I have had the misfortune of seeing how very deep this sexism goes- it's not just sexual harassment that's an issue (though I will say, it's the most pressing), but also the prejudices women meet in the tech world. It's as if there are two major discussions about women's roles in tech: women are either assumed to be underqualified or over glamorized.
Get more women into tech, and then get over having them there.
It's not just enough to get women into tech. You have to get them to STAY in tech. Because that's becoming an even bigger problem. We're here. We're vocal. And then we leave because of crappy things that happen to us. It's a lot to ask someone to be put through that time and time again.
If only there were some sort of world wide network of information where women could write about their experiences and share them with total strangers. I guess we'll have to leave it up to the occult for now.
Have you read Steven Pinkers "The Better Angels of Our Nature"? In it, he argues that even though violent crime is on the decline, and is at a historical low, the perception of violent crime is at a historical high, because we are bombarded with stories about the few violent crimes that happen across the globe.
Could it be the same pattern at play with blogs on the internet?
It would be entirely fair to say that sexism is also on the decline, I don't dispute that. For example, my father can no longer sell me for 3 goats (without my consent, of course). But this doesn't make it a non-issue, just as violence is not a non-issue. Just because a program is throwing out fewer errors doesn't mean its fixed.
Please stop. Stop this. Stop being dismissive. Stop being condescending. Stop trying to intimidate a woman in tech who is trying to speak up about the pervasive sexism that demonstrably deters women from entering the field and then pushes women out when they do try to enter. Stop the bullying. Stop the patronizing. Just stop.
> Stop being dismissive. Stop being condescending.
I am dismissive regardless of gender when poorly argued points are made. It would be sexist of me to "take it easy" on a person because of their gender. If you feel like I am laying particularly hard into this poster, then I encourage you to peruse my post history and verify for yourself that I do not modify my strategies based on gender.
> Stop trying to intimidate a woman in tech who is trying to speak up about the pervasive sexism that demonstrably deters women from entering the field and then pushes women out when they do try to enter.
You say "demonstrably", but that is the exact point that is being argued. You are just taking it for a given. I am sorry, but I would need data to accept the claim. From my personal experience, I have not seen women driven out of the tech industry. I have seen a shortage of women in the tech industry, but I also saw a shortage of women in my college tech classes, and a shortage of women in my high school tech classes, and a shortage of women in my middle school tech classes. I could be wrong, but I don't think girls in 6th grade were discouraged from signing up for a programming course because they were afraid of sexism from the rest of their class. If anyone drives women out of tech, it is their parents who instill gender roles into their children from an early age.
> Stop the bullying. Stop the patronizing. Just stop
You call it bullying. I call it asking for data in a sarcastic manner.
Anyone who is interested in an honest discussion about sexism in the tech industry can easily discover the data, which exists in abundance. If you can't be bothered to do a modicum of research before insulting and belittling a peer who is trying to have that discussion, then you are part of the problem.
> can easily discover the data, which exists in abundance.
I'm interested in knowing what sources you're referring to. You would do every single reader of your post a favor by posting a link to it, instead of referring to its existence but not giving anyone any way to find what you are referring.
Your response makes me think that you don't actually have a specific study or paper you are referring to - you are just referring to some gut feeling you have about the topic.
Can you link me to these statistics that you know about? And can you link me to statistics from other fields? And can you link me to statistics which talk about why the women left the field?
What if women leave the field because they can't countenance working long hours with little social interaction like many men can? That could account for the high attrition rate while not being because of any sexism in the sector.
> The NCWIT reports 56 percent of women in technology companies leave their
> organizations mid-way through their careers, representing a significant and
> costly loss of talent. Reducing the attrition rate by just one quarter
> would add more than 200,000 staff to the IT workforce.
I thank you for the sources. What I was specifically doubting was the linkage between attrition and sexism(which doesn't seem to be mentioned in the text you quoted). I will take a look over the links you provided this evening, but if you have anything more specific to add on the linkage between attrition and sexism, I'd love to hear it.
You naturally cannot use a microscope and come to a fixed, proven conclusion. However, I would say that all of the causes of attrition are very likely based upon a prevailing systemic gender oppression (sexism.)
I guess you cancel out my intuition with your random opposing statement and we are left with me with a ton of links to studies and you with absolutely nothing.
How does discern sexual harassment (between adults with no business ties between them) from flirting?
I ask because I've also seen flirting remakers being conceived as "harassement".
That "the place was not appropriate" or "it was uncalled for" is not a proper answer I think. There would be VERY FEW relationships and/or marriages if people never approached other people out of the blue and in non-appropriate places (in a conference for example).
Are people (men/women/gay) ever SURE about when to flirt with another person?
By this logic, half of the population would have never been born (which might have been a good thing, with respect to overpopulation and all, but that's a different argument).
>What you're saying is, "I am willing to possibly sexually assault someone in order to get a date."
No. That's the strawman you made out of what I'm saying. Can you please respond to what I actually said and not put words in my mouth as you please?
What I'm saying is: some people can also consider completely casual flirting to be a "sexual assault". As in, when you're flirting you're never sure beforehand if the other part wants your flirt. And in many cases, it takes a little time to win them over (or fail). It's not like there's a standard protocol: "OK, you can flirt me now".
And yes, people DO fall in love in tech conferences, or meet possible partners, as they do in ANY other place, including offices and funerals. So they do have the right to approach someone else they like there.
>You're a bad person
And who are you to tell me that?
Apparently in your mind verbally assaulting someone you disagree with and telling them they are a "bad person" is perfectly OK?
That's your idea of making the world better by stoping sexism? Introducing hatr-ism?
Haha, no. You are conflating two things (tell vs ask - ie unrestricted flirting vs social SYN, SYN ACK, ACK). The former can be good, but has massive externalities when allowed at (for example) tech conferences, or any are where you want a 'safe space', whereas the latter is fairly safe, and is not what is usually under discussion. This is a classic coordination problem, which has been solved by game theory. You see, there are actually places that people go to in order to flirt, where that is the primary (or a specific secondary) purpose; singles bars, mixers, dance clubs - there can even be spaces for this kind of stuff inside of other spaces where it would be otherwise inappropriate, for example 'work mixers', or 'geek mixers' at tech conferences. Unrestricted flirting in those locations does not have serious negative externalities, and so is not harassment.
So, the solution is to seriously restrict flirting at tech conferences as a form of harassment, but allow SYN, SYN ACK, ACK exchanges, and have people who want to flirt go to singles bars or 'geek mixer' events.
Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction.
>Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction.
Sure, you need an introduction. I'm not talking about crash pickup lines or jerk behaviour. But if you like the other person, why would you say anything less in a tech conference that what you are OK to say in the park or the library or wherever?
Plus, this isn't 1950 Sunday school. People don't just like each other because of a "interest in who they are as a person". People can _also_ like each other on the physical level, and/or have one-night-stands and the like. And modern people don't find anything wrong with that.
>get it together.
May I suggest you avoid making offhanded remarks about me as a person such as the above?
How about a government mandated quota of females in every industry or company? The EU is introducing this kind of enlightened, progressive approach to gender equality on company boards:
'The Commission wants to see more women represented in the making of economically significant decisions and has proposed a minimum harmonisation measure binding on all listed companies to create a level landscape. By 2020 all European listed companies should have at least 40% of their non-executive directors from the "under-represented gender". The Commission considers this project to be part of the completion of the single market project as well as an initiative to remedy an inequality. The measure is expected to impact upon 5,000 companies from across the Union.'
Get more women into tech, and then get over having them there.