That was definitely one of the more intelligent articles on gender inequality I've read in a while. I'm not sure about your proposed solution, but I don’t really have any better ideas right now. There are a couple things that I always found funny but no one seems to ever talk about…
First, colleges are somewhat elitist in the fact that they don't want to teach useful skills in getting a job programming; they want to teach you computer 'science'. Most of the major universities have you take plenty of courses that supposedly expand your thinking, but have absolutely no real world relevance. I’m not sure how many semesters I spent learning things I’ll never use again like lambda calculus first-order logic. And the introductory courses in many college programs reflect this. The courses usually focus on teaching things like recursion, logic, data structures, and algorithms. While these are very important concepts for future computer scientists, they probably aren’t the most useful topics to get outsiders interested in computer science. I think more women would be interested in computer science if the intro courses were more broad(pardon the double entendre).
Second, I find it funny that when you're in high school and college, you're always told to do what you love. This is what high school/college counselors tell you when you need help picking a major or a career path. But then after school, everyone complains that too many women chose majors other than the ones that make the most money. So what’s the correct choice? Choosing something you love or choosing something that makes money? Is the solution really to try to align women’s interests with those that make the most money? While I definitely think its important to open doors for women in business and politics, I'm not sure how I feel about convincing people that money buys happiness.
Angie
· 2 years ago
Why does this remind me of Maureen Dowd's "What's a modern girl to do?" article last year....
I agree with the boring computer science class thing. At the intro CS classes at Berkeley, I was bored by exercises shuffling playing cards, recursion, and stuffy labs. Boring, boring, boring.
So maybe I didn't graduate with a CS, EECS, or math degree when I emerged from college, but I did earn my humanities degree and 3+ years job experience in web design which now translates to "UI design" -- which is in pretty high demand these days. Score!
I'd audit this post-bac school you propose. Who's going to step up and organize it?
niti
· 2 years ago
Well, I can volunteer admissions, registration, resume and career counselling help because I have no clue about software and current technology, but do have significant experience in working with students and placing them. My references are on LinkedIn.
I've written about this gender gap in engineering in the past and recommended almost the same approach as Joyce does - have a class for women only and it makes many of the issues women face moot.
Thanks for writing these two articles, a lot to think about here.
(Currently running a company lacking any female engineers.)
Twerpette
· 2 years ago
Excellent pair of thought-provoking articles. I hope it helps get the ball rolling!
Jeffrey McManus
· 2 years ago
Joyce, I think you hit the nail on the head when you mention exposure to computers in childhood as a big factor that determines whether someone will have an engineering career in adulthood.
I set my daughter up with a hand-me-down Powerbook G4 which she now uses nearly every day. We also talk about science every day on our way to school. (She gets to pick the topic -- yesterday it was cavemen, today it was What Happens to Things We Drink.)
The fact that your interests are formed so early in life is, I think, one of the reasons why the problem of women in tech is so vexing -- we are accustomed to being able to knock out problems with careful thought, work, and discussion, but it's not possible to go back in time and re-raise our daughters. We have to do it right the first time.
Troutgirl
· 2 years ago
But Jeffrey... are you saying there's NO WAY to help a motivated adult woman get into technology if she wasn't lucky enough to have a daddy like you? That is a very depressing conclusion. :-(
Bess
· 2 years ago
To encourage more females to consider investing their time in engineering, you must make the learning fun on practical matters that female can relate to.
I found Silicon Valley Web Builder ,www.svwebbuilder.com, to provide opportunities for interested professionals to learn and expand their technical knowledge and go beyond their educational training. I strongly feel it is necessary to remove any cost barrier for exploring and learning the latest technology. Therefore our membership and admission are FREE.
Our membership qualification for those are not actively working in the internet industry, is to attend at least 4 Web SIG meetings to demonstrate your passion in technology and design, as well as volunteer your time in SVWB.
The intention is not about putting your name as SVWB member on your resume without going to a single meeting. I rather have a smaller membership size with members actively attending and participating our meetings and activities.
Not only I invited experts around the world in each field to share their knowledge and openly discuss technical issues, I am actively working on the concepts of practical sessions.
1. Review Group Review and write about books and software 2. Case study Group Study and analyze good and bad websites and applications 3. Demo Group Show how-to in design or programming step-by-step
How this is related to possible ways to increase female engineers?
First of all, female will feel more comfortable seeing a female leading web group. I am just a normal girl who giggles with sense of humor. I am just very funny and make you laugh if you are not careful.
Being a female, it is much easier to attract more female attendees and volunteers. Females tend to feel more comfortable learning in places where there are more females around.
I get bored if things are too dry. Therefore, our meetings are quite entertaining in nature, upbeat, trendy , stylish, and fun. This will encourage learning.
I hope this will help.
John
· 2 years ago
Vivian, while I agree that CS education in college tends not to have a very practical orientation, I'm having trouble understanding why this is a problem that affects women more than men. Or that it is a problem at all. Universities aren't trade schools, there isn't the expectation of practical training. But if you're a cs major at a good school, you can learn the practical stuff you need easily with the solid foundation you have.
I'm also not convinced that this self-learning issue is one that is going to persist. I do agree that among the older generation of developers and computer scientists, a lot of people are self-taught and that hasn't diminished their effectiveness one bit. However, CS was a much younger and less established field back then. Not that many colleges even had a CS major available. But I imagine that a substantial proportion of these people would have studied CS formally today. So I'd like to qualify my support for an accreditation institute with the caveat that I'm not convinced that there will be a lot of uptake.
Also I can't understand why everyone is freaking out that fewer girls are interested in CS. It's ok for people to have interests in different things, and if the cards fall such that there isn't gender balance, so be it. The standard diversity argument that CS is a profession that somehow needs more diversity in order to better serve society's needs...I'm not buying it. Why aren't we freaking out about the need for more male nurses if diversity is so important? Or white African-American studies PhDs?
Jeffrey McManus
· 2 years ago
Joyce, I am saying that it is very difficult to get a motivated adult woman into technology if she wasn't set up for it at a very young age. I am also saying that it is very difficult to get a motivated adult man into technology if he wasn't similarly set up by his parents (or a mentor, crazy uncle, etc.) at a pretty young age.
A lot of people our parents' generation blew it by thinking that women didn't need to consider science and technology. This wasn't totally our parents' fault -- an American society in which both husband and wife work outside the home is a very recent phenomenon.
But whatever our parents were thinking, how they raised us is a big part of what's going on here. Going back in time to fix it is not an option. We can only move forward. This is not some pernicious bear trap that's impossible to free ourselves from, but it's also not a problem that can get ironed out with six months of hard work by a dedicated team of engineering ninjas somewhere in a garage in Palo Alto. Changing the culture takes many years and hard work.
Hoyt
· 2 years ago
If there are ways we can help women find greater motivation and dedication and fascination within themselves for technology, by changing/improving college course content, for example, by all means lets do it (without demotivating men...).
But can a girl who starts taking an interest in computers in her teens keep up with a boy who started taking things apart and figuring out how things work when he was 3? Is her motivation - and dedication - ever going to be at the same level? Will she pull the all niters needed?
There are many many lonely (and loner) nights and days spent in isolation working on "cool stuff", particularly when you are miles out ahead of everyone else...do you think Linus Torvalds had his male support group around him when developing Linux? NOT! He just went and did it...
There is a COST to being at the cutting edge and exploring beyond new boundaries (either your own internal boundaries or external), i.e. you have to embrace risk (social, financial, physical) more openly. Female culture (and genes??) avoid risk, and have historically asked men to assume most risks (outside of childbearing). You avoid risk in dating (how many of you ask guys out on dates?) in sports (what percentage of women engage in extreme sports?), in business (avoidance of highly competitive situations?), when you dont go out at night because you are afraid (men face much higher crime victim rates than women). So there is the actual risk vs. the risk you perceive...and women often perceive risks in excess of reality...there needs to be some "growing up" here....
Regarding starting a separate certification course/process for women, I strongly disagree with the concept, it will ingrain (an existing) double standard between men and women and will bring with it the problems cited above, namely attracting some/many women engineers who are not truly dedicated or motivated, or who understand what they need to do to succeed in this increasingly competitive game.
A Stanford PhD in Engineering.
Karen Hoofnagle
· 2 years ago
I'm with you, but with a caveat. What we need is definitely education for women, but deep down I think the problem with verbalizing what will be taught as a "one year cert program" is that people respond to that description thinking you're going to be teaching in the classic American regurgitate-a-textbook sort of way.
The things we need to teach are two: First the ability to self envision in a new (possibly higher status?) profession and to believe in our own competence. This can probably be done, as Niti above says, by making the classroom all female.
Second: the meta-knowledge of engineering. When you don't know how something works, where does "everybody else" go? Doesn't "Everybody else" already know everything? The folkways of self learning -- RTFM and Google are simple on their faces, but they also take a lifetime of practice. You can teach people enough to pass a Java cert but without this underlying basis, they'll be exactly the sort of mediocre programmers your friends fear.
Anyhow, I'm with you in your vision and would be happy to do some volunteering.
Ellen Spertus
· 2 years ago
Great article! I just saw one mistake: there *is* a post-baccalaureate computer science program aimed at women, which I direct. It's at Mills College in Oakland, California. We actually have multiple CS-intensive programs, both aimed at people with a bachelor's degree in a field other than computer science. One program prepares students for PhD programs in CS, and the other encourages students to combine their earlier discipline with CS and earn an MA in Interdisciplinary Computer Science. While the graduate program is coed, Mills is a women's college at the undergraduate level, and the majority of the teachers and students are women. For more information, see "http://ics.mills.edu" or email me at "ics@mills.edu".
My experience tells me that females are more passionate and willing to participate in volunteer activities.
I am looking for sharp, smart, intelligent girls who are not afraid of being smart in the guy-dominated tech world, on mission to go to tech events, parties, conference and expo. Plus you can share your engineering experience and skill in our sessions.
Like the legally blond movie, it is alright to be a girl-girl and use pink accessories to stay active in web community. I can assure that it would not be boring like those computer courses. And it is alright to ask stupid questions once a while because I do that all the times.
Don't wait until you come to our Jan meeting. We want your help NOW! Please drop email at thewebsig@gmail.com and express your Pink Desire.
Indian
· 2 years ago
I can give you a perspective from India. I have noticed that a much larger percentage of our software workforce is women compared to America. Economic pressures ensure that almost all students, male and female, gravitate towards what will fetch them a well-paying job, and software is a well paying job. So doing what you love is a luxury most people in a poor country don't even think about (there is more gender equality in agriculture - think about that!). In my opinion, you can learn to love the job, in most cases.
A reasonably conservative society (ironically?) makes it easier for women in engineering. Dating is a fairly unusual, and "How do I attract boys?" is mostly a non-question for most girls (though boys will usually show off) If there is pressure on girls, it is more on the lines of: study, make money, and get married (note the difference: get married, not find a boyfriend!). I have felt that Indian men (if given a choice) would love the non-committal "relationships" so common in the West, but right now that is not a choice on offer. It will likely change as India gets richer, and when it does, my prediction is that girls will be pressured (just like in the US) to "attract" boys, and so the pressure to study and make money will go down.
So a different set of cultural conditions have produced a different outcome: fairly sizable number of women in software. But one problem does persist: women don't take as many risks as men, so the number of new ventures, start-ups etc. are disproportionately men, even when the engineering workforce is more balanced.
Spectator
· 2 years ago
I wish there would be no need to paper over differences between men and women, to achieve a sense of fairness. Could it be that testosterone is the root cause of at least some of these differences, good and bad.
Testosterone and "animal spirits" may well be the cause for men to take more risks, be non-conformist, and have undue confidence in their own abilities. And the cause for men to be prone to violence, and have other liabilities as well. Which would explain a lot of the observations here.
Women will likely rule in many fields going forward. They should feel no pressure to have to in engineering.
Angie
· 2 years ago
It's great that a post-bacc program of sorts for women who want to be engineers via Mills College is being publicized here. Now more of us CAN offer a suggestion for women we know who express interest in technology/engineering to check it out! Thanks you Ellen.
Re: the "Pink Desire" Bess mentioned, Women 2.0 fully embraces pink altho some of our female members don't personally. Just look at our website - www.women2.org
I think it's important for women+technology websites to be professional, aesthetically pleasing, and above all user-friendly. I hope it reflects a [positive] stereotypical characteristic of women, which is the ability to multi-task.
From juggling website aesthetics with utilitarian usability, to managing a family life while ascending the corporate ladder, the quote unquote brains and beauty of the Women 2.0 community is shines through the website. We hope to lead by example, and showcase those women (such as the author of this article we all keep thinking and talking about) we think are doing an exemplary job.
The world is not enough, it seems. I'm totally a Women 2.0 evangelist.
Eric
· 2 years ago
First, some caveats: I work outside the Valley, and I do application development, not web development. So I can't talk about the Valley's web jobs, which are obviously of great interest to many people here.
That said, I do interview programmers, and I'm slightly skeptical of a one-year intensive training course. There's already a huge pool of semi-qualified people who can kinda-sorta program, but don't have any real talent for it.
The people we actually want to hire for programming jobs are considerably more skilled (and more productive), even at a junior level. Many of them, male and female, have both a CS degree and years of hobbyist experience.
Which brings us to my question: Is there any way to create truly skilled and productive junior programmers in a one-year program? I think it's hard, but it just might be doable.
Assuming we're talking about application or system programmers (and not the web industry, which I don't know as much about), here's what I'd include:
1) A basic data structures and algorithms course. This should include recursion at some level (either in data or code). Why? Being able to see multiple levels of a problem at once is prerequisite for a lot of the best-paid jobs.
2) At least one "software engineering" course, which requires the students to work in teams of four or five people, and spend at least five weeks writing a medium-sized program. This kind of practical experience is hugely valuable.
3) At least one "theory" course, which requires students to do some math. The exact kind of math doesn't matter much, just the analytical thinking skills learned along the way.
I think you could teach all this in one intensive year. You might want two tracks, because about 25-50% of students won't be qualified for the material described above, but might discover related talents: UI design, project management, and so on.
Combine this sort of course work with a year of after-hours open source hacking, and you'd have candidates who could apply for almost any junior position out there.
Of course, it's not necessary to aim this high, but doing so would create exceptionally skilled, productive programmers, with access to the top 5-10% of jobs. And I'd like to see more women get hired for those jobs.
Jonathan
· 2 years ago
I think that women have just as much of a chance in software as men do. I base this on the job environments that I've witnessed first-hand. I just finished a MS in Computer Science (from a department with 3 women and 3 men with tenure and doctorate degrees) and saw every woman who entered graduate (both in 4yr and 6yr degrees). I interned during my 4yr degree in a software/IT department with 5 women (1 female manager) and 3 men. I just transferred from a department in my current company with 3 women (plus 1 female manager) and 2 men to my current department with 2 women and 2 men. These are not places where there is an active struggle to position women. People that apply with the appropriate skill set get the jobs. It's that simple. I'm not really seeing a difference between women and men on the job site either. Both like to go home and play with their kids, talk about their spouses, and pursue their own interests. Most software engineers do see their job as a job.. because it is a job. Going to meetings, following through on designs, and beating out errors from thousands of lines of code each day isn't always fun. If it was then you wouldn't get paid for it. Women who enter the industry aren't there for social reasons. I'm sure this is the same for Chemistry, Medicine, Aero-Space, or any other technical industry. The point of all this is that any notion of the programming industry being unfair towards women is false and any effort to "fix" the system is wasted. If you want better workers then put money into education. But education isn't a "man's world", so there's no need to worry. We haven't had the society idea of the stay-at-home house wife in at least a generation. I believe the change started in WWII or perhaps in the 1920's.
anna
· 2 years ago
Hey Joyce- got the link to this article from tharpo. I wanted to tell you that I'm also constantly wondering why women aren't in open source, and wrote about it here: http://www.banane.com/2006/09/08/tech-post-3-wo..., and I'm in SF WoW, and we're constantly talking about it too. In fact, Sarah Allen offered a free dinner anywhere if a woman on the list contributed to open source! I'll read your article and write back with comments, just wanted to drop this note quick.
thanks- anna
mayra
· 2 years ago
Some of you have questioned the need for more females in computer science in general. As a female with both a bs and a ms in computer science I would say one important reason is the domino effect. I was often the only female, or one of a small group in my classes. This can be intimidating, and a definite turn off to girls interested in pursuing careers. The majority of the time the men were welcoming, and they never questioned my abilities, but I still often felt isolated. I think there are almost certainly many women who would make really good software engineers who choose not try because they don't want to feel isolated. Having more women in the programs would encourage more women to try it out, which in turn would lead to more women. Short term solutions that would visibly add more women to the cs workforce would eventually have a snowball effect towards greater gender equality.
Anne
· 2 years ago
To "spectator": I am not sure about your Testosterone argument. My experience as a woman with a MS in CS is that most men in CS do not have a high testosterone level. They do not fight and put them selves at risk as the average man and most of them seems very afraid of many things - even women. If a high testosterone level was needed to be in CS it does not show itself in the guys that choses CS.
I definitely had a lot of time playing with computers when I was growing up, which I credit to my mom, who always had to have the latest & greatest. In interviews, my random geeky projects usually shone more than my professional experience. "Installing linux from the network on my laptop" and "making an internet webisodic" , etc. The way to institutionalize this? I'm not sure. I'd support your starting point, though. When I was growing up in Silicon Valley, I went to tons of computer classes. They were everywhere, and cheap. I just found fellow nerdie girls to join me. Is that prevalent now? Not sure. Our gorup- www.sfwow.org- had an ajax workshop recently, and there we decided to host a women-friendly superhappydevhouse. Someone had gone to one recently and let's just say... we had some improvement ideas :) better food, in the city, etc. But I like the effort, and it all sounds good- not to diss on shdh or anything. One thing I wanted to point out is that women, at least, really like to learn from other women but also need to learn from men too. Many of my geekie male friends are supportive, and I also just ignore their bluster and arrogance about technology. I don't think they'll change, and in the interim I'll learn the skills for projects that I want to do- movies, poetry databases, stuff like that. I think that's my argument in general- women are more practical, and interested in social fabric stuff, so if technology relates to that, they will learn it. Making a baptism gown? Sure, a wordpress plug-in exists for that, made by a very smart open source woman contributor. Take a count of all the knitting blogs.
Jason
· 2 years ago
Hey what inequality? Yeah CS 101 is boring as heck. I walked out of a number of CS topics, never to return. So what?
When it comes down to it I am still interested enough to pursue the topics in my own time and teach myself.
The cost of entry to become a computer engineer is - the cost of a PC and a desire to do so.
It is not about gender barriers - it appears to me to be a matter of interest.
To be frank I am not interested in flower arranging and I know few men who are. But so what that does not mean we need more male flower arragners - it just means that flower arranging does not interest males. On the whole computing does not appear to interest most women. Those who are itnerested can get into it - economics allowings.
As for professional postitions (as opposed to self teaching) women at the moment in engineering generally seem to have a, lot more opportunities, since employers/govts seem to want to address the apparent lack of interest by women in this field by hiring more of them....
David
· 2 years ago
Another similar proposal is for larger companies to hire smart but non-trained candidates into training programs. For example, before computer science university enrollment took off it was extremely common for companies to recruit Math majors and train them to write software. A similar tact could be taken, with a broader acceptance of degree program.
James P Lampwick
· 2 years ago
For reasons similar to those outlined in this article, I have recently opened an all-male nursing school. I think it is a tragedy that men are under-represented in the nursing profession.
niti
· 2 years ago
I must agree with Jonathan and also Karen Hoofnagle's particularly insightful comment about the metaknowledge of engineering, and let's not forget, for a moment, gentlemen, that design is but a metaphor for creation.
thus, you need good engineering and good design for operational excellence. we need more whole brain thinkers, that's what Dan Pink is saying. and yes, I agree, in this context, it should not be a women only class.
Actually I agree with the whole thread, k?
Amy D.
· 2 years ago
David has a very good point. If you are willing to hire smart people who are trained to analyze and think then you can train them to code.
The company I worked for straight out of the school in '98 did that. The year around my hire date at least one of the following majors was hired: Russian, History, Religion, Business,Physics,Geology. Almost all were from local liberal arts schools.
One history major now has a major role in the technology stack transformation we are doing.
Working in tech, as I now do, doesn't utilize my BA in Religion. In fact I find the challenges of tech far easier to get my arms around of many of the challenges and paradoxes that religion forces one to consider.
And no, I don't do Open Source, but I geek out in other ways. Because really, how many people read papal encyclicals for fun?
Soylent Green
· 2 years ago
I will be limiting my scope to self taught programmers that have no degree.
Why would someone become a self taught programmer? Simple really: it is because comp-sci in college is boring. So boring that some programmers are willing to inflict the pain of becoming self taught.
Most females are smart enough to know it's easier to go to college to get a degree. Once they get a degree then being self taught is moot.
Self taught male programmers, on the other hand, usually do not have the degree and therefore must constantly question their abilities and are constantly battling their technological ignorance. In the beginning it's fun, but it becomes a treadmill (once you get over 30).
In a nutshell, self taught male programmers have sacrificed their degree for the challenge of being self taught. I don't think you'll get any female to do the same because they'd rather not get on that treadmill.
That being said, if you're female and you think you want to be a self taught programmer, please come down to EFNET IRC so we talk about programming on #C. We're self taught and we won't try to sex0r you up with hot chat, we promise ;)
Rhys Lewis
· 2 years ago
I agree with Jason, and I'm actually having trouble working out what the problem is here. If the majority of people who want to do this work are men why does that matter?
I have 2 young girls. I try to give them as many opportunities as I can, and to encourage them to do the things they find interesting. I won't value them any more or less if they choose to become basket weavers or DBAs, and I don't want them to think that they have to do something that other people value to be important themselves.
This is roughly what my parents did, which is how I had the opportunity to stay up all night messing around with computers and eventually become an IT consultant.
The problem is not that women are making the wrong choices, it's that their choices aren't being respected.
Dennis
· 2 years ago
I'll over simply my take on the situation to the geek/cool aspect of 'life' and the socialized choice preferences. Women aren't the only 'group' under-represented in engineering. Virtually all groups that choose the 'cool' side are in short supply in engineering.
Lindsey
· 2 years ago
I think the problem is not that few women are getting their CS degrees, it's that they really aren't receiving the opportunities to get involved in the subject in the first place. A big problem I have noticed (as I am substitute teaching to work my way through college) is that girls COMPLETELY lose their interest in math and science around age 12. I'm not sure why this is, but I'm determined to keep their interest.
This is why I think it is extremely important to expose girls to technology at a young age. I am an active member in the Society of Women Engineers - where we do a number of outreach activities with the Girl Scouts, local schools, and any girl we can grab off the street and teach something to. We work with local organizations to teach circuit design, web programming, bridge design, artifical intelligence, and anything technical that comes up. Our particular section uses the Lego Mindstorm platform to introduce young teenage girls to programming logic, and they see how it can be applicable to real life. The Lego camp is week-long, and by the end, EVERY girl is interested in pursuing a technical degree. I think if we could catch more girls at this age, we would inspire more interest in programming and other engineering jobs.
Bryan
· 2 years ago
Yeah, I fit the bill -- male, self-taught from scratch, dumped university, own and operate a small programming business, love every minute of it.
There's only one skill that's pulled me through everything I've ever learned: reading. There's plenty of documentation, and plenty of examples, and plenty of help, and plenty of people. If anyone is willing to spend the time it takes to push every button in every combination, there's nothing one can't learn of the computer world.
The Internet has created a computer industry that supports itself from start to finish -- it's communism in a box.
So I guess my question is: why don't females enjoy the satisfaction of learning something by starting from the beginning and reading everything provided? Programming has strict documentation making it incredibly easy to start on page one, and be certain to know everything by the last page.
Ok, so it sounds really boring to me too right now. Obviously it's the task-completion that's rewarding, not the task-description. But it's a guaranteed completion, so where's the problem?
Yeah I've got my suspicions and observations and opinions, and they all revolve around female friends and marketing. The same things that create 90% of the television commercials presented to me for products that I could never find a use for.
Apparently, it's not fashionable for females to learn on their own. I guess it's just one more aspect of society where women are still back in the ages of not having any self-worth without a man.
I'd gladly support a monthly "women learn something technical" day. It would be nice to have women in my industry. It's tough wondering through life with exclusively male clients, colleagues, employees, suppliers, and associates. Doesn't really help my social life -- nor my social skills.
Ooh, ooh, can we blame the horrible manners and social skills of male engineers and technical personnel on the fact that females avoid the industry? Always good to blame women for things.
Martin
· 2 years ago
Perhaps this is a bit off-topic, but I'm not sure the distinction between self-taught and university-educated programmers is really all that important, at least not in the medium to long run.
I do have a CS degree, and I certainly don't regret having spent the time it took to obtain it. But in my daily work as a programmer I use hardly any of the things I studied in school: Fortran, LISP, calculus, numerical algebra, PL/I, artificial intelligence, etc. In fact, many of the systems, tools, and concepts I do work with every day -- object-oriented design, C++, STL, generic programming, Linux, the X Window System, the Internet -- didn't even exist then.
Of course, the education I received in my CS classes helped me to become proficient with these things more quickly. But my point is, even if some of us take the more formal path of degree programs, while others choose alternative forms of education (such as what Joyce is suggesting), or even do it entirely on their own -- at the end of the day we're all self-taught.
Siva
· 2 years ago
I think an important element of getting more women to take up math/cs/science/engineering careers is missing in the discussions here. When entering college, women (as well as men) need to be convinced that (1) these subjects ain't rocket science (indeed, as I read somewhere, "heck, rocket science ain't rocket science), and (2) you can be a normal person with a career in one of these fields.
In my humble opinion, to pursue a career in these fields, you don't have to have taken things apart, you don't have to have built a working scooter out of lego blocks, you don't need to have had a father who handed you down a PowerBook to play with, you don't need to have had parents who told you you couldn't do something because you were a girl, etc, etc.
I think the importance of such monkeying around is way overstated, as exemplified by this inane comment from a Stanford PhD: "But can a girl who starts taking an interest in computers in her teens keep up with a boy who started taking things apart and figuring out how things work when he was 3? Is her motivation - and dedication - ever going to be at the same level? Will she pull the all niters needed?"
I feel that women (and men) entering college carry such common misconceptions, which prevent them from pursuing a scientific field, even if they did quite ok in math and science in high school. Our University system (as well as graduation-time counseling at the high school level) needs to do a better job of educating women (and men) that as long as they have their basics and a modicum of curiosity, they would do well in just about any field.
The practice of computer science is messy - unintuitive platforms and user interfaces, bizarre sets of tools, the list is endless. Glorifying the ability to deal with such mess, glorifying the act of pulling all-nighters because you mismanaged your time in the first place, etc. aren't going to help anyone, and likely will turn away excellent women and men from the field.
Returning to the original proposal in the post by Joyce Park, yes, I think it's an absolutely sensible idea, and would mightily showcase the point I made above: cs/programming/science in general isn't so hard that anyone with sufficient interest/commitment can't pick it up in a year or so from good-quality teachers, despite any misconception you may carry from junior high; and it is easy enough to be a normal person and a good computer scientist without having been "a geek".
Brian
· 2 years ago
I see your point but the truth is women do not like technology as much as men. You dont see too many women eye-balling 100 inch plasma tvs.
You like tech because you do, its not something that women somehow wish they could love but arent given the opporunity.
I have worked with several female programmers and they all have one thing in common. They are like one of the guys ( if the guys we are talking about are techies ).
To be a good software developer you have to be extremely passionate about technology. Not to say that programming is for Geeks but it seems that even the women have the same love for sci-fi tv shows and other dorky stuff like the rest of us guys.
There is no one more than me who wants the guy to girl ratio to improve in the industry.
Jay
· 2 years ago
Why do we want to encourage women to become engineers if they don't want to? Why do we think being a computer programmer is so great? I buy the argument that if we could increase the job applicant pool then high-tech companies would benefit. But with all the outsourcing opportunities the job market isn't that tight.
I am a computer programmer, and I like it a lot, but I would not try to convince someone who was not interested to spend all that time struggling to teach themselves the skills so that they could do it. It just isn't worth it unless you love it, there are easier ways to make more money. Why not convince women to become lawyers, as long as we are trying to control people, so that they are the next generation of politicians and run the world in the future.
The whole thing is built on wanting to see a 50/50 split in all things. I just don't see it as being in the interest of women. Let people do what they desire to do, that is always what they do best.
db
· 2 years ago
The reason that this problem is more of a concern than finding more men interested in "nursing" or "flower arranging" is because Software Engineering is a skill that (generally) provides a good income, job security, and opportunities for upward mobility. Unlike many careers that are traditionally female dominated (secretaries, retail), software affords a woman a lot of opportunities for self-sufficiency, financial comfort, among other things. If women are choosing not to be involved as a true matter of interest, then they should obviously be allowed to. But if they are feeling boxed out, then both those women and the engineering community are missing out on a great opportunity.
Foo Bar
· 2 years ago
"I think Silicon Valley can and should go one better by establishing a post-baccalaureate program specifically designed to create female engineers in significant numbers"
Why?
Greater Quantity? There are already plenty of cheaper engineers in India and other countries.
Greater Quality? If they weren't that interested in the first place, they are unlikely to be good enough to compete with the existing expensive ones or even the ones in developing countries. If they are interested and really good, they can start writing great OSS and get near instant recognition. Low entry barriers.
I'll be happy to see more women working in my field. But the truth is most women aren't interested.
Rob
· 2 years ago
I'm confused. You either have the curiosity / technical aptitude / personality defects / whatever it is that makes good techies or you don't. You can't artifically encourage that. There isn't much of a gender barrier to entering this particular engineering field at all. I'm sure it's much less than physically demanding fields, high powered management type jobs etc. Pretty much every engineer I know and work with values people equally based on technical competence when it comes down to technical related activities.
I'm entirely self taught and work as a Unix sysadmin / network engineer / application specialist / whatever hat is needed that day. I don't feel there are any technical challenges I'm not up to solving - especially with OSS. Frankly I'm not particularly bright either; at the end of the day, this stuff isn't that difficult. It just takes a base level of competence with some dilligence and persistence, along with the desire to do things well.
Look at it from this perspective; what makes a great engineer? It's someone who had the geek curiosity phase, wanted to know how things work at a fundamental level. Male or female, if you didn't go through that phase, you're never going to be a top notch engineer outside of some highly specialized roles. What sparks that interest? Can it be forced or enticed? I think not. By trying to artificially entice interest, you're going to end up with people who take part for the same reason people generally go after Solaris or MSCE certificates; better paying jobs - not really to understand CS / engineering at a fundamental level. You end up with people who are helpless without vendor support and can't pull apart simple shell scripts when things aren't working.
I think instead of focusing on any gender debates (after all - teh online is gender/race/creed-less by default), a more constructive thing to do would be to promote interest/awareness in FOSS and CS / engineering across the board; let people decide for themselves if they're interested in understanding it. There are plenty of geek girl orgs out there, and that's all well and great. I will continue to judge tech people solely on their technical merits - at the end of the day, that's the great equalizer. You have it or you don't, and anyone who wants it has an equal shot of becoming competent.
Degenerate
· 2 years ago
I have to agree with Jason, Rhys and Foo Bar. Why does it follow that a gender imbalance an any given field must be a "social problem"? Must men and women be the same in all things?
Special program to tackle this "problem" are a ghastly idea that will drop standards and make life harder for those women who earned their position the old-fashioned way. Most men who work in male-dominated fields would be happy to see more women enter, but only if they come in as equal peers with the same start as everyone else. The chief cause of male resentment towards women in the workplace is women in positions that they lack the competence or background for. They're usually put there by managers with silly notions of being "progressive", similar to yours.
DJ
· 2 years ago
Nonsense! Why cant people just accept that men and women are DIFFERENT. Their likes and dislikes are DIFFERENT. Their tastes are DIFFERENT. Each sex is better at something. So stop pushing women into things they DONT want to do....!
Loz
· 2 years ago
Another reason that has been suggested for women not participating in Open Source, is the often confrontational nature of discussion. I've no idea if there's any truth behind it.
Oh, and Anne, I'm guessing spectator was comparing testosterone levels between men and women, not men and other men.
John
· 2 years ago
This all falls down to how we use our brain. Men are more focused and women are multi tasking.
I can see an advantage to making computing fun across the board and integrating code sharing into social networking.
However, this may create a society of programmers that don't understand what the code they are writing actually does and introduce more bugs into their programs.
Shaper
· 2 years ago
A very interesting article, and while I don't completely understand your take on the matter, it did made me think.
The main problem I have is that your central thesis seems to be that:
1. Women aren't pro-actively getting themselves involved in engineering, so 2. Something should be done to encourage/persuade them
Why?
Many roles or fields of human experience have marked gender-imbalances in them. Sometimes this is a result of social pressure or institutional sexism, but sometimes it's simply a result of legitimate gender-differences. You appear to immediately dispense with the first answer, and the only conclusion you reach is that women aren't in engineering because they're generally not interested in getting into it.
Now, women have every *right* and every opportunity to work wherever they want, but when did "a right to do X" imply that someone needed to stand behind them with a carrot and a stick until a predefined proportion of the population decide to exercise that right?
There's a link here I'm missing.
I can't work out exactly what you think is wrong with the current situation - presumably it's either "a non-optimal course for companies to pursue", or it's "unfair to women" generally.
Since you conclude that women aren't getting into engineering primarily because they don't want to, it would seem more unfair to then coerce women into taking it up. Clearly not "unfair to women", then.
It may well be that the present state of affairs is not the best way to run a company (or the entire engineering industry), and there may well be something in that. Certainly women approach problems very differently to men, and looking at a lot of software out there there's a lot of room for people who aren't single, white, middle-class, socially-deficient Aspergers-suffering males to get involved in the design and development (hey, I'm a developer - I'm allowed to generalise about us ;-). Indeed, I'd be gobsmacked if having a workforce made up of 50% smart, motivated passionate-about-technology women wasn't better than one which was 100% equivalent men.
However, your solution seems to be to persuade women who already have every opportunity but have chosen not to take it, to get involved. These are people who by definition *aren't* passionate or motivated, and the very, very *last* thing engineering needs is yet more mindless, tasteless, don't-ask-me-I-only-work-here, who-cares-if-it's-ugly-as-long-as-it-works-for-now corporate codemonkeys.
We need smart, passionate, able people, and given this, increasing the gender-equality is also a very good thing.
Attempting to remedy this by lowering the barrier to entry or trying to persuade people who really aren't all that interested to get involved is not going to achieve this aim, however.
I don't know why this gender-gap exists, but I think you need to explain exactly why it's a problem and why it needs "solving", before offering a solution.
I understand that to people of our generation "inequality == bad" (I'll confess that the lack of women in engineering also bothers me slightly), but this is an artefact of our upbringing and culture, not a universal law.
If you can't clearly explain *why* something feels wrong, then chances are it possibly *isn't* - it's just an edge case where our normal rules of thumb ("equality == good", "inequality implies unfairness", etc) fall down. A cultural singularity, if you will.
I'd love to see more women in engineering, but I refuse to devote any time to "solutions" until I can clearly elucidate (even to myself) what's *actually* *wrong* with the current situation.
Could it merely be that men are more prone to the anal, nit-picky, abstract, hyperfocused, logical mindset that enjoys and succeeds in engineering?
I don't see many articles decrying the tiny proportion of men who choose to go into nursing, for example. Why not?
So... if it *is* a problem let's hear why... and *then* we'll try to fix it.
Ryan
· 2 years ago
I am an engineer in DC, and have a wife that obtained two Bachelors Degrees before age 20. She is easily the smartest person I know.
Unfortunately, when I try to explain how the computer works or why 1080p is better than 720p, she invariably says, "I don't care. I just want it to work."
The problem is not that women can't learn CS, it is that it holds inherently no interest to them.
I prefer to code my days away, but I'm sure at some level is just a subtle way to subdue my OCD. My wife doesn't want to to know how things work because she wants to see the whole clock, not the gears behind it.
I strongly suspect women that are interest in things "CS" are abnormal, and differ in more ways from the baseline female than just an interest in technology (and by baseline, I try and describe a typical female without generalizing... tough to do without somebody jumping your butt...).
Maybe someone can perform a survey of those women that do have jobs in CS, and find out some unifying characteristics? Married? Children? Hetero? Military experience?
I know you guys will be pissed I even suggest it, but there's got to be some similarities between men and women that gravitate towards CS. I'm not trying to be sexist, but all the women I work with (or for, for that matter) that are any good with code or hardware are very similar to me in many ways.
Ryan
· 2 years ago
Note: Joyce isn't exactly wearing a dress in her image. Just food for thought.
Casey
· 2 years ago
If you think of it as "job marketing," perhaps it will seem like less of an issue of women's choices: right now the tech sector attracts more men than women, and they want to expand their base. That's pretty normal business practice.
But to those of you who aren't sure that the women who wish they were engineers are out there, hi!
I can't put it better than Siva did, so I won't. Thanks, Siva. It's just like she says--I thought that B-plus in Honors Calculus wasn't good enough, and no one told me otherwise.
Jeff--way to go with your daughter. It's great that you're encouraging her in science; it's even better that you have that solid social relationship. Too many dads confused by daughters get stumped at that early step--good for you.
Joyce--love it. Thanks for the well thought-out writing. I'm excited to see what happens!
You probably don't know that people want more male nurses because you aren't in the medical field. The same way nurses probably don't know that the tech sector would like more gender diversity.
JRK
· 2 years ago
Publications in conferences like CSE over the past ten years show that, in some countries (e.g., the Philippines) women equal or outnumber men in fields like CS, Engineering, and the like.
This tells me that the difference we witness in most western countries has very little, if anything, to do with genetics, and nearly everything to do with culture.
See, e.g., Beyer et al. Gender Differences in Computer Science Students, Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 49-53. Reno, NV, ACM Press, 2003.
CF
· 2 years ago
Fantastic read. Very accute insight that lack of female engineers is an opportunity cost. I (a male engineer) have worked in teams with all male engineers and ones with mixed gender engineers. By far the mixed gender teams were and are much more successful. My personally view is that the mixed gender teams are more successful because men and women have an different *take* on the world that they are either born or programmed with. The all male teams tended to go careenung off on tangents, whereas the mixed teams were far more balanced and achieved their goals more successfully, sustainably and with a higher job satisfaction. I'd love to see a study that examines these trends and could put numbers with my ancedotal experience.
Furthermore, I think your idea/proposal is excellent. Good luck and if you start it, I know several very intelligent bright women who would be interested!
And... don't pay attention to the nay-sayers, it probably means your hitting on something very real.
J. Lasser
· 2 years ago
Let me preface this by saying that I'm not in the Valley -- I'm in Seattle, at a former startup that recently IPOed -- and that I'm self-taught. Further, an ex-Unix sysadmin, I'm presently a senior support engineer. While I don't have final say over hiring, I'm highly involved in interviewing candidates for support engineer roles.
What I've seen here, and in similar environments, is a bias toward self-taught engineers: when 50+ hour weeks are expected, the two qualifications that matter are the ability to learn what you need to know, and the passion to go above and beyond the "just a job" mentality. A highly-talented self-taught individual has already demonstrated both of these attributes. Someone with a degree hasn't necessarily demonstrated either.
Of course, many people with a degree also have both of these, and there are a large number of incompetent self-taught people. In an interview, we're generally able to estimate the depth of technical knowledge -- but measuring passion is harder.
It's difficult to offer a job to a candidate who considers it "just a job," no matter their gender, given that there are a large number of candidates who are passionate about the work.
I'd love to have more women on our team here -- this article and the previous article provide more than enough reasons to do so, if they weren't already apparent. I've learned as much from the women I've worked with as the men, certainly, and the best female engineers I've known are every bit as good as the best men.
When I'm trying to build a team, I want the most dedicated individuals I can find. Certifications and degrees don't demonstrate that thirst for understanding and problem-solving in the way that self-taught engineers of either gender do.
I guess, in other words, that I agree with those who argue that we need to address these issues at a much younger age -- by the time someone's in college, it's likely too late for them to develop the passion for this kind of problem solving or technical work. That's as true for men as women -- but men are more likely to be pushed into discovering this interest at a young age.
If that's the long-term solution, and I think it is, I don't necessarily know what the short term solution is, or if there is one. In the meantime, I'll try to hire all the passionate, technically-competent people I find.
2) From the Jargon File: larval stage n. Describes a period of monomaniacal concentration on coding apparently passed through by all fledgling hackers. Common symptoms include the perpetration of more than one 36-hour {hacking run} in a given week; neglect of all other activities including usual basics like food, sleep, and personal hygiene; and a chronic case of advanced bleary-eye. Can last from 6 months to 2 years, the apparent median being around 18 months. A few so afflicted never resume a more `normal' life, but the ordeal seems to be necessary to produce really wizardly (as opposed to merely competent) programmers. See also {wannabee}. A less protracted and intense version of larval stage (typically lasting about a month) may recur when one is learning a new {OS} or programming language.
We see the same phenomenon in our area: medical engineering - for which there are now degree programs, instead of self-motivated engineers going larval under the direction of wizards - although there do seem to be more women in medical engineering than in aerospace.
I support your suggestion for a program, because if nothing else you can give the women who participate an opportunity to learn The Most Important Thing: If you want to create, you *have* to go out of your comfort zone on your own. Call it "larval phase" as we used to in my prior life, or call it "total immersion" as my VC friends do; one way or the other you have to choose to focus on one thing only until you Get It Right.
It's good practice for when you start your own company.
Just Me
· 2 years ago
what a bunch of pompous male windbags. cmon you know we need more girls in software development. get out of the way and let them in.
eyp
· 2 years ago
"those are pretty abstract principles of fairness to hold up against the realities of business and life."
That's some pretty bad philosophy. How can anything be right in principle, but wrong in reality? If you believe that principle of "fairness" should not upheld in life, why credit it at all? Just come out against fairness.
Robomarkov
· 2 years ago
I support the idea of establishing a post-baccalaureate classroom for women. It sounds like a great way for all those geeky guys to meet chicks!
Coder chicks are cooool...
Dommo
· 2 years ago
Hey, as an Mechanical Engineering Student I'm all for more women in engineering. But, realistically speaking most women just aren't that interested in the subject. It's got nothing to do with "unfriendly" work environments, but more to do with a subject that is Hard, Tedious, and often Frustrating.
Hell, it's why we have an 80% attrition rate in my degree program. The gender issue is not a problem on OUR end. It's a problem in the upbringing of the young women(and by youth I mean like
tFury
· 2 years ago
Women don't care about engineering. I don't think it has to do with different priorities, like attracting boys as one guy put it (most chicks in engineering couldn't attract guys if they had a dude magnet anyway). Park says something about women gravitating to fields where they can help people versus making money. Bull. In the same breath she mentions medicine, and we know doctors make money. Because women want money. There's nothing wrong with that, men want it too, but women (especially American women) are more business savvy than a lot of people give them credit for, and the idea of 'work less, make more' is not lost on them. Let's check out engineering. Most young women enrolled in engineering curriculae are in either chemical engineering or biomedical engineering. Which field of engineering (out of all engineering fields) pays the most? Chemical. Which is expected to grow the fastest? Biomedical. You can make over 100k a year in chemical engineering five years out of college if you play the game well. So it's a simple decision - 15 years of premed, medical school residency and board certifications before you get a real paycheck, or 4 years at an engineering college and you're on the fast track to a high paying job. Because that's what engineering is to a lot of people now - just a quick way to a decent paycheck. Incidentally, that's probably also why most young engineers suck at engineering and couldn't count to one in binary if their lives depended on it.
//jawn
niti
· 2 years ago
so all of this is just practicing our keyboard fingers, is it?
Josh Berkus
· 2 years ago
Joyce,
I agree with the problem. I don't agree that the solution addresses the problem (it might have other merits, but I don't see the two as related).
I don't buy the argument that there's a genetic difference, however there is a big social difference. My wife is certainly smart enough to be a good programmer, but she suffered through six years of primary schooling where her math skills were criticized and lost all interest in math and science. Most other American women are strongly encouraged by their families, teachers and role models to think pragmatically and in terms of securing a good home, rather than egotistically.
The last point is important. I became a self-taught database programmer by spending thousands of hours of my off time working on an open source db project. That's a pretty egotistical, self-centered thing to do ... I certainly wasn't doing it for my wife! Most women in this country have been strictly taught not to think or act that way their entire lives.
So when you look at the low number of female self-taught engineers, you're not fighting lack of training, you're fighting our entire culture and twelve to thirty years of indoctrination on the part of each woman whom you encourage. That's simply not something you can fix with a one-year training course.
To really solve this problem, you can't think in the short term, because it's insoluable in the short term. You need to get to girls when they're ten years old and get them interested in math, science, computers ... taking things apart and putting them back together. By the time a woman is 25 years old, you're fighting a losing battle.
Obviously there are things the OSS community could do too in the way of stopping discrimination and mentoring genders equally. We're making progress on that. But it's a lot bigger problem, and it will be solved very slowly.
Amrit
· 2 years ago
Several people have pointed out the fact that girls often fall behind in math and science around the age of 12. This happened to me. Although I made excellent grades in elementary school I always struggled with math. By high school, my grades were straight A's, with D's in algebra and geometry. And this was after begging teachers for help, and spending hours every night in tears because I just couldn't understand it. I took the minimum maths required to graduate because I hated it so much.
The problem is that in general, females absorb and process information differently than males do. Math and science textbooks and courses are largely designed for male's learning styles, not female's. In schools that teach math to boys and girls separately, gearing their presentations differently, girls excel!
I wish that had been done for me. As it is, I got interested in computers in my 40's playing with Linux. I spent 3 semesters in a community vocational college trying to learn about computers but couldn't get through even basic math. I had to repeat courses over and over to absorb them. I finally gave up on being able to learn in an academic atmosphere. I still keep trying to learn, though. I've managed to learn HTML at least and write my own website by hand.
After eight years, what I know about Linux is approximately what a male self-taught geek would know in perhaps 2 months. The documentation is almost impossible for me to understand.
What I ask the brilliant self-taught men is this: If your books and documentation were written in secret code, how fast would you progress? How long would you be able to stay motivated to learn?
Sunfell
· 2 years ago
I'm a self-taught 46-year old female PC Support Specialist. I have a military background and training in communications electronics- including radios. I got into computers as a hobby. Got the hardware and network stuff down pretty quickly- I have built my own boxes without any difficulty. I'm totally self taught, and only hold an A+ cert. My schooling has been lots of late-night tinkering, hard knocks, asking friends, head scratching and scrounging the discount racks at Books-A-Million and the library for manuals. Aside from being way too expensive and too long to negotiate, formal classroom schooling bores me into a coma. I want to learn it at my own pace, and in my own time and manner. Give me the foundation. I'll paint the walls later.
I work with computers as a support specialist full time, and love it. But I would love to learn programming. I haven't found a manual yet that is really accessible- one that presumes that you don't know zip and starts you from scratch. Maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Or maybe I haven't found the right mentor yet. (I am nowhere near Silicon Valley.)
Here is what I know about being a female techie and propellerhead: I have to love what I am into or I have no interest in it at all. I love puzzles. And I have to be in an environment that is socially comfortable: no horndogs or sexist people- male or female.
Like many women who have posted here, I have a really bad math deficit. I have also had to overcome the gendercrap heaped upon me as a kid: Girls don't take stuff apart (like the TV or the radio). Girls should be ladies (and not beg for electronics kits and crystal radios). Girls don't ask nosy questions and bug the men (while they are fixing the TV or the Stereo and not reading the instruction manual). Girls should serve the men, but not make any suggestions or show any interest in what they are doing (bring the beer, screwdriver, electrical tape, etc, then go away).
In spite of that, I am still doing what I want to do: being the local cyber-necromancer and miracle worker in my workplace. My being female is an advantage- people are not afraid to ask me what they consider 'dumb' questions. They know I won't treat them like scum, and they like the way I do things. They are not intimidated by a brilliant and capable woman. I consider myself very fortunate. It hasn't always been that way. My military days demonstrated to me how ugly men who feel intellectually or technically threatened can be. It is not a pleasant situation to be in.
How do you get good female programmers and engineers? I hate to say this, but keep the boys away- especially in the very beginning. Girls get dominated and humiliated by boys in such situations as a computer lab, or end up serving them or letting them do all the hands-on work. Segregate the classes- especially at the beginning level. Let girls succeed, let girls ask the 'stupid' questions without being humiliated, and most important, encourage and actively mentor them.
And keep encouraging and mentoring them. Everyone needs their hands held at the start of a new learning endeavor. There is no shame in this. Lazy people will fail, intelligent and capable people will wean themselves and soar.
I found the link to this article on my friend Twistedchick's Live Journal. I am glad this topic is being discussed.
Anon
· 2 years ago
I disagree with Amrit's assertion that the literature is written in some sort of secret code. I find that all of the books, manuals, and technical documents have been written as matters of fact (x=y). It is generally left up to the end user to develop some method of understanding or applying the principles presented. At no time when in any class did any teacher instruct me to think of numbers in terms of the suit patterns on playing cards, yet that is exactly how I visualize all numbers that I deal with. Same thing with variables, arrays, pointers, and so on. The way I visualize them were not taught to me they were tricks, familiar patterns, and imagery that I associated with them to memorize and understand them. Same thing with people associating words with musical chord progressions, and mathematical orders.
As for the article, I take great offense at any program that attempts to give privilege to any subset of society. It is just another form of affirmative action that has no place in a free and equal society. The opportunities, equipment, and knowledge is equally available to everyone. If an individual lacks the passion to see something through, than good riddance.
I don't see there being a lack of women in engineering, what I do see on a day-to-day basis is an over abundance of people given jobs for the sake of diversity, that do not have the passion or skills to independently succeed in a technically and socially challenging industry.
I also see a great number of people in threads like these that trumpet the stereotype that nerds lack social skills. In reality those nerds tend to have a higher level of social aptitude than those around them. Having to deal with people from all walks of life, varying knowledge levels, and complete lack of critical thinking capacity. What you perceive as inability to make friends is actually a lack of desire to want to be friends with someone whose knowledge and lifestyle does not go beyond what is taught to them by television.
One should never forget that this industry is based on science. The ability to observe, investigate, and develop theory is of great importance. If you can't accomplish something without someone holding your hand and "dumbing" things down for you, than stay the hell out.
P.S. Bess is either fresh off the boat or needs to go back to school and take some English classes.
Scott
· 2 years ago
Have you considered setting up something along the lines of Google's "Summer of Code" internship program with young women programmers? It might give them a chance to work with some interesting code and really participate in the open source community. I wouldn't be surprised if SourceForge might be willing to help sponsor this and recruit open source projects to participate.
Just an idea.
Josh Berkus
· 2 years ago
Scott,
Actually, one OSS project did exactly that after they noticed that they hadn't gotten any SoC applicants (we were luck enough to get three including one we could take). I'm not sure how successful the program was, though.
I do agree with focussing on college-age programmers. Certainly in my field (databases) there are more women coming out of school than there are currently active in the field. If we can just get the students ... all the students ... up and contributing to OSS quickly, it'll improve the gender balance.
Felix A. Lopez
· 2 years ago
Dear Joyce, You have interesting comments on gender based issues. I have three sisters all quite successul in their own way. My oldest sister is an attorney and part owner of www.mstarlabs.com - She needs venture capital now and/or financing now. If you have any contacts please post here. Where are they? Lots of talk; no action - it depends on your network and market viability. I worked for her in a biz dev-sales role and beat her competition (National Instruments) in a head to head battle and at NASA Ames Research Labs. But the finance or VC capital did not flow in...so what is your advice?
My other two sisters are school teachers and quite happy. I also have two brothers - one is an architect and the other is a principal of a school district. As for me, I have an MBA with focus on Information Technology and a BA in Biological Systems and work at Motorola in enterprise networks. Our formal education was a stepping stone out of poverty after my father's business struggled to stay afloat. Based on these and other life experiences my #1 advice for women/men is to get a formal education. The #2 advice is to network with the right and honest people in the finance world; including venture capitalists. But how does a woman/man do this? Lots You need the qualifications to talk the talk - that is why a formal education is needed. (similar to Anon's comments)
My 3rd advice is to stay razor-sharp focused on what you are good at with much flexibility.
Although I agree with your premise on a "certification program" to learn programming; but chances are that most people are not like you and thus may fail in their quest to succeed. Therefore, we must advise old/young to take the hard and narrow road of a formal education first; and combine this with learning a craft such as programming.
In regards to Anon's comments: I think industry is built on more than just science. There is money, human capital, espirit d'corps, and the things that gel for industry to work. I have many entrepneural ideas but without the financial capital they won't go anywhere.
Thanks for your time.
Felix A. Lopez
· 2 years ago
Joyce- My recommendation is to re-read Amrit's posting and help. Read her philosophy of life regarding 'taking a Hukam' and you will get an idea of perhaps what some are seeking in any profession. I studied biological systems in college. The Krebs Cycle, glycolysis, fermentation, are all extremely complex processes involving bio-chemical reactions, protiens, etc. The natural fragrances are an expression of the bio-chemical code. I always wondered if "code" could be written to emulate a biological process. Just like a website is ana expression of HTML code.
Amrit - math is a very linear subject and it makes sense that you found it challenging in your younger years. However, the fragrances are much more complex and after checking your websiite I think you are on a good path.
Perhaps you can help Ms. Joyce Young by simply helping "take a Hukam" on her idea.
Good luck.
Julie T
· 2 years ago
I think the best thing that can be done to encourage women in tech is to instill in young girls and boys that they *can* and *must* gain technical literacy. Once young adults have the confidence that they can hold their own in a discipline, they can make the choices that best suit their own interests and the needs of their time.
Out of Asian immigrant populations, there are greater numbers of women in technology both because the culture believes that math and science are learned, not intuitive; and the technical professions is seen as secure and upwardly-mobile, regardless of gender.
As Joyce points out, the reasons for the gender gap in tech are numerous and complex, i.e. role models, socializing, cultural beliefs about science and gender. One other thing to remember is that it's a documented fact that women are rewarded more for pursuing generalized professions that allow more flexibility for leaving and re-entering the workforce. Highly specialized professions often have the greatest penalty for interrupting one's working years.
GailStein
· 2 years ago
When people are born with physical defects it is very easy to spot. But when people are born with brains that belong to the opposite sex, it is a far more difficult to see. Feminists are born with a male brain but without the penis. Feminists have a severe case of Penis Envy; that is why they are so angry with men. They want to be men, but cannot. Can you imagine their anger and frustration?
Girls that have male brains do have the male abilities. It IS in the DNA!!
Have you noticed that the Gay Males are very effeminate. It is because they have girl brains. That is why they cry a lot and are emotionally very weak. But they don't get their fair share of the girl jobs!
NabilZariffa
· 2 years ago
The Asians are good at math and science because their brains are more evolved. At my job, the Chinese are way smarter because they tend to be able to focus onto the problem and fix it really fast. Conversely, the Blacks are really slow. They seem to take forever to get any simple thing done. The Blacks were hired to meet the Diversity Quota, but we can't fire them. Equality, HA!!!
Funny how girls always make up a million excuses if they can't get up to par! Imagine, girls comparing web building and technical support to Engineering. How ignorant!
Female Internet Entrepreneur
· 2 years ago
I don't think the problem is with women coming up with ideas. The problem frankly is men steal them. While this theft of IP is rampant throughout the hi-tech community I believe it is worse for women entreprenuers for the following reasons:
1) Others often don't even recognize that a woman has come up with the idea. Every woman in hi-tech that I know, at every level, has had the experience (multiple times) of making a comment in a meeting, having it be ignored, then 10 minutes later a man makes the same comment and his insight is deemed brilliant. People just can't get their minds around a woman have a great technology idea, concept, business model whatever. I've even had a man take my idea and later say he was already thinking of it in the back of his mind but it only became clear during our conversation. Therefore it was his idea! I met with him as a potential investor for a working prototype I had developed...3 months later he launched a company doing exactly what I proposed. Same thing happed with a different idea I presented to a VC firm -- their entrepreneur-in-residence was given the idea and the money to implement.
2) As women entreprenuers work to build teams and unvestors, some of these people see an opportunity to take the idea and simply build their own team and company figuring that they can do it better and that the woman either will not know, or have no leverage to go after them. This is a tremendous issue because in order to build a team and find investors one has to reveal the concept...and often to people you don't know well. A male entrepreneur with a great business idea is assumed to have the ability to implement it; a female entrepeneur with an equally great business idea is assumed to not have the ability to implement it.
DavidSalem
· 2 years ago
Science, technology, medicine and virtually all modern advances were built, designed, and implemented by MEN!! If it weren't for the hard labour and ingenuity of MEN, girls would still be stuck in caves caring for the children because they are too afraid and weak to hunt. Theft of ideas at the highest degree, and positions of men who have earned that tenure have been STOLEN by girls!!!! Marie Curie took credit for her husband's work. That is Theft!!!
Mike
· 2 years ago
After looking at alot of the negative opinions here I think a bit more perspective is required. Men need to understand that women don't need their hands held or to think something is a great social opportunity and not boring, but women do need access to a social network typically not available to them. I won't go so far as to say this social network is reserved for men, it's just not generally available to women.
The isolation mentioned by so many comes from not having this social network access which many times includes a supportive teacher who knows people but more like well-wishers who won't tell you anything outside of the content of the schoolwork (including a well-wishing teacher).
For all its foolishness and irrationality, the feminist hysteria about Summers furthers the career agendas of feminists who seek thinly veiled job preferences or quotas for themselves and their friends.
Summers was making a much-needed effort to break the self-serving feminist-careerist stranglehold on honest discussion of gender imbalances…
Now that Summers has succumbed to feminist re-education, can numerical “goals†for hiring, promotions, and departmental chairmanships be far behind?
Inconveniently for preference-seeking feminists, scientific evidence shows that while women do better than men at certain verbal skills, men do better than women at some other intellectual tasks. These include visualizing three-dimensional subjects in space — essential to much engineering and science work — and mathematical reasoning. More than twice as many boys as girls scored in the top range (750-800) on last year’s SAT math test, for example. Among serious scholars, the only debate is about whether the pattern reflects acculturation or genetics. A substantial body of work suggests genetics.
But if most mathematical geniuses are men, as many studies suggest, then the fact that men still dominate the few academic fields requiring mathematical brilliance is not entirely attributable either to sex discrimination or to the reluctance of mothers to work 80-hour weeks. This is why so many feminists have personal stakes in silencing talk, and stigmatizing study, of possible gender differences in mathematical-reasoning ability.
It is ironic that while shouting down any hint that men might be more capable than women in mathematics, many so-called “difference feminists†have long contended that women are morally superior to and more caring than men. This, says Daphne Patai, a former professor of women’s studies at the University of Massachusetts (Amherst), illustrates “the opportunism, inconsistency, and double standards that abound in contemporary feminism, often feebly justified by attacks on logic and reason as ‘masculinist.’ â€
“The modern university is the culmination of a 20-year trend of irrationalism marked by an increasingly totalitarian approach to highly politicized issues. Students are subjected to mandatory gender-and racial-sensitivity training akin to thought reform…. Faculty members and administrators are made to understand that their careers are at risk if they deviate from the accepted viewpoint.â€
Women learn better, faster — PEGGY CURRAN, The Gazette Even the TITLE is SEXIST against men! If the genders were reversed, the Feminists would cry Sexism! But men are marginalised by Sexist Feminist politics, and men have no rights.
While men are forced into silence, girls are free to make sexist statements at will. Even the education system has lowered standards to ensure girls take the majority of seats and positions in universities.
Here’s the enrolment breakdown showing the percentage of females, by faculty or department,
At McGill University
Medicine 60.6 % Law 53.6 % Dentistry 54.6 % Architecture 66.9 % Science 52.3 % Agriculture & Environmental Science 68.4 % Commerce 52.9% Education 78.9 % Arts & Science 70.5 % Social work 86.1% Nursing 96.7% Occupational therapy 89.6 %
Girls have far more than 50%. That is the feminist idea of equality!
Mackenzie
· 2 years ago
Hoyt, you said: There is a COST to being at the cutting edge and exploring beyond new boundaries (either your own internal boundaries or external), i.e. you have to embrace risk (social, financial, physical) more openly. Female culture (and genes??) avoid risk, and have historically asked men to assume most risks (outside of childbearing). You avoid risk in dating (how many of you ask guys out on dates?) in sports (what percentage of women engage in extreme sports?), in business (avoidance of highly competitive situations?), when you dont go out at night because you are afraid (men face much higher crime victim rates than women). So there is the actual risk vs. the risk you perceive…and women often perceive risks in excess of reality…there needs to be some “growing up†here….
And I want to respond that I have asked guys out a lot of times. I've been shot down a lot of times too. Oh well, ask someone else then. I walk around Washington, DC (even in the less-than-nice areas) alone at night. The day I met my boyfriend (at LUG), he insisted on walking me home because he thought it wasn't safe, and I told him I walk around much more dangerous areas at night on my own and didn't need him to protect me. He still stayed with me though, so I got a nice 20 minute conversation and his email address out of it. My computer is currently running bleeding edge Ubuntu unstable. Yeah, it breaks every now and then. Oh well, I'll fix it.
I agree with Mike about the social network though. I never knew any other girls who loved coomputers, and none of the boys would talk to me when I was little (girls have cooties!). It was in HS programming classes that I met other people into computers--and I was the only girl among them. They thought I was in the wrong room ("what's a GIRL doing here?") til I finished and debugged my programs before theirs were halfway written ;) My CS classes now are about 1/3 female. One of the other girls lives in my building, so we talk about computers a lot. I've also met some ladies at LUG, but mostly it's guys. Guys gather to talk about computers when they're still at the age when they won't talk to girls. Eventually they hit "woah, girl who knows about computers? hey, wanna go out?" but by then they sound like jerks (you used to tell me to go play with dolls, but now that I have boobs you like that I play with computers instead? heck no!).
michael reed
· 2 years ago
It's probably a bit late now but I wrote an article that debates some of the issues raised in this and another article. OSNews.com elected not to publish it.
Now, for anyone that reads the article: I like to think that I am sort of person who can take a bit of criticism and I would agree that the tone of the article is rather aggressive and at some points comes close to overstepping the mark. Making such errors is how we improve and I think that I have learned a lesson from the whole affair.
However, I still stand by the points that I have raised in the article. I remain committedly opposed to feminism. I would also maintain that the tone of the article is mild in comparison to some other articles on this subject written by feminists.
The article that references this article is called "Article: Attacking feminism: why should a geek care?" and can be accessed via the side menu. The part that references this article begins about half-way down the page.
I'd love i hear any feedback from anyone who sees this message.
Thanks in Advance,
Mike.
Lan Kim
· 2 years ago
I do not like being social and i am a girl. I have always liked computers but I think that alot of girls do not have the attention span it takes to do engineering... but some girls do which is great. Most of the girls i nkow in nursing and medicine are in it for the pay. for instance my sister is going to be a medioroligist or a pharmacy scientist because she wants to be a self serve woman... she hates medicine and thinks that people are starting to live too long when they are too old to even do much.
YOURMEASURE
· 2 years ago
He just moved to town
FAST PAYDAY ADVANCE
· 2 years ago
If the property were financed for 80 percent of its value ($80,000) at 7
What's a web surfer to do? I was going along, searching for some info on Dress flower girl online, and saw a link here. You can bet I'll be bookmarking this site TODAY (Monday). Great post!
Dress Flower Girl White
· 2 years ago
Two thumbs up to A modest proposal in regards to Dress flower girl white! Wednesday I was thinking the exact same thing. This is a VERY interesting line of thought.
Blog Comment Poster
· 2 years ago
This comment was posted automatically using Blog Comment Poster. Check out its site to learn more and start building backlinks to your websites today.
Adriana Lima
· 1 year ago
I couldn't understand some parts of this article A modest proposal, but I guess I just need to check some more resources regarding this, because it sounds interesting.
All Comments
First, colleges are somewhat elitist in the fact that they don't want to teach useful skills in getting a job programming; they want to teach you computer 'science'. Most of the major universities have you take plenty of courses that supposedly expand your thinking, but have absolutely no real world relevance. I’m not sure how many semesters I spent learning things I’ll never use again like lambda calculus first-order logic. And the introductory courses in many college programs reflect this. The courses usually focus on teaching things like recursion, logic, data structures, and algorithms. While these are very important concepts for future computer scientists, they probably aren’t the most useful topics to get outsiders interested in computer science. I think more women would be interested in computer science if the intro courses were more broad(pardon the double entendre).
Second, I find it funny that when you're in high school and college, you're always told to do what you love. This is what high school/college counselors tell you when you need help picking a major or a career path. But then after school, everyone complains that too many women chose majors other than the ones that make the most money. So what’s the correct choice? Choosing something you love or choosing something that makes money? Is the solution really to try to align women’s interests with those that make the most money? While I definitely think its important to open doors for women in business and politics, I'm not sure how I feel about convincing people that money buys happiness.
I agree with the boring computer science class thing. At the intro CS classes at Berkeley, I was bored by exercises shuffling playing cards, recursion, and stuffy labs. Boring, boring, boring.
So maybe I didn't graduate with a CS, EECS, or math degree when I emerged from college, but I did earn my humanities degree and 3+ years job experience in web design which now translates to "UI design" -- which is in pretty high demand these days. Score!
I'd audit this post-bac school you propose. Who's going to step up and organize it?
I've written about this gender gap in engineering in the past and recommended almost the same approach as Joyce does - have a class for women only and it makes many of the issues women face moot.
http://www.nitibhan.com/perspective/2006/03/wom...
(Currently running a company lacking any female engineers.)
I set my daughter up with a hand-me-down Powerbook G4 which she now uses nearly every day. We also talk about science every day on our way to school. (She gets to pick the topic -- yesterday it was cavemen, today it was What Happens to Things We Drink.)
The fact that your interests are formed so early in life is, I think, one of the reasons why the problem of women in tech is so vexing -- we are accustomed to being able to knock out problems with careful thought, work, and discussion, but it's not possible to go back in time and re-raise our daughters. We have to do it right the first time.
I found Silicon Valley Web Builder ,www.svwebbuilder.com, to provide opportunities for interested professionals to learn and expand their technical knowledge and go beyond their educational training. I strongly feel it is necessary to remove any cost barrier for exploring and learning the latest technology. Therefore our membership and admission are FREE.
Our membership qualification for those are not actively working in the internet industry, is to attend at least 4 Web SIG meetings to demonstrate your passion in technology and design, as well as volunteer your time in SVWB.
The intention is not about putting your name as SVWB member on your resume without going to a single meeting. I rather have a smaller membership size with members actively attending and participating our meetings and activities.
Not only I invited experts around the world in each field to share their knowledge and openly discuss technical issues, I am actively working on the concepts of practical sessions.
1. Review Group
Review and write about books and software
2. Case study Group
Study and analyze good and bad websites and applications
3. Demo Group
Show how-to in design or programming step-by-step
How this is related to possible ways to increase female engineers?
First of all, female will feel more comfortable seeing a female leading web group. I am just a normal girl who giggles with sense of humor. I am just very funny and make you laugh if you are not careful.
Being a female, it is much easier to attract more female attendees and volunteers. Females tend to feel more comfortable learning in places where there are more females around.
I get bored if things are too dry. Therefore, our meetings are quite entertaining in nature, upbeat, trendy , stylish, and fun. This will encourage learning.
I hope this will help.
I'm also not convinced that this self-learning issue is one that is going to persist. I do agree that among the older generation of developers and computer scientists, a lot of people are self-taught and that hasn't diminished their effectiveness one bit. However, CS was a much younger and less established field back then. Not that many colleges even had a CS major available. But I imagine that a substantial proportion of these people would have studied CS formally today. So I'd like to qualify my support for an accreditation institute with the caveat that I'm not convinced that there will be a lot of uptake.
Also I can't understand why everyone is freaking out that fewer girls are interested in CS. It's ok for people to have interests in different things, and if the cards fall such that there isn't gender balance, so be it. The standard diversity argument that CS is a profession that somehow needs more diversity in order to better serve society's needs...I'm not buying it. Why aren't we freaking out about the need for more male nurses if diversity is so important? Or white African-American studies PhDs?
A lot of people our parents' generation blew it by thinking that women didn't need to consider science and technology. This wasn't totally our parents' fault -- an American society in which both husband and wife work outside the home is a very recent phenomenon.
But whatever our parents were thinking, how they raised us is a big part of what's going on here. Going back in time to fix it is not an option. We can only move forward. This is not some pernicious bear trap that's impossible to free ourselves from, but it's also not a problem that can get ironed out with six months of hard work by a dedicated team of engineering ninjas somewhere in a garage in Palo Alto. Changing the culture takes many years and hard work.
But can a girl who starts taking an interest in computers in her teens keep up with a boy who started taking things apart and figuring out how things work when he was 3? Is her motivation - and dedication - ever going to be at the same level? Will she pull the all niters needed?
There are many many lonely (and loner) nights and days spent in isolation working on "cool stuff", particularly when you are miles out ahead of everyone else...do you think Linus Torvalds had his male support group around him when developing Linux? NOT! He just went and did it...
There is a COST to being at the cutting edge and exploring beyond new boundaries (either your own internal boundaries or external), i.e. you have to embrace risk (social, financial, physical) more openly. Female culture (and genes??) avoid risk, and have historically asked men to assume most risks (outside of childbearing). You avoid risk in dating (how many of you ask guys out on dates?) in sports (what percentage of women engage in extreme sports?), in business (avoidance of highly competitive situations?), when you dont go out at night because you are afraid (men face much higher crime victim rates than women). So there is the actual risk vs. the risk you perceive...and women often perceive risks in excess of reality...there needs to be some "growing up" here....
Regarding starting a separate certification course/process for women, I strongly disagree with the concept, it will ingrain (an existing) double standard between men and women and will bring with it the problems cited above, namely attracting some/many women engineers who are not truly dedicated or motivated, or who understand what they need to do to succeed in this increasingly competitive game.
A Stanford PhD in Engineering.
The things we need to teach are two: First the ability to self envision in a new (possibly higher status?) profession and to believe in our own competence. This can probably be done, as Niti above says, by making the classroom all female.
Second: the meta-knowledge of engineering. When you don't know how something works, where does "everybody else" go? Doesn't "Everybody else" already know everything? The folkways of self learning -- RTFM and Google are simple on their faces, but they also take a lifetime of practice. You can teach people enough to pass a Java cert but without this underlying basis, they'll be exactly the sort of mediocre programmers your friends fear.
Anyhow, I'm with you in your vision and would be happy to do some volunteering.
My experience tells me that females are more passionate and willing to participate in volunteer activities.
I am looking for sharp, smart, intelligent girls who are not afraid of being smart in the guy-dominated tech world, on mission to go to tech events, parties, conference and expo. Plus you can share your engineering experience and skill in our sessions.
Like the legally blond movie, it is alright to be a girl-girl and use pink accessories to stay active in web community. I can assure that it would not be boring like those computer courses. And it is alright to ask stupid questions once a while because I do that all the times.
Don't wait until you come to our Jan meeting. We want your help NOW! Please drop email at thewebsig@gmail.com and express your Pink Desire.
A reasonably conservative society (ironically?) makes it easier for women in engineering. Dating is a fairly unusual, and "How do I attract boys?" is mostly a non-question for most girls (though boys will usually show off) If there is pressure on girls, it is more on the lines of: study, make money, and get married (note the difference: get married, not find a boyfriend!). I have felt that Indian men (if given a choice) would love the non-committal "relationships" so common in the West, but right now that is not a choice on offer. It will likely change as India gets richer, and when it does, my prediction is that girls will be pressured (just like in the US) to "attract" boys, and so the pressure to study and make money will go down.
So a different set of cultural conditions have produced a different outcome: fairly sizable number of women in software. But one problem does persist: women don't take as many risks as men, so the number of new ventures, start-ups etc. are disproportionately men, even when the engineering workforce is more balanced.
Testosterone and "animal spirits" may well be the cause for men to take more risks, be non-conformist, and have undue confidence in their own abilities. And the cause for men to be prone to violence, and have other liabilities as well. Which would explain a lot of the observations here.
Women will likely rule in many fields going forward. They should feel no pressure to have to in engineering.
Re: the "Pink Desire" Bess mentioned,
Women 2.0 fully embraces pink altho some of our female members don't personally. Just look at our website - www.women2.org
I think it's important for women+technology websites to be professional, aesthetically pleasing, and above all user-friendly. I hope it reflects a [positive] stereotypical characteristic of women, which is the ability to multi-task.
From juggling website aesthetics with utilitarian usability, to managing a family life while ascending the corporate ladder, the quote unquote brains and beauty of the Women 2.0 community is shines through the website. We hope to lead by example, and showcase those women (such as the author of this article we all keep thinking and talking about) we think are doing an exemplary job.
The world is not enough, it seems. I'm totally a Women 2.0 evangelist.
That said, I do interview programmers, and I'm slightly skeptical of a one-year intensive training course. There's already a huge pool of semi-qualified people who can kinda-sorta program, but don't have any real talent for it.
The people we actually want to hire for programming jobs are considerably more skilled (and more productive), even at a junior level. Many of them, male and female, have both a CS degree and years of hobbyist experience.
Which brings us to my question: Is there any way to create truly skilled and productive junior programmers in a one-year program? I think it's hard, but it just might be doable.
Assuming we're talking about application or system programmers (and not the web industry, which I don't know as much about), here's what I'd include:
1) A basic data structures and algorithms course. This should include recursion at some level (either in data or code). Why? Being able to see multiple levels of a problem at once is prerequisite for a lot of the best-paid jobs.
2) At least one "software engineering" course, which requires the students to work in teams of four or five people, and spend at least five weeks writing a medium-sized program. This kind of practical experience is hugely valuable.
3) At least one "theory" course, which requires students to do some math. The exact kind of math doesn't matter much, just the analytical thinking skills learned along the way.
I think you could teach all this in one intensive year. You might want two tracks, because about 25-50% of students won't be qualified for the material described above, but might discover related talents: UI design, project management, and so on.
Combine this sort of course work with a year of after-hours open source hacking, and you'd have candidates who could apply for almost any junior position out there.
Of course, it's not necessary to aim this high, but doing so would create exceptionally skilled, productive programmers, with access to the top 5-10% of jobs. And I'd like to see more women get hired for those jobs.
thanks- anna
I am not sure about your Testosterone argument. My experience as a woman with a MS in CS is that most men in CS do not have a high testosterone level. They do not fight and put them selves at risk as the average man and most of them seems very afraid of many things - even women. If a high testosterone level was needed to be in CS it does not show itself in the guys that choses CS.
http://www.banane.com/2006/09/08/tech-post-3-wo...
Notes on your article-
I definitely had a lot of time playing with computers when I was growing up, which I credit to my mom, who always had to have the latest & greatest. In interviews, my random geeky projects usually shone more than my professional experience. "Installing linux from the network on my laptop" and "making an internet webisodic" , etc. The way to institutionalize this? I'm not sure. I'd support your starting point, though. When I was growing up in Silicon Valley, I went to tons of computer classes. They were everywhere, and cheap. I just found fellow nerdie girls to join me. Is that prevalent now? Not sure. Our gorup- www.sfwow.org- had an ajax workshop recently, and there we decided to host a women-friendly superhappydevhouse. Someone had gone to one recently and let's just say... we had some improvement ideas :) better food, in the city, etc. But I like the effort, and it all sounds good- not to diss on shdh or anything. One thing I wanted to point out is that women, at least, really like to learn from other women but also need to learn from men too. Many of my geekie male friends are supportive, and I also just ignore their bluster and arrogance about technology. I don't think they'll change, and in the interim I'll learn the skills for projects that I want to do- movies, poetry databases, stuff like that. I think that's my argument in general- women are more practical, and interested in social fabric stuff, so if technology relates to that, they will learn it. Making a baptism gown? Sure, a wordpress plug-in exists for that, made by a very smart open source woman contributor. Take a count of all the knitting blogs.
Yeah CS 101 is boring as heck.
I walked out of a number of CS topics, never to return.
So what?
When it comes down to it I am still interested enough to pursue the topics in my own time and teach myself.
The cost of entry to become a computer engineer is - the cost of a PC and a desire to do so.
It is not about gender barriers - it appears to me to be a matter of interest.
To be frank I am not interested in flower arranging and I know few men who are.
But so what that does not mean we need more male flower arragners - it just means that flower arranging does not interest males.
On the whole computing does not appear to interest most women.
Those who are itnerested can get into it - economics allowings.
As for professional postitions (as opposed to self teaching) women at the moment in engineering generally seem to have a, lot more opportunities, since employers/govts seem to want to address the apparent lack of interest by women in this field by hiring more of them....
thus, you need good engineering and good design for operational excellence. we need more whole brain thinkers, that's what Dan Pink is saying. and yes, I agree, in this context, it should not be a women only class.
Actually I agree with the whole thread, k?
The company I worked for straight out of the school in '98 did that. The year around my hire date at least one of the following majors was hired: Russian, History, Religion, Business,Physics,Geology. Almost all were from local liberal arts schools.
One history major now has a major role in the technology stack transformation we are doing.
Working in tech, as I now do, doesn't utilize my BA in Religion. In fact I find the challenges of tech far easier to get my arms around of many of the challenges and paradoxes that religion forces one to consider.
And no, I don't do Open Source, but I geek out in other ways. Because really, how many people read papal encyclicals for fun?
Why would someone become a self taught programmer? Simple really: it is because comp-sci in college is boring. So boring that some programmers are willing to inflict the pain of becoming self taught.
Most females are smart enough to know it's easier to go to college to get a degree. Once they get a degree then being self taught is moot.
Self taught male programmers, on the other hand, usually do not have the degree and therefore must constantly question their abilities and are constantly battling their technological ignorance. In the beginning it's fun, but it becomes a treadmill (once you get over 30).
In a nutshell, self taught male programmers have sacrificed their degree for the challenge of being self taught. I don't think you'll get any female to do the same because they'd rather not get on that treadmill.
That being said, if you're female and you think you want to be a self taught programmer, please come down to EFNET IRC so we talk about programming on #C. We're self taught and we won't try to sex0r you up with hot chat, we promise ;)
I have 2 young girls. I try to give them as many opportunities as I can, and to encourage them to do the things they find interesting. I won't value them any more or less if they choose to become basket weavers or DBAs, and I don't want them to think that they have to do something that other people value to be important themselves.
This is roughly what my parents did, which is how I had the opportunity to stay up all night messing around with computers and eventually become an IT consultant.
The problem is not that women are making the wrong choices, it's that their choices aren't being respected.
This is why I think it is extremely important to expose girls to technology at a young age. I am an active member in the Society of Women Engineers - where we do a number of outreach activities with the Girl Scouts, local schools, and any girl we can grab off the street and teach something to. We work with local organizations to teach circuit design, web programming, bridge design, artifical intelligence, and anything technical that comes up. Our particular section uses the Lego Mindstorm platform to introduce young teenage girls to programming logic, and they see how it can be applicable to real life. The Lego camp is week-long, and by the end, EVERY girl is interested in pursuing a technical degree. I think if we could catch more girls at this age, we would inspire more interest in programming and other engineering jobs.
There's only one skill that's pulled me through everything I've ever learned: reading. There's plenty of documentation, and plenty of examples, and plenty of help, and plenty of people. If anyone is willing to spend the time it takes to push every button in every combination, there's nothing one can't learn of the computer world.
The Internet has created a computer industry that supports itself from start to finish -- it's communism in a box.
So I guess my question is: why don't females enjoy the satisfaction of learning something by starting from the beginning and reading everything provided? Programming has strict documentation making it incredibly easy to start on page one, and be certain to know everything by the last page.
Ok, so it sounds really boring to me too right now. Obviously it's the task-completion that's rewarding, not the task-description. But it's a guaranteed completion, so where's the problem?
Yeah I've got my suspicions and observations and opinions, and they all revolve around female friends and marketing. The same things that create 90% of the television commercials presented to me for products that I could never find a use for.
Apparently, it's not fashionable for females to learn on their own. I guess it's just one more aspect of society where women are still back in the ages of not having any self-worth without a man.
I'd gladly support a monthly "women learn something technical" day. It would be nice to have women in my industry. It's tough wondering through life with exclusively male clients, colleagues, employees, suppliers, and associates. Doesn't really help my social life -- nor my social skills.
Ooh, ooh, can we blame the horrible manners and social skills of male engineers and technical personnel on the fact that females avoid the industry? Always good to blame women for things.
I do have a CS degree, and I certainly don't regret having spent the time it took to obtain it. But in my daily work as a programmer I use hardly any of the things I studied in school: Fortran, LISP, calculus, numerical algebra, PL/I, artificial intelligence, etc. In fact, many of the systems, tools, and concepts I do work with every day -- object-oriented design, C++, STL, generic programming, Linux, the X Window System, the Internet -- didn't even exist then.
Of course, the education I received in my CS classes helped me to become proficient with these things more quickly. But my point is, even if some of us take the more formal path of degree programs, while others choose alternative forms of education (such as what Joyce is suggesting), or even do it entirely on their own -- at the end of the day we're all self-taught.
In my humble opinion, to pursue a career in these fields, you don't have to have taken things apart, you don't have to have built a working scooter out of lego blocks, you don't need to have had a father who handed you down a PowerBook to play with, you don't need to have had parents who told you you couldn't do something because you were a girl, etc, etc.
I think the importance of such monkeying around is way overstated, as exemplified by this inane comment from a Stanford PhD: "But can a girl who starts taking an interest in computers in her teens keep up with a boy who started taking things apart and figuring out how things work when he was 3? Is her motivation - and dedication - ever going to be at the same level? Will she pull the all niters needed?"
I feel that women (and men) entering college carry such common misconceptions, which prevent them from pursuing a scientific field, even if they did quite ok in math and science in high school. Our University system (as well as graduation-time counseling at the high school level) needs to do a better job of educating women (and men) that as long as they have their basics and a modicum of curiosity, they would do well in just about any field.
The practice of computer science is messy - unintuitive platforms and user interfaces, bizarre sets of tools, the list is endless. Glorifying the ability to deal with such mess, glorifying the act of pulling all-nighters because you mismanaged your time in the first place, etc. aren't going to help anyone, and likely will turn away excellent women and men from the field.
Returning to the original proposal in the post by Joyce Park, yes, I think it's an absolutely sensible idea, and would mightily showcase the point I made above: cs/programming/science in general isn't so hard that anyone with sufficient interest/commitment can't pick it up in a year or so from good-quality teachers, despite any misconception you may carry from junior high; and it is easy enough to be a normal person and a good computer scientist without having been "a geek".
You like tech because you do, its not something that women somehow wish they could love but arent given the opporunity.
I have worked with several female programmers and they all have one thing in common. They are like one of the guys ( if the guys we are talking about are techies ).
To be a good software developer you have to be extremely passionate about technology. Not to say that programming is for Geeks but it seems that even the women have the same love for sci-fi tv shows and other dorky stuff like the rest of us guys.
There is no one more than me who wants the guy to girl ratio to improve in the industry.
I am a computer programmer, and I like it a lot, but I would not try to convince someone who was not interested to spend all that time struggling to teach themselves the skills so that they could do it. It just isn't worth it unless you love it, there are easier ways to make more money. Why not convince women to become lawyers, as long as we are trying to control people, so that they are the next generation of politicians and run the world in the future.
The whole thing is built on wanting to see a 50/50 split in all things. I just don't see it as being in the interest of women. Let people do what they desire to do, that is always what they do best.
Why?
Greater Quantity? There are already plenty of cheaper engineers in India and other countries.
Greater Quality? If they weren't that interested in the first place, they are unlikely to be good enough to compete with the existing expensive ones or even the ones in developing countries. If they are interested and really good, they can start writing great OSS and get near instant recognition. Low entry barriers.
I'll be happy to see more women working in my field. But the truth is most women aren't interested.
I'm entirely self taught and work as a Unix sysadmin / network engineer / application specialist / whatever hat is needed that day. I don't feel there are any technical challenges I'm not up to solving - especially with OSS. Frankly I'm not particularly bright either; at the end of the day, this stuff isn't that difficult. It just takes a base level of competence with some dilligence and persistence, along with the desire to do things well.
Look at it from this perspective; what makes a great engineer? It's someone who had the geek curiosity phase, wanted to know how things work at a fundamental level. Male or female, if you didn't go through that phase, you're never going to be a top notch engineer outside of some highly specialized roles. What sparks that interest? Can it be forced or enticed? I think not. By trying to artificially entice interest, you're going to end up with people who take part for the same reason people generally go after Solaris or MSCE certificates; better paying jobs - not really to understand CS / engineering at a fundamental level. You end up with people who are helpless without vendor support and can't pull apart simple shell scripts when things aren't working.
I think instead of focusing on any gender debates (after all - teh online is gender/race/creed-less by default), a more constructive thing to do would be to promote interest/awareness in FOSS and CS / engineering across the board; let people decide for themselves if they're interested in understanding it. There are plenty of geek girl orgs out there, and that's all well and great. I will continue to judge tech people solely on their technical merits - at the end of the day, that's the great equalizer. You have it or you don't, and anyone who wants it has an equal shot of becoming competent.
Special program to tackle this "problem" are a ghastly idea that will drop standards and make life harder for those women who earned their position the old-fashioned way. Most men who work in male-dominated fields would be happy to see more women enter, but only if they come in as equal peers with the same start as everyone else. The chief cause of male resentment towards women in the workplace is women in positions that they lack the competence or background for. They're usually put there by managers with silly notions of being "progressive", similar to yours.
Oh, and Anne, I'm guessing spectator was comparing testosterone levels between men and women, not men and other men.
I can see an advantage to making computing fun across the board and integrating code sharing into social networking.
However, this may create a society of programmers that don't understand what the code they are writing actually does and introduce more bugs into their programs.
The main problem I have is that your central thesis seems to be that:
1. Women aren't pro-actively getting themselves involved in engineering, so
2. Something should be done to encourage/persuade them
Why?
Many roles or fields of human experience have marked gender-imbalances in them. Sometimes this is a result of social pressure or institutional sexism, but sometimes it's simply a result of legitimate gender-differences. You appear to immediately dispense with the first answer, and the only conclusion you reach is that women aren't in engineering because they're generally not interested in getting into it.
Now, women have every *right* and every opportunity to work wherever they want, but when did "a right to do X" imply that someone needed to stand behind them with a carrot and a stick until a predefined proportion of the population decide to exercise that right?
There's a link here I'm missing.
I can't work out exactly what you think is wrong with the current situation - presumably it's either "a non-optimal course for companies to pursue", or it's "unfair to women" generally.
Since you conclude that women aren't getting into engineering primarily because they don't want to, it would seem more unfair to then coerce women into taking it up. Clearly not "unfair to women", then.
It may well be that the present state of affairs is not the best way to run a company (or the entire engineering industry), and there may well be something in that. Certainly women approach problems very differently to men, and looking at a lot of software out there there's a lot of room for people who aren't single, white, middle-class, socially-deficient Aspergers-suffering males to get involved in the design and development (hey, I'm a developer - I'm allowed to generalise about us ;-). Indeed, I'd be gobsmacked if having a workforce made up of 50% smart, motivated passionate-about-technology women wasn't better than one which was 100% equivalent men.
However, your solution seems to be to persuade women who already have every opportunity but have chosen not to take it, to get involved. These are people who by definition *aren't* passionate or motivated, and the very, very *last* thing engineering needs is yet more mindless, tasteless, don't-ask-me-I-only-work-here, who-cares-if-it's-ugly-as-long-as-it-works-for-now corporate codemonkeys.
We need smart, passionate, able people, and given this, increasing the gender-equality is also a very good thing.
Attempting to remedy this by lowering the barrier to entry or trying to persuade people who really aren't all that interested to get involved is not going to achieve this aim, however.
I don't know why this gender-gap exists, but I think you need to explain exactly why it's a problem and why it needs "solving", before offering a solution.
I understand that to people of our generation "inequality == bad" (I'll confess that the lack of women in engineering also bothers me slightly), but this is an artefact of our upbringing and culture, not a universal law.
If you can't clearly explain *why* something feels wrong, then chances are it possibly *isn't* - it's just an edge case where our normal rules of thumb ("equality == good", "inequality implies unfairness", etc) fall down. A cultural singularity, if you will.
I'd love to see more women in engineering, but I refuse to devote any time to "solutions" until I can clearly elucidate (even to myself) what's *actually* *wrong* with the current situation.
Could it merely be that men are more prone to the anal, nit-picky, abstract, hyperfocused, logical mindset that enjoys and succeeds in engineering?
I don't see many articles decrying the tiny proportion of men who choose to go into nursing, for example. Why not?
So... if it *is* a problem let's hear why... and *then* we'll try to fix it.
Unfortunately, when I try to explain how the computer works or why 1080p is better than 720p, she invariably says, "I don't care. I just want it to work."
The problem is not that women can't learn CS, it is that it holds inherently no interest to them.
I prefer to code my days away, but I'm sure at some level is just a subtle way to subdue my OCD. My wife doesn't want to to know how things work because she wants to see the whole clock, not the gears behind it.
I strongly suspect women that are interest in things "CS" are abnormal, and differ in more ways from the baseline female than just an interest in technology (and by baseline, I try and describe a typical female without generalizing... tough to do without somebody jumping your butt...).
Maybe someone can perform a survey of those women that do have jobs in CS, and find out some unifying characteristics? Married? Children? Hetero? Military experience?
I know you guys will be pissed I even suggest it, but there's got to be some similarities between men and women that gravitate towards CS. I'm not trying to be sexist, but all the women I work with (or for, for that matter) that are any good with code or hardware are very similar to me in many ways.
But to those of you who aren't sure that the women who wish they were engineers are out there, hi!
I can't put it better than Siva did, so I won't. Thanks, Siva. It's just like she says--I thought that B-plus in Honors Calculus wasn't good enough, and no one told me otherwise.
Jeff--way to go with your daughter. It's great that you're encouraging her in science; it's even better that you have that solid social relationship. Too many dads confused by daughters get stumped at that early step--good for you.
Joyce--love it. Thanks for the well thought-out writing. I'm excited to see what happens!
http://www.allnursingschools.com/faqs/men.php
http://www.medzilla.com/press61102.html
http://www.journalofnursingeducation.com/showAb...
Just so you guys know :)
You probably don't know that people want more male nurses because you aren't in the medical field. The same way nurses probably don't know that the tech sector would like more gender diversity.
This tells me that the difference we witness in most western countries has very little, if anything, to do with genetics, and nearly everything to do with culture.
See, e.g., Beyer et al. Gender Differences in Computer Science Students, Proceedings of the 34th SIGCSE Technical Symposium on Computer Science Education, pp. 49-53. Reno, NV, ACM Press, 2003.
Furthermore, I think your idea/proposal is excellent. Good luck and if you start it, I know several very intelligent bright women who would be interested!
And... don't pay attention to the nay-sayers, it probably means your hitting on something very real.
What I've seen here, and in similar environments, is a bias toward self-taught engineers: when 50+ hour weeks are expected, the two qualifications that matter are the ability to learn what you need to know, and the passion to go above and beyond the "just a job" mentality. A highly-talented self-taught individual has already demonstrated both of these attributes. Someone with a degree hasn't necessarily demonstrated either.
Of course, many people with a degree also have both of these, and there are a large number of incompetent self-taught people. In an interview, we're generally able to estimate the depth of technical knowledge -- but measuring passion is harder.
It's difficult to offer a job to a candidate who considers it "just a job," no matter their gender, given that there are a large number of candidates who are passionate about the work.
I'd love to have more women on our team here -- this article and the previous article provide more than enough reasons to do so, if they weren't already apparent. I've learned as much from the women I've worked with as the men, certainly, and the best female engineers I've known are every bit as good as the best men.
When I'm trying to build a team, I want the most dedicated individuals I can find. Certifications and degrees don't demonstrate that thirst for understanding and problem-solving in the way that self-taught engineers of either gender do.
I guess, in other words, that I agree with those who argue that we need to address these issues at a much younger age -- by the time someone's in college, it's likely too late for them to develop the passion for this kind of problem solving or technical work. That's as true for men as women -- but men are more likely to be pushed into discovering this interest at a young age.
If that's the long-term solution, and I think it is, I don't necessarily know what the short term solution is, or if there is one. In the meantime, I'll try to hire all the passionate, technically-competent people I find.
1) It seems that there are young women who are interested, I submit as evidence the following picture: http://www.flickr.com/photos/elzes/347235843/
2) From the Jargon File: larval stage
n. Describes a period of monomaniacal concentration on coding apparently passed through by all fledgling hackers. Common symptoms include the perpetration of more than one 36-hour {hacking run} in a given week; neglect of all other activities including usual basics like food, sleep, and personal hygiene; and a chronic case of advanced bleary-eye. Can last from 6 months to 2 years, the apparent median being around 18 months. A few so afflicted never resume a more `normal' life, but the ordeal seems to be necessary to produce really wizardly (as opposed to merely competent) programmers. See also {wannabee}. A less protracted and intense version of larval stage (typically lasting about a month) may recur when one is learning a new {OS} or programming language.
We see the same phenomenon in our area: medical engineering - for which there are now degree programs, instead of self-motivated engineers going larval under the direction of wizards - although there do seem to be more women in medical engineering than in aerospace.
I support your suggestion for a program, because if nothing else you can give the women who participate an opportunity to learn The Most Important Thing: If you want to create, you *have* to go out of your comfort zone on your own. Call it "larval phase" as we used to in my prior life, or call it "total immersion" as my VC friends do; one way or the other you have to choose to focus on one thing only until you Get It Right.
It's good practice for when you start your own company.
That's some pretty bad philosophy. How can anything be right in principle, but wrong in reality? If you believe that principle of "fairness" should not upheld in life, why credit it at all? Just come out against fairness.
Coder chicks are cooool...
Hell, it's why we have an 80% attrition rate in my degree program. The gender issue is not a problem on OUR end. It's a problem in the upbringing of the young women(and by youth I mean like
//jawn
I agree with the problem. I don't agree that the solution addresses the problem (it might have other merits, but I don't see the two as related).
I don't buy the argument that there's a genetic difference, however there is a big social difference. My wife is certainly smart enough to be a good programmer, but she suffered through six years of primary schooling where her math skills were criticized and lost all interest in math and science. Most other American women are strongly encouraged by their families, teachers and role models to think pragmatically and in terms of securing a good home, rather than egotistically.
The last point is important. I became a self-taught database programmer by spending thousands of hours of my off time working on an open source db project. That's a pretty egotistical, self-centered thing to do ... I certainly wasn't doing it for my wife! Most women in this country have been strictly taught not to think or act that way their entire lives.
So when you look at the low number of female self-taught engineers, you're not fighting lack of training, you're fighting our entire culture and twelve to thirty years of indoctrination on the part of each woman whom you encourage. That's simply not something you can fix with a one-year training course.
To really solve this problem, you can't think in the short term, because it's insoluable in the short term. You need to get to girls when they're ten years old and get them interested in math, science, computers ... taking things apart and putting them back together. By the time a woman is 25 years old, you're fighting a losing battle.
Obviously there are things the OSS community could do too in the way of stopping discrimination and mentoring genders equally. We're making progress on that. But it's a lot bigger problem, and it will be solved very slowly.
The problem is that in general, females absorb and process information differently than males do. Math and science textbooks and courses are largely designed for male's learning styles, not female's. In schools that teach math to boys and girls separately, gearing their presentations differently, girls excel!
I wish that had been done for me. As it is, I got interested in computers in my 40's playing with Linux. I spent 3 semesters in a community vocational college trying to learn about computers but couldn't get through even basic math. I had to repeat courses over and over to absorb them. I finally gave up on being able to learn in an academic atmosphere. I still keep trying to learn, though. I've managed to learn HTML at least and write my own website by hand.
After eight years, what I know about Linux is approximately what a male self-taught geek would know in perhaps 2 months. The documentation is almost impossible for me to understand.
What I ask the brilliant self-taught men is this: If your books and documentation were written in secret code, how fast would you progress? How long would you be able to stay motivated to learn?
I work with computers as a support specialist full time, and love it. But I would love to learn programming. I haven't found a manual yet that is really accessible- one that presumes that you don't know zip and starts you from scratch. Maybe I haven't been looking hard enough. Or maybe I haven't found the right mentor yet. (I am nowhere near Silicon Valley.)
Here is what I know about being a female techie and propellerhead: I have to love what I am into or I have no interest in it at all. I love puzzles. And I have to be in an environment that is socially comfortable: no horndogs or sexist people- male or female.
Like many women who have posted here, I have a really bad math deficit. I have also had to overcome the gendercrap heaped upon me as a kid: Girls don't take stuff apart (like the TV or the radio). Girls should be ladies (and not beg for electronics kits and crystal radios). Girls don't ask nosy questions and bug the men (while they are fixing the TV or the Stereo and not reading the instruction manual). Girls should serve the men, but not make any suggestions or show any interest in what they are doing (bring the beer, screwdriver, electrical tape, etc, then go away).
In spite of that, I am still doing what I want to do: being the local cyber-necromancer and miracle worker in my workplace. My being female is an advantage- people are not afraid to ask me what they consider 'dumb' questions. They know I won't treat them like scum, and they like the way I do things. They are not intimidated by a brilliant and capable woman. I consider myself very fortunate. It hasn't always been that way. My military days demonstrated to me how ugly men who feel intellectually or technically threatened can be. It is not a pleasant situation to be in.
How do you get good female programmers and engineers? I hate to say this, but keep the boys away- especially in the very beginning. Girls get dominated and humiliated by boys in such situations as a computer lab, or end up serving them or letting them do all the hands-on work. Segregate the classes- especially at the beginning level. Let girls succeed, let girls ask the 'stupid' questions without being humiliated, and most important, encourage and actively mentor them.
And keep encouraging and mentoring them. Everyone needs their hands held at the start of a new learning endeavor. There is no shame in this. Lazy people will fail, intelligent and capable people will wean themselves and soar.
I found the link to this article on my friend Twistedchick's Live Journal. I am glad this topic is being discussed.
As for the article, I take great offense at any program that attempts to give privilege to any subset of society. It is just another form of affirmative action that has no place in a free and equal society. The opportunities, equipment, and knowledge is equally available to everyone. If an individual lacks the passion to see something through, than good riddance.
I don't see there being a lack of women in engineering, what I do see on a day-to-day basis is an over abundance of people given jobs for the sake of diversity, that do not have the passion or skills to independently succeed in a technically and socially challenging industry.
I also see a great number of people in threads like these that trumpet the stereotype that nerds lack social skills. In reality those nerds tend to have a higher level of social aptitude than those around them. Having to deal with people from all walks of life, varying knowledge levels, and complete lack of critical thinking capacity. What you perceive as inability to make friends is actually a lack of desire to want to be friends with someone whose knowledge and lifestyle does not go beyond what is taught to them by television.
One should never forget that this industry is based on science. The ability to observe, investigate, and develop theory is of great importance. If you can't accomplish something without someone holding your hand and "dumbing" things down for you, than stay the hell out.
P.S. Bess is either fresh off the boat or needs to go back to school and take some English classes.
Just an idea.
Actually, one OSS project did exactly that after they noticed that they hadn't gotten any SoC applicants (we were luck enough to get three including one we could take). I'm not sure how successful the program was, though.
I do agree with focussing on college-age programmers. Certainly in my field (databases) there are more women coming out of school than there are currently active in the field. If we can just get the students ... all the students ... up and contributing to OSS quickly, it'll improve the gender balance.
My other two sisters are school teachers and quite happy. I also have two brothers - one is an architect and the other is a principal of a school district. As for me, I have an MBA with focus on Information Technology and a BA in Biological Systems and work at Motorola in enterprise networks. Our formal education was a stepping stone out of poverty after my father's business struggled to stay afloat. Based on these and other life experiences my #1 advice for women/men is to get a formal education. The #2 advice is to network with the right and honest people in the finance world; including venture capitalists. But how does a woman/man do this? Lots You need the qualifications to talk the talk - that is why a formal education is needed. (similar to Anon's comments)
My 3rd advice is to stay razor-sharp focused on what you are good at with much flexibility.
Although I agree with your premise on a "certification program" to learn programming; but chances are that most people are not like you and thus may fail in their quest to succeed. Therefore, we must advise old/young to take the hard and narrow road of a formal education first; and combine this with learning a craft such as programming.
In regards to Anon's comments: I think industry is built on more than just science. There is money, human capital, espirit d'corps, and the things that gel for industry to work. I have many entrepneural ideas but without the financial capital they won't go anywhere.
Thanks for your time.
Amrit - math is a very linear subject and it makes sense that you found it challenging in your younger years. However, the fragrances are much more complex and after checking your websiite I think you are on a good path.
Perhaps you can help Ms. Joyce Young by simply helping "take a Hukam" on her idea.
Good luck.
Out of Asian immigrant populations, there are greater numbers of women in technology both because the culture believes that math and science are learned, not intuitive; and the technical professions is seen as secure and upwardly-mobile, regardless of gender.
As Joyce points out, the reasons for the gender gap in tech are numerous and complex, i.e. role models, socializing, cultural beliefs about science and gender. One other thing to remember is that it's a documented fact that women are rewarded more for pursuing generalized professions that allow more flexibility for leaving and re-entering the workforce. Highly specialized professions often have the greatest penalty for interrupting one's working years.
Girls that have male brains do have the male abilities. It IS in the DNA!!
Have you noticed that the Gay Males are very effeminate. It is because they have girl brains. That is why they cry a lot and are emotionally very weak. But they don't get their fair share of the girl jobs!
Funny how girls always make up a million excuses if they can't get up to par! Imagine, girls comparing web building and technical support to Engineering. How ignorant!
1) Others often don't even recognize that a woman has come up with the idea. Every woman in hi-tech that I know, at every level, has had the experience (multiple times) of making a comment in a meeting, having it be ignored, then 10 minutes later a man makes the same comment and his insight is deemed brilliant. People just can't get their minds around a woman have a great technology idea, concept, business model whatever. I've even had a man take my idea and later say he was already thinking of it in the back of his mind but it only became clear during our conversation. Therefore it was his idea! I met with him as a potential investor for a working prototype I had developed...3 months later he launched a company doing exactly what I proposed. Same thing happed with a different idea I presented to a VC firm -- their entrepreneur-in-residence was given the idea and the money to implement.
2) As women entreprenuers work to build teams and unvestors, some of these people see an opportunity to take the idea and simply build their own team and company figuring that they can do it better and that the woman either will not know, or have no leverage to go after them. This is a tremendous issue because in order to build a team and find investors one has to reveal the concept...and often to people you don't know well. A male entrepreneur with a great business idea is assumed to have the ability to implement it; a female entrepeneur with an equally great business idea is assumed to not have the ability to implement it.
The isolation mentioned by so many comes from not having this social network access which many times includes a supportive teacher who knows people but more like well-wishers who won't tell you anything outside of the content of the schoolwork (including a well-wishing teacher).
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/5239.html
For all its foolishness and irrationality, the feminist hysteria about Summers furthers the career agendas of feminists who seek thinly veiled job preferences or quotas for themselves and their friends.
Summers was making a much-needed effort to break the self-serving feminist-careerist stranglehold on honest discussion of gender imbalances…
Now that Summers has succumbed to feminist re-education, can numerical “goals†for hiring, promotions, and departmental chairmanships be far behind?
Inconveniently for preference-seeking feminists, scientific evidence shows that while women do better than men at certain verbal skills, men do better than women at some other intellectual tasks. These include visualizing three-dimensional subjects in space — essential to much engineering and science work — and mathematical reasoning. More than twice as many boys as girls scored in the top range (750-800) on last year’s SAT math test, for example. Among serious scholars, the only debate is about whether the pattern reflects acculturation or genetics. A substantial body of work suggests genetics.
But if most mathematical geniuses are men, as many studies suggest, then the fact that men still dominate the few academic fields requiring mathematical brilliance is not entirely attributable either to sex discrimination or to the reluctance of mothers to work 80-hour weeks. This is why so many feminists have personal stakes in silencing talk, and stigmatizing study, of possible gender differences in mathematical-reasoning ability.
It is ironic that while shouting down any hint that men might be more capable than women in mathematics, many so-called “difference feminists†have long contended that women are morally superior to and more caring than men. This, says Daphne Patai, a former professor of women’s studies at the University of Massachusetts (Amherst), illustrates “the opportunism, inconsistency, and double standards that abound in contemporary feminism, often feebly justified by attacks on logic and reason as ‘masculinist.’ â€
“The modern university is the culmination of a 20-year trend of irrationalism marked by an increasingly totalitarian approach to highly politicized issues. Students are subjected to mandatory gender-and racial-sensitivity training akin to thought reform…. Faculty members and administrators are made to understand that their careers are at risk if they deviate from the accepted viewpoint.â€
Women learn better, faster — PEGGY CURRAN, The Gazette
Even the TITLE is SEXIST against men! If the genders were reversed, the Feminists would cry Sexism! But men are marginalised by Sexist Feminist politics, and men have no rights.
While men are forced into silence, girls are free to make sexist statements at will. Even the education system has lowered standards to ensure girls take the majority of seats and positions in universities.
Here’s the enrolment breakdown showing the percentage of females, by faculty or department,
At McGill University
Medicine 60.6 %
Law 53.6 %
Dentistry 54.6 %
Architecture 66.9 %
Science 52.3 %
Agriculture &
Environmental Science 68.4 %
Commerce 52.9%
Education 78.9 %
Arts & Science 70.5 %
Social work 86.1%
Nursing 96.7%
Occupational therapy 89.6 %
At Universite de Montreal
Medicine 71 %
Law 62.9 %
Dentistry 64 %
Veterinary science 72 %
Optometry 77.9 %
Pharmacy 70 %
Science 78.8 %
Nursing 87.5 %
Management 56 %
Girls have far more than 50%. That is the feminist idea of equality!
There is a COST to being at the cutting edge and exploring beyond new boundaries (either your own internal boundaries or external), i.e. you have to embrace risk (social, financial, physical) more openly. Female culture (and genes??) avoid risk, and have historically asked men to assume most risks (outside of childbearing). You avoid risk in dating (how many of you ask guys out on dates?) in sports (what percentage of women engage in extreme sports?), in business (avoidance of highly competitive situations?), when you dont go out at night because you are afraid (men face much higher crime victim rates than women). So there is the actual risk vs. the risk you perceive…and women often perceive risks in excess of reality…there needs to be some “growing up†here….
And I want to respond that I have asked guys out a lot of times. I've been shot down a lot of times too. Oh well, ask someone else then. I walk around Washington, DC (even in the less-than-nice areas) alone at night. The day I met my boyfriend (at LUG), he insisted on walking me home because he thought it wasn't safe, and I told him I walk around much more dangerous areas at night on my own and didn't need him to protect me. He still stayed with me though, so I got a nice 20 minute conversation and his email address out of it. My computer is currently running bleeding edge Ubuntu unstable. Yeah, it breaks every now and then. Oh well, I'll fix it.
I agree with Mike about the social network though. I never knew any other girls who loved coomputers, and none of the boys would talk to me when I was little (girls have cooties!). It was in HS programming classes that I met other people into computers--and I was the only girl among them. They thought I was in the wrong room ("what's a GIRL doing here?") til I finished and debugged my programs before theirs were halfway written ;) My CS classes now are about 1/3 female. One of the other girls lives in my building, so we talk about computers a lot. I've also met some ladies at LUG, but mostly it's guys. Guys gather to talk about computers when they're still at the age when they won't talk to girls. Eventually they hit "woah, girl who knows about computers? hey, wanna go out?" but by then they sound like jerks (you used to tell me to go play with dolls, but now that I have boobs you like that I play with computers instead? heck no!).
Now, for anyone that reads the article: I like to think that I am sort of person who can take a bit of criticism and I would agree that the tone of the article is rather aggressive and at some points comes close to overstepping the mark. Making such errors is how we improve and I think that I have learned a lesson from the whole affair.
However, I still stand by the points that I have raised in the article. I remain committedly opposed to feminism. I would also maintain that the tone of the article is mild in comparison to some other articles on this subject written by feminists.
I've made a little sub-site for articles on gender issues and it is located here:
http://www.unmusic.co.uk/ge/
The article that references this article is called "Article: Attacking feminism: why should a geek care?" and can be accessed via the side menu. The part that references this article begins about half-way down the page.
I'd love i hear any feedback from anyone who sees this message.
Thanks in Advance,
Mike.