On being a girl in computer science - a confession

I think these sorts of articles are asking the wrong question when they ask "why aren't there more women in CS?" or "how can we get more women in CS?"<p>Instead the question should be (IMHO) "are there any barriers to entry for women in CS?"<p>I suspect the opinion people have on this issue largely mirrors their view on affirmative action. Some believe in a meritocracy that is blind to race, age and gender. They believe that any discrimination for one group is discrimination against another (which, incidentally, is axiomatically true). Many in this camp believe that lowering standards for one group encourages a perception that <i>any</i> member of that group did less to get where they are (correct or not).<p>The other side believe that an artificial environment needs to be created to correct an imbalance. Rooted in this principle there is often a belief that this situation only exists because of artificially created and perpetuated gender roles.<p>Personally I believe that gender imbalance in this (and other) professions is only indirectly related to gender.<p>In this post as one data point, the author notes that she felt socially isolated from other girls. The question then is: is this because she didn't share the same interests as her peers or did she develop separate interests because of this social isolation? I suspect the answer is a little of both.<p>The stereotype of an engineer is that of a judgmental introvert, two traits that tend to negatively correlate with having many social connections. Of course this stereotype isn't universal but we're talking about patterns in a large group, not specific individuals. If such personality traits are causative (rather than simply being correlated) in choosing CS as a career, you then need to ask if there is a gender basis for these traits? Males and females form very different social structures when left to their own devices.<p>For me, I'm not sure how productive all this gender hand-wringing really is.

If you look at the real pioneers of computer science, people like Turing and Babbage, two women jump right off the page: Ada Byron and Grace Hopper. Women <i>belong</i> in CS, because it <i>belongs</i> to them. They were there at the start, just as much as the men.<p>As a 55-year-old man, I'm pretty sure I've experienced discrimination because of my age. Situations where people couldn't see beyond the wrinkles and gray hair and see the experience and skills. I know the same thing happens to women too, because they are different from the vision of an ideal employee the employer had in mind. I don't think women managers are immune to this either. I've worked in two departments headed by a woman who made all the hiring decisions and the entire team they hired was men. There are definitely barriers.<p>But I agree with the author that 'women in CS' programs aren't the answer. Success is. Each generation of CS pioneers includes a few more women with passion and intellect like Hopper or Bryon that cannot be ignored, and they will make it a lot easier for equally qualified women in subsequent generations, because when all is said and done, what you can do ultimately beats who you are in this field.

The problem with this type of the thinking is the same thing you see when it comes to racism in general: "If we just stop mentioning it, it will go away", "programs to counter racism are racist", etc. Not talking about racism/sexism etc will not make it go away. Kids are very perceptive, they notice the apparent differences in acceptable behavior very early on; they are internalizing it subconsciously whether we bring it up or not. The only way to compensate is to tackle it head-on. This means defining it, explaining why its wrong, and taking steps to mitigate its effects. Girl-centric CS activities are an appropriate way of counteracting these pervasive gender stereotypes. Ignoring it will not make it go away.

&#62;I liked it because it was hard, and considered hard. &#62;And I didn’t even notice that I was the only female in the &#62;class— a lack of awareness that persisted well into &#62;university.<p>I took programming classes in high school, and assumed that the hugely skewed gender ratio was just my school being weird. It wasn't until people were surprised/impressed that I was planning to major in CS that I started googling, and discovered that the gender ratio is a thing.<p>&#62; I simple never fit in with “the girls”. &#62; Because girls don’t do things that I like.<p>I often feel more uncomfortable at women in CS events than just plain CS ones. Partially, it's because the actual activities are less interesting; I'm there because it's "for women", despite the less interesting/ less technical content. Partially, it's because, after 4 years of CS courses, I feel like I'm in the wrong place when more than 35%-ish of the people in a room are female. Partially, it's because I tend to feel more out of place among women. I don't dress like they do - no makeup, unisex tshirts, more interested in coding than parties - and when I'm in a room full of normal women who happen to do CS, I feel more alone than in a group of CS people. If I'm in the group of people who are supposed to be my minority demographic or whatever, and I feel like I _really_ don't fit in with them, then doesn't that mean I don't fit at all?<p>I tend to like unpopular/strange pieces of programming (sometimes partially because "it [i]s hard, and considered hard"). I'm used to having different technical interests than the CS/tech people I hang out with. I just feel that a lot more when I'm at a women-in-tech event. Either there's a bigger disconnect or I care more deeply that I don't fit. I view it mostly as a personal insecurity, but I really long for the emotional validation of meeting someone who's female, doesn't care about clothes, and has vaguely similar technical/programming interests. Normal CS groups of sufficient size include people who fit on everything but gender; in my experience, women-in-cs groups provide examples that match only on gender.

Similarly, I have to confess I am a little worried about this with my daughter. It is ridiculously clear that she does not do your stereotypical girl activities already at the age of 3. To the point that some of the boys in her "pre-k" class have actually thought that spiderman was a girl's thing. For the most part, my wife and I both think this is hilarious. And we are fine letting her do whatever she wants.<p>However, we have been worried that it is obvious she does not fit in with some other girls her age. To the point where it almost seems to bother her. Luckily, it is not a 100% thing. Still a little worrisome to see, though.

This closely aligns with my thoughts on the issue.<p>While I understand the good intentions behind girl only events, women in CS meetups and girl geek dinners/mentors something about it feels wrong to me. It's like fighting an exclusion problem with just a different type of exclusion and simultaneously reinforcing the divisions they're rallying against.

The attitudes in this thread seem a little disturbing to me. Let me illustrate with a different example:<p>There are a number of other fields that are consistently dominated by women in the way that programming and CS are by men. Teaching, especially at the elementary-school level and younger, nursing, HR, administrative assistants, and others. Why is there no effort to bring more men into these fields? Is there some "old-girls club" that's keeping the men out? Do we need to set up some affirmative action programs at employers, outreach programs to men in high school and college, men-only nurse clubs, etc? It doesn't happen, because nobody seems to care. Just try and see how much googling it takes to even find out what the actual gender ratios in those professions are. After a little looking around, I found that, according to one article, teaching is 67-86% female, and according to Wikipedia, nursing in the US is 94.6% female (!).<p>There are a lot of other fields where men are heavily dominant. Firefighters, soldiers, police, etc. I don't see anywhere near the level of pressure to bring women into these fields as there is for CS/Programming.<p>The whole CS/Programming field is just another field heavily dominated by a particular gender. Why is it different or more special than any of these other fields? Why does this field need specific efforts to address the gender ratio? Why is this a Problem that demands all sorts of high-level money and attention to address?<p>I have nothing against any person trying to get into any field they care to. Programming can be a tough field, but if a woman, or anybody else, has the interest, brains, and drive, then more power to 'em. Anyone who tells a girl that they shouldn't get into the field because girls can't do it or it isn't feminine is a jerk and should be ignored, and should be sacked if they take action to block her progress.<p>So the gender ratio in CS/Programming is heavily male-biased. So what? Maybe women just don't tend to be interested in it. I don't see this as a problem that we need to work on solving. Let people do what they want to do, and if that leads to a gender imbalance in some fields, that's okay.

My daughter has told me a few times that she might like to program like me but was worried that it was a "boy thing".<p>I tell her that the computer can't tell you're a girl.

Hedy Lamarr (for those not familiar, <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr" rel="nofollow">https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hedy_Lamarr</a>) stands out as a woman who excelled in the "nerdy" aspects as well as the more "feminine" aspects. And she was involved long before it was treated as more mainstream, when her environment was more adherent to social norms than the world of 2013.<p>How did she break the norms, and why don't we see more women following her example?

&#62; I grew up in a household where there was no particular attention (that I can recall) given to the fact that as a young woman I could attain whatever career I wanted—it was just a given.<p>&#62; I fear that when you say, for example, that “yes, girls can do anything”, it first plants the idea that there is an inequality, before it attempts to combat this idea.<p>From your post it looks like you had lots of encouragement from an early age (or at least no great signs of discouragement).<p>I believe the reason we have women in CS events is to encourage those who have been discouraged already. Women that have been told though movie stereotypes, guidance counselors, and parents that programming is a nerdy boys thing to do need to hear it from us that CS is open to everyone.<p>IMHO those events are a good idea.

Well, I can't speak from a girl's perspective, but I can tell you about my great aunt, Betty Jennings Bartik, (<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Bartik" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Bartik</a>) one of the first female "computers," and original programmers on ENIAC. She passed away a couple of years ago, but she'd be the first to tell OP to suck it up and forge her own path in the world. Aunt Betty didn't take shit from anyone and she made that clear, by her intellect and attitude. And if a smart woman in WW2 can earn the respect of male colleagues, then I'm sure the same can be said of women today. Quit waiting for the red carpet treatment because it ain't coming.

"What if we just taught our kids about what computers can do, and worked toward a healthy appreciation for how vital computer science is to society and to a successful career, and then left them to decide on their own careers?"<p>I completely agree. My proposed solution (that would probably work): teach basic cs in middle schools so it becomes as normal as chemistry, biology, physics, math, social studies, and english- that way, kids wouldn't denote the subject as a particularly male or female oriented path and would simply see it as a stepping stone to another possible career. But we would need more knowledgeable teachers...and more teachers in general.

I keep returning to the time Etsy decided that they wanted female engineers (<a href="http://www.themarysue.com/etsy-female-engineers" rel="nofollow">http://www.themarysue.com/etsy-female-engineers</a>) and tried to figure out how to find them (<a href="http://firstround.com/article/How-Etsy-Grew-their-Number-of-Female-Engineers-by-500-in-One-Year" rel="nofollow">http://firstround.com/article/How-Etsy-Grew-their-Number-of-...</a> - good summary of their presentation points).<p>Interesting results; it worked. They did find that women had less industry experience, which made them riskier hires; a self-perpetuating problem, as we all know with the cliched need-experience-to-get-jobs-to-get-experience cycle.<p>The company was rewarded by taking the risk. The key take-aways are that they not only created an event that targetted women, but they also overcame several other barriers like women not wanting to leave already-safe workplaces (because it's more of a risk if you don't fit in as a woman than as a man) and women not asking for help as much (because if you ask for help, you're more likely to be seen as a failure/fraud) by creating a mentoring, learning environment that catered to women.<p>This sort of effort appears to be what's needed, even at the post-graduate level, to achieve gender parity in programming work.<p>I suspect that OP is one of a lucky set of gifted natural engineers who would have found her place in tech (and did) anyway. But, most people aren't natural engineers, and the deck is simply societally stacked against exploring the field as a woman if you don't have a burning innate interest already.<p>NB: I'm female, and I ended up in programming for mostly mercenary reasons (jerbs! My arts degree wasn't panning out); I never had any "Women in CS" events to point the way, but I did have work experience as an adult with female scientists and engineers, so it felt totally plausible that I could go into engineering myself. That exposure was key. The subfield I'm in now - web - is one of the few with a lot of female devs, and a community that actively supports us. I've heard a few coworkers express similar misgivings to OP and yet the evidence seems to be that the more we are encouraged to participate, the more we do.

Female-only programming events and CS groups are like female-only gyms, they provide a more low-pressure environment to gain confidence and skills. It's a great place for a beginner to be turned on to a rewarding and fun activity/profession and receive mentorship from more experienced women. It's fairly natural for people that share similar characteristics and experiences to band together to form support groups.<p>The author is an atypical female, so she doesn't see the need for such groups. She would be a techie regardless. But I expect that the gender ratio in CS would be worse than it is if these groups did not exist.<p>Software is only growing in importance. I would guess that these groups do a good job at drawing highly talented people into the industry. That's important for the future of software. If these efforts at outreach are effective, then I am grateful for all the talented future coworkers that I gain from them.<p>As a member of the majority, it is easy to feel devalued by special events for every subgroup who is not like us. And when members of the majority speak up about it, their concerns are considered illegitimate and even evil. I think it would benefit everybody if we were all a little more open and less judgmental.

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g032MPrSjFA" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g032MPrSjFA</a> I think this video, even though referring to the general sciences instead of CS alone demonstrates the issue as clearly as it is cringe worthy.

At my university, the drop-out rate was high enough for everyone as it was. The CS department held a few couple of social gatherings for the women there - dinners and such - and it really boosted morale amongst the people there, some of whom were thinking about dropping out.<p>It's also worth keeping in mind that there are universities that don't have a dorm culture, which makes it even more important to create a social support system.<p>Please consider what there is to gain - and feel free to weigh it against whatever there may be to lose - before discounting the idea of such a concept.

I wonder what Grace Hopper would say about this gender issue? Oh wait, she was too busy BEING an example of female computer science excellence rather than talking about it over and over. She apparently didn't need a "women's" group or having the barrier of entry lowered for her to succeed. As a result, she has the respect of pretty much any man in computer science, including me. I'll never respect anyone who carves out gender clubs and makes special rules for themselves. It's disgusting when men do it, but just as bad when women do it.

&#62;&#62; If we start young, really young, and simply presented all careers as gender/race/etc-neutral, and didn’t spend any energy defining special groups, what would happen?<p>What would happen is that even though you were no longer consciously creating the groups, they already exist in reality because of consciously or unconsciously sexist people. What would happen is that everything would remain the same, or get worse.<p>That said, I enjoyed the article. I think I would teach people to learn to stand to be different, and I would teach groups of people to be accepting of those that are different.<p>The problem isn't that groups are separated, it is that people don't feel safe being the only female individual in a male-dominated group, and that in many cases they are right to feel like this as they do not pass all of the in-group tests [0]. This is just human nature and it probably can't be changed - so just be what feels right for you, and try to respect other people's right to be what they want to be.<p>Reality is, this is probably the only possible solution: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ingroup_identity" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_ingroup_identity</a><p>[0] <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism</a><p>edit; I realise I've just synced with your view, but a little more depth here. Things won't just fix themselves because you choose to ignore them.

This is an excellent viewpoint. I am curious how the youngest generations of today are being introduced to computer science as technology becomes more and more ubiquitous. Clearly there are tons of "Women in CS" programs and, generally, I think they are making a good impact for those who may already feel alienated. But a lot more study needs to go into why gender ratios are really so skewed and what root causes can be properly addressed.

Thanks for writing this article!<p>There's a lot here that seems to apply to equality in general, not just gender equality.<p>I have two daughters, bi-racial. I struggle with what I think the ideal world should look like and what our actual world needs to look like, today. For example, if there were not a historic misbelief that women are not good at math, there would be no reason to go out of our way to make women only events. But it happened, and it lingers. So I wonder -- how many women have a story about how these women-targeted events helped to open some doors? Def seems like we've swung too far sometimes, but what's the right middle ground?<p>At home I go for the ideal. My wife and I don't bring up race and gender. We don't attach it to things. My daughters are still under 4, so this is easy. I wouldn't want to say, "girls can do it, too" because I agree with the author -- the effect would be opposite of the intended one. But some day, there eyes will be opened to all those ignorant ideas, and the imperfect "bandaids" that we have. I mean, hell, they already get party bags that are "for girls, not the boy ones." They are already being influenced in ways they can't comprehend.

Excelent content, horrible typography. To better read it : <a href="http://www.readability.com/apps" rel="nofollow">http://www.readability.com/apps</a>

My initial reaction to these types of observations about sexism/racism is to agree with the underlying sentiment of the post: give a completely blank stare and say in all seriousness "why wouldn't it be okay for a girl to be a programmer? What does that have to do with anything? Do what you love, and screw everyone else"<p>Then, I remember that for centuries people have been actively attempting to be dicks to other people that aren't "like them" and exclude, harass, and demean other people for no other reason than they are afraid that giving dignity to someone else somehow takes it from themselves. It's a thing, and it happens – way more than you might think. And ignoring that it ever happens will not make it go away. In fact ignoring it will only continue to empower those that have the power to abuse it.<p>So, as much as my gut wants to say that stuff like "women in cs" meetings are unnecessary, I know that they are <i>very</i> necessary. If only as a reminder to everyone else "there is still a problem, so remember: don't be a dick"<p>If only it were that simple of a problem to solve.

I've been thinking that I am very much contributing to the divide as well, and was too ashamed to say it out loud. So, thanks for the post.

I'll be more interested in hearing the opinions of women who didn't have access to a TI99/4A at age five on the need for "women in CS" programs. The questions are: Are there women who, under different circumstances when growing up, would have pursued a career in CS and would like to do so now that they're adults? How do you make it possible for these women to achieve their goals and in the process improve gender balance in the software industry?<p>Tech blog posts/comments and Hacker News being what they are, the opinions I've read have been from the tech-privileged - men and women. I would really like to hear from the tech-unprivileged, particularly those women that discovered computer programming too late in life to make a career of it without access to some sort of special program.<p>We should not pretend that all individuals are born with equal access to technology - or really equal access to anything. I also have a problem with this idea that writing computer programs is some highly technical process that only a small fraction of the world's population is capable of. Yes, it comes more naturally to some of us. But many computer programmers are programmers today because they had access to a computer programming course in high school, or they had parents or mentors or peers who encouraged them to start programming. It all starts with access - interest, focus, ambition, motivation, intellect etc are determining factors on career trajectories but these all come later, after access has been granted.<p>If Formula 1 teams started signing female drivers en masse, the likelihood of one of them being a Saudi would be effectively zero. I apologize, that's hardly a fair analogy, but it underscores my point that it all boils down to access. If one of those hypothetical female drivers happened to be a Saudi princess, raised in Belgium with access to Spa in the off-season and Michael Schumacher's 1994 championship-winning Benetton, and she couldn't see why other women needed special training programs, why I wouldn't know what to make of that. Again, I agree, not a fair analogy.

One thing I found as an educator of technology in higher education was that many girls/women didn't know they would like it. During the first week of the academic year I had the unusual opportunity to teach an introduction class to a mixed group of arts and technology majors. After a couple of hours I actually converted a few young ladies to the technology course. It seemed to be about re-enforcing that the technology was there, it was cool and it would give you a secure future.

Women are naturally going to be more attracted to software development as a career as time goes on, because everyone is realizing it's a lucrative career that's becoming more and more mainstream and even--dare I say--cool. It's one of the few career options left with high pay and low unemployment. It used to be assumed that only geeks could understand how to do it, but that isn't the case anymore. Things are changing.

Programming/Computer Science is a boy's club. This boy's club will perpetuate itself just like other boy's clubs historically. It will be integrated just like other boy's clubs have been: by a few talented and determined women who pave the way for others to follow. I agree with the author, in that the model to follow is closer to piloting than it is to sports.<p>EDIT: To its credit CS is much further along than NASCAR.

This line of thinking is well documented. It is referred to as stereotype threat. There have been some excellent studies done with the most profound being around the female math stereotype and the GRE.<p><a href="http://www.reducingstereotypethreat.org/definition.html" rel="nofollow">http://www.reducingstereotypethreat.org/definition.html</a>

There are no girls in computer science, just like there are no boys in computer science.<p>There are however, <i>women</i> in computer science.<p>This is part of the problem, women are not children, girls are and society sadly enforces this.<p>Think of how strange a title would be if someone talked about "being a boy in computer science".

@PLT_Zizek the platitude that male sexism is keeping women from entering CS only reinforces the notion that the field belongs to men by default<p><a href="https://twitter.com/PLT_Zizek/status/212662401525481472" rel="nofollow">https://twitter.com/PLT_Zizek/status/212662401525481472</a>

Maybe someone mentioned this but what if the reason more women don't go into CS/programming is more to do with discrimination from other <i>women</i> and not men? Perhaps women feel they won't be considered 'womanly' as defined by females?

This was a very refreshing change to read from the normal articles which all concentrate on "how to get more women into CS". I think you hit the nail on the head when you said that all these events and questions are just so backwards.

This question is important but apparently quite challenging. For an answer, we can pick from three -- yes, no, and maybe. After too much contact with that question, I fervently urge nearly everyone for now to settle on the third answer, maybe.<p>Why? Apparently what we are dealing with is not simple. And, I can assure you with no doubt at all, if we try solutions that are wrong, then we can do some harm. We should keep in mind the rule, "First, do no harm.".<p>Why not simple? Boys and girls, men and women, via nature and/or nurture "deserve equal respect as persons but are not the same" (E. Fromm, 'The Art of Loving'). My experience is that he was correct and made if anything an understatement. I fervently urge nearly everyone to keep in front of their mind the point "not the same" and add to that that we don't know nearly enough to be clear on the differences or even if they are due to nature, nurture, socialization, discrimination, stereotypes, ingrained traditions, or what. We just do not know.<p>For a short, interim answer, may I suggest that we work hard to ensure the same opportunities but not to count on the same outcomes.<p>Did I mention, boys and girls, men and women, are different and we don't how different or the causes. We just don't know. Moreover, finding the causes and being clear on the differences takes us into fields of social science. Gotta tell you, those fields are super tough places to do solid science. There's no Newton's second law, Newton's law of gravity, conservation of energy, Maxwell's equations, E = mc^2, quantum mechanics, standard model, etc. There's nothing like engineering, etc. Some bright people have worked hard in social science, and we are still waiting for Newton like results.<p>Did I mention, "First do no harm"? Maybe I should also mention, "It's not nice to try to fool Mother Nature.".<p>Now, don't let any young girls read this because it might cause them to give up trying to be a small version of Daddy and send them back to trying to be a small version of Mommy and sugar and spice and everything nice good at eliciting protective emotions from Daddy with fantastic verbal and social skills, with unbelievable ability to perceive and manipulate the emotions of others.<p>I will flip this over: How many of you male nerds believe it was just socialization or tradition that kept you from being as good as the little goody goody girls in the fourth grade at spelling, languages, clerical accuracy in arithmetic, neatness in your handwriting, playground gymnastics, reading comprehension, especially of fiction, drawing and painting, rote memorization, social skills in groups, understanding what the teacher wanted and pleasing the teacher, etc.?

I’ll just jump the shark. I feel sick and irritated today, so I won’t pretend political correctness.<p>Fuck this feminist, sexist shit.<p>First, I am the most orderly developer you could ever meet. My desk is absolutely clean. Everything has a well defined technical purpose there. Whenever I leave, those purposes cease to exist so I eagerly remove or put away those objects. I could walk in any day, pick up my desktop and get seated anywhere else.<p>“computer games, science-fiction memorabilia and junk food”?! Fuck that, who cares about that shit anyway? I might have a clean mug, but I ain’t never have no fucking plant. How could I be the nit-picking detail-obsessing code freak I am if I was careless with my physical environment in the functional domain? (I don’t give a shit about aesthetics, most of the time.) Some of my colleagues' desks seem to be covered with pig shit, and I don’t cease chiding them for it.<p>I treat my female coworkers with respect, I politely discuss technical stuff with them if they feel like. I do make sexist jokes if I was able to get to know them sufficiently before, like any healthy male. They mostly laugh and if they don’t, I apologize and tune it down. They don’t refrain from spicy topics, we even discuss that kind. My wife’s male coworkers behave the same way and I have no problem with that. American overdriven political correctness shall get the fuck off my lawn.<p>“Missing out on best career opportunities?” Well, concentrate on the fucking task at hand, not irrelevant details. Suppose I’d like to work in a fuckin' bakery but hate that the clothes are white (which doesn’t mean in the least that they are clean). So who will start a crusade for me? If the circumstances of your otherwise coveted dream-job are accidental, try to change them. If they are intrinsic, live with them or leave.<p>I was never hostile towards women in IT. Women consider sexist jokes repugnant in conference presentations? Well, I don’t go to no fucking conference, because I hate to travel, I hate to spend money, I hate the crowd. Networking is a lie if you don’t work with your peers on actual projects for longer times. Presentations are slow, linear, non-searchable. Give me a fucking transcript, post it to reddit, and I’m happy. Can’t recommend anything else to women either.<p>In my college class we had this beautiful girl with huge boobs. She was smarter than any guy in the whole class. Did we envy her? Did we hate her? Hell no. We respected her and we constantly tried to bring her in discussions for her insights. Did we talk about her body among ourselves? Hell yes, we’re no monks!<p>The fact is, most girls cannot not care about stuff that’s irrelevant in computer science / software engineering, and also lack the necessary attention to detail. They are simply not interested in it. Guess what, they have no place here, just like I could never be a historian or translator or lawyer or doctor, because I hate meeting new people. I’m not “enforcing” this or some shit like that, I simply accept that most girls are like this for whatever reason and I’m not trying to force them into IT. I’d rather be happy if some guys left software development. (Yeah, yeah, I’m conflating IT with compsci / sweng, who cares now.)<p>I practically don’t shave, but I’m clean. I never ever stink. I’m not attractive to women I guess, but I don’t give a flying fuck. I’ve got a beautiful, intelligent, loving wife; I don’t need to pretend. I wear sandals with socks because shoes are much too warm in the summer, and without socks I sweat like a pig. Don’t like it? Have a good laugh; I don’t care. I put on (clean) clothing items that are on the top of the respective stacks in my wardrobe. Are you a female who’d like to work as a software developer but you feel you cannot work with me because of my inconsistent clothing? Be a fucking fashion model, then. I never treat, I never even feel an urge to treat female colleagues negatively because they aren’t slender, young, or clothe “gray”.<p>There is no problem with girls in IT. They’re mostly not here because they don’t want to. Pick any female-dominated non-sex-worker job. Yay, who is protecting the poor shunned males? American media is blowing this shit out of proportion again. (Or if the surveys are right, then american girls are out of their minds, which might be true anyways, with requiring an expensive as hell diamond ring for wedding, or so I read. WHAT THE FUCK?!)<p>The whole issue is being overcompensated now. On some technical forum I’ve seen somebody ask for advice on whatever. Another user replied with a link to women.debian.org. What the fuck? Do we have “men.debian.org”? If you’re no different wrt. technical matters, then you need no different website. If you need different treatment, then don’t be surprised if you’re treated differently.<p>I’m tired of this shit.

I agree with everything she had to say.

This is the standard argument against affirmative action as well. Of course affirmative action is more about addressing pay inequality and discriminatory hiring practices, while the focus of this post is more around changing cultural attitudes toward certain activities. Is it possible to separate the two? That is, to have laws in place which will address the historical wrongs while simultaneously building a culture of inclusion?<p>And of course, the argument for continuing to do this inclusive workshop bullshit (you can tell I'm sympathetic to the author's point), is that while the gender bias persists active effort must be taken against it. So, how do you know when you're done? And, how do you measure your progress? No one answers these questions.

I agree with the author about the questionable nature of women-focused events.<p>Here's why:<p>Do girl-only schools produce more scientists, mathematicians, or programmers? That's the vital bit of research people need to know. Some research <i>suggests</i> that they boost test scores in those subjects, but <i>do they change career outcomes</i>?<p>It doesn't look like it:<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sex_education#Effects_of_single-sex_education" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single-sex_education#Effects_of...</a><p>The effects of all-girls schooling only seems to improve schooling-related effects, e.g. "More homework completed" and "More enjoyment of school."<p>And then there is the very problem of stereotype threat:<p><a href="https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&#38;client=safari&#38;rls=en&#38;q=stereotype+threat+girls&#38;oq=stereotype+threat+girls&#38;gs_l=serp.3..0j0i22i30.7108.7590.0.7780.6.4.0.2.2.1.106.379.3j1.4.0.les%3B..0.0...1c.1.5.serp.TEhrGrVSBvo" rel="nofollow">https://www.google.com/search?hl=en&#38;client=safari&#38;rl...</a><p>Far be it from me to tell people not to get together in whatever clique-y group they like, but what gets me is that <i>women and men assume that because I have breasts, I agree with their viewpoints</i>.<p>Like the OP, I never really connected with girls when I was young and I was anti-girly stuff. This, I got over. I learned that it's just as idiotic to (de)value somebody for hating makeup as it is to (de)value somebody for loving it. I have friends of all kinds now and respect that everybody is different.<p>But my worldviews are not shared by most women (or vice versa). And the most sexist things that have happened to me have been originated by other women who assumed I was like them. I have been cited for other people's agendas (which I disagree with), had my opinions devalued, I've been called sexist, I have been attacked, I have been told my experiences and viewpoint are "wrong," etc. etc.<p>This doesn't do anything worse to <i>me</i> than annoy me, but I've seen it really hurt women and men who "give more fucks" than I do.<p>I understand that people are (mostly) trying to do good things with the women-only and women-focused stuff. But they are creating stereotypes of their own, sexism of a different flavor. Any kind of division based on demographics is going to create antagonism.<p>This is human nature. It can't be helped. But if they can't bear to discuss it, and admit it, they are no better than the men they claim are sexist.<p>And I know some troglodytes are going to take this as an attack (it's not), or a reason to ignore women (it's not), but blah blah blah it's not for them and it's not as if they need more ammunition because they invent their own reality anyway.<p>This post is for you reasonable people who are organizing or thinking about organizing women-focused events. Question whether the research supports your beliefs. Spot the bias in yourselves and be respectful.<p>PS — if I have a daughter, I will tell her "YOU can do anything… if you are willing to be smart, and work your tail off when other people slack." And if I have a son, I will tell him "YOU can do anything… if you are willing to be smart, and work your tail off when other people slack." Because why would you use a label based on an accident of birth -- "boys" can, "girls" can -- instead of the most personal word in anyone's life -- you? How weird is it to teach kids to identify with their label, how weird is it that importance advice isn't aimed at them directly but instead at 51% of the world population?

IMHO Women are doing great in CS. They are not doing great in 20 hs/day crazy devops/IT work that nowadays passes for CS, that only men from 20-30 can endure. Edit: Right, women also can physically endure the developer death march, it's just they don't want to. And I don't blame them.

<p><pre><code> 1. What's the CS gender ratio? Assuming it's bad... 2. Is it bad because anyone is actively discouraging girls? 3. Is it bad because girls just tend not to like it? </code></pre> This post assumes #1, undermines those who claim #2 (anecdotally), and reenforces #3.<p>And I find this very, very easy to believe.<p>Computer science is an unusually unforgiving discipline, and it takes an odd combination of arrogance and masochism to get through it. The arrogance is a craving for the kind of exceptionalism that any wannabe astronaut (the author and myself included, of course) understands quite well. By being a girl in CS the OP got a double-dose of exceptionalism: she was mastering something hard, and she was unique. (That other girl in CS class...grrr!)<p>Anyway, the punchline is that we should be aware of #2 and keep a lid on that, but recognize at least the possibility that we're fighting nature here, and that #3 may have a grain of truth. We are all arrogant masochists together, no matter our race, creed, or gender!