Slashdot Mirror
Could a Change In Wording Attract More Women To Infosec? (csoonline.com)
itwbennett writes: "Information security is an endeavor that is frequently described in terms of war," writes Lysa Myers. "But what would the gender balance of this industry be like if we used more terms from other disciplines?" Just 14 percent of U.S. federal government personnel in cybersecurity specialties are women, a number startlingly close to the 14.5 percent of active duty military members who are women (at least as of 2013). By comparison, women are well represented in other STEM fields: "As of 2011, women earn 60 percent of bachelor-level biology degrees. Women also earn between 40 and 50 percent of chemistry, mathematics and statistics, and Earth sciences undergraduate degrees," writes Myers. Why the difference? Myers points to a comment from someone who taught a GenCyber camp for girls: "He found that one effective way to get girls to feel passionate about security was to create an emotional connection with the subject: e.g. the shock and distress of seeing your drone hacked or your password exposed," writes Myers.
As a (female) senior developer my only response to the summary was a stunned 'WTH'. Now I'm certain this is a The Onion article... *checks*
Site & blog: http://www.mayaposch.com
I'm the furthest thing from an SJW but could this be any more insulting toward women?
Get rid of the H1B's / have maternity leave where they can't fire you for using it.
WHAT
THE
FUCK?!?!?!
..."no" especially applies here, since wording, subtlety, and semantics are a rather big pillar of infosec, for frig sakes. If you get butthurt in the adverts, then how do you expect to once you're in it?
PS: 14% and 14.5% aren't far enough off to get anyone's panties in a bunch (yes, pun intended).
Quo usque tandem abutere, Nimbus, patientia nostra?
A sensitive bunch, to be sure. Perhaps, if a group isn't interested in a subject, just maybe you shouldn't try to con them into it? There's nothing wrong with someone being disinterested in something.
"We could attract more women to infosec if we fool them into thinking it's not really infosec." Guys, Dice, get it through your thick skulls: the ladies just aren't into you. Accept their decision and move on.
Just let people choose what professions suit them, instead of trying to lure people in?
"Your password was cracked! /quote
ramifications: because terrorists now have your password, your baby is now on fire!
What a dumb summary and an even dumber premise.
Harrison's Postulate - "For every action there is an equal and opposite criticism"
n/t
Information security is an endeavor that is frequently described in terms of war
And no sane person likes war ... right?
The point is that to make Infosec more attractive to normal, sane, people the intent should be changed from one of confrontation and dominance to one that coveys an intent to make the world better, more secure, safer, and protected from the crazies out there.
If that sounds a lot like the (female dominated) caring professions, then so be it. But if you really believe that Infosec is there as part of a "war" then carry on as you were ...
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
somebody trademark that phrase.
Who would have thought those silly women could be fooled by changing of wording? While I don't care for some of the "women in STEM" shenanigans going on lately, this just strikes me as insulting to women.
all women coders are like Elle Woods from Legally Blonde and won't take a job unless you feminize it. What an insult.
An SJW would actually promote this tactic. There was an article from CNNMoney a year ago that honestly said that we'd have more women going for IT jobs if we changed the wording of the job description. For instance use cooperative instead of competitive. Or don't use hard work in the description.
...You have to go out to meet hot women. You can't count on hiring them.
When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
Could a change in wording repel the parasites trying to turn software development into a political football ?
It's kind of like saying, "You know, those poor, oversensitive women. The problem isn't harassment, unfair pay, or things like that. It's just that we are using the wrong words."
You want to hire more women? Pay them the same as guys and crush any attempt to harass them with an iron first.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
Something I've noticed is that the SJW diversity push is effectively pushing skilled women (and skilled minorities, for that matter) OUT of tech.
Partly it's because it's become a self-fulfilling prophecy that "women don't do tech." Where as before a technically inclined woman would do the same things that technically inclined men do, now they've been taught by SJWs that they "aren't welcome in tech" no matter what they experience. So they just don't enter because they've been told again and again that they're not welcome, without realizing that the people telling them that don't even work in tech in the first place.
It also means that where before, people knew a woman in tech was there because she had earned the job, now you have to wonder if she's a "diversity hire" who's there not because she was the best for the job but because she allowed the company to check off "employs women" on the SJW score-card.
I've seen women actively leave where I work not because they didn't enjoy the job but because my employer has started doing this whole "encourage women in STEM" thing and all they've really accomplished is crapping all over the accomplishments of the women who work there. They're no longer "the best in the field" they're now "the best women we could find." Turns out being told "you're only here 'cause you're a woman" is really demoralizing to technically skilled women.
And so now, they're leaving the field entirely, giving SJWs even more to whine about.
"As of 2011, women earn 60 percent of bachelor-level biology degrees. Women also earn between 40 and 50 percent of chemistry, mathematics and statistics, and Earth sciences undergraduate degrees"
So what did they do to get women involved with the sciences.... did they change the lingo to better suit women?
love is just extroverted narcissism
Don't feed the News Troll. They want your painties in a twist.
I'm the furthest thing from an SJW but could this be any more insulting toward women?
That was my reaction too. I am a natural-born woman though I suppose the SJWs will argue even that point of truth.
I find the whole concept of Penis-and-Vagina Accounting applied to software development insulting toward women. The whole attraction of geeky fields (at least to me) is that they're about your mind, not your body. Do you have the geek mindset? Bright and intellectually curious and fearless? Welcome about. Reducing that to "but how many penis and how many vaginas" soils the field. That aspect shouldn't be important, and focusing on some unimportant aspect of biology is certainly insulting: it's reducing people to their junk.
Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
Well, we can't have that, then women might not get paid penny to penny to do touchy feely jobs like nursing instead of STEM jobs where the money is.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
but we have to treat people as collectives, not individuals! Wait ...
Frankly, industry members could start by showing much lower tolerance for awful hours, dead-end careers, and generalized workplace assholery. Oh, but that's more expensive than pinkwashing and working together is hard. If you all stand up to the Deathmarches you don't need to fear the H1B worker. Look in the mirror, righteous warriors.
My God, it's Full of Source!
OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
when they also show an even slight concern about the much greater imbalance of 90-95% females in most nursing degree programs, and a similar problem in teaching.
If we are choosing between "let women decide what they want" and "try to manipulate women into doing what you think they should do", then I guess I would have to say that only the first option is consistent with human dignity.
I'm a programmer on a team of about ten, all men. We were at lunch one day talking about it and my boss said he went way out of his way to try to hire women. He said he proactively sent invitations to CS programs soliciting women, sent invitations to women on LinkedIn, and as a rule he would interview any woman who applied, regardless of the resume (is that gender equality? whatever).
He got zero female applicants. Zero. We have women at the company, we have women doing programming, but none doing the kind of programming that my team does. My best guess, informed by personal experience, is that women are just a lot less likely to want to do this work. There might be more than zero, but the rate is less than 1/10th of the rate for men, which on a team this size means there are zero women.
He found that one effective way to get girls to feel passionate about security was to create an emotional connection with the subject: e.g. the shock and distress of seeing your drone hacked or your password exposed
Right -- the old 'shock and awww' approach. I guess it's true -- an effective way to induce passion (an emotion) in humans is to, you know, describe things using emotionally-laden descriptions. Protip -- some parents use a variation of this when telling a child to "Use your words."
The massive implication here is that women can't decide their own career for themselves and are dumb enough to choose a whole career path just because of some emotional trigger words.
But be sure to let them define harassment.
Ignoring them or paying attention to them is a good start. As is anything in between. Or anything at all, in fact.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Are you aware what you're saying there? You're saying that women are scared away from a field because of how it is described. They are according to this piece scared of words. Are you fucking serious? Can you get any more condescending and belittling?
I am in it security. And as far as I can tell it's the reputation the field has that is to blame for the gender gap, and how itsecs are treated by their coworkers. We don't tend to be the most social of people. On one hand because that's basically the reputation that we have (it's self perpetuating, on one hand we have that rep, on the other hand people who aren't too fond of too much human interaction choose the field, further reinforcing that stereotype), on the other hand itsec is usually as well liked as controlling. People feel uncomfortable talking to us. Because we might hear something that makes us go "Whhaaaaaat did you say?"
Most women probably just don't want to be outcasts.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If Mr. Editor here had two neurons to rub together, he would actually read the comments and see how fewer and fewer people are supporting him. He's done so much damage towards this cause, I wonder if that's what he intended from the beginning? Having special advantages for either gender was always sexist, I thought, but this is worse than even that.
"Set a man a fire, he'll be warm for the rest of the night. Set a man afire, he'll be warm for the rest of his life."
giving SJWs even more to whine about
I know you didn't mean it in quite this way, but ... yeah.
Could we attract more Yorkshire people by changing the name of everything to "whippet" or "Tetley's"?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I'm the furthest thing from an SJW but could this be any more insulting toward women?
Only if you...let's see now..introduced shoe metaphors?
They already get paid more than men on an absolute level. The statistic used in unfair wages arguments is the estimated lifetime income which tends to be lower for women because they tend to stay home with kids while dad goes to work.
If you hire someone and explicitly pay them less based on gender, you're a lawsuit waiting to happen.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
...who gives a fuck?
pr0n - keeping monitor glass spotless since 1981.
with getting women to do what they don't want to do?
Namely work in STEM fields.
The preceding post was not a Slashvertisement.
The gender pay gap thing is just dumb anyway. If I run a company, and I could save ~25% by just hiring women, why wouldn't I do that? We should see men having a hard time getting employment if this were the case, but it's not.
Nursing is probably a better career choice than STEM anyway: it's extremely stable (you have to be really incompetent to get fired as a nurse), the pay is pretty good if you're an RN, there's no ageism, the hours are good (since you actually get paid for your 40 hours and get overtime if you go over), and the social atmosphere is a lot better. Also, you can work anywhere, since there's almost no place that doesn't have a hospital nearby, whereas in STEM you're stuck working in certain cities depending on your industry and specialty.
Honestly, I frequently wish I had gone into a medical profession instead of engineering. Maybe not nursing exactly, but one of the jobs like medical imaging technicians might have been a good choice. I wouldn't make as much absolute money as I do now, but the career stability and better socialization would have made up for it.
Why not just tell them they'll get to read other people's gossip without them knowing?!
How about we try and get more men in to biology?
Pink keyboards, mice and IDE skins! Brilliant idea!
(First of all, holy cow, Dice! Just remade an account and WTF happened to D1? Oh well.)
You didn't fire that person for being lazy and not working, you fired them for being transgender.
Doubtful. Please provide citation. Like the deaths from cannabis edibles in Colorado, it may have happened once or twice, but this is certainly not the case.
It is true that if you fire a woman who simply can't code for shit, the SJWs and 3rd wave "feminists" will come after your ass, but only if she's a womyn-born-womyn (and white).
Observe the true horror of what the SJWs* have done to us. Trust me. Transphobia is very much alive and well. Us geeks are some of the most tolerant types. I have never faced or observed transphobia from a geek, at least one under 40. Yet we're being painted in the media as being a bunch of closed-minded woman-hating misogynerds. Look to Brianna Wu to see exactly what SJWs think of trans folks.
Now, that's a complicated point but bear with me here. Brianna Wu is trans, but she just doesn't want to admit it. In fact, I see the position she's taken, and I can't say I disagree. In an ideal world, Brianna Wu, yourself, myself, and every other person out there would just be women and men, and we'd have no use for my trans- this cis- that all over the place. I want to live in that world. I would be delusional to think I do live in that world, however.
Why do you think that whatever that project of Canonical's was needed to not only emphasize that they accepted trans women, but genderqueer folks? Do you think it was because they earnestly wanted help from anyone and everyone who wasn't a (cis/trans) man? Nope, try again. The SJWs imo, well, they don't really help anyone, but they certainly don't give a damn about trans women because we're not "real" women. We weren't "born" that way.
I'd argue that yes I was, because I'm the body part between my ears, not the one between my legs that was mutilated anyway within 24 hours of taking my first breath. SJWs would beg to differ. Their world is the world of oppressed womyn-born-womyn and us "invaders" who retain male privilege (somehow) and should FEEL GUILTY.
I'm the AC who's been complaining about gaslighting asshole managers. It's true. I've seen two women, one cis, one trans, get chased out of tech by gaslighting asshole managers, usually from the executive level. Why would an executive waste his time on a lowly tech in the trenches? Yet, the SJWs focus their hate on us, nerds and geeks who like I said seem to me to be the most tolerant and accepting people I know.
I would also like to add that blacks seem to be in a similar position. The SJWs will come after you with their FEEL GUILTY crap, they'll interrupt your rallies with their #blacklivesmatter shit, but at the end of the day, they don't care about the racism I've observed several gaslighting asshole managers display.
Us geeks value that body part between the ears, and I think that's why I simply fail to see transphobia from geeks. Please don't get confused by the SJWs. They want to act like they're progressive, but where is #translivesmatter? Why doesn't Brianna Wu stand up for the shit that trans women have to put up with? She doesn't even "pass" as well as I do (not that it should matter), but I admit she does pass fairly well. Perhaps she's just too self-centered, like SJWs tend to be, to see the misery that is the life of a trans woman who is obviously transgendered when a gaslighting asshole manager has her in the sights.
Of course, not all managers are gaslighting assholes. My former boss and current bosses I had/have I have a great deal of respect for, and I've learned many things about being a professional from them.
* I don't like the term SJW, but I think we all know exactly who it refers to, and it's not Rosa Parks.
I thought we had advanced as a society?
Or maybe infosec workers need a trendy uniform?
The thing is, this is just the same with all of CompSci, coding, etc. Women generally look more carefully at the types of careers and working environments they can have afterwards. Now, working conditions, career options and compensation for Coders, Software Engineers, etc. generally suck badly these days. It is no surprise that women with the talent and skills more often than not avoid going into this field. Incidentally, this is something a lot of men also do, but to a lesser degree.
The thing is, we have far to many IT people, coders, etc. We urgently need to get all the incompetents and semi-competents out of there, pay the rest a lot better and give them the power to decide things. An incompetent IT person (and they are far more than 50%) is worse than having nobody. But as long as you pay peanuts, you only get monkeys.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Several companies in fact do this. So do industries. Nursing is a great example where the pay is low and people complain about being unable to hire qualified people.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
While none of the female CS types I know have let themselves be pushed out by this, quite a few complain, and rightfully so. This is insulting to anybody that has worked hard to be good at things. In addition, the women that were hired because of gender often seem to be incompetent, disrupt the workplace, and generally make a lot of work for others, often the competent women.
Really, STEM is a "every competent sentient life-form welcome" club. There is NOTHING that should be done to push people in that field, because people that need to be pushed or manipulated into it will later very likely fail as they will lack the dedication and skill to make it.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
All scientifically done studies on the subject indicate a slight bias towards women being a little bit more for the same work. Of course, women far more often work part-time and often take significant time off for children. That results in lower pay, but it is not like this is hidden or unfair in any way.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
SJWs are not info pesky facts. They want to portray themselves as victims and then reap unearned benefits from that. Basically parasites without any useful skills.
I just hope the STEM field if more resilient to this kind of dishonorable and destructive attacks than other fields have been.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
This comes from people that do not understand the relation between cause and effect: They think by changing the numbers, they can change the conditions that lead to these numbers. Of course, that cannot work.
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
But even accounting for all of those things, women still get less pay for the same work. The Sony hack proved this, if nothing else. The major group of women that suffer are those that never marry a man. This includes lesbians as well as women that simply never wish to marry.
These women are screwed over by society. just as black men, short men, transgender people, muslims of any gender,
Similarly, the people that most benefit from this practice are gay, tall men. Of course, gay men suffer from other consequences and I am sure most would not consider the money worth it.
excitingthingstodo.blogspot.com
We should be able to get more men into nursing if we eliminate the emotional connection with patients. Perhaps, too, if we brought more concepts of "competition" and "fighting" to nursing, too, since men totally dig stuff like that.
Do you have ESP?
People in engineering and IT complain about the pay being low, while companies complain about being unable to hire qualified people, and that has nothing to do with sex since there's so few women in these fields.
And from what I've seen, the pay for 4-year RNs isn't that bad, and for NPs it's pretty good. For the LPNs it sucks though.
Brianna Wu is the embodiment of someone who is so voraciously pushing the SJW shtick because she doesn't want people to ever *dare* question her identity.
"The madame doth protest too much", as it were.
And of course, she's been self-promoting, including with a lot of fake claims (like saying she had been forced out of her place by haters when she in fact had signed up months ago to attend a con that day), and bogus drama (OMG they have the picture of where I live!). Like nobody can use google earth ...
Her artwork depicted women as if they had been drawn by an adolescent male (complete with camel toe in one instance which has been removed from the site after I made a bit of a stink about it and her portrayal of women in general).
Fortunately, she does not represent the majority of us. Unfortunately, not everyone will realize that. Even though she won't admit to being trans, she still depends on it to get a free pass from criticism.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
I agree with you completely, Ms. Hudson. She must not represent us imnsho. I have seen the evidence that she faked her own harassment. That's why I hate on her so viciously. I hate to do this to somebody who has lived through the hell we all have (assuming she has?), but she stands as a threat to all progress for trans women. I also vehemently disagree with her supposition that only us trans women may speak about trans women. I encourage all dialog, and I have great faith in geeks and nerds that we will expose the truth.
Fortunately people are catching on. Even the prosecutor in Columbus, Ohio says she's a waste of time. :-)
She has zero credibility except among the fools who she cons into donating to her Patreon campaign, who have no incentive to discover that they've been duped and would reject the suggestion.
She's as bad in her own way as the TERFs.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Equal opportunity has somehow morphed into equal outcomes, to the detriment of everyone.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
are rather sexist and are so busy fighting against "masculinism" that they don't notice they're reifying the very gendered category system that feminists once, at the beginning, set out to make obsolete. Once again, war, labor, objectivity and striving are seen increasingly as being for men, while flowers, cooperation, peace, and "locality" (a thin veneer over domesticity) are the supposedly more desirable feminine (i.e. not so masculine) traits that we ought to promote.
It's gone gone from "women should be free to leave the kitchen and join any action they want" to "if we can move the Oval Office and the battlefield into the kitchen, we can have women present in both places as they cook!"
STOP . AMERICA . NOW
The gender pay gap thing is just dumb anyway. If I run a company, and I could save ~25% by just hiring women, why wouldn't I do that? We should see men having a hard time getting employment if this were the case, but it's not.
Your reasoning only follows if the so-called "free market" is effective, or *efficient*. You seem to be treating the high effectiveness of the free marked as an axiom. Naturally if you choose your axioms, you can reach any conclusion you like using logic. However, if your axioms aren't based in reality then your reasoning won't have any bearing on reality.
If you wish your argument to have any merit, you need to provide some evidence that the market for employment is actually some approximation of an efficient, free market. I strongly suspect it isn't because there's a lot of friction for employees changing jobs and employers have very imperfect knowledge of who to buy employment from, and the extreme difficulties in assessing how good potential employees are.
With those two barriers it is unlikely that the market is efficient. Therefore any arguments based on efficient employment markets are inapplicable.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Even though she won't admit to being trans
Why the ever living fuck is half of slashdot so hung up on this?
Curiously it seems to be the same side who screeches about SJW and declares that they're all evil because software should be about your brain not your genitals. Somehow none of you all seem to get the irony.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
Could a Change In Wording Attract More Women To Infosec?
Yes. Start with not calling them "babes." Chicks hate that.
systemd is Roko's Basilisk.
The gender pay gap thing is just dumb anyway. If I run a company, and I could save ~25% by just hiring women, why wouldn't I do that? We should see men having a hard time getting employment if this were the case, but it's not.
The key is maternity leave; during a woman's career she can fall pregnant at any time, and her already having children is no predictor of lack of future children, nor is her marital status any real indication either.
A company is on the hook for an unproductive (read: absent) employee for 6 months (or more) at their current salary, and this can happen more than once. If this doesn't put downward pressure on women's salaries I don't know what else will.
Disclaimer: I come from USSR myself.
It's true that women had access to education and what not from Lenin's times.
Yet it is still statistically "not balanced" as majority of STEM-ers or politicians are, again, men.
The same goes for the top management of the most companies.
You can sure come across women here and there, but it's hardly any different from the West.
On top of it, views in regards of what harassment and "other things" is are much more, let's say, relaxed.
Just an example from a popular series ""
http://www.kinopoisk.ru/film/8...
1) sexual relationships with the boss, so what, no big deal
2) rape attempt, again, no big deal either
Men like war, women no like war! Ooga oorga! *pounds chest*.
But wait just a minute here. I thought the whole point these jerks have been trying to make is that you can't pigeonhole them like this, and that girls like GIJoe as much as boys if just given a chance to play with them!
In other words, make up your minds. Then shut up because tired of this.
We could change it to infosex...that aught to get everyone more interested...
blindly antisocialist = antisocial
Yep, this is why both maternity and paternity leave should be mandated by law, and equal to each other. It would eliminate this as a factor entirely, plus also give new dads a much-needed break to help take care of their kid and their wife/girlfriend. Every advanced country has this.
I'm female and actually in the field.. we don't need an emotional connection any more than a man does. To see a fellow female passionately talking about what she loves about technology is very inspiring to me and empowering, that alone. No words need to be changed. I think the message needs to be "Hey, you can wear skirts, be yourself and still like science and tech" from women to women. As far as men, they don't need to "help" us get interested. I was always in tech but got interested in Infosec because my former coworker (who is still my good friend) a guy, told me about it and how passionate he was. It rubbed off, but my own reasons for loving it are different. His are for "conquering knowledge", mine are for "protecting people" and I find it creepy and fascinating what "bad guys can think of next". I feel like Infosec is just isolating PERIOD. There are one or two of us in an organization, if you are lucky. We need to come together not the opposite, the gender separation is annoying. Let's talk about what we are passionate about in the field, that ignites people.
Let me again repeat why it's an issue, this time using slightly different words - her being ashamed of it informs her actions towards the rest of the world, particularly using her brand of feminism and SJW crap to be predisposed to launch attacks on anyone, not just over the subject of being trans, but anything that might call her into question on ANY subject. In other words, she's paranoid about her identity, and that explains why she acts the way she does. It's happened before, with transsexuals who feel they have to overplay who they are to be accepted, or at least, not have anyone dare call them into question.
It also explains why she posted threats to herself, and made the false claim that she had been forced from her home, as ways to draw sympathy towards her. She saw Anita Sarkeesian getting a lot of attention and decided to insert herself into the drama, because her game sucked and the angel investors are out of luck.
In other words, it's her own reaction to what she is that explains the "why is she doing this". She is the one who made it about more than just ability. When you get caught in a bunch of lies that you've done your best to attract attention to, people have the right to ask "why is she doing this?"
When it's the the cause of why she's behaving so dysfunctionally it becomes a legitimate issue. She is not representative of transsexuals, but an embarrassment and an impediment. She has become a professional victim, and judging by her Patereon account, she's making money off it. There are still some people that believe all the lies she told, even though they have been debunked, because some people have a vested interest in not looking too closely to her story. Same as someone who just bought a computer refuses to believe that someone else bought a better computer for less money - "There must be some difference, I paid more, so mine is better." See P.T. Barnum for more details :-)
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
According to this, a lot of countries have mandated paternity leave, but none or almost none give as much as maternity leave. It may have changed since June, but if that's your definition of "advanced country", then I don't think there are any. I agree with you that both should be offered, though.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Totally agree. The idea that women need to be duped into doing cybersecurity using emotional manipulation misses the point that you have to be quite clever in the first place to do it, so it's unlikely to work.
Nobody can guarantee what's going to happen tomorrow, not even an admiral from the future.
Like Santa Claus and the M&M figures - they do exist. I have actually worked with a few woman in infosec. They did very little, then moved on for a big pay raise, where they did nothing there as well. They were nice to look at while they were there though most of them are like a door knob. Everyone got a turn.
This is so stupid. They don't like the numbers so they just make up crap. Maybe more men should check off the female box so they can feel better. You know, women really are just as good as men.
also, "brianna" is a man.
Please, do some research on the topic, you'll find that was never really the case.
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Okay, maybe I'm stupider than I give myself credit for - but what does all this have to do with women in IT in general, except maybe to give more incentive for women to stay out of IT?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Heh, nice link.
Honest question: what's a TERF? Google!
Terf stands for Trans-Exclusionary Radical Feminists.Aug 9, 2014
Ah. Explains much. I just wonder how she got accepted into radical feminism in the first place.
Here's a better link about TERFs The reality is that Wu is not accepted into radical feminism even though she claims to be. Radical feminists believe only "women born women" are real women. Heck, even Germaine Greer continues to push that old, ignorant-of-the-facts-and-don't-wanna-know line that we're not "real women".
Too bad for them that they're more and more seen as exploiters of hate and misunderstanding towards us, same as many in the religious and political extreme right try to do. That horse might not be dead yet, but they'll keep beating it until long after it is. In a way, it's counter-productive to their aims - since they're seen as out to lunch on so many other issues, people who hear them attacking us will, for the most part, figure that if these people are against us, they should probably be for us :-)
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.