| I run a company, work ridiculous hours, and the other devs on my team are male. I don't think any of us puts it fewer hours or energy based on the number of ovaries each has. All of which is completely irrelevant. It's great that you ended up in tech, nobody is suggesting you're in any way less suited to perform well than men are (at least not in any reasonable discussion). They're simply suggesting reasons why other women don't choose the field; clearly there are some causes for this phenomenon, and they've got to be pretty strong given the overwhelming disparity. It assumes that all women want to have children, that men are mostly absent/dismissive in their children's lives (if they have them), No, it assumes that many women want to have children, and tend to take greater roles in their lives if and when they do so. Do you really disagree with that? I know it's anecdotal, but both these things hold true for such a vast majority of the people that I know personally that I'd have trouble believing it wasn't the case, not to mention the overwhelming biological imperatives in play here. and insinuates that women just aren't biologically fit to run a company. That's a radical interpretation of the text; the closest thing that she said to that was that women with children have a difficult time putting in the insane hours that a venture-backed startup requires. FWIW, despite my apparent defense, I don't think that this article really pins down a significant reason we don't see more women running tech startups - the sad fact is, most women never get interested in programming in the first place, and that happens way before they're thinking about having children or what sort of career might go well with that goal. |