[TylerE]

This doesn't really make sense.

She's complaining that at an event with 97% of attendance by men (by her own statement), they got, say, 92% of the bathroom facilities, and then throws a fit.

Not buying it.

If this is the biggest outrage in your life you should consider yourself fortunate.

[moistgorilla]

I don't think she has a problem with the fact that men got 92% of the bathroom facilities. Especially when it was logically justified. I just think she was disillusioned by the fact that there were so few woman at the conference that a decision like that could be justified.

[pdelgallego]

Honest question, Are people concern because there are not enough afro-americans/hispanics/etc in the software industry?

[wilkie]

Why is this a question. Of course we are. Black computer scientists represent less than one percent: http://www.math.buffalo.edu/mad/computer-science/cs-peeps.ht...

[moistgorilla]

I know I'm making a generalization here but the software industry isn't racist like it is sexist.

[sha348]

Wait, what are you basing this generalization on? If it's purely based on numbers, I've worked with more female programmers than african americans. If the allegation is that the software industry is sexist purely because women don't participate, then the software industry must be even more racist.

[tgrass]

Umm...assuming no bias, institutional or otherwise, you should randomly encounter a woman programmer once for every male programmer. Whereas you'd only encounter an African American one out of eight programmers (12% of the total pop).

[juridatenshi]

Some certainly are. It's important for us to have diversity in a variety of areas (and intersections of areas), not just women. That being said, this specific article is focused on a woman's experience, so it makes sense that it would focus on gender.

[JoelMcCracken]

Yes, many of us are.

[celer]

Low afro-american/hispanic participation can be explained in large part by lack of high quality education, lack of computers, etc. There is some residual, but nothing like the vast disparity that exists for women despite a lack of acceptable reasons.

[yarrel]

Honest answer, you're derailing.

[bhughes]

Did you actually read the article?

She's wasn't upset that there was less bathroom capacity for women, but rather that this illustrated the (in her view) woefully meager representation of women at the conference.

[incision]

I had the same initial reaction, but I think that the bathroom situation isn't the point at all, just a symbol of the shrinking number of women in the field - which is what she's actually concerned about.

[davidw]

If you read the article, she's complaining that there aren't enough women at conferences, not really about the bathroom situation.

[ajanuary]

I think it was more of a trigger for the realisation that 97% of attendants are men. i.e. when you're so male heavy you need to convert bathrooms, there is a real problem.

[artumi-richard]

When you realised that "this doesn't make sense", that was the time you should have asked "or is it me..."

As for women in IT, I can see why IT would want women, but I can't see why women would want IT.

[mcormier]

Not exactly. It's poorly written. It takes a lot of effort to read this and determine the author's point. She does a poor job of transferring from her bathroom story to the general issue of there being an absence of women in IT.

Then she starts throwing around statistics in paragraph 6 with absolutely no segue. She goes from whiny complainer about something trivial to I'm gonna fix the world's problems by talking to other women at this conference.

She's just not a good writer and her being a woman has nothing to do with that.

[Cushman]

Oh, come off it. It's not in the least hard to understand what she's talking about, and it's objectively no worse than any other self-indulgent post that gets fawned over here. Come back when you have a critique grounded in content rather than form.

[bglass]

You can't see why a woman would want to be paid quite handsomely to do work that is mentally challenging, not physically arduous, and -- in many cases -- can have a positive societal effect?

So... why do -you- want to work in IT?

[raganwald]

Let's compare this to golf, circa 1965. Caving to pressure, a local club opens its memberships to Blacks. One or two tokens with strong business relationships to Whites join, but where are all the other Black businesspeople and professionals?

A liberal White member sighs, "I don't understand why the Black people don't want to relax in our luxurious club, play a round on our excellent course, and eat our sumptuous dining fare. What is the problem?" Meanwhile, the Blacks are thinking, "Who needs to join the club and have all these racist assholes resenting the fact that we're in their club and tiptoeing around us in case the N-word slips out in our presence. How fucking uncomfortable."

p.s. Did I say 1965? What's the deal with Agusta National and Blacks and/or Women?

[BCM43]

For those of you who will undoubtedly complain that this is an unfair/exaggerated analogy, think back to how many posts have been on HN about the rampant sexism women have experienced at tech conferences.

[raganwald]

To be perfectly clear, I am not saying that conferences are sexist. I'm not denying it either, but I'm trying to make a slightly different point, which is that when a group is overwhelmingly underrepresented, members of that group might fear that they will feel uncomfortable if they join.

I can't really speak for women (for that matter, in 1965 I was too busy potty training to join any golf clubs). But I do wonder whether a certain number of them might look at the industry and shy away even if they haven't been personally exposed to any hostility or overt discouragement.

Just a conjecture, I am not speaking from data or anecdotes.

[mbell]

> Did I say 1965? What's the deal with Agusta National and Blacks and/or Women?

Augusta National isn't remotely comparable to the issue at hand. Its a VERY private, invite only club. There are numerous private clubs of all sorts that only allow men, only women, only blacks, etc. You can't compare a private club to a employment profession.

I don't necessarily agree with Augusta's position but they are a private club, so I just wouldn't join. If you were going to force Augusta to admit everyone then you'd have to go tell the Junior League they have to let men in, head up to the Ladies Golf Club of Toronto and tell them they have to admit male members, etc.

That said, Augusta National has invited black members since ~1990 and two women as of last month, Condoleezza Rice and Darla Moore if it tells you anything about the exclusivity of this club.

[raganwald]

I'm familiar with Augusta National even if I just noticed that I misspelled the name!

I think it's very relevant to the discussion at hand. We're talking about a profession that outght to be nothing at all like a private club, but the point is that it does behave like a private club. if we in fact didn't behave as if we were members of a club, not only would my comment be irrelevant, these kind sof blog posts wouldn't exist in the first place.

So.

Yes, I agree that the social dynamics of a private club ought not to have anything to do with the social dynamics of a profession, but alas they do in this case.

[protomyth]

I will protect Augusta's right to have just male members (not true anymore), just as I will protect the rights of every female-only gym. I will further bet that the female-only gyms have larger benefits than Augusta opening up to female members.

It is an unfair comparison between a profession and a club. They do not hold even close to the same place in society.

[raganwald]

Who said Augusta shouldn't have male-only members? The point is that IT departments shouldn't behave like private clubs. The industry behaves like a private club, but it isn't a private club.

[protomyth]

Well, I interpreted you p.s. to mean that. A lot of industries in the US (cannot speak for outside the US) need to be more receptive to members of the opposite gender. I am hoping both CompSci and pre-K education both make strides in the coming years.

[JulianMorrison]

Female only gyms protect women from being leered at and feeling objectively and justifiably unsafe.

Male only anything is bullshit. Nothing but sexism and the preservation of privilege.

[protomyth]

Equal rights means equal ability to free association.

"Female only gyms protect women from being leered at and feeling objectively and justifiably unsafe."

So, the basic premise is all men are leering and will act on their animal instincts. That isn't true as some men aren't interested in women, yet they too are not allowed. Others, were taught by their parents to be gentlemen. They too are not allowed. Never mind the women interested in other women.

"Male only anything is bullshit"

There is so much wrong with this statement, I don't know what to make of it. I could go with the basic support groups as one basic example.

If you expect female-only to be allowed then male-only needs equal protection.

[artumi-richard]

Because there are plenty of jobs that are mentally challenging and physically arduous that can have a positive societal effect, but come without all the jerks you get in IT.

Who said I wanted to work at all...

[danielweber]

IT might beat ditch digging or hauling garbage (or not, I think those are both honest work), but how does it compare to other avenues, such as business or medicine?

[rmc]

Sometimes it's the little things that can drive home "You Are Different Here" and make one open one's eyes to how something is wrong.