SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
Last edited:
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
YouTube CEO: one reason for the lack of women in tech is its reputation for being a "very geeky male industry."
- Thread starter TTOOLL
- Start date
Autoignition
Member
Yea, ok, sure, mmhmm, absolutely.
So you admit you have nothing.
This conversation is over.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
The ridicule this deserves is outside of the ToU I think.
Oh it certainly is because one participant is incapable of taking any meaningful part in it.
Vicetrailia
Member
But really the point I'm making is this:
Companies want diversity, and the government wants educated well paid citizens, so they will encourage women and minorities to go to STEM because there's a ton of room for growth in those demographics. The same is true for white males, although they are the vast majority are in these fields.
Now if we're trying to get women into STEM and we can't, then that is one thing, but the U.S.has all kinds of potential, especially as we break down barriers.
Companies want diversity, and the government wants educated well paid citizens, so they will encourage women and minorities to go to STEM because there's a ton of room for growth in those demographics. The same is true for white males, although they are the vast majority are in these fields.
Now if we're trying to get women into STEM and we can't, then that is one thing, but the U.S.has all kinds of potential, especially as we break down barriers.
what barriers? Men not allowing to wear stupid t-shirts because women have become so raigle that they can not take this? See this is my problem. Instead of cuddling women we should make them stronger. And again males do not get the support they need. Again Women dangerously outclassing men in terms of education and no one seems to care. Most tachers are now female and no one seems to care even there are studies that show that this is hurting boys in schools as well.
And I will say it again since I never got an answer. Why the hell is it so important to get women in there instead of everyone who is interested? Why can we not support children equaly why not making programs for every underpriviliged child instead of girls? Why can we not support everyone based on their interests no matter if this is a girl or a boy?
Last edited:
Vicetrailia
Member
Gender bias, implicit bias and stereotype threats, sexism and boys club bullshit, lack of woman leaders, mentors and role models, limited networking opportunities and a lack of strong professional networks, unequal growth opportunities, and blah, blah, blah, etcetera.
Corporations want more women, and they drive that on their own because they want diversity, which improves companies. They must reach out and go get and retain women in order to achieve that.
We also have a critical shortage of skilled professionals, and underrepresented groups have a lot of growth potential. You have to reach out and go get them. By the way, we do make programs for underprivileged kids, and actively recruit people of all ages, genders, races and etc. into STEM majors. We try to get people interested, and we support their interests. Society reinforces that we gotta go STEM, fuck your arts degree.
Last edited by a moderator:
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
They do? Or are they just being pressured by left wing nut jobs who constantly play the victim card and scream incomprehensible garbage so loudly that rational thought gets drowned out?
Seriously, the pay gap has been unequivocally disproven and the gender equality paradox proves that given equal opportunity, you do not end up with equal outcome.
Last edited:
Punchpudding
Member
I think the problems used to be laws (actual laws preventing women from working and owning property), opportunities, and culture. There was lots of progress made to get rid of laws and opportunities as barriers (employers must legally provide equal opportunity and equal pay). Lots of progress was even made in culture so today it is normal to see women in any field and encourage that. Let's say that is 2.5/3 barriers removed.
But culture is tricky and has many unknowns. Maybe biology has an effect on personal interests and manifests in culture. If you are aiming for total cultural purity, you need to clamp down on anything impure; that could include speech, ideas, and t-shirts.
Quick guess: if you see gender as a team instead of an individual state, and you see a good job as a position of power instead of an earned responsibility, you'll want to balance power between two teams totally equally.
Vicetrailia
Member
Oh yeah, i forgot about the pay gap. I don't think anyone cares about equal outcome unless measuring the results to better push equal opportunity.
Blood Borne
Member
Absolutely. Even Sweden that declared itself as a feminist government still have men outnumbering women in engineering and vice versa in nursing.
Equal outcomes can only happen with force/tyranny.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
Exactly right.
Unfortunately there are too many @ssolitare types in the world crying for "equal oppotunity" when we are already at that balance point and have been for sometime now. If anything, we are beyond the balance point. But they won't stop until it shows as a perfectly equal outcome. By that time the world as we know it will long since have consumed itself.
what pay gap? How often do you need to see the studies that say these 27 cents are absolute bullshit?
And I will say it again. Women are being prefered and supported all the way while men are not has nothing to do with equality. Women outclassing men in education while men do not get any help has nothing to do with equality.
Vicetrailia
Member
Pay gap is another debate, but it is a commonly cited difference.
You guys are so focused on politics and political optics that we can't even stay on the same subject. I'm not even talking about equality or equal outcome, but now you're going back to women outnumbering men in education, a totally different issue. What do you really want to say overall Dunki?
Blood Borne
Member
It is not a debate. It does not exist. It's been disproven numerous times but people with ulterior agendas keep perpetuating the pay gap myth.
Since this debate seems to be going no where I will quote myself from earlier. Biological difference would make sense if Stem representation was GLOBAL consistent among ALL women and cultures.
The fact is as pointing to the facts above there are MANY countries which have higher women representation in STEM then men. Western cultures seem to have the greatest disparity which seems to indicate culture more than biology being at play. Again when you have the Middle East with a 60% female stem representation and the West with a 30% Stem representation the argument is less about biology than culture. That being said I have some theories that are a mixture of both components which is when women are required to take place in the workforce for survival reasons their courses of study become more about survival and what they feel they made be able to do and be good at long term rather than studying for sheer interest.
Super Mario
Banned
Does the Middle East have more ideal conditions for women?
Of course not, what does that have to do with their 60% Stem rate? Let’s not conflate the issues.
We can acknowledge that measure and then dissect culturally why these differences exist but as with all statistics it gives us a control so that we can rule out factors such as biology.
Vicetrailia
Member
Well in the U.S. we tell people to "follow their passion". We gender jobs/careers, and there are social construct connections to our choices. As much as we think that we look inward, we really look outward. It's more robust and complicated than that, but all of that plays a role in influencing what we do. But that's not exactly the same in some of the countries you listed. I have friends in Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, and Algeria, and their systems work differently. Essentially depending on your test-scores you get funneled into engineering, medical, and whatever schools. Your test scores determine your career, and if you want to switch after you have entered, it's not that easy. People think that we push Science and Engineering here, but they push it more in those countries. Their school curriculum at a base level steers everyone towards those degrees, but of course many don't make it due to not being good students. However, after college women are much less represented in those fields compared to their graduation rates due to the reasons that we all know so well.
Last edited by a moderator:
I absolutely agree, but we can’t distill this down to a biological disinterest in the subjects as a whole either or having less biological inclination which was the argument presented. I do personally believe that it is a combination of factors. Yes women will have different interests at a biological level but in the West where we tie our field of study to our careers and future life success we tend to pursue our perceived options. Similar to how there is a lack of male teachers at the elementary level. It does not mean there is no interest but there is great success for male teachers in middle and high school teaching positions. It’s a combination of traditional gender roles, perceptions of success, and interest. I do not believe it should be a 50/50 split but the factors are far more nuanced than simply biological vs discrimination.
llien
Member
It doesn't look like you have actually watched it.
It's one day old kids, specifically picked up to erase all possible "social conformity" aspects.
Mostly, not exclusively. Difference is very important.
The same applies to girls/boys from the experiment above, boys MOSTLY go for things, but so do SOME girls and also SOME boys do NOT go for things.
It shows why we can't have 50/50 parity.
It doesn't mean people can't have other difficulties entering "non-traditional" profession, such as the one you have described, but that that are other reasons, besides that kind of barrier, that explain under representation of male nurses.
llien
Member
Spot on, thanks. (will take me a while to read through)
I've singled out Asian women as they are the top earners in US, outperforming men of all races (when single), but in our context it, perhaps, doesn't matter.
Lupingosei
Banned
The problem is, man do not choose this anymore not because they are not interested, but because they fear the backlash. You are pretty much always in jail with one foot, so people stay out even if male students desperately also need male teachers on that level. There were a lot of male teachers 30 years ago on that level, but because of the media and crazy parents you better stay out nowadays.
Vicetrailia
Member
Right, I agree.
I did not get you all of the info that you're looking for yet. I found a couple studies but I haven't had a chance to read through them. Hopefully the products one above accounts for the age of the company though.
Last edited by a moderator:
The problem I see it that we try to push women too much into these fields. When women really have the choice they rather chose "traditional" jobs in an more equal country. They often only chose these technical ones if they live in an opressed state/country
I think support is important but this support should be given to everyone interested and not separated by race or Gender. Just let it evolve naturally.
While I agree that many will elect more traditional jobs it also becomes a question of comfort and personal feelings of competence. Are women choosing these jobs because they will be less successful in that role as opposed to a traditional job.
The example, we see the reverse in male elementary teachers which discourages men from teaching at the elementary level. While biology may play a role in the choice, we see that historically men can teach that age level in a variety of cultures and one of the factors discouraging higher male elementary participation are stigmas associated with it.
http://abcnews.go.com/Health/men-teach-elementary-school/story?id=18784172
Today, at 51, Wiederspan has devoted more than half his life to the youngest students at Upper Freehold Regional Elementary School in Allentown, N.J.
"Word got out my first year of teaching," he said. "Parents would call the office to come and visit my classroom to see if they wanted their kids in my class. I remember that distinctly … they just wanted to see."
"
Stereotypes about male teachers, and sometimes mistrust, persist.
"It's very hard to change the suspicion of men who are going to elementary education when there are so few of them," Thompson said. "Schools ask me to talk to men on their faculty and when I sit with them behind closed doors, they say the moms look at them like potential pedophiles.
"If they are too nurturing or a mother comes in and sees a teacher reading in a chair and the child is leaning against the teacher or cuddling him, they freak out," he said. "Men tell me they only have to look in the mom's face to know what they are thinking."
That has never been the case with Wiederspan, he said, although when he first started teaching, mothers showed an unreasonable curiosity about what kind of a teacher he might be.
"I would have literally four or five parents sitting at a table at a certain point in the year observing me," Wiederspan said. "And it was nerve-wracking as an untenured teacher."
I am using this as an example of the kind of environment that can be fostered in a workplace traditionally dominated by one gender. It can be daunting. I say this as my father was a licensed male nurse for years and faced similar concerns.
Yes biology has its place, however cultural stereotypes often seem to be the largest concerns with genders entering into an opposing gender dominated field.
This is why the conversation of "naturally evolve" exists. I would say the discrimination felt by Mr. Thompson is unfair and gender based. I appreciate his ability to understand and look beyond it, however it does not excuse or mean it should occur. His gender should not be an concern when entering his line of work and neither should a woman entering tech. I definitely feel the levels of intimidation of entering those fields is a factor.
This is my point, there should not be intimidation factors based on gender. Those intimidation factors lead to lower participation in that job market. My point with the comparison is that women entering stem fields may feel they may have and easier path in another more traditional profession. The issue of both personal competence and environment factors leads people to take the path of perceived least resistance. My argument is that female interest in Stem fields may be higher, but the stigma of what a traditional stem employee looks like may make them rethink that career path.
But women do not have these stigmatas. Again Yes I know I am biased Feminism but this is also a reasony why these stigmatas exist. Try to argue that you have men to teach not to rape. Trying to make men in almost eevery instance a sexual predator etc is most done by modern Feminism. Same with women. They scare women out of these jobs by making it look absolutely horrible for women while in reality it is not for the vast majority of women working for example in developer studios etc. But overall women at most will be seen as oppressed and the ones you nee to help while men get either ignored or stigmatized like with teaching.
Thats why I said we need to stop genderfy these programms we need to stop stigmatization for men as predators and for women as weak who need help. And you have to begin with this in schools. With programms for everyone so there wont be differences regarding gender/race etc. Separating girls and boys is the totally wrong way IMO.
I'm not so sure that is accurate. Many professions have these stigmas. For instance:
Male nurses
Female mechanics
Male flight attendants
female construction workers (and we won't even talk about the sexual orientation stigma attached to that)
The point I am making is a hypothetical example as follows:
90% of women lack an interest in a career in construction. Of the remaining 10% only 5% elect to pursue the career due to social and societal pressures.
The point is while 90% of woman may not be interested in the career, only half of the the women interested in the career pursue it. These can both be true simultaneously and true equality would be achieve when all women who wish to pursue that career felt social stigmas would not be attached to it. There are no legal barriers, however there are social imprisonments in career fields for both men and women and breaking down those social barriers and stigmas should be something we value as well.
I certainly agree with this part however It would be interesting to know why women have these social preassures and here I think media andyes feminist journalism has something to do with it. They sensationalize every small thing. Like 2 men making a joke at some event which was overheard by some women who later wrote about it. Some stupid shirts etc. They make these news common and sensationalize it to a point which of course women will be influenced and brainwashed.
In the meantime in real life women have no such stories while being part of a development team etc. Best example but be the Atari thing. While people like Wu made a big deal of it. Women who worked with him said it was absolute bullshit and they never felt threaten etc.
And here again men are blamed for these while modern femininsm use the articles to push their agenda of the evil men who wants to hold women down etc...
I think you are modernizing this trend. It has something that has historically happened through all of human history, with or without modern feminism.
An example would be the field of being a physician was thought to be a man's role in the US 100 years ago, even just 50 years ago.
The representation in the workplace, as well as societal norms affect the perception of the job. 20-30 years ago computer nerds were considered geeks and undesirable until modern pop culture made them "sexy" and the job became more appealing. There are a ton of factors to consider but it little to do with modern feminism and more to do with societal norms and expectations of how men and woman in the workplace and their competence is presented. I don't really think feminists have anything to do with the large issue of perception of male/woman roles in the workplace as mechanism from scaring woman from traditionally male oriented jobs. If anything I would think it would show that movement as not very influential while previous feminist ideals and suffrage moved the needle quite a bit on equality and perceptions. Society just started seeing computer "nerds" as normal people and nerdy women are represented as undesirable and unattractive in the media. It will take time for these things to even out like its done with most other industries.
bitbydeath
Member
Nobody is saying women can’t do IT, it is up to them to choose. Same goes for guys. People can work toward whatever jobs they are interested in.
llien
Member
Well, I think disproven is a wrong word here, stats are there and are real, it's the interpretation one is giving to them, which differs.
Some do have illusions that the gap is a result of male conspiracy, but many are not delusional and go after actual gaps: e.g. that motherhood should not hit women's careers harder than men's (and why not?).
What I wonder in this context is, whether me making more money than my spouse (she's younger than me and spent some time at home raising the kids, still works part time) really means that I have more money at my disposal. As far as spending goes, I spend myself maybe half or third what my wife spends. (go show that in stats)
I am not seeing that... at all. "Computer nerd" look like James Damore or George Hotz (actual computer nerds, the former suffers from outism, the latter is typical self made computer genius) or, for older types, Richard Stallman and Bjarne Stroustrup, none of these do not look unattractive in ANY culture I know.
Could you elaborate where you got "normal people" impression?
Zok310
Banned
Yep, my family is the same way, they would rather you do all the tech stuff for them instead of taking the time to learn it themselves.
Well, I think disproven is a wrong word here, stats are there and are real, it's the interpretation one is giving to them, which differs.
Some do have illusions that the gap is a result of male conspiracy, but many are not delusional and go after actual gaps: e.g. that motherhood should not hit women's careers harder than men's (and why not?).
What I wonder in this context is, whether me making more money than my spouse (she's younger than me and spent some time at home raising the kids, still works part time) really means that I have more money at my disposal. As far as spending goes, I spend myself maybe half or third what my wife spends. (go show that in stats)
I am not seeing that... at all. "Computer nerd" look like James Damore or George Hotz (actual computer nerds, the former suffers from outism, the latter is typical self made computer genius) or, for older types, Richard Stallman and Bjarne Stroustrup, none of these do not look unattractive in ANY culture I know.
Could you elaborate where you got "normal people" impression?
https://www.usgamer.net/articles/the-people-vs-nerd-culture
You don't need to do a lot of research to see how much the concept of "nerd" has transformed in recent history.
Take the all-powerful podcast network Nerdist, for example. Its co-founder and spokesman, Chris Hardwick, is a fit, well-dressed, handsome, and affable guy who regularly dates models. When compared to those Revenge of the Nerds-style stereotypes of the '80s and earlier, the differences are pretty stark: Hardwick wears no Coke-bottle glasses, pocket protectors, or orthodontia, nor does he exhibit any strange mannerisms or fixations that peg him as a social outcast--at least, not in public. Is he just using "nerd" to pander to an audience who may connect with this identity?
Fnord
Member
https://www.theatlantic.com/science...nder-equality-the-fewer-women-in-stem/553592/
"
The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM
A new study explores a strange paradox: In countries that empower women, they are less likely to choose math and science professions."
Research is looking like women just aren't as interested in STEM fields as men. When given options, they choose something else. Something they're more interested in.
"
The More Gender Equality, the Fewer Women in STEM
A new study explores a strange paradox: In countries that empower women, they are less likely to choose math and science professions."
Research is looking like women just aren't as interested in STEM fields as men. When given options, they choose something else. Something they're more interested in.
WaterAstro
Member
I think it's more deeply rooted than geek culture. It's what is portrayed as anti-geek.
Society always looked down on the reclusive geek types, especially from females, but that thinking is slowly going away and geek culture is more accepted. More women should be less worried certain images and just do whatever they want. It's up to each generation to slowly teach that, and for education systems to stop enforcing gender-based job roles, like women as nurses.
Society always looked down on the reclusive geek types, especially from females, but that thinking is slowly going away and geek culture is more accepted. More women should be less worried certain images and just do whatever they want. It's up to each generation to slowly teach that, and for education systems to stop enforcing gender-based job roles, like women as nurses.