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!
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"
Didn't you hear? They made Asians honorable whites as soon as they demonstrated a study and work ethic.
It's like "white hispanic", whatever label is most convenient for the SJW narrative of the day.
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 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.
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.
And asks those women, DO YOU LIKE MY GREAT BIG COCK?!
No, that's the poultry farming boot-camp.
How much more of this silliness can we take? Girls statistically don't like to code. Period.
Enough with the moronic statistical outliers. (Some men want to be flight attendants, but it's not generally a dream job).
Why are we engaged in these massive social engineering projects to push girls where they don't want to go? Boys don't get pushed. They code alone in their rooms. It's a rare female that does.
Stop the madness.
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]
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.
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...
Or they are better off working mc's with Welfare then working mc's with student loans.
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.
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!
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'
Are you sure you aren't creating the divisiveness? Easy to point fingers.
"The single biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." George Bernard Shaw
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
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
If there's some booing/whistling/hissing there's a small chance they'll listen and stop.
Don't be ridiculous. They want just one thing: page views.
Do you know why they post stories like this so frequently? Because it gets people to click, comment, and check back for replies. Stories like this keep eyeballs on the site. The more you boo/whistle/hiss the happier the overlord's become. They made the right decision. "Look at how many people commented! Look at that bump in page views! Our advertisers will be pleased!"
You've played right in to their hands.
Required reading for internet skeptics
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
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
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.
If you are interested in it enough then you are going to pursue it. You have made me curious though. Who and what discouraged you? How did you overcome your discouragement?
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
It was always things that seemed benign, but in hindsight were pretty discouraging. Mind you I'm in my 40's now but I remember in high school being scheduled for a class that taught basic logic and being unregistered and sent to the secretarial course - without my having been asked. Because girls weren't supposed to take that class anyway.The teacher "knew" it was a mistake because I was the only girl in there. This was mid to late 1980's.
What changed it all for me was actually having a computer at home and wanting to know more and do more. And having a husband who knew as little as I did - we tackled quite a bit together although I think learning C++ may have contributed to our divorce.
At any rate, I'm just saying, it's important to just let girls be and discover and grow. You'd be surprised how many girls are getting the same messages in 2015 that I got in 1980-something. If only everything "for us" wasn't pink or purple.
Interesting. I was about a decade behind you in school and didn't see anything like that happening, nor hear about it from others. I have no doubt that your story is true, but attitudes change faster than people think. It certainly was an issue in the 80's, but that has changed and not in the last few years. It changed early in the 90's, shortly after more women had to enter the workforce due to the lowering of real wages. I do not doubt that there are still small pockets where this still exists, that happens with every social change, but they are very few, and the media pretends that those few are the norm to whip people into frenzy for profit. It is also being used for control. If you make all the men feel guilty about being men then they are easier to control, see Catholicism if you want another example of this tactic.