[krath94]

"Although there is no reason in theory why men could not become nurses or care-home assistants, few do."

This is true, but why is it that the shortage of women in technology fields is attributed to them not being accepted or even forced out? Maybe this isn't the general attitude, but I have certainly heard people say that woman aren't in tech as much because they feel unwelcome, whereas when talking about men in those other fields, it's because "they don't want to."

[weberc2]

I think it's a double-standard. When women underachieve in any area, we assume discrimination is the culprit, or we at least say there is some system that is failing them. When men underachieve, it's because they're "not able to adapt" or we blame it on "toxic masculinity" (for example, when boys do worse in school, we make negative implications, but years after graduation when women receive a lower salary, we assume discrimination even in the presence of strong contradictory evidence).

This isn't meant to be read as defensive; just a social observation.

[deelowe]

I wonder how many people making these statements and doing these analysis have spent any significant amount of time with kids. Girls, in general, prefer social interaction, helping people, working as a group, etc... Boys, in general, prefer physical activity, constructing things, and admiring the fruits of their labor from afar.

This might not be the best characterization, but you get the point. I see this in very very young kids. It's innate. Again, these are generalities, but most who work with a lot of young kids understand these things. It's no surprise to me that as boys and girls become men and women we see these traits dominate employment trends. Girls tend to gravitate to fields that tie success (either academically or professionally) with social interaction, while boys gravitate to ones that rely more on demonstration of individual impact.

Sure, there's an element of group dynamics, xenophobia, etc... that influences this stuff, but I've never held the belief that this stuff is the root cause. Why are more men chefs/cooks? Because, they like making food/seeing what they've made. Why are more women waitresses? Because they like serving/interracting with people. It's not that complicated.

[Sammi]

What you are saying is actually scientifically supported: http://www.math.kth.se/matstat/gru/godis/sex.pdf

"102 human neonates, who by definition have not yet been influenced by social and cultural factors, were tested to see if there was a difference in looking time at a face (social object) and a mobile (physical-mechanical object). Results showed that the male infants showed a stronger interest in the physical-mechanical mobile while the female infants showed a stronger interest in the face. The results of this research clearly demonstrate that sex differences are in part biological in origin."

Neonate means newborn child.

[deelowe]

Good to see that I'm not crazy. I guess I'm back to wondering why everyone else is. :-)

[jldugger]

"they don't want to" can be expanded into a number of causal cultural factors:

- teachers, parents, advisors all too often say tech is not for women - daughters are rarely given personal computers at the same as sons - video games, an important gateway into programming, are primarily marketed at boys - we have very few living role models of expert women programmers

Many of these same arguments apply to men and nursing. The primary reason we don't talk much about it in terms of access to opportunity is that comparatively, nursing is yet another underpaid pink collar job. If nursing was a comparable opportunity to tech, there'd probably be more grousing about the cultural barriers of masculinity that inhibit fuller participation.

[TheOsiris]

where did you get these facts from exactly? because they're all made up.

> teachers, parents, advisors all too often say tech is not for women.

let us know who does this so we can shame them. btw, some parents might be doing this but they're terrible parents. but no teacher or advisor would ever do this. please don't sully these hardworking people.

> daughters are rarely given a computer at the same as sons

rarely? I would dispute that.

...

> nursing is yet another underpaid pink collar job

maybe they're underpaid (I think devs are underpaid too) but it is a very good paying job that doesn't need a 4-year degree and $100k in student loans. and to top it all off they're unionized, have benefits that would make you drool, and many can retire at a young age with full benefits. it's a well sought after job and a way for many people to move up economically.

[yardie]

The only profession I know that men aren't welcome has been teaching. At least in the US, any man that wants to work with young children is viewed as a potential pedophile. In middle and high school they are subject to calls of sexual predication.

RNs and CNAs don't have this problem. Male nurses aren't seen as sexual predators, some simply don't want to do it. And most don't have any visibility into the field to see it as a potential career.

[root_axis]

Maybe elementary school teachers, but after about 5th grade the stigma seems to fade.

[yardie]

No, the stigma just changes, slightly. Members of my family who are teachers keep a literal open door policy when it comes to pre/after school meetings and tutoring. Even the accusation of impropriety between teacher and student is a career ender. Some of the teenage girls they teach are extremely manipulative. Some come from broken homes and use the sexual assault accusations as a quick pay day.

[jayd16]

Probably because when you ask women in those fields, they mention feeling unwelcome.

[ams6110]

There is indeed a reason, that is women are naturally/biologically caretakers and nurturers. Women are more trusted and accepted as nurses and caregivers than men. Many women would be uncomfortable or refuse to have a male caregiver help bathe or dress them.

[simias]

This "naturally/biologically" is the crux of the issue really, where does nature stop and society begin?

And even if nature biases one way or an other, does it explain the measured discrepancy completely? Am I to believe that there's basically a shortage of "nurturing" men, as there is a shortage of technically inclined women?

We also see that the proportions vary very significantly between countries, so clearly there's a societal factor at play, one way or an other.

So I don't really like these types of shortcuts, because clearly the most nurturing man is probably more so than the less nurturing woman. We should judge people on their own merit, not their gender, race or other factors.

[ams6110]

Sure, individuals are individuals.

I was addressing the larger question of why not many men become nurses. Not saying that those who do are not nurturing and good at what they do.

[simias]

Well you were saying that the only answer was of a biological nature, I was pointing out that while it probably factors one way or an other it's a bit presumptuous to say that it's the only reason.

In particular your example: "Many women would be uncomfortable or refuse to have a male caregiver help bathe or dress them." I think there's a massive cultural component to this, rather than some innate behavior. And the fact that there are many male gynecologists show that many women aren't that picky with their intimacy...

[devonkim]

I'm not sure so much as a naturalistic fallacy of "women are naturally X" or "men are naturally X" should be a basis of argument as much as aggression is highly correlated with testosterone levels, and aggression is not something that is compatible with most interpersonal customer service jobs especially in healthcare and education. Those that achieve higher academic success also tend to score higher in traits such as delayed gratification and emotional expression control, and a lack of these traits thereby limits upward mobility. I can't find the recent article submitted to HN discussing these problems from the perspective of someone quite successful raised in rural Tennessee asserting that luck does play a larger role than anything else for upward mobility rather than hard work in America now.

[panglott]

It's possible that men feel unwelcome in female-dominated areas for the same reason women may in male-dominated areas: it can be intimidating to enter a group of people of the opposite sex, with their own norms and microaggressions and who feel entitled and encouraged to be there, when you have received numerous social signals that's weird for you to be there or even want to be there. Unless those people and institutions specifically welcome you in.

[krath94]

"microaggressions"

You mean someone saying something completely normal with no ill intention and someone else, for whatever reason, getting offended?

[pksohn]

It's not about getting offended or not. It's the small assumptions that, when repeated ad infinitum, build up social beliefs and structures that make it harder for certain people to succeed or fit in. The fact that folks on HN or Reddit constantly refer to their anonymous peers with male pronouns might make a female programmer a little less welcome. It may offend her, it may not, but it certainly doesn't help.

[panglott]

"for whatever reason" says it all. If you can't even pretend to care what they think, don't try to pretend you've been welcoming.

[JulianMorrison]

It's because of the direction of the power inequality. Women are pushed out of tech by misogyny, both unconscious bias and conscious hate. This does not apply in reverse to men in female dominated fields. What does apply is fragile masculinity.

In addition, fields with high female participation are systematically devalued and underpaid, and men may be leaving them for greener pastures.

[douche]

No good ever comes out of going down this rabbit hole.

[coldtea]

Yeah, god forbid people say anything that goes against the assumptions of du jour, which should be permanently set in stone...

[douche]

I mean, we have this conversation thread like every third day. I'm not sure that there's anything left to be said that hasn't been beaten into the ground, over, and over, and over. Nobody is convincing anybody, we'll just yell at each other for a while. Maybe that makes some people happy.

[reitanqild]

I mean, we have this conversation thread like every third day.

Which means many here find it interesting.

I'm not sure that there's anything left to be said that hasn't been beaten into the ground, over, and over, and over.

Not true IMO. The fact that you still don't see any nuance here should tell us that this is still an important discussion.

Many of us men has experienced being systematically and officially discriminated against during school.

Note: I am not saying girls aren't discriminated against. I actually think they have it worse (I have seen some of it and it was ugly). I'm just saying this discussion really lacks nuance.

[circlefavshape]

I've seen lots of yelling, but no actual conversation.