Too Few Women In Tech? Stop Blaming The Men.

http://techcrunch.com/2010/08/28/women-in-tech-stop-blaming-me/

by MediaSquirrel • 16 years ago

121 153 16 years ago

lotharbot• 16 years ago

The editorialized title here ("Dear Women in Tech: Put Up or Shut Up") fails to convey the sentiment in the article (titled "Too Few Women In Tech? Stop Blaming The Men. Or At Least Stop Blaming Me.")

The article isn't really aimed at women in tech so much as people who complain about women in tech, and especially women who are not in tech but complain that there aren't enough women doing what they themselves aren't doing either.

greenlblue10• 16 years ago

The problem is that women in general do not feel comfortable in the male dominated ecosystem of tech startups. Could men be doing more to change that perception, I think so. So whenever somebody complains about the problem men like Mike Arrigton should not lash out but instead they should just list all the things they do to encourage more female participation. Then the people that complain about the problem can actually point at the proactive steps people are taking to address the problem and tell them these things are working and those things are not. It's silly to tell women to put up or shut up because it's a lot like telling somebody if you don't like the country then leave.

philwelch6• 16 years ago

The problem is that women in general do not feel comfortable in the male dominated ecosystem of tech startups.

You can replace "tech startups" with "med schools" or "law firms" or "MBA programs" or "factories" or "the military" or "science fiction fandom", but women have entered all of those male dominated ecosystems and are still there in far greater numbers than the tech industry. There has to be another factor.

mkramlich10• 16 years ago

Men probably would not feel comfortable working in female-dominated industries like hair salons, professional child day care, cosmetic sales or modern dance classes. But nobody cares about those cases for some reason.

3pt14159• 16 years ago

Although I disagree with greenlblue I'm pretty dismayed that (s)he has -4 votes. We shouldn't downvote people for stating their opinion, we should downvote people that don't contribute meaningfully to the discussion.

The essence of greenlblue's post was that it would be better to list how we could help women rather than lashing out at them which could further alienate them. Which contributes the the conversation.

Towle_3• 16 years ago

The more excuses any given demographic has available to it, the worse it will fare.

greenlblue10• 16 years ago

What excuse exactly are you talking about? That most tech startups are run by men? That's not really an excuse but a fact and I think people are right to demand more participation of women in the tech world in general.

FlemishBeeCycle2• 16 years ago

Honestly, why? What does bringing X demographic into industry Y accomplish?

"The year was 2081, and everybody was finally equal."

Perhaps different people, have different interests?

Towle_3• 16 years ago

The general idea that there are a bunch of old men sitting around in smoke-filled rooms saying to each other, "Hey, I have an idea! Let's intentionally discriminate against women in our hiring and salary setting practices. Why? Because fuck 'em, that's why!"

This is the United States of America in 2010. It's not ancient Egypt. It's not feudal England. It's not even the U.S. in 1950. You can do whatever you want to do and be whoever you want to be. Nobody is stopping you but yourself. Might your climb to the top be steeper than mine? Sure. But realize that nobody who's ever made it to the top of their mountain complained about how steep it was. They just climbed. If you want to be the best, whatever that means to you, you have to go Jackie Robinson that shit. No matter what the douchebags throw at you along the way, you have to just smile back and hit home runs.

klipt• 16 years ago

> people are right to demand more participation of women in the tech world in general

What if the women don't listen to my demands?

btmorex2• 16 years ago

I don't know the answer, but I have to agree that it has nothing to do with silicon valley, venture capitalists, or really the tech industry at all.

My introductory freshmen computer science course had about 100 people of which maybe 10 were female (this is at a school that has more women overall than men). You simply can't recover from a gender disparity like that. Also, remember, this is a course that you decide on taking essentially before even getting to college. The kids enrolling in this course hadn't even been exposed to all the things that people usually blame the gender disparity on.

Groxx• 16 years ago

Similar setup at my school, albeit smaller. A single female goes through the CS major every year or two at most, compared to 30-50 males, and fewer still graduate with a CS major. We have a 2:1 ratio in favor of women, and it used to be higher, and still had a similar amount in the major.

timr4• 16 years ago

"I don't know the answer, but I have to agree that it has nothing to do with silicon valley, venture capitalists,"

Yes. The "system" really does seem to try.

"or really the tech industry at all."

....aaaaand, No. You've just grossly over-generalized.

The tech industry is clearly unappealing to women. Maybe that's because women like to have a sense of the humanity of their work. Maybe it's because it's a terrible choice of long-term career. Maybe it's Barbie's fault. But just because you can't identify the reason, doesn't mean that the phenomenon doesn't exist.

Instead of observing that your freshman courses were hideously gender-unbalanced and then stopping the intellectual pursuit, you have to dig deeper. It's a hard problem, but even hard problems have an explanation. I can come up with one consistent pattern without even trying: most women don't like working with anti-social losers. And like it or not, our industry is filled with 'em.

Personally, I had about the same number of women in my CS101 course (back in the mid-90s) as you did, but the difference is, I saw them treated like shit -- usually by guys who didn't have a clue that the way they behaved was boorish and offensive. Those guys also liked to believe that the gender inequality in CS was "just the way things are". Nonsense.

More recently (just a couple of years ago), I had a female friend who became really interested in CS, and enrolled in the 101 courses at a top program. Because of the way the courses were structured, she was a brand-new programmer, competing with guys who had been writing code since they were knee-high. Doesn't matter -- she still kicked their asses; she was one of the top students in the class. But she ultimately dropped out of the program because she felt unwelcome, and felt that the barriers she had to overcome were too high. Every day, I was treated to a new story of how some dude ignored her opinions, stared at her chest, or belittled her in front of her peers. It was infuriating.

To this day -- from classroom to coffeehouse -- I see programmers who treat women like another species. Just today, I watched a guy write code, while taking a break every two minutes to check out a nearby girl's "attributes". It isn't cute, it isn't endearing, and you can damn well bet that this kind of stuff plays a role in why women decide that they don't want to work with us -- even before they get to school. And it's our fault.

btmorex2• 16 years ago

shrug... you've named a bunch of things that have to do with the tech industry. The whole point I was trying to make is that women are deciding to stay away from engineering before being exposed to any of that.

A 17 year old who decides she's not going to take cs101 hasn't been treated poorly by awkward coworkers for years. she hasn't had trouble getting hired because of gender bias. She hasn't been disparaged in front of her tech peers.

And yet she still decides to not go into CS. I still maintain that whatever brought about that decision (maybe gender roles from an early age or being put off by awkward teenage nerds... whatever) really has nothing to do with the tech industry. Today's tech industry is a result of that bias not the cause of it.

jsz0• 16 years ago

why women decide that they don't want to work with us -- even before they get to school. And it's our fault.

It's not fair for women to make that generalization of all men involved in technology. I think you're probably right that plays a major role but I certainly won't take any responsibility for it. It's not my fault someone who doesn't even know me might decide they don't want to work with me just because I might fit a stereotype.

neilk4• 16 years ago

> I saw them treated like shit -- usually by guys who didn't have a clue that the way they behaved was boorish and offensive.

I agree that this problem does exist, but I don't think this is the only factor. In my experience, the programming profession does have its basement-dwelling neckbeards, but there's an even larger number of progressive, enlightened males who are egalitarian by default.

I know that some women believe that the instant they leave the room, we break out the pork rinds and start watching porn videos, but really, most male programmers I know are pretty mild-mannered.

Compare our profession with the legal profession. This is a group where older lawyers have vast power over younger colleagues, that's traditionally had a very macho and elitist attitude. And right now law school admissions are almost at parity. 52.7% male. [1]

So either the behaviour of male programmers is really, really bad compared even to lawyers, or, there's something else intrinsic about the job that is differentially unappealing to women.

[1] http://www.abanet.org/abanet/media/release/news_release.cfm?...

brown9-2• 16 years ago

Maybe it's because it's a terrible choice of long-term career.

Do you mean a terrible choice for everyone, or just women?

Goladus• 16 years ago

I never once saw women "treated like shit" in any of my computer science classes in college. All I observed was that guys had a mild bias towards being more helpful and cooperative with girls.

philwelch6• 16 years ago

And if your CS program is even halfway as "progressive" as mine, all 10 of those females will be given scholarships and aggressively targeted for retention far above and beyond the male students.

gbhn• 16 years ago

You think? I thought the typical blame was placed on high school stereotypes; as you point out, by college most women want nothing to do with engineering or computer science. (Hence FIRST, among other efforts.)

Another explanation I've heard is that women are smart enough to see that the expected value of going into medicine or law is substantially higher. Given the social status and economics are better, why wouldn't they enter those fields instead?

_delirium• 16 years ago

There seem to be differences even earlier than high-school stereotypes or economics become a consideration, though--- my after-school Logo class for elementary-aged students was mostly boys too. Due to girls just not being interested? Due to parents pushing their male v. female children in different directions? Something else? Whatever the reason(s), it's pretty early overall, I think; all the techies I knew in high school began becoming techies quite a bit before high school.

dieterrams2• 16 years ago

This is just Michael Arrington defending TechCrunch against one person's assumption that they're not aware of the issue. There's nothing really relevant to the issue itself here, aside from the obvious point that the reason why there are "too few" women in tech is because there aren't enough women who want to be in tech.

dgreensp2• 16 years ago

Arrington disagrees that the criticism has any merit; at worst he's letting himself be trolled. I guess he feels something needs to be said, and I respect that.

dieterrams2• 16 years ago

Which is fine, of course. He's more than justified in defending himself. This article just isn't interesting from a "too few women in tech" angle, and you can't really generalize from what's going on here. It's fine that he wrote it, I just don't see that it warrants much attention from HN.

patio113• 16 years ago

I think the Valley greatly overestimates how much inside baseball like conference speaking slots impacts startup formation or decade-prior turning points like taking AP English instead of AP CS because English is the easy A and your GPA gets you into a better college.

blahedo2• 16 years ago

I certainly wouldn't blame Michael Arrington in particular, but this entire argument is precisely parallel in form to the one held up by casual racists in the US where they say, well, I haven't done anything to keep black people down, and I have nothing against black people (see also: "I have lots of black friends"), so don't look at me. The problem there is that white people (in the US) operate from a position of implicit privilege---not that we asked for it, but we are unable to reject it, either, not that it would serve any good to try.

The situation wrt women in technology is not quite the same, but it's not entirely different, either. As Arrington points out, techcrunch and YC and a lot of other groups go out of their way to try to recruit women, which is fantastic. But to then turn around and say, well, if you personally aren't out there founding a business, you have no right to complain... that's a pernicious idea and it certainly is not furthering any useful cause.

mkramlich10• 16 years ago

I'm totally with Arrington on this one.

The next time I see somebody complain about too few women in software I want to see them complain about too few men working in hair salons, too few men working in child day care centers, too few women working the trash pickup trucks, too few men in corporate HR, too few women in Tactial Special Ops teams. But I'll never see that because I think secretly deep down they know, gee, people are different, genders are different, and there's something about gender that just has this shaping force on our interests and talents. And that there's nothing wrong with that. Really, it will be okay. Just relax. Carry on.

Instead let us all please focus on real problems and challenges like hunger, disease, WMD proliferation, climate change, pollution, education cost & disparity, etc.

greenlblue10• 16 years ago

It's not about differences or different people having different interests. Technology and technology companies are major drivers of societal change and it is important to have as many different groups involved in that process as possible. That is the larger philosophical issue here and I don't think anyone can disagree with that.

sz2• 16 years ago

If you want a group to become more involved with a process, they need to be interested in it first.

tbrownaw3• 16 years ago

Technology and technology companies are major drivers of societal change and it is important to have as many different groups involved in that process as possible. That is the larger philosophical issue here and I don't think anyone can disagree with that.

Yay for stakeholder representation and death-by-committee.

Groups cannot be involved in doing things, only in preventing things. Individuals can do things, and it really doesn't matter what groups those individuals may be seen by others to be a part of. All that matters is whether they're willing to try something new and different, and whether everyone else feels like using whatever they build.

No structure, no "process" for groups to get involved in and veto, just people doing interesting things and other people choosing whether to use those things.

fauigerzigerk3• 16 years ago

"and there's something about gender that just has this shaping force on our interests and talents."

What would that "something" and that "force" be?

philwelch6• 16 years ago

"too few women in Tactial Special Ops teams"

There's intermittent controversy over having women in combat. Countries that have tried it, incidentally, find that it's a liability because men tend to go apeshit protective when female soldiers get hurt.

"But I'll never see that because I think secretly deep down they know, gee, people are different, genders are different, and there's something about gender that just has this shaping force on our interests and talents."

If so, it may be helpful if more women were involved in software, because if women are different from men that probably extends to how they use software, and it would be good if software was better for women.

lenni2• 16 years ago

I'm interested in the apeshit protective bit. Have you got something to read on it?

jacquesm5• 16 years ago

> find that it's a liability because men tend to go apeshit protective when female soldiers get hurt.

Solution: all female battalions.

dgreensp2• 16 years ago

To the latter point, I have a female physicist friend who hates the "diversity of viewpoints" argument for women in the sciences, the idea that she has some kind of "feminine" take on the equations that confers special treatment.

steve19• 16 years ago

Please cite your sources. Many countries have females serving in combat roles.

The same arguments they used 50 years ago to keep woman out of frontline police work are still being used to keep woman out of combat.

fauigerzigerk3• 16 years ago

I wouldn't count too much on what people secretly "know" deep down but are unable to reason about. These things are usually stereotypes or religion, both of which have questionable qualities when it comes to analyzing causality.

cookiecaper• 16 years ago

You don't believe that gender bears any kind of fundamental impact on emotional and intellectual development? I think that the things mentioned in this thread are proof enough. There is no reason why there wouldn't be more women in tech except that women (generally speaking, of course) don't find tech that desirable, just as men don't find working in a daycare center very desirable.

In the whirlwind of 20th century liberation movements, people seem to forget that there really _are_ fundamental differences between certain types of people. Not differences like "women are only good at cleaning and men only think about sex", but differences like "women are generally more often disposed to child-rearing and men are generally more often disposed to computer programming".

I don't see what good there is in ignoring these differences. Yes, some people took it too far and decided women shouldn't vote and blacks and whites couldn't intermingle, but that doesn't mean we go to the other extreme and plug our ears and refuse to believe that any one type of person is predisposed to a behavior, belief, or emotional status.

lingrush5• 16 years ago

I do complain about not enough male nurses, where the gender difference is noticeable and is affecting the direction of the field or perceptions of the field itself.

Yes, there should be some room for "gender differences" which is not necessarily distinguishable anyway--however, there are actually compelling reasons for women and men to join fields that they are minorities in.

In this case, it is not that women merely choose not to go into technical fields out of pure disinterest. It is the social barriers and the lack of exposure women have had since childhood. This comic briefly explains: http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1883

Women have the possibility of increasing the total popularity of the field and decreasing the social stigma behind technological fields. They increase the total size and productivity of the industry. They increase the diversity of perspectives in the field. They appeal better to and understand female clients. They could make technological fields more presentable and appealing.

This technological feminism helps women as well. There are increasing spaces for Computer Science-related jobs in the industry and there is not an equally strong work force rising to meet it. Making it more appealing and more acceptable for women to take these roles (there would have to be a disproportionate push towards women because of their given backgrounds) would give them a wider range of profitable options in life and would increase the accessibility of the technological culture to all women. I believe that the 'geek' culture surrounding the growth of technology is becoming a more important and significant part of mainstream culture, yet women are not participating in it as widely as men are. The implications for the culture and the women not participating it are not great.

I realize the group here is not as receptive to technological feminism, being primarily male and anti-feminist, so I will stop here. Please feel free to message me if you are interested.

neilk4• 16 years ago

I didn't really like that SMBC comic. Boys play with dolls too, we just call them action figures. There are an infinite amount of stories you can make out of Barbies or GI Joes or whatever. Furthermore, what about crayons? Paints? Again there are infinite possibilities and I don't think these toys are particularly gendered.

However, it is true that "building" type toys are generally marketed to boys only, and that's got to be a factor.

One interesting data point; lately they've been marketing a Barbie with a tiny camera (concealed as a pendant necklace) and LCD screen on the back. Apparently many boys think this is "creepy", but many girls instantly see the possibilities of making movies from Barbie's point of view.

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/07/23/lights-camera...

protomyth• 16 years ago

There are economic reasons why many daycares will not hire men (e.g. fear of lawsuits).

philk• 16 years ago

I'm always slightly puzzled as to why this is an issue. Surely the goal is to have lots of innovative and successful startups, and the gender of who is founding them is irrelevant.

There aren't, as far as I can tell, any real barriers to women starting a tech company; being able to code, having a lot of mental resilience and having some starting capital is not something that's only possible if you're male.

whakojacko• 16 years ago

IMO, Its considered an issue because 1. Women have succesfully entered lots of other previously male-dominated fields (Doctors, Lawyers, Business execs, etc). 2. Tech is considered a "sexy" field to be in.

To expand, Women are still a minority in a lot of areas of work where physical differences are mostly unimportant-E.g. truck driving, skilled construction workers (carpenters/electricians), etc. Other engineering fields (eg EE) are similarly male-dominated, but being an EE or whatever isnt "sexy" in the way tech is, so it doesnt get as much attention. By "sexy" I mean the software industry has lots of high-paying jobs, growth, job security (if you are good at what you do), and, most importantly, publicity. Facebook essentially didnt exist 6 years ago, now they have 500m users every tiny change they make is "big" news. If you can create your own company (which , relative to other industries, is incredibly easy to do), you get lots more money and publicity. This makes it a popular target for the "Why arent there more women in industry x" discussion.

ahoyhere3• 16 years ago

Do you really believe that the general perception of programming/IT is "sexy"?

edanm• 16 years ago

" Surely the goal is to have lots of innovative and successful startups, and the gender of who is founding them is irrelevant."

Yes and no. Just as Paul Graham often says that there could be more startups than there are, and that would be a good thing, I suspect there can be a lot more female-founded startups, and that would also be a good thing. The goal is to have more successful startups, and from the numbers, it looks like there's many women who might otherwise have created a successful company, but don't start one because of lack of awareness/society pressures/etc.

In other words, just like pg tries to get more people to try entrepreneurship with his essays, by raising awareness and showing it is possible, more concentrated efforts to raise awareness are needed for groups who are also likely to succeed, but who are harder to get to.

philwelch6• 16 years ago

It's a touchy political issue. Some people, for ideological reasons, would prefer gender equality everywhere possible. Some people suspect that women are different from men in how they use software, and that women are better equipped to serve female customers.[1] And some people think the low numbers of women in startups, or in the tech industry, indicates some fundamental discrimination or injustice against women.

[1] Think about the 50's and 60's--there were tons of companies almost entirely run by men who produced lots of products used almost exclusively by women. You have to wonder how well they really understood their customers.

patio113• 16 years ago

women are better equipped to serve female customers

While it would be difficult to A/B test, I rather suspect that the Y chromosome is not depressing my conversion rates.

viggity• 16 years ago

Its funny how you never hear about anyone arguing for gender equality when it comes to death row or homelessness or psych wards or menial physical labor.

amirmc• 16 years ago

You have to wonder how well they really understood their customers

A quote comes to mind: "You are not your target market". This is as true of women selling to women as it is for men selling to women.

Those companies in the 50's and 60's you refer to probably did perfectly well for themselves as long as they were listening to (and learning from) their customers.

tbrownaw3• 16 years ago

I'm always slightly puzzled as to why this is an issue.

Young, single guys don't like having all of their coworkers also be guys? (Especially if they work crazy hours and are a bit light on social skills.)

Having more women in the field would make it more socially acceptable?

A bigger industry is better? (What about the industries we'd be stealing the women from?)

More competition is better? (Even when you're the one being competed against?)

Maybe having more women is a sign that the industry has become socially acceptable, or that we've learned better social skills, or something?

Maybe "women" here is really a stand-in for some larger group that wants our perceived salaries without our perceived social sacrifices?

i.e., I suspect it's not really about the women at all...

sliverstorm4• 16 years ago

Anytime a group that thinks they are a minority notices somebody else is making a lot of money doing something, they decide they naturally deserve a piece of that pie too.

Whether or not there are barriers is irrelevant to whether or not they will clamor for their 'fair share'.

robryan• 16 years ago

I think rather than looking at the overall numbers, what you really need to identify is if there are any women out there that do want to get into the industry but are being held back by something.

If in fact every woman that wants to run a startup or be employed as a programmer ect doesn't have different barriers to males then I don't think there is really an issue here.

I think many female dominated fields just genuinely don't interest the majority of males so that fact that they are female dominated isn't a big deal. The important thing is that both sexes get the opportunity to participate, whether they choose to take up the option is another matter.

mkramlich10• 16 years ago

The nice thing about computers is that they don't discriminate.

A male and a female have equal opportunity to sit down at a computer, and get themselves to learning about it, write "Hello World", read books, study, learn new techniques, grow their programming knowledge, etc. But you know what? I bet the ratio between genders of the folks that actually sit down and do that, at home, wherever, is skewed toward male by a large percentage. Exact amount? Dunno. But I'm sure it skews male. All else is going to follow from that.

]> man vi

HAL: I'm sorry, Susan. I'm afraid I can't allow you to do that. You see, your gender is wrong and I'm going to have to oppress you. It's for the sake of the mission and I hope one day you understand.

JCThoughtscream6• 16 years ago

70% of the technical degree holders living under the Iranian patriarchal theology... are women.

That's problematic to me. That suggests to /me/ that the gender disparity in Silicon Valley has very little to do with genetics. In fact, the role of genetics in intelligence is too heavily disputed to be considered anyhow - the tech field being a supposed /meritocracy/, and genetics having little to do with personal /merit/, it instead suggests to me that the problem is how our culture is defining "ideal merit" to our women.

The reason why tech conferences can't find enough women speakers is because there aren't enough girls encouraged /socially/ to enter the tech field. And by "girls," I don't mean to use disparaging language, but indicate that the problem is rooted all the way in how they're taught and influenced, be it in schools or amongst friends and family.

When mathematics, science and computer programming are considered culturally gender-neutral, that's when female representation in the tech industry will be less of an issue. Until then, we remain unable to tap a good half of our population's intellectual resources.

That's a bit of a problem.

mkramlich10• 16 years ago

I can't speak to your 70% Iran science degree holder figure but I do want to make the point that we can't make generalizations about gender participation in "tech" when tech is a generic heterogenous basket of different activities. It jumbles together all/most of the the sciences (for example, would bio be tech but social science not be tech?), engineering and programming, for example. Still speaking in rough terms, but at a little higher degree of fidelity, I'd say female interest/talent/ambition in science fields is much higher than in programming, which in turn is higher than in traditional engineering (EE, mech eng, etc.) -- and even within engineering the percentages vary by specific field. So if you told me of one particular country or region or whatever where say 70% of bio science degree holders were women, that wouldn't sound too extra-ordinary to me. If you said 70% of electrical or mechanical engineers, that's different.

Btw, do you think society also has a problem (speaking USA) that the vast majority of cosmetics salespeople are women? Do you think there's some horrible educational/cultural/societal conspiracy or flaw going on that has caused there to be so few men in that field? And how about child day care? How about the small percentage of women that are garbage truck pickup workers? Auto mechanics? Hunters? Weightlifting?

I think that today in the USA we're about as close to "culturally gender neutral" in mathematics, science and programming as we're ever going to get without some sort of significant genetic engineering or neurological/cyborg modification. Small changes? Sure, of course. Big changes? I highly doubt it without hacking on our DNA or hormones.

JCThoughtscream6• 16 years ago

Note that the use of gender-specific industries is a bit of a sham when you can't demonstrate that the tech industry /itself/ has any overt gender-specific targeting, outside of the occasional attempt at tech fashion. In fact, it isn't too hard to imagine a culture where cosmetology /is/ male-predominant - just switch the zeitgeist around so that peacock behavior is seen as sexually beneficial.

I'm afraid your underlying logic is full of holes. At the very least, it's unimaginative, and fails to at least ask "actually, /why/ is this so?" As for the 70%, Wiki's "Science in Iran" lists it as specifically degrees in science and engineering. While Wiki is, at times, unremarkable in its factuality, this specific assertion is actually backed by citation.

Furthermore, biology being /also/ male-dominant in the US, your point doesn't hold well. What makes biology more female-oriented than chemistry or physics anyhow? What basis are you making such a claim?

akshayubhat2• 16 years ago

     70% of the technical degree holders living under the Iranian patriarchal theology

Highly unlikely, their must be some difference in definition of "Technical", are they including Biology, Nursing even Teaching under "Technical"?

Even in India, Women in engineering have similar proportion as USA.

JCThoughtscream6• 16 years ago

http://web.payk.net/mailingLists/iran-news/html/2000/pdfj3iW...

In 2000, Iranian women accounted for 56% of students enrolled in the natural sciences. No matter how you cut that, /that's not nursing and teaching/.

And isn't it a bit of a sign of discrimination to merely assume off-hand that another culture's definition of "science and engineering" isn't as "rigorous" as ours, even if we seem to be gearing up for a clash with them? Instead of pooh-poohing their efforts, it seems more appropriate to be astonished by their capabilities in as hostile a cultural paradigm as they live in.

mkramlich10• 16 years ago

My two little nieces had a birthday this week and for their birthday I gave them each a cool LEGO set, and, some rubber balls, play masks, a game and some windup toy robots. A few days later they came over to visit, and you know what they brought out to play with? Again? Dolls. And they wanted to bake cupcakes. No LEGO or robots or games in sight. Funny that!

JCThoughtscream6• 16 years ago

Yeah. Common saying amongst my friends, mostly techies.

"The plural of 'anecdote' isn't 'data.'"

To counter that, though, I would say that your presents to your nieces, while a great idea and well-encouraged, palls in the face of parental and social pressure. Their friends are playing with dolls. Playing with legos by yourself can be fun, but not quite as fun as playing with their friends.

greendestiny• 16 years ago

Well little girls do love dolls, but just for the record as a parent of two girls they do love LEGO as well. Mine are pretty young but the oldest loves playing with duplo. The big difference to the little boys I know is the games they play with the LEGO. They make pet stores and horse stables and involve their dolls (the smaller ones) in it all.

Perhaps the next generation who grow up with very female friendly computer games and software (like facebook) will have the motivation to learn to program like boys have in the past. While boys might tend to enjoy things like programming for its own sake - I see a lot of reasons for girls to want to be involved in programming in the future.

shadowfox• 16 years ago

I am not sure how you can generalize from that.

What is the attitude of their parents towards playing with masks etc? What is the attitude of their peers? The environment that you operate in introduces all sort of variables.

yummyfajitas2• 16 years ago

I've discussed this phenomenon with my Iranian ex-girlfriend. She believes it is caused by two Iran-specific factors and can't really be repeated in the US.

A) Iran has forced labor (in the military) for men from age 18-20. Students are sometimes exempted, but the government makes it difficult for men to become students to prevent "abuse" of this exemption. Further, many men go straight to work after their term of forced labor is up - connections/skills they developed in the military serve a similar purpose to college.

(Israel has a similar phenomenon - due to forced military labor, college is not as strict a requirement. But this does not affect gender balance since Israel has forced labor for women as well.)

B) The country is ruled by, as you note, patriarchal theocrats. Religion is a path to power/money - this creates a brain drain among intelligent men.

Eliezer• 16 years ago

> there are women... who complain about how there are too few women in tech, and then there are women who just go out and start companies

Never heard it put quite that way before, but very well said.

lhnz2• 16 years ago

I understand that sexism might cause companies to not employ women in management/technical positions. But how can this affect whether they create their own successful startups?

stackthat• 16 years ago

Real reason is ridiculously simple as most of the men don't care about if the color of their great hat matches with their nice boots, most of the women are not geek.

punnned• 16 years ago

How about the idea of role models? There simply isn't many female role models that motivate young women to go into tech.

Being involved with young athletes in high school - I know 18 year old boys who aspire to be the next Michael Jordan or next Michael Phelps. I know 18 year old girls who aspire to be the next Cathy Freeman.

Outside of sports there are also many industries where potential female AND male role models are rife.

Film, dance, journalism just to name a few. Even the 'normal' fields which have been thrown around - doctors, lawyers, business, teaching etc. Many young people are may aspire to be like that 'aunty who is a lawyer' or that 'family friend who is a doctor' etc.

But tech? .... Because the industry is so skewed towards males and because of that there is no... female version of steve jobs, or bill gates, mark zuckerberg to aspire to.

Just a thought.. what do you guys reckon?

sorbus• 16 years ago

Ada Lovelace was the first computer programmer. Of the first six programmers for the ENAIC, all were women.

Of course, that isn't quite as well known as it could be, and recent role models are more important than historical ones, but still.

Another problem is that, by and large, the only tech people who the average person can name are those who have hit it big, generally by starting and running a famous company (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, and Mark Zuckerberg are not well known because of their programming, but because of their companies).

todayiamme2• 16 years ago

This is a really complex question, and I doubt that anyone will ever have the answer to this. As, there are so many variables at play over here that most of the times we can't see them let alone comprehend them. Most people over here have a pretty unary point of view i.e. they don't even realize the subtle signals they get everyday about socially acceptable behavior. Even though, I don't want to be unique in this regard, but unfortunately I am and there are a few things that I would like to share.

First of all, the 5 year old me knew that I couldn't act "feminine" (what was feminine for the 5 year old me is laughable at best). Why? I just knew at that age that I couldn't do that. The adults around me simply wouldn't approve. In fact, they would be disgusted if I did. I knew that I couldn't play with my cousins' dolls because it was wrong for me to do that. I knew that I couldn't talk about the fact that I liked making stuff in the kitchen to other kids because it was wrong for me to do that. In fact, I stopped doing it after a while and I constantly had to suppress behavior to fit into that mold.

Take a look at any kid at an early age and see what happens if that child picks up a "masculine" or "feminine" toy. Most adults simply don't engage, or they engage too aggressively. For a child these subtle things matter a lot and they start dictating the pattern which still exists till later life.

You won't believe how suffocating it is to be an outlier in this regard, a freak for all intents and purposes. I have to constantly pretend to be someone else and it is amazing how subtle those cues which operate are. I can't talk the way I want to. I can't gesture in the same way. I can't walk "that way". I can't eat "that way". I can't move "that way". I can't relate to others "that way". I can't pick up topics "that way". This list goes on and on and on.

The truth is that who we are is hammered into shape by our experiences to a large extent. Unless, we consciously embark on exploring ourselves and examining our motives for everything.

So, yes it's true that on average male and female brains are different (it's a bell curve), but to what extent do those "differences" shape future behavior? To what extent is a person's behavior determined by what's between their legs? Or in their blood?

These are questions that we simply don't have an answer too. It's not like we will never have it, but it's just that right now we don't.

So, in the mean time maybe we shouldn't write articles going either way and, perhaps, focus on creating things instead. An even bigger perhaps is that we might want to try respecting people for who they are. Not who we want them to be. Just saying.

Charuru• 16 years ago

Especially interesting in light of: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1634955

didip• 16 years ago

Not really contributing to the arguments...

But rumor has it, Etsy have female (Python) programmers and they make boring online shopping experience fun with their creative UI.

See: http://www.etsy.com/color.php or http://www.etsy.com/time_machine.php or http://www.etsy.com/geolocator.php

Imho, female input is valuable when it comes to software design especially UX.

nochiel• 16 years ago

In absolute terms, women constitute the largest segment of the market. That alone should be sufficient reason to have more women participating in or founding start-ups. It stands to reason that their intuitive insights, understanding and vision, due to their affinity with women at large, will lead to products and services which serve that market segment --and perhaps humanity in general-- better.

mobile• 16 years ago

If you want to know how predisposition can affect the outcome, please read this article and you will understand what we are discussing here:

"Princeton Economist Finds that Auditioning Behind Screens Helps Women Win Orchestra Positions"

http://www.princeton.edu/pr/news/97/q2/0425orch.html

Quoted directly from the article: "The switch to blind auditions can explain between 30 percent and 55 percent of the increase in the proportion female among new hires and between 25 percent and 46 percent of the increase in the percentage female in the orchestras from 1970 to 1996," the economists write. The study notes that the surge of women in symphony orchestras has occurred despite the fact that the number of positions is highly fixed and turnover is slow.

Too Few Women In Tech? Stop Blaming The Men.

Related Stories