Slashdot Mirror
Boot Camps Introducing More Women To Tech (dice.com)
Nerval's Lobster writes: A new study from Course Report suggests that boot camps are introducing more women to the tech-employment pipeline. Data for the study came from 769 graduates from 43 qualifying coding schools (a.k.a. boot camps). Some 66 percent of those graduates reported landing a full-time job that hinged on skills learned at the boot camp. Although the typical "bootcamper" is 31 years old, with 7.6 years of work experience, relatively few had a job as a programmer before participating in a boot camp. Perhaps the most interesting data-point from Course Report, though, is that 36 percent of "bootcampers" are women, compared to 14.1 percent coming into the tech industry via undergraduate programs. Bringing more women and underrepresented groups into the tech industry is a stated goal of many companies. Over the past few years, these companies' diversity reports have bemoaned how engineering and leadership teams skew overwhelmingly white and male. Proposed strategies for the issue include adjusting how companies recruit new workers; boot camps could also quickly deepen the pool of potential employees with the right skills.
It's Friday on the east coast, so I guess we are back to Feminism Fridays.
Yay for racist and sexist social justice policy!
Right after tech boot camp is logger bootcamp then deap sea fishing.
Really?
When I'm at work and I take a look around, I can see:
White guy, Chinese guy, Indian guy, Indian guy, Indian guy, Indian guy, Indian girl, Indian guy, Indian guy, White girl, White guy, Indian guy, Indian guy, Indian guy, Black guy.
But, quite frankly, I don't give a crap. All I care about is if my co-workers con communicate effectively and do a good job. I'm getting pretty annoyed with this social justice warrioring in the tech culture.
Know what other fields are overwhelmingly male-dominated? Mining. Law enforcement. Personal security. Emergency services. Construction. Garbage collecting. Won't feminists try to fix the gap there? Nah, of course not... they only want the safe, well-paid, glamorous jobs.
Do not comment on these articles or they will continue forever.
Pass them by. If you agree, reply with the code word "GIBLETS"
Prepare for Slashdot's mostly white Mens Rights/Libertarian audience to start whining about getting non-whites/females interested in tech fields that needs more workers.
I think what a lot of people on her miss is that there's a cultural aspect as to why some women aren't inherently interested in pursuing IT. If we stop forcing young people to play with barbies and dolls and try to get everyone interested in science, tech, space, and other things males are mostly associated with, we can make some progress in this area. Not sure if "boot camps" are a good idea though.
Let's have gender-appropriate footwear: that should probably be "stiletto camps".
I've seen a lot of niggers in these camps too.
The camps might be the solution to SJW bingo that we've been looking for.
"Boot Camp Graduates Who Learn Python Earn More."
(captcha: "fellatio" ...that's a new one)
Normally as an employee in the field it would be logical for me to be against these things as they increase the supply of labor which drives down my salary theoretically.
But being a long time employee in the field, I know it doesn't work the way these people think it works. You can't just pop in to your local coding boot camp after working for 10 years as an apartment manager or secretary and start crapping out code.
Somebody who grew up spending countless hours nerding out and went from hobby->job will almost always be leaps and bounds better than someone who went into software/IT as a career as if it's just like going to a heating and air conditioning school. "I'll spend 6 months learning how to do Javascript and Ruby and then I'll go get a $100K job!" Right.
I for one welcome our new narrowly educated, technically sparse "programming" overlords.
It's not easy being green... in today's highly competitive tech industry (which you are assumed to be part of and care about to the exclusion of all else). /.ers every time.
I am not a script, I am a man (or woman with equal likelihood)!
Shill? More like "thrill", amirite?
QOTD: "It's time to roll the dice[dice.com]!!!!"
This one weird trick will suck in
As a middle aged, white male who's invested more than twenty years into computer engineering/computer science and started at an early age (eleven)... I'm starting to feel like the only reason I have a job these days is that I'm in a wheelchair and can be counted as a diversity hire. The rest of you non-female, non-disabled, non-transgender, non-homosexual, non-whatever need to get the fuck out.
Seriously, this shit is getting old. I hired more female developers at my last job than male. One of which was one of the best developers I've ever worked with. I helped a good friend who's black learn to code and he's not making a quarter million a year (way more than me). Can you even imagine if you started a "code camp" for boys only what kind of backlash you'd get. White males are the one and only group that it's not PC to form a group to support their interests.
Do they teach that in "boot camp"?
It's ALWAYS going to be mostly white as long as people keep making other races "white" to prop up the agenda they're pushing.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
I'd just like to say...fuck dice. And their shitty "stories".
*drops mike*
Quack, quack.
They don't work in IT. If they did they wouldn't write the clap-trap they do. I've never seen a more balanced profession and yet they bemoan it like they understand something we're all missing. Get off your high-horse Dice and worry about something other then your short term page hits.
Quack, quack.
I wanted to simply escape for a few minutes from my anxieties about unemployment and, boom, "newsfornerds" becomes yet another source of irritation.
Fuck you, slashdot. I'm out.
I love the SFSR or "anti-SJW" movement, so predictably trolled.
I just can't wait till women expect reparations from us. Oh wait....
nt
It takes a special kind of person to see celebrating greater diversity as celebrating the decline of another group.
I don't understand it myself. What's wrong with increasing diversity? Is it that you feel threatened because you think you can't compete in the job market? Are you afraid of interacting women and minorities? You strongly imply that white males are being attacked or otherwise oppressed and that some unnamed other takes pleasure in causing that harm.
Do you remember that "pac-man" pie chart of religious affiliation in the US? The one where the largest piece is saying "help, we're being oppressed!"? Your comment reminds me of that.
It's really easy to be a Christian in the US. You're in the majority. There are even social benefits that come simply from self-identifying with that majority. Though, as many atheists know, there are also social consequences for those on the outside. The larger group benefits from something called "privilege".
I couched that in religious terms for your benefit. It's easy to see that Christians in the US are not, in fact, being oppressed and that they enjoy numerous social benefits. It's also easy to see why atheists often need to hide their beliefs to avoid discrimination or other harmful conflict. It should be simple to understand (and acknowledge) the concept of privilege in this context. That should bring us a step closer to understanding the privilege that straight white males enjoy. (If you're still having trouble, add additional characteristics like 'tall' and 'attractive'. Don't those guys surely have it easier that you? Why do you think that's the case?)
That brings us back to your post. Do you think that by elevating atheists we necessarily hurt the religious? Shouldn't they be just as free to express their views and Christians, without fear of social repercussions? Don't they deserve equal treatment and opportunity?
Are those atheist groups interested in oppressing Jews, Hindus, and other religious groups? Obviously not. For the most part, they just want a "safe space" where they can meet with others who share the same beliefs without facing the nasty social consequences they would otherwise. They want society as a whole to stop discriminating against them, and thus do community outreach. Inexplicably, some Christian groups see this as an assault. Doesn't that seem foolish? They're not under attack just because another groups doesn't want to suffer discrimination at their hands!
They shouldn't need to hide their atheism any more than a girl should need to hide her gender playing an online game as folks like you insist they should. They should be afforded safe spaces where they can focus on learning without the continual sexual comments, pick-ups, and challenges to the authenticity of their interest in the subject they face in a typical male-dominated classroom. Adding opportunities for others doesn't reduce your own opportunities any more than opening up an atheist club diminishes Christian churches.
In this case, it's even simpler than that. These aren't "for girls" boot camps. Women just feel more comfortable in these environments and thus are more likely to participate. This is reflected in the enrollment statistics. Yet, just because they're not behaving like you believe they should (by staying out of tech) you see this as an assault on white males. That is, the majority group. The Christians of the industry, if you will.
You're not being oppressed. No one is out to get you. You're terrified by a monster under your bed. It's time shine a flashlight under there and face reality. There's nothing there. It's all in your imagination.
Required reading for internet skeptics
Increasing "diversity" (read: instituting gender or skin based racism) is bad when you do so by reducing the quality of people you are working with... No-one is "threatened" by diversity, most welcome anyone who is a pleasant and effective co-worker.
But again, "diversity" is not welcome at the cost of losing touch with reality that work needs to get done.
Which is why the code-camps are a good step, because more women attend them and thus it increases the quality of women hires.
Posting anon because obviously I would be doxxed and/or murdered for these thoughts should I reveal my name.
I don't think many of us likely think women shouldn't be in tech. I don't. Hired many women myself, in fact, more than men. There have been plenty of articles about code camps and other things that are girls only. If you can't see reverse discrimination when it slaps you in the face, you're just as bad and a SJW.
Those of us in tech just want people to go into tech because they are passionate about it and love it. For the same kinds of reasons I got into it as a kid and not because it's being forced on them. Most of us have known women who got pressured into STEM degrees and didn't belong. AT. ALL. Those that did, did. I see lots of interest in tech from the girls in my family and I hope it continues, but if they'd rather do something else, that's what I want them doing. For the same reasons it's ticking me off that industry and schools are trying to force coding on everyone, not just girls... very few people have the aptitude to be good at it (men included).
Not the original AC, but still answering.
Women just feel more comfortable in these environments and thus are more likely to participate.
So, you applying stereotypes here? You assume that women are so weak and fragile that they must be forced to decide to work in tech? Can't they decide for themselves?
Adding opportunities for others doesn't reduce your own opportunities any more than opening up an atheist club diminishes Christian churches.
In fact, I'm even fine with "girl" boot camps and so on. I really don't care whether they exist or not. Just don't cover all of tech news with these SJW things. What would you say if the new york times had an article about atheists every day, the finance part about how "atheists are the unknown potential", the culture part about "art hall announces atheist exhibition", the main page about atheist boot camps?
The second reason why I don't like these SJW "lets have more woman workers" initiatives is because they mainly stem from companies wanting to lower salaries for their engineers by changing the market, having a common source with the H1B lobbying those companies do for the same reason.
Instead of yet another codegirls.org initiative, google has a very simple way to do something to fight against sexism. Their vast ad network delivers not just malware, it also serves as the platform for many sexist ad campaigns or ad messages. Why don't they use their influence to get rid of sexist ads? This surely isn't the only sexist aspect of society, but it wouldn't just cure symptoms.
We need more diversity. It should be 50% incompetents.
^^^
This is called proof by counterexample. When you're done arguing fantasies of equality for all in a job that requires precision and logical thinking I recommend you look it up. I have no problem with everyone being given equal opportunity, but at the end of the day I want the most competent person to get the job.
Why? Do you assume that all women fit into your prostitute fantasy?
I will add that the phrase "boot camp" is an insult to all those who died at Hiroshima and Nagasaki due to US imperialism and should be replaced with something less militaristic.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
It takes a special kind of person to see celebrating greater diversity as celebrating the decline of another group.
I don't understand it myself. What's wrong with increasing diversity? Is it that you feel threatened because you think you can't compete in the job market? Are you afraid of interacting women and minorities?
A person who disagrees with the diversity rhetoric is not necessarily doing so because they feel threatened. In my case, for example, I see two main reasons to oppose it:
(1) Many of the claims made by the supporters of diversity are irrational claims. See, for example, http://www.ams.org/notices/201409/rnoti-p1024.pdf. An individual who values logic and rational thought should be expected to oppose such claims.
(2) The benefits of diversity are not really apparent to me, but I am increasingly pressured to help to increase diversity. In that sense, discussion of diversity is an annoyance that takes time away from other endeavors. In particular, many individuals read Slashdot as a form of entertainment. The discussion of diversity diminishes that entertainment.
You strongly imply that white males are being attacked or otherwise oppressed and that some unnamed other takes pleasure in causing that harm.
Do you remember that "pac-man" pie chart of religious affiliation in the US? The one where the largest piece is saying "help, we're being oppressed!"? Your comment reminds me of that.
It's really easy to be a Christian in the US. You're in the majority...
You seem to be jumping to unwarranted conclusions here. (See point 1, above.) The people who are opposed to the diversity rhetoric are not necessarily white male Christians.
Though, as many atheists know, there are also social consequences for those on the outside. The larger group benefits from something called "privilege".
I couched that in religious terms for your benefit. It's easy to see that Christians in the US are not, in fact, being oppressed and that they enjoy numerous social benefits. It's also easy to see why atheists often need to hide their beliefs to avoid discrimination or other harmful conflict.
I, in fact, happen to be atheist. I have always been very open about my beliefs, even though I spent most of my life living in a conservative religious community. Although I did receive some harassment for my beliefs, you greatly exaggerate it. For example, I never needed to "hide [my] beliefs to avoid discrimination or other harmful conflict" while I was growing up.
Its not as if the industry is setting up gender quotas and free schools specifically for women, the pew study indicates that women have a 2 to 1 advantage in odds of being hired in tech. They see some discrepency in the population figures, and think that any disparity is due to some 'oppression', instead of people choosing to do what they want, in reality its the older devs lot who are discriminated against.
There ought to be a distinction made between computer scientists and computer artisans, these bootcamps are really quite shitty and churn out the worst talent. What I've noticed is that most of the female positions in the 'tech' industry aren't in 'technology', they are in fields that USE technology and not PRODUCE technology, especially the disproportionate numbers of them in 'evangelist', HR, outreach, community managers, business, etc.
There are 10 types of people in this world. Those that understand binary and those that don't. This is all that matters in tech.
No physical labor required and they can spend 90% of the day being unproductive gossiping with cube-mates.
And asks those women, DO YOU LIKE MY GREAT BIG COCK?!
No, that's the poultry farming boot-camp.
The larger group benefits from something called "privilege".
It's not being the larger group that gives people privilege. It's preferential treatment that does that. In tech, at present, that's quite clearly in favour of women.
You fear Christians, thus you hate them.
We're tired of having to work around lame rhetoric like yours. People with an agenda are not good problem solvers. You are not a good problem solver. Your strategy and only value is that you can create problems that will make people listen to you, an expert on the problems you pulled out of a hat. All that is ever going to create is more "useful idiots" who create more "useful problems" which keep people from working on actual problems.
If women want to do the job, they need to do the job, not change the job until it suits them. Before this whole "third wave" feminism onslaught, most men in tech were not opposed to having more female colleagues. As you said, why would they? But the women just would not come. Instead, the feminists started showing up and demanded that we come to them, change ourselves so that more women would want to join us. Well, that's not them joining us, that would be us joining them.
The women who are in tech and made it on their own are proof positive that there is no fundamental obstacle to women in tech, but you are in fact erecting a huge obstacle: The impression that tech needs to change to accommodate women devalues the work of any woman in this field. Personally I now steer clear of women coworkers. The risk of triggering a feminist is just too big.
atheist groups [...] just want a "safe space"
I assure you that they definitely do not want that.
You're not being oppressed. No one is out to get you.
This rings a little false when the #killallwhitemen tag is trending on Twitter.
The problem is that the that there are no real barriers keeping minorities out of Tech. None of the so called barriers have kept ass poor asians from basically dominating by working their asses off, so much so that they are grossly over represented statistically speaking. Or the Indians, etc. I'm a half indian woman in the tech sector and feel no barrier that I couldn't overcome because tech interests me, robotics interests me, programming interests me. Because I was interested I learned and got very good at my interests. Now I pursue those interests for work.
I would hate for someone to judge me by the color of my skin or my sex. When my father emigrated here from India, that was what he was most excited about, a place where people would not judge him by his skin or the class he was born into.
I love diversity, but there is no need to force it, Most people don't want to become programmers, even less women want to become programmers and there is no problem there, no real artificial barriers keeping anyone out.
As a side project I recently programmed a game with some of my younger cousins, we used the unity engine and i was absolutely blown away at just how accessible it was. It was fabulously easy to manage the project even though I had no prior experience and my programing experience wasn't gaming related.
Literally anyone who is interested can grab Unity and run through some tutorials and learn to program. My cousin is doing it now by herself because it was just too easy. She is now thinking of programming as a career because she enjoys it. There is no barrier. It is mostly a private experience and there is nothing wrong with that.
I love diversity because I'm part of it, . To me diversity just means everyone gets a chance, an opportunity. It has nothing to do with counting indians, blacks and hispanics. To me that is emphasizing racism. I've experienced it too, people think because i'm dominantly Indian in appearance I'm a H1B worker. I want to get away even further to a truly color blind, sex blind society.
These bootcamps are sold as "Get respect and Money with computers" I know because I've seen two friends go through them. In the end two of them found out that programming just isn't something that they like to do, even for money. One did, but she was already pursuing programming on her own. I'm all for the bootcamp opportunity, I just wish that the ones getting press weren't sexist and racist. I really feel bad for my male white cousins who are automatically disqualified from childhood because of their gender and skin.
I do wish we'd just get a story here about coding education that wasn't tied to gender. I can see how it would feel like it's being foisted upon us to try to make sure i'm at least a little guilty for being half white, gods help us if i was male too.
You're an idiot. There are a limited number of jobs. What do you mean by "diversity"? Fewer white people? Genocide? You're obviously so stupid that you don't even know what you mean - you're talking about genociding white people. "In whole or in part". That's genocide.
Why don't non-whites want to live in their own countries? Because THEY think white countries are better, that's why. I wonder why that would be? Could it possibly be because of - gasp - white people?
There are a limited number of jobs, and women are now being given special treatment (as have useless non-whites for the past fifty years), which means fewer men are getting those jobs.
So yes, we ARE being oppressed.
Is it that you feel threatened because you think you can't compete in the job market? Are you afraid of interacting women and minorities?
Sadly, the answer to both of these is "yes". At the more extreme end you have the "red pill" people, who honestly seem to think that all women and minorities are out to get them. In their minds they are just waiting for an opportunity to make a false rape or racism accusation, to drive the white man out. All women and minorities in anything but menial or "traditional" jobs are just diversity hires who stole jobs from white guys.
Seriously, this is how those guys think:
https://manboobz.files.wordpre...
https://hailtothegynocracy.fil...
Do you think that by elevating atheists we necessarily hurt the religious?
Yes, because they consider not being able to inflict their personal beliefs on others to be harm. Being forced not to discriminate against gay people, for example, is oppression to them. To be fair it's true that they are not allowed to enact their bigotry in certain situations, it's just that they fail to realise that the same rules protect them too. They have privilege, so they don't see the value of those rules because they don't need to rely on them.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
> I think that the people who mention "logic" and "rationality" in posts often seem tobe the least able to use either.
you've been spotted
Seriously, this is how those guys think:
[... the first poster...]
I like how the poster is implicitly condemning the existence of non-sexual freindship/mentor relationships.
Speaking of mentorship, it's a good job it's just people shouting from the sidelines though. I'm glad there's no one famous in the FOSS community, (for example Eric S Raymond to choose a person at random) making completely unsubstantiated claims that roving groups of wild feminists from the defunct Ada Initiative are trolling conferences hoping to bait some poor man in order to make fake claims of harassment, and then declaring that any backlash against all women is deserved because all women deserve it---and therefore you should never mentor any evil harpies^W^Wwomen.
I mean I'm really glad we don't have people like that around.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
This whole females-in-tech stuff leaves me with a rather bad taste in my mouth. We're discussing this as if we're discussing an increase in population of an endangered specifes. It's not. I think we'd all be better off if girls in tech would be treated as normal human beings. Celebrating each girl entering the field as if she's something special is really very sexist. In that regard I'm glad this was not the result of some strange get-more-girls-in-tech bootcamp but just a regular normal unisex bootcamp. I find it rather unfortunate, though, that girls are once again singled out as being something special.
Cannot we just quit discussing this situation in order to create a neutral playing field in which girls don't have to feel like they're something special, simply because they are not and should not be. It's not professional. It's sexist. It really shouldn't matter if programmers have tits or dicks nor should it matter if the number of males is somewhat equal to the number of females. The only thing that should matter is that neither sex should feel reserved about working in a certain sector. And I'm not so sure all this extra exposure for girls joining the sector is helping...
0x or or snor perron?!
... the tech industry is a stated goal of many companies. Because reasons.
Over the past few years, these companies' diversity reports have bemoaned how engineering and leadership teams skew overwhelmingly white and male. Because reasons.
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
Tell women they'll get a cute pair of boots and they'll go anywhere. [/teasingmygirlfriend]
Thanks to Obama and his divisive racist and sexist agenda.
Women are also severely underrepresented in mining, oil drilling, heavy equipment operation, fishing, logging, plumbing, transportation and garbage collection. We should work hard to encourage more women to take these well paid jobs.
Sig ?
1. This is a Dice.com post.
2. Boot-Camp? Can you think of anything that is more male centric than the term Boot Camp?
See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
You have restored some of my faith in the slashdot community.
Are staying home and changing their kid's diapers while women with "Boot Camp" training get the jobs...
I'm one of them. My brother is another... Says something about our societal values on education.
And asks those women, DO YOU LIKE MY GREAT BIG COCK?!
No, that's the poultry farming boot-camp.
ROFLMAO
Touche monsieur.
I always wondered if just maybe women have enough brains and objectivity to avoid tech.
Horror stories abound about the tech workplace from hours to career advancement to job security. There are plenty of good reasons to avoid a EE degree. Who really wants to be in a field where your career within your degree reaches a dead end with no further advancement after 10 years (the only way up is management)? A field where 20 years of experience is as much a liability (you cost too much) as an advantage.
It would not surprise me to hear that people look at the work situation in tech and say "Umm, no, I'll train to be their boss." or choose another field.
Anyone who has a PhD, especially from MIT, should have a Federal Minimum Income of $250,000/year.
It takes a special kind of person to see celebrating greater diversity as celebrating the decline of another group.
I honestly don't think that's what riles them up, I think it's that we see these stories once or twice a week, every singe week, and some people just get tired of it.
I'm all for women in tech, I think it's a good thing, but I admit sometimes I also get tired of the frequency at which these stories appear. (And I speak as a guy in a tech field who works in a building that's about 75% women-populated, so this whole "women are in tech!" is not exactly a revelation from on high.)
Women aren't some weird life form that scientists have just discovered, and we all know that more and more are getting into tech-related fields. That's fine. There's no need to report on it as if this is some amazing new event, unprecedented in history. If anything it just serves to differentiate their involvement and make it seem unusual.
Yes, there are some guys that feel threatened by it, but I think it's the frequency of these stories that annoys people, not so much the content.
Just my 2 cents.
Just cruising through this digital world at 33 1/3 rpm...
who they will train and get laid off.
Gender equality takes place ONLY on the unemployment line thanks to our government.
As a side project I recently programmed a game with some of my younger cousins, we used the unity engine and i was absolutely blown away at just how accessible it was. It was fabulously easy to manage the project even though I had no prior experience and my programing experience wasn't gaming related.
Literally anyone who is interested can grab Unity and run through some tutorials and learn to program. My cousin is doing it now by herself because it was just too easy. She is now thinking of programming as a career because she enjoys it. There is no barrier. It is mostly a private experience and there is nothing wrong with that.
I love diversity because I'm part of it, . To me diversity just means everyone gets a chance, an opportunity.
Your cousin clearly has an interest, an attitude, and a burgeoning passion of computer programming / software development. I think most of us began along a similar vein though back during the early 1980s it was mostly self-taught by necessity without benefit of existing code libraries or frameworks. If she decides to turn this hobby into a career, she can build a portfolio of projects to show potential employers or clients. I agree computer programming is by its nature an egalitarian and meritocratic career if the meddling SJWs and HR departments stay out to the way.
A person who disagrees with the diversity rhetoric is not necessarily doing so because they feel
threatened. In my case, for example, I see two main reasons to oppose it:
I don't even know where to begin with that one. Apparently you think *lack* of diversity trumps ability, which is even more stupid, frankly.
You're jumping to conclusions. Just because the poster is opposed to diversity rhetoric does not mean that they think "lack of diversity trumps ability". At no point in the argument did the poster argue for less diversity. Instead, the poster claimed that the arguments for diversity are not compelling. Many of us simply don't care about diversity, one way or the other, but the diversity politics is interfering with other things that we do care about. (In particular, the poster claimed that it was interfering with his fondness for rationality, and with his desire to read entertaining stories on Slashdot.)
Although I did receive some harassment for my beliefs, you greatly exaggerate it. For example, I never needed to "hide [my] beliefs to avoid discrimination or other harmful conflict" while I was growing up.
Great! I like how assume that your experience is representative of the entire world for in analogy, therefore the analogy is wrong therefore there isn't a problem with diversity in tech. I also like how you do this after banging on about rationality and logic above.
It's interesting, I think that the people who mention "logic" and "rationality" in posts often seem tobe the least able to use either.
Look, neither of you have facts to back up your claim, but the poster's anecdotal experiences seem to contradict what was being said. The poster never claimed that his "experience is representative of the entire world". Instead, he was questioning the claim that atheists in the US "need to hide their beliefs to avoid discrimination or other harmful conflict".
One person made an unsubstantiated claim, and another person questioned it. The next step in the argument is for somebody to provide some factual evidence to support one side or the other.
[Citation needed]
You either didn't read the post you're replying to, or you're replying to a post you didn't read.
I see nothing in his post to support your claim.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
It'll take awhile to level that out. So, just rounding to make it easier and assuming 50/50 splits on race we have:
36% white male
36% white female
6.5% black male
6.5% black female
4.5% mixed male
4.5% mixed female
2.5% asian male
2.5% asian female
And then we have a really small amount of Native American/Alaskans/Hawaiins/etc...
So, when we read these articles on how there is too many white males or whites in general in any job, we have to normalize for the existing populations.
And, depending who does the counting white can be composed of Caucasian and Hispanic. Or not.
It's kinda funny how his second point actually proves the original claim because it is a perfect example of 'feeling emotionally threatened' and the first, on 'randomness trumping diversity' has little to do with the actual claims but interpreting it as such is a great example of missing the forest for the trees.
I guess I'm just bemused how these people who gripe about SJWs keep throwing around really obvious arguments as if they are things we've never heard of before.
In particular, many individuals read Slashdot as a form of entertainment. The discussion of diversity diminishes that entertainment.
Aside from that being a perfect example of feeling emotionally threatened, it seems that what you're saying is that /. should be an echo chamber that sticks to what the 'many' think is entertaining. Gotcha.
Anyone disagreeing is now an MRA? What about the flip side, instantly modded +5 insightful; an overly worded straw-man. I should just call those that modded him insightful as vapid SJW feminists, right?
Yes, the /. modding system is flawed. Yes, -1 troll is used as disagree by many. However, to use a brush so large to paint everyone that disagrees with the sacred cow of identity politics is an MRA is laughable.
I think that is one thing that I absolutely hate about modern feminism. They claim moral superiority on everything and if you disagree and dismiss any claim.
A woman disagrees; just wants male attention, brainwashed, internalized misogyny, all the above!
A man disagrees; just an MRA, rape apologist, privileged, moral degenerates, misogynists, all the above!
Equal opportunity, we have it. Or are you going to try and convince me that a male being in the same room as a female is oppressing her ability to learn CS.
and if you disagree /insert insult here/ and dismiss any claim.
damn you brackets!
Re: finding it annoying because of the frequency of these stories: That's probably just because /. is a sausage-fest.. If a significant percentage of visitors to this site were affected by this issue, it would be another story
In particular, many individuals read Slashdot as a form of entertainment. The discussion of diversity diminishes that entertainment.
Aside from that being a perfect example of feeling emotionally threatened, it seems that what you're saying is that /. should be an echo chamber that sticks to what the 'many' think is entertaining. Gotcha.
If an individual says that "discussion of diversity diminishes that entertainment", it sounds more like they're being annoyed than "emotionally threatened". How did you come to the conclusion that they were emotionally threatened?
If we want women to be treated as equals in society then people had bloody well better just start treating them as equals... That means that we need to stop fucking focusing on things like disparity in genders in particular fields where there is no technical reason that such disparity should exist. If it does still exist when society is simply treating men and women the same anyways, then who the fuck cares? Stop worrying about stuff that shouldn't matter in the first place and just treat every human being you encounter with the dignity and respect they deserve. Nobody can ask for more than that.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
Now we evil white guys can compete with the pre-anointed female contingent along with the outsourcing and the H1B visa invasion. Fuck this profession. Starting my own company called White Guys Only. I'll register it as a "Woman Owned Distressed Business" (yes, a real government classification) so I'm immune to most of the laws the rest of you have to deal with and hire whomever the hell I want. Racist sexist nitwits. How fucking stupid do you have to be to think that every sex and every race should be equally talented (or interested) in a particular field of endeavour?
What's wrong with increasing diversity? Is it that you feel threatened because you think you can't compete in the job market?
I have no issues with getting a job. My issue is constantly cleaning up after other horrible programmer messes. Programming is a power curve with 80% below average. Programming also have negative scaling as you add more programmers. The more programmers, the more mess and the longer stuff takes. The best situation is a few really good programmers. you know that "10x" programmer "myth". The actual research shows a 100x difference, but they changed the title to "10x" because most people would think it's too unbelievable.
Someone mod this up. Anyone who has read past serviscope posts (or just the ones in this thread) can see that this is a quintessential example of projection.
If you're a boot camp away from being employable, maybe employer's should hire you and offer a training.
really obvious arguments as if they are things we've never heard of before.
Perhaps you keep hearing the same arguments because you never actually address them. Snarky comments and vague assertions make poor rebuttals.
You can claim a problem with moral superiority but when you say "are you going to try and convince me that a male being in the same room as a female is oppressing her ability to learn CS" it shows you aren't really even bothering to understand what it is you're angry about, because nobody has ever suggested that anywhere.
And yeah, SJW and MRA get thrown around too easily, but if you employ the arguments of an MRA, you're going to get labeled as such, and vica versa with SJWs. That's kind of how in-group out-group behavior seems to work.
Last, it isn't too hard to look through this thread and find plenty of posts denigrating women as stupid or incapable or inferior.
The fault, if any, doesn't appear to be with the hiring companies. Some of them probably are unfriendly to women, but most seem to accept women just fine. If, as I suspect, there are unequal opportunities, it's happening before the women enter the workforce. Things like this boot camp and other attempts to encourage more girls into the field will tell us more.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
In reality, people don't treat women and men the same. People don't treat boys and girls the same. I don't think they ever have or ever will.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
Anyone who has a PhD, especially from MIT, should have a Federal Minimum Income of $250,000/year.
That's definitely not true. Most PhD's in the sciences get positions as "postdoctoral students", which only pay $40,000 to $50,000 per year. See
http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2014/10/04/glut-postdoc-researchers-stirs-quiet-crisis-science/HWxyErx9RNIW17khv0MWTN/story.html
Perhaps it's because the purported 'arguments' keep twisting diversity into foolish things that almost nobody on the side of diversity is even arguing. Maybe a proper rebuttal ends up being the same as what happens when you try to rebut a creationist who is out to tell you how the liberal universities are excluding him, and how bad off he is, while won't give up on his straw man of evolution--a waste of time.
To:
Are you afraid of interacting women
You replay with a solid 'yes':
Personally I now steer clear of women coworkers. The risk of triggering a feminist is just too big.
Interacting with women in the workplace is pretty easy. All you need to do to is behave like a professional and treat them like human beings. It's that simple. No special treatment or changes in behavior should be required.
Or does that require a change in your behavior? Do you find that need distasteful? The fact remains: if you're not acting like a professional, you're a problem for all of your coworkers and your employer.
Required reading for internet skeptics
Small articles now and then on issues regarding women in tech that are optional to read, that he disagrees with, and, he's 'annoyed' because they 'diminish' his ability to feel entertained, as if the 'many' can't be entertained on /. because of articles like this! ..yeah, that's feeling emotionally threatened.
shows you aren't really even bothering to understand what it is you're angry about, because nobody has ever suggested that anywhere.
It has been argued, as quoted below.
From GGP:
These aren't "for girls" boot camps. Women just feel more comfortable in these environments and thus are more likely to participate.
Other posts on ./ had similar reasoning in the discussions and topics. A girl feels uncomfortable therefore segregation/special treatment.
Feelings are more important than equal opportunity.
look through this thread and find plenty of posts denigrating women as stupid or incapable or inferior.
Welcome to the internet. The Eternal September is a long and harsh mistress indeed. The irony, the ones arguing for special treatment of women presuppose women's inability to succeed on their own. How droll, isn't it.
Coward calling me angry. rofl. Good one. Now, kindly fuck off or log on if you want a discussion. :)
Glad to know there's some sanity left on /. these days. Can't say I've ever had any issues with women in IT positions either. Not surprisingly when there's mutual respect, there's no real problems.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
Check your privilege shitlord!
How dare you suggest that people be judged by the content of their character instead of the color of their skin! You probably also refuse to acknowledge the binary races of white people and colored people^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hpeople-of-color.
You don't see the opportunistic omission in that sentence of yours I quoted? Here's a hint:
So.. you concede that the internet is shitty.. and with the pathetic attitude toward women rampant even throughout this site.. the thing that -really- pisses you off is that some women can learn about tech in peace.
What a trivial thing for you to worry about by comparison. How beyond petty! What was that about whose 'feelings' again?
So you know the score, yet you're angry about solidarity or cooperation because that "presupposes women's inability to succeed on their own." Nice one with that brilliant, individualist, philosophy-capsule from the MRA dept!
Yes and maybe that's the point. Some say that just addressing this issue perpetuates it. But if you want equality, you're never going to have it if you put your fingers in your ears and pretend this doesn't happen.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
What nonsense is this??
White isn't a race. White is the absence of race, just like male is the absence of gender.
you concede that the internet is shitty.. and with the pathetic attitude toward women rampant even throughout this site.. the thing that -really- pisses you off is that some women can learn about tech in peace.
Oh, look a white knight to defend the honour of women online everywhere! As if, only women are mistreated online? despite some reports to claim the contrary. Could you please, remind me what stopped women from coding before? Must have been that Star Wars poster. Which is more demeaning, one who thinks women are strong and capable enough to enter CS without special treatment or the one who thinks they need a safe space from Star Wars posters and men.
So you know the score, yet you're angry about solidarity or cooperation because that "presupposes women's inability to succeed on their own." Nice one with that brilliant, individualist, philosophy-capsule from the MRA dept!
If you protect the rights of the individual you protect them for the collective. The narrative passed on by you and others ignore the individual because Cultural Marxism and identity politics.
Keep trying to convince yourself that I am just an angry MRA meanwhile feminism becomes its own worst enemy.
I pity you.
Small articles now and then on issues regarding women in tech...
The Slashdot articles on women in tech aren't "small". They appear to be about the same size as the other articles. And by "now and then", you mean multiple times a week and sometimes multiple times in one day.
It looks as though you're trying to pretend that these articles are less annoying than they actually are.
In my opinion your strongest moments were when you stuck to "white knight" which I guess is insulting if one identifies as an MRA or a PUA?
It was less strong when you broke out the right-wing conspiracy theory about cultural marxism--perfect for metapedia, the armchair sociology equivalent of creationism. I guess it must feel pretty cold over there, being ostracized from mainstream academia.. clearly proof you're on the right track!
And since you're fine with the internet being as it is, it's pretty hypocritical for you to complain about it.
Feminism is doing just fine, which of course, is why you're pissed off, but your tears are kind of delicious and sweet ^_^
Depending on your definition of "acting professional", it can be very anti-creative. People need to be able to be themselves, mostly. Of course it's not like being at a party and doing/saying whatever comes to mind, but people should be able to have "fun" at work. You also need at least some ability to vent.
I'll accept that they are genuine when they start advocating for gender equality in other male dominated industries like deep sea fishing and garbage collection. Until then it is an obvious grab for power at the expense of others. In other words "give me your safe, high paying job that you worked hard to get and you go work the dangerous, low paying job that I don't want, because glass ceiling!"
Think, for just a few moments, about why your argument isn't convincing to anyone. It's better if you figure this out for yourself.
give me your safe, high paying job that you worked hard to get
You imply here that women don't work hard to get those safe, high-paying, jobs and that they're forcing men in to dangerous low-paying jobs. This tells me a couple things: First, you don't think women are as capable or hard-working as men. Second, you're afraid that you can't compete in a job market that doesn't marginalize women.
The facts are that women face artificial barriers not faced by men, meaning they need to work harder than men to reach those safe, high-paying, positions. Attitudes like yours, such as believing women to be less capable, contribute to those barriers. The glass-ceiling is so named because it's an invisible barrier, imposed by regressive attitudes, not written rules, that keep women from reaching the same heights.
Let's try an example: We have two candidates for promotion, Alice and Bob. Alice is the obvious choice, having both seniority and better numbers than Bob. Bob's no slouch, being a hard-worker with decent numbers. Alice and Bob both have families. People wonder why Alice even wants the promotion as she has kids at home. At the same time, they hope Bob gets the promotion as he's a good family man who could use the pay raise. These regressive attitudes regarding traditional gender roles give Bob an edge over Alice -- even without the blatant misogynistic attitudes you express.
This isn't complicated.
Required reading for internet skeptics
No, I do not imply such. I imply that is what the SJW's, such as feminists, want.
I do not think that women are less capable or hard working in the tech industry, they are just far less inclined to want to enter it.
I have no issue at all with competing with anyone as long as the playing field is kept even. Incentives for hiring a woman or a minority (lets not confuse women with minorities like you dumb fucks always do) do not allow for an even playing field.
No, they don't face artificial barriers not faced by men. They once did, but they haven't for well over a decade, especially in the tech sector. In fact, a woman applying for a tech job is far more likely to to be hired than a equally qualified man, and will have a higher salary than the man would have.
If there is any remnant of a "glass ceiling" it is due to differing priorities and behavior between men and women. Men and women play politics very differently and that could be an advantage or disadvantage to them based on who is their boss.
I see you have to imagine your misogyny. I can't say that I'm surprised.
You're right, it isn't that complicated. You are just incapable of seeing through the veil that has been pulled over your eyes, and our extremely powerful instinct to always protect women and children isn't helping you much with that. In order to see reality you have to be able to step back and question your beliefs, even your instincts.
No, I do not imply such. I imply that is what the SJW's, such as feminists, want.
You're deeply confused. Try reading that section again.
No, they don't face artificial barriers not faced by men.
Nonsense.
They once did, but they haven't for well over a decade
At least you acknowledge those barriers exist! Now, what do you think changed? How were those barriers universally lifted in the last decade? As far as anyone else can tell, things are the same as they were in 2005.
You are just incapable of seeing through the veil that has been pulled over your eyes
Lol! It's a conspiracy, man! They've been, like, lying to you about everything. The truth is out there!
Do you hear yourself?
Required reading for internet skeptics