[yeukhon]

Here is my abridged comment:

1. It is important to like who you are and what you do. I am glad you are proud of being who you are,

2. But at the same time I don't like when people are calling out initiatives like "more women in tech". Look, getting a job is tough. It can be luck or qualification. I know someone is going to cite some research studies but at this point, let's just say yes we get it, a lot of assholes out there are discriminating women. But in reality, you can't stop them by hiring more women. You wish you could just get more women in manager level so that more women can be hired. That's not going to happen magically and hoping women managers hire more women is also acting discrimination. I am not comfortable with that kind of initiatives. It is as if I was a broker setting a goal for myself. That's just number game, there is nothing we gain from it other than growing the numbers.

3. All-girls class is just bad. For one it's like containing them, like putting them in a zoo and wait for them to do something amazing and then we pay a visit and cheer them for their accomplishment. Events meant for helping girls to find self-esteem is great but then again, too many is going to do damage because they soon will get attached to these "all-girls" environment. To actually work in the real world, one must accept the flaws and be ready to work with unfriendly people. What is even more frustrating is that we are dogfooding people with the crazy things CS and programming are doing. The ability to code is great, awesome. But coding is just a tool. Like every other tool out there, you can either make something awesome and powerful or something ugly and useless. Knowing how to code doesn't make you smarter or special. It's like knowing quantum physics suddenly makes you a wantable guy among your girlfriends? That's just bullshit (for some it's true but then that's just bullshit). And that's pretty much stereotyping.

What we need is to stop telling girls or any group of people to do XYZ because they are the minority or is having disadvantage. Making exceptions to them isn't going to help them. I am Asian (Chinese to be exact) and if 20 years later Asian MD dominates like 80%, do we start another initiative to bring up other ethnicity? If all the ice cream truck drivers are Asians, do we want more diversity? If we think (or because studies have shown...) that girls don't end up in tech because they are afraid or because they were told they weren't good enough, having all-girl class won't solve the problem when they enter the real world either.

Teach people about computer and web literacy, about science and engineering, about what people do in their daily jobs. Teach regardless of gender or race. We all deserve to know them and we don't need to have special non-profit organizations going after XYZ groups of people. Bring those things into core education.

[daleharvey]

I dont think the gender split is the issue that needs to be fixed, if the ratio was uneven for some particularly boring reason then I dont think its an issue that people would care about as much.

The problem I care about is that this industry is hostile to a very large group of people, women arent around not only because they arent encouraged early on, but because they are being driven out when they do get here, ask any women in the industry what their experiences have been and it will likely be surprising and upsetting, it has been to me at least every time.

[belorn]

Its hand-waving comments like this that really annoys me when reading HN. As with anecdotal evidence, it tries to masquerade as scientific while being the exact opposite. My reply to such comment is like always: Bring in the real science (i.e. Sociology).

If women are being driven out as you describe, it should be possible to measure. For example, if they are being actively driven out, women in technology should then be naturally gravitating towards those companies, conferences and similar spaces which has an lower hostility than the average.

While some people do perform some studies like that, it still very much in a early stage.

From statistics and Wikipedia and HN have done, one shared answer that have provided is a cultural phenomenon, in which anonymous non-social interacting work is a male dominated area. I would very much like to see a study how true that is, if its located to the IT industry, and if it is true globally.

[daleharvey]

What is hand-wavey, that women are being driven out of stem or that any women I have talked about the subject has repeated how hostile it is?

The fact that women are leaving stem fields is very easy to measure and has lots of reports and studies, the fact that everyone I talk to about it has hostile experiences to describe is very much an anecdote, one that I think its easy for a lot of people to share.

The reference to sociology seems like some xkcd joke, are you annoyed that I commented on an issue without doing a pdh on the subject or that you dont think it is an issue?

[belorn]

You claim that women are getting into STEM, and then forced out through (the cause) a hostile environment.

But you have nothing to support your claim beyond "any women I have talked about the subject" says so. If you have "lots of reports and studies" to show that the cause is from a hostile environment, bring them on! Im calling on your bluff there.

There is "lots of" reports that show that the number of women in STEM subject are decreasing. However, they rarely if ever venture into the cause of the statistic decline. Since statistics are cold facts without much worthy of discussion, its the cause that people discuss.

And its such causes that study of human social behavior is useful to figure out. It using Science rather than grunting.

[daleharvey]

Most of the recent things I have read have been a summation of this study - http://sf.oxfordjournals.org/content/early/2013/08/21/sf.sot... In particular I think I noticed http://journalistsresource.org/studies/society/gender-societ... Which mainly discusses how many women leave STEM compared to over fields and to do what.

However if I didnt find any emperical studies to backup my anecdote I wouldnt really care, unless I have some reason to believe everyone I talk to is a habitual liar I will carry on considering it a real and upsetting problem. Problems are still problems and can even be worked towards without having an scientifically rigorous process applied to their definition.

[belorn]

Neither of those studies shows that women leaves STEM because of an "hostile environment".

Study1:

  What does emerge is that investments and job rewards that generally stimulate field
  commitment, such as advanced training and high job satisfaction, fail to build
  commitment among women in STEM.

The second study is more interesting, but is only speculative (i.e. Not scientific).

  “We suspect that the retention deficit in STEM may be due to the team organization
  of scientific work combined with the attitudes and expectations of co-workers and
  supervisors who hold more traditional beliefs about the competencies of women in
  these rapidly changing fields,”

When a researcher says that they "suspect", it really does mean what the word says. Its a opinion without study. A study can produce findings, and findings are what the last linked research article (in the research) show.

  A related 2012 study published in Sociology, “The Dimensions of Occupational Gender
  Segregation in Industrial Countries,” examines why some jobs may be filled more by
  men or women, be it by choice, obligation or exclusion. Among the findings are that
  women tend to outperform men in the general desirability of occupations

So neither is a empirical studies to backup your anecdote. The findings however where an interesting read, and I hope similar studies are made on the "suspected" and "suggested" theories.

[obstacle1]

In what universe is Sociology a 'real science'?

[_bfhp]

No one is "telling" girls to do anything. You seem to recognize that the issue is bigger than "women (and men) in tech," that it's actually more about "women and men" in general, but you don't want to put any effort into thinking or learning about gender.

Organizations for girls in tech offer resources to the few girls who are actually there. I encourage you to try to find me a program that isn't completely voluntary, but I doubt you will.

[yeukhon]

No one is "telling" girls to do anything

I did not say a gun was pointing at the girls to force them to program. If low female population in the tech sector is due to the lack of resource and the stereotyped masculine geek image, then how does inviting girls to an all-girl programming class help them in the long run?

If we want to minimize stereotype, and if the stereotype has to do with gender, then we need to educate both genders. This means bring in female speakers to educate and show to both the boys and the girls what they do as software engineer or as a mechanical engineer. The same resource we offer to girls can be offered to boys.

Because the popular culture has associated geek with a masculine image, a lot of girls don't think they are capable of or should be involved. Is mixed gender event less powerful than single-gender event? To some extent yes. For the beginning, the girls may feel comfortable with their own gender. But later on? First time working with a guy on a hackathon project? I am not shy, but if you ask me to work with a female for the first time, I probably end up being shy and careful.

but you don't want to put any effort into thinking or learning about gender

What do I need to know about gender? What is special there that I am not aware of?

In reality, people think differently about themselves. Some people think they are more capable than others. The best we can hope is that we can give each other a chance to show what they can do, to bust the myth that guys are better.

[_bfhp]

I agree that these classes should not be touted as "the solution", especially when the problem has not really even been articulated. But I'm of the opinion that women need all the help they can get financially, and so organizations offering resources to women for a good profession are doing good work. You may not see it that way, and I'm not going to try to sway you.

Increasingly many social scientists are thinking about "gender" ("women and men") as a social construction, laid on top of material reality (sex dimorphism, "males and females"). There's a wellspring of new thought, theory, and research in the past 20 years on gender, including:

Doing Gender - Candace West; Don H. Zimmerman - http://blog.lib.umn.edu/clar0514/academic/west%20and%20zimme...

Delusions of Gender by Cordelia Fine - http://www.cordeliafine.com/delusions_of_gender.html

The Gender Trap by Emily Kane - http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0095VEM5O/ref=cm_cr_thx_vi...

[yeukhon]

Regarding social construction, no I haven't heard of it yet. I will take a look at that. Thank you.

I think we have reached a good discussion here. I do agree with you on "getting every help" they need, except, I just don't think it's a good idea to call for "hire more women" (some people literally turn having more women in tech into hiring more women). We are all for a better world.

[belorn]

You post strongly reminded me of the Physician's Oath.

  I will not permit considerations of age, disease or disability, creed,
  ethnic origin, gender, nationality, political affiliation, race,
  sexual orientation, social standing or any other factor to intervene
  between my duty and my patient;

Teach like that. Everyone deserve the chance to learn and grow as human beings.

[tommorris]

But that's the thing. In healthcare, we do find disparities in terms of things like race/ethnicity/national background, social standing and sexual orientation.

If you are born in the wealthy London suburb of Hampstead, you are likely to live eleven years longer than someone born in to a family in the much poorer Somers Town/St Pancras area.

If you are a sexually active gay man, you are more likely to contract HIV/AIDS than if you are a heterosexual. If you are an Ashkenazi Jew, your children are more likely to suffer Tay-Sachs disease.

If you are setting medical policy, you will sometimes need to target particular communities for intervention and prevention.

These factors should never be used as a reason for providing lower quality of care. But if an observable trend exists that is causing a particular problem for people in a specific community, it should be permitted for considerations of minority status to be taken into account for deciding health policy.

Like, I'm okay with the government spending less money and effort telling childless people to vaccinate their kids than the money they spend telling parents to. I'm okay with the National Health Service putting a free condom dispenser in gay sex clubs and not doing so in primary schools.

[belorn]

The comparison, while similar is not an fair one. I would call it intellectually dishonest comparison, but I am going to try give it the benefit of the doubt.

Free condom dispenser is quite minor, with a clear benefit. A black only hospital would however be a bit different. Most countries made away with such concept a life time ago, yet we do all-girls classes/schools.

There was also a new article a few days ago about grants given exclusively to female students. To compare that to the medical world, that is like giving gay people free HIV treatment, while demanding full price of people with different sexual orientation (resulting in some of those getting sub-optimal or no treatment plans). Would it be acceptable for government to make such policy?