[untog]

> there are all sorts of incentives for them to go into tech and they're STILL not going

You don't think it's worth at least looking at why that is? What does "psychologically different" mean? If we're saying they are genetically less disposed to enter tech as career then no, I doubt there's a lot we can do. But something tells me that isn't the case at all.

What if they're "psychologically different" because our education system and culture drives them away from engineering-y, logical careers and into more personable, "soft" industries? Shouldn't we be able to take a second look at that culture and that education system?

Note that this goes both ways. How many boys out there would make fantastic fashion designers, carers or teachers, but are dissuaded from those careers because they're not "masculine" enough?

[advantark2]

So what if the differences in gender are because of educational and cultural reasons? There's always this assumption that all differences between genders are terrible, but I don't really see why this is the case.

Honestly, the only reason I see this being done is so the labor pool for tech workers can go up(and thus pay would go down).

[untog]

Why would it not be the case? That people are forced into careers they don't actually want because of cultural pressure?

And you're OK with this because it helps ensure you have a high salary?

[advantark2]

Forced? Women aren't forced to stay out of the tech industry right now.