[Perceval]

I think the narrative you're constructing is inaccurate. Even given that society only just recently realized that women could be equal members of the workforce, I don't think that tech fields were especially male dominated when they started out. In fact, there was an article recently arguing that women used to comprise about 40% of the IT field. Computing used to be seen as somewhat clerical work, so the inclusion of women into it was natural early on—it wasn't a field that women had to fight as hard to get into.

http://blog.fogcreek.com/girls-go-geek-again/

I know several women in their 60s now, friends of my mother, who were early systems analysts for IBM or otherwise involved in the tech field. IT is a field that women have left, not that they have been excluded from.

Second, taking from my mother's experience, she did have to fight her way into a field that was male dominated: graphic design. But that field is no longer dominated by males. Look at graphic design degrees awarded and you can see that women outnumber men now. Is graphic design somehow fundamentally different from IT? Are people in IT inherently more sexist than people in graphic design? They both use computers to do their jobs. But graphic design sees growth in the number of women, while IT sees a decline.

I just don't buy the early socialization argument, because there are just as strong pressures on boys to not be nerds. Simply because there are more male losers doesn't make having a 'clique' of losers an advantage over a loser girl. It's still discouraging whether or not you have a bunch of other negative charisma, zero social skill geeks to be miserable with.

As for your personal anecdote, I don't see how that's unique to tech at all. It sounds just like everyone else's shitty high school experience: you endure shitty fucked up social situations in order to fit in. Would have been no different had you been interested in other things and been in a different clique. If it hadn't been guys saying retarded fucked up shit, it would have been girls saying retarded fucked up shit.

[thricedotted]

I disagree with much of what you say, but because I don't think continued debate will get either of us anywhere at this point, I'd like to return to the last point I made, which was: at the end of the day, does it matter whether or not gender binaries and socialization and sexism is the reason there aren't more women in tech? It sure as hell is a reason the women who ARE in tech are dissatisfied. Does it matter that sexism isn't unique to the tech field and therefore can't a barrier to entry, so nothing needs to be done about it? I still hold that it's a barrier to entry, though one that will hopefully be torn at just as it was in other fields (do you think feminists in those communities didn't also have these conversations?), but even if it wasn't, does that mean it's perfectly okay for these attitudes to continue?

The answer is no, so this debate is moot. If we fix the sexism problem and women keep shying away from CS/the tech industry, then a point to you. As for me, I'll just be happy that we all respect each other more from it.

[Perceval]

I saw your comment last night and it bothered me, but I couldn't put my finger on exactly why.

I think it's because it doesn't actually respond to my link, evidence, or argument. You acknowledge that I made a comment, but then reassert your prior point of view, and attempt to silence further discussion by declaring your position correct, making the point moot, and implying that I'm too recalcitrant to be swayed by debate with you.

If you're not willing to engage people in discussion, and not willing to entertain an alternate narrative on the basis of evidence, perhaps you're right that continued debate won't get us anywhere. Because you're not engaging in debate: you're not adding anything new in our back-and-forth, but rather declaring it pointless given that your original position was obviously correct.

[cheez]

We should be careful not to associate women in computer science with popular ideas of feminism.

It's more fair to say "woman" as that encompasses all their experiences and does not advocate any one particular political philosophy.

It's also not about rights at this point. I've never been on a software team that would not love to have more women. We code all day long, how else should we meet smart women? Trust me, the library doesn't work ;-)

Right now, the problem is society's filter leading up to professional work.

I'm confident it will be solved in the next few decades as more women gain positions of authority.

Once they can reproduce without input from a man, then it's over. Hopefully they'll remember how much it sucked to be powerless!

[cheez]

You're definitely right. I know there are women who got into the field when it was just starting because it was considered clerical.

I was chatting with a school headmistress last weekend and she said that she was into computers but once she had the kids and tried to come back, technology had moved so fast that she had to change careers to education. Somehow, I get the feeling she would have done fine anyway but that's another anecdote. Places with paternity leave probably also have similar problems in high tech fields.

My sister is an excellent IT project manager but I don't think she has ever talked to me about how it was for her as a kid. What I do remember is that she had very few friends and those who she did hang around with were techno geeks.

I think female involvement in graphic design can be neatly explained by society's gentle nudging. It's "creative" work. It's drawing. It's art. Stuff women are "supposed" to be good at.