
Notes from UPenn's Forum on Brogramming and Sexism in Computer Science - tessr
http://tessrinearson.com/blog/?p=226
======
wpietri
For my fellow guys who may be unsure how to participate in discussions like
this without looking like an ass, may I suggest:

Quora's discussion on "What things are most useful for men to keep in mind
when discussing theories or topics relating to gender?"
[http://www.quora.com/What-things-are-most-useful-for-men-
to-...](http://www.quora.com/What-things-are-most-useful-for-men-to-keep-in-
mind-when-discussing-theories-or-topics-relating-to-gender)

Ellen Spertus's classic "Why are There so Few Female Computer Scientists?":
<http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/pap.html>

The handy "Male Programmer Privilege Checklist":
[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege...](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege_Checklist)

"HOWTO Encourage Women in Linux": [http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-
HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-H...](http://www.faqs.org/docs/Linux-
HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO.html)

And that useful reference "Derailing for Dummies":
<http://derailingfordummies.com/>

~~~
wpietri
Not getting the downvotes here. Anybody care to explain? I expected to have
some of my more polemical contributions ride the vote rollercoaster. But as
somebody who often wasn't sure how to usefully participate and who made a
variety of mistakes in the past, I meant this to be helpful.

EDIT: Previously it was down to -3. Now it's back in the black.

~~~
agateform
I'm not sure but its possible people have downvoted your comment because of
heavy feminist bias on some of the links. There are people that see a lot of
hatred of man in feminism. This link might help explain why
[http://www.womenagainstmen.com/media/feminism-is-a-hate-
grou...](http://www.womenagainstmen.com/media/feminism-is-a-hate-group.html)

~~~
wpietri
In my view, feminism is about gender equality. Or, as the line goes, "Feminism
is the radical notion that women are people." As as guy, I'm happy to identify
as a feminist.

So when you say "heavy feminist bias", that plays in my head like "heavy anti-
slavery bias". A) I think it's a viewpoint, not a bias, and B) that sounds
like a complaint from a 14th century ayatollah.

I do agree that some feminists sometimes make sexist anti-male statements.
Honestly, I might too had I, say been violently raped, had the police refuse
to take my rape report because the rapist obviously wouldn't do such a thing,
been bashed in my community as a slut, been told I deserved to get raped
because I wore the wrong outfit, and then been forced to carry the rapist's
baby to term. So although I see that male-bashing as unfortunate, I also
generally think it's an understandable backlash that I try to forgive.

However, I didn't see any male-bashing in those links, so I don't think any
downvoting on those grounds is legitimate.

------
nhashem
I find the "brogramming" thing fascinating because I've never actually met
anyone that has called themselves "brogrammer" non-ironically or non-
satirically. My best friend's cousin is from Long Island and he has cousins
that call themselves "guidos" and intentionally live up to every Jersey Shore
stereotype because they legitimately think it's cool. My experience is only
anecdotal, but I've yet to meet anyone who has actually used "brogramming" as
a serious label for themselves.

My own personal theory is that there are two collective phenomenon at play
here:

1) There's a self-cyclical force here where some people think brogramming _is_
a label some people use non-ironically, so there are things like marketing
materials developed specifically for it, which by definition will be
exclusionary and sexist. This material further spreads the idea that
"brogrammers are real" and everyone gradually forgets that nobody is actually
this ridiculous.

2) There is a fear among programmers that our wonderful merit-based community
accepting of all genders, cultures, and creeds -- which it is, really -- is
going to turn into Phi Delta Toolbag overnight. For a lot of us, myself
included, we've never been one of the "cool kids" and found computers and
technology a much better fit for our introverted personalities. And suddenly
these pink popped-collared polo shirt sunglass-wearing monsters are going to
_take that away from us._

Anyway, I understand why the women at UPenn would be offended by the
"brogrammer" term, sometimes you just don't want to be associated with a term
even if it's satirical. But are there actual brogrammers out there being
sexist, or is this an overblown issue?

~~~
tessr
LOL @ Phi Delta Toolbag.

So, here's the thing. I touched on this (but now I'm wishing I'd emphasized it
more).

Brogramming is moving away from satire. There are actually people who want to
be brogrammers, just like there are actually people who want to be guidos.
Now, almost everyone I know is proud to NOT be a brogrammer (I think some
people slyly enjoy the label, but that's another issue).

I would also challenge your idea that our community is accepting of everyone.
I think we are in theory--certainly, we all want to be--but there's little
things that happen. IMO, the stuff that's been surfacing this week has always
been here. It's just people are getting called out on it now.

And, btw, thanks for such a thoughtful comment.

~~~
ckwang
"LOL @ Phi Delta Toolbag."

I would think that's pretty offensive to anyone who's in any sort of "* Phi
Delta *" fraternity. In a thread that touches on the offensiveness of
stereotypes and subsequent alienation, the irony of both the comment and your
LOL reaction should be pointed out. As far as "thoughtful comment" goes, there
certainly wasn't much thought put into the phrase "Phi Delta Toolbag".

~~~
tessr
You're right, that hadn't occurred to me. I'm sorry--if I'd been a bit more
thoughtful I wouldn't have reacted like that. I was, in part, trying to be
appreciative of a comment that was clearly thoughtful.

Penn sometimes jokingly refer to our CS group (which has the abbreviation
"DP") Delta Phi, especially when we're planning social events or the like. So
it was an amusing coincidence, too.

~~~
katane
Interesting, isn't it? Our direct reactions tend to be the most honest, but we
don't often want to admit that to ourselves for we know that we should be
aspiring to be better.

Tolerance might be the opposite of abstraction, and thats a hard reality in a
field where abstraction has gained us so much.

------
stale2000
Is the stereotype of the frat boy, or tradition "bro" offensive? Not as it
applies to technology or brogramming, but just as it exists by itself, or as
it relates to Greek culture. Does it discourage women from joining Greek
organizations, and is therefore discriminatory or offensive?

IMO, it doesn't discourage women from joining Greek organizations, as there is
a corresponding Sorority girl stereotype and culture that is completely
different from the frat bro stereotype.

To bring this back to the topic, I believe that the brogramming stereotype may
only be off-putting to women as there doesn't currently exist a corresponding
"programmer girl" stereotype that is completely different from the male-
focused ones and is also a stereotype that women might aspire to be like.

As such, I don't think telling people to get rid of there new meme, because
its off-putting to women, is going to be very effective (I mean, just look at
how long people have been trying to get rid of the nerdy CS major stereotype),
but starting your own "coding girl" stereotype just might.

Bryan

~~~
wpietri
So in brief, your theory is that the best way to reduce sexism is to
accentuate gender stereotypes?

~~~
stale2000
Stereotype was probably a bad choice of words on my part as it has inherently
negative connotations. What I'm saying is that there doesn't currently exist a
Computer Science "image", or idea of what it is like to be a Computer
Scientist, that is friendly to women.

I'm just using the logic behind how it would be ridiculous to say that the
frat boy image is putting women off from joining Greek organizations (beyond
having to interact with them), as most women who are thinking about joining a
sorority probably aren't worrying particularly much about becoming a frat boy.

------
pilgrim689
Brogramming and being sexist are two completely different things.

My girlfriend is also in the field of software engineering. Often times, we
program together. However, on rare occasions I'll get together with my male
friends one evening and indulge on Pizza Pockets and Python. We call it
"brogramming" as self-mockery. I'm not being sexist; I'm hanging out with my
buddies, and she completely understands that.

I don't like watching football with my male friends, so we code together
instead. As long as we keep brogramming outside of work, it should _not_ be
thrown in the same basket as sexism... and it's ridiculous to propose that we
abolish men wanting to sometimes code with men outside of work.

~~~
tessr
One of the points that I make in my post is that it's not up to YOU (or even
your girlfriend) to decide what offends ME (or any other woman in CS). If you
take nothing else away, please understand that.

With regards to "brogramming," I personally don't find the idea all that
offensive. But there's a critical mass of women in tech who do, and I think
that it's my responsibility--and yours--to respect that.

~~~
pilgrim689
My point is that I think your "critical mass of women in tech" are offended by
_sexism_ , not brogramming. Brogramming isn't sexist in itself, as I tried to
illustrate. Hiring based on the brogrammer meme is sexist discrimination,
though.

I respect that they're offended, I just don't think you've targetted the
source of offense precisely.

~~~
tessr
I'd guess that close to 100% of women in tech are offended by sexism. There is
a group--almost certainly a subset--which is offended by _brogramming_. They
have said so.

Now, you can try to go convince them otherwise, but I strongly recommend
against it.

------
xenophanes
All this talk about "Don't do X, it's sexist" or "Don't do Y if it's for Men
not People" has a negative focus: what not to do.

And then punishing offenders instead of helping them learn better. People
don't learn by punishment. (See: Karl Popper.)

At best, this gets people to hide _overt_ problems. It sweeps problems under
the rug without getting rid of them. People will still think sexist thoughts,
then add self-censorship on top of that.

Real solutions will come from discussion of better ways of life and thinking:
what to do instead. And how to characterize this by what it's about rather
than a list of things excluded. Life needs a whitelist more than a blacklist.

~~~
tessr
I think there's something to be said for faking it until you make it, in this
case.

IF men in tech learn to "hide" their sexist thoughts, this will help women in
tech feel more comfortable and will thus encourage more of them. And then they
will show men how competent women can be in CS, sexist stereotypes disappear
because they aren't true at all anymore, etc. etc.

I know this is an optimistic oversimplification, but you get the idea.

~~~
xenophanes
I don't think that works. We've had a lot of (unintentional) "fake it until
you make it" with anti-semitism at various times in various countries, but it
has never solved the problem. (Example: France during/after the French
Revolution.)

PS I don't agree but I don't think you should be downvoted.

~~~
tessr
I guess I don't understand, then, how society shifts. Some people who are
racist/sexist/whateverist come around, but more often it seems to me that
younger people grow up in a world with different paradigms. There has to be a
huge number of people "faking" tolerance.

I could be completely wrong on this, however. This isn't something I've spent
a ton of time thinking about.

On the other hand, I am pretty sure that Be Nice To People is considered a
basic law of humanity.

~~~
xenophanes
One reason for brogramming is that our society (not everyone, but overall in
various peer groups or subcultures) provides substantial social rewards for
men who:

    
    
      - like sex
      - like beer and other alcohol
      - like to party
      - are "fun"
      - like to "hang out", "socialize", etc
      - various other stuff kind of along these lines (it's really not my scene, hard to give good examples)
      - demonstrate their strong commitment to these things. roughly: the more dedicated, the larger the social rewards.
    

So, brogramming is stupid overtly, and causes some problems, but if you tell
people to just stop, a lot of them aren't going to want to. They may not know
how to explain why, but one of the reasons is that brogramming provides them
social rewards (ones that programmers in general are a bit starved for
compared with athletes or even chefs).

You want social change? It needs to be broader. Brogramming is a symptom of
something much larger. It's basically a coping mechanism for lonely people.

The most important driver of societal shifts are good ideas. Really high
quality ideas. One type of idea that will help is changes that _make things
better for some and don't create any losers_. Those are pretty easy to get
everyone to agree to and like. But they are hard to come up with. They require
a really good understanding of the situation and incentives and how people
benefit from the behaviors you want them to stop (which normally gets into
even more complicated, larger social structures, which normally touch on
sensitive issues affecting most people).

I might be inclined to try starting somewhere else entirely if I wanted a
large scale societal change. For example a lot of people feel shame regarding
being alone. There are problems with being alone, plus social costs, but then
there is this extra emotional cost that isn't from any actual concrete problem
and even goes beyond the social costs. Help people be more proud of living
alone and spending time alone, and feel good about it instead of bad, and that
will be a step towards changing romantic relationship dynamics. Making
standard romantic relationships a little more optional will enable people to
question them a little more. And, very indirectly, that is a step towards less
sexism or brogramming.

------
petercooper
It is interesting watching this discussion play out.

I've been wondering whether people are put off becoming
musicians/writers/artists due to others having sexist stereotypes in their
material. We don't seem to see the same widespread demands for apologies and
desistance in those fields (consider the amount of songs talking about
"bi^ches" and the like) - or do we? But then I realized that we _have_ seen
racism (and homophobia) become taboo in pop culture and the arts, thankfully,
yet sexism is still a free for all. Why?

As idiotic as "brogramming" is (IMHO) and as much as I think software
development _should_ be a semi-academic, tight-knit discipline with
progressive and respectful norms, many of these things causing offense seem to
be misjudged attempts at injecting pop culture. "Brogramming" is on par with
the group "LMFAO" in terms of stupidity and tact, yet LMFAO are not called
upon to apologize or up their game to stop offending people. Why? (Differing
standards for pop culture celebrities vs professionals, maybe? But are some
developers also pop culture celebrities? Tricky.)

Bear in mind this is just armchair sociological analysis, and no opinion of
mine can be derived from these questions (well, other than that brogramming is
a bit silly and that I think we should all treat each other with the respect
we'd also want to receive) :-)

------
driverdan
It was funny when it was just a joke mocking foolishness. It was no longer
funny when people intentionally began doing it.

~~~
tessr
I agree 100%. It's a fantastic piece of satire. Now that people are going
around boasting about how they go to parties with naked women? It's not so
cool.

When you take into account that the Sqoot API Jam was very brogrammer-like,
too (although they never used the term)... Well, that just underscores that a)
People now want to be brogrammers and b) Brogramming is inherently exclusive
to women.

~~~
dmbass
Brogrammers are the Jersey Shore of programming. A small, laughable, easily
ignored minority of the population. They are a joke whether they take
themselves seriously or not.

If you don't like them, spend your time with programmers who don't brag about
sex parties.

And why do you want to be a part of brogramming if you hate it so much?
(inferred from your comment on exclusivity to men as a problem)

~~~
tessr
I don't.

I didn't elaborate much on how this got started, but this began when the CS
group at my school (I'm on the board) considered printing shirts with
"Brogrammer" on them. For all the CS students.

Do you understand, then, why exclusivity is a problem?

Also, I'm sorry that so much of my post was overwhelmed by BROGRAMMING. The
forum was really about sexism in CS, too.

~~~
dmbass
Not really. Would you have preferred a shirt that says HOGRAMMER? I just think
"exclusivity" is a super weak argument against the term.

Clearly you feel strongly about this so maybe explore exactly what the problem
is until you can articulate it in a more direct manner. There are most likely
legitimate problems of sexism in CS, but BROGRAMMING is more sensational than
important.

~~~
tessr
As I've said before, in many places on this thread, this was less me sharing
my feelings and more of a synthesis of a variety of ideas shared by a group of
computer science students, male and female, at the University of Pennsylvania.

(We did discuss the possibility of Hogrammer, yes.)

------
fourk
I feel like I'm missing something here. Why would someone (of any gender) feel
like they're missing out due to an inability to fit a stereotype melding
douchebag frat boy with programmer?

It's sad to me, because there are so many much more worthy things for us to
aspire towards, as software developers, than some stereotype based around
degenerate behavior.

~~~
dantle
I actually wonder if the brogrammer faces more discrimination than the female
programmer. Who would want to hire a loud drunk frat boy to program for their
Fortune 500 company?

~~~
tessr
See, this is the thing. Startups are now using "brogramming" as a recruiting
buzzword (including one I interviewed with--though I dropped out partway
through the process because I accepted an offer elsewhere).

~~~
agateform
I searched for brogrammer with Indeed, simplyhired, startuply and craigslist
and haven't found a single job opening. The "brogrammer" buzzword does not
seem to be a trend.

------
useflyer
As a once upon a time finance guy who made the transition to web designer /
founder, I have the following observation:

Wall street was the hot go-to destination, and it was as 'bro' as it got. The
never-ending conversation was "can women fit in on Wall street?"

Now SV is the hot go-to destination, and its getting 'bro'. The new
conversation is "can women fit on in SV?"

------
parfe
A quick (but not comprehensive, conclusive, or popularly agreed upon!) guide
for determining if you plan on doing something sexist, ask yourself:

    
    
        "Is this for Men?  Or is this for People?"
    

e.g. Advertising/Hiring "all-female servants" is for men. "Serving food and
drinks" is for people.

Side-note: If you _ever_ think to respond with "But what about lesbians?" you
are attempting to justify something sexist. Start over and cater to People.

~~~
tessr
Yes! (And what about men who aren't interested in women, too?)

------
redthrowaway
>Why is “brogrammer” offensive, anyways?

Because it denotes retards trying to pass themselves off as qualified. Just as
"humbers" would denote unqualified plumbers trying to ply their trade, or
"barpenters" would denote something similar. "Brogrammers" isn't offensive
because it's sexist; it's offensive because it's idiotic.

------
dinkumthinkum
It just makes me think of non-technical programmers that recently started
programming after watching a few screencasts of "pick your 'hip' web
framework" and now consider themselves to be uber-hackers or something.

------
arjunnarayan
> As I see it, women are put off by “brogrammer” for two reasons. Some women
> would say that dichotomy of “programmer” and “frat bro” leaves women out
> altogether. If you’re not a nerdy boy or a brogrammer, where do you fit in?
> Others see the brogrammer meme as taking the most “masculine” aspects of the
> discipline and emphasizing them (think chugging Red Bull, pumping iron,
> eating steak and “getting” women). Is this really what we should be doing
> when women are already so underrepresented?

I think the author is misreading the entire "movement" by first assuming the
false dichotomy she stated, that I've quoted above: that computer science is
for the two exclusive groups of "nerdy boys" and "brogrammers". First, the
entire meme is mostly satire making fun of bros. Because, hey, easy targets,
right?

Second, whatever serious brogrammers there are isn't out of nerdy guys coming
out of the woodwork and embracing a culture of bro-ing. I know and socialize
with a fair number of self-proclaimed "bros". Whatever non-satire based
brogrammers exist, they come from a realization on the part of the bros-who-
formerly-did-not-program --- that programming is a useful skill. So a lot of
bros who previously took Econ classes and lined up for the investment banking
recruiting sessions are now learning how to program and spending more time in
the CS department.

I don't think this is something to be "offended" by. If what you're offended
by is bro-culture (and yes, I will be the first to say that there are
sometimes troubling things about a frat-culture that sometimes objectifies
women --- the "brogramming" session cited where recruiters were trumpeting the
existence of naked women at parties _is_ offensive.), then decry those bros
that _do_ do things that marginalize various groups. But there are plenty of
bros who do nothing worse than consume copious amounts of alcohol on friday
night, play games of beerpong late into the night, wear popped collars, get
excessive tans and lift a lot of weights (which is how I've met most of my bro
friends, seeing as I do find some of those activities pleasurable). It's not
all Mike-The-Situation out here, and you can empirically verify this fact by
walking down Walnut Street on a Friday Night as the frat parties are in
session.

But as a computer scientist who has all too often seen too many groups
excluded from this beautiful subject --- I'm mostly troubled by this blogpost
--- as it is an attempt to marginalize a group of different people (bros) who
seem to have taken to learning more computer science. I want more bros in
computer science. more women, more goths, more emos, more whatever-stereotype
you have in mind. And if they want to brogram, let them.

~~~
tessr
Nice point. I, too, think that CS stands to benefit from more diversity, of
all kinds.

I find it interesting that you assumed that by "some women" I meant "me."
These are not actually my views, exactly, on brogramming. If I were the only
woman in the world, I wouldn't consider "brogrammer" offense. I agree--most of
them are pretty harmless. Blah blah red bull.

But there ARE a significant number of women who ARE offended. And I don't
think that you, or me, or anyone else, should tell them to not be offended by
it. We haven't had their experiences, you know? Even as a woman in tech, I
don't understand the full range of female experiences and perceptions.

~~~
arjunnarayan
I stand by my point that your ire is misdirected.

Here's how I see it:

1\. Bros be bro-ing, with alcohol and weights. (not sexist)

2\. Bros decide to program, bringing with them their bro-baggage (not sexist).

3\. This becomes a meme: brogramming (not sexist).

4\. Douchebag recruiters capitalize on latest meme in sleazy fashion,
advertising "naked women" (definitely sexist).

5\. Some women (ok, more than just you) and all reasonable persons are
(rightfully) outraged at that blatant display of sexism.

I still don't seen anything offensive about brogramming itself --- insofar as
brogramming consists of bros who like to program. If assholes are going to
make sexist remarks/be sexist, you are entirely justified in calling them out
for those vile acts, and I will happily join you in doing so. But your
blogpost reads like a witchhunt against bros for... being bros.

~~~
wpietri
If this were a field where professionals roughly mirrored the population at
large, I wouldn't have much of a problem with brogramming. But that's far from
the truth. So I am pretty happy to take issue with anything that reinforces
the notion that programming is for guys.

Also, I think you're a little hasty to suggest that bro-ing has absolutely
nothing sexist about it. Consider, for example, Time's photoessay "A Brief
History of Bro Culture":

[http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1997965,00.htm...](http://www.time.com/time/photogallery/0,29307,1997965,00.html)

The subtitle? "Beer and babes, a timeline of bros gone wild". That sounds like
objectifying women to me.

Or look at the urban dictionary entries on bro:

<http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=bro>

There's quite a lot there about chicks, homophobia, women as targets, etc. And
you see the same themes cropping up in other bro-related media.

------
gt384u
Never did I expect to have this discussion about "brogramming" as a legitimate
phenomenon. My knee-jerk reaction is to lament that this is a misunderstanding
of language/culture and that is why we can't have nice things, but that's just
simple of me to think so. Clearly the cultural angle of this is much more
interesting if a large group of reasonable, intelligent people in the software
community at large can arrive at such a broken state of affairs.

I took it for granted that the portmanteau of "bro" (never a positive
adjective in my corner of the world, e.g. "Ugh, the bar upstairs was full of
bros, so we left") and "programmer" was something that was obviously poking
fun at (among other things) the social life of the archetypical awkward,
introverted programmer.

With the above in mind, I truly adored the satire of brogrammer when I first
came upon it. I would have never thought of it being exclusive towards women
because, frankly, all of the women in computer science I've ever worked with
have been not only good computer scientists, but also properly well-rounded
individuals able to comport themselves with other human beings without being
painful to be around who never ever EVER desire being a Brogrammer and would
be offended to be called as much.

I kind of laughed brogramming off early on in the genesis of the phenomenon
when I saw people behaving like they were taking it seriously. My thought was
they were using an ultra-mock seriousness in the furtherance of humor. Think
of your favorite comedian looking you square in the eye and telling you that,
say, they think babies are delicious for breakfast on toast.

The discourse on brogramming sort of percolated over time, then I distictly
recall that I saw a post from someone in (Malaysia, maybe?) here on HN where
they were referring to themselves as a Brogrammer on their website's bio, and
I took it to be either someone who had the misfortune to lose something in
translation, or that I misunderstood that they too were in on the joke, as it
were. I know when I try to understand humor in French or Spanish I lose a
great deal of the nuance and have to resort to fairly broad humor when I
communicate in those languages. As a consequence, I tend to avoid trying to be
funny in anything other than English. It's for the best.

Then I saw articles popping up in the media about Brogramming as cultural
phenomenon and I took it to be the standard sort of journalistic fare where a
cultural phenomenon that gets reported on is either wildly misrepresented or
turns out to be patently false. Anyone remember "toothing" [1] from early-mid
2000's? Just think how much serious play that got in the news. So much so,
that I'd be shocked if there weren't a substantial number of people who tried
it out of curiosity.

And now I'm discovering that Brogramming isn't a self-deprecating joke that
I've been sharing with nearly as many people as I thought. I'm not sure if
this would really happen, but I'd be eager to hear from journalists who
reported it as phenomenon, startups and recruiters who chose to use it as
recruiting pitch, or someone who internalized Brogramming as aspirational
lifestyle. I'm just confused.

At any rate, I give up. No joke is worth the shitty feelings and exclusion and
hurt and animosity that I'm seeing being identified now as coming out of
brogramming as meme.

[1] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toothing>

~~~
tessr
I loved it, too (see:
<https://twitter.com/#!/temiri/status/117771875618263040>) and I wish it
hadn't shifted the way it has. But it has.

------
wavephorm
I coudn't even finish the article, it just sounded like a bunch of whiny
nagging.

~~~
tessr
This actually is less "Tess writes about brogramming" and more "CS students
(of ALL genders) got together and talked about it."

So maybe you're just getting old and out of touch?

~~~
sbarron
What does the poster's age have to do with it?

------
temphn
Let's start with some facts.

FACT: Men and women have significant, measurable neurological differences[1].

FACT: These differences are measurable before birth[2].

FACT: Men and women show large, reproducible differences _on average_ in tests
of visuospatial ability, differences that can be mapped back to the brain[3]

    
    
      Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, 
      including mental rotation, which is the ability to 
      identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in 
      space. Now, a University of Iowa study shows a connection 
      between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the 
      parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of 
      skill.
    
      The parietal lobe was already known to differ between men 
      and women, with women's parietal lobes having 
      proportionally thicker cortexes or "grey matter." But this 
      difference was never linked back to actual performance 
      differences on the mental rotation test.
    
      ...
    
      "Differences in parietal lobe activation have been seen in 
      other studies. This study represents the first time we 
      have related specific structural differences in the 
      parietal lobe to sex-linked performances on a mental 
      rotation test," said Tim Koscik, the study's lead author 
      and a graduate student in the University of Iowa 
      Neuroscience Graduate Program. "It's important to note 
      that it isn't that women cannot do the mental rotation 
      tasks, but they appear to do them slower, and neither men 
      nor women perform the tasks perfectly."
    

There are literally thousands more studies of the deep rooted genetic,
neurological, and endocrinological differences between the genders on
pubmed.org. These differences manifest before birth. And this research is what
your tax dollars pay for. It is just young earth creationism to postulate that
evolution did not happen, or that biological gender differences do not exist
or are somehow disconnected from their real world consequences.

One of the consequences is that in any niche which requires cognitive or
physical activity, we should not expect an exactly 50/50 distribution of males
and females. Interests differ. Abilities differ.

The religious outcry against stating these basic evolutionary facts got Larry
Summers ousted as the President of Harvard in 2005. You simply cannot state
these facts and retain your job. And the irony of all ironies is that those
who drove the President of Harvard from power will insist that they are
actually the oppressed, rather than the powerful.

That's the root of the matter here. The ostensible evil of the term
"brogrammer" rests upon the tacit desirability of having a 50/50 distribution
of women in programming, which in turn rests upon the presumption that it is
even possible to _achieve_ this equality given biological constraints,
constraints that are obvious upon a cursory skim of the relevant literature.
We are just not blank slates to be blasted clean and remade by ideology.

[1] [http://www.amazon.com/Female-Brain-Louann-Brizendine-
M-D/dp/...](http://www.amazon.com/Female-Brain-Louann-Brizendine-
M-D/dp/0767920090)

[2] [http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-10/uu-
spb102309....](http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-10/uu-
spb102309.php)

[3] [http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-12/uoi-
sdo121708...](http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2008-12/uoi-
sdo121708.php)

~~~
flatline
FACT: the number of women in CS has been dropping for decades. The prevalent
reason for this appears to be "cultural biases that discouraged girls and
women from pursuing a career in the field" [1].

There have been several high-ranking HN discussions over the last few days on
this topic, all of which revolved around women in the field feeling ostracized
and even harassed by their male colleagues. There is absolutely no need to
draw in a spurious evolutionary argument to explain this trend.

[1] <http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/16/business/16digi.html>

~~~
katane
You are linking low number of CS freshwomen to being harassed by male
colleagues. The problem of that argument is obviously that the earlierst most
people would be exposed to such an environment is _after_ college.

So maybe its not culture in programming, but culture in society that is to
blame here.

------
davvilla
Hahaha that's so cool. Thats my laptop right there!

------
edwinnathaniel
As a group of Computer Scientists, Software Engineers, Developers, we seem to
try hard to be "accepted" by the public.

Why is that?

Ever since a very long time ago, we want to be acknowledged and to be put in
pedestal. Be it the word "prodigy", "young hacker", "talented nerd",
"millionaire boy" or something along that line....

