Slashdot Mirror
Women Interviewing For Tech Jobs Actually Did Worse When Their Voices Were Masked As Men's (fusion.net)
Kristen V. Brown, reporting for Fusion:It is well-trod territory at this point that biases against women's technological abilities hold women in technology back. Study after study has shown bias persists at every point of the employment process. So the start-up interviewing.io decided to try and do something about it. It masked women's voices to sound like men's and vice versa during online interviews to see if interviewers would like them better. It was inspired to do the experiment because it was seeing some alarming data. Interviewing.io is a platform that allows people to practice technical interviewing anonymously and, hopefully, get a job in the process. After amassing data from thousands of technical interviews, the company noticed a troubling trend, writes founder Aline Lerner in a blog post: "Men were getting advanced to the next round 1.4 times more often than women. Interviewee technical score wasn't faring that well either -- men on the platform had an average technical score of 3 out of 4, as compared to a 2.5 out of 4 for women."
This isn't surprising. It's been my experience that men are more willing to consistently put in the long hours for certain types of tasks than women. Moreover, there is usually less overall team drama when a team is composed entirely of men compared to when the team has a larger portion of women.
I fail to see how this is a troubling trend if its not based on any external force. Maybe men just studied harder and learned whatever skillset they needed better. Hell the only "troubling trend" is that women with subpar skills were hired more often when people knew they were women.
and are getting advanced out of political correctness. That's not good.
Women in general are worse at tech jobs, and therefore, less women want to pursue tech jobs.
MYSTERY SOLVED!
So is the implication here just that it's harder to find highly competent women in technical fields rather than men?
I think that's the problem exactly -- companies want to hire good people, and while women are just as capable as men when it comes to tech jobs (my company has some *very* strong female senior developers), there just aren't as many female tech applicants of any level. Nearly all (95+%) of our developer job applicants are male so it's much harder to find a strong female applicant given that for every female application we review 20 male applications. We are completely gender agnostic when we hire, but that's true agnosticism, not giving preference to any applicant based on gender.
The only way to fix that problem in the present is to go back in time 20 or 30 years and get more females interested in tech early on. It's not fair to blame tech companies like Google for a problem that started well before it was even in existence.
We have a much better male to female ratio in our intern programs, so things are getting better, but even there we're seeing around 80% male applications.
Also the title here is particularly bad, but I guess it's part of the Science News Cycle
Horror & SciFi Erotic Nudes
Yes, clearly the fact she doesn't want to sit around all day cooking and cleaning for you is because feminism has "ruined" her, and not because cooking and cleaning suck and she'd rather spend her life on something that interests her rather than being an unpaid maid.
Unless you're prepared to marry her without a prenup, I think her opinion is valid. If you want her to stay home, she'll need the long-term guarantee that she'll have money to survive. Otherwise you're asking her to give up her future financial stability on the basis that "right now" she doesn't need to work.
So pay her ... if you think her spending most of her time doing homework is so valuable convert that value into cold hard cash. That would make the decision a whole lot easier for your girlfriend. She's not your wife, she can't claw the value and lost opportunity/experience back if you leave her (unless your state has common law marriage).
I'm closer to a nazi than a feminist, but I can still see that she's the one thinking clearly here.
The fact we don't see the super wealthy going "now that I've amassed a fortune, I've decided to retire so I can finally indulge my true passion, which is scrubbing people's toilets for them" should be enough to tell you that.
...on what you consider "disfunction".
If you're looking to build a consensus driven organization, that cares about feelings, work life balance, and considers a functional team by their internal happiness, then by all means, women are often the ticket (though, there are cases of severe feminine dysfunction as well).
If you're looking to get product delivered, quality built in, and durability of your deliverables, then maybe going with second and third string techs is truly dysfunction. You'll need strong management that can handle conflict, but there's an argument that conflict can actually drive progress faster than kumbayah consensus.
...women are sheltered from competition.
Women don't have to be aggressive, competitive leaders to be valued in our society - they have inherent value simply by being women, and we would never admonish a little girl who didn't want to compete to "man up".
Men, on the other hand, must compete with each other and demonstrate, through action, that they have value.
While you might feel like calling a girl "bossy" can be damaging to a girl, boys get it even worse - "boys don't cry", "never hit girls", "man up".
If you're really going to get women used to competing, they need to be able to survive the converse - "girls don't cry", "never hit boys", "woman up". They're also going to have to survive, on their own, when anyone calls them "bossy" :)
tl;dr - if girls can't handle being called "bossy", they'll never be able to compete
Seriously, the anti-feminist backlash is like... whoa. Poeple are saying the most idiotic things in the comments here that don't in any way comport with the experiment, or even the experimenter's conclusions.
In the last few years a lot of crap has been said about feminism. The irony is that the posters often end up espousing feminist ideas without realizing it.
The really frustrating thing is seeing just how ignorant people are about feminism. It's usually the exact opposite of what they think. This debate is a perfect example, and the summary is just flamebait.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
I don't really understand this. I live alone and don't have kids. I have to work for a living AND take care of the house. I guess if your partner is a slob it might be a lot of work. Or if you have some kind of massive frankenhouse. Or if you have kids.
There, fixed that so you see why your situation is probably different.
But I do agree any stay at home spouse with no kids at home is just taking early retirement with a few chores to do each day.
-- All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. -- Edmund Burke