment so that women can concentrate on the matter at hand, rather than dealing with all the 'good natured' 'non-PC' crap that men throw at them.

    1. Re:You guys don't get it by Bogtha · · Score: 1

      As far as the "This thread is useless without pics." joke, I read that as irony making fun of immature nerds, not anything insulting to women.

      That maybe the reason more women don't go into tech is cultural - not in the "women are more interested in nail polish than hard drives"-sort of way, but in the sense that they sick and tired of dealing with all the "oohh, titties!" comments that we men think is good natured humor, but gets old with women?

      Yes, I do think that. But it's stupid to let the jokes continue and set aside a special women-only club for them to play on their own. That's incredibly uncaring and condescending. The better approach is to cut out the stupid sexist jokes, flame people for making sexist jokes and ban them from the mailing lists if they continue - like you would with anybody who made racist jokes.

      Maybe, just maybe, if women (or minorities or the handicapped, etc) can be provided with a supportive environment, we'll find that women are interested in tech. Maybe we'll even find that some women can be really good at it.

      Er, we already know that. There are plenty of good female developers. There are fewer than men in proportion, but there's still plenty of them.

      It's all about providing a supportive environment so that women can concentrate on the matter at hand

      But it's creating a second-class segregated environment rather than fixing the real environment everybody currently works in. You don't see a problem with that? Maybe we should make them sit at the back of the bus too.

      --
      Bogtha Bogtha Bogtha
    2. Re:You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As many jabs there are on ./ about other groups of people, by far the most comments are making fun of themselves. I interpret the "oohh, titties!" comments as making fun of their own immaturity for saying such a thing. Oh coarse someone not familiar with ./ could be understandably insulted, but if they take the time to understand the community, they would know that we're not all sexist bigots.

    3. Re:You guys don't get it by rackrmnn · · Score: 1

      This reply is to the first intelligent comment I've read on this thread. Truly, never before have I been so disgusted with my fellow male computer geeks. Do any of you actually talk to women? In the environment we create it's a wonder there's even 1.5% of females working on FOSS. Of course women choose not to be in tech, but not because they're not good at it. They choose not to be in tech because of the horrendous, entirely male-dominated environment. Programs like these are trying to give women a chance to escape from that environment without have to escape from tech entirely. A lot of people claim that women don't like tech because of biology. The deep flaw in this is the fact that individual characteristics will always triumph over small differences in biology. Remeber that the first programmer, Ada Loveleace, was a woman. Being good at something is not enough to make you do it. There needs to be an enjoyable environment as well. For women in tech, this environment is completely lacking. That is why in my graduating computer science class of 60-some people I can think of only two women. On the other hand, my graduating class in mathematics is about 40% female.

    4. Re:You guys don't get it by JuicyBrain · · Score: 1

      "in the sense that they sick and tired of dealing with all the "oohh, titties!" comments that we men think is good natured humor, but gets old with women"

      Unfortunatly, the men from the first group of posts are a part of reality that every women in the world will have to cope with for as long as mankind will walk the earth. Just like every ethnic man will have to cope with racism until we're all the same color. Stupidity is a bottomless pit, but everybody has to learn to live with it.

      From what I've red from the second group of posts, nobody seams to be AGAINST a special community for women. We're just asking why is it needed since women are generally welcomed and appreciated in the world of IT.

      "we'll find that women are interested in tech"

      Do you really believe that a small bunch of horny geeks could really prevent a talented women who likes/is passionate about technology from entering the field ? Personally, I doubt so. I would look elsewhere.

      Could it be that (like I red from another post) women are so different than men that they can't effectively communicate with us as much as with other women ? In this case, we're doomed, because the reason there aren't many women in IT is because there aren't many women in IT ! And we're caught in a vicious circle...

      The only way I see out of this circle is to create a special community targetted at women where they can share their interests and ideas in their own language. There, I said it ! Well, thank you for your post, you helped me find an answer to my own question ! :-)

      Have a nice day !

    5. Re:You guys don't get it by roman_mir · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      I think what you said was: 'blah blah blah, we need more titties'.

      I agree with you. More titties!.

    6. Re:You guys don't get it by roman_mir · · Score: 2, Funny

      In case someone didn't hear me right the first time:

      I mean MORE TITTIES

    7. Re:You guys don't get it by debiansid · · Score: 1
      Maybe, just maybe, if women (or minorities or the handicapped, etc) can be provided with a supportive environment, we'll find that women are interested in tech. Maybe we'll even find that some women can be really good at it.
      I can back that up with an emample. My fiancee is a geek of sorts and I recently got her started with a debian base system. She is now building up to a full system herself. The key is that whenever we talk tech I don't fool around and I treat her like an equal.
    8. Re:You guys don't get it by shudde · · Score: 1

      Hasn't anyone ever thought that these two viewpoints might be related? That maybe the reason more women don't go into tech is cultural - not in the "women are more interested in nail polish than hard drives"-sort of way, but in the sense that they sick and tired of dealing with all the "oohh, titties!" comments that we men think is good natured humor, but gets old with women?

      While I think it's an interesting comment, my own experience doesn't quite mesh. I'm a geek by inclination and habit but a chef by trade. Hospitality is a breeding ground for the worst kind of sexism (which, in truth, I'm very very guilty of).. the comments we routinely throw at our waitresses would make the average geek blush in shame. We've never had a shortage of willing workers, nor do I recall a single person quitting over our harassment.

      By contrast, in every tech project I've been involved with the majority of guys have been over-sensitive nearly to the point of emasculation. My own behaviour is much improved, due to the simple fact that you're dealing with women whose opinions and intellect you can respect. It probably also helps that it's harder to objectify someone you'll, most likely, never see.

    9. Re:You guys don't get it by IamTheRealMike · · Score: 1

      Being a waitress is hardly a career though is it? I mean, loads of girls go work in restaurants/bars at some time because it's easy to get work and demands basically no skills or commitment. If you go into computing you have to have put a fair bit of work into it and that means thinking "hmm is this what I really want to do?" - so the effects of a female-unfriendly environment are magnified.

      That said, I really don't see what the big deal is. These "get women into engineering" debates pop up all the time. You know what, most directors are men too. Most nurses are female, as are most models. It happens, and though I'd like to work with more women as much as any other guy I really wonder if the effort/hand-wringing that goes into all this is really worth it.

    10. Re:You guys don't get it by shudde · · Score: 1

      True but we're talking about open-source though, which for quite a lot of people (myself included) is a hobby and not a career. I code, script, eat/breathe/sleep linux and bore my mates with the occassional burst of anti-ms rhetoric (too much slashdot) yet I've got zero experience in infotech and my only university qualification is in ancient history.

      While I've never read any studies on it, I'd guess I'm far from alone. I refuse to cook when I get home, I'm guessing a lot of IT people don't want to code after work either.

    11. Re:You guys don't get it by SanityInAnarchy · · Score: 1
      That maybe the reason more women don't go into tech is cultural - not in the "women are more interested in nail polish than hard drives"-sort of way, but in the sense that they sick and tired of dealing with all the "oohh, titties!" comments that we men think is good natured humor, but gets old with women?

      While this may mean fewer women in IT, it will certainly mean better women in IT. And before you jump on me for being sexist, what I mean by this is women who can deal with that kind of bigotry. Especially fun are the ones who fight fire with fire -- you make a comment about "ooh, titties", the woman says "Yeah, yours are getting kind of big..."

      Ok, bad example, but I'm not even that smart of a guy when it comes to insults. I know for a fact there are women who just love to be in this kind of situation -- no competition from other women, and if the guys want to be assholes, they're also probably easily... distractable.

      And one more thing -- if I'm ever guilty of this, I'd rather be told about it, to my face, so I can change, rather than see the woman walk off the job entirely.

      But anyway, this whole thing is moot, because Slashdot is not a good representation of the IT industry -- especially because it's online. It's a lot harder to say "ooh, titties" when they're staring you in the face, unless you're this guy

      --
      Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
    12. Re:You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think the problem we have is:

      1. We find being a programmer is a calling. If you need special encouragement, then you are probably not really intrested and will end up being another incompetent fool we will have to deal with.
      2. Men exhibit agressive behavior towards one another through school and into adult life. By your theory, nerdy boys would 'give up' after being bullied in middle school and decide to be a secretary.
      3. Women use their tits to get what they want, but they also come ready to sue anyone who don't give them what they want.

      When women show up in a work environment where there were only men, suddenly everyone has to start acting different. No more joking around, no more comradery. They emasculate the men and force everyone to behave like they are attending Barbi's tea party. Women have bascially come and stolen the realm in which men operate best. See 'Fight Club' if you need more details.

      I wonder why people aren't concerned that there are not more women in construction, or women garbage collectors, women plumbers?

    13. Re:You guys don't get it by pimpimpim · · Score: 1
      I really don't care so much about people making jokes, jeez, I like the jokes about geeks just because I am one!

      But what is the point is that it is their 'choice'. Here, there is some magical stuff going on. I recently saw a talk by a female computational physics professor about women in science. A few years back, about 50% of the Natural Science (math, physics, chemistry, etc.) students in Iran were women. Similar numbers can be found in Italy, Spain, South America. The big riddle is that no-one really knows what causes this. I am from a north-western european country, that has had several projects to get women in science, but percentages here are way below the ones in southern europe. Apparently in the anglo-european-american regions there is some very heavy stigma over science that scares women away from this field.

      So is it their choice to go here? I don't think you should consider it like that. There really still are role models, especially in the 'western' world, and we need to get rid of them. I believe women and men should both be in science/IT, not because they're the same, but just because both their different approaches are needed for the best advancements in the field. Do women have naturally more social skills then men? I think so. But what is a professor nowadays? Someone who spends all day in the lab, or someone who has to connect with a lot of people to get a group working, funding organized, etc. etc.

      --
      molmod.com - computing tips from a molecular modeling
    14. Re:You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      People on slashdot make those comments. Insecure college students who are still looking for mates make those kinds of comments. I very rarely hear those kinds of comments in the "real world". Still, if what people *SAY* to you is enough to keep you out of a job, especially a job like programming or sysadmin where you can basically work in isolation, then maybe you've got some personal growth to work on.

      I (a man) see things the way my mother taught me to see them: the only person that can really get in your way is yourself. The only person who chooses your responses is you. If a woman wants to be a successful programmer and fails, she only has herself to blame. If she wants to be a successful CEO and fails, she only has herself to blame. Yes, I know this flies in the face of the USA's "entitlement culture", but if you start thinking this way, you start thinking in terms of success. You start to see opportunities, instead of merely the absence of obstacles.

      I've met women with this attitude. They didn't need to hide in women-only groups. They don't pretend to be "one of the guys", either. They don't blame the men when roadblocks got in their way, even when it was the men putting them there. And it's not like women aren't just as bad as men when it comes to being competitive. These women kick ass and earn respect. When somebody tries to sabotage them, they route around. They work harder. They work smarter. They quit and start their own business. Whatever. Sure, some guys still make the jokes. But when they make those kind of jokes about a successful woman, it just makes them look stupid.

      You know, nobody really sees a level playing field. People of different age, gender, religion, attractiveness, height, whatever, they all have their own path. A person should take what's in front of then and conquer it without whining. This was one of the biggest revelations of my life and I must admit I'm mildly bemused when I see people who haven't learned it yet.

    15. Re:You guys don't get it by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      They choose not to be in tech because of the horrendous, entirely male-dominated environment.

      I seriously question this. Maybe that's a factor in the US, but in the UK, I've been in quite a few computing classes both pre-university and during university, and have encountered no sexism. Despite this, there have been extremely few women in the classes.

      I think it's more of a societal thing in that women aren't so much encouraged to go into IT.... or maybe it's intertia.... I dunno. But a sexist environment? I don't think you can generalize like that.

    16. Re:You guys don't get it by identity0 · · Score: 1

      Personal interactions matter a lot more to women than to most men. If they have to hang out with assholes, women will just leave, whether they like the hobby or not.

      If anyone disagrees, go look at the demographics of MMORPGs vs. table-top RPGs. The last time I checked, there were more women involved in MMORPGs than in table-top, even if they hid their gender online. I think this has a lot to do with the fact that many males, especially geeks, tend to act wierdly or inappropriately around women, and so women tend to avoid those kinds of people. You can hide your gender online, but you can't do so in person. Basically, online you can be judged for your character(pun intended), and not by your body.

      Also, if you've ever seen the FAQ on how to get women to join your LUG (written by a woman), it said things like 'have meetings in safe-looking neighborhoods', stuff that guys would not really think about, but which matter a lot to women. To guys, it's all about the core issue, and complaining about perhiheral issues might seem like a distraction, but to women a large part of whether they find something pleasant to do or participate in is the side issues like how interesting the other people are, or how they're treated by the others.

    17. Re:You guys don't get it by merc · · Score: 1

      I'm looking at the comments so far and they seem to be broken up into two groups: "We need naked pics" jokes...

      I agree, naked pics are a bit too much. I'd be happy with "The Girls of Fedora" swimsuit issue.

      --
      It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
    18. Re:You guys don't get it by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      While I can appreciate this position, I still don't buy into it. Sure, everyone wants women on the same bus, so to speak, but right now, we can't even get them to think that the bus is a good idea at all.

      Giving them an opportunity to ride the bus without someone catcalling to them might get them more interested, so when they finally get on the same bus as the rest of us, they can tell the catcaller to jam a sock in it, and sit wherever they like.

      I've more or less run that analogy as far as it'll go, but I think it gets my point across. :)

      At least you recognize the problem. A significant number of the people in this thread think that everything is just fine, and women just don't like computers for some reason.

    19. Re:You guys don't get it by MrNougat · · Score: 1
      Blah blah blah blah, blah blah. Blah blah "oohh, titties!" blah, blah. Blah blah.


      Where!? Pics!

      (Please appreciate my sarcasm.)
      --
      Web 2.0 == Giant Blogspam Circle Jerk
    20. Re:You guys don't get it by rincebrain · · Score: 1

      The distinction that needs to be drawn here is that, while there is an excessive level of lol bewbs in some coders, probably because they don't get out often, a certain amount can be expected - it only differs from the "man, Bob over in graphics must never leave his computer, he probably can't fit out the door" in its prevalence and openness. People will always try to find a reason for another's shortcomings, and if you find a woman who can't tell who's winning in a sporting event, or a man who can't dress well to save his life, what are you going to think first?

      Personally, I'd think they had no interest in the respective things, and a tiny little voice in my head would point out how stereotypical that is. Just like my comment earlier about programmers not getting out often - it's a comment even coders make to each other, tongue-in-cheek, but the distinction that is drawn there is that the programmers, by and large, don't care. In this case, people do care, because it's symptomatic of a larger trend for the last however long of women being treated as less than men in a large number of ways.

      Our (disclaimer: US citizen, can't speak for a large portion of the world, observing outside my window) culture today objectifies women (and men as well, to a far lesser degree), and with the advances in modern technology, it does it very efficiently. Eight year olds wander around in tight tank tops with messages like SEXY on them, female popular culture stars parade around for a few years in skimpy clothing with the best looks money can buy, and then vanish into drama when they've passed what is laughably called a prime. People in all industries make lol bewbs jokes, because they've been doing it for years and years, and very few of them have been corrected in any significant fashion.

      It's fine to complain that, in CS, it's unpleasant to be around socially inadequate (see?) people who don't see women outside of the Internet all day, but the level of unpleasantness generated by that interaction is almost certainly a direct result of the culture that these people have been raised in over the last decade (I'm going to be lenient and leave television alone for now, let's assume the Internet (which is for porn, after all) is the sole cause of the degradation of social niceties in society).

      I guess the point of this rambling comment is that it's not just CS that suffers from this problem, it's just that CS has a disproportionate number of socially maladjusted individuals, so trying to fix their inadequacies (after they've entered the FOSS world) while ignoring the fact that they had to grow up believing this was acceptable (I know it's quite possible for someone to hold onto a belief regardless of their education, but I'm being optimistic in this case and assuming that education can thwart ingrained idiocy for the sake of argument) is ludicrous.

      In short, just because CS is the largest wart doesn't mean you should pop it and ignore its viral cause.

      --
      It's only an insult if it's not true.
    21. Re:You guys don't get it by kcbrown · · Score: 1

      No, you don't get it.

      How many people here who got into computers got the crap ridiculed out of them in high school or wherever because of it? Lots. Did you stick with it? You bet.

      We're not talking about an activity, like sports, where you have to have the support of other people in order to pursue it. We're not talking about careers, where you have to have the approval of someone else (those who are hiring and managing) in order to get anywhere. We're talking about a hobby that is solitary in nature.

      So if a woman wants to get into computers, there is nothing stopping her. It's her choice. It's as simple as that.

      I don't give a shit if a bunch of other people give me crap about it. If it's something I want to do and something I can do, I'm going to do it. Why? Because I have a spine, unlike (it seems) a lot of people.

      So the bottom line is that any woman who wants to get into computers but gets "turned off" of it or whatever because of what other people think needs to grow a spine and get with it. Because many of us here who are male had to deal with the same sort of thing, just from a different crowd (the jocks). We stuck with it because it's what we love to do.

      And that is what it's all about: if it's something you love doing, then you're a spineless wimp if you don't pursue it, and to hell with what anyone else thinks or says.

      And if there aren't very many women with spines, well, then maybe that is what really needs to be addressed. Hell, it may even be that the average woman is genetically (not nurture) less aggressive in general (but not necessarily in some specific situations, e.g., when their child is in danger) than the average man. Has that ever occurred to you? It seems not.

      The pursuit of one's dreams and desires requires a certain amount of aggressiveness. It requires a spine. If someone doesn't have that, they're not going to pursue their dreams and desires in the face of any real adversity. The solution isn't to remove the adversity, it's to teach them how to grow a spine. That will be immensely more useful in real life than making things easier for them.

      If this were some other group of men we were talking about here, most people here, women included, would be laughing at them for being such wimps.

      So cut the two-faced double-standards crap.

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    22. Re:You guys don't get it by Reverberant · · Score: 1

      We're not talking about an activity, like sports, where you have to have the support of other people in order to pursue it.

      We are talking about an activity where you need the support of other people! Even assuming for the moment that OSS programming is a 'solitary' activity, the skills you need for this activity aren't solitary in nature - they are acquired through classwork, reading books (often through recommendations), online and offline (face-to-face) discussions, mentoring, and by browsing discussion sites.

      When all of these communities are comprised of horny single males constantly talking about Natalie Portman's nipples, is it suprising that many females might choose to do something else? I may not think discussing women's body parts is particularly offensive, but I don't get to decide what other people take offense to.

      ...needs to grow a spine and get with it.

      If you're talking about a few isolated incidents, I agree wholeheartedly. When you're talking about institutionalized attitudes, it eventually becomes little more than self-inflicted pain. If you're facing a hostile environment at every turn, it's understandable if one says "screw it, I'm going to do something else."

      Because many of us here who are male had to deal with the same sort of thing, just from a different crowd (the jocks).

      Not the same thing. You're talking about group 'A' (jocks) that is picking on you for choosing to do activity 'b' (computers). Presumably your peers in compsci were supportive of your efforts. Imagine if you really wanted to do athletics, but the jocks throughout grade school, high school, and college consistently tormented you, all in the name of 'good-natured' humor. Are most people going to 'grow a spine' and stick with it, or eventually move on to something else?

    23. Re:You guys don't get it by kcbrown · · Score: 1
      the skills you need for this activity aren't solitary in nature - they are acquired through classwork, reading books (often through recommendations), online and offline (face-to-face) discussions, mentoring, and by browsing discussion sites

      Classwork is optional, as it was for so many of us. Reading books is a solitary activity, not requiring interaction with others. Recommendations can be had by browsing forums and such, which doesn't require interaction.

      My point is that if you're motivated to do what you want to do, then the opinions of others won't stop you.

      When all of these communities are comprised of horny single males constantly talking about Natalie Portman's nipples, is it suprising that many females might choose to do something else? I may not think discussing women's body parts is particularly offensive, but I don't get to decide what other people take offense to.

      Who gives a shit what the people in these communities are discussing? In most of them, because they're online, you can participate without revealing your gender.

      My point, which seems to have whizzed right over your head, is that if you want to do something, you do it, and it doesn't matter what other people think. You grow a spine and deal with all the shit thrown your way because what really matters is what you really want to do.

      You're talking about group 'A' (jocks) that is picking on you for choosing to do activity 'b' (computers). Presumably your peers in compsci were supportive of your efforts.

      In other words, your peers, the people who have the same interest as you and the same problems as you, were supportive of you. No shit. If women need and want that then they can form their own groups. Just like us nerds had to. Nobody is stopping them. Hell, women are better at forming support groups than men are, because men tend to try to be self-reliant.

      People who are in the same situation and have the same set of problems tend to find each other. Just like we nerds did.

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
    24. Re:You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No shit. If women need and want that then they can form their own groups.

      Umm, you know that's basically what's happening here, right?

    25. Re:You guys don't get it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's a stepping stone tactic, I think.

      Build up the number of women by giving them an environment where they can be more comfortable, and then once you have enough of them there'll BE enough people to wack the idiots who made inappropriate comments over the heads with newspapers.

      As it stands, they don't have the mass of population to be very effective at it.

    26. Re:You guys don't get it by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      Maybe, just maybe, if women...can be provided with a supportive environment, we'll find that women are interested in tech.

      And how many times does this need to be attempted before people accept this assertion as being false? Far fewer women are interested in tech than are men. The only way to "correct" this is to force women into careers they don't want.

    27. Re:You guys don't get it by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1
      I think it's more of a societal thing in that women aren't so much encouraged to go into IT.... or maybe it's intertia.... I dunno. But a sexist environment? I don't think you can generalize like that.

      Or maybe it's just that you're the one-in-a-thousand women who have an actual interest in IT. Ask your female friends why they didn't go into IT. Even though they will be a highly biased sample (since your friends are most likely to be like yourself), I would expect them to say that they are more interested in something else, many of them, ANYTHING else.

    28. Re:You guys don't get it by Concertina · · Score: 1
      We're just asking why is it needed since women are generally welcomed and appreciated in the world of IT
      [slashdot filter] ... for our breasts. [/slashdotfilter]

      kthx!
      concertina
    29. Re:You guys don't get it by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      Oops, rereading that post I suppose I did suggest that I was a woman, didn't I. :-) I'm male.

    30. Re:You guys don't get it by Concertina · · Score: 1

      The US is not the UK. The education systems are notably different, and don't even get me started on the cultural differences.

      Maybe you never experienced sexism growing up. That doesn't make our experiences any less valid. Please stop cheapening them.

      -Concertina

    31. Re:You guys don't get it by Concertina · · Score: 1
      While this may mean fewer women in IT, it will certainly mean better women in IT. And before you jump on me for being sexist, what I mean by this is women who can deal with that kind of bigotry.

      Or you end up with women who are bitter, angry with the world, and full of issues. And blame you for their problems.

      Better able to deal with certain very bad situations != healthy.

      concertina
    32. Re:You guys don't get it by Concertina · · Score: 1
      You grow a spine and deal with all the shit thrown your way because what really matters is what you really want to do.


      God damn, you are an unsympathetic little fuck, aren't you? Anybody ever told you you have issues? 'Cause I'm telling you now.

      In other words, your peers, the people who have the same interest as you and the same problems as you, were supportive of you.


      And what peers would those be? The ones oggling the titties, the ones drooling because they can't help themselves in the presence of women, or the two other women in your major who don't even speak english?

      My friend, the only "peers" female computer scientists often have are their gay male colleagues. Who often don't come out until late in the college experience, or after they enter the workforce, too recently self-aware to make a difference.
    33. Re:You guys don't get it by kcbrown · · Score: 1
      God damn, you are an unsympathetic little fuck, aren't you? Anybody ever told you you have issues? 'Cause I'm telling you now.

      Sure, I'm sympathetic. The people who give others a hard time for no good reason simply shouldn't be doing it.

      But the original poster, and many other here, are making the claim that it is because of this that women in particular aren't found in "male dominated" fields, computers in particular.

      I'm sorry, but that's bullshit. The same factors that these people claim are driving women away are the same factors that many/most people who get into the field to begin with have had to deal with from the beginning.

      So I'm sympathetic with someone in that it sucks that they have to deal with that sort of nonsense. I'm not sympathetic with them when that's the reason for their decision to do something else.

      And what peers would those be?

      Uh....other women who are also interested in computers?

      If women who are interested in computers can't find other women who are also interested in computers, then guess what? That means there aren't very many women who are interested in computers! And that means that the root cause of women being scarce in the field of computers has little to do with the attitudes of the people who are already in it and everything to do with the lack of interest on the part of women.

      So make up your mind: which is it, that few women are interested in computers to begin with, or that many are but they're "driven away" by the people who are already participating in the field? If it's the latter then the women who are "driven away" have nobody to blame but themselves for that decision, because it's not like they can't find each other and support each other in pursuit of their common interest. Nerds have been doing that from the beginning, and that's despite the fact that they're at a severe disadvantage when it comes to social interaction -- something that women in general are better at than men (which means that women who like computers should be able to find each other more easily than men do).

      --
      Use 'slashdot stuff' in the subject line in any email you send me if you want to get past the spam filter.
  34. Not at all by geoffrobinson · · Score: 1

    Inclination doesn't mean lack of talent. That only follows if you think the only talented people do IT.

    If someone doesn't generally desire to do something, that doesn't mean I'm necessarily bad at it.

    Now, apptitude and enjoyment often go hand in hand. But not always.

    --
    Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
    1. Re:Not at all by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      That only follows if you think the only talented people do IT.

      Only losers do 'IT.'

      Talented people hack real time embedded code, and write multimedia apps, and all kinds of cool stuff.

      'IT' is crackle-finish filing cabinets and the tards working at the help desk.

      And people who take 'certificates' like an MSCE serious....

      Think about it. And if it makes you mad, maybe you're misclassifying yourself as 'IT' when you're really something more. Or maybe you're in a rut with a crummy job and it's time to widen your future.

    2. Re:Not at all by Psychotext · · Score: 1

      Or maybe you do a job much like everyone else and there's nothing special about you at all short of the size of your ego. Ignoring that, what the hell is cool about writing multimedia apps or hacking embedded code? I think you've been living the geek dream too long.

      --
      People that believe in their opinions don't post AC.
  35. Why women aren't into FOSS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because Linux is for FAGS. Gay women are called Dykes. Non-Linux OSS are small so there is a small number of heterosexual women involved in OSS.

    Go shove that up your ass, Linus.

  36. Colbert, is that you? by dominion · · Score: 2, Insightful


    Thank you for brilliantly illustrating why programs like this are sorely needed.

    1. Re:Colbert, is that you? by Arthur+B. · · Score: 1

      I am saying this programs are sexist and damageable to women image. They make women feel like second class citizen in OSS. In the end they might have the opposite effect of what they are trying to achieve.

      --
      \u262D = \u5350
  37. Did it go something like this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FEDORA: Would you like to... I don't know... maybe kinda... do something together sometime?
    BABE: Get lost geek.
    FEDORA: *retreats to parent's basement to continue work on Laura Croft robot*

  38. Allright, let's look at the percentage of women... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    in programming jobs and then someone please explain why there should be more women than that in FOSS. Politcally correct software, they got to be kidding.

  39. Fedora welcomes Women/Largest Object in Universe by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I noticed the two stories on the page next to each other. Coincidence?

  40. what's really needed is DorkElimination by EllynGeek · · Score: 1

    Which would wipe out half of FOSS in one fell swoop. But the ranks would quickly be re-filled with normal people with actual technical and social skills. What to do with all those leftover dorks? Not to worry, they'll have more time to do what they really want, which is spend more time posting asinine comments on Digg and Slashdot.

    --

    we will end no whine before its time

    1. Re:what's really needed is DorkElimination by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you get rid of the dorks who will post on slashdot?

  41. Maybe? by treak007 · · Score: 1

    Maybe women stay away from "nerds" on the internet for the fear of being hounded to death by people who have never seen a woman online before.

    typical conversation
    *Christine has entered the channel
    randomperson > OMG!!! R joo @ girl????
    randomperson 2 > OMG!!!!111 GIRLS!!!
    Christine > ah yeah.
    randomperson3 > OMG randomhotmail@hotmail.com send nude pics!!111
    randomperson > Y@ s3nd nudie pics plz.
    *Christine has left the channel

    --
    Klingon Software is not released, it escapes, inflicting terrible damage onto the enemy as it does
    1. Re:Maybe? by TheStonepedo · · Score: 1

      I believe you can cut the "online" from your statement. Nobody acts like that in the real world after having dealt with any one woman who thinks everything racy you say is harrassment.

      --
      I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
    2. Re:Maybe? by treak007 · · Score: 1

      apparently you have never been on irc chat before or played CounterStrike: Source, becuase what I posted is a pheasible situation in both. This kinda of behavior paints a bad picture of the internet in women's eyes and convinces women that the internet is filled with a bunch of "creepy wierdos". How can you expect them to get involved after dealing with this? And yes, these people have experienced women such as you described, in fact, I think most people have.

      --
      Klingon Software is not released, it escapes, inflicting terrible damage onto the enemy as it does
    3. Re:Maybe? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no girls on the internet.

    4. Re:Maybe? by TheStonepedo · · Score: 1

      Reading is critical. The people who act as if women aren't online likely do not se women in the real world or they'd know better than to behave like idiots. It's not about playing a certain game or using IRC. Socially retarded people are generally just as socially retarded in the real world as they are online. I do not doubt the fact that people may act as you described. The internet is a big and dangerous place, and grown women should be able to deal with that. Making linux appeal to little girls is a lost cause unless it comes bundled with the N*Sync (or whoever the latest boy band may be) party pack.

      --
      I'll be your candy shop of infinite deliciousity if you'll be my discotheque of endless rump-shaking.
  42. Impact by fishthegeek · · Score: 1

    The impact of women on FOSS is tangible already. Every 28 days my FC5 installation gets cranky and won't let me log on.... some message appears that says "You don't love me anymore!!!!" and then the screen goes black. On alternate days it let's me logon, but in order to keep it speedy I have to buy it a diamond.

    --
    load "$",8,1
  43. I, for one by DylanLeigh · · Score: 0

    welcome our new Female overlords.

    --
    Ever been Overrated and Underrated without being actually rated?
    1. Re:I, for one by kryten_nl · · Score: 1

      Obviously, you're not married ...

      --
      For the perfect anti-Unix, write an OS that thinks it knows what you're doing better than you do and let it be wrong.
  44. Re:Little confused about the membership requiremen by ettlz · · Score: 1

    Let's leave the sexual objectification to FreeBSD, shall we?

  45. Time, Talent and Money by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think many are missing the point... Giving a group an identity is a sure way to increase the chances, that those who are interested and fit qualifications of the group, will turn out good work. This is backed up by every long standing Military/Governmental/Religous group every in existance. Esprit de corps is very very real... if the male community is upset/threatened/annoyed by this then create a competing "Real Men of Linux" or some such other group.
          One almost certian way to increase membership/attention/interest in anything is to create competing groups. Look at college rivalries.

  46. Not all women by Slithe · · Score: 1

    I do not think you can say that all women enjoy working with other women. I have heard several female friends (and relatives) complain that some other women are 'catty'. My mother (a teacher) once told me that she prefers having a male boss (principal) because his moods are more static; with a female principal, she never knows if the female principle might be having a 'bad day'.

    Mostly, The individual personalities of one's co-workers can influence a person's working environment far more than individual gender demographics.

    --
    ---- "XML is like violence. If it doesn't fix the problem, you aren't using enough."
  47. Already a female-oriented distribution. by SB_SamuraiSam · · Score: 1

    There has been a female-oriented distribution forever.

    Check it out

  48. Why can't they just contribute? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does their sex have to be a factor? Or worse, why does it have to be a gimmick or selling point?
    Just write code!

  49. T-Shirt by madnuke · · Score: 1

    Now I can finally wear my chicks dig unix t-shirt and get all the babes.....

  50. useless without pics by Morosoph · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Comments like this is exactly why women stay out of computing...
    I thought that that was the joke. I hope that we're bright enough to realise it.
    1. Re:useless without pics by Estanislao+Mart�nez · · Score: 1
      I thought that that was the joke. I hope that we're bright enough to realise it.

      You're missing a very important point: if the prevalence of jokes like that contributes to keeping women away from certain opportunities, the intent behind them plays no role in this.

      Sure, perhaps the OP was making a very sophisticated joke about sexism. That doesn't mean that its overall effect won't be propping up sexism.

  51. how is that 1.5% determined, anyway? by plate+of+felt · · Score: 2, Informative

    Unless someone indicates otherwise, on the internet, we are all gender-anonymous. There could possibly be more women involved in F/OSS than is assumed (none?). The default assumption here, anyway, is that everyone involved is male. Somehow every comment I post with any sort of gender reference is replied to with the assumption that I am male. Last time I checked, I was fairly certain that I was a woman.

    Personally, I am detracted from Women-specific IT/programming/OSS/etc groups, if only for the fact that because they exclude men, it is allready a guaranteed smaller base for information. That just does not make sense. There are other factors making me wary of such groups, but after much thought on it, I have not been able to come up with a specific description of what bothers me about it. Most likely it's allready been ingrained in my head that things designated toward women are somehow of a lesser status, or dumbed-down.

    Anyway, us women are amongst you, maybe you just have to stop assuming that we are guys.

  52. /. Member Halvy having to post as AC. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why does /. management keep spelling Inciteful-- INSIGHTFUL!!?



    --
    Safely entrenched into the depths of 'Terrible Karma'.. now I can FINALLY speak my mind..

  53. Yeah right.... by ruyon · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    When girls sucks at something, it's cultural, environmental issue. When boys sucks at something, it's because boys are just stupid.

    Yeah right.

  54. Hi Strawman. Meet my Zippo by ReallyEvilCanine · · Score: 1
    How incredibly disingenuous of using ramps as an analogy as if ramps prevented non-disabled from entering a building. Discrimination is discrimination, sweetie. Either it's always wrong or it's OK.

    Unlike almost every other feld in the world, programming is something anyone who wants to can. There are tons of free books and courses on-line as well as source code, with a whole new source repository opening.

    There simply isn't the discrimination you so desperately wish to see in the field of programming, only an overall lack of interest in entering such a field by one sex. As a percentage there are a lot fewer women working as movers. Why not start working on getting the percentage up over there?

    1. Re:Hi Strawman. Meet my Zippo by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Yes, and this lack of interest is caused by what? Sunspots?

      I'm not claiming there's any particular discrimination; my 'reverse discrimination' example was in response to someone claiming that setting these groups up at all is a form of discrimination. I hardly think so. Giving someone a leg up so they can be included isn't discrimination. It's actually why my example is particularly apt. If the barrier to entry for programming was that you could get into the building, people in a wheelchair would be able to do it, technically, by dragging themselves across the ground to get to the job. It doesn't really feel very inclusive, but they could do it. The barrier to entry for women here is the bad attitude that men have towards them, for whatever reason. They can still do the job -- and many do -- but that psychological barrier is a big one. I dare say it's nearly as intimidating as a building with no ramp.

    2. Re:Hi Strawman. Meet my Zippo by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, that 'sweetie' comment is kind of what's being talked about here. If I were female, that would probably sort of offensive; you're obviously using it as a diminutive, pejorative term. Since I'm not female, it just seems sort of weird, but your patronizing tone is clear. I understand why women don't necessarily want to work in this field. Sometimes *I* don't like working in this field, and I only have to put up with people that are jerks. I can't imagine also having to put up with SEXIST jerks all the time.

  55. Only driving the wedge deeper by crossmr · · Score: 1

    I made this point on the fedora forums a few months back when someone made a point of acknowledging some internal women's day or something such thing. By pointing out the differences you only further remind everyone that we are indeed different for pointless reasons.

  56. First Women then... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... what's next? Are they going to start allowing minorities to participate in FOSS!?!

  57. Looking around a CS Engineering class by djfiander · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Man, this crap is old. One can hardly wonder why there are so few women around. Try reading what some women have to say about their experiences in computing. But don't expect too many to out themselves here. And don't point out that Spertus's paper is old and things have changed. This thread just demonstrated that it hasn't.

    1. Re:Looking around a CS Engineering class by master_p · · Score: 1

      Since women turn out to be better managers of language, I wonder how programming languages would be if they where designed by women.

  58. From TFA by ex-geek · · Score: 1

    "An EC funded study (2006) summarized in the Flosspols report, indicates that about 1.5% of FLOSS community members were female, compared with 28% in proprietary software."

    1. Re:From TFA by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AHAHAHAHAHA! You believe that BS about 'proprietary software'? WTF is that anyway? Look around in software companies. The farther you move away from Visual Basic and scripting languages the less women you will find.

  59. Not until more than 1.5% of them by zullnero · · Score: 1

    Comprise graduating Computer Science and Software Engineering classes from universities.

  60. Get over it by elsrod · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, reading the first 182 comments posted here it's pretty clear why women still need dedicated users'/developers' groups. The stereotype humor appears to be alive and well:

    - ponies
    - pink
    - periods
    - pedicures

    As a woman in IT, I have actually found the majority of men in IT either don't care about women in IT or else are actively interested in broadening diversity in the field. (Mind you, that applies not only to gender but to ethnicity and other criteria as well.) Then there's that minority, the stereotype bitter socially retarded geeks with chips on their shoulders, doomed to eternally relive some perceived rejection from a woman or girl that dates back to elementary school...

    To those (whose postings I found so typical of their group) I say, what do you care if there are specialized programs targeted towards women? You are the majority participants, are you really that threatened if a bunch of girlies with sub-par technical skills (as you like to describe them) sit around, do their nails, doodle ponies and contribute to FOSS? I am flabbergasted to imagine how such an activity would have any impact on you whatsoever.

    If you are really concerned that the quality of FOSS will somehow decline, may I remind you of the peer review system. Even supposing any of the women's groups were to promote something that was of no use to the larger user/developer base, it would be critically reviewed and sent back for revision or else shot down completely. My point is that it shouldn't be an issue how people arrive at solutions; let them gather, support each other, brainstorm and develop in the forums that suit them best.

    Users/developers form specialized groups all the time, whether it be because of their gender, location, belief system or what have you. The news here is not so much the groups -- it's whether the percentage of women in FOSS may be higher than is popularly understood. All the hogwash about women not being interested in IT, not having the innate skills etc. aside, we're here and we're working away on the same projects men do. This may come as a horrible shock, but there are women who excel in the field.

    Personally I'm all for it. Let there be women's groups, gay groups, blue collar groups, Hindi groups, what have you. Let people work and network in whatever ways increase the brain trust. It's the results that count.

    --
    Science is about what is, not what we believe or hope. -- Dr. Lonnie Thompson, glaciologist, Ohio State University
    1. Re:Get over it by Compuser · · Score: 1

      You are not getting it. There are, broadly speaking, two
      kinds of guys - the ones who are self-confident and the ones
      who are not. The second group has one ultimate fantasy: a
      woman recognizes their inherent worth (the whole "what's inside
      that counts" crap) and pursues them. In short, a great number
      of guys would love nothing more than for a woman to sweep
      them off their feet. The problem is only a confident woman
      who is sure of here self worth could do that. So these "sexist"
      jokes are nothing more than a challenge to weed out women
      who are not strong enough.
      I predict that once it truly flips to being a woman-dominated
      society, where women pick guys up in bars, then there will be an
      influx of women into male-dominated areas and those mailing
      lists will finally be full of women-initiated flirting.

  61. Clever ruse: using damp straw by ReallyEvilCanine · · Score: 1
    You and others keep using real-world analogies such as wheelchair ramps and "giving someone a leg up" but the fact of the matter is there is no barrier whatsoever to a woman coding if she wants. None. Most FOSS code is written by people at home, in private. There is no gauntlet to walk; there are no stairs impeding a wheelchair; there is no glass ceiling. A coder is as good as the code he or she writes, period. Demanding special treatment is akin to saying, "I can't do this on my own. I can't compete on a level playing field," or so said my econ prof more than a decade ago. She had previously been a Sovet analyst with the CIA and was sick of everyone thinking she got her jobs through Affirmative Action.

    "Damned if you do, damned if you don't", one might say, but there is, as I wrote before, no barrier to entry of any kind when it comes to women and coding. None. There are no school or college programming classes (in the Western world, anyway) which discourage women from joining. Quite the opposite, in fact. Schools try to recruit women into CS courses to keep certain government departments which mean well off their collective asses.

    There is no real "old boy" network preventing women from getting their additions included in the next CVS. It doesn't exist. In the coding world, no one can see your genitalia... only your crappy commenting, piss-poor formatting style and your pathetic attempt to rewrite some library within every iteration of a badly structured loop.

    The only time I look at the name of the coder of some piece of software I use is if it doesn't work and I need to find out who to write to.

    1. Re:Clever ruse: using damp straw by Dixie_Flatline · · Score: 1

      You never really answered my question, though. What keeps women out? I've already pointed out that women enter into every other area of science with no particular difficulty; even mathematics, which is about as anti-social as you get in the sciences.

      Here's an interesting thing: papers with womens' names on them tend to be judged more harshly. They've done studies and found that the same paper will be criticized more harshly BY THE SAME REVIEWER if a woman's name is at the top. Interestingly, even women are guilty of this bizarre discrimination. This does happen across all fields.

      But given that, you don't think you can see the undertone of sexism in a strongly male dominated field like computing? Schools are trying hard to recruit women into these programs, but it's not working. Why is that? Rightly or wrongly, this field has an image problem. The part where we've failed is that we haven't fixed the image. We haven't worked hard enough to disabuse women --or the population in general -- that we're inclusive, harmless, and happy to work with women; that we know that they can do the job, and we're not spending all our time staring at their tits.

      This is either because we're lazy -- which is possible -- or it's not true, and we AREN'T happy to work with women, and we DO spend all our time staring at their tits.

      Either way, programs like this remove that from the equation for a while and let women work in an environment where they can enjoy the field on its own merits, and to hell with the slimy assholes that make it unpleasant for everyone. I know a lot of programmers that are poorly socialized and cope extremely poorly with the few female programmers at our company.

      Listen, if you don't see the problem, I'm unlikely to convince you that there is one. Things don't happen for no reason. If women aren't becoming interested in computers, something is doing it, and it's unlikely to be sunspots.

        I believe that it's us. We do it. And we need to UNDO it.

    2. Re:Clever ruse: using damp straw by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      You never really answered my question, though. What keeps women out? I've already pointed out that women enter into every other area of science with no particular difficulty; even mathematics, which is about as anti-social as you get in the sciences.


      Really? What's the ratio of male to female Phds in physics, mathematics, or any given engineering discipline? And note: I'm not talking about university faculty where they throw in token women to even things out for political correctness, asshole.

      I've heard from female coworkers (mostly MS level, a few BS and Phd) that there are two main reasons they considered leaving the field:
      1. they don't feel "accepted" (boo motherfucking hoo.. ostracized by the big bad male geeks)
      2. they want to have a life outside of coding and cannot compete with somebody who codes 60-100 hours a week, sometimes without pay

      Incidentally, the ONLY sexual harassment case I've heard of in my 20 years in the industry was for the federal govt with a female engineer who was a "serial accuser". She managed to wreck four careers before they figured out she was full of shit and mentally ill. Most geeks I know stay the hell away from the females because they feel threatened or can't be bothered wasting time with non-geeks.

      I believe that it's us. We do it. And we need to UNDO it.


      Yeah, well affirmative action is going down the shitter thankfully, and I'm a center-left Democrat who is going to work to see that it stays that way in the US at least.

  62. THIS IS NOT ABOUT "PUSHING WOMEN INTO FOSS" by Guy+Harris · · Score: 4, Informative
    RTFWiki. The Fedora Women page on the Fedora Wiki says:
    A large portion of the Fedora userbase is made up of women. They are often under-represented within the community, with many people not even realizing how big a share of the community they are. The Fedora Women program aims to improve that representation and to provide a forum for the women of the Fedora Community.

    Note the "is made up of women". That's not talking about getting women to use Fedora. It's talking about women already using Fedora.

    It also says:

    Lady contributors to the Fedora Project can add their wiki homepages to the CategoryWomen category. The CategoryWomen page can be used to locate them, along with other Fedora Women pages.

    Note the "contributors". It's not talking about pushing women into contributing. It's talking about women who are already contributing.

    It also says:

    Women who are interested in working with the Fedora Project can work with Fedora Women to get started. They can also work through the Fedora Mentors project to get assistance for every step. For more information about working with the Fedora Project, see these resources:

    Note the "who are interested in working with the Fedora Project". It's not talking about pushing women into getting interested in Fedora. It's talking about women who are already interested in contributing.

    So this is not the project to get the girls away from their cooking and sewing, haranguing them into instead developing driver patches even though they'd rather be knitting baby booties, that all too many of the responses seem to be treating it as.

  63. Re:stop the hostilities by senatorpjt · · Score: 1

    I have no concrete ideas how to go about this but feel very strongly about this issue. Any suggestions?

    Yeah, fuck 'em if they can't take a joke.

    I've made way too many posts on this article, but the general point is that it's way more important in the long run for women to stop being so offended over any mention of sex than it is for men to stop saying anything offensive. Seriously. It's their problem, not ours.

    In fact, that's a way more feminist position to say that women shouldn't be so offended by off-color remarks than saying an overwhelmingly male community (FOSS) should coddle women to make them feel better.

    In my field, at work, there are just as many women as men around. I generally don't associate with the women, for the sole reason that I already have a girlfriend, and it's boring talking to other women because they get so offended by my off-color remarks that every guy at work finds hilarious.

    In short, the problem isn't that there aren't enough women in whatever. The problem is that women don't appreciate a good fart joke when they hear one.

  64. Finally an O.S. for us! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    OMG!! Ponies!!!

  65. "more women" != "fewer men" --get the difference? by KWTm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Parent post has a good point.

    If you are crying "Unfair!" about how it's not fair to have compensatory "reverse discrimination" or "affirmative action" because men and women should be on an equal footing, you don't get it.

    You can debate about whether this is fair in the job search market, but that's a completely different debate, because that's a zero-sum situation: if a company hires a woman due to "affirmative action", then by definition they have rejected a man applicant. That's not what's happening here.

    Women's outreach projects like Fedora Women, LinuxChix, etc. are taking advantage of an untapped population. Drawing more women into the FL/OSS community is *not* a loss for men; in fact, it is a gain for everyone. Why the big uproar?

    Now, it so happens that the way in which we realized there was an untapped population was because of the low ratio of women to men, but this is merely an indicator. The goal of these projects is *not* to "fix the ratio", which would have implied that we would be equally happy reducing the number of men. Rather, we use the indicator to tell us where we can focus our outreach efforts. We see that there are reasons why women are being systematically and subconsciously being discriminated against (see the FLOSSPOLS report http://www.flosspols.org/deliverables/FLOSSPOLS-D1 6-Gender_Integrated_Report_of_Findings.pdf --it's a PDF file). So we want to fix the problem, partially by increase awareness.

    What if we had replaced "women" with some other population with great potential for contribution --say, "non-English-speaking programmers"-- would people complain that the effort to involve all of the international community would be unfair to the English speakers? I can just imagine the outcry:

    "There are already some non-English-speaking programmers on one of the Sourceforge projects."
    "Why are we trying to get them involved in FL/OSS? That means fewer resources to promote FL/OSS to English speakers!"
    "Who's stopping them from learning English? Face it --they're just not interested."
    "FL/OSS is doing okay with just English-speakers only. I don't see any problem."
    "We shouldn't help them, because they're rude --I emailed them about some bugs in their program, but they never even acknowledged my email."
    "Hey! You English no good! Okay? Me teach you program: HELLO WORLD! Yes?"

    Guys, let's pull our collective head out of our ass and stop giving knee-jerk reactions just because the Google keywords "affirmative action" showed up somewhere in this threat.

    --
    404555974007725459910684486621289147856453481154 in hex is "You sank my Battleship?"
    [GPG key in journal]
  66. Minority reporting by erroneus · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Nothing keeps a minority group in the minority quite like identifying and classifying.

    So while we're at it, let's have "Fedora Blacks," "Fedora Orientals," or maybe just lump them together and call them "Fedora Coloreds?"

    I don't think it's a good idea, frankly, and for all the same reason that racial identification might seem inappropriate.

    (And on a side note regarding political incorrectness, why is the NAACP still called NAACP!? "They" don't want to be called "Colored People" even though 'of color' was the popular term, so why keep the same organizational name?!... I don't get it.)

    1. Re:Minority reporting by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't get it

      Yeah, we noticed. Hey, 1952 called, they wanted their cultural attitudes back.

  67. Yeah, we -really- fawn over you all idefinately... by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The stereotype humor appears to be alive and well

    Then there's that minority, the stereotype bitter socially retarded geeks with chips on their shoulders, doomed to eternally relive some perceived rejection from a woman or girl that dates back to elementary school...

    Wow. Just...wow. You complain about one stereotype, and then use another.

    Newsflash: I don't know, nor have I ever heard of, any guys who "eternally relive [sic] some perceived rejection from a woman or girl blah blah blah". I -do- know of a lot of women that come up with "theories" for why men acted a particular way, why their relationship failed, etc...which is exactly what you just did; you pulled that straight out of your ass, because I guarantee no man has EVER told you about obsessing over some playground rejection. Most of these theories are extremely condescending; men are stupid, have no emotions, think with their dick, are obsessive and single-minded, etc. Don't even get me started on some of the conversations I've overheard between two or more lesbians. It used to be in style for guys to make dumb blond jokes; now it's women making dumb guy jokes or statements, and they're usually quite viscious.

    Want to talk about childish jokes? I have a camera with a fairly big zoom lens. Perhaps one guy has joked "hey, that's a really thick lens" or somesuch. About a dozen plus women have. Interesting percentages, eh?

    Maybe you should stop and consider that most IT workers just don't give a flying fuck who they work with, as long as they're competent/professional, and easy to work with.

  68. Silly question by Rorian · · Score: 1

    But, why is it so important for women to be using Fedora, Ubuntu, Debian or FOSS in general? I'm all for helping people find nice, free alternatives to , but maybe it's not necessary to push Linux on every unsuspecting, dis-interested user, regardless of their denomination...

    Or did I just miss the entire motto of Slashdot?

    --
    Will program for karma.
  69. don't blame it on sex by r00t · · Score: 1

    You were the first born.

    The first kid is always treated as older than they are. They get the high expectations and responsibilities, no matter if they are male or female.

    The second kid is somewhat ignored. They can get away with bad behavior more. The expectations just aren't there.

  70. Fedora Women by Ammiel · · Score: 1

    I don't think that any effort to get a particular group of people interested in Linux is going to do anything. I mean a women's not going to help Fedora just because there is a group for their sex. If a women wants to help any Linux distro she would do it on her own.

  71. Women are smarter... by hackel · · Score: 1

    Maybe most women are just smart enough not to want to contribute to the nightmare that is Redhat, Fedora, etc. I certainly wouldn't, and I'm just a dumb guy. I dreaded every job that required me to administer Redhat machines, and usually was successful in convincing higher ups how much they could increase my productivity by switching to Debian. I only wish more people could see this, yet it seems may Redhat users are still unaware of the advantages. To them, dealing with dependencies is still just a way of life in Linux, which is absurd. I think women are usually more practical about such things and can see them as part of the larger picture.

  72. shocker-- by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    chicks don't get computers. nothing to see here, move along...

  73. dont' bring feminism into FOSS by kailash+badu · · Score: 1

    Why media does create so much fuss around male-female issues? If they don't want to be a part of it, let it be so. I don't want them to be a part of this just because they are women. Please, keep computing and FOSS away from crappy feminism.

  74. Re:stop the hostilities by FanaticalDesperado · · Score: 1

    and it's boring talking to other women because they get so offended by my off-color remarks that every guy at work finds hilarious.
    I've found that a lot of women at work can be more crude than any guys would dare to be. Women can get away with it because they know no guy will ever be offended by it. Guys, on the other hand, have to worry about the things we say offending one of the women. The worst are the women that you never know which side of the fence they are going to fall on. Example, on a conference call we were talking about our weekends...

    My PM: He took me to $someplace and we did $something... so, I had to put out.
    Me: That seems fair. After all, he did pay for $someplace and $something.
    My PM: (Getting serious) I can't believe you said that. You men are all alike, blah, blah, blah.
    Me: WTF? You opened the door for the joke.

    The problem is that women don't appreciate a good fart joke when they hear one.
    I don't know the women you're hanging out with, but most of my female friends appreciate a good fart joke.

  75. Why aren't there... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Why aren't there more men on the Swedish bikini team? Wait nevermind. Please don't kill me.

  76. Affirmative Action, alive and well by unsigned+integer · · Score: 1

    I'm going to get flamed to hell for this.

    I'm sick of women being given special consideration in the tech field.

    I believe in a meritocracy - if you have the skills and the knowledge,
    fucking prove it. Step up to the plate. Get involved. I know *I* don't
    give a fucking care if you're red, white, black, female, handicapped,
    just as long as you can do the fucking job set in front of you. Yet here
    we have 'special groups' to encourage more women to come out and play -
    what, are they afraid to come get their hands dirty and need some sort
    of support group before they have the confidence to chip in?

    It's the kind of thing that pisses me off about the online gaming clans
    of 'all women' teams. Christ, you're anonymous, and can pretend to be
    whomever you choose to be, yet you fall back to some safe little sphere
    where you're 'all women' and can bond in your little gaming world. Way to
    take some risk and get involved.

    And here's where I really burn: From my anecdotal evidence, all the women
    I've run into in the tech field have been, for the most part, silly girls
    who got where they were because they were hand-held by drooling nerds
    trying to score some female nerd BOOTAY and never had to fucking do anything /for themselves/.

    "Oh, having problem with that system upgrade? Let me help, (and maybe I'll
    get in your pants!!)".

    I find special groups for women secular, isolated, and counter-productive
    when it comes to dealing with the rest of the world.

    But hey, if women out there want to join their "special" club instead of
    getting their hands dirty in the massive /already existing/ community,
    then whatever. Hold hands, and sing songs of trial and problems and how
    unfair the rest of the world treats you.

    1. Re:Affirmative Action, alive and well by dbIII · · Score: 1
      all the women I've run into in the tech field have been, for the most part, silly girls who got where they were because
      After you graduate and meet more people or read papers you may notice the women who have doctorates - and there is no way they could get there the way you describe. There's a bit of a difference between an environment that favours high school graduates with an MCSE and the entire range of people who use computers.
    2. Re:Affirmative Action, alive and well by Concertina · · Score: 1

      I'm going to get flamed to hell for this.

      I'm sick of women being given special consideration in the tech field.


      Well, yes, you will get flamed to hell for this.

      This isn't about women being given special consideration.

      This is about female developers forming an online support group for themselves.

      Amazing how much shit you give people for taking some initiative and trying to stop the hemmoraging of female developers from open source.

      From my anecdotal evidence, all the women
      I've run into in the tech field have been, for the most part, silly girls
      who got where they were because they were hand-held by drooling nerds
      trying to score some female nerd BOOTAY and never had to fucking do anything /for themselves/.


      Awww, look at the mysogynist little boy so scared he's about to crap his pants. He's so cute when he's threatened!

      concertina
      ps. it doesn't count as "in the tech field" if you're not old enough to have graduated from college yet.
  77. good by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    lady tuxians :)
    http://www.secgeeks.com/

  78. Something Tells me... by wateriestfire · · Score: 0

    We are going to see the "OMG PONIES!!!" theme return to Slashdot over this...

  79. Why is this modded insightful? by LinuxDon · · Score: 1

    IMHO is it very sad that something like this gets modded insightful.
    I believe that if everyone would just act more professional, it would create a better/more attractive atmosphere for women to work in.

    If you want to find a nice girl, go to a bar, lose the obsession and act normal.

  80. I'm a "minority" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm male. I'm also disabled, gay, and Hispanic. And you know one nice thing about being a programmer? No-one actually cares about any of these three traits. No-one even knows it unless there is some reason for the topics to come up. And sometimes people joke about my sexuality, my nationality, and sometimes even my disability. And almost without exception, they're having a laugh, and it's funny. I don't feel offended. I don't feel scared away. And the last thing I'd want is some organisation to prop me up for being gay, disabled or Hispanic, instead of for putting in my day's/night's worth an an enthusiastic coder. Have non-white, non-straight people with disabilities been sidelined in the past? Yeah. Are there still heaps of people who would show aversion to me because of one of these characteristics? Yeah, but in other social settings - not the coding community. Of course, having a handicap means certain work is harder for me. I appreciate the help I've obatained in allowing me to be more fully able - i.e., to fulfil my own potential. But only I can stop myself from deciding to fulfil my potential because of my race or my sexuality, as there is no-one there who wants to stop me in this field. Hooray for geeks! The day there is proposed a "blah for Hispanics", "blah for Gays" or "blah for Cripples" corresponding to projects to which I contribute is the same day I object strongly to it, and if counter-arguments fail to convince, I shall probably stop contributing, because I will then be seen for my race/sexuality/disability, whether I like it or not, and I will have access to unfair advantage, whether I like it or not. That's not the geek spirit, it's not furthering human scholarship or creation, and it's not in the interests of freedom!

  81. That old "socialisation" myth again by BeanThere · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is a myth so oft-repeated that it's become widely believed, perpetuating itself. However there is no evidence for it - only a lot of rhetoric. In fact there is extremely strong and irrefutable evidence that traditional 'gender role' tendencies are more genetic than the result of socialisation:

    Perhaps you ought to read up on (and try to explain) the case of David Reimer:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Reimer

    This is not the only case:

    http://www.infocirc.org/rollston.htm

    So much for "socialisation".

  82. men, mars, women and venus by Concertina · · Score: 1

    Well, of COURSE men and women communicate differently :) That doesn't mean you should exacerbate the situation by only communicating with people of your own gender!

    Women interpret insults as threats. Men interpret them as challenges.

    Women interpret gossip as stress relief. Men interpret it as visciousness.

    Some people interpret both insults and gossip as great ways to pass the time and get to know people, and view those who don't participate in such activities as weak and antisocial.

    Some people interpret both insults and gossip as vile and hateful, and view those who do participate in such activities as bullies and bitches.

    My point? Stereotypes are stupid, insulting people and gossiping and work are both really bad ideas, and we're all human so we do it anyways. But if you think you have a problem with being interpreted as an insulting or gossipy individual, maybe it is getting out of hand. Have some fun and get away from work for a while, readjust your attitude, and be a happier person. Same goes for people who get offended reading slashdot occasionally, like myself :) Oh, and take the time to get to know (and like!) your coworkers, and you'll have a much easier time judging when you've crossed the line.

  83. Hostile females... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 1

    And the first time I ask why this crap even exists I get a hostile response. So yeah, girls seem to agree, they're totally inept at getting themselves into anything. Just like the Debian developers say.

  84. If more women were into Linux... by redbaritone · · Score: 1

    Ubuntu wouldn't be BROWN. The penguin would sport a dinner jacket, bow tie and cuff links. Standard distributions wouldn't come with more than three games - Tetris, Solitaire and Mine. Everything would just be - classier!

  85. Re:stop the hostilities by Concertina · · Score: 1

    Hint: implying that a woman is a whore ... in the workplace ... is usually crossing the line.

    HTH!
    concertina

  86. Inviting Project won't overcome OS-male egos by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's nice to greet women at the door, so to speak, but as soon as they get into the core (as in kernel) projects, they can be expect to be picked apart and disinvited to kernel conferences should they express any sentiment on par (in conflict or not) with anything the existing patriarchs have done. Have even heard women be called "too dangerous" to invite to a linux kernel conference by some scared, MIT prof patriarch. Any woman wanting to get into that mess has to have extra thick skin. It's fairly well known that testosterone is great for creating tougher, thicker, less sensitive skin.

    Of course they will always come up with "specific reasons" why any _specific_ woman is a "problem", but it will almost always amount to the same end result. Fear and a good-ole-boy network that shuts out anyone who doesn't appropriately kiss ***.

  87. Re:Little confused about the membership requiremen by taff^2 · · Score: 1

    I believe it's fundamental to what the community is all about. if you want to keep your clothes on, you can always use proprietry, closed source solutions.

    --
    Karma: Bad. (As in Good?)