Girls Don't Want To Be Geeks 624
Silas writes "According to a new study by the American Association of University Women, highlighted in this AP article, 'Girls have the ability to learn and use computers, but they are turned off by technical careers that they view as full of geeky guys'. The study blames the general sentiment on a gender imbalance in access to computers, and on social pressures that steer girls away from technology. What say you, women of the Slashdot population?" Stand up and shout on this one, ladies. I think that it takes a special breed of person to be attracted to this line of work, not necessarily a specific gender. Tell us what you think.
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
--The knowledge that you are an idiot, is what distinguishes you from one.
I accuse my parents... (Score:3)
Most parents, unintentionally, will treat their children differently based on their preconcieved notions of that gender. It is most likely very unconcious, but it happens. It is this social conditioning that I think really creates the disparity in technology careers. By the time girls (and boys) first reach school, these concepts are already programmed in. It doesn't just affect interest in math/science/comp.sci... but that is one effect.
(For example, in the average grade 1 class, most girls are much better with "fine motor skills"... they can use scissors much more effectively than the average boy. This is likely because boys are encouraged to play outside more often when they are young.)
These sort of seemingly trivial differences end up affecting how girls view math and science, and they are less likely to pursue those topics in high school and university. It becomes a vicious circle, because there are few women in these fields, there are fewer role models.
---
Re:Fundamentals (Score:2)
See, now if everyone in the world could reach a consensus like this, all our problems would be solved! =)
*sigh*
--
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
When people try to deny it, I think they are really oversimplifying because it's easier to "assume that everyone is the same" than it is to grok and communicate the real issues involved in treating people fairly. And our societey tries to value fair play.
Ultimately, eneralizations are of limmited use when dealing with individuals.
Re:Geek Girl and proud of it! (Score:2)
The media might be responsible for some bad ideas that girls get of what a woman should be like.
However, as women make up about 50 percent of the people at universities, that obviously doesn't keep them away from the intellectual challenges of university. They simply seem to study other things, for whatever reason.
There is an interesting article on that, 'Why Are There So Few Female Computer Scientists?' [mit.edu].
We make grrls feel stupid (Score:3)
Now the problem might stem from the common observation that men are typically better with pure logic and can usually figure the stuff out with a few well placed questions ("So you're saying this CPU thing is like the carburator ?"). Anyways, in contrast, women seem to have (in general) much more difficulty in relating abstract concepts to more physical/familiar counterparts; they're more confortable sticking with purely abstract things, not crossing over with metaphores and real-life examples.
Let's take our favored example : Math. I'd have to say that 90% of all women I've known totally suck at math, yes even my geek mother. It's a very exhausting experience watching my gf do her math homework, mainly because she asks me more questions than she has to answer. How hard can it be to understand that a trapezoid is really just a square + 2 triangles ? I must have spent the whole afternoon shoving some spatial sense into her head.
Anyways, PC's are prime applications of this abstract-to-concrete train of thought. We have small rectangular icons we call "objects". They're not the objects like coke cans, or long-range throwable desk phones.. but if you can look beyond the physical aspect, the computer representation of an object is right on par with the real-life object. This is the key analogy that most female specimens seem to have trouble with. I'm not saying they're too stupid to figure it out, because the ones who persevere DO end up grokking the goods, but it's a relatively long process for women, at least from my personal observations. IMHO, women who have difficulty with this type of symmetric thinking are the ones who shy away from technical jobs because they have more trouble deriving solutions when faced with unexpected hurdles.
Another thing I've noticed is not necessarily the hostility of non-geeks vs geeks, but more importantly the reverse situation. Intellectual, technical types such as myself look upon the rest of the crowd as somewhat ignorant and pointless. Spending a day without thinking, without creating.. that's a wasted day to me.
My gf throws a small fit whenever I spend more than 10 seconds at the keyboard when she's around, which usually results in her being totally ignored for a few hours to pressure her. It's a natural reaction to her hostility toward my career, and I'm sure it gives her a bad impression of the type of people I work with. We're all highly focused tech-gods, each trying to prove him/herself right and the other person wrong. This holds for "geek girls" as well. We have a spoonful of them here, and they're a bunch of sore-tempered perfectionists. Now quite frankly, I'd rather have a dumb but sociable assistant, than these long-haired psychos. Anyone who knows a true geek girl will agree with me that they're independent, stubborn, and aggressive. Just like us guys. The problem is that this behavior may be expected in men, but most managers just don't know how to handle it in women. The workplace is such a gender-centric environment. I'm one of two tech guys transplanted into a human resources department, and wouldn't you know, we're the only guys on the whole floor. Managers hire along certain gender patterns, and people apply for work along similar patterns as well. All these things are slowly changing with the implementation of a gender equity process, but for the time being, every single department is dominated either by men or women. And gender favoritism set aside, there will always be more guys in tinkering work and more women in paperwork. That's just what we each do best.
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
This is mostly because of carrer choice. Tech jobs can pay very well. Some people feel that gender pay inequality is bad for society in general - contibuting to the childhood poverty rate and such.
There are rather more factors involved. Many of which are outside of "employment" issues. One of these is that whilst it is not acceptable for a man to "marry for money" it is acceptable for a woman to do so. (Women demanding husbands and boyfriends earn more than they do undoubtedly contributes to these kind of statistic.) Another factor is that state and charity "welfare" are often not gender neutral in their application.
Much of this statistical difference could be accounted for by men having to "pay their way" more often than women.
There are lots of reasons but I believe that the 70% figure only counted people who actually work, so housewives and welfare mothers weren't counted. The statistical analisis concluded that the biggest determing factor in one's pay is one's job choice (No, really?) . There are lot's of other factors but carrer choice was the biggest. Women who don't feel pressure to be head of the household, because their husbands make more money, may choose less demanding positions that don't pay as well. But remember that there are single mothers, single women, women who don't subscribe to the man-as-breadwinner mentality and women who don't end up with a high-earning man. And with the increasing finacial pressure on the middle class (it's well documented that the middle class is shrinking) 2 income households have gone from being an option to being a necessity.
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
The chicklets they quoted were super annoying. Makes me wonder whether most highschoolers are that vapid and grateing or if the reporter went out of his/her way to pick the most inflamatory comments.
Why don't they want to? (Score:2)
I don't think it's because they are "wired differently". I think it's because of unconcious social conditioning. Subtly, our parents and schools have molded our expectations, based on theirs. Most girls, no matter how 'progressive' their parents are, have dolls, and most boys, have action figures. The mode of play encouraged is very different. What does this suggest? Sure, you can brush this off as of no real importance, but these small differences when we are children is what make us into the adults we are and what controls what we want to do. I bet if girls had more of a chance to play with computers when they were young, and if they were not discouraged, there would be more women in technology.
Note: when I say 'discouraged', I don't mean directly being told they aren't smart or that computers are for boys. I refer to the subtle pressures of their teachers and classmates. (Don't kid yourself, they are certainly there. Despite being in the same classroom, boys and girls often DON'T receive the "same" education. Reliable studies have shown that boys are more likely to get chosen to answer questions, for instance.)
---
More grrlgeeks (Score:2)
Re:Whatever happened to beer? (Score:2)
I'd believe them, except that... (Score:4)
female population growth (Score:2)
CAD, kicked, good [cadfu.com]
Re:Girls don't watch the Man Show or play Football (Score:2)
it wasn't every woman they asked, it was every woman they showed. They probably asked 50 women and edited it down to the 5 funniest. That's how t.v. works. I'm sure if they asked guys the same questions, except making the penis smaller they'd get simmilar results.
Although, they probably didn't ask any latina or black chicks
Quoting my MALE hubbie: "I've seen teenagers getting high for the first time not giggle during the man show, I'd rather read Bazooka Joes. "
Re:More grrlgeeks (Score:2)
I also work a co-op job to pay for school. In both companies I've worked for, women filled less than 10% of technical roles. Most women were in accounting, management, sales, and other non-geek roles. The engineering, quality assurance, technical support, and IT deparments were almost completely staffed by men.
You should check out this [slashdot.org] gender poll on Slashdot. Note that out of over 20000 respondants, only 5% clicked on female. It's not unsubstanitated. There are far less women in this field than men, much to the dismay of us men. We wish there were more girls interested in this area, but the linked story is probably right. If more women found computers to be an area of interest, many of us might have been less angsty in high school. <grin>
Re:Important!=powerful (Score:2)
If everyone agreed with everybody else, this planet would be boring as hell. =)
The trouble comes when a group decides that their world-view is the "right" one. There is nothing so arrogant as believing your personal belief system is more valid than someone else's.
This is why I so dislike these politically correct societal revisionists telling me that "my kind" is responsible for "repressing" group X. Instead of pointing fingers at me and demanding restitution, why don't they do something constructive and help out the underprivileged?
--
Some women have what it takes (Score:2)
I know I'm probably sounding like a pretty chauvanistic jerk right now, but the same thing goes for guys who are getting into the industry just because it offers larger salaries. The only reason to get into a technical field is because you love the field and you have a talent for it, not to "balance out the gender gap" or to "make the big bucks".
That's just my thoughts on the matter.
Re:Okay, so I'm some sorta sicko. . .^_^ (Score:2)
*nod*. What I think is worthwhile pointing out is that these people who say "look everyone, the geek industry isn't 50% male/female, there's something wrong here" really don't know fsck-all. They start from the assumption that what works for members of one sex works for the other and say "all probabilities are 50%". Er....
What's *wrong* with there being an uneven distribution of skill level, interest, suitability, whatever, between the sexes?
(Stereotypical caricature alert: I wouldn't "go for" a woman into chopping trees and I would be surprised if all females on the planet "went for" guys who knitted and sew!!)
~Tim
--
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
Shouldn't have to. But this is the real world. In an environment where everyone "owns" her/his projects (and everyone is over-worked), how do you deal with the loss of a quality employee for six months?
It's very difficult to transfer all the knowledge, the contacts, the understanding of a project to someone new - particularly if the recipient is already burdened with her/his own work. It's even more difficult to train a temp or a new employee.
There can be a definite expense to the company to lose an employee on maternity/paternity leave. Legislation or not, it's still an inconvenience at best.
Touche.
Labour law is one thing. Working environment is another. Is it reasonable to expect in this industry that when you return after six months, that nothing will have changed?
In that time, customers who used to deal with you directly may have forged new contacts with your co-workers. You may have been passed over for promotion. Projects you were working on may have wrapped up.
All of these are very possible. They may be unjust, but nobody ever said life is fair. It's definitely a setback.
I have a problem with this reasoning. Often these types of grants are very poorly advertised, and the only people who end up getting them are the ones whose parents know about them in the first place - not the parents who work 60 hours a week in some hot kitchen to make ends meet.
Studies have also shown a predisposition towards different types of "play" in infants - who are very unlikely to have been contaminated by social expectations.
I don't think it's entirely valid to point to just one study and say "this is conclusive proof". There's no such thing as a conclusive study in psychology. It's virtually impossible to design a study that isn't riddled with confounds. Nobody is really sure how much is nature or nurture... but pretty much everyone agrees by now that most behaviour is a product of both.
Good for you! I think this is exactly more of what's needed. Positive role models, not legislation. More importantly, active participation for everyone involved, not selective exclusion by gender.
--
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
I have a collection of lectures by Ursula Franklin (a retired physicist from the U of Toronto) that sort of addresses what you're talking about. She doesn't go along gender lines though. The book is very dry too. I hope she was a much better speaker.
But anyways, she does mention a book called "Economic Anthropology" by M.J. Herskovits (NY: Alfred A. Knopf, 1952) that apparently addresses some of the holistic/directed issues.
For the record, while I wouldn't go so far as to generalize and say women are better, I agree that both approaches are complementary.
Furthermore, it's just more evidence that men and women aren't the same. Why do we have to deny this? It is such anathema to our society.
--
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
That is a very slippery slope you've built yourself there. It has been very well documented that in general men have much better spatial perception than women, while women have superior language ability.
This is just one of many studies from a quick Google search: from John's Hopkins [unisci.com].
Also, social trends != discrimination. If you don't want to work in an industry because there's a large proportion of "geeks", I'd suggest that you are the one who is prejudiced and discriminating.
--
Re:Forgot a comment... (Score:2)
My little demonstration got you to admit that YOU DON'T KNOW ME.
How does that crow taste?
Think before you judge next time.
Gotta give you credit though - you flamed me with your real name and I respect that. The one other person who flamed me was an anonymous coward as well as a hypocrite.
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
You fucking hypocrite.
Re:Finding a geek wife (Score:2)
Case in point: When my wife first moved in with me around four years ago (and about three and a half years before we finally tied the knot), she knew virtually nothing about computers. Before going to work one day, I sat her down in front of my PC and showed her, "this is how you switch it on, this is how you connect to the Internet, this is how you can send email to me at the office, and--oh yeah--here's where the Web browser is." It didn't take her long to get hooked.
She continued her explorations, learning about different things the computer could do. I provided her more help as she needed it, showing her how to use the word processor and other applications. Eventually, it got to the point, about a year and a half ago, where I had to buy her her own machine because she and I were starting to fight over mine. The one I bought her was more powerful than mine, and its arrival not only restored domestic tranquility, but enabled her to further expand her knowledge.
Today, she uses that box for at least several hours every day. She corresponds with family and friends via e-mail, shops online at many different sites, talks with people around the world on ICQ, and listens to music via RealAudio and MP3 (she even rips her own MP3 files, stashing them on a Samba server I have set up). I've added a CD burner to her system recently, and provided her with additional software as she needed it. After she got jealous of my Palm VII, I bought her her own Palm IIIe, and she's rapidly becoming proficient in its use. Her machine runs Windows 98, but she wishes that the people working on WinModem support under Linux would get something working so she can try it out herself. She's not a programmer yet, but she's been thinking of learning something like Visual Basic or Java; she has, however, been learning HTML. She now has no problem understanding computer talk; if we ever go shopping for a notebook for her, I think I'll just let her talk to the sales guy.
My advice for anyone else contemplating attempting to bring out your SO's inner geek:
Our experience has been generally positive; it has improved my wife's self-confidence as well as her marketable job skills, and it's also helped our relationship. Here's hoping you have the same good fortune.
Eric
--
Obviously, all technology was created by males... (Score:2)
I think the reason that most Males pursue IT-related careers is because they love technology, where as most women don't. The big question is, however, *WHY* do we like technology?
My theory is simple: All technology was sreated with one aim: Women...
Fire --> Keep warm, whilst seducing women.
Club --> Threaten and impress women.
Printing press --> Look at women.
TV --> Watch women.
VCR --> Watch more women.
Internet --> Look at neked women without having to go into embarrasing shops.
etc...
It could easily be true, you've got to admit...
Michael Tandy
NEWS ITEM: Male Career Under-Representation (Score:2)
"We bring you the bust, re, best in news!"
NEW YAWK, NEW YAWK:
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
in many cases, they don't. however, in many cases, they don't, because they have been conditioned out of it, or just outright told that they could not do that becasue of a simple accident of gender. I'm not all so old (hell, I haven't even finished my BS yet), and I've been told that more than once. now, I'm not claiming that this is a universal experience, but it seems to be fairly widespread.
oddly enough, people do hire me quite readily, and I really do resent the implication that certain people have been known to make (not directly to me) that (in general) it's easier to get by in the computer/science/engineering field as a female, becasue standards aren't as high. as you say, the emphasis is on what you produce -- and if it isn't, it should be.
These fools acts as if thirty years of conscious gender equalization did nothing to level the playing field.
oh, it did. now jobs aren't listed separately by gender, so these jobs are open to women like me now. women aren't systematically excluded from technical schools. etc.
what do we see? a dramatic legal change in status. however, there are some things that are slower to change -- specifically people. right now we get a few types:
1. the throwback -- either older people or people who learned attitudes from them that I am really emabarrassed to hear expressed (example: my step-grandmother said at dinner the other night "well, I don't understand this fuss about women not being paid as much as men. they aren't as competent, and have babies to take care of". it got worse as she tried to backpedal when everyone's jaws dropped)
2. the over-compensator -- if anyone ever were to give me a chance NOT on my merits as a researcher and a scholar, but instead on my femininity, I would be very, very, very upset. there are people who want to "do a favor". they aren't. truthfully, I've never seen this type in action, but the guy I work for says that they exist -- and that, do what I may, graduate school admissions people have a different standard for female applicants. to them, I have to say that lowered expectations reduce the ability of the objects of your (surely unconscious) contempt to perform as her peers.
3. balanced people -- the people who don't have a heart attack on a MUD or a BBS when I happen to mention I'm female, specifically, and the ones who don't see me only as one of a few prospective dates in the EECS department -- and who don't get frustrated beyond belief when they find I don't want a date, thank you very much. they expect that I'll do as well or better than they do, since many of the females who make it as far as college in a technical field tend to be many of the most competent people in the department.
until we have more balanced people -- which will take time -- people who don't have to consciously compensate for any contempt of their own or others, perhaps you should think twice before posting a diatribe of that type. we'll know we have arrived when it simply isn't an issue anymore -- and if you ask women in these professions, you'll find that many of them consider it one.
Lea
Girls, Computers - Crap on this thread (Score:2)
There doesn't have to be a 50/50 split in everything - however, when the discrepancies are startling, they should be examined.
I don't mind so much, being outnumbered. I'm used to gaming circles, where females are decended upon by geeks desperate to meet a girl that they have something in common with. I don't mind so much because I see it changing, every day. But the crap on this thread scare me equally, 'cause for every girl who's willing to put up with the undercurrents of sexism, there's prolly five that will walk away.
Take a look at the posts in this thread. How many of them that are moderated up are from women?
-Noiz
---------
Re:(Sorry I'm late...) (Score:2)
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
If you assume that I didn't explain what a vector was after we were done chuckling, then I can only feel sorry for you. Perhaps someday you will learn that refraining from judgement before you know all the facts is what makes a mature person.
Re:Geek Girl and proud of it! (Score:2)
Well...   since everyone is "outing" themselves... hee hee.. might as well join the club.
Yes, I'm a geek lady and one in a management position as well.   I think that the times, they are a-changing, and for those who aren't aware (although based on most of the comments here, people ARE aware), alot of those old "keypunch" operators and data-processing clerks (traditionally the "female" IT occupations) have made the leap to higher tech....
When I was going through college in the late '70s-early '80s, the Computer Science departments were just forming.   Most of the folks who I knew were interested in a career in computers, were electrical or mechanical engineers who might have taken some programming classes in COBOL or Fortran...   Otherwise, folks learned on the job.
Funny how times have changed....  for *everyone*!
Re:Forgot a comment... (Score:2)
Re:Watch what they do, not what they say (Score:2)
Perhaps I need to give you an analogy, as you clearly don't have much real world experience besides being jealous of some person who plays games.
That man is like a man who goes to the surplus computer store to buy computers. Sure, he may get a lot of 386s (they are only 5$ each!), but they are cheap and slow compared to what you get if you put out the effort. Do you just want to play some quick Doom before deciding to buy another cheap computer, or do you want to work hard to get that nice K7 fully loaded which will last you for years to come and do everything for you?
Your decision.
---
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
actually, that's a pretty damn good description of what my boyfriend does, since he's a MechE geek... he actually will not go to parties that he knows are all computer geeks (think Eta Kappa Nu banquet -- he hates to dress up, and he hates to talk about programming)
he's a sweetie, and I can't blame him, becasue the humor gets pretty bad when the EECS geeks get together!
Lea
Re:(Sorry I'm late...) (Score:2)
Re:I think you miss the point . . . (Score:2)
Ok, I just have to say this here. I am SOOO Tired of everyone screaming about how everyone is equal. Everyone is NOT EQUAL! NOT! People are Equal in the Eyes of the Law. That does not mean that if JoeBob the weightlifter can bench 415 then I can bench 415, It doesn't mean that if I can strip down a computer to its component parts and then reconstruct it that JoeBob will be able to. We all have different skills, different abilities. Those skills and abilities aren't always divided along racial or gender lines but sometimes they are. No one is Equal to me, I am not Equal to anyone else. We are all viewed as equal by Law. Which is an ENTIRELY DIFFERENT concept.
So now that I've got that rant out of the way you can continue your conversation.
Kintanon
Re:I want to be a geek... wait i *am* one. :) (Score:2)
Maybe when our society stops thinking of child birth as such a wonderful accomplishment that will decline some. But everyone praises these couples that have 8 kids at once even though there is no way 2 people can support 8 kids. People need to realize that there are 6 billion of us, that's enough for now, let's chill out on the breeding for a little while and learn to manage our current population.
Kintanon
Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:5)
Back to the topic at hand, why is it that people feel the need to try to push girls into technical careers? From my experience most females including the ones that are good at Math (both my last two girlfriends got A's in Calculus II but one's an English major while the other is studying criminal justice) do not like technical fields. Frankly the crap about gender imbalance to access computers is a load of bull, this isn't the fifties when women couldn't eat without a man supporting them...any woman worth her salt can get a job and buy a PC or go to the library. The last time I checked the neither CompUSA nor BestBuy was discriminating according to sex. Also, the article describes negative social pressure for women to get into technology, but fails to mention that until the Internet boom of a few short years ago there was negative social pressure for men to get into technology as well. I remember being teased and taunted for being a computer geek while in school and even when I grew older I was still looked upon by others with disdain, off course being uninterested in sports probably didn't help this.
PS: I am very tired of self righteous people who want to mold the world in their own image. Women don't like technical fields, so what? Men don't flock towards positions in elder care, nursing or child care yet I don't see articles bemoaning this.
Re:Our Sad Technical Frat (Score:2)
What?!?! Where do you work at? Every place I've worked since college has consistently been a melting pot of white, asian, asian indian, latino, etc. men and women, and yes, several gay men/women too. I think you're grossly oversimplifying by saying the industry is flooded with nothing but "straight, white males". The fact here is that the computer industry is one of the most diverse that there is! Sheesh... Someone's got a chip on their shoulder.
Blatant example of Cultural Engineering.. (Score:2)
girls as geeks (Score:2)
i think that another thing that holds women back from achieving really well in technology is that to be a true uber-geek you need to put in really long hours. technology has to be your 24hr/day obsession. i think that most women would rather go home at the end of the day, see their friends or family and have a little more balance, a little more of a life.
The 'Coolness' Factor (Score:3)
I still look basically the same. 6' 1", 210 athletic pounds, dark blonde hair, blue eyes. The anti-geek. But when I was lifeguarding and in college, I picked up WAY more girls than I do now, even though I am exposed to just as many.
My personality is basically the same, but that twinkle in my eye and uncontrollable grin that takes over my face when I talk about encryption or compression or alternative operating systems seems to be a genuine turn-off to girls.
I don't know if they are intimidated by me because they don't understand what I'm saying or they are simply assuming that I'm a geek at heart (which I am) underneath my athletic frame.
Girls are taught that geeks are not desirable men. Here on
I don't wear glasses. I'm not fat. I don't shoot milk out of my nose when I laugh. Well... I *usually* don't...
But once girls find out what I do, I'm suddenly a geek.
I think society's perception will change in time as the IT profession becomes more and more important. Network engineering will one day be thought as 'cool' of a job as being a lawyer or doctor.
The upper echelon (top 15% or so) already makes the same amount or more money than the other 'prestigious' professions. Respect will come in time, I think.
Many people are already dismissing the 'geek' notion just because someone is into computers. But even more are clinging onto the stereotype. People in my company can't even comprehend why I make 2x to 3x more than they do. Sometimes I feel like handing them a keyboard and saying, "If it's so easy, YOU do it."
If they really get to you, just do what I do. Hack into their home machines and leave a "y00 h4v3 ju$7 b33n h4xx0r1z3d bi 4 31337 h4xx0r d00d. $$$$$$$$$ EZ $$$$$$$$" message on their screen.
They'll be your best friend the next day
Remember, you aren't getting paid big bucks for what you know. You're getting paid for what the rest of the world doesn't know.
Knunov
not necessarily true (Score:2)
Anyway, I've known just as many geeks who were female as male. Just because a girl doesn't talk about Star Trek or whatever doesn't mean she doesn't like computers, or isn't good with them. I think if you're going to just go from initial impressions, yeah, you're going to find that guys are alot "geekier" than girls. But I find there really isn't too much of a gender split, except on the most shallow levels. Even that is overgeneralization, as that I've known girls who WERE the stereotype.
I guess what I'm trying to say (albeit poorly) is that if we're GOING to make over generalized statements like this, we need to define what makes a "geek" versus "non-geek". Personally, I define it as "devotion regardless of popular opinion". If someone does computers because they think it's the cool thing to do, then they're not a geek. If someone loves obscure movies not because they're obscure, but because they do regardless of what anyone thinks(good or bad), then they're a geek.
As for the article, consider the source
Re:I'm shouting this... (Score:2)
Toss in a non-unreasonable legal interpretation (if a broader word is used instead of a more precise word, the author must have chosen it deliberately) and a bit of fear-mongering about the Law of Unintentional Consequences, and you get the charming theory that the real effect of the ERA will be to prohibit laws banning sex with members of the same sex (remember, the ERA was debated in the 1970s when gays didn't dare show themselves outside of a few major cities), interracial couples (ditto), to say nothing of pedophilia, necrophilia, etc.
Look at the current debate over "gay rights" and multiply it 100-fold. Most of the opponents of the ERA were misogynists of the type that you only find in the Southern Baptist Convention today (or am I the intolerant one for mocking their stated belief that wives must be subservient to husbands, women must stay out of the pulpit, etc.?), but a significant number of liberals were also concerned with the ERA because of the very real possibility that it could be viewed as covering more than intended.
Unfortunately, as another poster observed other people are defining "gender" in psychological terms. It's not <i>that</i> far from "homosexual female trapped in male body" to "13-year-old horndog trapped in 25-year-old body." The latter may even be a valid description of someone with arrested sexual development, but that doesn't mean that we as a society must condone pedophilia.
Bottom line: you may have had a point a generation ago, but this is one area where the language is rapidly evolving.
Guess I'm a sports geek too. I like BASEball! (Score:2)
I hate football AND basketball. Too tense. Too commercialized. Too many rules. Rigidly timed games. Too much stats. Anything deviating from the stats is called an "upset". I always wonder why people watch if they have such a strong pre-determination of what they're about to see.
Baseball is far more relaxing and enjoyable to watch. A little more random. No clock to worry about. No scary buzzers. Far less cheating. No stress. Which is exactly what I need after racking my brain staring at severely inbred (inheritance wise) C++ code.
Aren't there any baseball fans anymore?
Relax. It's okay. (Score:2)
Quite frankly, any group of guys has a tendancy to stray toward the "geeky" side of things. Don't think that "geek" is not synonymous with "aficionado". It is. Listen to the boys talk about the big game. Listen to the connoisseurs talk about last year's Merlot. The subject doesn't change the pattern.
I looked long and hard to find a job were I couldn't describe the Devel. Dept. as "The Nerdery". Some people are willing to work in them, but I won't. I think women, in general, aren't fulfilled by the same work as men. Who expects them to be?
I should probably note that "women in general" means an assortment of girlfriends, past and present, sisters, cousins, etc. and I'm in no way claiming to speak for all woman-dom <shudder>.
The Point: Equality has nothing to do with the number of different groups in any one situation. It just means that everyone has the same access. If a woman doesn't want a job from a tech co sweating to give here one, all the power to her. I'm not going to worry about it, because she'll find another way to contribute to society.
ps. A belated Happy Canada Day, Canadians! Um... is Independence Day "happy"? Anway, a premature Happy Independence Day to those denizens of the U.S. of A.
Reality is Sexist (Score:2)
Re:Girls don't watch the Man Show or play Football (Score:2)
I always find these postulations ridiculous. Human nature is similar enough between genders and external factors are constant, so it's not like we would program computers by arranging flowers on screen and all computers would crash once a month. The only difference that would matter is that we would all be reading an article about how guys don't want to be geeks.
And if you are interested in the influence on early computing by a woman, look up Grace Hopper [yale.edu]. Of course geeks might not be too happy about her support of COBOL.
OOG TELL SECRET TO GETTING CHICKS!!! (Score:3)
OOG READ POSTS HERE AND STARTLED ABOUT PEOPLE HERE WONDERING WHY THEY CANT FIND GIRLS!!! OOG KNOW NO WORTHWHILE GIRL COULD STAND OBNOXIOUS PSEUDO INTELLECTUALISM OF MANY POSTERS HERE!!! [slashdot.org]SO MANY SLASHDOT PEOPLE KNOW-IT-ALLS, KARMA WHORES, ELITISTS, ETC!!! IF YOU LIKE THIS IN REAL LIFE, NO WONDER PEOPLE NO LIKE GEEKS!!! PERHAPS LEAVE MONITOR, CLOSE PROGRAMMING WINDOW, AND LEARN ABOUT REAL LIFE!!! AFTER ALL, OOG NEVER GO NEAR GEEK CAVE WOMAN BECAUSE OOG CANT STAND SUCH ONE DIMENSIONAL MENTALITY!!! [slashdot.org]
OOG ALSO NOTICE HOW CERTAIN PEOPLE USE GENDER STORIES AS WINDOW TO START BRAGGING ABOUT CONQUESTS AND TRY ONE UP PEOPLE!!! GUESS WHAT, OOG CLUB MORE CAVE WOMEN AND DRAG HOME TO CAVE THAN YOU HAVE KARMA POINTS!!! BESIDES, NOBODY CARE ABOUT YOUR LITTLE BRAGGING STORIES!!! OOG BET YOU ONLY GET RELATIONSHIP BY SETTLING FOR UNATTRACTIVE CAVE WOMAN!!! [slashdot.org]
IF YOU WANT ADVICE ON WOMEN, OOG HAVE THIS TO SAY: CLUB WOMAN AND BRING HOME TO CAVE!!! IF THAT FAIL, GET CAVE WOMAN DRUNK ON CAVE BEER AND HIGH ON CAVE WEED!!! THAT NEVER FAIL!!! [slashdot.org]
Re:Blatant example of Cultural Engineering.. (Score:2)
Who encourages them to do all of these dastardly girl-stereotype things? There is actually quite a bit of evidence that much of this behavior is not learned, but is instinctual.
I know for a fact that my little 18 month girl already displays many of the stereotypes that you are ascribing to cultural engineering. For example, her favorite toy is a ugly hairless little doll that apparently materialized in our home. I am not exactly how it came to be in her possession (neither my wife nor I was interested in giving our daughter toys that were "gender biased), but I don't dare take the darn thing away from her. Last time I took it away she wandered around the house looking for it for hours, crying all the while. She doesn't even form sentences and she is already playing with dolls!
I am not stating that cultural engineering doesn't happen. I have lived in different countries, and so I have a pretty good idea at how important our customs can become. I simply am not willing to believe that there is some mysterious "them" that is using our culture as a weapon against us. Nor do I believe that counter-cultures like the Goths are somehow more enlightened than those that more closely fit the gender stereotypes. Painting my hair green and putting a nail through my nose does not make me any harder to stereotype. In fact, it makes it easier. Now instead of guessing my observers could simply conclude that I was a "Goth," with all that this generally entails.
Cultures have grown, for good or ill, out of the combined observations of millions of people over hundreds and thousands of years. Social norms and morals generally have distinct biological reasoning behind them that has allowed these cultures to pass on to the next generation. In a way cultures evolve in much the same way as the genetic hosts that they are propogated on. The 1950's Beaver Cleaver culture that you rail against is simply a culture that has been fairly successful at being propogated, although it certainly has undergone a great deal of modification in the last few generations.
Men don't like computers either. (Score:2)
I don't think men or women like working in computer fields. The enviornment created by today's high tech companies is terrible. Long hours, no social interaction, constantly fighting stupidity that is out of your control. Most guys in computer fields are unhappy, or at least neutral. You find few working in the field who are truly happy with what they do.
So, what is the difference? Women are willing to put their happiness first, and choose other jobs. Men are more inclined to put up with the crap, in the quest for the dollar. That's why computer sallaries are so high, it's not that techies are really worth that much, rather if they were not paid that much they would go into other fields.
In effect, this is good for women, at least from a mental health point of view, and bad for men. Of course financially this isn't true, and too much of "equality in the workplace" is focued on sallaries, which is a poor way to judge equality.
Re:I'd believe them, except that... (Score:2)
Ugh--where can I get the *real* study? Most studies are pure crap anyway. It amazes me that there are even *published* studies that use bad statistics and 90% rhetoric to get a point across. *Published* studies! My God! Rhetoric doesn't prove anything! Quotes don't prove anything. The quote at the beginning of the article? I can find you *at least* 70 men that would say the same thing.
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
The last time I checked the neither CompUSA nor BestBuy was discriminating according to sex.
Actually, last time I bought hardware in person, I went to CompUSA (or was it Future Shop? I forget.) Anyway I was getting a modem and I was trying to find out which were PCI and which were ISA (since they were all behind the counter and I wasn't wearing my glasses). Every time I'd ask a question the sales guy kept answering towards my husband - who wasn't even looking/listening - since he dosen't deal w/ the computer's guts. Finally Chris realized that this dork was trying to talk to him and he said "Don't tell me, I don't know anything about it"
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
Well, to get off-topic for a moment, I'll bet that if you checked magazines/websites in those industries, you would find such articles. I spend between 5-10% of my day in a nursing home hanging with my Dad, and I know they are desperate for male nurses; many of the female nurses simply don't have the physical strength needed to lift patients.
In addition, the school systems are always looking for male teachers -- so many kids these days are without fathers, that there is a real need for male role models in the schools. And, of course, the public schools want to balance out the gender make-up of the staff. (My wife's school has only one male teacher out of about 20.)
I don't know if it's genetics, cultural biases, societal remnants from bygone eras, or what, but technology is not the only industry that is heavily weighted one way or another.
And just to broaden the scope a bit, the make-up of the nursing/patient care staff at my father's nursing home is about 90% philippina, with a few russians thrown in. That is most certainly a cultural thing -- My sister-in-law (also a philippina) helped care for my father when he lived with me.
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:3)
1) On average, women make less money than men. This is mostly because of carrer choice. Tech jobs can pay very well. Some people feel that gender pay inequality is bad for society in general - contibuting to the childhood poverty rate and such. Some people feel that as long as women have second class finacial status, they will have second class political and social status. Personally, I tend to feel that everyone should have an equal chance to take care for themselves financally and feel these these efforsts help remove barriers.
2) We could use more tech workers and women are an 'untapped resource'. With all the companies lobbying to increase the number of visas, it only makes sence to spend some effort in genreating more applicants at home.
3) Having people from diverse backgrounds working on design and problem solving often yields better results.
4) People already in the industry (both male and female) would, all other things being equal, enjoy having some more women in the office.
What salary ceiling? (Score:2)
Red Herring and Corporate Hypocricy (Score:2)
BoyGeeks and GirlGeeks are not the enemies. Ask any male in a technical field and he'll tell you that he wishes there were more women in his line of work. If a finger has to be pointed anywhere, point it at the people who make choices and actually have impact on the hiring and encouragement of women in these careers (and classes in school). Further, do something about it.
I don't fall for the statistical bullshit. Men and women are different creatures and there are obvious reasons why there are such rifts between careers paths. It's natural. More women stay at home to be mothers. More women take maternity leave. More women work only part time instead of full-time, to take care of their children. This is just the tip of the ice-berg of differences and we haven't even touched the inherent trend of differences that cause is to find our interests in various fields and areas of life.
So do we just shrug and say "well, that's life and we're different -- I guess we'll just have to live with it".
No. When an industry needs more people to populate its positions, it advertises, reaches out to schools, conducts press-releases, gets as much air-time and play as possible, to attract people.
So if we're so interested in bringing more women "into the fold", then lets do something about it. Offer to help children of all ages, genders and nationalities to learn about technical careers. Some will get bored to tears and give up, but others will sink their teeth into what you have to offer and either run with it as a career or enjoy it as a hobby. Don't focus on males or females, just put the information, encouragement and assistance out there and let it affect as many people as possible. You can't force people into anything, but you can offer them a chance that they didn't have before.
And for businesses -- reach out to a younger crowd. Screw gender; just offer more itnernships, employment or outreach programs to the communities that you are 'a part of' and teach skills to people who want to learn. You tend to offer jobs and careers to people who have had the privelage and oppertunity to attend four year colleges and universities, but what happens to the sixteen-year-old boy or girl who pounds away on coding or other engineering projects in his or her bedroom day and night, but can't afford schooling or certificates to catch your attention? You're exhausting your pool of potential employees, because you're failing to help out. It's cheaper to hire out to other countries and bring people in on visas (not that there is anything at all wrong with that, but then you turn around and complain about it -- citing lack of employable people in this country! God, you're such hypocrits!).
Just because the pay-off isn't within your immediate future doesn't mean the investment isn't worth your time and money. If nothing else, the publicity and good-standing with communities for your efforts to help people who want to learn and get a toe-hold in the business will be worth the cash and time.
---
seumas.com
Gender differences: Do we want to train them away? (Score:2)
This [columbia.edu] This appears to be a good technical summary with lots of subsiduary references. Or try feeding "gender differences math" to the search engine of your choice.
One point must be made is that men and women are different. (and oh what a beautiful difference) This difference starts at a fundamental chemical level and is revealed in physical appearance and social behaviour.
One study which I saw some time ago and alas can no longer find study the way groups of high school math students solved problems. The females were happy to accept a solution, even a wrong one, that the majority of the group accepted. While individual males would support their solution against the majority if they considered it correct. (general disclaimer: whether other groups or individuals behave this way, who knows). What it does show is that social behaviours have a lot to with scientific investigation.
There was also that british study that showed that London taxi drivers grew their brains to better navigate the city. I am sure the amazing adaptable human body can make up for any basic gender differences if the appropriate training is provided.
The questions we should be asking are:
1) To what level should individuals be subjected to training that will change their natural gender tendancies.
2) What level of maturity is required before individuals are allowed to select such training for themselves or are others allowed to make against gender training decisions for them.
3) Is it desirable or detrimental to society as a whole to have the natural gender bias result in gender unbalanced professions. Or should some professions require that a reasonable balanced be maintained between the genders.
These are basic rights questions. We have the technology, should we and to what level be using it.
I want to be a geek. (Score:5)
A friend sent me an article once - I think it may have even been posted on /. - about why a lot of girls don't become programmers. It offered up the notion that most girls are reared not to obsess over how and why things work but, rather, over their social relationships.
In an era when it is cooler than ever before to be a dork-guy, when guys who run internet startups are sought after for their bank accounts and their geeky sensuality :), I'm afraid it is still not cool to be a geeky chick. I think this owes itself at least in part to the fact that there are currently so few (relatively speaking).
The geek-chick bandwagon does not yet exist, so it is hard for even those who desire to immerse themselves in all-things-geeky to jump on...
Girls, ladies, women, chicks, babes, broads, pieces-o'-ass or whatever you want to call them are taught to nurture relationships. Doing so inhibits their ability to sit in front of a computer all day and pore over code or read /. A lot of women don't see overclocking a 1 GHz Thunderbird in mineral oil or soddering or disassembling some piece of electronic equipment, rewiring it, and then reassembling it or sitting in front of a computer screen for hours and hours a day as valid, socially acceptable ways to spend their time. For many women, it is a better use of time to spend time with friends, talk, position themselves in a career where they can work with people, rear their children, or involve themselves in charity work. (Don't get me wrong; these are all noble things.)
Moreover, in an effort to support their social relationships, girls (and the eventual women they become) learn they are supposed to worry about grooming, going out, shopping for the latest trends, decorating their homes, hosting dinner parties, caring for their kids (even in a two-career family), and so on.
I know this is fairly incoherent, and I apologize... I wish I were expressing myself better... because I am very passionate about this issue. I am a chick, and I am a dork, and I am proud to be both.
To sum up that which I have spent several paragraphs babbling about: It's still not cool to be a geek-chick. I hope one day it will be, as I am one of the few, the proud, the sexy :) who aspires to be one. :)
-heidiporn :)
Computergrrrl vs. The Man (Score:5)
Act One: Computergrrrl meets the patriarchy
Computergrrrl has been a geek of many stripes for most of her life. About 2 yrs ago, she decided to actually pursue computer programming at school. She went, saw and conquered, and with her freshly-minted diploma in hand, landed a job at an internet startup [interconn.com]. Her job description was titled "junior programmer". The immediate reality, however, was different. This company made two hires in the same week, both fresh grads; one was computergrrrl, the other was a boy who we'll call Rob (well, that's his name). Rob was plopped down at a desk in the "back room" and set to work on ASP stuff immediately. Computergrrrl was plopped down at the reception desk and told to answer the phones and compile a list of office supplies. When computergrrrl pointed out to her new employers that she had no secreatrial training whatsoever, she was told that she should find "it came naturally" and that they "couldn't possible have one of the guys do reception"
Act Two: Geeks ride to the rescue
This company is divided into two layers. Business guys who have the money and call the shots, and coders who write the product (service?) and get free pop. After a few days, the "head coder" who we'll call Gord (well, that's his name) started to realize what was going on. At the end of a week, he confronted the owners and told them that they were denying him a valuable resource (computergrrrl) and that this "misallocation of talent"(his quote) was unacceptable. The owners hummed and hawed over transferring her, finally prompting gord to ask them why they had chosen to hire a woman in the first place, if they really felt her gender precluded her from doing her job. The answer: "We figgured she could do the reception work and help you out with little things in her spare time."
Act Three: making a loooong story short(er)
The ultimate compromise, was that computergrrrl was moved to web design (it's artsy! girls are good at artsy!) and, over time, into some backend coding (computergrrrl to owners "java is a new language. I have a talent for languages." language=artsy.)
The long-awaited moral of the story
Geeks tend to work on a merit-ocracy. You're judged on your chops, not your sex, race, religion (unless it's linux) etc. Sadly, a lot of the hire decisions are made by the money people. They can't tell good code from bad code (hmmm. I can't decipher it. It must be a good code...) and tend to have more "traditional" views of women in the work place. If you're a girl and you're a geek, find a boss who's into computers more than s/he's into money.
thank you for your patience.
Re:Girls don't watch the Man Show or play Football (Score:2)
(although I know some guys who will try to catch the girls on tramolines bit at the end)
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:2)
What about:
Would Hitler have been Hitler if he had a different childhood experience? What about Einstein? Bill Clinton? Kurt Cobain?
Saying that work with children isn't important because you don't make public policy is just plain ridiculous.
If you ask me, the garbageman contributes more to society than your average hack politician. I still remember my kindergarten teacher - her name, her face. Do you remember who your MP (Congressman) was twenty years ago?
--
bull (Score:2)
Girlfriend (Score:2)
That, and since she likes me. :)
Anyone that goes into the field for any other reason isn't a geek.
-------
CAIMLAS
Re:I'd believe them, except that... (Score:2)
natural gap...my ass (Score:2)
If you think that evolution is what has caused different approaches to career selection and emotional state, you've been living with blinders. And if the other guy geeks on this board agree with you it's no wonder they keep complaining about needing a date.
As a girl, from the time I was old enough to know the difference I was treated different from boys. I was given different chores, different toys, different clothes... I was repremanded for getting dirty and told to that "good little girls" sat quietly, spoke softly and politely. My brothers, on the other hand, were encouraged to be aggressive and "take things apart" because they were boys.
Just in case you think my parents were the only influence of this type... I have been told by countless teachers, counselors, and college department heads (the cs department no less) that my interest in computers was misplaced because it was "no place for a woman". All this inspite of the fact that I graduated in the top 10% of my class, have been programming since I was 12 (on an old tandy that hooked to a tv), and continue to rank first in almost every programming class I take which are made up of 99% men.
The only reason I have managed to stick with it inspite of all the discouragement is that everytime I sit down infront of this damn thing I remember how much I love it.
And as for the different approaches to emotions/analytical thought that you claim are "evolutionary". Try to remember when you were 5... you and your sister both fall down, your mother wraps your little sister in her arms and comforts her with soft words and tells her how cruel the world can be...your father tells you to buck up...boys don't cry.
Re:definition of geek. (Score:2)
I would guess that the reason that girls that are geeks are classified as geek girls is that there are so few female geeks that being male is implied. It is unfortunate if it made you feel ostracized, but it almost certainly is unintentional on the part of the geek community.
After all, this is the same group of people that wore directory listing down until there was nothing left but `ls' and yet somehow created approximately 400 legal flags for `tar'. We want a maximum of efficiency without sacrificing for flexibility. Hence the more common male geek is simply a `geek' and a female geek is a `girl geek'. Also note how this notation leaves room for geeks from other species (eg. `alien geek'). You will also note that your geek friends probably don't refer to you either as a `girl geek' or even as a generic `geek' (with the male implication), but instead refer to you more directly as the_v (or perhaps simply v).
The "guys" that somehow supposed that "girls can't be geeks" are A) clearly not geeks, and B) probably delusional. After all, anyone who holds to such an idea in the face of all of the available evidence is clearly not geeky enough to truly be considered a geek.
P.S. I prefer the term nerd, but that is probably because I don't have any friends.
Re:glass ceiling (Score:2)
And, IIRC, the head of the computer division and the head of the printer divisions are both women as well.
Hello?! Did Anybody Read This Sentence? (Score:5)
The problem, then, is that we're the same guys that they didn't want to go out with in highschool and didn't want to sit next to at lunch.
Assuming the line of this statement, I am lead to understand that if the industry was full of handsome, athletic jock guys, they would have no problem?
Further, what does 'geeky guys' have to do with a career? Either you like the technical side of life or you don't. What next? "Gee, I don't want to work in the technical fields because of all those foreigners..."?
If anyone is so nearsighted that they'd give up something they're interested in because they don't like the class of people that are already in that field, then maybe they should stay far away in the first place and go find a job where they can gawk at men with firm white asses as they walk by the Sam Goody's in the mall.
I'm a bit geeky. I was also a very successful jock. I'm a young white male. I work with great people. I work with a lot of talented men and women of all ages, backgrounds, educations and ethnicities. If nothing else, the people in this industry are a reason to want to work in it, not shy away from it.
---
seumas.com
Computers not just for boys? (Score:3)
It's almost as if it's taboo to be a girl who like computers, at least where i live. I was the only girl in the computer club, I was also the only girl really willing to get involved and learn things. Sometimes i feel really inferior compared to the males, it's almost as if they treat my like i'm stupid because i'm a girl... though i try harder then most of them to learn things...
I think parents need to encourage both girls and boys equally. That would be the first step in getting more females interested and it could start to even the playing field.
Just my two cents
Krys
Re:My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:2)
The friend I mentioned in my previous post was recently hired at Ford Motor Company. IMHO, she's a damned good Controls Engineer and could easily have gotten an excellent starting salary great benefits and far better opportunity for advancement at any of the smaller contractors Ford hires to design and maintain their machines.
Instead, she chose Ford itself - not because they offered to pay her more or because she's on the fast track to management. You know why she chose Ford? Because they offer a great maternity leave package and job security. That was the deciding factor.
She wasn't even looking for the biggest salary or upward mobility - she was looking for a comfortable job with a decent salary. A job that won't make her feel guilty leaving when she decides to have kids.
I don't think it's fair to point to statistics that say "women earn less, pay them more" because there's a fundamental difference in what a large number of women are looking for when they seek employment. Yes, those statistics often cover the value of benefits too. But how do you measure something like the knowledge that your job will still be there when you return after a six-month leave?
Yes, but how are you generating those applicants? Are you in fact generating more applicants, or just different ones?
The article mentions big names like Cisco and IBM sponsoring tech camps for girls. What about the boys that would have _killed_ to go to those? Are you going to get Betty Crocker to sponsor Summer Cooking Camps for boys? =) It sounds ridiculous, because it is.
Can't argue with that. Good point. Although, arguably, removing immigration barriers accomplishes this too. Perhaps even moreso.
This is hardly a good reason to push girls into science and engineering. So that it's easier to put together a co-ed office softball team? =)
--
Re:If i was a girl.... (Score:5)
I guess it depends on the geeks. If you've got to be around teenage guys, I think the geeks are certainly better than the alternatives.
Maybe what we really need is for the media to just portray geeks in a better light and feature them in afternoon specials or whatever kids are watching these days.
I dated a bunch of geeks in high school and they were all sweet, polite, intelligent, and a lot of fun. They also seemed likely to want to spend the evening talking or doing something fun and frivolous (contrasting, it seems, to many guys who were only interested in sex.)
And certainly when trying to date, a 5 to 1 ratio is not a bad thing: at least from the 1 side ;-) Even if there are a few that that aren't yet ready for that level of social interaction, you've probably got your pick (and the rest are usually pretty trainable). I don't think any of my fellow female geeks ever had trouble finding dates. And we used to just laugh at the various complaints of the others about insensitive guys who never called.
Ah, well, perceptions can be so important. Maybe we need to start a date-a-geek campaign.
Maybe if we lure the young ones into math clubs and computer teams with thoughts of dating they'll fnd that the subject matter is pretty interesting too. I can just see the posters in the halls:
Or maybe I'm just getting a little silly now. :-)
Chaosnymph - (who recommends geeks to all her friends)
My own (vicarious) experience... (Score:5)
One day in class she was lecturing on gender bias in the elementary school system and how girls/women are discouraged from careers in science and engineering because teachers have this preconception that boys are better (and subsequently devote more time to them).
At one point, she stopped and we listened to this girl in class describe how she, personally, had experienced this phenomenon in her gr. 5 class and that because of this, she was no longer capable of doing well in mathematics courses.
Well, during this whole sob story, one of my best friends was sitting right next to me, snickering. She later recounted to me her own experience in high school: her gr. 13 physics teacher had laughed in her face when she told him her post-secondary plans. Electrical Engineering. He told her then rather dubiously to come and visit when she got her degree.
She's planning a visit in six weeks.
WHY DOES THERE HAVE TO BE A 50/50 SPLIT IN EVERYTHING? Is it not possible that some women just aren't as interested in some things as some men are? And vice versa? Why do we need to engineer our society to be perfectly symmetrical?
Somebody please give me a good answer to this. Explain to me why.
--
Re:Hello?! Did Anybody Read This Sentence? (Score:2)
Whether or not women are actually paid less than men for the exact same amount, quality and length of work and whether or not they are encouraged to participate and enter that workforce -- they are at least understandable qualms to have. If they are valid, then I have sympathy for those people who are slighted by the way things are.
If, on the other hand, the problem is that they don't like the type of people they would have to work with, then my answer is "Tough shit. Go work somewhere else.".
---
seumas.com
Dumb Valley Girls Make Poor Test Subjects (Score:2)
The problem is the attitudes. "Oh, that's so much work" and "oh, you have to like, be exact and stuff..." -- boo hoo.
``It's tough work getting it to work exactly correctly and it's frustrating because one misspelled word and you can't get it to work,''
Referring to Microsoft Corp. chairman Bill Gates, she added, ``I say let him have it all, let him do it all.''
That's the spirit! Let someone else do the work. After all, who wants to be like, all detailed and stuff. I mean, at least when you're at Burger King, the only important thing is that you squirt some mustard on the burger. Nobody cares where or how much!
'`I don't want to take computer science. ... Just looking at it, all the programming and these funny-looking things on the paper. It (takes) so much stuff to do one thing on the computer.''
I'm having flashbacks to the Barbie Doll that used to say "Math is soooo hard! - let's go shopping!"
``The reason why you see more men doing computer stuff is that girls are more ambitious than that. My parents always say, 'Do something with computers,' because it is stable and stuff, but a lot (of people) don't want to be at a desk from 9 to 5.''
Oh my god. I actually laughed out loud at this last statement. "More ambitious"... What, like being the next Britney Spears or Ricki Lake?! And you have to love the "be at a desk from 9 to 5". I'm not sure about everyone here, but most of the people I know, including myself, are at their "desk" probably at least double that. Further, how can you be looking for an "ambitious" career, where you only have to work under eight hours a day?!
It's nice to know that all of us out here who are making wads of cash -- many without formal educations (or even highschool educations) are lacking ambition.
So, like -- ohmygod!
---
seumas.com
Translation for those who do not speak OOG (Score:2)
The 7 step guide to getting a lasting relationship.
Note: if you just want to get laid, you're better off masturbating or going to a party where the <ahem> women go to get drunk and laid (bring extra-strength condoms).
Common myths you should forget:
* Women love to hear about other conquests
* Women will get turned on watching women have sex with women
* Women love muscles and/or bodily perfection
Step 1: be presentable. This means you should shower regularly (i.e.: daily or better), wear deoderant (old spice is nice), and try to have your clothes aranged in a suitable fashion (i.e.: shirt untucked if normal shirt, tucked if dress shirt, and never ever partially tucked!).
Step 2: be yourself. Women are attracted to "together" guys (i.e.: confident and assured), not guys who attempt to be all things to all people (if you're not confident, well, that's really another whole essay in itself). Follow the Unix philosophy, and show that you can do one (or a few things) well. Don't make it a pissing contest between you and every other guy on earth, and don't lie about what you know.
Step 3: understand her motivations. By now you've selected a girl, talked to her, and generally had pleasant small talk with her. Use this to find out more about her, and what makes her tick. Knowing a woman's motivations is like having the source code!
Step 4: gently ease into it. Don't just call her up one day and say, "hey, wanna fuck?" Doing so will not get you anywhere (or if it does, you probably don't want that woman anyway). Assume that step 3 will take a month or more. As you know her better, signal that you appreciate her by offering subtle flirtations (i.e.: you seem stiff, would you like me to rub your shoulders?).
Step 5: learn even more! Now that you have a small relationship started, you can take the opprotunity to learn more about her motivations. This is beyond having the source -- this is "understanding to the point of being able to implement new features" having the source. You should be able to help her with any personal problems she might share with you
Step 6: enjoy the relationship. A relationship is not about sex. It's about having a partner of your perfered gender with whom you have a deep, mutual understanding. Sex (and sexual play) is a fringe benefit (a very nice fringe benefit). If you get to step 5, and feel nothing for her, you're probably going to hurt her a lot if you continue.
Step 7: lead into other things. Now is when you get to consider sexual relations. It'll come as a natural extension of everything you've done so far. Enjoy it.
Addendum to step 2: where to find women you'll like, and how to chat them up.
First off, don't assume you'll get the hotest woman with the curves of a goddess, and the cleavage of the Indian subcontinent. Assume instead that you will find a woman whose intelligence is to the levels of Mensa. Those are the kinds of women whom geeks appreciate the most, and geeks are the kind of men those women tend to appreciate the most.
Obviously, the best place would be your local library, or other place of learning. Find a local woman you know through mutual friends, and talk to her via a neutral medium. Shared parties, shared activities, etc. After a while, you'll get to the point where your conversations are private, one to one afairs. The woman will likely not be interested in computers. Get used to it. You probably don't want your sweetie to be intensly interested in the thing you find dearest to your heart, because having her point out your code flaws can be somewhat emasculating. Get a local Unix buddy for that kinda stuff.
Be attentive. You certainly can appreciate it when people's eyes don't glaze over at the mention of "Unix" or "compilers," so try not to do the same when she mentions things important to her. This will make your conversations flow more smoothly, and allow you two to grow closer.
---
Maybe it's a technology thing? (Score:4)
I realise this is massive gender stereotyping, but perhaps the majority of girls aren't interested in socially-deprived isolated activities like staring at code for hours?
Call me selfish ... (Score:2)
Re:Hello?! Did Anybody Read This Sentence? (Score:2)
Maybe teenage guys (on average, in general) view sex as a commodity more than their female counterparts. At that age hooking up with someone really hot seems like The Most Important Thing In The World. There is the belief (true or not) that hot chicks will fuck/date/marry anyone as long as he's rich. So by that reasoning it dosen't matter where a guy works so long as he's successful.
Getting a trophy wife seems like a worthy ambition to an upwardly mobile 16 year old guy but his female counterpart would be more likely to expect her mate to make as much or more than her. And teenage girls are probaly more interested in the non-sexual aspects of relationships than thier male counterparts (the guys do catch up eventually). So a HS girl who knows that she wants to have relationships with peers and will want to put herself around as many desireable peers as possible.
Of course, geek guys aren't all unattractive, trophy wives aren't as satifying as interesting and intelegent women and being rich dosn't necesarily get you laied. But they'll all learn that eventually.
use the web! (Score:2)
I think maybe the *creative* possibilities of computers need to be emphasised more to get girls' attention, and the web is a great way to do that. When I was at school I would never have considered going into computer science as it seemed really boring, but I ended up following a kind of roundabout route of arts degree -> journalism -> web design -> programming and realised to my surprise that coding was actually really interesting and rewarding and fun. I hadn't expected the feeling of *power* - not in the sense of dominance but the ability to create stuff out of your own head - or the aesthetic satisfaction you get from really elegant code. It was nothing like my preconceived notions of a programming job as being something akin to eight hours of long division a day.
People trying to encourage girls into computers should be using web development as a point of entry, because it really makes it clear how creativity and code interact, and scripting languages like PHP make it really easy to get started. You can learn a few basic principles and then go in whatever direction your imagination takes you, and once you get over those qualms about the 'funny-looking things' you realise there's heaps more interesting stuff out there.
Of course it's still not going to appeal to everybody, and there's no particular reason why Katy Prendergast *should* care about programming if she'd rather be a travel agent or whatever ... just as long as girls get to have a go and see if it's for them before they write it off as 'too technical'.
NAME ANY COUNTRY WHERE THIS ISN'T TRUE?!?!? (Score:2)
This is not an American phenomenon or some white male sexist chauvinistic conspiracy. It is purely Biology 101. You will find the same "problem" in Russia, Israel, China, Latin America, or Africa. Men greatly outnumber females in tech fields across all racial and ethnic groups all over the world.
The genetic differences between males and females simply lead to different tendancies in how men and women use their brain. In short, men tend to think better spatially and thinking of things as objects, whereas females tend to personalize in their thinking. Women have no trouble going into social sciences or practicing law. The men who go into tech fields tend to have the most extreme levels of spatial/objective ability. Even though most men do not feel comfortable or desire a science/math/engineering/tech career, because these fields really demand the most extreme in spatial/objective ability, most people who do will statistically on average be men, thus men will outnumber women.
Now, whether we want to increase the number of females in tech fields is a seperate issue. It depends on how far we want to social engineer people to do certain things because we want everything to be politically correct.
The excuse that women don't want to go into tech jobs because of us geeks is true, but it is not the core reason why women don't go into the jobs. That's like saying most men don't want to go into daycare because they don't like taking care of little children. Anyways, biology is not really interested in what you want or don't want, that is subjective, and for psychology to interpret. Biology is only interested in action, what you ultimately end up doing.
Re:Maybe it's a technology thing? (Score:2)
Danny.
because women are "intellectual aristocrats" (Score:2)
What men, in their imbecility, constantly mistake for a deficiency of intelligence in women is merely an incapacity for mastering small and trivial tricks. A man thinks that he is more intelligent than his wife because he can add up figures more accurately and because he understands the lingo of the stock market, and follows the doings of political mountebanks, and knows the minutiae of some sordid and degrading business or profession, any soap selling or the law. But these puerile talents are not really signs of intelligence; they are merely accomplishments, and the differ only in degree from the accomplishments of a trained chimpanzee.
The truth is that the capacity for mastering them is the sign of a petty mind, and Havelock Ellis, in his great study of English genius, shows that men of genius almost invariably lack it. One could not think of Shakespeare or Goethe or Beethoven multiplying 3,456,754 by 79,999 without making a mistake, nor could one think of them remembering the price of this or that stock last July, or the number of beans in a pound, or the freight rate on steel beams from Akron, Ohio, to Newport News, or concerning themselves about the cost of producing a stick of chewing gum, or the pay of street car conductors, or the credit of some obscure shopkeepr in Memphis, Tenn, Such idiotic concerns are beneath the dignity of first-rate minds.
That women always try to evade them - that they have little capacity for the childish complexity of tricks upon which men base their so-called business and professional skill and cunning - this is but one more proof of their intellectual aristocracy. They are not stumped by such enterprises because they are difficult, but because they are trivial.
- from "Meditations on the Fair," H. L. Mencken, 1917
Yours WDK - WKiernan@concentric.net
Re:glass ceiling (Score:2)
There are two genders, folks, not one. (Score:3)
I think the problem here is that people aren't yet understanding that the two genders in our society are not the same. They have different behaviors (in general), and are interested in different things. Does this mean that one sex is obviously better or superior? Of course not. Does this mean that women aren't capable of some of things men are generally more proficient at (such as programming) or vice versa? Don't be absurd.
My point is that females are just different than males. Just what is so wrong with *most* women not liking the same things as men? Trying to figure out *why* this is the case is irrelevant, and so far it's leading to a whole slew of stupid assumptions in this thread, since it's fairly obvious that it won't change a whole lot in the near future.
I see nothing wrong with trying to introduce females (and maybe more males) to technology, computers, and programming. But specifically trying to recruit more women into computer technology fields simply because the male/female ratio isn't balanced is just plain ignorant. It's exactly the same as pushing more females to become NASCAR drivers or encouraging males to do cheerleading in highschool. And if I don't keep repeating this, some troll is going to flame me: This doesn't mean that [gender] can't do [activity], it just means that most [gender] aren't interested in [activity].
Miranda and Ki (Score:3)
I wonder why it is that girls don't go for guys in IT. Sure, the occasional one of us is a fat slob or turbo-nerd, but I don't think those subsets are in the majority. And, we tend to have more money than the average Joe Six Pack, which is supposed to be attractive (according to the Discovery Channel, because it signals the women that we're more apt to provide for their young).
So, what's up? Why do the women keep flocking to the high-power lawyers (which is just as non-physical, academic a job as programmer), while neglecting us? What the hell is going on?
Re:Maybe it's a technology thing? (Score:3)
And I've seen it happen time and again: the geek get's up on his mountain top to show everyone he's the king and knows everything. And that just turns anyone (not just girls) away faster than
greem stuff between your teeth.
(unless you happen to have a faster processor, more RAM and a bigger HD - "birds of a feather flock together")
Also, I've come across many geek guys that just haven't grown up - they're still playing computer games at 30. Girls mature faster than guys, guys laaaaaaaaaag behind signicantly until late teens (so I'm told) - but some guys just don't seem to break the teen-male mentality. I've spoken to many girls who just take one look at a geek guy and see a child...
I won't start on personal hygiene, because that is something every geek must get together - for the sake of his friends and especially those of the opposite sex.
-Spud.
Trolling For Babes. (Score:3)
Somebody had to say it.
Re:Gender Imbalance....WTF? (Score:5)
--
Our Sad Technical Frat (Score:4)
And the salary ceiling that women hit in technical fields if they don't move into project management or sales isn't much of a positive incentive either.
It's unfortunate because when your whole company is made of 25-35 year old straight white males (like mine), you are naturally going to have a limited number of approaches to a given problem. Divesity is a real benefit. Too bad we don't get more of it.
Don't give me that.. (Score:3)
While it is true that discrimination happens, this has the feel of someone feeling that someone set out to prove there's inequality for the sexes in technology. Look hard enough for something and you'll find it. This story doesn't deal with schools being harder on female students or employers disregarding apps because of the sex of the applicant.. No, this is a study saying that because there aren't enough females in technology, there aren't enough females in technology. Give me a break! I don't believe in effects causing themselves - especially when it comes to people. As a species, humanity is more stubborn than that. And the half a dozen female geeks I know seem to indicate this to be true. They don't care if the industry is populated by men - geeks are what they are and the "geek lifestyle"(?) is the one they've chosen.
I encourage any woman who wants to go into technology and has even a shred of self-respect to do it. If they meet resistance, keep fighting. I feel I was just about born a geek and I wouldn't let anyone in the world take that away from me - they shouldn't either.
Girls don't watch the Man Show or play Football (Score:3)
some truth to it... (Score:5)
This really does depend on which girls you talk to. If it's teeny-boppers who love Britteny Spears and who care lots about what other people think, then yes, they will be concerned about working with 'geeky guys.'
If, however, you talk to a more independently minded young woman, she is more likely to give real reasons besides cooties for not wanting to persue a tech-related field.
The study blames the general sentiment on a gender imbalance in access to computers, and on social pressures that steer girls away from technology.
Now, this I buy. Generally speaking, schools do not do a good job of encouraging our girls to get into science and technology. This has improved in recent times, but there is still a long way to go. Parents also don't always do a good job of encouraging girls to try out computers. In fact, some unwittingly discourage them. (I continually thank my mother for giving me legos instead of an easy bake oven when I was a kid.)
And never underestimate the social pressures women face in the workplace. Not every person can deal with sexist attitudes that many women encounter in tech-related jobs, and so some women choose not to deal with it and persue other careers. While I think this is sad, I personally know two women who left the computer science field because of sexism and other social pressures they continually faced from their peers. It does happen.
Nevertheless, there are many women such as myself who love computers, technology and science, and who thrive on working with geeky people. In fact, for me it's a requirement...
--
brave little toaster
--
Grrls don't wanna be geeks. (Score:4)
she won't stare at the monitor's light
society says "don't you wanna hack all night?"
we just don't care about zeros and ones
and grrls, don't wanna be geeks
no, grrls don't wanna be geeks.
lasted three days in a programming class
those "for loops" and "call stacks" really kicked my teen ass
just can't log into those x-terminals
and grrls don't wanna be geeks
no, grrls don't wanna be geeks.
not what they want, not a geek,
let the boys balance red-black trees,
cuz grrls don't wanna be geeks.
no, grrls, don't wanna be geeks.
they don't wanna, they don't wanna,
they don't wanna, they don't wanna,
grrls, oh, grrls, don't wanna be geeks.
I took a LOT of flak for being a geek in school (Score:3)
Girls can't do math... (Score:3)
definition of geek. (Score:5)
but now it seems that definition has been applied to guys who like computers.. emphasis on _guys_..
It seems that if a girl has an interest in computers, she's singled out as a _geek girl_
girls don't seem to be included in the new definition of geek...
For a while I had a problem with this.. being a member of the female population with a major interest in computer engineering I felt a little put off...
The last thing I wanted was feel excluded from my feild of interest because of my gender... I didn't want to be singled out either..
So I decided to forget about the whole thing until I realized that there was no good reason for it...
Now that I've gotten passed the initial batch of "girls can't be geeks" guys and I've met some really cool people, male and female, who don't have these prejudices and now I get to work on some neat stuff.
Re:Miranda and Ki (Score:3)
Focus (Score:3)
It's one thing to have a talent for something. But to to truly master a field requires a certain amount of mono-mania. This is what makes true masters of their art what they are. It's also what makes many geeks insufferable people to deal with.
Slashdot as a reflection of the geek community (Score:4)
A male has to deal with social pressure from outside the geek community, but within the community, there is support and like minded people. I'm generalising here, but a female has to deal with harrassment from both inside the community and without, and for most of them, it just isn't worth it. I have a tremendous respect for females in technical fields, because they have to deal with social difficulties on two fronts.
In other words, don't treat female geeks as aberrations, prospective geek wives, or otherworldly creatures... treat them as fellow geeks.