Will Peggy the Programmer Be the New Rosie the Riveter? 333
theodp writes "The Mercury News' Mike Cassidy reports that women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science. 'The dearth of women in computing,' writes Cassidy, 'has the potential to slow the U.S. economy, which needs more students in the pipeline to feed its need for more programmers. It harms women by excluding them from some of the best jobs in the country. And it damages U.S. companies, which studies show would benefit from more diverse teams.' The promise of better financial results, says Anita Borg Institute Director Denise Gammal, is making diversity a business imperative. It's 'the sort of imperative that cries out for a movement,' argues Cassidy, 'maybe this time one led not by Rosie the Riveter, but by Peggy the Programmer.' So, where will Peggy the Programmer come from? Well, Google is offering $100 to girls attending U.S. public high schools who complete a Codecademy JavaScript course. 'Currently only 12% of computer science graduates are women,' explains Codecademy, 'and great tech companies like Google want to see more smart girls like you enter this awesome profession!' Google joins tech giant-backed Code.org in incentivizing teachers to bring the next generation of girls to the CS table.
But Silicon Valley claims the talent crisis is now (although there are 19 billion reasons to question SV's hiring acumen). So, what about the women who are here now, asks Dr. AnnMaria De Mars. 'If you are overlooking the women who are here now,' De Mars writes, 'what does that tell the girls you are supposedly bringing up to be the next generation of women in tech that you can overlook 15 years from now? Why do we hear about 16-year-old interns far more than women like me? If it is true, as the New York Times says, that in 2001-2 28% of computer science degrees went to women compared to the 10% or so now — where are those women from 12 years ago? It seems to me that when people are looking at minorities or women to develop in their fields, they are much more interested in the hypothetical idea of that cute 11-year-old girl being a computer scientist someday than of that thirty-something competing with them for market share or jobs. If there are venture capitalists or conference organizers or others out there that are sincerely trying to promote women who code, not girls, I've never met any. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but it means that whoever they are seeking out, it isn't people like me.'"
But Silicon Valley claims the talent crisis is now (although there are 19 billion reasons to question SV's hiring acumen). So, what about the women who are here now, asks Dr. AnnMaria De Mars. 'If you are overlooking the women who are here now,' De Mars writes, 'what does that tell the girls you are supposedly bringing up to be the next generation of women in tech that you can overlook 15 years from now? Why do we hear about 16-year-old interns far more than women like me? If it is true, as the New York Times says, that in 2001-2 28% of computer science degrees went to women compared to the 10% or so now — where are those women from 12 years ago? It seems to me that when people are looking at minorities or women to develop in their fields, they are much more interested in the hypothetical idea of that cute 11-year-old girl being a computer scientist someday than of that thirty-something competing with them for market share or jobs. If there are venture capitalists or conference organizers or others out there that are sincerely trying to promote women who code, not girls, I've never met any. That doesn't mean they don't exist, but it means that whoever they are seeking out, it isn't people like me.'"
Dangit Peggy (Score:2, Insightful)
Peggy Hill as the spokeswoman. I could get behind that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Dangit Peggy (Score:5, Insightful)
Let me see if I have this straight:
A: 12 years ago, we expended the resources necessary to educate a *relatively* large number of women in computer programming
B: The objective of that resource expenditure was to increase the net number of computer programmers in society
C: We do not currently see a lot of these women from 12 years ago in the workforce as computer programmers
It may or may not be in the best interest of womens development to spend resources educating them in computer programming. But, unless A or C are factually incorrect, the evidence seems to suggest that, if your primary goal is to compensate for a lack of computer programmers in society, educating women as computer programmers is a piss poor way to do it.
We could try forcing them into the trade with the threat of punishment. We could try to create an even more unbalanced economy, increase the level of poverty among the masses and hope that the carrot becomes sufficiently appealing to motivate them to "freely" seek a career they wouldn't otherwise choose.
Or we could just acknowledge that, even though they're not going to be the ones taking responsibility for these programming problems, we're not going to pressure them, because they have lots of intrinsic value just the way they are.
The people behind this article seem to really be unsatisfied with women. Like a man who always wanted a son and tries to turn his daughter into one.
Re:Dangit Peggy (Score:4, Insightful)
We DID see many women in the workforce as programmers! Those 30% CS grads who were women thirty years ago did get into the field. I see plenty of them. The problem is that these numbers are changing. If you look at more middle aged computer professionals you will see a larger percentage of females compared to entry level jobs.
One issue is that new women coming into the field that I see tend to be the brilliant and determined ones, whereas there are plenty average Joes who squeak in for their boring 9-to-5 job. The average Janes are the ones who are becoming rarer over time.
Re: (Score:3)
A better question is why are we freaking out about which fields and degrees women choose to pursue while men are 40% or less of college graduates in the first place.
Re: (Score:3)
We we are, by nature, expendable. We should be used as beasts of burden and discarded once our usefulness is over.
[John]
Re: (Score:3)
"women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science."
Is it the computer science they're missing out on or is it the lucrative bit they're missing out on?
Because I know a lot more men who program for enjoyment than women.
Re: (Score:2)
Geez... (Score:5, Insightful)
If a group isn't interested, they aren't fucking interested. You don't HAVE to have two of every creature in every positon.
Hell, the NBA is really lacking of white college educated women....are we freaking out and trying to induce them with $100 to work to get into the NBA (and god help them if the teams discrimate!!).
Geez, please...get over it..people will do what people want to do.
Re:Geez... (Score:5, Insightful)
Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women.
If they felt men as a gender would be disruptive then that should be handled on an individual basis regardless of gender, and even then I find it hard to believe that it'd be a widespread issue.
As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes. lsu many of the complaints can be attributed to the female dominated HR field; which has shown that women in HR will not hire other women they consider to be prettier then themselves.
Re: (Score:3)
Yea, there was a Ruby workshop I was interested in attending; but seems it was only open to women
So go to a different one. Stop treating this as some ridiculous zero-sum game.
Re:Geez... (Score:4, Informative)
http://railsgirls.com/
Re:Geez... (Score:4, Informative)
There you go http://www.railsbridge.org/
It is very popular, but you wouldn't know it because you probably don't have a vagina. Sarah Mei teaches them specifically to women. It is no boys allowed.
http://techfemme.wordpress.com among others, including people on slashdot have brought this up. Either you are not paying attention, or you are part of the problem.
Now kindly go fuck yourself.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Look at the gender distribution in most of them. 90% male? 95% male? 99?
But that's not a forced distribution, that's because 90-99% of the people who are interested are men. That's a completely different story than a conference which flat out locks out attendees based on their gender.
If you find the gender imbalance (and some of the nastier aspects of that) in IT not to be
Ruby is not "IT" it's CS. Calling a programmer "IT" is like calling an Architect a "Construction Worker".
> As it stands, women probably have a far greater opportunity advantage from Diversity Quotas, Gendered Scholarships, and Classes
That's an opinion, and you're perfectly entitled to it.
No, he's 100% correct. There are scholarships which are offered ONLY to women, but you do not find any offered only to men. There are also no Quota requirements to employ at least x% Men in any
Re: (Score:2)
Agree.
Take down the barriers that unfairly prevent women from entering the job, I'm totally cool with that.
But why do we feel the need to lure people who clearly arn't interested for the sake of balancing the numbers.
Programming is a weird gig, maybe it just doesn't appeal to women for whatever reason. Contrary to what the social progress movement would have us believe, women and men are actually different physically and mentally. We shouldn't discriminate based on that, but we need to accept that on a larg
Re: (Score:2)
"Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!"
Whenever I've said the same thing, even more politely, I've been accused of being a bigot.
Regardless, the latter part of OP sounds like just yet another woman blaming the shortage of women in tech on discrimination, when studies have consistently found that is not the cause. I mean, not just one study or two, but many of them over a period of decades.
because it's a hostile environment (Score:2, Insightful)
Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!
It makes a difference when the path to the field, and the field itself, is hostile to non-straight, white, men. Reading through the comments here there's a lot of really angry, hostile, dismissive posts. Which certainly doesn't help counter the argument by TFA.
Hell, the NBA is really lacking of white college educated women....are we freaking out and trying to induce them with $100 to work to get into th
Re: (Score:3)
The funny part about that, you won't find a much more pure meritocracy than IT in the entire history of Humanity.
If group-X has a problem with the attitudes in IT, that says more about group-X than it does about IT. We may not, as a whole, tend to kowtow to BS politically correct social norms; but we'll accept a black Muslim woman programmer just as readily as any run-of-the-mill pasty white
Re: (Score:2)
>Rubbish. Women aren't as good at men in sports.
Assuming you have a decent TV service, look back at the winter Olympics. Snowboarding, bobsleigh, skeleton, skiing. Is the women's competition any worse than the mens? Look at the icedancing, speed skating, etc. Still not convinced?
Historically, men have watched sports, and - particularly in the team sports - it seems that men are more in need of that tribal identification with a group than women are.
Or maybe it's simply that many more men than will admit t
Re: (Score:2)
Seriously, what the fuck difference does it make what sex, race or religion you are to be in IT??!?!
Well, "talent crisis" usually means "talented workers cost too much, we have to find a cheaper source of them". Women do tend to get lower salaries than men...
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that women want to go into IT but find there are barriers in their way because they are female. You are right, it shouldn't have anything to do with gender, but it does and we should try to do something about that.
To be absolutely clear, it isn't that women are not interested, they are. It has nothing to do with getting a 50/50 ratio, just making sure that there are not artificial barriers in place for the women who do want an IT career.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Be welcoming and warm in our acceptance of anyone. But to push them toward something they are not really interested in, just so some people feel better about themselves, is absolute silliness.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
When I start seeing movements to increase the dearth of men in the fulfilling career of nursing, I might start having some actual respect for efforts such as these.
It's been happening for a while, you just aren't paying attention. For example: http://aamn.org/aamn.shtml [aamn.org]
Some people get stuck in a single solution mentality. There may well be less inherent motivation to join programming in women. But every time the point is even close to being raised, Slashdot seems to have a collective hissy fit and shuts down and refuses to talk about it. Which itself is a sign that there's probably a problem, because we can't even talk rationally about whether there's a problem.
A
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would ANYONE feel welcome? American has a pervasively anti-intellectual culture where salesmen are held in the highest esteem and most technical fields are looked down upon. Law and Medicine are notable exceptions. They are both viewed as glamorous and lucrative occupations.
Perhaps if IT got the Law & Order treatment we would see a sudden influx of female programmers in 10 years time.
This whole media "narrative" about "unwelcoming" IT geeks is just a dressed up version of "Revenge of the Nerds".
Re: (Score:2)
Trying to recruit more women is a politically correct way to encourage folks to enter the profession, increasing the supply and subsequently reducing wages.
This article is about Google incenting girls to try programming, Google's issue is not that they're not paying enough, but that they simply can't find the people.
The Google office I work at (Boulder) experiences a near 100% offer acceptance rate. Almost every engineer who interviews and gets an offer takes it, which is a pretty strong indicator that the compensation is fair -- and Boulder is a tech-heavy area, and within the extended Denver metro area, so engineers here have lots of options and salaries i
Re: (Score:2)
If you discriminate based on race, you're cutting off a certain percentage (varying by country) of the talent pool. Stupid.
If you discriminate based on gender, you're cutting off ca. 50% of the talent pool. Really stupid.
You don't need to invoke lofty principles to argue against discrimination.
The supply/demand issue doesn't really have much to do with discrimination.
Re:Geez... (Score:4, Insightful)
But that does show up as a problem, and no, it's not just a lack of Amish representation.
Which is why efforts are made to remedy that.
What problem? The one that the article falsely claims? TFA starts with a false premise, and then repeats a fabricated statistic as propaganda. Here [payscale.com] is a link to a set of data that disagrees with the idea that women make less money than men. I'm not claiming that there are no differences, but the differences are minor. It's not .77c on the dollar as people try and claim for propaganda, reality says it's much much closer. Sure, we can always improve but if the 'problem' is distorted then the solution will also be distorted.
You are arguing that a person should not have a choice because your liberal viewpoint is that everything should be equal all the time. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but Utopia does not exist and people won't do something simply because -you- and people of a similar belief want them to. Many times, the forcing of behavior has the opposite effect in fact (basic psychology, read a book). Further, society can't function if everyone is in a technical field. We need doctors, plumbers, welders, farmers, and many people want to perform those roles in society and not be pigeon holed into what -you- want them to do.
Ask the basic required questions, and these would be true for any claim of bias or discrimination (gender, race, religion):
1. Do the people have the same opportunities to education? I'm pretty sure we can state that the system is pretty fair, not perfect, but fair. If they have the same opportunities for education then they could get into the same line of work if they so choose unless there are barriers to entry in the field. This is why we have so many women doctors, pharmacists, lawyers, etc..
2. Do they have opportunity for employment? I work with a lot of women programmers, most of them are originally from China and Russia, so you would have to show me proof that there are entry barriers to employment for women. If you have knowledge and skill, you get jobs even if your English is not so good and you may have difficulty in communicating.
3. Does society discourage them from working in these fields? Again, you need to show me proof that this is happening. I have not seen any advertising or articles talking about how poor a specific gender, race, or religion is in any field since I was a kid. Anything that would even hint at a bias today would end up in court extremely quickly. I'm sure you could dig up a company that was found guilty of discrimination in recent times, but that company would be an anomaly and not a 'normal' company with what society considered acceptable practice.
If those questions are answered "yes", "yes", and "no", then it's possible that people are just choosing not to do certain jobs. Why not let them make up their minds about their careers instead of trying to force them to be what you want them to be? What I find very ironic is that most people will tell you today that if you want to make an excellent living, you go into welding or plumbing because there are real shortages there. But that's not what -you- want them to do.
How about Norm the nurse? (Score:3)
Or Frank the pharmacist? These two professions are dominated by women. Perhaps we should make boys more interested in those professions as well somehow.
Re: (Score:2)
Sounds great to me. Why don't you go hop on over to a forum for nurses and pharmacists, and bring it up there?
Todd the Teacher.. (Score:5, Insightful)
You missed the big one.
Todd the Teacher.
Men have been practically excluded from teaching, by being painted with the sexist assumptions
that they are all child molesters and pedophiles with nothing positive to contribute.
In comparison to this particular problem, an imbalance in programmers is nothing.. bias in the
teaching of our children should be a huge priority, and yet, its not....
Re: (Score:2)
You missed the big one.
I'm not sure what your point is?
Are you saying we should make sure we're absolutely the worst employment sector before we start to do something?
Or should we be wringing our handsin abstract over something that is worse that we simply don't see day-to-day.
Put it this way: yes it's worse in teaching, apparently, but I have no kids, no plan to have kids and therefore have no involvement or future prospect with the teaching sector at all. I have no easy way in and no way of experiencing
Re:Todd the Teacher.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I was thinking Tracy the Truck Driver. My not-that-intensive search on gender stats in truck drivers suggest that the field is approx 93% male, which sounds plausible to me. We should push women towards that profession too.
Re: (Score:2)
An old joke: what do you call the guy who graduated bottom of his class from med school? A doctor. What do you call the guy one place below him? A pharmacist.
Um, what? (Score:2, Insightful)
"The Mercury News' Mike Cassidy reports that women are missing out on lucrative careers in computer science. 'The dearth of women in computing,' writes Cassidy, 'has the potential to slow the U.S. economy,
No they are not, there is no such thing, and I smell bullshit.
If you make up fairy tales, you can put any ending you want on them. That is what is happening here. Women are not missing out, they are choosing to not do certain things. Let's look at a very good reason for this to be the case.
Programmers tend to work horrible and long hours. Most women are choosing to manage life and work together, and not work 60+ hours a week. That is a choice, and I have no issues with them doing so. I used to work 60
Re: (Score:3)
Acknowledging that this is totally a 'devil's advocate' type statement, but I suspect you would find there are plenty of women, particularly single mothers from lower income households, that work more than one lower paid job that total in excess of 40 hours (and some in excess of 60 hours) just to make ends meet.
Many of these women come from backgrounds that don't value education and are not equipped for higher paid roles that would enable them to work more manageable hours at a single job rather than terri
Get Over it FFS (Score:5, Funny)
MOST women don't like to code, stop fucking trying to turn them into programming machines. Some do, good for them, let them be great programmers, but for fucks sake stop trying to force women to do shit most of them have no interest in doing. Its not going to get you a girlfriend, you'll still be an asshole.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think the problem isn't attracting women to the field, it's that the field is so full of men who are at best crude with their social skills. To be honest, seeing interactions between developers is quit
Re:Get Over it FFS (Score:4, Interesting)
I can tell you that there's a good subset of people who are shy, much more so than average, and who look awkward in social situations. They're not sexist either.
So really, I think there's often some massively wide brushes being used here. You're basically taking your bad experiences and branding the entire field with the same stroke. That's a gross generalization. By saying this, you're basically doing the same thing that the sexist machos (who do exist, I'm sure, what I'm not sure is whether they're representative) do when they put all women in the same basket.
I'd also often be curious to actually read those sexist jokes and innuendos. Perhaps I'm just not noticing them and they permeate the culture as you say, but thus far I've only seen them referenced, but never really documented and dissected.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, you are half right. Some women do want to code, and we should let them. No one is trying to force women into IT though. That isn't what TFA or the general movement to get more women into IT is about. It's the first bit, the bit you got right about removing the things disadvantaging the ones who do have an interest.
Re: (Score:3)
MANY women do like to code. Thirty years ago about 30% of computer science graduates were women; today it's about 10%. So if your theory is right then what changed? I refuse to believe that stupid line that women just don't like computing because they're wired up differently because the evidence says otherwise.
Finally (Score:5, Funny)
Was wondering when this topic would finally get some coverage again. It's been at least a week since this important injustice graced the front page.
Well done slashdot, your click bait got me again.
Oops and /or Ouch. (Score:2)
"Peggy" or "Pegging" the programmer? Given the current job market, either seems plausible.
Nursing? (Score:2)
In 2011, 9 percent of all nurses were men while 91 percent were women. Men earned, on average, $60,700 per year, while women earned $51,100 per year. [census.gov]
I know it is impossible, but I just want there to be honest discourse about this supposed "STEM shortage / gender gap". There is no STEM shortage just like there is no Lawyer shortage. The gender gap in software engineering isn't a problem just like the gender gap in nursing isn't a problem. Corporations want to turn software engineers into a commodity. Period.
Re: (Score:2)
just like the gender gap in nursing isn't a problem
Isn't it a problem? You sure about that or are just using one field being fucked up in the polar opposite manner to your field as an excuse to be fucked up and not doing anything about it?
It's a matter of biology (Score:5, Funny)
They just don't have the upper body strength that the job requires.
I think not. (Score:5, Insightful)
No. No she won't.
Padma the Programmer, however, is a name with potential.
Re: (Score:2)
Google Search Padma the Programmer [google.com]
I hope she's cute!
Re: (Score:3)
http://www.linkedin.com/in/kar... [linkedin.com]
He is.
Productivity gap (Score:2)
The same productivity gap for women exists in all industries. 5 days a month and doesn't die, etc. etc. plus baby-time means that fewer employers will invest in a female employee knowing the ROI is lower than for a male employee.
OTOH, men die earlier then women, so they have a chance to make it up on the back end.
Re: (Score:2)
The same productivity gap for women exists in all industries. 5 days a month and doesn't die, etc. etc.
Every time some neckbeard opens his mouth and allows the misogyny to flow out it just reinforces the notion that there needs to be more incentive for women to get into software. I know this is /. but you probably just made some femnazi's panties crawl up her ass....dammit.
Re: (Score:2)
You accuse me of misogyny and then use the term "femnazi" and the phrase "panties crawl up her ass"?
Women take more time off, career-wise, than men do, and it's related to their gender. That's a true statement. What's the problem?
Re: (Score:3)
But to play ball: in the US as in many other developed nations you can't discriminate against employees because of things like that. If I have diabetes you can't discriminate against me because I may have low blood sugar one day and have to go home. You can't discriminate someone with a propensity to get the flu every winter because on average that person misses more days than someone who doesn't get the flu. Furthermore you can't just lump all women together and ge
Re: (Score:2)
Some things cannot be delegated.
Women are indoctrinated differently. Foul smelly "brogrammers" are at the very tail end of a long process that really has very little to do with anyone in the computing industry or academia.
Let's just put nine women on the job! (Score:3)
. . . and then the baby programming project will be done in a month!
We need more good programmers, not just more programmers. And their sex is totally irrelevant. A good programmer is a good programmer, regardless of sex,race, religion, shoe size, hair color, etc . . .
computer science is not javaScript or other hands (Score:2)
computer science is not javaScript or other hands on skills it's loads of theory that is not really needed to do the job.
Makes good business sense. (Score:2)
You can pay women less.
Again the 'women must be stupid to miss out' (Score:5, Insightful)
This is soooo freakin tired. And not just on /. Women are not stupid. Or no more so than men. If they want a career/job in comp. sci they certainly can figure out what to do. Can we stop wetting our pants that 51% of the work force in industry X is not women?
Re: (Score:2)
At least part of it must be that women are reluctant to enter a field where there are so few other women. Some won't care, obviously, but others will.
Re: (Score:2)
At least part of it must be that women are reluctant to enter a field where there are so few other women. Some won't care, obviously, but others will.
This certainly didn't stop women from entering the armed forces in large numbers. It may just be that women don't care for computer science as much as men do.
Re: (Score:3)
Assuming you're a male, wouldn't you perhaps think twice about a career choice where you might be the only male out of 10 people in your group and you were one of only a few men in any class you took or conference you attended?
Re: (Score:2)
Aren't you curious as to why?
Perhaps the field has changed in the past 25 years? It's possible that the skill set that is currently the successful still set has a certain group self selecting themselves out of the field?
Re: (Score:3)
Did you even read TFS? It says that a decade ago 28% of computer science degrees went to women, and now it's 10%. It's not about 51%, it's about the fact that we know more women are interested in computer science than are taking degrees in it for some reason. If we remove the things that are putting them more more will take those degrees.
Google et al really want more women in IT because they need more skilled coders, and understand that there are women who do want to be programmers but are put off. If they
Programming is over-hyped as a career (Score:5, Insightful)
Programmer burn-out and turn-over to other IT careers is high. Age discrimination and RSI injuries are common, and you are competing with 3rd-world wage-slaves and typically work long hours. For those who want to be involved with family life, long hours is not a selling point.
Programming is a stepping-stone job into project, network, equipment logistics, and server management, but not the only path. It's only real appeal is quick money out of college. After that you statistically will flat-line compared to other options.
Enough STEM career bullshit already.
Re: (Score:2)
After that you statistically will flat-line compared to other options.
Cite?
Re: (Score:2)
Programming is a stepping-stone job into project, network, equipment logistics, and server management
Lolwut? You have it exactly backwards, unless you think "programming" is shitty web page writing.
Re: (Score:2)
This only happens because you let it. I think it is far worse in the US where labour laws are extremely weak. Then again maybe if some guy in India on the end of a phone serveral time zones away can be as valuable as you sat at a desk in the company offices maybe you aren't worth more.
This is about driving down wages not womens rights (Score:2)
Remember when 1 bread winner could provide for a family in the 1950s? That was before women joined the workforce in mass and drove down wages by competing with men for jobs. It's all so defensible when it's masked as women's rights but it's really about cheap labor.
Re: (Score:2)
There used to be more... (Score:2)
In addition, ho
Re: (Score:2)
Another kind of ageism: women younger than 40 can get pregnant, and demand long maturity leaves. And anybody over 40 is too old for IT.
Also, women are usually primary care for children, and that it makes it difficult for them to work over 90 hours a week.
Also, most visa workers in IT are men. And these days, you can hardly tell Redmond from Bangalore.
poorly paid when compared to (Score:2)
Stop these articles already! (Score:4, Insightful)
I've seen an absurd number of stories on this topic, probably ever since the Hour of Code crap started. /. would you please give this topic a @#$% rest???
nuclear power has an imbalance too (Score:2)
IT is going offshore anyway (Score:2)
Women, as well as men, in the USA might be wise to avoid IT.
There is just no way for a US resident to compete with 3rd world wages.
The jobs that cannot be offshored, will be filled by visa workers.
It is far easier to offshore IT, than to offshore manufacturing. With IT there is no physical inventory, no shipping, no customs, no storage, nothing like that. With IT, you just zap files back and forth.
Unless you have a top secret clearance, there is no way for US and Europe to compete.
2001-2 (Score:2)
Sigh.. (Score:5, Insightful)
Enough of this narrative already. Women are given every opportunity and are practically begged by universities (via discriminating scholarships under the guise of 'diversity' programs) to major in comp-sci and other engineering/science majors. They've been doing this for decades, now, and they're still looking at it as though it's 1970. The problem is they're measuring success by the standard of equal outcome on the false premise that men and women are physically and psychologically the same. They're not, so they won't always make the same life choices given similar backgrounds and opportunities. Despite what the PC crowd will say, there's nothing wrong with this at all. This is the very essence of diversity. In a diverse systems, equal outcome is not a given.
How about we focus on equal opportunity based upon relevant attributes (ie demonstrated interest and aptitude), rather than building systemic bias into society under the guise of eliminating it? After that, let individuals make their own life choices. The only thing this bias does is teach women how to play better victims, which denies them opportunities to earn real respect among their peers. Getting society to discriminate against men will not empower them, either. It just creates more irrelevant discrimination and bilateral bigotry.
Here we go again... (Score:2)
another solution looking for a problem. The reason there are fewer women in IT is not because they are being discriminated somehow. It's because they don't see it as a viable occupation for them. They are choosing not to enter the field - for whatever reason - but it is a choice that women have made.
This is not something that needs "fixing" but yet another diversity fuck-wit.
So Google is handing out $100 to girls that complete the JavaScript course? That's great but how about giving it to boys too?
-- Sarcas
Re: (Score:2)
It's because they don't see it as a viable occupation for them. They are choosing not to enter the field - for whatever reason - but it is a choice that women have made.
What incredible insight you have! Some people with more insight, though, go even further and ask "Why?"
Re: (Score:2)
And others...with even more insight...might actually try to answer "why". Oh, I see that's missing from your response.
What do you think the reason is?
I don't pretend to know what it is - but I know what it isn't and that's discrimination. This two-wrongs-make-a-right type of approach when we tilt things one way and then re-tilt them back to address some supposed injustice just doesn't work.
How about we let the market decide? When IT jobs pay enough and have the right balance of home/work and provide whateve
where are the entwives? (Score:2)
i've met some really good women programmers over several decades in the tech world —but precious few. :-(
to make things fit our statistical ideal — we strive to glamourize writing code, the good pay, how easy it is to start, and the cool places you can work if you do. yet these things, have little to do with actually being interesting in numbers and algorithms.
if you have a real interest, the difficulty doesnt stop you, no more than salmon swimming upstream. the insatiable desire to grok code is
if you can't H-1B it... (Score:3)
It'd be worth every quarter just to drive out some of the brogrammers
Tech companies just want to further glut the field (Score:3)
The field is already glutted. US workers are being replaced by offshore workers in droves. Wages are not going up.
But IT workers are never cheap enough for the tech companies, so they churn out this propaganda routinely.
There's no shortage. (Score:3)
I'd just as soon "Peggy" found something else to do. The entire "shortage" is a mythical construct of tech companies engaged in their biannual attempt to raise the H1-B cap.
If you need to be convinced to take up programming you probably won't be very good at it anyway.
I hope so. (Score:2)
I for one fervently hope so.
Oh, not because this is a real or important issue. I find "diversity" studies in technical fields laughable. You can have more diversity in relevant thought between two white males who graduated from different schools than between a white male and a black female CS graduate. Race and sex are not equal to diversity.
No, I hope this works because I'm fucking tired of hearing about it. So very, very tired.
Where are they now (Score:2)
The excess female graduates from 2001-2 were the ones at the tail end of the pipeline following the .com boom to become HTML programmers just like the excess men from that time frame. Once they got their degree they had to face the cold reality of a job environment that they didn't have the capacity to work in.
Rosie the riveter (Score:2)
I'd like to point out that Rosie quit after a couple of weeks because she thought the job was too dangerous.
Re: (Score:3)
Umm... (Score:4, Interesting)
Is there some massive draft underway, with hundreds of thousands of code monkeys being churned into cannon fodder, that I missed out on?
Even casually equating a total-war domestic propaganda/production mobilization exercise with the half-assed plan of the day by silicon valley to get slightly cheaper programmers just seems... tone deaf. At best.
What War (Score:2)
Exactly which war is Peggy the Programmer going to help us win? The war against 35-year-old virgins?
Maybe I'm too dim, but I'm just not seeing a meaningful connection here.
Are Techies Bigger Jerks than Lawyers??? (Score:3)
Let us indulge in a little thought experiment about two male dominated fields.
50 years ago Law schools and Engineering schools had less than 5% women. Today, Law schools are 50+% women and Engineering schools are maybe 10% women. We can therefore conclude a) Techie men are much bigger jerks than lawyers, or b) something else is causing this.
Re: (Score:2)
are there any notable female programming wizards?
There's Grace Hopper, but I'm sure there must be some more recent
Re: (Score:2)
When I was their age made ~500 UK pounds (given inflation and dollar conversions > $1000) on some basic computer programming tasks. I remember porting "Columns to BS449" from a Sinclair QL to an Apple ][ for an architect.
$100 is not good pay.
Re: (Score:2)
It seems that BS 449 is obsolete. "EN 1993 - Eurocode 3: Design of steel structures" is the new overlord of structural columns.
Re: (Score:2)
Not all IT jobs are created equal and the distribution of non-CS grads and women varies. You can't use Silicon Valley as a guide (or startups). Both of those environments are much less forgiving of people without talent or dedication.
There are plenty of jobs for less technical people in Fortune 500 companies where navigating the political quagmire is more important.
Re:this again ? really (Score:5, Insightful)
The female hostile tech work environment is largely a myth nowadays. I've heard atrocious war stories from older female engineers who were treated like secretaries at former employers... and then they proclaim how much better they are treated at their current job. I've also heard numerous women with no actual experience paint an unappealing picture of what they perceive to be the work environment in (non-bio) science and engineering.
The reality is that the majority of women just aren't as interested in doing that type of work, either due to social conditioning (Barbie: "Math is hard") or innate lack of interest. There have been decades of effort to promote women in STEM positions with no real results other than the biology related sciences. Is that the fault of men or it is just because women aren't interested no matter how much boostering is directed their way? Is it really that important to put so much effort to create an artificially level paying field? Nobody is complaining about the paucity of male elementary school teachers. Why aren't there alarmists crying over that?
In my experience, the technical women are treated fairly and the negative image is just an outdated stereotype perpetuated by women themselves. I'm sure there is still a level of unfair bias and inappropriate behavior but from my observation the modern male tech worker is the most welcoming to women compared to other fields. I can't enumerate all the times I've heard inappropriate comments come from female coworkers that any male compatriot would not dare say for fear of going to a reeducation camp.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
That's not necessarily true. There are many high-income professions which are male dominated.
I think that there's a great deal of interrelationship between the way men and women treat each other, and the way people treat each other at work and outside it. And one of aspect of that that I think is not looked at often enough is the way people make their sexual choices. Women can feel under pressure to be thin and beautiful with large chests because of men's preferences, but men come under pressure, too - unde