Slashdot Mirror
Study Reveals What Women Want From IT Jobs
amigoro writes "Ever wonder why there are so few women in the IT workplace? It turns out that the typical recruiters sales pitch, which emphasizing job promotion and security, acts to keep women out of the information technology jobs. While about 30 percent indicated they valued careers that afforded them opportunities to perfect skills in technical areas, others said they wanted careers with managerial opportunities. In addition, there was little overlap among the women who reported that managers give up technical skills to develop management skills."
If there's one thing I won't stand for, it's intolerance.
what women don't want from IT jobs is being forced to hang out with all those nerd all day long. I'll post my study on this thesis tomorrow, I promise.
Is that there is very little market for software that deals with periods, make-up, vacuuming and the like.
...others said they wanted careers with managerial opportunities. So, in other words, they don't want to work in IT.Can we see some pics?
Seriously though, did that line make sense to anyone else?
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I'm apart of an Enterprise network support group and we have zero women involved.
IT isn't a place for the ladies. No one cares how you look as the others on my staff display in their daily attire. You can't get promoted by sleeping around. Management is married or single (and not by choice) so sleeping your way to the top isn't possible. And finally we, the men, tend not to backstab or sabbotage our co-workers as we often need backup and like maintaining a drama-free enviornment.
CAPTCHA: sleeps
Yes, when we men get together for a monthly Skull & Bones IT meetings, we talk, and plan, on how to keep women out of the IT field.
Maybe most women don't want into the IT field for the same reason most men aren't too keen being nannies?
So, what they want is control NOW ?
While the rest of us toil to perfect our skills and move up the ladder, they want to be on top?
Damn, next they will want the damned TV remote, too.
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it everywhere, diagnosing it incorrectly and applying the wrong fix.
This survey is 100% accurate, because they interviewed all 29 females currently working in IT jobs.
ad logicam Claiming a proposition is false because it was presented as the conclusion of a fallacious argument.
Why do we care why women do or do not go into IT? I don't mean this as a flame, I'm just curious, because all the tools are there for women that are there for men. Computers cost as much for a woman as they do for a man, google searches work as well for women as for men, and O'Reilly books are as easily opened by women as by men. Why separate these studies on the lines of gender?
encourage women to work in formerly all male careers instead of the 1950's way and that's a start. quit assuming that women cant or dont want to go into computer fields because of its complexity- in short they're not idiots stop treating them that way. women deserve to have the same opportunity, encouragement and respect that their male peers do- that is what they want.
Sigs are too short to say anything truly profound so read the above post instead.
Government scientist say womens have brain size of squirrel.
Originally: "It turns out that the typical recruiters sales pitch, which emphasizing job promotion and security..." Actually: "It turns out that the typical recruiters sales pitch, which emphasizes job promotion and security..."
Most female IT professionals I know could hardly be classified as women. They are more sort of asexual, overly pierced, obese rats that scurry around the office.
"...others said they wanted careers with managerial opportunities."
I do not think I am chauvinistic and/or sexist, but maybe it's just me, but somehow, that kind of says "We don't want to do real technical work or at least less of it than most." to me since they seem to care more about manager positions than actual technical jobs.
What do you guys/girls think?
Maybe I do not understand the reasoning or am taking it emotionally,
but I think it's a little unfair to have managers who have little or no experience in the respective field.
It's much easier to respect a manager who knows her stuff and understands the work well rather than a fresh-out-of-college MBA.
"Give orange me give eat orange me eat orange give me eat orange give me you." -Nim Chimpsky
If I'm reading this right, they determined that not all women want the same things.
To which I say, duh. They're not all one person sharing a single brain. Were they seriously expecting them to all have the same goals?
Not everyone can be a manager. Unless you of course consider jobs such as the trash man a trash MANAGEMENT expert.
Others said they wanted careers with managerial opportunities?
You mean in other words, they don't actually want an IT career at all?
Maybe most women just aren't really that interested in IT? Is it really so impossible that the different sexes might have different likes and dislikes?
It's likely not a natural thing, but an effect on the way females are brought up, it's also not necessarily be a bad thing. Surely the questions should be:
a) Are women generally happy with their careers?
b) If not, would moving to IT make them happy?
Do we really have so many women out there sat thing "God, I'm so unhappy, I wish I had a career in IT" that this is really a problem?
Unlike men, who apparently only have a single value and motivation for choosing their career.
Really, I don't get the whole article. They claim there's not many women in IT because recruiters tout the chances for promotion and job security. I have my doubts that anyone, male or female, goes "Man, this job has security and I likely won't be looking for work in 3 months? Well the hell with that. I don't want this job." As to the chances for promotion, does that not fit right in line with the women interviewed and quoted who say they want to move up into IT management?
And then of course there is a question that I always have. If there were few women in IT because they were being told they are too stupid to understand computer or something, I get how that would be a problem. If there's not many women in IT because the type of work and the rewards that IT jobs typically offer are not what many women want, though, then what's the big deal?
What on earth does In addition, there was little overlap among the women who reported that managers give up technical skills to develop management skills mean?
Do they bring some kind of sixth sense to programming? Does their design layout match the office decor? Does the female mind somehow intuit complex operations?
:D
Wouldn't a more important "study" reveal what QUALITY WORKERS want from IT jobs, not just women?
That said, I work in the marketing department, and I'm surrounded by attractive women
"Anybody who tells me I can't use a program because it's not open source, go suck on rms. I'm not interested." (LT 2004)
Me.
Thank you ladies, I'll be here all week!
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
I was having an argument with someone in another thread about political correctness. They were basically saying that people who insist on it have a thin skin, and it should be okay to make sexist or racist jokes.
Thanks for helping me make my point: it's not okay, it isn't funny, you aren't joking. You really are trying to humiliate and keep them in their place. I'm sad for you that you are so insecure, so cut off from real human connections that you have to lash out that way.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
They want to meet hot IT guys.
No seriously, that's what they after!
Ok, ok, I am joking. Like all other people they want money from their work.
Oh maybe they want to meet hot IT guys for money. Yeah, that's it.
You can't handle the truth.
Actually, it was scarier than poor grammar. It was poor cut and paste skills. The true original, FTFA:
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Who cares?!
Women should do what men do. When a man wants a job, he works and qualifies for it. He does what is expected by the employer. And if it doesn't work out, he does something else.
I don't think it's too much to expect women to play by the expectations of business people. You can twist and spin things any way you like, but the bottom line is that what we are talking about is business changing to meet the expectations of a specific subset of employable people. It just doesn't work quite that way. We're not talking about "challenged" [disabled] people unless you would like to reclassify women as being challenged or disabled in some way. What we're talking about is that somewhere between 45% and 55% of the general employable population who are making a decision about whether or not they want a job based on the criteria and expectations of employers for any given position... in IT or otherwise.
I think it's lovely that women want extras and allowances from their workplace. And hell yes, if an employer WANTS to provide those things then great! There's a match and life goes on happily ever after. I want extras and allowances too! I don't often get them, but that's not enough for me to not work for a living. But what are we talking about? Employers being compelled to provide for women as if they were some "special needs" group? To me, "special needs" people are mentally challenged, sensory challenged or mobility challenged people. If women by virtue of their gender can qualify under one of those categories, then they should probably be afforded special treatment. If not, then why are we always talking about this?!
Why aren't we talking about why there aren't more men doing jobs that are generally populated by women?
I hold there is an idea best identified as "different but equal." We shouldn't be concerned whether or not women want to be involved in a certain profession if that is their choice. If they want it, they will do what other people who want it do. If they would rather not do what it takes, then they shouldn't do the job... and that's largely why they don't I'm guessing.
Would *I* like to see more women in IT? **YES** I like smart women who can appreciate the things I appreciate. That's just about every geek's desire. It's rare, it's a pity, but it's life.
Is there any evidence that diversity in the workplace has any tangible benefit to productivity, the bottom line, quality, or employee happiness? I would think that having a group of employees working together who have similar backgrounds, cultures, ideas, and styles would work better together than a diverse group - leading to higher productivity, higher employee happiness, better communication, and an overall positive effect on the bottom line.
One will often hear the argument that diversity brings different ideas and approaches to the table. This may be the case in some fields, and may have a positive impact in some fields. I suspect that IT is not one of those fields. Somebody is not likely to have a different and helpful perspective on any particular technical problem because they have different skin color, a different gender, or a different culture.
Before you call me racist, consider what I am suggesting: that a group of old nerdy white East-coast Slashdotters and a group of young liberal social Latino SoCal women will _both_ outperform a "diverse" group. I am not discussing, nor presently concerned with, the relative productivity of the first two groups.
It would be an interesting problem if it was shown that diversity actually hinders performance in certain fields. A corporation's policy of encouraging diversity would be in direct opposition to its responsibility to its shareholders.
Conduct a study that contradicts my hypothesis, I and will gladly admit to being wrong.
The masses are the crack whores of religion.
If you read the board, you'll see why.
...and to think I argued with someone last week in defense of IT. "nooo..guys in technology aren't misogynistic"
I mean, damn. Most of the posts read like they are out of a steelworkers union after-bar party.
I'd love it if women were hired here for our IT group. It'd be cool to have a female character in our lunchtime AD&D games.
I'm joking, we do have a female here. One of the best IT people I've ever worked with
Trolling is a art,
If you're in technology for the money, there would seem to be easier ways ( marketing, stock trader/finance ). Perhaps, if this is the motivation, a different path might be better?
However, this ( also from TFA ) seems to be spot-on:
So, if you're a bitter control freak ( All programers and DBAs, raise your hands. Yes, you too. Mine is up as well.) welcome home.
What's interesting from TFA is 18 of 92 respondants quoted the first motivation, while 28 quoted the second. What, did the other 46 pick "other"?
A Human Right
The article is very badly written. It's next to impossible to glean the point the author is trying to make. So why is it again that women aren't being sold by recruiters' pitches? I read the article twice and I still don't know. Women don't care about job security or promotions? That seems doubtful. They want jobs that can lead into management? Isn't that... promotion?
I'm willing to consider that I may have the reading comprehension of a road apple, so someone please explain this article to me so's I can understand it.
--- Tao
And before you set up your pillory, I heard this on The Simpsons, so it must be true!
(Special insert for the clue-challenged: Malibu Stacey is as off as the HR people described in the article.)
668: Neighbour of the Beast
From the Article::
"My parents said we are [only] paying for four years of school and I could
not become a lawyer in four years", 48 year-old CIO said. " I just said
okay, well I want to make a lot of money and so what is the next best
thing? And I did the research and the computing industry was the next big
booming thing"
My first thought:
I have noted throughout my career that the worst IT people are those who are in it for the money or treat it as just a job.
Those managers and co-workers who have a true passion... those who live and breathe for technology: they're the ones that actually get stuff done.
The Digital Sorceress
I thought it was another shit summary, but it's actually a shit article. If all there was in the research was what's in the piece, then the research itself is crap - no insight why there aren't more women in IT.
I see not a single reference to Mel Gibson in the article. I call shenanigans!
I hear there's rumors on the Slashdots
According to Ace of Base,
All that she wants
Is another baby
She's gone tomorrow, boy.
So I don't know what IT can really offer women.
More Twoson than Cupertino
The problem is not what the recruiters are pitching, it is the recruiters themselves. In most if not all IT-centric organizations that I have worked in, recruiters are young, good looking woman. This is entirely intentional, as a means to attract the young, generally not so good looking geek guys. Often the HR department of a Software company is the only department with a signficant number of females. Perhaps a few young hot guys in HR would help attract more women to IT.
This artical is a joke. I'm glad to hear that some lady feels that programming is a better palce than her disfunctional childhood, but who really cares? If the study were about disfunctional families and the warm feeling one gets from a computer I might care, but it isn't and I don't.
This is because I work in civil service, where we have a 37.5 hour workday, 9 to 5 with a half hour lunch, excellent benefits, plenty of vacation time off, and a living wage. Oh, and it takes an act of congress to fire one of us (pretty close, anyway).
Women are sensible. They want:
* Job security
* A living wage
* Reasonable hours that are compatible with raising a family
* Good benefits
* A nice working environment.
All of these things are available in plenty in civil service. I knew that years ago, and got in on it at first opportunity! Now, look at me: I'm surrounded by pretty women all day, and they're great to work with, too: no ego issues, the developers are all reasonable and sensible...
It's nerdvana!
Seriously. It's the truth.
NO CARRIER
Seriously, my wife and I started out in software development together, and for a time even worked for the same large corporation. Now, basing my observations on a sample size of 1, I can say that while men tend to enjoy the narrowly-focused problem solving that programming requires at times, women simply get bored with it.
More accurately, they get bored with solving problem after problem, with no change in their prospects for advancement. For what it's worth, my wife moved to systems engineering, then product management (after getting her MBA). I wouldn't call her lazy.
But when she was "just a geek in a cube" (as she termed it), she was very tired of coding, of the long hours, of the hellish schedules, of the indifference of her co-workers, and of no chance to contribute more to her company than by whacking out even more code.
In short, most women in the software workforce know that there is no free lunch. They would, however, like to see a better selection of dishes for sale, since they're paying for that lunch with their time.
--- The American Way of Life is not a birthright. Hell, it's not even sustainable.
The article itself is crap, really. It doesn't seem to address anything well or sensibly, as other commenters have noted. The real problem with being a woman in IT? Shows in the comment threads to this post.
I've worked IT jobs and I've worked education jobs and I've worked retail and that whole collection of jobs that someone works getting to where one needs to be, and even as recently as, oh, two weeks ago, showing up in response to something IT-related with the audacity of having been born and continuing to be an actual female gets raised eyebrows, snickers, and derisive comments. Now, I'm all for mocking mercilessly those who deserve it, but purely being female is not grounds for deserving it.
10. Women do not like to work 80 hours a week.
09. Women expect to be promoted and IT people do not get promoted.
08. Women expect benefits and maturity leave which is hard to do when on call 24/7/365
07. Women Like having family time, not getting called and having to run because the the company sees the server as more important than their kids.
06. Women know that guys NEVER listen when they give instructions, so telling some one how to fix a computer is pointless.
05. Most women meet their husbands at work, and the IT department is not as good as being an executive assistant.
04. Women like to have others to talk to and geeks only drool when they are around.
03. Women expect to be treated with respect and we all know that IT is never treated with respect.
02. Women like taking baths and showers and can not stand being around people who do not.
And the number one reason is
01. Women never let guys know how smart they are, this would put them at a disadvantage when arguing.
The IT russian women were spying the connections of the boys seeing porn movies.
boy-with-fear: i'm seeing the Lolita movie.
IT women1: come in girl, watch!, this boy 13-year old is seeing the most PORNest movie of the world!
IT women2: hahaha!
IT women1: hahaha!
IT women2: fuck him! hahaha!
It was originally part of Teen Talk Barbie in 1992. From the Barbie Wiki (so you know it's true!) In 1992 Mattel released Teen Talk Barbie, which spoke a number of phrases including "Will we ever have enough clothes?", "I love shopping!", and "Wanna have a pizza party?" Each doll was programmed to say four out of 270 possible phrases, so that no two dolls were likely to be the same. One of these 270 phrases was "Math class is tough!"
If anyone needs me, I'll be in the Angry Dome.
they are smarter then the rest of us in are 'rewarding' work to death for meager salary jobs.
If I was to do it over again, I'd become an actuary.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
from the article
"Addressing women's under-representation not only will help tackle the anticipated IT worker shortage but will help foster a diverse workforce, a cornerstone of both innovation and economic development, "
I'm sorry, I must have slept through that part. Which woman (besides COBOL by Grace Hopper)provided what computer innovation and/or spawned economic development.
By this reasoning, the NBA should draft three foot dwarfs in order to develop innovative offenses and increase the box office.
Sensitive male coworkers with blue eyes, square jaws, and big biceps?
Attention zealots and haters: 00100 00100
They want to work here. They just want to be the Chief and not the Indian. Of course, in most places it is very competitive to become either lead or manager. So if they do not want to put in their time, it is not surprising that they are leaving for different jobs or family life.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
A lot of people think IT work = cubicles, fat and creepy nerds, impersonal, stressful, long hours, and high turnover or layoffs.
The perceived upsides to IT work are that there are quite a few jobs that have high pay for fairly young people and sometimes you get to play with cool, new stuff. I'm not going to speak for all women but I'm under the impression that women tend to value salary and cool equipment a little less than men tend to do when job hunting and value they may work environment more.
If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
I've been working overseas in the Middle East and Asia and my IT workforce have been pretty much evenly divided by gender. Perhaps non-western women view IT as an unusual opportunity to gain entre to the marketplace and work with men as peers. Why it's not appealing to western women is not clear in the article although I must say not much of anything is clear in the article.
"He's using a quantum encryption scheme! That'll take hours to break!"
The article failed to point out exactly how women are being kept out of IT positions. I know many women who are Unix system admins and Java and .NET developers and I doubt someone conspired to keep them out of IT.
I just do not see IT as an interest for the majority of women.
For starters, that is half of the ppl who use computers. Secondly, it offers new insight on how to do things different. I have no issue with trying to bring in more ppl esp. if it takes just a bit of work. The problem comes in, when you have a group who is basically saying that they do not wish to do the real work, but want to manage. I already have enough CIS type managers who I have had to explain WHY a hash table is of use or why their bubble sort approach will not work, and they still try to push their ideas.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
about women from? Soap operas and crappy reality TV shows?
If anyone needs me, I'll be in the Angry Dome.
Warning! Dangerous generalizations lie ahead!
Unlike men, who apparently only have a single value and motivation for choosing their career.
While that's not quite true, it's far more accurate when describing a man than a woman. Socially, men are judged and measured by their occupation and potential as a provider. If a man works a laid-back, 25 hour a week part-time job because his spouse allows him to do so, he's a lazy bum; for a woman, it's a perfectly acceptable decision as far as society is concerned (although how an individual woman feels about it is up to her).
Far and above all other standards, men want a decent salary and job security, and they're willing to put up with a lot of crap to get it. According to Department of Labor statistics, for example, 90% of on-the-job deaths are men, and men work more hours both in fullt-ime and part-time jobs than women; Men will take the dangerous, filthy, and more time-intensive jobs because of the extra pay associated with them.
Women certainly value good pay and stability, and this study isn't questioning that. Rather, it is saying that opening a book and saying, "Look ladies, we have good pay and stability" isn't the deal maker that it is for men. Socially, women can afford (more than men) to demand additional perks from a job. We're all familiar with the list: flexible hours, jobs that focus more on interpersonal communication, etc. Again, a total generalization but true when looked at as a total generalization.
In essence: if you are an HR manager, part of your job is to bring in diverse employees. The reasons for that are certainly debatable, and I agree with you that it shouldn't be as big of a deal as some make it out to be. But if you are an HR manager, and if you are attempting to recruit more women, you should probably rethink your sales pitch.
The best managers I ever had were the ones who had a good grasp of the expected _outcome_ of my work, but were a little fuzzier on the technical details. Not that they were completely ignorant about what my work entails, but they gave me a goal and turned me loose to accomplish it.
Scratch a manager who is interested in the nity-grity minutia of what the employees and nine times out of ten, you'll find a micro-manager.
Just my experience, of course. YMMV
Women aren't as smart as they think they are: they don't know how little us guys really understand.
You need to look up "misogynistic" so the next time you decide to use t, you'll do so correctly.
As it is, you sound like a retard.
But if you are an HR manager, and if you are attempting to recruit more women, you should probably rethink your sales pitch.
Most HR staff is female. Perhaps it would help to have more male HR managers, because the women would be more attracted to what they have to say.
Because we live in a politically correct world where every disparity is a racist and/or sexist and not just because people are different.
Otherwise this is a freakin' long post for a guy who doesn't (or doesn't want to admit) he cares.
What I am going to write is not politically correct! I expect it may get modded "troll" but I can assure everyone it is not meant to be a troll. It is simply my observations and opinions.
This is a personal observation and I am 54 years old with 25 years experience as a consultant/contracting developer on many different projects for many large and small clients. In addition I had 5 years managerial experience before I set up my own company.
I have met very few competent female programmers. Of course I know there are some out there. But on a percentage basis it is low.
I have of course also met quite a large number of incompetent male programmers. The average ability of the male programmers I have met, worked with and known is quite a lot higher than the average ability of the female programmers I have met, worked with and known. The ability of the top 10% of the male programmers I have met, worked with and known is substantially above the abilities of the top 10% of female programmers.
I can only guess why this might be the case. Nevertheless the curves are greatly skewed and were I hiring I would consider very very carefully before hiring any female applicants. My experience with male programmers is that in the vicinity of about 1/2 can't cut it.
My experiences with the technical abilities of IT managers is that on average it is quite low. I would not attribute this to the idea that they give up technical skills in order to focus on managerial and people skills. I would attribute it to the idea that they never had the aptitude in the first place and just coveted the idea of being a manager and were better able to handle the politics.
One observation I would make is that since systems development is a very technical and thus very difficult endevor, anyone who is writing code at the level of a top programmer has no time to pay attention to the office politics. As such, they always get caught flat footed and are side swiped and often made to look bad.
I am sure I don't need to go into any examples. Examples are out there all over the place and a very common trait I noted about good programmers is that they often felt very unappreciated and questioned why they were doing sometimes more than 3/4rs of the work in the department and never seemed to get recognition for their contributions.
A for instance is when a shinning star gets glorious appraisals for a relatively easy task which is done of course reasonably well, while at the same time someone who has done absolutely brilliant work slogging in the trenches but has come in late because the project was very difficult and ill defined is criticized because it took a little longer than was planned.
Most of the IT managers I have met know so little about the technical issues their staff face that they are not able to even evaluate who is a good programmer and who is not.
My career has taken my into the engineering and scientific fields. I have never worked with an incompetent engineer. I have never worked with an incompetent geologist. I have never worked with an incompetent geophysicist. I have never worked for a competent IT manager.
Some of the IT managers I have worked with or known:
IT management in a major oil company who thought they could implement a production accounting system in a version of BASIC which could not handle an integer greater than 32,767 and in which you could not write a function or subroutine. This was HP3000 basic if anyone cares.
IT manager in the company I worked for who couldn't understand why we shouldn't use the same version of BASIC. This same IT manager thought using a FLOAT was ok for financial data and couldn't understand why the general ledgers would not balance if the entries were stored as floats.
Another IT manager of a major oil company who thought it was a bad idea for programmers to converse during the day and hold seminars where they could show each other how to use debuggers and how to build things like dynamic
From my personal experiences, most women prefer jobs with the following characteristics: - significant communicative aspects - organisatorial tasks - social component - cultural themes - enough time for family which denies the following blessings of technical employeeships: - knowing 73 types of secure asynchronous communication protocols, but no one to communicate with - spending days and nights to build uberous complicated technical designs consumers will control with one button - the six o clock horror - spending saturday evenings home alone searching red herrings Scott Meyer's didn't catch. - ambituous discussions about the physical laws of Middle Earth and the Vulcan - never going into management because it takes social competence which you actively dropped for learning Ruby. My only way to get out of this mess would be ahuge amount of many. But my company owns all my patents... i need gameboy for love
I just came back from maturity leave. I no longer talk about 80's cartoons or Batman comics. Damn maturity.
I am on the road crew. This is my stop sign.
The big deal is that we are constantly told that there are no differences among the sexes (or races for that matter) and that if there is a difference it is because somebody is holding someone else back. If it turns out that there is a difference between men and women (remember I am on slashdot and haven't actually seen a naked woman), then maybe the masses will figure out that not everything the elites tell us is true. Careers will be ruined, college curriculae will have to be changed and who knows what other chaos will reign.
This whole pandering idea is ironic because only nerds have low enough self-esteem to care MORE about what women want as a gender, than they care about what men want. It's about PEOPLE, not gender. Kissing up to women is gonna get you friended, not laid. Who gives a shit what women as a whole want? Most of them are jackall stupid and egocentric, just like the average man. I care what individual beacons, individual people of worth want. People talk about appreciating diversity, but then they cram the differences and distinctions down your throat so damn much, you begin to resent the beneficiary of the damn cramming.
I see what you're saying here. In context of the article, that's not the impression I got, though. I got the impression the author was saying men just want power and money and are savages (well, maybe not savages). Women are sensitive and complex and have a lot of other needs and desires to consider. Perhaps I'm just a bitter old bastard, but that's how I read it.
Purely in response to you, I have say I both agree and disagree.
Yes, I want those things, as do most other men I want. On the other hand, I would think the same extra perks that would attract women to a job are also likely to attract a man to that same job. This is assuming everything being equal other than what the recruiter specifically says about the job, as the article suggest to me, I would think a man would also go "Woah, plus good vacation time and normal hours? Hot damn, where do I sign up?" We may accept the potentially shittier yet higher paying job because that's our duty in society to be able to support our family, but we're just as interested in those other perks if we can get them, I'd imagine.
Our differences here could all be in our personal interpretations of what the author meant to say,though.
Are we sure that the jobs that aren't advertising those things actually offer them? Maybe they don't talk about the flexible hours and interpersonal communication because what the employer wants is for the employee to stfu and get the code written/servers working/whatever before they go home today, however many hours that might take, and to get up and fix the thing at 2am if that's when it breaks. In exchange for that, you get pretty decent pay, to play with cool tech toys, and chances for promotion. I've worked as everything from phone support to tier 2-3 server and app support to a developer in companies ranging from 20K employees down to 100 employees worldwide in a local office of 10 people. In all of them, that most accurately described IT. The pay was good, but you might be pulling a 12-14 hour shift with no warning any time and you might have to wake up at 3am after that 12 hour shift to fix something else if you were really unlucky.
If those other things truly a benefit/selling point of the job, then it should be advertised to everyone. Not just women so that women can be hired, but to everyone, so that everyone knows what the job offers and can decide if they want it or not.
sucking on my alabama black snake
You're joking right? The EEOC has been a joke ever since Reagan reduced its effectiveness to nothing. Remember, Clarence Thomas used to run it, and he made sure the backlog was very long. And as an added bonus, if you want to file a discrimination claim in federal court, you have to file with the EEOC first. And quotas??? When you see zero black people and zero women in the good IT jobs, are you saying the quota is zero?
s/workday/workweek/g
NO CARRIER
So does that mean 70 percent want to be managers? 70 percent managing 30 percent doesn't sound very practical to me... that's more than two managers per underling.
This could be one of those many instances when desires just don't match up with reality.
Back when Women's Lib began, women wanted equal rights. But suddenly, they are now faced with the fact that they are considered a minority. So in their minds, they thought "Why should I settle for anything less than the top". They decided to use their minority status to get to high positions and if they were refused, they screamed sexual discrimination. Well guess what, Women are in managerial positions and there is no more room left for more positions. Now, women are stuck in the mindset they can do anything and everything better than men so let the men be the IT Workers and the women cna manage us.
Click Click Bloody Click PANCAKES!
According to Fortune magazine (latest print edition, just got it yesterday), this is true of almost all Generation Y people as well.
Specifically:
10. 80 hours a week - to Gen Y this means you can't do your job right, it's supposed to be 40.
09. Promotions - to Gen Y if they don't get promoted and given responsibility from Day 1, they aren't working for you.
08. Benefits and maternity (sp?) leave - again, this concept of no benefits is something only a boomer or Gen X would want.
07. Family time - true of all Gen Y.
06. This is a canard. Sure, guys don't listen, but at least computers do.
05. Actually, this is where guys meet their wives.
04. Totally fabrication. Grow up.
03. True, and respect is something all Gen Y demand. Period.
02. True. But can you blame them? A real job would have a sauna, steam room, and hot tub, anyway.
01. No, this is old fogie Gen X thinking. Gen Y women have no problem telling you this.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
It's undiagnosed high-functioning autism.
I wonder what the difference in autism incidence rates is between men and women? It wouldn't surprise me one bit if there was some degree of coorelation between male/female autism incidence and male/female IT profession ratios.
I believe you have misread the passage. As my emphasis indicates, the problem is with the perceptions of human-resources personnel. Look, for a long time, television producers targeted most prime time programming at men. This has changed somewhat as advertisers have realized that women spend much or most of household income. Yet it demonstrates that whole industries can remain wedded to mistaken stereotypes even when money is on the line.
The problem is that the jobs are being misrepresented. The HR people are telling only half the story, so women who would enjoy the work are effectively being told it's not for them. Take two popular perceptions of computer networking: one as a technical field of math and silicon, the other as a social domain of chat rooms and sex predators. It's like the parable of the blind men and the elephant: telling people it's like a rope is truthful in its way, but it's completely misleading and unhelpful for those who want something to make their piano keys out of[1]. Incidentally, the most obvious reason for this is implicitly sexist sterotypes[2].
Oh, and by the way, we do also have good evidence that women are discouraged from entering technical fields. The recent Kathy Sierra incident, and the outpouring of women online reporting that such experiences are common for them, offers a clear example.
The big flaw I see in the article is that it doesn't provide comparable statistics for men. Many of the comments here reading the results as claiming that women in particular want this or that, when in fact some of these motivations might be even more prevalent among men. The result is that while the article talks about the problems of stereotypes, it ends up reinforcing them.
[1] Yes, killing elephants for ivory is wrong.
[2] I say implict because they are probably unconscious rather than a product of malice.
Plus, three the four professional organizations she claims on her CV are sexist, discriminatory and exclusionary - yet if anybody ever suggested to her that there should be an organization for "Men in the Sciences and Engineering" what do you suppose her reaction would be?
This is nothing more than yet another sexist, feminist ivory tower denizen who believes that advancement at the expense of others is a noble pursuit. Some of the best IT workers I've ever known were women and some of the worst were men - and I, like just about everybody else, really don't care who does the work so long as the work gets done. Sex should have absolutely ~zero~ consideration in IT hiring practices. Hire the best person for the job and get rid of that person if their work-life balance is always tipped towards life at the expense of work.
If the g'vt kept the data on you that google does you'd better believe you'd be calling it "doing evil"
In the city I live in here in Canada I met an IT consultant (woman) who claims she developed the eBay ePayment systems. Seems she is single and looking for a guy. I wonder what kind of guy? I wonder why eBay farmed this out to a girl from Canada.
I guess she chose IT for a reason. I wonder what it is?
I declined to ask for her phone number and its not because I might feel intimidated!
Sometimes you need to wonder about the opinions some people express.
If there's one field in the entirety of industry where the gender wage gap is narrowest if it exists at all, it has to be IT. This field is populated by (on average) the most logical, objective people the entire planet has to offer. It has to. If it weren't, none of these systems would work.
In other sectors, if there's a wage gap for reasons other than skill, experience, energy, and commitment, I could believe it.
But not in IT. At least not in my city.
If you're making less in IT, your gender has nothing to do with it.
On a somewhat related note, if there's a field where people need to be the most "dialled-in" to what they do, in terms of having been "born to do what they do" as it were, it is probably IT. There's just a certain something, a something that has nothing to do with gender, race, whatver, that makes or breaks someone in the IT field. It's there in varying degrees in varying people, but it has to be there. *cough*high-functioning autism*cough*
direction.
What do women want in IT jobs? The same as everyone else: An opportunity to pursue whatever goals they have through the job. If, on average, they have different goals, the jobs they take will look something different.
My grandmother introduced me to computers when I was 5 (back in 1981). She programmed her physics models in Fortran and ran them on big mainframes and not quite so big computers (still huge by our standards today), and was a pioneer in her field of astrophysics. She had a lot in common with many women in IT today and felt that it was a mistake to focus on bringing more women into the field when we should be focusing on more fundamnetal goals instead.
The basic issue is: in IT as in astrophysics, you are only really good at your field if you are borderline (or more) obsessive-compulsive. You can't just work in the field-- you have to live and breathe the field most of your waking hours nearly every day. It is a lifestyle more than a career. And it is found in mathematics, physics, etc (all fields dominated by men). Indeed this may say more about balance in life (and a gender gap in that area), and an ability to avoid letting one thing overwhelm the rest than it may say about aptitude in the field per se. Think about all the jokes about Slashdotters and girlfriends (or engineers and girlfriends, for that matter) and ask how many women want to be in fields where such jokes are made as at least representing some version of the reality of those who work in them.
My suggested solution is to stop thinking about what we can do to lure women into jobs that they don't want and instead focus on architectures of participation. The goal should not be "why don't you want this job" but instead "what do *you* want to do? How do you want to participate?" THis requires a fundamental shift of a company away from top-down management into something more organic or community oriented.
Think of it this way (for the men out here): If you were a registered nurse and everyone always asked you, "Why don't more men go into nursing?" would that be helpful or would it dissuade you from promoting others going into the field? Wouldn't it be better if we focused on redefining the field such that it could be more inclusive of people with diverse goals so that more people could contribute what they could?
We are also going to have to admit at some point that gender roles are going to eventually play into peoples' career choices and that some fields are going to be dominated by people from one gender or the other. This is OK and healthy by itself and without other factors, not worth worrying about.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
"Men will take the dangerous, filthy, and more time-intensive jobs because of the extra pay associated with them"
No, they take those manual, high-death rate jobs (e.g. construction work, mining, oil rig work etc.) because they are traditionally "male" jobs. No-one thinks anything strange of a guy who embarks on a career as a construction worker, but for a woman, most people's first thought would be: "strange job for a woman".
The situation with woman in such jobs (as with in I.T.) is similar to that of the situation facing black people (sorry, African Americans or whatever) 50 years ago. Back then, they had certain professions which they were "meant" to work in and ones which they weren't "meant" to work in. Just as is the situation facing with woman now, a black person 50 (or so) years ago could officially be employed as say a banker, but I doubt you would have seen many because of the stigma attached. Today, thankfully, racial stereotyping of jobs has/is being pretty much eliminated. Sexual stereotyping however is still extremely common, particularly in countries where religious or cultural ideals support it (e.g. Japan and the USA, to name but a couple).
It is this that causes the current situation - like that facing black people 50 years ago, albeit with different jobs - where a woman "can" officially be a construction worker, but would have to put up with years of "psst, apparently she's a construction worker" stigma. Eventually, the sexual job stereotyping will evaporate as has/is occurring with racial job stereotyping. Making wide-sweeping generalizations about what jobs each sex supposedly wants, then backing them up with totally bullsh*t reasons, just reinforces the pointless stereotyping which is no more valid than the now (almost) extinct racial stereotyping.
The whole "why aren't there more women in IT?" question is framed with a whole "IT is so super, so why doesn't everyone want to do it?" angle. Let me assure you, my girlfriend can't think of anything WORSE to do as a job. To her, thinking of actually sitting down most of the day at a desk is like hell on earth. This is not particularly unusual thinking amongst women in the main. Note that, generally, even office jobs with high ratios of women to men involve a lot of moving around and social behavior, such as secretarial and executive assistant jobs, even management. Women are rarely seen in jobs with low levels of social interaction and immobility.. so why should they be in IT?
This isn't some status thing either.. there are significant numbers of women in areas like medicine and law, both of which have a far higher status than IT. Women aren't in IT because IT is compared to most other forms of work boring, loner work compared to other forms of work, even at the best of times. Working in kitchens, courts, or hospitals is far more sociable and rewarding.. so they're there.
If we're meant to be doing the whole "equality" thing nowadays, why is the question even being raised? We shouldn't even be looking at gender really if we're "all the same". It's like asking, say, why there aren't many black people in IT (and there aren't, in my experience). We don't ask those sorts of questions because it's pointless and points out biases that don't actually exist. Why aren't there many male nursery carers? Why aren't there many white rappers? Why aren't there many fat marathon runners? These questions are irrelevant.
Thought it said "What women want from STEVE Jobs." That might have been more interesting.
I can honestly count the number of competent SysAdmin/Network engineers that are women on one hand. I have met possibly 4 in my entire life in IT. And they were tom boys. IT is hunting. All that other shit- management and otherwise- is gathering. Women aren't good at it- any more than men are good at tracking bills and invoices. Women just suck ass at IT. They aren't made for it.
Just like men suck ass at women's jobs. Men and women aren't equal in mind or body or interests or desires. It's currently manifest in IT. Tomorrow it'll be manifest in something else. And none of you will ever admit the truth. Cut out the bullshit. Men and women are different. It's that simple.
It amuses me that when I was hiring to fill an open spot, the one woman on the team wanted to make sure that I didn't hire any more. She said she's been on teams with more than one woman, and it just doesn't work. (This happened more than once)
Oddly enough, she wouldn't go out to lunch with us in general since she was out numbered 5 to 1. But she at least had the sense not to complain about that, since it was a necessary side effect of what she wanted anyway
The parent should be rated 5 insightful, not funny.
Items 10 to 6 are true of everyone, just that women seem to know what the stakes are. Us guys take a lot of hits from this stuff, and if we are smart we finally wise up and see what it is doing to our family. That is why older IT people are soooo skeptical of attempts to get them to work longer hours: rewards none, family costs high.
The others: could be true, I must ask some of the women programmers here what they think. BTW, in my office about a quarter of the programmers are female. And I don't drool, well except for ...
Bitter and proud of it.
UserChrisCanter4 wrote:
SadGeekHermit wrote:
Anon-Admin wrote:
All of those answers are pretty much dead on accurate, but do you want to know what's extremely irritating? I've used all those arguments in the presence of women who aren't in IT and the lash-back was severe. Even though I provided government stats, they still ripped me a new one. Facts or logic didn't matter. Why would this be so?
It's because a lot of women operate in a defense mode of "This is a man's world and I have to prove I'm just as capable and worthy" and anything that might imply there are genetic or cultural reasons why women would be uninterested in IT, long hours, dangerous or dirty jobs is assumed to be an attack meant to kick women back into line--stripped of power, robbed of decision making, and forced to be barefoot and pregant.
Of course merely recognizing gender differences is not an attack. Most of us inherently know there are real evolutionary differences. Women are communicators and men are hunters. The problem is NOT that women aren't pursuing IT. The problem is society seems to perceive communication, politics, and negotiation skills as worthless so this makes women feel less valuable and unappreciated. The response is to become motivated to prove everyone wrong (defense mode).
Frankly, I'm sick and tired of this topic. It doesn't make a damned bit of difference if IT is composed of 99.99% men. Society self-organizes for a reason, which often turns out to be the optimal, most efficient grouping. It's not anyone's fault. Not yours. Not mine. Not God's. Quit wringing your hands over it. Just recognize and appreciate the value of women and show some respect toward them in the workplace.
Camping on quad since 1996.
Have you ever held a job? In my company the hiring department is running scared, and will pretty much hire any woman that can spell "IT". This is working out about as well as you might expect.
They look at us poor techy schlups and think sod that. Then they look at management with their own office who get to boss us around and they think hey that's just like home!
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
In essence: if you are an HR manager, part of your job is to bring in diverse employees.
Only if you have a ridiculous hiring quota based on sexism (or racism, or whatever). (Sadly these places exist, because if you get hit with a discrimination lawsuit and happen to not represent the ethinicity of your local populace, you have a pretty good chance of losing. Mid sized businesses can't afford a hefty judgement should they lose, small businesses can't afford to hire lawyers to fight the suit in the first place.)
Tirades aside... your job is to bring in GOOD employees. Diversity in and of itself is not a virtue.
When will people get it through their heads that men and women have quite varying interests.
I'm not even talking about employment itself here but rather the path that leads to employment. Take a look at any 'challenge' sites that deal with encryption, security, programming etc and a good 95% of the challengers are male, and the top 100 is normally all men. This is what we do in our free time for no financial gain because it interests us. If women really are interested in these things then why are there bugger all of them on such sites when it's accessible to all??
If this is the case (not saying that it is or isn't, FWIW), then what does that say about women's attitudes in general toward pay equality? Traditionally, the purported 20-30% salary gap between men and women has been a women's rights rallying point.
I see a few problems with this notion. First of all, when there's a barrier to entry into a specific field, that barrier tends to create a protracted bell curve in the minority which is confronted with the barrier. In other words, assume you have 50 men and 50 women who want to go into IT. 40 men make it and only 10 women make it, due to discrimination. The average ability of those 10 women will be greater than the average ability of those 40 men, because the lower outliers are more likely to have been eliminated from the female camp. However, if this trend is not present it likely indicates either self-selection or simply less of a needed qualification in the smaller camp. Confirming that this is self-selection rather than industry bias is the dramatic drop in number of female students majoring in CS at UCLA. At the height of the tech boom, nearly 3.75% of women and 6.5% of men said they were majoring in CS. Today, about .3% of women and slightly less than 3% of men say they're majoring in CS.
These facts essentially show the OP's narrative to be garbage.
source
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
p.s. Please note in the parent post that's point three percent of women and three percent of men. A 10x difference between men and women.
___
It's the end of my comment as I know it and I feel fine.
The US DoL has also found in several studies that, when analyzed properly, that pay gap does not exist. That is, women do get paid less, on the whole, than men. Women are more likely to take part-time jobs, more likely to work shorter hours, more likely to leave the workforce for an extended period of time, and less likely to correctly gauge their own value when asking for initial salaries or raises. On top of that, the jobs traditionally held by women (teacher, nurse) are only now starting to have pay levels that are commensurate with the education level. When analyzing a man and a woman who do an identical job, though, the pay is equal.
You see those 20-30% claims pop up every few years because it makes for a good way to get a grant in research and a good headline for rights groups.
While I'd certainly grant you that sexual stereotyping has a little to do with some of the jobs (police officers, for example), I'm going to have to ask that you seriously rethink your standing here. You are making the 1960's GI Joe vs. Barbie argument all over again, and it's one that's been repeatedly disproven.
If there's anything wrong with my argument regarding dangerous jobs, it's related to the fact that many of those jobs (construction, commercial fishing) are physically demanding enough that they do bias themselves toward men. The time spent in work, though, bears out the record. As a section of the work force, full-time employed men spend more time at work than women; about 8 hours more per week depending on the study criteria. Socially, women are still expected to do more of the work at home, and they are thus more likely to seek out jobs that allow them to do so.
Wide-sweeping generalizations work in this situation because they are wide-sweeping. We're talking about entire sections of the population here, not your sister, neighbor, friend, or self (if you're a woman). My wife works more hours per week than I do, but the demographics bear out exactly what I'm saying. Women are more likely to spend more time at home than men; they are also more likely to seek out jobs that enable them to do so. Couple that with the lack of a stigma for working fewer hours, and you've set up a sweeping generalization that works because *gasp* it's backed up by numbers. It's not a negative "women are lazy" statement by any stretch - their efforts are just focused in other areas. Again, before you start claiming that these are bullshit reasons or stereotyping, please go take a cursory glance at any sociology textbook or labor study.
When we speak about the genders as a whole, men and women communicate in entirely different ways, they crave different things from certain situations, they assert control in different ways, and they manage conflicts in different ways. Men and women are different in ways other than the obvious external characteristics. Is it really that hard to fathom that they desire different things out of their respective careers?
I'm wondering where the hell all of you guys are working? In my (>10,000 person) outsourcing company, we female programmers are somewhere around 60% of the total. I guess I got lucky with getting this job.
On the other hand, I would think the same extra perks that would attract women to a job are also likely to attract a man to that same job.
Of course they are. I simply read this article as less of a "How to recruit a good IT worker" and more of a "How to recruit a good female IT worker." If HR is looking for a worker of indeterminate gender, then it makes logical sense to choose the one who will do the best job for the least amount of money. If HR is looking to hire a woman, then we're already dealing with a smaller labor pool, and HR is subject to the same rules of supply and demand as the rest of us. If your stated goal is to hire a woman to fill a position, as this article seems to assume, then you need to be aware of a what women as a whole do and don't value in a job. While your particular applicant might not fit that bill, it's better to go off of data that suggests what she may want rather than flying blind in the situation. According to this particular study, it's a really mixed bag in terms of what women are looking for in IT careers, so I guess it would be best to save the "Things we offer" section for after you've ascertained what an applicant is looking for.
What are these "women" things you speak of? I've been in IT for around two decades. Although I've heard of these "women" things, I have yet to ever see one. I think they're a myth, like the tooth fairy or something, made up to give lonely IT guys something to dream about while they're debugging C++.
Hey, why are you reading this? Aren't you supposed to be changing that toner cartridge out for the project manager on the 11th floor?
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
When you have a job opening, advertise for it, and collect resumes and cover letters, as normal. Then put all the resumes into a pile, shuffle it, pick one at random, and hire that person.
Before you laugh or scoff, consider the advantages:
This is bull! There's NO way that anyone can really know what a woman wants, even the woman herself.
might stem from the fact that there arent many women majoring in IT and CS in colleges compared to men. probably because they get turned off earlier for one reason or another.. my guess is that all it comes across as is "nerdy coding".
I don't really consider myself a nerd. I played college lacrosse, and I still play in club leagues. But in terms of what i do for a living (software dev) and how i approach the computer, i realize (and expect) that many of my friends, especially females, would think its pretty nerdy stuff. somehow biology, various forms of being a doctor, or a lawyer, seem to grab most of the really sharp women at large. A large percentage also end up going down the management pathway. Many more who probably arent as ambitious or as sharp go down the education path, or the insert name of generic and useless liberal arts degree here. yes there are lots of female engineers and scientists, but a look at enrollment says most of them are elsewhere, particulary many are in liberal arts colleges.
"Jazz isn't dead, it just smells funny" ~Frank Zappa
EdelFactor
I graduated High school 2 years ago. I'm not an IT guy, but I'm training to be one. So, I can't actually talk about what it's like in those jobs. However, in my high school we had a rather large tech department. Same with the college I'm attending. Every technology based course I've taken you can see the imbalance. The classes are dominated by males. Yes there's a few females in the courses, but if you ask them why they're taking these courses, you get the same answer from almost every one of them; " I've been told I'll need these skills to get good jobs." The guys in the class however, are living and breathing this stuff. We're in it because we're truly interested in what's being taught. Not to say "no" women are interested or intensely active in computer tech. it's just not as common. I myself can have a three hour conversation on the newest video card, or how Microsoft is evil and we should all install Linux. Women are just not as commonly interested.
Any IT courses are open to any sex, race, orientation, well you get the point, anyone. We go into these courses not knowing what the jobs would hold for us. We go into them just knowing our personal interests. The interest itself is what causes the imbalance, not the recruiting practice.
Or am I the only one with that problem? It's really annoying to be frequently reminded that people need to be convinced that you can do what you spend your life doing. No one is surprised when I make good cookies or get a small child to stop crying! Why must they be shocked when I do good math?
The closely related phenomena is that people feel the need to tell me I'm good at this stuff. It's as if they expect me not to realize I'm good at it, since it was such a shock to them. I swear it's as if they caught their pet gerbil building a rocket, completely unthinkable but kind of cool.
I think I understand what you're getting at. The women are sick of the "trying to react non-stereotypically" when they break stale stigmas that are sadly still present.
If so, thats a good point. In highschool, I was the only person in my graduating class that took more math classes than were offered at the school. (No, I did not graduate valedictorian or fit in any stereotype from The Breakfast Club.) We just had no Calculus, in fact, we had no AP classes. My senior year I didn't feel like taking "Baking Deserts III" (don't laugh, it was a real class) and fought the "football is all that matters" public school system to let me take my two empty slots to go off-campus to the local university and take a Calc I course, instead of being an office aide and learning to bake pie.
When I did this, a women from the university used me as a research subject in her psychology thesis entitled "Women Can Conquer Math Phobia". She interviewed me for hours asking me how I got over my fear of math and science, etc... Then she showed me a bunch of data about how women are born with brains that are physically different and have to overcome hurdles to understand math. My mom is an ardent feminist, both parents are liberal, open-minded archeaologists that told me I could do whatever I wanted to do with education despite gender. Before I met this woman who told me about "math phobia" I guess I never even thought about gender applying to how I studied. I blew her off because one of the best teachers I ever had was my high school math teacher who was an older lady that didn't take any crap from anyone and taught math like no one's business.
In college, to help buy groceries, I tutored math. I don't recall having a significant number of guys who hated math and whined about Calculus anymore than did females.
Yet I was sick of the "Oh wow, its a chick that can code in C and she compiles her own Linux kernels too!" in the senior/grad Math/CS classes. The first time it was kinda flattering, then it got condescending fast. It was like I was performing for an audience at a circus.
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
If women don't want to work in IT, so fucking what!!!! I wish these stupid "social engineering" types would take a leap of the nearest tall building. Stop trying to warp the job requirements so that every little demographic group is represented proportionally to the general population. Not everyone is well suited to the oddities that often are so typical in the average IT dept. If a woman likes computers and has the abilities to be a good coder, tester, tech writer, etc, that's great. She can then compete with everyone else in that field for those types of positions. If not, there are other careers that can make use of her abilities & interests. It makes about as much sense as forcing the NFL to hire more Japanese running backs.
There is a fairly simple, non sexist reason why there are less women in IT, science and engineering in general and it comes down to hormones.
Not the persons own hormones, but in fact the hormones that were present in the womb during that person's gestation. Testosterone assists the development of the spatial acuity and mathematical centres of the brain, oestrogen assists the development of the language centres of the brain. (and and there seems to be some evidence that testosterone increases the length of the ring finger, and oestrogen the length of the index finger)
Testosterone is present in the gestation of 95% of male babies, but only about 10% of female babies.
This cuts down the amount of candidates that have a natural inclination for these subjects that are female - however if you take a sample of women that were found to be in this 10% (it was done with 100 of them for a study release in the early 90's that was obviously started in the 70's) then the proportion of them in science and engineering fields is much much closer to proportions of men that work in those fields.
It comes down to the fact that people do what they are good at, and IT is incredibly competitive - at least it is if you want to get above a basic salary.
$_="Slashdotter";$syn="OTT";s;..;;;sub _{print shift||$_};s!ash!Perl !;s=$syn=ack=i;tr+LLEd+BLAH+;_"Just Another ";_
Hmmmm. I hesitate to agree simply out of ignorance. I don't know what its like to be male. In truth, I haven't paid enough attention to them to know whether they are forced to leave their integrity at the door for IT jobs or any jobs.
I'm too romantic and idealistic. I can't imagine anyone in the US still being forced to do that, even if they didn't have the choice to go to college or high school for financial reasons. I can see not being able to start out with a job you truly enjoy, but realizing that temporary sacrifice will lead to a career you will. I suppose I'm naive, but surely anyone in our nation can find a job that doesn't require them to sacrifice any of their integrity, unless of course thats not a big deal to them.
What about it guys? Do you have little problem sacrificing your integrity to work in IT?
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
"Socially, women can afford (more than men) to demand additional perks from a job."
Are you seriously claiming there's a lack of men willing to do IT jobs without 'additional perks', so that companies have to offer those perks to women to fill the jobs?
Let me set that in context. I work in a IT for finance environment, that's got all manner of regulation and control, and constraints. I know there's a lot of stuff that we're 'just doing wrong'. In fact, I'd go as far as saying we've a hell of a lot of stuff that's really just not very good.
I also have a fairly good idea of how to fix some of it. Unfortunately, rather a lot of these go as far as 'throw it away, and start again'. As I'm sure you're aware, that kind of approach is often ... well limited for all sorts of reasons.
So I content myself with scribbling down a solution to a problem. Then deciding whether it's something I'll be able to implement or not. Most fall into the category of 'no one's going to pay because you think the UI on app XYZ is moronic' levels of problems - staff here are well trained into thinking that their IT is supposed to be complicated, obfuscate and just plain stupid to use.
So there's no real perceived need to change, and I have neither time, nor a huge amount of enthusiasm to do a 'cost justification' of exactly why using a _real_ database rather than an email system to pretend to be a database is a good idea.
So I lay aside my integrity, my knowledge of how things could and should be, in favour of the pragmatic. I have a job to do. I don't have the power to fix these problems in the 'right' way, I just have to workaround them as best I can.
Not at all. If HR departments decide that they want to hire a woman for a particular job, though, then they've already selected a smaller applicant pool.
I would like the posters who bring up the subject of "sacrificing their intregity to work in IT" explain what they mean by "integrity" and what do they percieve as "sacrifice".
All work requires one to adjust to the demands and the reality of work. Sure, we are not being asked to lop of baby seal heads (unless that is your thing in which case because that is YOUR thing its not an integrity sacrifice).
I myself have worked in for companies and in positions that represent me... yes it has cost me a significant amount of money over time, but my own goals and ideas have to be maintained by me. But it is my choice, just as it is theirs.
God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board -- Mark Twain Look for http://Thebar.steelbeachca
Socially, men are judged and measured by their occupation and potential as a provider. If a man works a laid-back, 25 hour a week part-time job because his spouse allows him to do so, he's a lazy bum; for a woman, it's a perfectly acceptable decision as far as society is concerned (although how an individual woman feels about it is up to her).
You are making it sound as if men are responsible for this. But have you tried to approach a woman and tell her that you work part time? you have no chance unless this part time job pays $$$$$$ and more.
Far and above all other standards, men want a decent salary and job security, and they're willing to put up with a lot of crap to get it. According to Department of Labor statistics, for example, 90% of on-the-job deaths are men, and men work more hours both in fullt-ime and part-time jobs than women; Men will take the dangerous, filthy, and more time-intensive jobs because of the extra pay associated with them.
Or men don't want to spend their time at home due to all the nagging, the soap operas, the murmur etc.
Women certainly value good pay and stability
Especially when men provide those.
flexible hours
Yeap, there are lots of soap operas/reality shows on TV that women must catch. Plus the shops are open certain hours only.
jobs that focus more on interpersonal communication, etc.
English has a word for it: it's called gossip.
Why aren't there that many women in IT? Who knows? Why aren't there many women in construction? coal mining? steel factories? Where are all the women lumberjacks? The fact of the matter is, there are certain jobs that appeal more to women than men, and there are jobs that appeal more to men than women. Why aren't there more men in nursing? I had a friend in college who was studying Audiology and she said that in her classes, the student's were about 90-95% female, just like in my computer science courses, where the students were 90-95% male.
In general, I think men gain a certain satisfaction in building things, whether it be a bridge or a piece of software. Women, on the other hand, tend to get more satisfaction out of helping others. Men feel that by building a bridge or piece of software, they will be helping thousands of people, but on an impersonal level (When's the last time you thought, "I'm sure thankful for all the people who built this bridge I'm driving over?" You probably haven't, you just take it for granted) Women tend to work on a more personal basis, helping people individualy (If you or a loved one have ever had an extended stay in the hospital, odds are you've thanked the nurses for their hard work and dedication.)
Of course there are always exceptions to all of these things. And then you have all your sadists, who naturally become managers. So what's my overall point? Hell if I know. I'm just rambling.
So, if you're a female looking to go into IT, just remember:
The odds are good...
But the goods are odd.
"Now I'm seriously serious!" - Serious Sam
What about it guys? Do you have little problem sacrificing your integrity to work in IT?"
I think a big difference shows in your question. In describing jobs, career choices, etc...what does integrity have to do with anything?? Or possibly I missed what you are implying by it. I mean, I'm honest...I try to do the right thing as often as possible, but, when it comes down to it, I do what it takes to get the job done, and to make money for myself. The thought of 'integrity' doesn't play into it. While I'm lucky to have a job I enjoy, it isn't the driving factor...money is. And, I do what it takes to earn money, 'cause in the end, money is what allows me to do things I DO enjoy...buy things, travel, take care of family and friends...
I know this thread is getting a little old, but, could you define what you mean by sacrificing integrity for a job?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I dunno where you work...that isn't the case in any of MY jobs.
Plenty of women and minorities, some good....some worthless, just like anyone else.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I read an interesting op-ed that I really wish I could link to here that pretty much said that the problem isn't entirely with women, but these days, perhaps a lot more with men. Why aren't men asking for these things? What's wrong with them that they won't ask for the things out of jobs that they also want? Honestly--in an equal society, especially if you're going to examine, let's say, a pair of earners, one male and one female, who have shared responsibilities at home that may include children, it's not just that we are telling women they have to choose, but we're telling the guys they have to do the same, and I think I've seen MANY fewer men (and this article detailed it as well) be able to say that they wanted just a little more flexibility in any job, including IT professions, so that they could have a life outside of work. IT isn't about an 80 hour work week, and I doubt most people really do work those hours at the office who are strictly considered in IT. I've definitely read plenty of discussions here where most commenters have smashed each other for suggesting that life, in America, is all about work. You don't live to work, not most of you. So men out there, who are thinking about families, kids, etc in the future: are YOU thinking about the flexibility you might need later in your life, or are you just going to leave that up to someone else?
... a quad bypass at an early age.
And I don't care squat about job security, promotion opportunities, or other intangibles that come along with permanent positions. I've been around the block enough times to know there is no such thing as job security, and working your way up the ladder involves way too much political game playing and too much stress and effort compared to the reward. What I care about is using technologies I'm interested in and working on good projects. That, and show me the money! This is why I'm a contractor. I come in, do my job well, and when I leave the office, I'm on to doing other things in life that I care about. My resume is very strong and I never have a problem finding the next assignment or negotiating the rate I want. I like change and the challenge of learning something new every 6 months or so. I've been a J2EE developer for the last 8 years and it's been a good wave to ride.
I just had lunch with several (male) co-workers. Often during lunch they made comments about women that entered the restaurant. I was repulsed by the conversations in general, did not participate and felt slightly guilty that I didn't say anything to stop them. I guess that is losing a bit of my integrity.
I often witness sub-standard work, and I either suggest an improvement for the co-worker or I correct it myself later. Am I losing integrity by letting it occur at all or not fixing it at the source. Probably.
Do I allow or participate in unethical practices in the workplace? No. Do I myself cut corners on a job just to get in done in time? No. Do I mis-report time, costs or other data? No. Am I 100% honest in everything I do? I'd be lying if I said I were.
I figure I'm above average on maintaining my integrity. Obviously I'm biased and only stating my point of view, but by the reactions of colleagues, supervisors and peers who call me "responsible, reliable and trustworthy" I must be doing something right.
As for the portions of my life, I have compromised myself for the sake of the job in the past. I stayed in a job that kept me away from my family for 85% of an eight month period. I've missed family events because I had to work. I have let my work dictate my free time because I was on call or had work to do at some point while I was away from the office. I have let my work, in general, come before my family. Only over the past years have I realized those mistakes and worked at making sure they do not happen again. I have sought a position and company that allows the person to come before the work, and it is acceptable for me to say "No" if the work interferes with my life.
Honestly I think this latter part is why there are so few women in IT. Women have values and they stick to them. They will always put the family first. They will not work in a job where they cannot do an excellent job AND have a healthy personal life. IT asks for a great deal of sacrifice. Over the years IT has devolved into positions that are perfectly designed for a single male: travel, little personal time, challenge of "fixing," and rewards based upon effort not necessarily efficiency.
Why aren't there more women in IT? Because they are smart and can see that IT work puts life out of balance.
Relative to IT, HR is really only concerned about one thing - minimizing the risk of lawsuits against the company for any reason they can imagine (hiring, firing, and compensating employees tends to lead to lawsuits, for a variety of reasons). Since HR employees are not the legal department, they spend their time covering their own ass and the ass of the company as a whole relative to issues that may or may not be genuine.
Please tell me where you work. I'd love to test your claim.
Full disclosure: I am woman (roar). And I don't even wear cokebottle glasses. Perks that attract me (as IT jobs go): Open Source (and other things that qualify for "cool!" or "might make the world a better place" tags). Management by objectives (doesn't matter where or when I work, 's long as I get the job done by deadline). No bloody micro-management. Gee, that's something you can relate to? Women found reasonable? Film at eleven!1!! : )
Seriously, though.
As an engineer I don't care that much. Are they good enough so I don't have to clean up after them all the time? Are they agreeable workmates? Great. Doesn't matter whether they're girl or boy, as long as those conditions are met.
As a woman I acknowledge that a) the internet has an appreciable impact on the way that people live and communicate, and b) there's work in IT, and as long as we're told to vote with our money, work goes a long way, so yes, I'd appreciate women being part of "shaping the future(TM)."
Both being reasonable and important concerns, the synthesis is probably, "Yeah, I wish there were more competent women in IT" (even if I'd no longer be the hen of the walk : ). So it'd be nice if schools would nurture such talent in women. Because, remember, it's talented people that we all want to work with.
One last thing though ... Maybe we should be a little less concerned about getting women into IT, and more about how they're treated once there? Like, Kathy Sierra, anyone? Like, Kos' completely asinine comment that he too gets nasty comments? For reference for what kind of nasty and inhuman stuff women visible on the 'net are exposed to -- oh well, just pretty much surf with open eyes, I guess. Let's be fair here. If you're good at your stuff, what is there to fear from women in the workforce? If you suck ... well, I guess the rest of us don't want to work with an incompetent man any more than we wish to work with an incompetent woman. : )
What I meant by "sacrificing integrity for a job" in the OP that its taken from was that when I was back in my dinky home town my father was a public official and his generous salary was published in the town paper. As soon as I turned XX age, my parents expected me to go out and get a job to start saving for college and for my personal spending money.
I could not get a job anywhere in town literally. Everywhere I applied they told me that I was a rich kid and didn't need money or some version of that. Finally, a guy at the church I went to that managed a grocery store gave me a job at min wage cleaning the bathrooms and mopping the floors. I had to take it because I needed a job.
This meant that I saw some really lousy stuff, like stealing from the registers by employees, the produce guys doing things to your produce you don't want to know about, etc... My ethics all told me to turn these folks in. I knew if I did, I'd be out the only job I was able to get. Literally, people would stop in and watch me mop because they didn't believe a university president's kid would scrub a bathroom for $3.05/hour. Small towns are cruel. Living in the public eye is cruel. I'd come home from work and strangers that were being entertained at my dad's house would have snuck into my bedroom and would be going through my underwear drawer or looking at my toothbrush in the part of the university residence that's off limits to the public. No, I'm not wanting a "poor you".
I'm explaining my point. I had to sacrifice my integrity to work there and watch that crap go on in highschool and the first few years of my college vacations until I got a better job. I have to live with knowing I never turned in those people that regularly sold alcohol to minors that would go in the back and give "favors". I was in a unique, probably extreme position. It taught me I'll never put up with that in a work environment again.
Probably a little of the stereotype that still floats around at work when a female gets promoted and a few bitter males whine "I wonder who's *#@$ she's s*cking." helped contribute to my mindset. I bet my therapist would tell you that some of it is even baggage guilt from me considering my dad had to sacrifice integrity by letting his highschool kids be exposed to the public weirdos to keep an institution of higher education in such excellent condition.
Did that clear things up? I hope so. I can see how that probably isn't the first assumption that comes to mind. The clubbing baby seals is a good example too as I'm an animal lover and non-violent type.
~WBGG~ "And I'm so sad like a good book I can't put this Day Back a sorta fairytale with you" ~Tori Amos
wouldn't everyone like to be the leader of the code monkeys?