Survey: More Women Are Going Into Programming

itwbennett writes: We've previously discussed the dearth of women in computing. Indeed, according to U.S. Bureau and Labor Statistics estimates, in 2014 four out of five programmers and software developers in the U.S. were men. But according to a survey conducted this spring by the Application Developers Alliance and IDC, that may be changing. The survey of 855 developers worldwide found that women make up 42% of developers with less than 1 year of experience and 30% of those with between 1 and 5 years of experience. Of course, getting women into programming is one thing; keeping them is the next big challenge.

Comments

And we care because...why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Perhaps we could move the craft forward rather than focusing on the players?

Re: And we care because...why?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think he's referring to situations like this one:

Three male developers have been tasked with improving the quality of the software systems they're responsible for. They're looking into using the Coq proof system.

They're sitting together in the office's open workspace discussing this tool. The conversation goes something like,

Programmer 1: "What do you guys think about playing around with Coq?"

Programmer 2: "I've played with Coq for a few minutes, but I don't like it very much."

Programmer 3: "Yeah, I've tried Coq a few times, too, and sometimes it's way too hard for me to handle."

Programmer 2: "Yup, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, too."

Programmer 1: "Ok, that settles it. Coq is no good for us, so we won't touch it."

Well, since they're in an open environment, some of their coworkers overhead the conversation. These coworkers include a couple of women, and a male homosexual who is transitioning into becoming a woman, all of whom work in project management and design. All three are extreme feminists.

Taking the discussion totally out of context, these coworkers mistakenly hear "Coq" as "cock", as in penis.

As you can imagine, this brings an extreme level of outrage to these self-righteous coworkers. They think they're hearing sexually explicit, and possibly homophobic, discussion in the workplace. They go to HR, and raise a shitstorm.

HR cracks down hard on the three male programmers, who have no idea why they're being attacked. They try to explain what Coq is, and how it has absolutely nothing to do with penises or sex. It doesn't matter. They dared to say a word that sounds like "cock", and for that they must pay dearly, because coworkers got offended.

Instead of using their skills to improve the products that the customers want and need, the programmers are now stuck fighting political battles over a total non-issue.

I think that that's what the GP was talking about. Situations like those.

Re: And we care because...why?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, ah, ah... You can't use male motivations if one cannot use female motivations.
We need to MAKE SURE that there is a 50% male population in those areas.
Isn't that how this works?

Exactly. What can we do to get men to work in management, project management, testing and UI design? If 95%of males don't want to work there, we have to take an honest what drives them away from these fields. I could be those fields are hostile to men's needs.

Re: And we care because...why?

[Ol Olsoc]

This isn't about forcing people to take jobs they don't want. However women are clearly capable of these jobs, and were clearly interested in them in the past.

If there is some biological basis then it does not account why the percentage of female programmers has declined over time, so I seriously doubt it's some sort of innate bias. There's a clear problem, even if you fail to acknowledge it. Why has the percentage dropped? You clearly don't care, but some people do.

There has been a lot of conjecture. And your choice is who you want to listen to.

At can be either the third wave "weak woman" model, where some incredibly trivial things can apparently force a young lady who is passionately into programming into dropping it completely.

Or it might be that women who have now re-entered the workforce voluntarily - as opposed to the "Rosey the Riveter" WW2 example of dire need - to perhaps adjust over time to what they find as a good career path.

Now an analysis of the two "reasons" is pretty important. The "weak woman" model presupposes that any negativity will destroy a woman's passion for the work, as well as ruin her self esteem. It's the same rationale that Barbie Dolls turn young ladies into anorexics.

It also fails because it assumes that the only career field in which there is any form of sexual harassment is STEM. Because I don't hear people whining too much about rampant sexism in the business sector, and there are a lot of women employed there. And if a dongle joke or a image of a Playboy model's face can destroy a young lady's passion for STEM, imagine when she gets to the workforce. You get hammered with more negativity than that every day. If that's the real reason, it makes no sense.

Now the other thesis, which I espouse based on many years of experience trying to recruit young women into STEM fields is that they have seen STEM, and want no part of it. And for much different reasons.

And those reasons are really long hours, mediocre pay, and an utter lack of respect. The image of the geek, working in the company basement, living on Cheetos and Mountain Dew, and working 20 hour days is not terribly inaccurate (I like their Crunchy Jalepeno Cheddar ones myself)

There might also be a correlation with thought process, but it is like walking into a minefield trying to suggest that there is any difference between the way men and women think in general.

But you do not have to invoke the second one, the first reasoning is fine by itself.

In the end, I question not so much why women are not going for STEM careers, but why any men are.

All of this is to say, if there is enough pay and prestige, and pleasant work environment, they will show up. And good luck with the idea of making the geek's work life better. That would cost money, and the woman making that decision might not want to spend it.

Retention is a bigger issue

[Anonymous Coward]

I graduated with a masters degree in CS in 2008, and as such now have 7 years job experience. Watching the other women I graduated with it's entirely a retention issue. The reasons for why they left the field were wildly varying, but I only know of two who graduated with me who are still in the industry out of maybe twenty.

More women = good stuff!

[grub]

I keep the sexual harassment forms in the bottom drawer of my desk.
That way when a woman goes to get one, I can check out her ass.

I don't believe her.

[gerald.edward.butler]

In all my years working in IT I have NEVER seen the kind of behavior that is claimed. Women get out of IT because IT sucks. It's incredibly socially isolating (working with a machine all day). *Most* women want much more inter-personal interaction. That's a fact.

Re:Keeping them certainly is the challenge

[Grishnakh]

I've said it before and I'll say it again: the 80s were a better time. Everything went down the tubes with the invention of grunge music.