Slashdot Mirror
Google's Diversity Chief: Mamas Don't Let Their Baby Girls Grow Up To Be Coders
theodp writes: Explaining the reasons for its less-than-diverse tech workforce, Google fingered bad parenting for its lack of women techies. From the interview with Google Director of Diversity and Inclusion Nancy Lee: "Q. What explains the drop [since 1984] in women studying computer science? A. We commissioned original research that revealed it's primarily parents' encouragement, and perception and access. Parents don't see their young girls as wanting to pursue computer science and don't steer them in that direction. There's this perception that coding and computer science is ... a 'brogrammer' culture for boys, for games, for competition. There hasn't been enough emphasis on the power computing has in achieving social impact. That's what girls are interested in. They want to do things that matter." While scant on details, the Google study's charts appear to show that, overall, fathers encourage young women to study CS more than mothers. Google feels that reeducation is necessary. "Outreach programs," advises Google, "should include a parent education component, so that parents learn how to actively encourage their daughters."
Feminism is a belief system. The primary tenet of this belief system is that men and women have on average, exactly the same brains, interests, capacities, goals, desires and approaches to work.
This tenet is absurd and provably false. ...But logic and feminism have never mixed anyway.
heard this last millennium: little boys want a place to 'perform', while little girls want a place to 'relate'.
C'mon, you can troll better than that!
there is no power in being a corporate droid programmer, what a load of bullshit. So corporate america wants to increase the number of coders and we should change our child rearing accordingly? And this STEM push is bullshit also, why are they not also having advanced classes in the fine arts and humanities? neither my son nor daughter are being encouraged to be coders, if they desire that on their own that's fine
or it could be the influnce of testosterone during early development of the child. Harald Eia made an excellent documentary on that topic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tiJVJ5QRRUE
Same as for males, actually.
Human beings in general aren't very rational, even though we may think we are. Those who have these grand notions of purpose behind their actions are usually merely very good at rationalising.
not that they are incapable of logic, but emotion is their fundamental mental underpinning
Really? And that must be why there are more battered husbands shelters than battered wives shelters ... oh wait ...
And why most murders are committed by women ... darn, again not true ...
How about most recipients of the darwin awards being women? ... oops -
Sex differences in risk seeking behaviour, emergency hospital admissions, and mortality are well documented. However, little is known about sex differences in idiotic risk taking behaviour. This paper reviews the data on winners of the Darwin Award over a 20 year period (1995-2014). Winners of the Darwin Award must eliminate themselves from the gene pool in such an idiotic manner that their action ensures one less idiot will survive. This paper reports a marked sex difference in Darwin Award winners: males are significantly more likely to receive the award than females
So, women are more emotional and men are idiots?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
From now on, I'm modding up any troll posts in these bs threads. This is beyond ridiculous.
Society forced her to like ponies. And conversely, society rewarded you for spending hours with computers.
This is *so* obviously true: Don't you remember in high school, all the computer-club guys getting all the girls and being invited to all the cool parties?
Oh wait...
I thought this was true for all genders and species. I'm constantly pushing myself to be more logical and have more control over my emotions, but I'm nowhere near completely there. And some of that might also aid in social awkwardness.
For the record, in regards to the post, I didn't learn how to use Linux extensively through playing around with Gentoo or learn to program C and whatnot because my parents encouraged it. Having said that, my mother bought me an HTML book when I was young, and only after seeing that I was starting to make my own websites. Now I'm studying electrical engineering at school, and my parents never told me or suggested what I should do. It was entirely my choice driven by what I found to be my own interests. So having said that, why must we assume that women don't participate in STEM as much due to outside influences?
Anyway, someone said something about Feminist Friday... It's been what, 3 days?
So you and your brother were interested in computing, but your sister wasn't? Dude, you were literally brogrammers! It's your fault your sister wasn't interested!
Why would *anyone* encourage their child, regardless of gender, to spend a decade or more training for what is quickly becoming a minimum-wage job at best.
We should instead be encouraging kids to become investment bankers, hedge fund managers or politicians.
Actually, men do get raped far more often than women. Just clearing that one point up.
(Real rape, that is. Not this silly "new" rape concept).
And the rest of your points seem to assume that crime is inherently emotional. This is a highly questionable thesis.
And... I've never seen a man cry at work btw. ...Just saying.
You complain, but these articles get 1000 posts. Your corporate overlord is doing exactly as expected.
Google fingered bad parenting for its lack of women techies.
More like: Google disagrees with their parenting.
Just because their values as parents didn't agree with your values today, Or your general desire to have more people in computer science, in order to reduce wages, Or your desire to have more diversity among computer scientists to help you comply with arbitrary government-imposed regulations on your employee population : does not make them bad parents.
There's good studies that there are as many male victims of battering as there are female. Males are less likely to get hurt when battered by a female, obviously, and are less likely to report battering, so there is far less need for a 'battered male' shelter. Just remember it's not because females are any less likely to resort to violence than males are.
A great documentary about how biology (not culture) effects genders and differentiates males/boy from females/girls, so that males/boy choose masculine jobs/toys (e.g., coding... yes, its "masculine"!) while females/girls choose feminine jobs/toys (e.g., nurses... good for them!) - a great point was that the most "free" a society is, the more those gender differences will be observed: Brainwash: The Gender Equality Paradox (note: i watched it just yesterday, thanks to user "popo" posting it in the "Science Still Seen As a Male Profession" story - by the way: ENOUGH WITH ALL THE GIRL-CODERS FUCKING STORIES)
Antisthenes: "Wisdom begins by examining the words/names." - excuse my English, i am (slightly...) better with my Greek!
Although GP is clearly a troll, you are attacking his point fallaciously.
1. Even if men were by far the most emotional irrational beings on earth, that would not disprove "emotion is [females'] fundamental mental underpinning"
2. Risk taking, murder and aggression are not necessarily driven by emotion. It's a fine line, but technically those behaviors can be (and might often be) about attaining social status or power.
3. There is evidence that there should be many more 'husband shelters' and that their lack is driven largely by a culture of (implicitly) shaming 'weak men', not by a lack of battered husbands.
Let me state clearly that I do not agree with the GP. The only thing I'm trying to do here is point out some logical fallacies in the hope that this will improve the quality of the discussion.
Really? And that must be why there are more battered husbands shelters than battered wives shelters ...
60-70% of domestic violence is initiated by women. The reason we don't have "battered men" shelters is that it is socially acceptable for women to be violent, and that any man that "can't handle it" isn't a real man, and should be ashamed of himself. In the media, when women are depicted as violent toward their partners, it is almost always supposed to be funny.
It would seem to me that if you need to be "reeducating" kids about what they want, you're doing something wrong. Let's examine a few of these points in the summary.
Parents don't see their young girls as wanting to pursue computer science and don't steer them in that direction.
And... should they be? You seem to be coming at this from the perspective that it doesn't matter what the individuals want, there should be more women in tech because reasons.
There's this perception that coding and computer science is ... a 'brogrammer' culture for boys, for games, for competition.
A couple thoughts on this point. This retarded "brogrammer" media push has happened much more recently than 1984. I seriously doubt that people perceived it the same way back then. And even if they do now, you seem to gloss over the fact that it could simply be the result of this shrieking media push about the culture. In other words, it may be that this push has caused the results that you're looking at now.
There hasn't been enough emphasis on the power computing has in achieving social impact. That's what girls are interested in. They want to do things that matter.
Okay, you raging sexist. Let's take it down a notch for a second here. We'll just assume for a moment that you're right and that's what girls are interested in. How is it the case that "achieving social impact" and "things that matter" are the same? What a ridiculous conflation. First off, you assume that social impact is always good. Secondly, you assume that nothing else matters besides social impact. Could these be, I don't know, products of your bias?
Q. What explains the drop [since 1984] in women studying computer science? A. We commissioned original research that revealed it's primarily parents' encouragement, and perception and access.
And now for this point. I looked at the linked abstract and it only focuses on the individual's decision-making process without taking into account factors that the individual may use. For example, it doesn't even bother to look at hours worked. And then has the gall to call the perceptions of the field "flawed." It still blows my mind that every time this comes up, almost nobody talks about the elephant in the room: Women are smarter and value their time better than men in general.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/11/19/gifted-men-earn-more-than-gifted-women-and-they-value-time-differently-but-both-report-being-happy/
http://www.bentley.edu/centers/center-for-women-and-business/millennials-workplace
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/31/professional-women-time_n_1068291.html
There are more if you're curious about this phenomenon.
If we look at the numbers for women in CS, we see:
http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2014/10/21/womencoding-d463ab944849ed2fce2df3d7d27d2f1c4daa7689.jpg?s=1400
I looked pretty deep trying to find a graph of hours worked in the sector since the mid-1980s (or earlier too), but couldn't find anything. The closest thing I could find was "services" sector hours worked, which I assume includes things like restaurants and so on. Not very useful for this purpose. If hours being worked was a part of the discussion at all, you would think that information would be a bit easier to find. But it's not, despite the fact that it's probably kind of important. If anybody can wrangle that info somehow, I'd love to see it.
That said, if we look at when the Internet hit big (circa 1995), we see a lag time before the sharp dropoff. Once the Internet became popular, 24/7 on call became a common thing and hours worked went way up. If the industry is the input and schooling is the output of that industry, you would expect something like this.
Pissing and moaning about "the culture" doesn't seem all that useful, especially because it paints women as delicate beings that need everyone around them to give them big toothy smiles and pats on the head. I don't deny that there is likely to be a perception problem (or more than one perception problem), but the question is whose perception problem(s) it is/they are.
The spokesperson at Google making these claims, is not a tech. She is a lawyer. So there is likely no connection between what she says, and what she actually believes. Anyway, since she is a lawyer, her parents clearly didn't raise her right, so she may just be projecting the failure of her own parents onto others.
Disgusting straight white cishet male shitlord here.
My parents, particularly my dad, discouraged me from pursuing any kind of work with computers. He wanted me to go into trades (blue collar, not Wall Street) like he did, specifically to follow in his footsteps and continue his one-man business as a painter. Then you've got the whole NEEERRRRD thing from the jocks in schools. In short, many males aren't particularly pushed into STEM either. They take it upon themselves, under their own agency, to pursue those goals. I wonder how so many boys who got bullied for their STEM related interests throughout their young lives managed to stick to their interests and goals. It must be the penis.
Except that women who enter STEM (to actually WORK in a field) are in the same boat. They see past any discouragement from their families/pees, and they ignore all the "I deserve a free-ride into the field" rhetoric from gender ideologues, and they put in the time and effort to become proficient with whatever it is they want to do. Granted, there's fewer of them than men ...BUT DON'T YOU EVEN TALK ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT EACH GENDER MIGHT HAVE DIFFERENT CAREER PROCLIVITIES.
Not hard to find on Google.
But the "more male rapes" fact should say: More men than women are raped IN THE USA. ( Globally more women are raped. )
And the reason more men are raped in the USA is because the US has an absurdly large prison population.
And that must be why there are more battered husbands shelters than battered wives shelters ... oh wait ...
Did you know most domestic violence in initiated by women? Did you know that by far lesbian relationships have more physical abuse than any other gender pairing? Abused men are just SOL - why do you need support or a shelter? Just man up! Perhaps not an argument for rationality, I'll grant you.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
I'm actually curious to know why that was modded down. It's a point that many have made.
Including women ... https://youtu.be/w__PJ8ymliw?t...
------ The best brain training is now totally free : )
Google presumes to know what is good for boys and girls. They presume to know better than the parents of those boys and girls. They presume to know more than the boys and girls themselves.
I'm sick of all this social engineering. I just want to barf.
What is WRONG with little girls who just want to be girls? Why does every girl have to grow up to compete with the boys for a job? What if she doesn't WANT a job?
Like Obama, Google doesn't WANT women to have the traditional occupation of "home maker". Like Obama, Google places no value on those home makers.
Arrogant SOB's.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
So, women are more emotional and men are idiots?
Yes! But it's not our fault. Evolution has hardwired male brains such that we experience a 20-30 point drop in IQ whenever we see boobs.
In fact, we don't even have to see boobs to start drooling with stupidity...just thinking about them makes us dull-witted morons - albeit to a lesser extent that when we see a fully exposed rack in all its glory.
So you see, Evolution (in its infinite wisdom) has ordained that women have boobs, and men are thus rendered idiots for the majority of their lives.
Now if you'll excuse me, I feel a strange urge to go make one of those "hey guys, watch this!!!" videos that often precede receipt of a Darwin Award.
p.s. BOOBS!
You have to be intelligent to code well, and it is a very specific form of intelligence that often comes with weakness in other areas. So is it genetics or nurture that is responsible for that particular gift/curse? I say it is genetics and that it is also probably x-linked therefore more males are affected by it in the same way they are far more likely to suffer from x-linked disorders too. Why had this not ever occurred to people before I do not know but if you can have an x-linked disability there is the same chance that you can have x-linked abilities that are exceptional. Why are autism spectrum disorders correlated with programming skills and with being male, because they are both x-linked!
For the record my oldest girl can code like a kid twice her age can, sure I encourage her because it is a form of literacy that scientists need but she will never be somebody else's "programming slave", she will use the skill as just one facet of her projects.
Can I claim credit where others have received blame from Nancy Lee? No, my kid is just very intelligent and that is as much or more her mother's fault and if you say otherwise you are being (how ironic!) sexist.
Parents don't see their young girls as wanting to pursue computer science
OR
and don't steer them in that direction.
Which is it? I get the feeling it's that girls just aren't that interested. People like to point out that more girls were interested in the 80s but that was a very different era. Few people actually knew what was involved with "programming computers".
All of this effort reminds me of a similar misunderstanding that I came across years ago. In the 50s Lionel decided that girls didn't play with trains because they weren't "girly" enough. They were black and steel and perhaps too boyish. So the genius marketers came up with this:
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/roadsh...
http://www.lionel.com/Products...
Should you wish to see one in person go to Holiday World and check out the old toy museum.
It flopped badly. The reason was simple: girls generally don't like trains, but those who do want an authentic train. Black, steel, menacing - a real train.
Every time I see people trying hard to make computer science appeal to girls I see the same thing. It simply doesn't appeal to most girls, and to those to whom it does appeal it will have that appeal without any sugar coating.
Ultimately, the SJW crowd needs to understand that men and women - and boys and girls - are very different creatures who aren't interested in the same sorts of things. The roots of this are genetic and stem from the social order tens of thousands of years ago. Nothing's going to "fix" it, but, then again, there's nothing to fix.
Do you have ESP?
We're so busy trying to play the blame game that nobody has actually asked the young girls what they want to do with their lives.
BeauHD. Worst editor since kdawson.
In the USA, men are just as likely to be domestically abused, but less likely to ask for help and when they ask for help, rarely given help. Pretty much every bad thing that happens to women also happens to men.
"girls are interested in. They want to do things that matter." And boys don't? fuck you, I am tired of male hate everywhere. Be mad more we tend to just be better
(Full disclosure: I am neither female nor a parent; I'm a male who studies physics.)
There are too many links in the summary. The most relevant one is the google study, which has some interesting data and is fairly neutral. I don't think the study supports the flamebait headline, but instead paints a complicated picture. In particular, see the charts on page 5 of the study.
The story headline is in the same style as this interesting article titled "Papas, please let your babies grow up to be princesses". That article makes the case that interests in "girly" things are not mutually exclusive with interests in STEM fields. There are anecdotes in the above comments about girls being pressured by parents into STEM activities (like robotics clubs), and how it often doesn't work. Perhaps this is because some parents push STEM at the expense of "girly" things rather than simply encouraging STEM without taking a hostile stance towards "girly" things.
Just a thought.
I see you've never had to live with a vindictive woman. They can abuse the crap out of you and nothing you can do about it. Just stupid little shit. They're really good at staying on the fine line of being a bully without quite being assault. Women that I know who were in an abusive relationship just left and that was that. But men in a abusive relationship, no matter where they went in the country, the woman was great at making their life a living hell.
I've seen women call in false reports over and over and over and over. The police don't seem to care. I got to listen in on one first hand when I was voice chatting with a friend for almost 8 hours about how his wife was abusing him, when she suddenly came home, I could hear her screaming and yelling in the other room. She threatened to kill him several times, then she called the police on him, they showed up, and she immediately began crying and told the police how she was home all day and her husband just came home and started to beat her. Lucky for him, the police saw the bruises on him and she was fine. The police actually talked to us on mumble.
He wasn't so lucky the next week. she called the police, got a temporary restraining order just before the weekend, and the police kicked him out of his own house. He was homeless for the weekend, no money, no phone. Welcome to the USA.
Eventually we had to take him in to help him get back on his feet. We had her calling police on us, making false reports. Police refused to do anything about it. We were able to get a restraining order, but it took several months of constant harassment and a few death threats. Eventually what it took was my wife to call in and fake cry just like the other woman. That seems to get shit done.
Police do not respond well to yelling and they don't take being calm seriously. Wife calls police, talks to them in a pissed off tone, they think you're crazy. She calls the police and talks to them calmly, they don't think anything is really happening. Call them and be crying like your child died and you get somewhere. You need to be crying. How often do you see a man bawling his eyes out? A lot of women can do this on demand.
Nobody steered me. The opposite is true, i had strict times for pc usage. I learned the whole programming stuff by myself, using not more than some turbo pascal book.
I steered myself, because i knew what i liked.
So, nobody should steer anyone. People just need to open opportunities. The rest will come by itself.
You literally just made up the 95% number. How does it feel to be a victim of cognitive dissonance? To know that you're so scared of the truth you twist reality to fit your biases?
Research indicates women use tools and weapons far more than men, which make up for their physical limitations. They also carry grudges for far longer than the male partner and will re initiate the violence at a later date.
Stop this bullshit SJW slashdot.
That is total bullcrap. Instead of repeating the big lie, you could have just searched for it and found this study
While the vast majority of perpetrators of domestic violence are men, women are arrested in three of every 10 incidents and men in only one of 10, a study says
Men are responsible for most cases of domestic violence, but women are three times more likely to be arrested for incidents of abuse, research reveals today.
A report into domestic abuse and gender by Bristol University found that the majority of cases involved alcohol misuse, that women were more likely to use a weapon to protect themselves and that children were present in the majority of cases.
Previous research has shown that the vast majority of domestic violence perpetrators recorded by the police are men (92%) and their victims mainly female (91%), with many more repeat incidents recorded for male than female perpetrators. While the majority of incidents of domestic violence recorded by the police involve male-to-female abuse, little is known about the nature of incidents where men are recorded as victims and women as perpetrators, nor about the circumstances where both partners are recorded as perpetrators.
The new study, by professor Marianne Hester of the University of Bristol's school for policy studies and carried out on behalf of the Northern Rock Foundation, looked at 96 examples from 692 "perpetrator profiles" tracked from 2001 to 2007.
The research looked at 32 cases where women were the aggressors, 32 where men were in that role, and 32 where it was both partners.
It found that 48% of the cases were related to couples still in a relationship, 27% involved violence after separation and the rest involved couples in the process of splitting up.
Some 83% of men had at least two incidents recorded; one man had 52. In contrast, 62% of women recorded as perpetrators had only one incident recorded, and the highest number of repeat incidents for any woman was eight.
Men were significantly more likely than women to use physical violence, threats and harassment, and to damage the women's property; women were more likely to damage their own.
Men's violence tended to create a "context of fear and control", the researchers said, whereas women were more likely to use verbal abuse or some physical violence.
But women were more likely to use a weapon, although this was often to stop further violence from their partners.
All cases with seven or more incidents, most of which involved men, led to arrest
But in general, women were three times more likely to be arrested: during the six-year period, men were arrested once in every 10 incidents and women arrested once in every three.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Why can some people not accept that other people make choices that they don't necessarily approve of? Why do we have to assume that half the software developers SHOULD be women? Why can't we simply let people make the choices that make the most sense to them and their own interests? It's insane to pretend that it's a problem when an industry has a gender disparity. As long as everyone has the ability to choose a field if he wants it, that's all that matters. After that point, you're trying to force people into making decisions that you think they ought to make. It's just another form of idiotic social engineering. Just let individuals decide what's best for themselves.
He's just saying that making the choice to be home-maker should be just as valid for women as any other choice they could make. And he's right; it's not even close currently, as many look down on "homemaker" almost as much as they would "prostitute" or "stripper".
Why should choosing to be a home-maker be a choice any less honorable? And YES that also goes for Men, though if you think about it there's less of a societal stigma for men becoming a house maker than a woman!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
While I agree that domestic violence is a bigger problem for women and am not supported the grandparent poster, I think the higher arrest rates are likely to be a function of men only reporting the more severe incidents to the police due to the humiliation/emasculation factor. If men wait to only call the police when they have visible bruises/cuts, that makes it a lot more likely that the police visit will result in an arrest than when there's no readily obvious physical evidence. This is likely a factor in why 62% of female perpetrators were only reported once as well.
This space intentionally left blank
And sexual violence on women (and men) is vastly under-reported. We have to work with the hard data we've got. And that data shows that there's way too much violence, period.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
And even your article shows that men are more likely to inflict serious injuries or use weapons.
You must be a weightlifter. Those goalposts are heavy and difficult to move. I have no dog in the fight but I do see a lack of logic. 15 yard penalty and a loss of the down.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
males/boy choose masculine jobs/toys (e.g., coding... yes, its "masculine"!) while females/girls choose feminine jobs/toys (e.g., nurses... good for them!)
This is just an anecdote (and thus worthless as data), but I have a family friend -- a female -- who earned a B.S. in chemical engineering. Dad was an engineer, and I think mom was a scientist, so she was highly encouraged (well, pressured) to go in a STEM direction. And she did it, she managed to pass all the math courses and crunch all the equations, earned her degree. And as a newly-minted female Chemical Engineer, I"m guessing a lot of companies were interested in hiring her, as they have been making intense efforts to fix the gender imbalance in their workforces.
Guess what happened next? She then proceeded to go back to Nursing School, and has since graduated and now does clinical nursing work. Basically, she paid four years of hard study and tuition to make other people feel good about make the "right" decisions for someone else's life, and only after satisfying them did she get to live her own life doing what she wanted to do.
The year is 2015... calling women victims is a gross generalization. Men and women are each thoroughly capable of being supreme assholes. Women get paid less on average for many reasons. Applying some common generalizations which contribute :
1) Women tend to want to be rewarded and recognized for their achievements and hard work.
2) Men typically will make moving a pencil look like a 4 person task they did all by themselves.
3) Women do their jobs without advertising to the universe they did.
4) Men place billboard advertisements on their bosses street to brag that they did what they were being paid to do and it's time for a bonus.
5) Women are far less likely to counter-offer a job offer than a man.
6) Women will refuse on principle to sell their souls to get a raise. Men will beg and grovel if they think it will work.
7) Women will wait for raises, men will calculate the opportune moment to ask for one and spring it.
It's not a mans world because of misogyny. Men are paid more because daddy taught us the principles don't mean shit if they inhibit putting food on the table. There is only one reason why women don't get paid the same as men. :
Asshole bosses who love the power of being in charge of your life. It seems the only way of expressing their manly dominance is to try and put their penis to work. Men can joke with other men about blow jobs... with a woman, it's harassment. So how can that loser express his dominance and feel the power without crossing lines? Remember, there's a good chance he had to yield to the supreme manliness of someone else to get there.
I'm not doing this again with you. You consistently ignore my points and just change the subject.
Goodbye.
1. It's interesting that you didn't specify your country so we could check your facts
2. 1/3 of all Mexicans live the in US. Do you have the 1/3 poorest of a third world nation living in your country? You can't have socialism and open borders and we have both
3. You say you pay 49.6% of your income in taxes. After paying income tax, state income tax, property tax and sales tax I pay more than that. If you factor in the tax that my employer pays on all income he pays me, and the loss of corporate income due to the highest corporate income tax in the world I pay a LOT more than that. To rub salt in the wounds, if I were to work in other countries I would have to my my country's taxes as well as the other, and if I attempt to leave this country behind I get taxes substantially on everything that I own - even though I already paid taxes on the money already. When you add the death tax in for all the money I leave my family I think you'd be strained to find other countries that pay more taxes
4. We have socialized medicine here, but only for one group - our vets. Every 4 years the media 'expose' how bad it is and the politician wave their hands and promise to fix it, but don't. Their medical system atrocious and I don't wish it upon anyone - especially my own family.
5. Socialism is the antithesis of freedom. Someone is going to make the important decisions in your life. Is it going to be you - who actually cares, or a politician thousands of miles away who doesn't know you and really doesn't care? Given the choice, I choose freedom! I just wish there were politicians I could vote for who represent that.
"fathers encourage young women to study CS more than mothers"
In other words, *women* don't want to be programmers. But we already knew that because there is no grand conspiracy keeping them out of the field. The reason this is a "problem" is because there's money on the table. Nobody cares that garbage collectors are almost entirely men, or that daycare providers are almost entirely women. Nobody is shocked that most men would -- quite literally -- rather pick up other people's dirty diapers than deal with children all day, or vice versa. It's not a crisis that men don't want to go shoe shopping. But somehow it's a crisis that women don't want to stare at screens making sure implementations conform to interfaces and creating custom data structures.
https://www.eff.org/https-everywhere
Men make more money than women, so it would be reasonable to expect them to pay more taxes. One reason women tend to earn less is that they are more involved in bearing and raising children, which is essential and mostly unpaid work.
As far as social services, which ones are you referring to? I'd suspect that a lot of that is welfare for single mothers, and there's reasons for that. Typically, the father is a lot more likely to abandon the child than the mother is, and it's hard to earn a lot of money as a single mother with a young child.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes