Slashdot Mirror


Will Peggy the Programmer Be the New Rosie the Riveter?

theodp writes "The Mercury News' Mike Cassidy reports that women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science. 'The dearth of women in computing,' writes Cassidy, 'has the potential to slow the U.S. economy, which needs more students in the pipeline to feed its need for more programmers. It harms women by excluding them from some of the best jobs in the country. And it damages U.S. companies, which studies show would benefit from more diverse teams.' The promise of better financial results, says Anita Borg Institute Director Denise Gammal, is making diversity a business imperative. It's 'the sort of imperative that cries out for a movement,' argues Cassidy, 'maybe this time one led not by Rosie the Riveter, but by Peggy the Programmer.' So, where will Peggy the Programmer come from? Well, Google is offering $100 to girls attending U.S. public high schools who complete a Codecademy JavaScript course. 'Currently only 12% of computer science graduates are women,' explains Codecademy, 'and great tech companies like Google want to see more smart girls like you enter this awesome profession!' Google joins tech giant-backed Code.org in incentivizing teachers to bring the next generation of girls to the CS table.

But Silicon Valley claims the talent crisis is now (although there are 19 billion reasons to question SV's hiring acumen). So, what about the women who are here now, asks Dr. AnnMaria De Mars. 'If you are overlooking the women who are here now,' De Mars writes, 'what does that tell the girls you are supposedly bringing up to be the next generation of women in tech that you can overlook 15 years from now? Why do we hear about 16-year-old interns far more than women like me? If it is true, as the New York Times says, that in 2001-2 28% of computer science degrees went to women compared to the 10% or so now — where are those women from 12 years ago? It seems to me that when people are looking at minorities or women to develop in their fields, they are much more interested in the hypothetical idea of that cute 11-year-old girl being a computer scientist someday than of that thirty-something competing with them for market share or jobs. If there are venture capitalists or conference organizers or others out there that are sincerely trying to promote women who code, not girls, I've never met any. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but it means that whoever they are seeking out, it isn't people like me.'"

333 comments

  1. Dangit Peggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Peggy Hill as the spokeswoman. I could get behind that.

    1. Re:Dangit Peggy by mwehle · · Score: 1

      She speaks fluent Spanish you know.

      --
      Wir sind geboren, um frei zu sein - Rio Reiser
    2. Re:Dangit Peggy by dicobalt · · Score: 1

      I'll tell u wut, that's a dog gone good idea.

    3. Re:Dangit Peggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Intelligent people of either gender, if they're interested, should become programmers. What we don't need are more losers being pumped out from colleges who have no idea what they're doing, nor do we need people who are just doing it for the money.

      If the plan is to get intelligent women who are interested in programming to try to realize their dreams, then fine. But I suspect that that's just not the case.

    4. Re:Dangit Peggy by davester666 · · Score: 1

      She HATES getting it from behind.

      --
      Sleep your way to a whiter smile...date a dentist!
    5. Re:Dangit Peggy by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Let me see if I have this straight:

      A: 12 years ago, we expended the resources necessary to educate a *relatively* large number of women in computer programming
      B: The objective of that resource expenditure was to increase the net number of computer programmers in society
      C: We do not currently see a lot of these women from 12 years ago in the workforce as computer programmers

      It may or may not be in the best interest of womens development to spend resources educating them in computer programming. But, unless A or C are factually incorrect, the evidence seems to suggest that, if your primary goal is to compensate for a lack of computer programmers in society, educating women as computer programmers is a piss poor way to do it.

      We could try forcing them into the trade with the threat of punishment. We could try to create an even more unbalanced economy, increase the level of poverty among the masses and hope that the carrot becomes sufficiently appealing to motivate them to "freely" seek a career they wouldn't otherwise choose.

      Or we could just acknowledge that, even though they're not going to be the ones taking responsibility for these programming problems, we're not going to pressure them, because they have lots of intrinsic value just the way they are.

      The people behind this article seem to really be unsatisfied with women. Like a man who always wanted a son and tries to turn his daughter into one.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    6. Re:Dangit Peggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Best way is to introduce men into women centric fields like teaching, pharma, HR, etc. which will force women to join men centric careers. It will be a egalitarian thing to do.

      Currently what is happening is punishing men for being men and women just enjoying it without any responsibility.

    7. Re:Dangit Peggy by Darinbob · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We DID see many women in the workforce as programmers! Those 30% CS grads who were women thirty years ago did get into the field. I see plenty of them. The problem is that these numbers are changing. If you look at more middle aged computer professionals you will see a larger percentage of females compared to entry level jobs.

      One issue is that new women coming into the field that I see tend to be the brilliant and determined ones, whereas there are plenty average Joes who squeak in for their boring 9-to-5 job. The average Janes are the ones who are becoming rarer over time.

    8. Re:Dangit Peggy by Shadow+of+Eternity · · Score: 2

      A better question is why are we freaking out about which fields and degrees women choose to pursue while men are 40% or less of college graduates in the first place.

      --
      A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
    9. Re:Dangit Peggy by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 0

      Because feminists won't be happy until 100% of high-paying jobs go to women and men are treated as beasts of burden to be used or discarded.

    10. Re:Dangit Peggy by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 2

      "women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science."

      Is it the computer science they're missing out on or is it the lucrative bit they're missing out on?

      Because I know a lot more men who program for enjoyment than women.

    11. Re:Dangit Peggy by Bigbutt · · Score: 2

      We we are, by nature, expendable. We should be used as beasts of burden and discarded once our usefulness is over.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    12. Re:Dangit Peggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      50% of CS leave the field for better options on the functional side. Management, business analysts, etc offer better pay, work environment, social standing, etc. Women culturally are more social so leave CS in a greater percentage. That's slowly changing as cultural gender blurs, but the 50% of people leaving the field hasn't wavered. Why improve conditions when you can just import more warm bodies?

    13. Re:Dangit Peggy by ILongForDarkness · · Score: 1

      A little over the top but close. They don't freak out about the lack of men in typically women dominated fields (elementary education, nursing). Fields that go along way to excluding men from work or even being customers (how many women's only gyms|aerobics classes out there?).

      The genders are different, if a woman wants to pursue CS she is more than welcome too but shouldn't get special assistance. Similarly for a guy that wants to be a second grade teacher. Just don't block them out of the field no need for special scholarships and hand holding from grade 9 on to help them get in. Fix the cases where qualified people are being discriminated against, otherwise until you have that 50% of the other gender complaining they can't enter the field don't worry about it: maybe men are more attracted to working with computers than women, or maybe it is just genetics: the guy doesn't need (or perhaps it is more of a matter of want) to bugger off for a couple years mid career in a field where 2 years is a product cycle or two.

    14. Re:Dangit Peggy by DeathToThePatriarchy · · Score: 1

      You already force a lot of us out with the threat of punishment -- harassment, assault, just plain being looked over. If you want us to stay/come back, perhaps you could: Write job reqs that don't state flat out that you want to hire a "dude, bro, guy." For those women who got their degrees 12 yrs ago, write job reqs that don't call for a "young guy fresh out of school." When you post pictures of the team you are hiring for, include at least one woman, even if you have to go get one from the web design firm next door. Expect to pay a woman you hire exactly what you would pay a man you would hire. I know, sounds simple, but not so common. Have at least one woman in the interview -- even if it is only the HR person. That will start letting some of us into the boy's club that STEM still is.

  2. this again ? really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well there were not many women doctors not too long ago and now there are quite many. I assume if programming is as attractive as medicine then this will also happen. I know some will say that there is a hostile work environment but do you think most single gender dominated jobs do not. Like being doctors - those impediments will be overcome .

  3. Geez... by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

    If a group isn't interested, they aren't fucking interested. You don't HAVE to have two of every creature in every positon.

    Hell, the NBA is really lacking of white college educated women....are we freaking out and trying to induce them with $100 to work to get into the NBA (and god help them if the teams discrimate!!).

    Geez, please...get over it..people will do what people want to do.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    1. Re:Geez... by firex726 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women.
      If they felt men as a gender would be disruptive then that should be handled on an individual basis regardless of gender, and even then I find it hard to believe that it'd be a widespread issue.

      As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes. lsu many of the complaints can be attributed to the female dominated HR field; which has shown that women in HR will not hire other women they consider to be prettier then themselves.

    2. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

      Exactly, it shouldn't matter.

      But that does show up as a problem, and no, it's not just a lack of Amish representation.

      Which is why efforts are made to remedy that.

      If a group isn't interested, they aren't fucking interested. You don't HAVE to have two of every creature in every positon.

      Indeed, it's not about arbitrary mechanisms such as that, but rather Noah getting off his ass and making sure that the Unicorn, Dragon, Minotaurs and Cyclopes got on board, not go chase after the Pixie Fairies with a hammer.

      Hell, the NBA is really lacking of white college educated women....are we freaking out and trying to induce them with $100 to work to get into the NBA (and god help them if the teams discrimate!!).

      The NBA is indeed concerned about its representativeness in a variety of ways. Heck where do you think the WNBA came from?

      Geez, please...get over it..people will do what people want to do.

      This is a naive view that doesn't recognize how people are influenced by external effects and sometimes there is a reason to want to change things.

    3. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Basic psychology and sociology: have you stopped to think why a group isn't interested? Is there a possibility that they do not feel welcome, and thus are better off investing their efforts elsewhere?

      "If gay people don't like professional locker rooms, they don't like professional locker rooms. You don't HAVE to have gay people in professional sports."

    4. Re:Geez... by Anrego · · Score: 1

      Agree.

      Take down the barriers that unfairly prevent women from entering the job, I'm totally cool with that.

      But why do we feel the need to lure people who clearly arn't interested for the sake of balancing the numbers.

      Programming is a weird gig, maybe it just doesn't appeal to women for whatever reason. Contrary to what the social progress movement would have us believe, women and men are actually different physically and mentally. We shouldn't discriminate based on that, but we need to accept that on a large scale you will seen trends towards one sex or the other no matter how all-inclusive you make the world.

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

      You're talking to a 'conservative'. Reason won't work.

    6. Re:Geez... by Jane+Q.+Public · · Score: 1

      "Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!"

      Whenever I've said the same thing, even more politely, I've been accused of being a bigot.

      Regardless, the latter part of OP sounds like just yet another woman blaming the shortage of women in tech on discrimination, when studies have consistently found that is not the cause. I mean, not just one study or two, but many of them over a period of decades.

    7. Re:Geez... by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Why would ANYONE feel welcome? American has a pervasively anti-intellectual culture where salesmen are held in the highest esteem and most technical fields are looked down upon. Law and Medicine are notable exceptions. They are both viewed as glamorous and lucrative occupations.

      Perhaps if IT got the Law & Order treatment we would see a sudden influx of female programmers in 10 years time.

      This whole media "narrative" about "unwelcoming" IT geeks is just a dressed up version of "Revenge of the Nerds".

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    8. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you! Somebody with common sense. If the Human is NOT interested, then who cares. Now everybody should be given a fair look into different career paths, BUT their should NOT be such a thing as Women's Day Engineering Seminar Or other BS like that.

    9. Re:Geez... by kraut · · Score: 0

      >Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women.

      There are tons of Ruby workshops. Look at the gender distribution in most of them. 90% male? 95% male? 99?

      > If they felt men as a gender would be disruptive then that should be handled on an individual basis regardless of gender,
      I have no idea what you meant to say, but what you said does ont make any sense.

      > even then I find it hard to believe that it'd be a widespread issue.
      If you find the gender imbalance (and some of the nastier aspects of that) in IT not to be a widespread issue, you're either
      * wilfully blind
      * stupid beyond belief
      * incredibly blessed to work in a balanced environment.

      > As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes
      That's an opinion, and you're perfectly entitled to it. But given that we don't have hordes of female junior programmers - it's probably wrong.

      Did I say probably? I meant certainly.

      > lsu many of the complaints can be attributed to the female dominated HR field;
      Oh, yes, it's HR stopping people from hiring all these female programmers because they're too darn pretty! HR can't handle the competition!
      Either that, or you don't actually get *any* CVs from women. Ever.

      Have you ever been a hiring manager? I've spent 20+ years (*) in IT. I've worked with 4 female developers. Two of which I had to hire as mathematicians (they were, but they could also code).

      > which has shown that women in HR will not hire other women they consider to be prettier then themselves.
      Citation, please - or did you just make that up on the spot? Logically that would imply the HR department is populated by the ugliest people you can find that are still qualified to do the job. That's not even true in Dilbert/

      (*) Look at my user id. And then get the HELL off MY lawn. (**)
      (**) Before you get the hell of my lawn, please try and take the time to talk to someone of the female persuasion and ask how they feel in all male meetings, or if that's too tough, just google "programmers being dicks". THEN get the hell of my lanwn.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    10. Re:Geez... by bsolar · · Score: 1

      Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

      Well, "talent crisis" usually means "talented workers cost too much, we have to find a cheaper source of them". Women do tend to get lower salaries than men...

    11. Re:Geez... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 0

      I call bullshit. Name this Ruby workshop. Link to the website. Show some evidence that it was only open to women.

      Na, didn't think so.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    12. Re:Geez... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      The problem is that women want to go into IT but find there are barriers in their way because they are female. You are right, it shouldn't have anything to do with gender, but it does and we should try to do something about that.

      To be absolutely clear, it isn't that women are not interested, they are. It has nothing to do with getting a 50/50 ratio, just making sure that there are not artificial barriers in place for the women who do want an IT career.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    13. Re:Geez... by briancox2 · · Score: 1

      When I start seeing movements to increase the dearth of men in the fulfilling career of nursing, I might start having some actual respect for efforts such as these.

      Be welcoming and warm in our acceptance of anyone. But to push them toward something they are not really interested in, just so some people feel better about themselves, is absolute silliness.

      --
      We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
    14. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reason for the push for women in IT is fuckin' obvious as a clear summer afternoon: wage suppression. Women make less money than men. If anyone thinks there is another fuckin' reason for it, they are retarded.

    15. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are no barriers other than what women create for themselves. "We have met the enemy and he is us."

    16. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

      IT is NOT programming. IT is a vocational degree, not a college degree. While it certainly can help IT folks to have programming skills, most IT positions do not involve any significant amount of programming. IT is everything from crimping cables to fixing keyboards to installing Windows to pulling blades in a data center. Once you start getting into developing applications and programming, you're not IT anymore.

      The reason they are yelling is because *programmers* can be expensive, and employers want to see wages drop so they can fuck their workers over easier. A sudden influx of barely skilled "minority" programmers is a great reason to put older, more experienced programmers out to pasture. You get to cut your payroll budget, reduce load on the retirement/pension funds, make a big deal about being an EEO, and get a nice fat quarterly bonus. Plus, you can get some fresh eye candy wandering around the office.

    17. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://railsgirls.com/

    18. Re:Geez... by Znork · · Score: 1

      Perhaps. Then again, I can recall a fairly decent influx of female hires during the web boom years when internet was a hot thing. Unfortunately, at least in my proximity, most of those hires ended upp gravitating towards admin positions, management, process and project management, pretty much anything not actually technology. Because they were not really interested in technology, they just went for things that would land them a job in a hot field.

      So, no, I don't think sexing it up with 'glamour and lucrative' is going create an influx of employees of the kind you actually want to have.

      Better to keep trying to find ways to actually encourage interest in those who show some and make sure there's nothing stopping those who actually enjoy the work.

    19. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

      There you go http://www.railsbridge.org/

      It is very popular, but you wouldn't know it because you probably don't have a vagina. Sarah Mei teaches them specifically to women. It is no boys allowed.

      http://techfemme.wordpress.com among others, including people on slashdot have brought this up. Either you are not paying attention, or you are part of the problem.

      Now kindly go fuck yourself.

    20. Re:Geez... by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

      But that does show up as a problem, and no, it's not just a lack of Amish representation.
      Which is why efforts are made to remedy that.

      What problem? The one that the article falsely claims? TFA starts with a false premise, and then repeats a fabricated statistic as propaganda. Here is a link to a set of data that disagrees with the idea that women make less money than men. I'm not claiming that there are no differences, but the differences are minor. It's not .77c on the dollar as people try and claim for propaganda, reality says it's much much closer. Sure, we can always improve but if the 'problem' is distorted then the solution will also be distorted.

      You are arguing that a person should not have a choice because your liberal viewpoint is that everything should be equal all the time. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Utopia does not exist and people won't do something simply because -you- and people of a similar belief want them to. Many times, the forcing of behavior has the opposite effect in fact (basic psychology, read a book). Further, society can't function if everyone is in a technical field. We need doctors, plumbers, welders, farmers, and many people want to perform those roles in society and not be pigeon holed into what -you- want them to do.

      Ask the basic required questions, and these would be true for any claim of bias or discrimination (gender, race, religion):

      1. Do the people have the same opportunities to education? I'm pretty sure we can state that the system is pretty fair, not perfect, but fair. If they have the same opportunities for education then they could get into the same line of work if they so choose unless there are barriers to entry in the field. This is why we have so many women doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, etc..

      2. Do they have opportunity for employment? I work with a lot of women programmers, most of them are originally from China and Russia, so you would have to show me proof that there are entry barriers to employment for women. If you have knowledge and skill, you get jobs even if your English is not so good and you may have difficulty in communicating.

      3. Does society discourage them from working in these fields? Again, you need to show me proof that this is happening. I have not seen any advertising or articles talking about how poor a specific gender, race, or religion is in any field since I was a kid. Anything that would even hint at a bias today would end up in court extremely quickly. I'm sure you could dig up a company that was found guilty of discrimination in recent times, but that company would be an anomaly and not a 'normal' company with what society considered acceptable practice.

      If those questions are answered "yes", "yes", and "no", then it's possible that people are just choosing not to do certain jobs. Why not let them make up their minds about their careers instead of trying to force them to be what you want them to be? What I find very ironic is that most people will tell you today that if you want to make an excellent living, you go into welding or plumbing because there are real shortages there. But that's not what -you- want them to do.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    21. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Look at the gender distribution in most of them. 90% male? 95% male? 99?

      But that's not a forced distribution, that's because 90-99% of the people who are interested are men. That's a completely different story than a conference which flat out locks out attendees based on their gender.

      If you find the gender imbalance (and some of the nastier aspects of that) in IT not to be

      Ruby is not "IT" it's CS. Calling a programmer "IT" is like calling an Architect a "Construction Worker".

      > As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes
      That's an opinion, and you're perfectly entitled to it.

      No, he's 100% correct. There are scholarships which are offered ONLY to women, but you do not find any offered only to men. There are also no Quota requirements to employ at least x% Men in any field, but there are in some places requirements to employ at least x% women.

      But given that we don't have hordes of female junior programmers - it's probably wrong.

      Which is assuming that the ONLY thing keeping women out of CS majors and jobs is a lack of Diversity Quotas and Scholarships. And given that college enrollment for women is on par with men, drawing that conclusion is entirely incorrect.

      > which has shown that women in HR will not hire other women they consider to be prettier then themselves.
      Citation, please - or did you just make that up on the spot?

      Women are threatened by other women who are perceived to be better looking than they are. If you need a Citation there are entire sections in your local book store written about this very subject, both in the Business and Economics categories as well as "Gender Studies" and the like.

      Logically that would imply the HR department is populated by the ugliest people you can find that are still qualified to do the job

      You obviously need to work on your reading comprehension. The people in HR are hiring for all the positions in the company, not just in HR. But the counter-point is that while women DO feel threatened by what THEY perceive to be better-looking women, they are also extremely Catty and tend to avoid hiring "ugly" women nearly as much. The primary problem you have with seeing this is that what women perceive as "good looking" is not always the same as what MEN perceive. Women place far more importance on how other women dress than men do, just as one example, and with women who you know is far more important. So a butt-ugly but well-dressed woman who knows a lot of people is far more "hireable" than a really good-looking woman who knows few other women and dresses in a similar fashion.

    22. Re:Geez... by lgw · · Score: 1

      To be sure, we need more nurses far more than we need more programmers. It's a serious crises in some areas.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    23. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      factual burn
      Captcha: Puberty

    24. Re:Geez... by Your.Master · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I start seeing movements to increase the dearth of men in the fulfilling career of nursing, I might start having some actual respect for efforts such as these.

      It's been happening for a while, you just aren't paying attention. For example: http://aamn.org/aamn.shtml

      Some people get stuck in a single solution mentality. There may well be less inherent motivation to join programming in women. But every time the point is even close to being raised, Slashdot seems to have a collective hissy fit and shuts down and refuses to talk about it. Which itself is a sign that there's probably a problem, because we can't even talk rationally about whether there's a problem.

      And frankly, if you don't see discrimination against women in IT, you are really not paying attention. I say this as a man in software development. When we ask if there's a systemic bias, it doesn't mean "are you, briancox2, personally a sexist radical who advocates giving women 1/4 pay and rescinding the vote from them". I think a lot of people take it as a personal insult.

      Absolutely be welcoming and warm in our acceptance of anyone. Totally agreed. And when we see inequality, think critically about the possible causes. Are women not interested? Are women too stupid (most agree that no, that's not it, but strictly it's a possibility)? Are women pushed out of the field intentionally? Are women pushed out of the field unintentionally by social factors? Are women pushed out of the field unintentionally by physical factors (as a ridiculous example, if upper body strength were correlated to typing speed)? Is it because women have better alternative options that men don't have? Is it because men have safety nets that women don't have, and thus men can choose a higher-stress occupation? Is it a combination of factors?

      Is it possible that some of these factors are actually pushing women into the field, but other factors are stronger? For instance, hypothetically it's possible that women are actually much better suited than men at programming but they won't do it because they have a fulfilling career in nursing that men can't break into. I don't think anybody actually believes that one; I chose it specifically so that we wouldn't get off-point by debating specifics. I don't really know the answer and nobody on Slashdot is really talking about it. They've landed mostly on "it's 100% from natural preferences" with a few on the "umm, obvious pervasive sexism???" and just a couple "actually everyone is discriminating against white straight middle class men".

    25. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women.

      There are tons of Ruby workshops. Look at the gender distribution in most of them. 90% male? 95% male? 99?

      So? Firex stated he was interested in going to a particular Ruby workshop yet he felt discriminated against because he was a male. I assume you were trying to say that reverse discrimination isn't discrimination since he has more opportunity to attend. However I have heard of no computer related presentations that were strictly open to men. I have heard of Rail Girls not that I see anything wrong with them.

      As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes

      That's an opinion, and you're perfectly entitled to it. But given that we don't have hordes of female junior programmers - it's probably wrong. Did I say probably? I meant certainly.

      Actually that is a fact. HR especially in companies performing work on government contracts do try to fill positions with female employees. The problem of women not wanting to be programmers even though employers are trying real hard to recruit them doesn't disprove his assertion.

      Have you ever been a hiring manager? I've spent 20+ years (*) in IT. I've worked with 4 female developers. Two of which I had to hire as mathematicians (they were, but they could also code).

      I do find the complaints about women not hiring other women hard to take seriously.

      (*) Look at my user id. And then get the HELL off MY lawn. (**)
      (**) Before you get the hell of my lawn, please try and take the time to talk to someone of the female persuasion and ask how they feel in all male meetings, or if that's too tough, just google "programmers being dicks". THEN get the hell of my lawn.

      WTF? I think you'll find some of the women today are pretty damn outspoken. Judging by your user id maybe you need to go out and meet with some of the more professional younger women. I know I have women professionals attending the same meetings as I and sometimes they run them.

    26. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's right, tell them to check their privilege! You go girl!

    27. Re:Geez... by briancox2 · · Score: 1

      I graduated with a degree in Engineering in 2010. There were organized groups and promotions EVERYWHERE on campus to promote all kinds of engineering and programming to women. There was not a single group to encourage men to join nursing. Not a single poster anywhere.

      Just because you find one website on the fringes of the internet does NOT mean you have discovered parity. The social obsession to view women as victims at every turn doesn't apply to men. EVER.

      --
      We should learn what we need to know about issues, before we decide what we need to feel about them.
    28. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are arguing that a person should not have a choice because your liberal viewpoint is that everything should be equal all the time.

      I hate to be the bearer of bad news to you, but that's a complete and utter bullshit fabrication on your part as to what I have said as well as a completely manufactured strawman of the liberal viewpoint.

      That's an active misrepresentation on your part.

      Please post a reply lacking such fantasies if you want an actual reply.

    29. Re:Geez... by s.petry · · Score: 1

      Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

      Exactly, it shouldn't matter.

      But that does show up as a problem, and no, it's not just a lack of Amish representation.

      Which is why efforts are made to remedy that.

      Your claim about a problem and needed remedy is misrepresented, and you didn't use those exact words?

      It's possible that you simply were not clear in your post, so were not understood due to the lack of clarity. Your WNBA comment makes me rather skeptical, but I'll give the benefit of the doubt.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    30. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh hey, look here everybody! We have the one true man who just gets it.

      Clearly, we should all bow down to his superiority and defer to his deference to women.

    31. Re:Geez... by Sperbels · · Score: 2

      When I was a kid, I coded for fun. I met a lot of guys in highschool who did this too. In college, I met even more. How many women have I meet who coded for fun since they were kids? Zero. That's telling. I think a lot of people here will say the same thing. You say there are barriers...what barriers are there preventing girls from downloading a compiler and googling some "learn to code" websites?

    32. Re:Geez... by Nemyst · · Score: 2

      I fully agree with this, but there's a problem: we have this whole bunch of questions and no way of answering. You and I and everyone else can conjecture for all we want, but at the end of the day that's all it is: conjecture. There needs to be actual research done on a much wider level to attempt to answer these questions. As it is now, I'm largely seeing a lot of people flailing at what they think is the problem with what they think is the solution, and I can't say that it's worked. At the very least, we still have only 10-20% women at university in comp sci despite a lot of women-only grants and loads of advertising aimed at getting girls into computer science. This is compared to 40-50% in chemistry, >50% in medicine and biology, around 30-35% in physics, etc.

      I'd love to see more girls in tech, but until we have actual data to attempt to understand what's going on to me the obvious answer is that they're just not attracted to it. Since there are quite a few "hard" sciences where women have taken over men in attendance and graduation, I'd say the remaining fields are either hostile to them or less attractive, and hostility is something I can most assuredly say is not a problem where I'm at (it may be an issue elsewhere, but all of my experience thus far tells me it's not much of an issue anymore, if at all).

      Therefore, the questions that we just can't answer right now are: is this difference intrinsic to women, or something to do with upbringing and society? If the latter, how can we change it and should we change it? If the former, what do we do?

    33. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      please try and take the time to talk to someone of the female persuasion and ask how they feel in all male meetings, or if that's too tough, just google "programmers being dicks". THEN get the hell of my lanwn.

      What a load of crap. Why should it matter how someone "feels" in all male meetings? In hi-tech, it is ability that matters. If a woman feels put down or some other bad feeling in a meeting, that shows her lack of self esteem, most likely justified due to her base incompetence at being a programmer in the first place. If I meet a woman programmer that is competent, I would respect her, up to the point of her using her gender and privilege to destroy me with political games. But, competent women programmers are pretty few and far between. I have spent a lot of time cleaning up after those that didn't know what they were doing but stayed in the profession anyway because all the male programmers carried them with the off-chance of getting some pussy. They generally didn't get any but that didn't stop them from fawning all over and doing their work for them.

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

      Take down the barriers that unfairly prevent women from entering the job

      Exactly what barriers are those? Oh, you mean, can she program? Yeah, that's a pretty stiff (and oh so unfair) barrier, and I can see how women would view that as a barrier. But, a lot of women jump over that by playing the sex angle and wrapping the geeks around their little finger.

    35. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      The problem is that women want to go into IT but find there are barriers in their way because they are female. You are right, it shouldn't have anything to do with gender, but it does and we should try to do something about that.

      To be absolutely clear, it isn't that women are not interested, they are. It has nothing to do with getting a 50/50 ratio, just making sure that there are not artificial barriers in place for the women who do want an IT career.

      Exactly what the fuck are you talking about?? Specify exactly what barriers there are? I have been a developer for almost 40 years now and I can tell you that if there was ever a woman that had any ability at all, she got the job, all the time. There are no barriers for a woman that is a competent programmer and if anything, she has a huge advantage due to her gender in getting and keeping the job. For sure.

    36. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And frankly, if you don't see discrimination against women in IT, you are really not paying attention. I say this as a man in software development. When we ask if there's a systemic bias, it doesn't mean "are you, briancox2, personally a sexist radical who advocates giving women 1/4 pay and rescinding the vote from them". I think a lot of people take it as a personal insult.

      You are so full of shit, and I say this as a man in software development that has been discriminated against the other way. If anything, there is massive discrimination against men with a woman present vying for the same job opening. The woman will get the job anytime. As to why there are so few in the field, it is because of them either not wanting to or unable to cut the mustard, not because of any sort of fantasy "discrimination against women". Poor little victims. Take your feminist cunt sucking bullshit and go die.

    37. Re:Geez... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But WHY aren't they interested now. They clearly were interested in the past. That's the problem. I do not believe that the physical and mental attributes of women have changed in 30 years, so if you honestly feel that women just aren't "wired" for computing then how did they get unwired?

    38. Re:Geez... by Anrego · · Score: 1

      No idea, but while I'll buy that interest in programming as a career may be influenced by some kind of negative force, the thing that really sells it for me is the lack of women hobbyist programmers.

      I, and really most programmers I know, got into computers way before gender discrimination would have even been a serious thought. I think socially we are at a point where in most cases if a kid, regardless of gender, has an interest in computers... they can explore it. The computer is literally right there in the living room. I find it hard to swallow that somehow society is conspiring to prevent even young girls from having any interest in computers. If they had it, they could easily explore it at a young age.

      I'll buy that a small number of such women hobbyists may not identify themselves in the community as women due to the male dominated culture, but I'd still expect to see a reasonably sized group of women who don't give a shit. This exists in most other areas that were traditionally male dominated.

    39. Re: Geez... by ShieldW0lf · · Score: 0

      Sounds great. You should get buzz cuts, start a company together, build a campus shaped like a vagina and live there happily ever after.

      --
      -1 Uncomfortable Truth
    40. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It matters to THEM, because they expect that women will ask for LESS MONEY.

    41. Re:Geez... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I checked out the web site and it doesn't say men can't attend. It is targeted at women but not exclusively for them.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    42. Re:Geez... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      I checked out the web site and it doesn't say men can't attend. It is targeted at women but not exclusively for them. Can you point to the exact page where it says "no men"?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    43. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the door of the toilets, I just see a woman pictured . Nowhere it says "no men". I assume men are allowed.

    44. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >But WHY aren't they interested now. They clearly were interested in the past. That's the problem. I do not believe that the physical and mental attributes of women have changed in 30 years,

      If they where interested 30 years from from now, will not be a lot of woman above 50 in the IT at the present day ? Not the case. Multiple explaination possible :

      - They were not more interested (Any stats ?)
      - The IT was a young unknown discipline and women discovered later they, on the average, don't give a shit about
      - The number of women interested in IT is the same than by then but more men enter the field lately
      - Most woman did not choose IT they just slipped into the domain from another job (by example, https://www.nwhm.org/media/category/exhibits/spies/telephone%20operators%20world%20war%20I.jpg seems to lead to http://mariehicks.net/img/ICL80headerimage1.jpg http://www.festival.si.edu/images/2012/campus_and_community/timeline/content_img_1950.jpg http://www.wired.com/images_blogs/thisdayintech/2010/03/whirlwind.jpg )
      - ...

      Or maybe, the combination of multiple factors. Anyway you post lack of statistics, and real facts.

    45. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women do tend to get lower salaries than men...

      Completely incorrect. Think about it, if $BIG_COMPANY could hire a woman for XX% the salary of a man, they simply would replace the men with cheaper women.

    46. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      These special interest groups have outlived their usefulness now that their objectives of equality have been met. In today's US, women and minorities can become whatever they want. It's up to the individual to pursue their dreams. But these special interest groups keep perpetuating propaganda that 'The Man' is keeping them down. News flash... Nobody's keeping you from education or pursuing your dream but yourself.

      The only thing keeping women and minorities down are the special interest groups making them feel inferior when they are, in reality, just as capable as anyone - regardless of sex, race, etc.

    47. Re:Geez... by Pope · · Score: 2

      Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women

      So go to a different one. Stop treating this as some ridiculous zero-sum game.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    48. Re:Geez... by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      Ain't that the truth. Our recent company wide all hands meeting offered congratulations to three of the four departments in the company for work they did. The department that was ignored? Operations. Talk about feeling unwelcome.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    49. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Spot on. There is ABSOLUTELY NO gender wage gap if ALL things are applied equally between the sexes. NONE.(*) The mythical wage gap starts creeping in once things like longer hours, time off, etc., are thrown into the mix.

      Hell, the common sense litmus test will tell you this is all a myth. That is, as a company, labor is probably one of the biggest expenses I have. So wouldn't I WANT to hire the cheapest person I could? And that would be who (when comparing men and women and the mythical gender wage gap)? But it ain't happening.

      (*) - Actually some reports suggest WOMEN make more than men in the 20-35 yr old range for the same job when all other things are equal, but those reports are usually quickly ignored/shamed.

    50. Re:Geez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because when a homosexual couple goes to buy a cake and are turned away because they're not the right kind of patron, telling them to just shop at a different cake shop supports discrimination, hate, etc. Just like the black folks that just wanted to eat at a diner -- they should have just went to a different one?

    51. Re:Geez... by RyoShin · · Score: 1

      you wouldn't know it because you probably don't have a vagina

      It is no boys allowed.

      Am I the only one seeing a disconnect here?

  4. How about Norm the nurse? by the_humeister · · Score: 2

    Or Frank the pharmacist? These two professions are dominated by women. Perhaps we should make boys more interested in those professions as well somehow.

    1. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      Sounds great to me. Why don't you go hop on over to a forum for nurses and pharmacists, and bring it up there?

    2. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps we should make boys more interested in those professions as well somehow.

      Dad was always talking about how great pay is for doctors, but have you looked into being a pharmacist instead?
      Perks over being doctor:
      You aren't expected to diagnose the ever-growing list of infectious diseases.
      You'll never be called on to give a colonoscopy.
      Many pharmacists go their entire careers without ever being stopped in the hallway because "that lump on the patient in 208 just burst and is oozing something purple."
      Less radiation exposure.

      There is however one major drawback to being a pharmacist rather than a doctor. You are expected to be able to read the handwriting of all doctors in the same county as you.

      Know the risk, know the rewards, consider a life as a pharmacist today.

      (final image of the commercial shows a lone man in a labcoat surrounded by attractive women in labcoats in what is possibly an art-major's idea of what a pharmacy looks like)

    3. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Henry the hooker :)

      Oh, and give this stupid topic a rest already for fuck sakes.

    4. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

      An old joke: what do you call the guy who graduated bottom of his class from med school? A doctor. What do you call the guy one place below him? A pharmacist.

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    5. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Came here to say pretty much this (only it would have been Nick the Nurse).

      Though actually, I'm ok with a "Peggy the Programmer" or "Nick the Nurse" to try and get people interested in such fields. But when you start trying to force a gender balance? That's when things have gone too far.

    6. Re: How about Norm the nurse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sally the sanitation worker? Carol the construction worker? Molly the miner? Olivia the oil rigger? Etc etc

    7. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by mooingyak · · Score: 1

      I was thinking Tracy the Truck Driver. My not-that-intensive search on gender stats in truck drivers suggest that the field is approx 93% male, which sounds plausible to me. We should push women towards that profession too.

      --
      William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
    8. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by kraut · · Score: 1

      > You aren't expected to diagnose the ever-growing list of infectious diseases.
      The list isn't growing. If it is, it's growing much slower than the list of available drugs/

      > You'll never be called on to give a colonoscopy.
      Most doctors aren't Gastroenterologists, so neither will they.

      Also, giving one is probably less unpleasant than receiving one.

      >Many pharmacists go their entire careers without ever being stopped in the hallway because "that lump on the patient in 208 just burst and is oozing something purple."
      And so will almost all doctors

      >Less radiation exposure.
      If you get radiation exposure as a doctor, you're either doing emergency relief at a nuclear plant, or you're not doing your job right.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    9. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Really? I mostly only know male pharmacists...

    10. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by novium · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who spent a summer working as a truck driver. As a trainee, she had another driver with her. Anytime they stopped, she couldn't go anywhere without the other driver present. At first she thought this was an exaggeration, but quickly learned to stick to it, because if she were seen as by herself, even for a minute, she got seriously harassed, mostly on the assumption that because she was female, she must be a prostitute. It was worse when they realized she was a driver.

    11. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > You'll never be called on to give a colonoscopy. Most doctors aren't Gastroenterologists, so neither will they.

      Also, giving one is probably less unpleasant than receiving one.

      It's the preparatory clearing of the colon that is unpleasant. Colonoscopies are generally performed with sedation, so just a needle jab to start the IV, go to sleep, when you wake up it's all over.

      For unpleasant, try a cystoscopy.

    12. Re:How about Norm the nurse? by MiSaunaSnob · · Score: 1

      yes I would have thought the gender bias was more males less females. But then 3 out of my 5 elementary school teachers were men so I guess I live in a weird part of the country?

  5. Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "The Mercury News' Mike Cassidy reports that women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science. 'The dearth of women in computing,' writes Cassidy, 'has the potential to slow the U.S. economy,

    No they are not, there is no such thing, and I smell bullshit.

    If you make up fairy tales, you can put any ending you want on them. That is what is happening here. Women are not missing out, they are choosing to not do certain things. Let's look at a very good reason for this to be the case.

    Programmers tend to work horrible and long hours. Most women are choosing to manage life and work together, and not work 60+ hours a week. That is a choice, and I have no issues with them doing so. I used to work 60+ hours a week, and decided I was missing out on too much living to continue. I'm glad more women refuse to work 60 hour weeks, more men should do the same. Your average company does not reward you for the extra work, they simply take advantage of you for doing it.

    This is similar to the myth that women on average make less money than men doing the same work. Sure, there is some of the good'ole boy network that does this intentionally, just like certain places won't hire minorities. Those places are extremely rare, and not "normal". If a man works 50 hours a week and a woman works 40, the man does and should make more money. Women on average choose not to do this for various reasons.

    Reality is a real drag when you start to look at it, but it's reality. I don't buy this line of shit because that's what it is. It's a piece of trash intended to increase hostilities toward each other and ignore the bigger issues like corruption.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Um, what? by lgw · · Score: 1

      I've never regularly worked a 60+ hour week - that's exploitation, not programming. I can think of just a few such weeks in my whole career, times when I had dropped the ball and needed to bust my ass out of simple professionalism.

      These day's it's just as common for men as women in the field to have "hard stops" for when they must leave the office - one parent "drops off", the other "picks up" and the latter, male or female, is gone by 5 unless something is actually on fire. Every place I've worked for the past 10 years has respected that.

      I think there was a historical shortage because more men than women were willing to be social outcasts, as was once more-or-less required to learn programming. But thankfully society has changed, and for whatever reason I'm seeing women interviewing for entry-level programming positions who are there out of sheer geeky interest, drawn into coding from robotics or EE or similar non-CS backgrounds. Never seen that before, and it's a great sign.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:Um, what? by Macgrrl · · Score: 2

      Acknowledging that this is totally a 'devil's advocate' type statement, but I suspect you would find there are plenty of women, particularly single mothers from lower income households, that work more than one lower paid job that total in excess of 40 hours (and some in excess of 60 hours) just to make ends meet.

      Many of these women come from backgrounds that don't value education and are not equipped for higher paid roles that would enable them to work more manageable hours at a single job rather than terrible hours at more than one job.

      This is not to say there aren't guys who work terrible hours, some in more than one job. But choosing to ONLY work 40 hours is sometimes a luxury afforded to people to can afford to do so, either because the job they have is sufficiently well paid or they have someone else supporting them.

      Women also frequently are expected to be the primary partner responsible for child care, to be at home and available when the kids aren't at school, 'allowing' the male partner to put in the extra hours for the greater responsibility and career opportunities that equate to higher incomes.

      Much of the push these sort of initiatives promote is not about mandatory quotas when hiring but about providing equal opportunities. Currently the opportunities are not equal, women are still actively discouraged from pursuing STEM jobs and encouraged to work in lower paid, lower status, nurturing based roles. If you want to see men becoming teachers or nurses or aged care - make changes so that the roles are perceived to be as valuable to the community and the bank account as programming or sales or working on an oil rig.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    3. Re:Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      First, not addressed to you.. is that people with MOD points need to read the rules for spending mod points. If you can't follow the rules don't use them.

      Generally and to your points now, I'm referring to studies that were done by several credible sources, as well as a link I give above to how the information that the pay scale of 77c on a dollar is simply wrong. They are all searchable, but don't receive air time because people benefit more from spreading fabricated and false information.

      I've never regularly worked a 60+ hour week - that's exploitation, not programming. I can think of just a few such weeks in my whole career, times when I had dropped the ball and needed to bust my ass out of simple professionalism.
      These day's it's just as common for men as women in the field to have "hard stops" for when they must leave the office - one parent "drops off", the other "picks up" and the latter, male or female, is gone by 5 unless something is actually on fire. Every place I've worked for the past 10 years has respected that.

      I agree that most companies respect your hard stops. My point was that during my 20s and early 30s I used to work 60+ hours a week to get ahead (before I became a father). I don't know many women that did the same thing. It was my choice to work more, and I received extra for doing it. I don't hold it against anyone for not doing the same thing, and actually regret some of those decisions. Getting ahead at companies that no longer exist due to buy outs and mergers has not made me incredibly wealthy.

      At the same time, that statistic is used to falsely claim that women make way less money than men. Comparing a promotion rate or income based on disparate hours worked is foolish, yet this is how they come up with these bogus numbers. Studies that don't back TFA's argument clearly show that when things are compared on even footing, this alleged gap in pay mostly disappears. Claiming there is no bias is foolish, and that's not my claim. My claim is that the "women are losing" is false statement and there are numerous ways we can show my claim to be true without fudging numbers.

      I think there was a historical shortage because more men than women were willing to be social outcasts, as was once more-or-less required to learn programming. But thankfully society has changed, and for whatever reason I'm seeing women interviewing for entry-level programming positions who are there out of sheer geeky interest, drawn into coding from robotics or EE or similar non-CS backgrounds. Never seen that before, and it's a great sign.

      I'm **erm** close to 50. I don't remember a time when I heard anything regarding "women can't". I also don't remember seeing a sign "no [insert race/religion/gender/sexual orientation]". That does not mean those things didn't happen, but that when they did they were not "normal". Sure, I saw teachers give favoritism to boys for math and home economics for women. We still had the same classes however, and one of the best partners I ever had in woodshop was a girl.

      The issue I have with TFA and other such articles (I view as trash) is that they are at a minimum grossly distorting facts. That means that any solution you come up with (if one is needed) is also grossly distorted. I have known a lot of gay men in my life, and most of them wanted to get into cosmetology and fashion. That was their choice for numerous reasons, and I don't see anyone claiming "Gay people should be [this profession]" and trying to come up with ways of coercing them into that field..

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    4. Re:Um, what? by lgw · · Score: 1

      There are apparently some real obstacles remaining before you get into the field. Guidance counselors and faculty advisors steering women away from hard technical fields. Man, I hate the "soft bigotry of low expectations".

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    5. Re:Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      You are arguing something very different than TFA or myself, which is also known as a straw man argument.

      If you and I work at the same job, 40 hours a week would our pay be equal? The answer is "yes", in almost all cases it would be equal. Do you and I have equal opportunity for education? Again, in almost all cases the answer will be "yes". If our jobs require an education, do we both have the same opportunity for a job if we have the correct education? Again, you will find the answer is "yes".

      I am not claiming that there is no biases mind you, because they certainly exist. When found, they generally go to court and the companies are punished. Most companies don't give any favoritism because of this reason, or they do their damn best to hide it if they do.

      Generally the people that don't think highly of education are those in certain income groups, not "women". So while we could surely have a debate on that topic, it has nothing to do with the article or my comments. It's a diversion used to support a claim that is simply not true.

      The straw man argument you are making has nothing to do with an employer, and would be better suited to teaching people consequences for their own actions.

      Yes, a girl that gets pregnant is going to lack education and have a much harder time finding a good paying job. Whether it's being a doctor, lawyer, programmer, astronomer, etc.. there are consequences for decisions. The boy is not as bad off, but will be paying child support as soon as he is of age and his parents will be paying until he's of age. Courts are completely unfair in most cases, seeing the father as an income source for the women instead of being a father and the women as a victim no matter the circumstances. The latter may sound harsh, but I know women accused of abuse that received custody over 'that dirty man' that wanted custody and feared for the kids. Those kids often die or end up on the street, so there are victims on both sides of that debate.

      There are plenty of great debates to have, but very little of it deals with how "women are losing out on lucrative programming jobs". First, the jobs are rarely that lucrative. Most importantly women choose not to be programmers, and I see absolutely no issue with that.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    6. Re:Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure I get the point, was it sarcasm? I didn't read anything about how guidance counselors are steering people away, and in truth I think that gender would be the smallest reason for that.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    7. Re:Um, what? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      I was in part responding to the idea that women get to choose to work lesser hours therefore it's fair they get paid less. Many women don't work lesser hours and the roles they more frequently work in are often lower paid per hour.

      The reasons for this are varied and complex, but a significant part of that is the 'higher paid' STEM roles are seen as unattainable for women more than for men - even given a broad background of socio-economic factors.

      Women are more likely to be channeled into nurturing or service roles such as teaching, nursing, childcare or aged care, rather than more lucrative roles such as sales or STEM roles. At the lower end of the economy, they are more likely to be a waitress than a construction worker - guess what pays more. Yes being a construction worker may be more physically demanding - but being on your feet all day waiting tables isn't being slack either. In Australia, tradesmen are some of the best paid people, I can assure you that the 'professions' for working class women are not paid nearly as well, they are likely to be a hairdresser or beauty therapist or a masseuse.

      And you can bet that the construction industry is unwelcoming to women in very similar ways that IT is. I can tell you I've experienced both first hand having started in Architecture and worked directly on building sites as well as moving into IT and working directly with programmers and other IT types from the position of doing both Tech Support and now as a Systems Analyst.

      You say that programming jobs aren't lucrative - that is a relative term. They may not be paid as well as a top performing sales person or someone in finance or banking - but they generally pay better than nursing or teaching or any of the personal care professions women tend to get pushed towards.

      It has been shown in many developing countries that the best way to improve your economy is to give women more money. Here's a couple of studies to get you started. It makes no sense to keep 50% of the population explicitly in underpaid roles.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    8. Re:Um, what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Women also frequently are expected to be the primary partner responsible for child care, to be at home and available when the kids aren't at school, 'allowing' the male partner to put in the extra hours for the greater responsibility and career opportunities that equate to higher incomes.

      That's one very self-serving way to look at it.

      Another way to look at it is that men are expected to earn enough to support their family, 'allowing' the female partner to put in the extra hours for child care at home. Women are also 'allowed' to work if they want to.

      Men are very rarely 'allowed' to stay home and take care of the kids, because women simply won't put up with it. Any man who isn't supporting himself and his family is seen as a failure. Obviously, there are exceptions, but you'd have to be willfully blind or ignorant (something most feminists seem to be) to deny this.

    9. Re:Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I was in part responding to the idea that women get to choose to work lesser hours therefore it's fair they get paid less.

      Not to be pedantic, but the wording of this is biased as is the statement in whole. "get to choose" is not the same as "choosing". There are many reasons why women make the choice, and not all of them are because the are free . That said, the "therefore it's fair they get paid less" statement implies that if a [insert race/gender/religion] works 50 hours a week they should make the same amount of money as someone working 40. Is that your true opinion? If so then you should have no problem working 40 hours a week and making the same paycheck as someone working 30, and someone working 20 hours a week would of course follow, as would someone working 10 because they all have circumstances they can present to claim why they should only work X amount of hours a week.

      This truly is a liberal viewpoint, but it's not valid for a functional society. You end up with a more extreme version what we have now, a working class and dependent class with aristocrats on top diving up the money of the workers. There is incentive for everyone to do less and less, and society will crumble. Human nature is a bummer sometimes, but it is human nature.

      The reasons for this are varied and complex, but a significant part of that is the 'higher paid' STEM roles are seen as unattainable for women more than for men - even given a broad background of socio-economic factors.

      This is fabrication with regards to women. If you wish to claim otherwise provide facts, and not an opinion of something being unfair. I have worked in numerous environments and never seen a bias when a women chooses to get an education and degree. General Dynamics, General Motors, Bosch, Hewlett Packard, Ericsson, CSC, EDS, cover many of the companies I have worked for in the last couple decades and none of them refused women when they had the education and skill sets required for a job. Obviously a women without an electrical engineering degree can't get a job as an electrical engineer.

      Now, where I said before we could debate and where you may find some truth is in economic circumstances. A women from poverty is just as likely as a man from poverty to get an education and get out of poverty. To be frank, the chances for either are very low. Most will be stuck in the rut but that's not because of gender barriers but because of the economy (or lack thereof) they live in. There is an even chance for both genders to turn to crime, though the crimes will obviously differ. Men have trouble being prostitutes and women have trouble being gun toting thugs, that is a real bias I guess someone could bring up in futility.

      Women are more likely to be channeled into nurturing or service roles such as teaching, nursing, childcare or aged care, rather than more lucrative roles such as sales or STEM roles. At the lower end of the economy, they are more likely to be a waitress than a construction worker - guess what pays more. Yes being a construction worker may be more physically demanding - but being on your feet all day waiting tables isn't being slack either. In Australia, tradesmen are some of the best paid people, I can assure you that the 'professions' for working class women are not paid nearly as well, they are likely to be a hairdresser or beauty therapist or a masseuse.

      Channeled or choose? Further, you make it sound like anything other than a STEM job is simply cleaning up vomit which is untrue. Nurses, Doctors, Dentists, Lawyers, and Pharmacists are shit jobs that nobody wants and nobody can make a living at? Those are just as likely today to be filled by women as men, in fact most pharmacists today are women. Nurses have been women for much longer, and men are generally shunned in that job. I know plenty of women who chose to quit STEM jobs to work in nurturing services because they enjoyed that type of work.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    10. Re:Um, what? by s.petry · · Score: 1

      I needed to further quote on what portion of your 3rd world country comment was a fabrication since I offered no clarity and a generalized claim that it is false. Moving money from men to women does not benefit all of society in developing countries. Primarily because the majority of those people live hand to mouth, not even paycheck to paycheck. In that case, there is no such thing as "extra money" or money past basic survival needs. Making such a claim would require all economic situations to be identical, and walking down a street where you live should show how absolutely foolish that would be.

      Of course you have to look for the bias to see the bias, so let me give you a couple easy examples to contemplate.

      From the first paragraph of the first link you give, the benefit is from money "given" to women versus "given" to men and how it benefits a child's well being. Later they show this with women as HH. This is obviously true, because even in extreme poverty adults will give up their own food to feed a younger child/sibling. This has little to do with money, and more to do with human morality and human nature.

      The bias and falsity is further exemplified by the insinuation in that same page that all men will spend money on alcohol and tobacco instead of what a family needs to survive. While surely this happens, what is not described are some fundamentals of human nature and economic situations which should be applied unilaterally.

      First, to claim all men do this is absolutely fabricated. Further, if your job is to move piles of crap all day, or work in a mine where you were in constant fear, or work at a site where the boss beats the workers, would you drink? No matter the gender of the person working certain jobs: In developing countries (and "developed countries'), certain types of work lead to people seeking out coping mechanisms such as alcohol/drugs/tobacco. A woman in those places does not work. This means that the claim of "men are worse" is simply a fabrication because there is no data to substantiate such a claim. Further, in developing countries workers are sometimes paid in alcohol or tobacco instead of money. Dubai has had numerous cases by immigrant workers claiming that they have been paid in drugs, alcohol, cigarettes, and sometimes they were not paid at all.

      To view that concept without the bias look at similarly high stress jobs in places where there is no such gender inequality. Women tend to drink and do drugs just as frequently as men in those circumstances. For a fair comparison, look at addiction levels of military men and women, and you will see no difference in rates of addiction, parental/spousal abuse, neglect, child abuse, etc... Admittedly even those statistics present no true conclusion because men serve in combat roles more frequently than women The conclusion you can come to is much more fair than an invented scenario. Looking at Police or Air Traffic controllers looks more similar to the Military than the invented scenarios in the paper.

      Yet another issue with this paper is the presumption that men are simply peeing away money when they are not buying new clothes for the kid (this is the perception they provide, not mine). There are certainly different views on how to invest money into a family, and one is not necessarily better than the other. One parent may try to stash money for a better/new house, while another spends every penny possible on new clothing for the kid. One parent may buy a toy where another buys a fishing pole. One may try to save for a computer where another tries to save for a car.

      The point is, the paper makes the assumption that all moneys have to be spent on the child's well being immediately or presumed to be non-existent.

      As I pointed out with TFA, if you start with a broken premise the solution will always be broken. These topics are complex, and can not be simplified down to man = bad and women = good answer. Similarly, the issue with jobs is not one of STEM = fabulous and !STEM = bad. One can surely have that belief, but that is not a belief grounded in reality.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  6. Get Over it FFS by BitZtream · · Score: 5, Funny

    MOST women don't like to code, stop fucking trying to turn them into programming machines. Some do, good for them, let them be great programmers, but for fucks sake stop trying to force women to do shit most of them have no interest in doing. Its not going to get you a girlfriend, you'll still be an asshole.

    --
    Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    1. Re:Get Over it FFS by tlhIngan · · Score: 2, Insightful

      MOST women don't like to code, stop fucking trying to turn them into programming machines. Some do, good for them, let them be great programmers, but for fucks sake stop trying to force women to do shit most of them have no interest in doing. Its not going to get you a girlfriend, you'll still be an asshole.

      I think the problem isn't attracting women to the field, it's that the field is so full of men who are at best crude with their social skills. To be honest, seeing interactions between developers is quite eye-opening at times. You'd think by their language that they were stereotypical construction workers full to sexist jokes and innuendo, catcalling, and the like.

      It's going beyond programmers having poor social skills, it's poor social skills AND being some of the most sexist people on the planet. Heck, in any other workplace, a lot of their behavior would count as sexual harassment.

      And perhaps that's the reason why women aren't entering the field - they're entering workplaces that haven't really evolved beyond suffrage, while the rest of the world evolved and modernized. Like programming is the last refuge for manliness.

    2. Re:Get Over it FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what workplaces you've been in, but I've found the idea that all IT/programmers have "poor social skills" to be a myth.

      I'm a small business consultant. The technical shops I work in have some of the most polite and friendly people around, while law offices, medical clinics, HR offices, etc. have some of the worst. As horrible as this will sound, from a purely anecdotal stand point, I've found that the more women an office employs, the more unfriendly that place will be. Female colleagues that I work with have the same opinion as I do.

      While I do believe that the stereotype and myth of the "social slob" technician/programmer might keep a lot of women out of the field, I'm more inclined to believe that most simply don't want to do it. Women have not been shy about breaking through the barriers into other fields that they've wanted to work in. Why would they suddenly become shy over IT/programming?

      In short, stop parroting the idea that this is a "poor social skills" problem. I've yet to meet any technician that actually lives up to it and I've been doing this for fifteen years.

    3. Re:Get Over it FFS by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Well, you are half right. Some women do want to code, and we should let them. No one is trying to force women into IT though. That isn't what TFA or the general movement to get more women into IT is about. It's the first bit, the bit you got right about removing the things disadvantaging the ones who do have an interest.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    4. Re:Get Over it FFS by ksheff · · Score: 1

      Most men don't like to code either and there usually aren't huge lines of people fighting to get into CS departments. Do the high schools still have kids take the ASVAB tests? Are they using those results to encourage kids who have the necessary skills to go into CS? Have they ever surveyed those people later to find out why they did or didn't choose a CS education?

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    5. Re:Get Over it FFS by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Yeah if you don't flirt and make useless small talk you have poor social skills.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    6. Re:Get Over it FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is, at the very least, a perception of poor social skills.

      There is also, for sure, on many OSS projects, some absolute fuckheads with very poor social skills. This isn't an OSS-vs-proprietary argument; I can't actually speak for non-OSS environments because by their nature less of the goings-on are well known, with some exceptions. Eg. Brad Wardell was publically a bit of an asshole to women, and got away with it mainly because his victim turned around and did something stupid herself in revenge -- corporate sabotage. Big companies do tend to have big HR departments that frown on this sort of thing though though.

    7. Re:Get Over it FFS by Mashdar · · Score: 1

      Did you even read gp before you vomited your opinion to the screen?

    8. Re:Get Over it FFS by Nemyst · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's funny because what you're describing, to me, sounds like another planet. I'm at university in computer science. What I see is a bunch of guys (and a few girls) doing maths and programming, learning computer science, and geeking out along the way. We'll play card games, computer games, make jokes about whatever you can imagine (but largely about computers and science, obviously) and just have a good time. I don't see anything socially inept or sexist about it. I see people.

      I can tell you that there's a good subset of people who are shy, much more so than average, and who look awkward in social situations. They're not sexist either.

      So really, I think there's often some massively wide brushes being used here. You're basically taking your bad experiences and branding the entire field with the same stroke. That's a gross generalization. By saying this, you're basically doing the same thing that the sexist machos (who do exist, I'm sure, what I'm not sure is whether they're representative) do when they put all women in the same basket.

      I'd also often be curious to actually read those sexist jokes and innuendos. Perhaps I'm just not noticing them and they permeate the culture as you say, but thus far I've only seen them referenced, but never really documented and dissected.

    9. Re:Get Over it FFS by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      MANY women do like to code. Thirty years ago about 30% of computer science graduates were women; today it's about 10%. So if your theory is right then what changed? I refuse to believe that stupid line that women just don't like computing because they're wired up differently because the evidence says otherwise.

    10. Re:Get Over it FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes we do. We just got sick of dealing with your bullshit every fucking day and found a job where we don't have to deal with assholes like you. As far as I know, that's true for EVERY SINGLE woman in my graduating class.

    11. Re:Get Over it FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They now have other job opportunities that they didn't have 30 years ago. They choose those jobs over computing.

    12. Re:Get Over it FFS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      MANY women do like to code. Thirty years ago about 30% of computer science graduates were women; today it's about 10%. So if your theory is right then what changed? I refuse to believe that stupid line that women just don't like computing because they're wired up differently because the evidence says otherwise.

      I don't know if any of this is true but here's some speculation. There are more CS graduates than ever before, the constant drumbeat from those pushing STEM as a career has succeeded in raising the number of CS graduates. Most of the increase has come from people with less of a natural affinity for the field and more of a "this is a good career" approach to choosing a college major. Men are more likely to pick a major based on a future career than natural affinity because they are expected to be breadwinners; making more money makes them more attractive to women. (Right or wrong, this is a phenomenon in our society.) So most of the increase comes from the male side of the equation, skewing the overall percentages. In this model, the percentage of women CS graduates out of the total population has changed only a little, while the percentage of men CS graduates out of the total population is much higher.

    13. Re:Get Over it FFS by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Did you miss your morning coffee or something? Geez.....

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    14. Re:Get Over it FFS by Mashdar · · Score: 1

      Actually I did :) Flu, sorry!

  7. Silicon Valley?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But Silicon Valley claims the talent crisis is now

    See this from 2012. As you can see, SV area isn't on the list for best paying cities for programmers and yet, it's the most expensive.

    SV companies are averaging $110,000/year (Source: PayScale) for software engineers. Why should a talented person go there when they can make just as much (or even more) and have less than half of the living expenses?

    SV companies pay shit for their area and if you consider the ridiculous hours they expect you to work, you're better off somewhere else.

  8. Finally by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Was wondering when this topic would finally get some coverage again. It's been at least a week since this important injustice graced the front page.

    Well done slashdot, your click bait got me again.

  9. Answer: No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    "Will Peggy the Programmer Be the New Rosie the Riveter?"

    No, but this "We need more women in IT" meme is becoming the new "Schools need more money".

    1. Re:Answer: No by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Not all IT jobs are created equal and the distribution of non-CS grads and women varies. You can't use Silicon Valley as a guide (or startups). Both of those environments are much less forgiving of people without talent or dedication.

      There are plenty of jobs for less technical people in Fortune 500 companies where navigating the political quagmire is more important.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    2. Re:Answer: No by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      Nonsense, I see plenty of bad programmers getting paid good money in Silicon Valley.

  10. Flame Time.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Can we get past the PC nonsense and accept that reality that there are actual differences between the sexes (some due to social environment, some biological), and from that accept that some jobs just aren’t well suited for one sex or the other.

    I’m all for providing the opportunity for either sex to do whatever job they want as long as they are capable, and to a certain extend I’m all for breaking down cultures that make the job less appealing to women for reasons unrelated to the job, but beyond that I think we have to accept that there are certain aspects to programming beyond the male dominated culture that are not appealing to a large number of women.

    Now here comes the inflammatory part. What might those reasons be? Based on a very limited sample size and keeping in mind that we are talking general case here, there are plenty of exceptions, my best guess is:

    - Weird hours. I know it’s not PC to say it, but yes, women tend to be more burdened by their life schedule then men. Sudden "ok everyone has to stay till 2am to get this working" are common in the job, and this can be a major stressor.

    - Stress. I believe there’s different types of stress. Some men handle better, some women handle better. The kind of "you need to find a solution to this problem by 8am tomorrow or you might actually get fired/company might go out of business" stress you sometimes find in this job or even the "been pounding my head against this problem for 3 weeks and getting chewed out by management about why I haven’t made any progress" is a very specific kind of stress that (and again, this is a very small sample size) seems to hit women harder then men.

    Reading what I just wrote, how the hell is this a "best job in the country". Many women have more common sense and realize that this is actually a shitty job with a lot of stress and crazy hours and a career path consisting of "you're probably fucked when you hit 40".

  11. Bad name by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm all for making programming more attractive to women, but can we not tie the name to sticking a dildo up their bumb? I don't think that's really helping anything.

  12. Oops and /or Ouch. by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

    "Peggy" or "Pegging" the programmer? Given the current job market, either seems plausible.

    --
    It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    1. Re:Oops and /or Ouch. by RabidReindeer · · Score: 1

      "Peggy" or "Pegging" the programmer? Given the current job market, either seems plausible.

      Actually, it should have been Pratibha the programmer, given the eagerness with which we offshore everything.

  13. Nursing? by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 1

    In 2011, 9 percent of all nurses were men while 91 percent were women. Men earned, on average, $60,700 per year, while women earned $51,100 per year.

    I know it is impossible, but I just want there to be honest discourse about this supposed "STEM shortage / gender gap". There is no STEM shortage just like there is no Lawyer shortage. The gender gap in software engineering isn't a problem just like the gender gap in nursing isn't a problem. Corporations want to turn software engineers into a commodity. Period.

    1. Re:Nursing? by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      just like the gender gap in nursing isn't a problem

      Isn't it a problem? You sure about that or are just using one field being fucked up in the polar opposite manner to your field as an excuse to be fucked up and not doing anything about it?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
  14. Todd the Teacher.. by thesupraman · · Score: 5, Insightful

    You missed the big one.

    Todd the Teacher.

    Men have been practically excluded from teaching, by being painted with the sexist assumptions
    that they are all child molesters and pedophiles with nothing positive to contribute.

    In comparison to this particular problem, an imbalance in programmers is nothing.. bias in the
    teaching of our children should be a huge priority, and yet, its not....

    1. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Fwipp · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      You missed the big one.

      Todd the Teacher.

      Men have been practically excluded from teaching, by being painted with the sexist assumptions
      that they are all child molesters and pedophiles with nothing positive to contribute.

      In comparison to this particular problem, an imbalance in programmers is nothing.. bias in the
      teaching of our children should be a huge priority, and yet, its not....

      Well, maybe you can start by combating the sexist assumptions that women are naturally more nurturing (a story uniquely suited to keeping those pesky women in the home). You can follow up by setting teacher pay to a reasonable level, so that they're competitively compensated for the amount of schooling and long hours that they need to put in.

      The patriarchy (I wonder if I'll get modded down for using that word) tells us that women are gentler, weaker creatures more suited for "family" work than men are. Men are taught to assert their masculinity by displaying their power over others, which combined with the narrative of "men can't help raping women," naturally leads us to be suspicious of any man transgressing those gender roles. Because men are coded (by our culture) as inherently sexual beings, we assume their motivations for pursuing a "feminine" job are also sexual - that is, that they must be sexually interested in the children they are supposed to protect.

      (I personally don't know anybody who has a problem with male teachers, but I'm going to take you at face value that this is a real problem that you've faced.)

    2. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Amtrak · · Score: 1

      Damn, why did I go and waste my mod points on an article earlier today. Someone mod this guy up.

    3. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by serviscope_minor · · Score: 1

      You missed the big one.

      I'm not sure what your point is?

      Are you saying we should make sure we're absolutely the worst employment sector before we start to do something?

      Or should we be wringing our handsin abstract over something that is worse that we simply don't see day-to-day.

      Put it this way: yes it's worse in teaching, apparently, but I have no kids, no plan to have kids and therefore have no involvement or future prospect with the teaching sector at all. I have no easy way in and no way of experiencing its nuances. And, frankly, I'm not that interested in teaching. Not to say teaching isn't important, but I'm a tech person.

      However, I can see something wrong with the sector I work in day to day in otherwise immerse myself in in my off hours.

      And this is /., which is really a tech website. Is it surprising that problems in the tech industry are relevant here even if other industries have worse problems?

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    4. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The patriarchy (I wonder if I'll get modded down for using that word) tells us that women are gentler, weaker creatures more suited for "family" work than men are.

      I don't know if you'll be modded down, but I am grateful that you pointed that out. Now I don't have to waste time reading your conspiratorial drivel anymore.

    5. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by onkelonkel · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This is a huge problem for elementary (Grade 1 to 7 ) schools. Any male teacher who wants to work in elementary schools and isn't a specialist (Librarian or Music Teacher) is viewed with great suspicion.He must be some kind of pedophile. The school I went to as a child had 5 male teachers out of 25 total. Now 25 years later my kids are there, and there are no male teachers at all and 35 women.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    6. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by chispito · · Score: 1

      You missed the big one.

      Todd the Teacher.

      I'll one-up you: Dave the Daycare Provider.

      --
      The Daddy casts sleep on the Baby. The Baby resists!
    7. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Posting AC because of previous moderation.

      Well, maybe you can start by combating the sexist assumptions that women are naturally more nurturing (a story uniquely suited to keeping those pesky women in the home). You can follow up by setting teacher pay to a reasonable level, so that they're competitively compensated for the amount of schooling and long hours that they need to put in.

      Oh, Bullshit.

      This smacks so much of the "Young girls are being fed bad body imagey by Barbie." Adherents

      At some point, somewhere, somehow, These fragile little snowflakes, just waiting to be devastated, and ruined by the evil menfolk, has to stop

      I worked in a University environment that practiced a complete reversal of the evil menfolk, and the glass ceiling. If there were two people applying for a position, and one was female, the other male - the females automatically got the job. Heck, I had one promoted over me after being on the job for 1 year, when the minimum requirements said 2 years.

      All a woman had to do was not quit, and she'd rise really quickly.

      Lest you think this is bitterness, I participated in heavily the drive to get women into engineering and technical positions. I ended up with the belief that it takes more thna just men changing their "evil ways".

      But we worked really hard to get the women involved. A number quit to raise families, others because it took up "too much time". And the vast majority of young women at Take our sons and daughters to work day simply were interested in other fields.

      The problem is the almost universal assumption that men are at fault, and the woman never is. Instead of what men have to change to include women in Tech and engineering, at some point we need to address what women have to change.

    8. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by chooks · · Score: 1

      You missed the big one. Todd the Teacher.

      I'll one-up you: Dave the Daycare Provider.

      Oscar the Ob-Gyn?

      --
      -- The Genesis project? What's that?
    9. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      I didn't say that men need to change. We need to change our culture, which currently parrots patriarchal narratives. Most dudes aren't out there consciously making sexist decisions, just like most dudes don't rape people. That doesn't mean that, by virtue of being non-sexist, they suddenly stop being affected by our sexist culture (in both positive and negative ways, just like women).

      Right in the paragraph your quoted there, I cited the low pay for jobs perceived as "feminine" by our culture as a reason that dudes (who are expected to be the primary breadwinners) might not want to take up teaching. If teacher pay were more in line with other "masculine" professions, or if men faced less social pressure to be the sole provider for their family, more men would take it up.

      Our cultural narrative also codes both violence and sexuality as "masculine" (both as a form of strength) - so it's no surprise that a guy in a "feminine" role might be suspected of having violent or sexual reasons for it, ones that we would not usually attribute to lady teachers.

    10. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      There's no conspiracy, don't worry. "Patriarchy" is just a word for a society in which males are generally the authority figures, both on a family level and a societal level, like the one we live in.

      Societies have cultures, and cultures have cultural narratives. The cultural narratives of patriarchal societies are necessarily sexist (just as narratives of a matriarchal society would be).

    11. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      I definitely don't deny that males are underrepresented in elementary education - the number I see floating around most often is 18% to 20%. I am having a lot more trouble finding statistics on how male teachers are perceived, but since you guys say that this is a real problem, I believe you.

      Does what I was saying about the reason that men are viewed as pedophiles not make sense to you all? It seems really straightforward to me, that since we believe women "should" care for children, we view men with suspicion.

      By the way, http://www.menteach.org/about_... might be a resource you'd like to send money to. They look like they do good work promoting male teachers in elementary schools (though their website is a little outdated).

    12. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by onkelonkel · · Score: 1

      The reasons make sense, but they don't excuse what is basically sexist bigotry. There is at least some awareness of the issue now.

      --
      None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    13. Re:Todd the Teacher.. by Fwipp · · Score: 1

      Oh, I totally agree that it's sexism, and a problem.

      I guess I feel weird about the parent of my original post (is that the... GGGGGP at this point?) seeming to assert that we shouldn't be worrying about getting lady programmers, because we don't have enough guy teachers - as if it's a zero-sum game. Especially since, to me, they seem simply like two different sides of the same coin - the same sort of forces that say teaching is "women's work" also say that "programming is for men."

  15. It's a matter of biology by wilson_c · · Score: 5, Funny

    They just don't have the upper body strength that the job requires.

    1. Re:It's a matter of biology by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It also doesn't help when her pair's line of sight is regularly diverted from the code during an intensive pair programming session. Although the code reviewers do like the new, softer style in the comment sections with less expletives and more boobage, the chairs of the human resources department and legal hold all new stains.

  16. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No she won't.

  17. I think not. by sesshomaru · · Score: 5, Insightful

    No. No she won't.

    Padma the Programmer, however, is a name with potential.

    --
    "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    1. Re:I think not. by sesshomaru · · Score: 1
      --
      "MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."
    2. Re:I think not. by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 2
      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  18. $100 cash? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > Well, Google is offering $100 to girls attending U.S. public high schools who complete a Codecademy JavaScript course.

    As far as I can tell from RTFMing, Google is offering $100-worth of supplies from DonorsChoose.org for the classroom, not $100 cash to the girls that complete the course.

    1. Re:$100 cash? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      When I was their age made ~500 UK pounds (given inflation and dollar conversions > $1000) on some basic computer programming tasks. I remember porting "Columns to BS449" from a Sinclair QL to an Apple ][ for an architect.

      $100 is not good pay.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
    2. Re:$100 cash? by TechyImmigrant · · Score: 1

      It seems that BS 449 is obsolete. "EN 1993 - Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures" is the new overlord of structural columns.

      --
      I should use this sig to advertise my book ISBN-13 : 978-1501515132.
  19. Productivity gap by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

    The same productivity gap for women exists in all industries. 5 days a month and doesn't die, etc. etc. plus baby-time means that fewer employers will invest in a female employee knowing the ROI is lower than for a male employee.

    OTOH, men die earlier then women, so they have a chance to make it up on the back end.

    --
    I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    1. Re:Productivity gap by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 1

      The same productivity gap for women exists in all industries. 5 days a month and doesn't die, etc. etc.

      Every time some neckbeard opens his mouth and allows the misogyny to flow out it just reinforces the notion that there needs to be more incentive for women to get into software. I know this is /. but you probably just made some femnazi's panties crawl up her ass....dammit.

    2. Re:Productivity gap by Gothmolly · · Score: 1

      You accuse me of misogyny and then use the term "femnazi" and the phrase "panties crawl up her ass"?

      Women take more time off, career-wise, than men do, and it's related to their gender. That's a true statement. What's the problem?

      --
      I want to delete my account but Slashdot doesn't allow it.
    3. Re:Productivity gap by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 2

      You obviously ignored the sarcasm tags.

      But to play ball: in the US as in many other developed nations you can't discriminate against employees because of things like that. If I have diabetes you can't discriminate against me because I may have low blood sugar one day and have to go home. You can't discriminate someone with a propensity to get the flu every winter because on average that person misses more days than someone who doesn't get the flu. Furthermore you can't just lump all women together and generalize about them. Some choose not to have children, should they be punished because some women do choose to have children?

      Were you really trying to say that there is such a disparity between the number of men and women in software engineering because they may take more time off? Or were you just waiting for your chance to get in a cheap shot against women?

      You may not be a misogynist, but you do have some silly thoughts regarding women.

    4. Re:Productivity gap by jedidiah · · Score: 1

      Some things cannot be delegated.

      Women are indoctrinated differently. Foul smelly "brogrammers" are at the very tail end of a long process that really has very little to do with anyone in the computing industry or academia.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Productivity gap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why don't you enlighten us on the reasons women make less money than men? It is a fact that employers take potential time off for raising children into account when they make job offers and negotiate pay.

    6. Re:Productivity gap by BitZtream · · Score: 0

      In the real world, just because you say something like 'you can't discriminate against me for that' doesn't make it magically true.

      The real world simply doesn't give a flying fuck what laws man makes.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    7. Re:Productivity gap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      exactly this... In my college class (IT) there were 55% girls... most of them were utter crap at coding .... they don't work in IT even thou they have the degree... and what is with this diversity crap ... you don't need any diversity in IT

  20. Let's just put nine women on the job! by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 2

    . . . and then the baby programming project will be done in a month!

    We need more good programmers, not just more programmers. And their sex is totally irrelevant. A good programmer is a good programmer, regardless of sex,race, religion, shoe size, hair color, etc . . .

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Let's just put nine women on the job! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're not seriously suggesting we let ginger people code?

      >captcha: satanic

    2. Re:Let's just put nine women on the job! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry, but shoe size is the most important trait for all programmers. I thought everyone knew that.

  21. wait,, is this LifeTime?? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    since when did /. turn into the LifeTime network??
    Where all men are evil, and women can do no wrong..

    But seriously, I could grasp as the fact where this may appeal to the more feminine crowd.
    But how does it really relate to the community at large?
    Hence the referral to LifeTime.. A place where crap like this is more appropriate and tolerated, accordingly..

    if I want cable crap I turn on lifetime and get a restful sleep, to others the affects may be different, but run along the same parallel.
    If I want stuff that I am used to seeing on /., perhaps, with the propagation from their "dice" overlords this article, I may go elsewhere.

    I am not a chauvinist vby any stretch, just pointing out the facts..

    Thanks Dice, any more resumes posted as a result of this article..

    Hmm speculative @ best I bet. right,,

    c ya

  22. computer science is not javaScript or other hands by Joe_Dragon · · Score: 1

    computer science is not javaScript or other hands on skills it's loads of theory that is not really needed to do the job.

  23. Makes good business sense. by plopez · · Score: 1

    You can pay women less.

    --
    putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
  24. Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Lawrence_Bird · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is soooo freakin tired. And not just on /. Women are not stupid. Or no more so than men. If they want a career/job in comp. sci they certainly can figure out what to do. Can we stop wetting our pants that 51% of the work force in industry X is not women?

    1. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by unimacs · · Score: 1

      Aren't you curious as to why? I am because I've noticed a definite fall off in the number of women in the field. I don't think that the women of 25 years ago are fundamentally different than the women of today. So what gives?

      At least part of it must be that women are reluctant to enter a field where there are so few other women. Some won't care, obviously, but others will.

    2. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Algae_94 · · Score: 1

      At least part of it must be that women are reluctant to enter a field where there are so few other women. Some won't care, obviously, but others will.

      This certainly didn't stop women from entering the armed forces in large numbers. It may just be that women don't care for computer science as much as men do.

    3. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by jader3rd · · Score: 1

      Aren't you curious as to why?

      Perhaps the field has changed in the past 25 years? It's possible that the skill set that is currently the successful still set has a certain group self selecting themselves out of the field?

    4. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK, I'll be the asshole.

      There wasn't as much competition 25 years ago from men. Sorry.

      In the early days of CS _nobody_ grew up as a computer nerd, it was all new. But once it came in more and more boys started growing up as computer nerds, while this didn't happen as much with girls.

      So fast forward to today. I think most good technology people don't learn their skills or at least all of them in college - it comes from a lifetime of being a filthy nerd.

      Fewer female filthy nerds means fewer good female programmers. Easy peasy.

      This might change though, lots of girls growing up nerd now and for the last decade.

    5. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      Did you even read TFS? It says that a decade ago 28% of computer science degrees went to women, and now it's 10%. It's not about 51%, it's about the fact that we know more women are interested in computer science than are taking degrees in it for some reason. If we remove the things that are putting them more more will take those degrees.

      Google et al really want more women in IT because they need more skilled coders, and understand that there are women who do want to be programmers but are put off. If they can make things easier for them by either removing the things putting them off or offsetting them with extra support they can get those workers they need.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    6. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Computing was a more exciting field 25 years ago, now it's old hat. Women also have more employment opportunities now than they did some time ago. Studies have been done, women select traditional job/life roles more often in situations where they have choices. It's rather funny that the "equal outcomes" ideology is being killed by the very same discrimination programs pushing it.

    7. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by unimacs · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's it. I'm almost 50. When I was growing up very few people had computers in their homes but we had them available in high school. Maybe there weren't computer nerds but there were technology nerds. Programmable calculators were all the rage.

      Anyway, there were plenty of women in my college CS classes, and most of them got jobs very quickly. But far more of them left the field than men. It was not at all unusual for me work with women programmers in the late 80's to the mid 90's. But it was very rare for me to work with one after that, even though I was in my 30's and still in my prime as far as software development goes. What happened to them?

    8. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It 'must' be no such thing. A majority of the BA's and testers in my current company are female. My project manager is female, and all the business reps are female. All up I'd say about 40% of the people in the department are female, but only one of the programmers is. There is no lack of females in in the field, there is a lack of females in a specific role in the field.

    9. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by unimacs · · Score: 2

      I agree that there are enough women in the armed forces today that it's not as much of a barrier as it used to be, but don't you think it was much more difficult when there were fewer of them?

      Assuming you're a male, wouldn't you perhaps think twice about a career choice where you might be the only male out of 10 people in your group and you were one of only a few men in any class you took or conference you attended?

    10. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is going to sound horrible, but my guess is that it's because there is no status value associated with being in computer science.

      Every other profession that women have gotten into has a high social status associated with it. For example, law and medicine are held up as being very desirable, very commanding careers. They get respect. But, computer science, programming, IT ... pretty much anything that deals with computers doesn't.

      Most programmers and technicians are looked at as being slobs that don't know how to interact in the world. Men do these jobs either because they love it or because it's what they're trained for and don't have the opportunity to train out of it. For that, they are ridiculed in the media (ie. The Big Bang Theory), they are treated as "the help" in offices, they are not listened to until something breaks and companies go out of their way to get rid of them (outsourcing, H1Bs, etc).

      Women don't do it because there are easier, more respectable ways to make a living. The one time that women signed on for this stuff in any real number was when the Dot Com Bubble was in full effect. That was one of the few times when being "in computers" was looked at as being high status. Now that that isn't the case, women don't enter the field.

    11. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by BitZtream · · Score: 1

      wouldn't you perhaps think twice about a career choice where you might be the only male out of 10 people in your group

      The only men afraid to work with women are those who have major inadequacies their afraid of exposing.

      That means you, just for reference.

      You're that guy who made fun of the dude who went to home economics class with all the girls. Let me give you a hint, he saw tits way before you did, I mean other than his moms and his dads magazines. Seriously, you have issues if this bothers you.

      --
      Persistent Volume manager for Kubernetes - https://github.com/dwimsey/openshift-pvmanager
    12. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by unimacs · · Score: 1

      Actually, I would have been about the last guy to make fun of a dude for taking a home economics because I honestly wouldn't have given a crap.

      I'm not talking about being afraid of working with women. My ideal workplace would have members of both sexes.

      I've had plenty of female coworkers and a few women supervisors for that matter. My first real job after college was in a team that was entirely composed of women (aside from myself), but there were other men around. For the most part I really enjoyed working in that group and they seemed to enjoy their token male but at the same time I knew that position was temporary and wasn't a situation that was going to last throughout my career.

      I'll also be honest. If I was a college student trying to decide amongst careers and one of the options was a field that was made up of 90% women, it would be a factor in my decision. Would it stop me if it was something I really wanted to do? Probably not. Then again I also think it can be easier to be the lone guy in a group of women than the other way around.

    13. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      The problem is that it's about 10%, which is drastically below the balance between the genders in society at large. More importantly, that number is changing. There are fewer women entering the field than in the past, so theories about nurturing women not liking technical stuff is just bullshit. Women did used to get the jobs in computer science, now they avoid the field.

      Your attitude is so freaking tired as well. Rather than just remain neutral about the affair you seem to feel an obligation to step forward and spend some time to defend the status quo.

      (my theory is that computer science overall is less important in computing fields nowdays, since the vast majority of jobs are grunt jobs doing support tasks instead of actually building things and doing science, and it's not computer science that is scaring away females but I.T.)

    14. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The reasons are legion. And many of them are far too reasonable for any government program or hiring protocol to ever "fix" the way some people want to fix it. Here's two:

      First, there's the question of interest. Let's take an... opposite(?) field: Fashion. What's the ratio of men even wanting to be in fashion compared to women? It's not as if we don't wear clothes, don't enjoy a comfortable fit, or don't want to look appropriate to the times for an interview or date. Yet far more women are willing to say "Hey. I want to spend a few decades working in this trade". Strangely enough there's little, if any, fuss over the lack of men in the industry is there? If women aren't interested in IT as often as men are, surely there's no inherent wrongness to this fact.

      My wife is a nurse. I don't want to be a nurse, I can barely change my own kid's diapers without getting sick, forget some grandpa's catheter! Never hear a complaint about how nasty it all must be from her, though. Anyone trying to force gender equality in nurse/malenurse ratios?

      Second, the work conditions. While some at HR will take this into account as much as the law will allow them to, for the most part, women prefering to prioritize, say, actually seeing their kids at the end of the work day (as opposed to an extra six hours at said work for unpaid overtime) is far more common than men doing it. Men are more willing, particularly when they have a family, to just shut up and eat whatever bovine-byproduct is shoveled their way on a daily basis in their job. This is one of our worst habits, though. Maybe if we remembered how unions happened and collectively stood back up as a gender for once in our flabby lives, we'd eat a lot less crap at crunch-time, and the women not willing to take that bull would naturally gravitate back into the career.

    15. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by swillden · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's it. I'm almost 50. When I was growing up very few people had computers in their homes but we had them available in high school. Maybe there weren't computer nerds but there were technology nerds. Programmable calculators were all the rage.

      I'm 44. I got my first computer (at home) when I was 14. A good friend of mine had his first computer at home when we were 9. I used to go over to his house and help him type in games that we got in magazines. With my talented-and-gifted class, I wrote code and ran it on a local bank's mainframe when I was 7 -- utterly trivial stuff, but still.

      Bill Gates started playing with computers (at school) in 8th grade, age ~13 -- and that was 40 years ago, when I was 4.

      The GP's argument makes no sense.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    16. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CrsF7wyUxs8

      Check it out, it's a documentary made in Norway. It says that the more people are free to do what they want, the more they are likely to conform with gender roles. It mentions a study that says the biggest gap in hard sciences is in the rich western countries, while 'paradoxically' in countries chock full of sexism and discrimination they are much closer to parity, because life is unequivocally hard there and it's a good career that puts food on the table.

      To put it bluntly: women in rich, free countries have options to be princesses and they go for that.

    17. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even read TFS? It says that a decade ago 28% of computer science degrees went to women, and now it's 10%. It's not about 51%, it's about the fact that we know more women are interested in computer science than are taking degrees in it for some reason.

      This conclusion is not supported by the data given. For example, there may have been an influx of men into CS who were not really interested in it beyond a good paycheck.

      The number you need to look at to support your conclusion is the percentage of women with CS degrees out of the total population of women (not the total population of people with CS degrees). If that number is going down, then you have an argument.

      All we really have from the numbers presented is that the percentage of men getting CS degrees out of the total population is getting larger compared to the percentage of women getting CS degrees out of the total population. That could happen with both percentages increasing or decreasing.

      This is similar to the 70 cents on the dollar figure people like to trot out. That number is based on the total amount grossed by all the women compared to all the men - there is no accounting for the choice some women make to enrich our lives by raising children instead of pulling down a paycheck. So you can't use it to generate a disposition as to whether there is discrimination against women or not.

    18. Re:Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' by darkgrayknight · · Score: 0

      The real question is do we "know" that the interest level is still the same? I think things have changed and the interest isn't what it used to be. More research is needed to discern the actual reasons. Spending money trying to promote women to join the CS world is pointless if we don't know "why" they aren't joining to begin with.

  25. leet skills while female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    are there any notable female programming wizards?

    1. Re:leet skills while female by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      are there any notable female programming wizards?

      There's Grace Hopper, but I'm sure there must be some more recent

    2. Re:leet skills while female by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There aren't many, but that Rajtkoudklwmski hacker lady seems pretty fucking smart.

    3. Re:leet skills while female by maharvey · · Score: 1

      Probably about as many as there are male programming witches.

    4. Re:leet skills while female by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      One problem is that number of "wizards" is a stupid measurement. The vast majority of the field is filled with average people. I see the really good female programmers holding their own with really good male programmers; not 50/50 but they're doing well. However when you look at the average programmers who do ok but won't amaze anyone with their brilliance, that demographic is dominated much more by men.

      So that says there are some barriers or discouragements. Those people who want to fight their way in will do so and overcome obstacles. But those who just want to go with the flow will hit those impediments. That is, a little bit of subtle discrimination will do a lot of discouraging for those who don't really want to fight the system. The average men aren't hitting as much subtle discrimination but women are more likely to be swayed by it and try a different field.

      Ie, take the college student who has yet to decide their major; if there's some negativity in computer science towards women, even if it is very subtle and difficult for slashdotters to notice, those undeclared women may decide that some other major is a better choice, whereas the undeclared men may think "programming's as good a job as any other" and sign up.

  26. Programming is over-hyped as a career by Tablizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Programmer burn-out and turn-over to other IT careers is high. Age discrimination and RSI injuries are common, and you are competing with 3rd-world wage-slaves and typically work long hours. For those who want to be involved with family life, long hours is not a selling point.

    Programming is a stepping-stone job into project, network, equipment logistics, and server management, but not the only path. It's only real appeal is quick money out of college. After that you statistically will flat-line compared to other options.

    Enough STEM career bullshit already.

    1. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by swillden · · Score: 1

      After that you statistically will flat-line compared to other options.

      Cite?

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Enough STEM career bullshit already.

      This site is owned by Dice Holdings. Good luck with that.

      Abandon all hope ye who thought /. would be worth a damn with corporate money behind it.

    3. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2

      Programming is a stepping-stone job into project, network, equipment logistics, and server management

      Lolwut? You have it exactly backwards, unless you think "programming" is shitty web page writing.

    4. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      This only happens because you let it. I think it is far worse in the US where labour laws are extremely weak. Then again maybe if some guy in India on the end of a phone serveral time zones away can be as valuable as you sat at a desk in the company offices maybe you aren't worth more.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    5. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      I can't find the article I've seen before, but here is a starting point:

      http://www.infoworld.com/d/app...

      I'll link more as I find them below this.

    6. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      More:

      http://improvingsoftware.com/2...

      This quote is from a dated study, but interesting nevertheless:

      [S]ix years after finishing college, 57 percent of computer science graduates are working as programmers; at 15 years the figure drops to 34 percent, and at 20 years -- when most are still only in their early 40's -- it is down to 19 percent. In contrast, the figures for civil engineering are 61 percent, 52 percent and 52 percent.

    7. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You're talking about the base level grunt jobs. Those numbers may be rising as a percentage but there are plenty of higher quality computer science jobs out there that don't involve help desk support or being on call 24/7.

    8. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Also, didn't Rosie the Riveter quite after a couple weeks because the job was too dirty and dangerous?

      Seems like a bad goal to set...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    9. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Posting anon due to modding. I often see this on slashdot and wonder just what the hell is going on, because it is nothing like this where I come from

    10. Re:Programming is over-hyped as a career by swillden · · Score: 1

      As a 44 year-old software engineer who works with a lot of others in their 40s, 50s, and 60s (as well as many in their 20s and 30s), my personal experience doesn't support this. That doesn't mean it's not true, of course, but I wonder if the causal arrow is in the direction that these articles presume. Most of the former SWEs I know who are now doing other things made the career change by choice, either because they got tired of writing code, or because they felt like they could get more money doing other things.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  27. oh, i forgot.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What about Chrystal the Crack dealer?? Or pete the Pimp?
    should we reverse the roles of these dynamic professions make it Carl the crack dealer, and Penelope the Pimp?

      or how about jenny the giglio? I mean really I could go on and on..

    how about Darth vader transposed with Danielle Vader??
    or prince larry instead of Princes Leia

    or how about Jenny fallon transposed with Jimmie Fallon.. Now that would be interesting, but still to be aired on lifetime.

    But I digress..

  28. This is about driving down wages not womens rights by TheNarrator · · Score: 1

    Remember when 1 bread winner could provide for a family in the 1950s? That was before women joined the workforce in mass and drove down wages by competing with men for jobs. It's all so defensible when it's masked as women's rights but it's really about cheap labor.

  29. There used to be more... by unimacs · · Score: 1

    I've been doing this for about 25 years now and there used to be more women in the field. I'm not exactly sure what happened. As to Dr. AnnMaria De Mars's point, what about the ones that graduated 10 years ago? I'm guessing a lot of them moved on to different jobs, either in management or someplace else. Compounding the problem women face is ageism. I think it's pretty well accepted that older programmers have a more difficult time finding work in a field that demands constant retraining.

    In addition, how many companies would be interested in a programmer that took a few years off to stay home with their kids and didn't have time to maintain their skills? Men don't have that problem to the same degree.

    I'm in a position now where I'm involved in hiring new developers. We've always had far fewer women candidates then men. The last time around we had zero.

    1. Re:There used to be more... by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Another kind of ageism: women younger than 40 can get pregnant, and demand long maturity leaves. And anybody over 40 is too old for IT.

      Also, women are usually primary care for children, and that it makes it difficult for them to work over 90 hours a week.

      Also, most visa workers in IT are men. And these days, you can hardly tell Redmond from Bangalore.

  30. poorly paid when compared to by mjwalshe · · Score: 1

    a lawyer or medical professional for the same experience

  31. Stop these articles already! by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've seen an absurd number of stories on this topic, probably ever since the Hour of Code crap started. /. would you please give this topic a @#$% rest???

    1. Re:Stop these articles already! by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1

      Maybe once more people understand what they are about they will go away by themselves as the problem goes away. Predictably most of the early positive mods are for comments about how we should stop trying to get to a 50/50 balance, despite the fact that TFS, not even TFA but TFS says we are down from 28% of computer science graduates being women a decade ago to 10%. Hint: it's not about equal numbers, it's about the fact that clearly at one stage a lot more women were going into IT and the fall is due to the things TFA talks about.

      When you learn and adjust your attitude the problem will go away, and then you can stop reading about it. At the very least if you can't be part of the solution at least stop being part of the problem and denying it even exists.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Stop these articles already! by avandesande · · Score: 1

      Agreed. One of the days topics that should be viewed on BETA.

      --
      love is just extroverted narcissism
    3. Re:Stop these articles already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've seen an absurd number of stories on this topic, probably ever since the Hour of Code crap started. /. would you please give this topic a @#$% rest???

      We are DICE. We do not forget. We will not give the topic a rest. Expect more of it.

    4. Re:Stop these articles already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "will go away by themselves as the problem goes away"

      That's assuming there is a problem, which I'm assuming the above poster disagrees with. Perhaps the number is down because women wised up and found better career paths. Poor dumb men just don't see the writing on the wall.

      Perhaps we don't need to get more women into Comp Sci, perhaps the real problem is we need to start getting more men out.

    5. Re:Stop these articles already! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't exist, the only group alleging it does are worthless social justice warriors who blame everyone else for their failures.

  32. This is about pay - again. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Trying to recruit more women is a politically correct way to encourage folks to enter the profession, increasing the supply and subsequently reducing wages.

    That's all.

    Business NEVER does things for the common good - ever.

    And as we see, it's Silicon Valley lamo companies bitching about "shortages" when it because they don't pay enough.

    1. Re:This is about pay - again. by swillden · · Score: 1

      Trying to recruit more women is a politically correct way to encourage folks to enter the profession, increasing the supply and subsequently reducing wages.

      This article is about Google incenting girls to try programming, Google's issue is not that they're not paying enough, but that they simply can't find the people.

      The Google office I work at (Boulder) experiences a near 100% offer acceptance rate. Almost every engineer who interviews and gets an offer takes it, which is a pretty strong indicator that the compensation is fair -- and Boulder is a tech-heavy area, and within the extended Denver metro area, so engineers here have lots of options and salaries in the region are pretty decent. The problem is that the vast majority of the people who interview don't make the cut. AFAIK, the situation is the same at other sites. The company pays plenty well to attract talent... there's just not that much talent to be had. I think most of the big Silicon Valley tech companies are in the same boat.

      What you is true some places, of course. There are a lot of companies that pay crap salaries and then wonder why they can't find anyone. But I don't think that's the case with any of the big tech giants.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    2. Re:This is about pay - again. by kraut · · Score: 1

      If you discriminate based on race, you're cutting off a certain percentage (varying by country) of the talent pool. Stupid.
      If you discriminate based on gender, you're cutting off ca. 50% of the talent pool. Really stupid.
      You don't need to invoke lofty principles to argue against discrimination.

      The supply/demand issue doesn't really have much to do with discrimination.

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    3. Re:This is about pay - again. by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      How about if you discriminate based upon psychological preference. It seems the only measures are capability to do the job and the minimum amount of remuneration required to achieve the necessary numbers. The only human values being measured seems to be intellect and greed, no wonder programs are put on market so full of bugs and missing features.

      How about defining the appropriate intellectual and psychological profile and testing for those and selecting those who will be the happiest in the job and capable of performing it in a reasonable manner and not necessarily for the lowest possible remuneration but reasonable remuneration based upon say a reasonable proportion of the maximum salary paid at a company and the profits generated by those efforts.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    4. Re:This is about pay - again. by Mr.CRC · · Score: 1

      "Business NEVER does things for the common good - ever."

      So tell us who does?

  33. nuclear power has an imbalance too by mdsolar · · Score: 1
  34. IT is going offshore anyway by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

    Women, as well as men, in the USA might be wise to avoid IT.

    There is just no way for a US resident to compete with 3rd world wages.

    The jobs that cannot be offshored, will be filled by visa workers.

    It is far easier to offshore IT, than to offshore manufacturing. With IT there is no physical inventory, no shipping, no customs, no storage, nothing like that. With IT, you just zap files back and forth.

    Unless you have a top secret clearance, there is no way for US and Europe to compete.

  35. 2001-2 by EMG+at+MU · · Score: 1

    Humm, if only there was some economic event that happened around that time that could explain why large amounts of people would switch careers. It is almost as if there was some kind of recession in the number of software jobs available that caused female CS grads to pick different careers.

  36. Sigh.. by epyT-R · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Enough of this narrative already. Women are given every opportunity and are practically begged by universities (via discriminating scholarships under the guise of 'diversity' programs) to major in comp-sci and other engineering/science majors. They've been doing this for decades, now, and they're still looking at it as though it's 1970. The problem is they're measuring success by the standard of equal outcome on the false premise that men and women are physically and psychologically the same. They're not, so they won't always make the same life choices given similar backgrounds and opportunities. Despite what the PC crowd will say, there's nothing wrong with this at all. This is the very essence of diversity. In a diverse systems, equal outcome is not a given.

    How about we focus on equal opportunity based upon relevant attributes (ie demonstrated interest and aptitude), rather than building systemic bias into society under the guise of eliminating it? After that, let individuals make their own life choices. The only thing this bias does is teach women how to play better victims, which denies them opportunities to earn real respect among their peers. Getting society to discriminate against men will not empower them, either. It just creates more irrelevant discrimination and bilateral bigotry.

    1. Re:Sigh.. by AmiMoJo · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      The problem is they're measuring success by the standard of equal outcome on the false premise that men and women are physically and psychologically the same

      You idiot. TFS says that nearly 30% of computer science degrees went to women 12 years ago, compared to 10% now. TFS is not arguing for equality of outcome, merely trying to address the decline. Do you think that 18% of 2001-2 graduates were forced at gunpoint to do that course, just to make up the numbers? And now the decline is because no-one is forcing women to do CS any more?

      If you can't be bothered to even read TFS please just fuck off. I'm sorry to be so blunt, but this story is littered with similarly moronic comments about how everyone who thinks there is a problem just wants there to be a 50/50 ratio but actually no-one (except you) is saying that. By always introducing that straw man it makes it difficult to improve the situation, so how about you just go RTFA for once and at least make some token effort to stop being part of the problem it talks about?

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Sigh.. by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Hey, that IS the current party line on the subject. Go read up on current feminist literature and punditry if you like. I knew it'd come up in discussion so I stated my position on it. What the article said is irrelevant as it's still clamoring for more sexist affirmative action as the solution to "the dearth of programmers" in the market. If the author's real goal was to push for a solution to this problem, real or not (instead of piggy backing on it to give his propaganda faux merit), he would've said something along the lines of "we should encourage more people to enter the field." Instead we get:

      As I mentioned above, this article is a perfect example of what not to do. If sex doesn't matter, stop re-framing the narrative to make it about one or the other, or one vs the other. How many there are or were, then or now, and the constant reaffirmation that women's problems are men's too (men are codeworded as 'everyone' by these people) makes it pretty clear this was meant as a shaming/propaganda piece and not a rational analysis of anything.

      It then goes on to make arguments from authority, and then quotes someone's quality logic:

      "..she likes to point to research that shows companies with women in leadership positions offer investors and shareholders better returns than those without."

      "There's not a lot of cross-pollination of ideas. Whether you're a woman, a man, short, tall, black, white, Asian, whatever, everybody has a different perspective and the more you mix it up, it's just better."

      Just better, eh? Wow, that explains a lot, thanks! What's quoted as an example? Voice recognition, which has nothing to do with leadership skills, actual capability in computer science, or anything else. If that's the summation of the whole problem, we don't need more women in computer science, we need more women in product testing labs...or maybe there's actually some physics (acoustics modeling, differences in male/female voices) involved, but since that would be politically incorrect, any investigative work done by the manufacturers will be shelved to avoid frivolous lawsuits from the legal brigades of the perpetually offended.

      Allowing different perspectives into the discussion is one thing, but having to tolerate them just because they came from a specific sex, race, or culture, is quite another, especially in science. Whatever happened to being correct? Hire those people. They're the ones who'll make companies money, male or female, white, not white, gay, straight, whatever. Toss the ones looking for drama out on their asses.

    3. Re:Sigh.. by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      I too am getting tired, not of these stories, but that slashdotters who jump out of the woodwork to defend the broken status quo whenever these stories arise. So rather than just not caring about the issue and keeping quiet, they care about the issue so much that they take the time to post in opposition to it. I think there are many people here who are insecure about the whole topic.

    4. Re:Sigh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well there AmiMoJo, look at his mods, and look at yours. You're the outcast here, so kindly go fuck yourself.

      Let me guess: you've got a vagina.

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

      Oops.. sorry.. looks like you're from the UK.

      Well, then again, UK men *are* vaginas so there's not a great deal of difference.

    6. Re:Sigh.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      who gives a shit. If you can't pinpoint the cause, eg some kind of systematic discrimination then shut up.
      Women get nearly 60% of higher-ed degrees already, it's none of my business that they apparently prefer women studies and underwater basket weaving.

    7. Re:Sigh.. by Zeromous · · Score: 1

      When you have nothing to add: Ad Hominem is best Homonym.

      --
      ---Up Up Down Down Left Right Left Right B A START
    8. Re:Sigh.. by dwpro · · Score: 1

      I think the graphic on the NYT showing the enrollment of both genders is informative:

      http://www.nytimes.com/imagepa...

      I wasn't in the field in 82, so don't know much about that time, but interest from both genders spiked around the dot com bubble, which from my experience correlated to more folks who were less interested in Computer Science and more interested in the anticipated salaries. I do think there are more few factors at play, but the respective spikes seem more like aberrations than norms.

      --
      Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. -- Susan Ertz
  37. Here we go again... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

    another solution looking for a problem. The reason there are fewer women in IT is not because they are being discriminated somehow. It's because they don't see it as a viable occupation for them. They are choosing not to enter the field - for whatever reason - but it is a choice that women have made.

    This is not something that needs "fixing" but yet another diversity fuck-wit.

    So Google is handing out $100 to girls that complete the JavaScript course? That's great but how about giving it to boys too?

    -- Sarcasm begin: Oh but make sure you don't give it to any white boys. They have enough advantages in life already, don't ya know. What about those asian boys? Nah - we have enough of them in IT already. They don't need the $100. Yup, better just stick with giving it to the black and hispanic boys. They are, no doubt, under represented as well so they need a helping hand. And all girls - even white girls - will get the money. That should even things up. -- Sarcasm end

    See where this is going?

    1. Re:Here we go again... by hondo77 · · Score: 1

      It's because they don't see it as a viable occupation for them. They are choosing not to enter the field - for whatever reason - but it is a choice that women have made.

      What incredible insight you have! Some people with more insight, though, go even further and ask "Why?"

      --
      I live ze unknown. I love ze unknown. I am ze unknown.
    2. Re:Here we go again... by erp_consultant · · Score: 1

      And others...with even more insight...might actually try to answer "why". Oh, I see that's missing from your response.

      What do you think the reason is?

      I don't pretend to know what it is - but I know what it isn't and that's discrimination. This two-wrongs-make-a-right type of approach when we tilt things one way and then re-tilt them back to address some supposed injustice just doesn't work.

      How about we let the market decide? When IT jobs pay enough and have the right balance of home/work and provide whatever it is that would make it attractive to women as a career option they will join the ranks.

      Do you really think that Google offering $100 to some schoolgirl is going to magically re-balance the workforce? It's nothing more than feel good, PR bullshit.

    3. Re:Here we go again... by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      So find out WHY they're not interested today even though they were interested in the past. If you're too young to remember when women were common place in the industry then read the damn article. Maybe it is not discrimination (at least not overt) but there is SOMETHING causing this trend.

  38. where are the entwives? by johnrpenner · · Score: 1

    i've met some really good women programmers over several decades in the tech world —but precious few. :-(

    to make things fit our statistical ideal — we strive to glamourize writing code, the good pay, how easy it is to start, and the cool places you can work if you do. yet these things, have little to do with actually being interesting in numbers and algorithms.

    if you have a real interest, the difficulty doesnt stop you, no more than salmon swimming upstream. the insatiable desire to grok code is its own reason. if we cant draw more people into computer science by showing how fascinating powers of 2 arithmetic, binary logic, and how neat pointer references are — then i'm afraid there's little hope — sometimes it seems they just dont like it. they have other less abstract, more practical concerns. so often, in perplexity, i have wondered — why are there so precious few women who are intrinsically interested in writing code? guys dig chicks with whom they can talk C++ —— but where are they!?!?

    so i dont know if they are being shut out, or if they are simply averse. for the ones that arent — please, come code. the guys more than want more female programmers around. because of this, i've spent a lot of time trying to help women grok technology more deeply.

    one thing i've noticed though, while machinery speaks in hexadecimal; the women are using the machinery more. instead of 'how it works', their quesion is 'how to use'? instead of making machines, they would rather use them. it reminds me of an old quote from Heinrich Heine's mom — 'the man thinks, and the women steers'.

    in the end — it is for women to decide.
    all we can do is encourage, and hold the door open. :-D
    please come.

    1. Re:where are the entwives? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Explain the social benefit of coding and women will want to code.

  39. if you can't H-1B it... by Thud457 · · Score: 2

    just hire more women and pay them 75 cents on the dollar.


    It'd be worth every quarter just to drive out some of the brogrammers

    --

    the preceding comment is my own and in no way reflects the opinion of the Joint Chiefs of Staff

  40. Re:This is about driving down wages not womens rig by unimacs · · Score: 1

    So companies conspired to get more women in the workforce to drive down labor costs?

  41. Tech companies just want to further glut the field by walterbyrd · · Score: 2

    The field is already glutted. US workers are being replaced by offshore workers in droves. Wages are not going up.

    But IT workers are never cheap enough for the tech companies, so they churn out this propaganda routinely.

  42. Affordable Childcare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A big part of the reason women aren't as present in the American high tech workforce compared to other countries is the complete lack of any sort of public child care. In other first world, and in third world (servant economies) a woman with children can rely on help while she pursues a career. In the US help is only available for those with thousands of dollars a month to pour into private childcare. The US prioritizes corporate profits above all, and ignoring the realities of child care is the order of the day.

  43. In my Armchair Sociologist's opinion... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It seems to me that there are basicly 3 things that contribute to the lack of women in tech:

    1. As a society we tell women that having a career is optional and that if you do have a career it's acceptable to sacrifice it for other goals like family. By contrast we tell men that their value is directly related to their career and that if the want to pursue other interests like family they have to find a way to squeeze them in around their career. This results in women frequently being uninterested in jobs with the sort of expectations that are common in tech fields (particularly over time, and continued training/education).

    2. Our society views being good at math and logic as un-feminine. So women who have the aptitude frequently choose other paths due to peer pressure.

    3. Because there are few women in tech, the sub-cultures surrounding it are often pretty toxic, even hostile towards women. It's rarely intentional, but when a woman looks at her career options and on one hand there's a bunch of geeks who talk to her chest and won't stop making unfunny jokes about how there aren't any girls on the Internet, and on the other hand are a number of fields where she won't have to deal with that crap, it's pretty obvious what choice she's more likely to make.

  44. There's no shortage. by tsotha · · Score: 2

    I'd just as soon "Peggy" found something else to do. The entire "shortage" is a mythical construct of tech companies engaged in their biannual attempt to raise the H1-B cap.

    If you need to be convinced to take up programming you probably won't be very good at it anyway.

  45. because it's a hostile environment by SuperBanana · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!

    It makes a difference when the path to the field, and the field itself, is hostile to non-straight, white, men. Reading through the comments here there's a lot of really angry, hostile, dismissive posts. Which certainly doesn't help counter the argument by TFA.

    Hell, the NBA is really lacking of white college educated women....are we freaking out and trying to induce them with $100 to work to get into the NBA (and god help them if the teams discrimate!!).

    Aside from the fact that a sports league has nothing to do with IT, when's the last time you watched a WNBA game? Can you name a SINGLE WNBA player playing this season? How about a single hall-of-famer? Can you name your area's WNBA team? When was the last time you even accidentally came up on an WNBA game on TV? (hint: rarely, because they're not televised nearly as often.) Or how about this: why doesn't the NBA sanction both men's and women's leagues, ie, why did the WNBA need to be formed in the first place? Answer: because the NBA refused to allow women's teams.

    So, women don't get the same TV coverage, sponsorship, press, etc.

    The gender bias in professional sports *is* a huge problem. And it's a problem in scholastic/collegiate areas as well, which is the whole point behind Title 9 - all the money for scholastic and collegiate athletics was going to men's sports.

    1. Re:because it's a hostile environment by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      The gender bias in professional sports *is* a huge problem

      Rubbish. Women aren't as good at men in sports. It's as simple as that. It's not the oft-cited "upper body strength" either. It's everything. The more any given "sport" requires strength, speed, agility, power, endurance, or any other physical trait the more men dominate it.

      So no, women don't get the same TV coverage, etc.. except in niche cases where basically they are hot. I'll tell you what - if you want equality how about we end all unisex sports. Make it so that women and men must all play in the same field of competition in all sports - let's see how that works out.

    2. Re:because it's a hostile environment by kraut · · Score: 1

      >Rubbish. Women aren't as good at men in sports.
      Assuming you have a decent TV service, look back at the winter Olympics. Snowboarding, bobsleigh, skeleton, skiing. Is the women's competition any worse than the mens? Look at the icedancing, speed skating, etc. Still not convinced?

      Historically, men have watched sports, and - particularly in the team sports - it seems that men are more in need of that tribal identification with a group than women are.

      Or maybe it's simply that many more men than will admit to it enjoy watching hot men get sweaty :)

      --
      no taxation without representation!
    3. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...the NBA refused to allow women's teams.

      So, women don't get the same TV coverage, sponsorship, press, etc.

      The gender bias in professional sports *is* a huge problem.

      Yep. I'd bet that the unrequitted consumer demand for televised women's basketball is just through the roof.

      Gosh, I wish those darned networks and sponsors would quit robbing us of the opportunity to watch women's basketball because of "bias"... and not because of wholly imaginary revenue projections from imaginary consumer demand.

      ...wipes a tear from his eye....Can't we all just be equal in every single thing we do? Can't we? It's not fair!

      I know! Let's make it Equal! I propose the NBA create and integrate women-only expansion teams, but handicap the spread of each game against men's teams to make it equal! Yes! The NBA can also give everyone that participates in professional basketball a participation ribbon for every game in which they play- If we hold one team above the other for winning a game we'll hurt the losing team's self-esteem- I mean, really- must we focus so much upon "winning" and "losing"?. It's just not fair if everyone isn't recognized for trying.

    4. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that as of right now, women earn more degrees than men. More high school graduates are female than male.

      So, if scholastic bias is towards men, why does this happen?

    5. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Peristaltic · · Score: 1

      When's the last time you watched a WNBA game?

      When the Houston Comets were in the 2005 playoffs, I went to one of their games... SuperBanana, it might have great for some, but it didn't have the energy or quality of play that we enjoyed watching the Rockets. Neither I, my wife nor my friends ever had the desire to pay to watch another WNBA game. Sorry, just say'n.

    6. Re:because it's a hostile environment by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 1

      The competition or the ability/skill? You can put two toddlers in a basketball and they'd be pretty evenly matched, does that make it a great "competition"?

      For example, compare records in speed skating - massive differences. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L...

    7. Re:because it's a hostile environment by pla · · Score: 2

      It makes a difference when the path to the field, and the field itself, is hostile to non-straight, white, men.

      The funny part about that, you won't find a much more pure meritocracy than IT in the entire history of Humanity.

      If group-X has a problem with the attitudes in IT, that says more about group-X than it does about IT. We may not, as a whole, tend to kowtow to BS politically correct social norms; but we'll accept a black Muslim woman programmer just as readily as any run-of-the-mill pasty white middle class basement dweller.

      That said, yes, other departments put up with us more for what we bring to the table than for our manners. But again... That still says more about them than about us. We earn our keep. And theirs. Suck it up or go back to paper ledgers, physical pricebooks, board games, and typewriters.


      The gender bias in professional sports *is* a huge problem.

      And with that one line, you destroyed your own credibility. Women have every opportunity to compete in pro sports. Just find one who can beat LeBron or Kobe - Or hell, even a John Lucas or Jason Thompson.

      Some professions don't appeal to women, some they don't do well at. But if you really want to rant, perhaps you should encourage more men to become K-6 teachers or nurses or therapists, to even out the gender gap there. Sorry? I can't hear you over the crickets. Can you speak up?

    8. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know! Let's make it Equal! I propose the NBA create and integrate women-only expansion teams, but handicap the spread of each game against men's teams to make it equal! Yes! The NBA can also give everyone that participates in professional basketball a participation ribbon for every game in which they play- If we hold one team above the other for winning a game we'll hurt the losing team's self-esteem- I mean, really- must we focus so much upon "winning" and "losing"?. It's just not fair if everyone isn't recognized for trying.

      Harrison Bergeron

    9. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Girls should be married when they're young.
      6.
      The muslims had it right there.
      Women are rotten. Especially tech bitches.
      Actual girls are often cute and nice.

    10. Re:because it's a hostile environment by cayenne8 · · Score: 1
      Why is there a WNBA and a NBA....I thought separate but equal was verboten?

      Why aren't they protesting no Asian women in the NBA?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    11. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Pope · · Score: 1

      It makes a difference when the path to the field, and the field itself, is hostile to non-straight, white, men. Reading through the comments here there's a lot of really angry, hostile, dismissive posts. Which certainly doesn't help counter the argument by TFA..

      Exactly. It's the same zero-sum, majority-privileged mentality.
      Someone wants to have a women-only programming class? The straight white male cries "Discrimination!!"
      You know, because the mere existence of such a thing DENIES him his "right."
      It's fucking pathetic.

      --
      It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
    12. RE: because it's a hostile environment by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So the answer to making the WNBA competitive is to make people watch the games? Where are the women in all of this? Why aren't they demanding WNBA? They make up over 1/2 the population. As far a naming female hall-of-famers, can you name a cricket champion? No? Maybe we need to force that on every one.

      As far as "non-straight white men" having trouble in IT, I've never seen it. In fact, I've run into more gay men and women in IT management than anywhere else. I've also seen them be extremely discriminating against so-call "white straight males" without any recourse.

      The supposed shortage of STEM workers is exactly the opportunity that should make IT/Computer Science the place for them to go. Women now receive more bachelor degrees than men. Go to work. I guess the real problem is that like all jobs, you have to start at the bottom before you get to the top.
       

    13. Re:because it's a hostile environment by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

      Last time I watched a WNBA game? I think I saw part of one years ago.

      Even more telling, the last time I watched an NBA game. I've seen bits here and there, mostly in the news I think.

      The last time I watched any sports at all? Well, my girlfriend made me watch the last 3 or 4 football games including the Superbowl :)

      The last time I watched any sports because I _wanted_ to was a couple of years back when I watched MotoGP racing.

      [John]

      --
      Shit better not happen!
    14. Re:because it's a hostile environment by MrResistor · · Score: 1

      But if you really want to rant, perhaps you should encourage more men to become K-6 teachers or nurses or therapists, to even out the gender gap there.

      There's plenty of discussion about how we need more men in nursing and K-6 education, it's just happening on forums you aren't paying attention too. Perhaps you could pull your head out of your ass and google yourself up a bit of education on those topics. I can't speak to therapists, but then all of the relatively few therapists I've met are men.

      --
      Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  46. Far too smart by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My current theory is that women don't enter programming because they're far too smart to get suckered into these jobs.

  47. Well, about that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you have a top secret clearance, there is no way for US and Europe to compete.

    My father in-law was laid off form Lockheed months ago. He has a top secret clearance and Lockheed is the only place that requires such things.

    He's VERY sharp but unfortunately, when a job posting isn't mysteriously closed, he'll get the "you're not a good fit" when he occasionally gets an interview. Of course, what makes him "not a good fit" is never mentioned. I think it's the gray in his beard.

    When I see companies bitch about not getting enough qualified people, I can tell you that it's their hiring practices.

    Anyway, off-shoring is going to continue and what I tell sharp kids is go into something else other than IT unless you really really LOVE it.

    1. Re:Well, about that... by Nemyst · · Score: 1

      When I see companies bitch about not getting enough qualified people, I can tell you that it's their hiring practices.

      Nah, they just want your father-in-law but at half the price. Then they'll claim there's a shortage when nobody shows up.

    2. Re:Well, about that... by walterbyrd · · Score: 1

      Thanks for letting me know, it's even worse than I thought.

      Maybe women want no part of IT because women are smarter than men.

  48. I hope so. by RightSaidFred99 · · Score: 2

    I for one fervently hope so.

    Oh, not because this is a real or important issue. I find "diversity" studies in technical fields laughable. You can have more diversity in relevant thought between two white males who graduated from different schools than between a white male and a black female CS graduate. Race and sex are not equal to diversity.

    No, I hope this works because I'm fucking tired of hearing about it. So very, very tired.

  49. IT career = good employment, horrible life by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Ok, that's a bit dramatic. Perhaps.

    But seriously, you can't expect a profession that almost REQUIRES minimum 50 hours per week (on an easy week) and off hours 'emergency' calls for basically your entire life, to be popular.

    Working with new technology? Cool
    Devising new ways for business to use said new technology? Cool
    Supporting the demands of financial strapped business that now REQUIRE 24/7 uptime or it's a shit storm? Career breaking terrible.

  50. Where are they now by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

    The excess female graduates from 2001-2 were the ones at the tail end of the pipeline following the .com boom to become HTML programmers just like the excess men from that time frame. Once they got their degree they had to face the cold reality of a job environment that they didn't have the capacity to work in.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  51. Depends on who you ask by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I currently sit in a .Net team that has 3 women to 1 male.
    It really depends on if the job is appealing.
    Most men don't care about having to be in a basement for there jobs.

  52. Rosie the riveter by Larry_Dillon · · Score: 1

    I'd like to point out that Rosie quit after a couple of weeks because she thought the job was too dangerous.

    --
    Competition Good, Monopoly Bad.
    1. Re:Rosie the riveter by Krishnoid · · Score: 2

      Incredibly, though, this one is still working as a riveter as of about 5 months ago.

  53. More bullshit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nothing stopping ANY women from becoming programmers...

  54. Umm... by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Does that question even make sense without some sort of suitable historical context?

    Is there some massive draft underway, with hundreds of thousands of code monkeys being churned into cannon fodder, that I missed out on?

    Even casually equating a total-war domestic propaganda/production mobilization exercise with the half-assed plan of the day by silicon valley to get slightly cheaper programmers just seems... tone deaf. At best.

  55. Most boys and men arent interested either. by buttfuckinpimpnugget · · Score: 0

    So what?

  56. give me a fucking break by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    > It harms women by excluding them from some of the best jobs in the country

    Nobody is excluding women from tech but women and this useless bullshit stance that we somehow need to make women more equal in order to encourage them in to tech jobs is more damaging than them not coming in to tech.

  57. Bob the babysitter by Timmy+D+Programmer · · Score: 1

    Seriously, why do the young men all have to flip burgers, and all the young ladies get to babysit. I don't know about the rest of you but I would have much rather played Legos with a 5 year old than stand behind a fryer all day.

    --


    (If at first you don't succeed, do it different next time!)
    1. Re:Bob the babysitter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      'Played Legos?' Is that what you sickos call it these days? Also, Mr. Pedophile, you should be ashamed for perpetuating the 'women are nurturers' stereotype!

  58. And thanks to the feminazis, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    women can stay where they are, as far as I am concerned. Don't want that risk potential at the workplace. The workplace cooperation between men and women is severely tainted by threats of litigation, especially in the IT world.

  59. Re:this again ? really by wiredlogic · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The female hostile tech work environment is largely a myth nowadays. I've heard atrocious war stories from older female engineers who were treated like secretaries at former employers... and then they proclaim how much better they are treated at their current job. I've also heard numerous women with no actual experience paint an unappealing picture of what they perceive to be the work environment in (non-bio) science and engineering.

    The reality is that the majority of women just aren't as interested in doing that type of work, either due to social conditioning (Barbie: "Math is hard") or innate lack of interest. There have been decades of effort to promote women in STEM positions with no real results other than the biology related sciences. Is that the fault of men or it is just because women aren't interested no matter how much boostering is directed their way? Is it really that important to put so much effort to create an artificially level paying field? Nobody is complaining about the paucity of male elementary school teachers. Why aren't there alarmists crying over that?

    In my experience, the technical women are treated fairly and the negative image is just an outdated stereotype perpetuated by women themselves. I'm sure there is still a level of unfair bias and inappropriate behavior but from my observation the modern male tech worker is the most welcoming to women compared to other fields. I can't enumerate all the times I've heard inappropriate comments come from female coworkers that any male compatriot would not dare say for fear of going to a reeducation camp.

    --
    I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
  60. What War by Dripdry · · Score: 2

    Exactly which war is Peggy the Programmer going to help us win? The war against 35-year-old virgins?

    Maybe I'm too dim, but I'm just not seeing a meaningful connection here.

    --
    -
    1. Re:What War by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Exactly which war is Peggy the Programmer going to help us win? The war against 35-year-old virgins?

      Maybe I'm too dim, but I'm just not seeing a meaningful connection here.

      Agreed. "Rosie the Riveter" was about women taking manufacturing jobs so we could increase production of war materiel in spite of the male workforce being diverted to combat. "Peggy the Programmer" is about trying to convince women to pursue careers where the level of unmet demand is debatable and there is downward wage pressure due to offshoring and H-1B visas, which is basically not the same thing at all. Maybe women are smart not to pursue programming now.

  61. Not the Best Jobs in the Country, and Other Things by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    While some programming jobs do pay exceptionally well, there are loads of fully capable workers getting a pitence and being treated like indentured servants. We have too many programmers as it is. Getting more programmers isn't going to help anything. What we need are entrylevel positions for programmers. The biggest hurdle isn't the number of programmers, but getting them on-the-job experience.

    Women aren't being excluded. The few women I've worked with had been given the same respect as the men. The reason there are so few women is that in school we had 4 women in the computing science department, and one was a teacher. They aren't interested in it. It's that simple.

  62. Re:this again ? really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    well there were not many women doctors not too long ago and now there are quite many. I assume if programming is as attractive as medicine then this will also happen. I know some will say that there is a hostile work environment but do you think most single gender dominated jobs do not. Like being doctors - those impediments will be overcome .

    Those are mostly red herring arguments. There are plenty of programmers out there, but employers don't want to pay good wages they want to be able to hire a college grad with 10 years experience for $20k a year, and right now they can't really get away with that. So by convincing women to get into the industry they're hoping for an influx of inexperienced and underqualified applicants who can water down the pool of available workers, leading to wage deflation all while claiming we're really making things better by getting women into tech.

    If the goal REALLY is to get women into tech, then we shouldn't be pushing for programmers, but rather pushing for IT type jobs which are an applied (vo-tech) style degree, not a College track degree.

  63. Re:this again ? really by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Maybe the ladies just aren't interested? Did any of the anti-male ass-fuckers who come up with these "we must have as many women as men in profession X" ever think about that? there's probably a dearth of female mechanics too, but that never garners headlines.

    Just more reverse sexism from the culture that brought you Justin Beiber.

  64. You could START, Google, by making it $10,000 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because you've got more money than God.

  65. Forced outcome equality by DaFallus · · Score: 0

    Only around 10.7% of murders are committed by women. What are we doing to close the gap and introduce more women into this male dominated field?

    --
    No one cares what your captcha was

    Houston TX, USA
  66. maybe all the women doesnt like CS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Because all the male geeks in CS course doesn't shower or bath.....

  67. Re:this again ? really by lgw · · Score: 1

    There are bad neighborhoods in tech that have quite the fratboy mentality and are quite hostile to women. You may have heard of "brogramming". I've heard enough first-hand accounts to believe that corner of the profession exists.

    But in the sort of work I do - infrastructure and backend stuff - I've never seen a hint of it. We welcome anyone who's a competent coder and who actually wants to write the sort of programs that don't have UIs. It's a fairly introverted and inoffensive bunch even by developer standards, so it's not like "inappropriate comments" are likely regardless.

    --
    Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
  68. if the people who care take "diversity" seriously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    they should complain about the lack of women lumberjacks, fishermen(fisherpersons?), taxi drivers, roofers, construction workers, farmers etc

    but they don't because those jobs are dirty and hard and dangerous, leave those for the men

  69. Other options in technology by Cereal+Box · · Score: 1

    Personally I'm of the opinion that in order to be a really GOOD programmer you have to live, eat, and breathe it. Part of that is spending your formative years locked away coding on a computer, eschewing things like friends, social gatherings, etc. I know I did. How many girls and young women are willing to do that? I dunno, maybe that factors into it.

    But I don't see why the only option for women in technology is programming. Where I work, it seems like just about every Project Manager is a woman. And that's probably because a good PM has to do things like interact with many people, pay attention to details, schedule, organize, etc. which traditionally are things that women are good at. Why not, you know, stress those kinds of options to young women interested in tech jobs instead of trying to force women into something they really don't seem that interested in? Just because men dominate a certain industry doesn't mean there's a "problem", you know.

  70. Soon to be Peggy the Project Manager by Maltheus · · Score: 1

    Most women I've encountered in IT usually go into middle management. At pretty much every job I've ever had, most of the managers are women, they all claim to have come from a programming background, but there are hardly any female programmers (maybe one of two among the testers) who stick with it.

  71. I would'nt exactly say they've been missing it Bob by Yakasha · · Score: 1

    Women are smarter... maybe they just know something we don't?

  72. Wages too high by rsilvergun · · Score: 1

    IT companies are tired of paying $100k/yr for programmers. They're trying to flood the market. Getting women into Programmer is just one part of this.

    --
    Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
  73. Empirically provably false by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

    See the book "Unlocking the Clubhouse" for the results of hundreds of interviews with bright highly motivated female CS students.

    > equal opportunity based upon relevant attributes (ie demonstrated interest and aptitude)

    That's a good thing to focus on since we're not there yet and have more work to do.

    1. Re:Empirically provably false by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      My point was that affirmative action moves us further away from that goal. All it does is bestow privilege based on the traits that aren't supposed to matter.

      .

  74. "If a group isn't interested" by Beryllium+Sphere(tm) · · Score: 1

    Groups aren't interested in things, people are, and pre-adult female people get a lot of messages about what should interest them which are outright toxic and which we should compensate for. Getting them some exposure to CS and programming may partially make up for a lifetime that begins with their brothers hogging the computer and which continues with outright anti-intellectualism in school.

  75. Re:this again ? really by XopherMV · · Score: 1

    well there were not many women doctors not too long ago and now there are quite many. I assume if programming is as attractive as medicine then this will also happen.

    Yes. When developer salaries rise to match the salaries to those in medicine, then the field will get flooded with all types of people looking to do development work. This will include women. That's economics 101: supply and demand.

  76. Are Techies Bigger Jerks than Lawyers??? by onkelonkel · · Score: 2

    A common assumption I read here is that the male dominated culture is keeping women out of engineering and programming.

    Let us indulge in a little thought experiment about two male dominated fields.

    50 years ago Law schools and Engineering schools had less than 5% women. Today, Law schools are 50+% women and Engineering schools are maybe 10% women. We can therefore conclude a) Techie men are much bigger jerks than lawyers, or b) something else is causing this.

    --
    None of them can see the clouds; The polished wings don't care.
    1. Re:Are Techies Bigger Jerks than Lawyers??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Perhaps instead of a show called "Law & Order", there needs to be a show - top rated too - called "R & D".

    2. Re:Are Techies Bigger Jerks than Lawyers??? by ejasons · · Score: 1

      Seems likely that the intelligent women have started to decide to go into law and other fields instead. The way that engineering is going, that probably makes them a lot more intelligent than I...

  77. if there's such a shortage ... by cascadingstylesheet · · Score: 1

    ... then raise the pay.

  78. Empowering Women or 70 Cents on the Dollar? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I wonder how much of this is about empowering women and how much of this is trying to get programmers at 70 cents on the dollar. I'm all for the former, but not the latter.

    Women, don't sell yourselves short!

  79. Hugely stupid topic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    This whole topic is a non-starter.

    Programming is neither lucrative nor stable unless you're a 10x engineer or you lucked out in the right start-up.

    As an RN, my wife:
    - Makes 80% of the salary I do.
    - Only puts in 70% of the time, and those hours are very fixed.
    - Is paid overtime (time and a half) for any extra time she's asked to put in.
    - Work is far more stable.
    - Has far better benefits.
    - Is *paid* for ongoing career training.
    - **Does something that offers immediate benefits to others**
    - **Deals in a line of work where experience is valued.**
    - **Deals in a line of work where the wheel is NOT reinvented constantly (seeing the same thing in slightly different form but dressed up in a completely different name is so far from interesting) **
    - Deals in a virtually all-female profession.

    For the more ambitious: Doctors have it even better, despite their bellyaching.
    Further bonus: We know RNs that double-dip by working two shifts in two different hospital (and hence, double pay); making a quarter of million a year for 70 hours a week is pretty damned good. I'm pretty sure most SV workers put in close to those hours for far less pay.

    So the real question: Why the hell aren't there more men getting into this lucrative career of nursing?

  80. Why women? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They want more female programmers so that they can pay them less. Women typically earn less than men with the same qualifications and same responsibilities.

  81. Will she be the new Rosie? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good lord I hope not.. didn't Rosie quit after a few weeks? I'd rather not have a glut of half-hearted girls in my field just for a pathetic attempt at a cash-grab. It took me years to convince some of the older guys I worked with that I wasn't just some mimsy pretending to know what a pointer was. Times have changed substantially, and this kind of thing would only be a move in the wrong direction.

  82. this is how I know we have equality already by otc-lame · · Score: 1

    Everything in the summary is just as true for men/boys as it is for women/girls. We all know the shortage is a farce. At the same time, we actually would benefit from STEAM education, in the olden days they just used to call it education.

  83. It starts in the home by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A key factor in getting more of a gender balance in IT is ensuring at a very young age that women are encouraged equally to explore and tinker just as young boys are. I obviously don't speak for everyone, but the majority of clever technologists I've met have had a keen interest in how things work from early childhood (hacker mentality). Boys are usually encouraged in this, whereas a lot of parents in the last 10-20 years still encourage women to be more 'feminine'.

    I sincerely doubt offering girls $100 at the high school level to learn JavaScript (c'mon, really? JavaScript?) is going to do anything to affect the number of women in computing. It'll certainly put $100 in the pockets of some resourceful high school kids, however.

    At the end of the day, a technologist needs to have a job that's also a hobby - keen interest in the field coupled with an analytic mind. Gender shouldn't be relevant, and I don't think any woman who has come through public grade school is going to let an immature mentality (i.e. a bunch of "bros" quipping "that's what she said") keep her out of a field that she has a passion for. That's just implying women are emotionally fragile, which I don't buy for a second.

  84. FUCK YOU by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women are SMART(er) to stay out of this dumbass rathole of career.

  85. Re:this again ? really by Nemyst · · Score: 2

    "Brogrammers" aren't hostile to women, they're hostile to intelligence. Anyone with more than a few brain cells left, man or woman, would flee the fucking place as fast as possible.

  86. No!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Men like to code, women do not. So what?

    Most men don't like to work at day care centers either. Thank God for the women who do. I can barely handle my own children. I couldn't imagine watching someone else's kids.

    We each have our strengths. No amount of P.C. or feminism will change that.

  87. Re:This is about driving down wages not womens rig by Nemyst · · Score: 1

    I doubt it back then, but those sudden showings of kindness from Google and co sure look a bit suspicious. After all, they keep harping on STEM shortages, but when you dig a little deeper you tend to find out it's just that they want high paid workers for cheap, and the best way of doing this is by driving offer up so prices go down. Women just happen to be the most logical target: nobody will ever criticize them for it, they might even get some govt support for getting girls in tech, and theoretically it's a solid 30-40% gain in workforce if we aim for the mythical 51% split.

  88. Few women in developed countries want to be engine by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    In a 50+ nation study referred to in the Norwegian documentary "Brainwashed", it was discovered that in developing nations (like India) where women are traditionally more limited in their career options, about 30% of young women express an interest in engineering as a career. However, as women progress in equality issues, they become less and less interested in engineering. In Norway, Sweden and Finland - the nations at the top of the male female equality scale, less than 10% of young women express an interest in engineering as a career.

    It would appear that "Peggy the Programmer", as a social movement, is unlikely in the US.

  89. Fucking gender bias... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Seriously?
    Come on! Isn't it the high time to stop with that shit? This discrimination can not be allowed to stand any longer.
    Too long have we been thought that it is only women who can aspire towards a career of marrying a rich and handsome individual. Or at the very least rich. Very.
    Where is MY supermodel sugar-mommy?

    But seriously... get that shit out of the way, convince the girls that not only do they not need to get married and have babies to be a complete person but that the marriage as a career option is demeaning and strictly for sleazy gigolos and dumb weaklings and you got your problem solved.
    As a bonus, not only will there be more women in EVERY high paying profession (taking our jobs... but hey...), marriage will become a thing of the past. Nudge-nudge, wink-wink...

    No. Really.
    100$ incentive can't hold a candle to that all day every day "marry rich-make babies-be happy forever" training that they go through every second of their life.

    I mean, come on.
    Would you rather study and work OR would you impregnate supermodels for food, rent and everything else?

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  90. Wow totally agree by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a woman, I feel guilty for when I hear about these teach kids to code ventures and my first thought is, what about me? I need to learn to code but I have to work at the mall even though I have a Masters because no one out there will give me a chance. I am almost through the javascript CodeAcademy course, can I have a $100? to add to the $30 in my bank account? Only jobs out there for women new to coding are freelance dead-ends. The jobs out there advertising for engineers are not talking about me. They are talking to the 11 year old girls in school now with an ipad in their hands and they are talking to the 20 something guy who graduated from an ivy league college who knows Ruby like the back of both his hands. Working women today, right now, not 10 years from now, are struggling and no amount of cheerleading is going to erase the fact that many of us already got college degrees and have no more chances to take out more loans, and learning to code and use: javascript, php, python, ruby, c++, css, css3, sass, html, html5, html canvas, MySQL, Adobe CC (not CS5, CS6) but CC you know the Adobe programs that you have subscribe now and not buy once. All of this requires a stable, sizeable income and for many women in this economy that is just not possible. I am quite tiered of the ra ra ra! and ya ya ya! for teaching coding. It's not easy especially for women in the their 30's with degrees in how to use dreamweaver to move a box across the screen. Google and them all know this, why try to fix what is already broken. Let's start afresh, anew with the young girls and boys. After all, computer products for kids is an exploding market. Kids are the future consumers of technology. Get them while they are hot.

  91. Re:this again ? really by Darinbob · · Score: 1

    So if the work environment was more hostile to women in the past than today, yet today there is a smaller percentage of new women entering the field than in the past, what does that mean? Women are staying away in larger numbers than in the past because they're hearing outdated horror stories?

    The reality is that there were more women in the past who entered the field. They were apparently interested in it in the past. Maybe in the past CS was more closely aligned to math?

    I do hear very inappropriate things from men in the field still. I am amazed at some of the stuff I hear. Though it varies with companies and the crowd; the groups that tend to be heavily male also seem to be the rudest, whereas groups with a mix of genders tends to be more civilized and professional.

  92. Sigh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a white male who has never benefited from that white male privileged everyone talks about I am tired at the rampant sexism and racism aimed at me.

  93. Re:This is about driving down wages not womens rig by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not quite as non-insidious, but effectively, yes. Not because it's women, but because you now had a return to multiple household-members (we hadn't seen that since half the workforce was our children) providing for the household.

    The more widespread and acceptable it became, the more they could ease down on the brakes regarding pay and benefits. You get twice the production, and look, a married couple can still afford their house and college for 1.5 of the 2.5 kids perfectly just fine even if we increase pay at less than half the rate of inflation for a few more years!

    Women fully joining the workforce wasn't a problem in itself, just that it allowed some very intelligent bean-counters and their friends in the legislature to pull one heck of a smoke and mirror show on the economy. And anyone that tried to point out what was happening, well, obviously that's just one of those horrible mysoginists that wants his wife pregnant, barefoot and in the kitchen once again, that's right, go lynch that patriarchist, girls!

  94. Listserv? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Is this like a Listserv? The moronic politics are certainly pretty 90s.

    UNSUBSCRIBE SLASHDOT_FEMINIST_BULLSHIT

  95. Re:Tech companies just want to further glut the fi by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The field is full of useless programmers. Getting more women involved raises the number of good programmers. Companies pushing initiatives like this are the big ones that pay people well over the average, so your point about cheap wages is not really relevant.

  96. Re:this again ? really by xelah · · Score: 1

    The impact of the working environment doesn't just come from hostility, though. Take an organization - or any social group, really - and you're going to find it shaped by and for the people who are actually in it. If it's stuffed full of 22 year old men then you're going to find social expectations that you go out and get drunk with colleagues, and sympathy for people who turn up in the morning with a hangover. If it's stuffed full of 35 year old women you're more likely to find company provided childcare and sympathy for people who have to stay at home with sick children. There may be no hostility or different treatment of men and women whatsoever, and it's hard to say it's anyone's fault, but that doesn't make it go away.

    I don't believe this can explain the whole of gender imbalances across industries, possibly not even a large part of it. There are no doubt many reasons. However, it is one of those causes that can be attacked using positive discrimination (though I don't agree with that, personally...I think that if you want equal treatment for each gender on principle, then you need to stick to that principle).

  97. Re:this again ? really by xelah · · Score: 2

    That's not necessarily true. There are many high-income professions which are male dominated.

    I think that there's a great deal of interrelationship between the way men and women treat each other, and the way people treat each other at work and outside it. And one of aspect of that that I think is not looked at often enough is the way people make their sexual choices. Women can feel under pressure to be thin and beautiful with large chests because of men's preferences, but men come under pressure, too - under pressure to have high status jobs earning a lot of money (or, at least, to be higher status and higher earning than their prospective partner - one ex-partner told me that she wouldn't have considered me if I had earnt less than her). Inevitably, this will push more men than women in to making the sacrifices to their personal well-being to gain those things. In doing so, they make the labour market and working environment more competitive, political and hostile, and so less attractive to everyone. But that disproportionately puts off women, who don't need to deal with that to find the 'best' partners.

  98. No, it's not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Women don't get the same coverage in sports because the public does not want the product. The WNBA was forced on the public and if it had to actually rely on its attendance and sponsorship to survive it would have died years ago. The only reason that it's afloat is because the NBA sees it as a marketing tool to get money out of women. So be proud girls, every time a WNBA game tips off the NBA is laughing behind one of their hands and taking your money with the other....FYI, the WNBA IS an NBA-sanctioned league...the majority of the teams are owned by the NBA, simply because no actual businessman would buy teams because they don't make money.

    BTW, I've been in IT nearly 3 decades and can count on one hand the number of women who I've worked with at a very high technical level. But if you think it's hostile, you're wrong...the NUMBER ONE complaint in IT over it's history by men is that it's a sausage factory...all men. You think we WANT to work with other dudes?

    Oh yeah...Title 9 is a massive failure. It has done zero, other than force a lot of colleges to shut down mens teams because they couldn't get enough women to play sports.

    1. Re:No, it's not. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are confusing the situation with reason, you rotten sexist.

  99. This by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is such B.S.! The defense contractor company I work for goes out if its way to the extreme to promote women! It's so blatant that it nearly amounts too reverse discrimination. The problem is, like so many politically correct crap is that you don't always get the best person for the job. Instead, the company gets to check off a box on their 'hire a woman or minority' list.

    I'm so tired of hearing this same old song and dance. It's been sung time and time again since the 60's yet it's still in the P.C. songbook because every naive idiot buys into it.

  100. one-sided... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Ever hear secretaries interact? They make a football locker room seem like a haven of political correctness. The bottom line is, people do that. So what. I've heard a room full of university-educated women rank the men in their workplace by penis size by pooling all their data from sleeping with them.

  101. Re:Todd the Teacher.. Little girls should be marri by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Little girls should be married
    They make good wives.
    Cute, nice.

    They should not be turned into feminist cunts by women.

    The old religions had it correct.
    Deuteronomy 22 28-29 (in hebrew).
    Those muslim hadiths.
    Vedic writings (girls must be married young lest father goes to hell)

  102. They lost me at "lucrative careers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Sorry, but the days of lucrative careers are long over. Programming peaked in the late 90s.

  103. Re:this again ? really by swillden · · Score: 1

    But in the sort of work I do - infrastructure and backend stuff - I've never seen a hint of it. We welcome anyone who's a competent coder and who actually wants to write the sort of programs that don't have UIs. It's a fairly introverted and inoffensive bunch even by developer standards, so it's not like "inappropriate comments" are likely regardless.

    This is my experience as well, and it applies to all forms of social discrimination, not just gender. Race, age, gender, sexual orientation, religion (well, except for vi users), national origin... none of it matters in the slightest. The people who can do the job are so scarce, and all that other stuff is so irrelevant, that no one cares.

    Actually, that's not entirely true. Many companies (like Google) are convinced that diverse teams produce better results, and are fretting over the lack of diversity. So anyone who isn't the stereotypical white or asian male has an advantage. Not enough to overcome inability to do the job, of course, but still an advantage.

    --
    Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
  104. Re:this again ? really by Pope · · Score: 1

    Yes. When developer salaries rise to match the salaries to those in medicine, then the field will get flooded with all types of people looking to do development work. This will include women. That's economics 101: supply and demand.

    Have you seen the salaries being offered at Google, et. al these days?

    Simply increasing salaries mostly means you get people who get into a field simply for the money.

    --
    It doesn't mean much now, it's built for the future.
  105. Rosie and Peggy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about MARGARET the programmer . . . oh, I guess that doesn't have a cute alliteration.

  106. Re:this again ? really by Bigbutt · · Score: 1

    Heck, we have no problem with women joining our team. I know of two resumes we've received from women (or recruiters) for open Unix Admin positions at my job. The first was several years ago. She'd worked in a data center for 20 years but scripting wasn't something she had much experience with. Combined with other factors, she wasn't interviewed further. The second one was recently and apparently supplied by a recruiter who sprays resumes everywhere in the hopes it will stick on the wall somewhere. The candidate had extensive AIX experience but absolutely no experience with Linux or other Unix based operating systems. We considered her several times but finally the team decided to not interview.

    [John]

    --
    Shit better not happen!
  107. Some problems with the article . . . by Kimomaru · · Score: 1

    "The dearth of women in computing,' writes Cassidy, 'has the potential to slow the U.S. economy, which needs more students in the pipeline to feed its need for more programmers. It harms women by excluding them from some of the best jobs in the country."

    The dearth is excluding women from the programming field? I mean, the "dearth" itself? I'll just table that statement as either someone doesn't know what the word "dearth" means or someone just doesn't proofread their own statements.

    I don't think programming is appealing to a lot of women. I encourage family members to go into it, but even the very young ones who are especially good at math (although you don't need to be, just illustrating that they have some mental capacity) just don't find it interesting - they roll their eyes at it. It's sad and I very much hope I'm wrong because having more women in the field would be a really good thing for everybody.

  108. missing the point by novium · · Score: 1

    I'm not shocked, but I am a little disappointed that the discussion here completely missed the main point, which was that maybe all these "women in tech" pushes are fundamentally flawed because they don't actually focus on the women in tech and the careers they've built. Instead the focus seems to be on "look at ms cutie teenager coding!" rather than "look at Ms. Senior Developer working on these interesting projects", and it's detrimental.

    That actually makes a lot of sense to me. People need to be able to picture the future of something, an end result. A teenage girl isn't going to really be able to picture herself as a coding wunderkind unless she already is, and if all the images of adults in interesting STEM positions are white dudes, she's going to have a harder time imagining "hey, I could learn this, and then one day be doing job X!" And I think it's important that all this happens at a really subtle level, so it develops a series of expectations that are very hard to counter.

    And it's something that's easily applicable outside the specific topic of women and IT jobs. If you want to motivate someone to volunteer, you don't tell them about George The Super Volunteer who single handedly saved orphans, you tell them that you need people to help sort canned goods in order to get food to hungry families. Specific action, specific outcome, both framed in such a way that the person can easily envision themselves in that role. People need to imagine not only how they could do something, but what it would achieve.

    If I were trying to get boys to consider careers in nursing, I wouldn't just talk about boys who like biology, I'd talk about men whose nursing careers were successful and rewarding.

  109. The machines are sexist? I call bullshit. by Atypical+Geek · · Score: 1

    The feminist argument is that women are interested in programming and capable, but cannot get into the industry because they are being discriminated against. According to them, the work environment is hostile. But how can that be true?

    If you write code, the ultimate judge of your job performance is a machine. The compiler doesn't magically switch to hard mode because the coder lacks a penis. An executable won't somehow crash in the presence of a vagina. This is as ridiculous as the argument that women fall behind in math because an equation will be solvable or not depending on who is trying to solve it.

    As mentioned elsewhere, IT/Software is about as close to a meritocracy as you can get, in large part because the work involves unthinking machines that simply cannot be biased. It is also heavy on independent work. Your coworkers are keeping you from writing code? Did they steal your keyboard?

  110. Seriously. This again? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I fucking hate this site. You're all a bunch of idiotic fucksticks.

  111. I'm gonna get flamed, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm not trying to be a troll or flamebait. Really I am not. I'm just posting an observation and opinion. I would genuinely like to hear if others have had similar or different experiences.

    I've been programming for over 30 years. There truly are not very many women in programming. But there are a few, and of the few I've had to work with over the years there have been only three that I think were worth a damn at programming. The rest just typed and pointed and clicked and stumbled around until they had a solution. And sometimes they would never complete a project, which then required another, male programmer to come along and clean up the mess and get it working. Except for the three cases I've known, female programmers demonstrate a complete lack of understanding of how computers work, or how to write decent code. At my current job all but one of the programmers is male. But nearly all the BA's are female. The BA's, like their female programming counterparts are frustratingly ignorant when it comes to computers, networking, data administration and programming. Everything about a system has to be explained to them in excruciating detail, and still you can see that they don't really understand.

    This is merely anecdotal evidence. This is just my experience. Based on my observations, women are pretty much incapable of coding. I don't know why that is, but I don't think it's because anyone is "keeping them down" or pushing them out of these careers. It is not that I am a mysogynist. There are some occupations where males dominate, that I think women excel at. My dentist, for example, is a woman, and I think she's great. Same for two of my doctors. But if I needed some coding done, I would be very, very reluctant to get a woman to do it.

  112. Clarity by Todd.Stedel · · Score: 1

    I read this as being hostile to Gay, white, men

  113. WOW: Alot of emotion around this one. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As a woman who has been an IT professional since 1977 I can attest to the fact that hiring has gotten more biased since the advent of the web. I am a senior J2EE developer and at user groups and conferences am frequently one of only a few women. And we are at best absolutely ignored and at worst harassed. If you are not a 20 or 30 something young male, forget getting any respect. People are VERY surprised when I tell them what I do or discuss a highly technical subject. It should not be that way. If I were a 25 yr old white male there would be no surprise. So, guys, own up to the unconscious bias and occassional outright misogyny. Maybe if there were not so many problems at conferences more women would be interested.

  114. Needs a Song by tmjva · · Score: 1

    It needs a song like the original Rosie the Riveter song. What will be the sound effect to replace the original "Bltbltbltbltbltbltblt" noise? A clacking keyboard? The error bell?

    Secondly, you need a major war where all the men are gone. Although women can serve in combat jobs, they are still not subject to the draft.

    --
    Tracy Johnson
    Old fashioned text games hosted below:
    http://empire.openmpe.com/
    BT
  115. I've Worked in Male Dominated Offices..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and if you don't think there's a bias against women in the workplace, you have not been on the receiving end, and you are part of the problem. I didn't believe there was a gender bias in my last workplace.... I had been fortunate enough to be hired by a woman, who shielded me from a lot of it. When she left, they they hired a man 5 years younger than me with zero professional experience in the area he was assigned to, to be my boss. He got the job because he had been with the company for a while.... in another department. I was repeatedly referred to as one of the "girls" by this man. I was told that he felt I was "in the wrong department" and that I would "do so much better if I wanted to go to marketing". I have no marketing experience. I did not want to be in marketing. You know who's in marketing at this company, though? Women. 100%. Not a man works there. Guess how many women worked in my department? 3 of 45.

    When I did not go to marketing, the snide comments about how I was not dressing professionally began. I worked in an office building, in a cubicle. I wore skirts that came to my ankles in the summertime, usually with a blouse and a sweater over top because it was always freezing cold. How was this inappropriate? Then being constantly asked to "smile, you look so much prettier that way". I am at work, not at a beauty contest. Or, "you should be nicer to people" when asking if they had work that they owed me 2 weeks ago.

    I left that job of my own accord. I'm sure they were happy to see me go. They hired another man-- in fact, 3 other men to replace me (so much for women not working as much as a man!)

    I work for a man now at my new job- my new job in the same field. I'm one of his best employees. I don't roll over and say yes to everyone, and I work harder and longer when it's really needed. I'm not asked to smile to look pretty, or to be charming and gracious to people when they are late with work. I'm not told that my long skirts are "unprofessional" and I'm not asked to go into the marketing department because there are more women there.

    But here's the difference: at my new job, we are pretty well balanced gender-wise. I would say about half the employees are women. Half of our managerial/director positions are filled by women. Our CEO is a woman, and our exec director is a woman. Diversity is encouraged in a myriad of ways, and we are encouraged to hire women and minorities.

    By the way, most of those women have children and families. At least a dozen women on my floor have gone out on maternity leave and come back. We're still managing to turn a profit. We're on those "best places to work" and "top companies in the country" lists.

    My last workplace hasn't sunk... .but I know from the friends I have who stayed there that they're struggling financially... it's hitting the employees now... only a matter of time till it hits the shareholders.

    1. Re:I've Worked in Male Dominated Offices..... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OP here, and BTW-- this was just 2 years ago.

  116. No by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're obviously a moron. Die.

  117. Re:this again ? really by Belial6 · · Score: 1

    Exactly. This conditioning starts at birth and is pressed for our entire lives. You can also add to that the fact that boys are raised being told that they MUST get a good job if they want anything but a life of destitution because no one is going to pay your way through life. Girls are raised being told that they CAN get a good job, but they could also choose to attach themselves to a man who got a good job.

    I have no doubt that if I grew up knowing that I would have women offering to pay my way through life just so that they could attach themselves to me, I might not have worked nearly as hard.

  118. Re:this again ? really by MrResistor · · Score: 1

    Nobody is complaining about the paucity of male elementary school teachers.

    Yes, they are, you just haven't been paying attention to the forums where those conversations are happening. A tiny bit of Googling would educate you.

    --
    Under capitalism man exploits man. Under communism it's the other way around.
  119. Re:this again ? really by DeathToThePatriarchy · · Score: 1

    You are naive. Nice, but naive. Yes, some things are a bit better. But are things good? No.

  120. Re:this again ? really by ahabswhale · · Score: 1

    You could argue this is true in just about any profession. I don't see how it's more significant in the world of programming.

    --
    Are agnostics skeptical of unicorns too?