
Google sponsors over $150k of grants for female programmers - colinmarc
https://www.hackerschool.com/blog/29-google-sponsors-grants-for-female-programmers
======
xiaoma
What about men who have financial need?

This isn't an academic question. The tech industry is one of the very few left
where large numbers of men from diverse backgrounds are doing well. For many
who are struggling, it's the best shot they have. Men receive less financial
aid for college and graduate with more debt... if they graduate. Women now
outnumber men 3 to 2 in current graduating classes in the US. Far more men
than women suffer poverty and homelessness. Amazingly, it's common for
shelters to refuse single men.

Does Hacker School and its sponsor's "need based" help truly discriminate
against the very group—poor, non-degreed men—that society treats so callously?

The last thing I want to see is women being dismissed or shut out of
opportunities purely out of chauvinist ignorance, but when it comes to poverty
and need it's almost like our society has empathy only for women and children.
Recognizing this doesn't mean becoming blind to the glass ceiling that women
often hit at the high-end of the career ladder. Both are problems. This really
is an issue where two wrongs don't make a right.

Disclaimer: I earned well under $10k living in SF last year and faced some of
this pain personally. I overcame the obstacles in my path and am now in a
great situation... but I can't help but feel for those I know who aren't.

~~~
lclarkmichalek
Given that this is for an institution called `Hacker School`, and I have a
feeling that your stats aren't P(x | studying CS), I don't really see how this
is particularly relevant. The grant isn't give as part of a `help women in
financial need` project, it's given as part of a `help increase the proportion
of people in the tech industry who are women`.

~~~
belorn
If you want to increase the proportion of people in the tech industry who are
women, do out reach, eliminate glass ceilings in management, and sponsor
research into industry causes of gender bias.

Doing gender discriminations to "counter" gender discriminations is neither a
good or effective way. It's lazy, and only causes more harm.

~~~
ceol
What do you think this is if not outreach? Any sort of outreach will be
targeted. I can only imagine you would be in those threads complaining about
"gender discrimination" because Company X created women-focused programming
classes or the like.

There's plenty of research into "industry causes of gender bias." _This is one
of the solutions._ You're basically claiming that because this doesn't
completely solve the gender divide, it's lazy and worthless. Well, sorry, but
that's not how the world works. This is one of many small steps into getting
more women interested in programming, which then eliminates the glass ceilings
and discrimination.

How you and the others in this thread don't see this is just baffling.

~~~
belorn
Are you defining preferential treatment as outreach? Thats not only a very odd
definition, but also creates the idea that glass ceilings is some form of
outreach for male leaders.

The definition of "Outreach", is an method that are used to fill in the gap in
the services provided by mainstream means, to the purpose of reaching groups
who otherwise would not be aware of existing services (In this case,
education). This doesn't do that. Mozilla mentor program for example is one
that does. Compare and see the difference.

women- _exclusive_ classes do not work, and are indeed counter-productive. Any
research of this has proven this point. When the Sweden government body tried
it, it was found to be ineffective, counter-productive (created more
separation between sexes), and declared illegal in the last years. Sadly,
given the current gender politics, little money has been spent to answer why
it failed, as it is easier to simply ignore the fact that it failed.

So to reiterate, _This is not one of the solutions, its a illusion of an
solution that do harm rather than good_. It is worthless, because it do not
work and causes harm. It is lazy, because other groups has shown (like
Mozilla) how to do it right. In the real world, thats how progress work. You
discard what is a step backward, and only use what is a step forward. Small
step backwards are still backward steps.

What is baffling is how people keep disregarding any sense of scientific
method. Just because a previous theory is thought to be working, one should
not be ignorant to new information.

~~~
ceol
_> Outreach is used fill in the gap in the services provided by mainstream
means_

Check.

 _> to reach groups who otherwise would not be aware of existing services (In
this case, education)._

Check.

It does both things. It fills the gap of an affordable, welcoming resource for
women who have an interest in programming, and it reaches women who would
otherwise not be aware of a resource that is friendly toward them. You just
don't like that it's reaching out to a specific group that you happen to not
belong to.

 _> women-exclusive classes do not work, and are indeed counter-productive._

Hacker School isn't excluding men. It's merely saying they will help women
with _expenses_ while attending the school. It's not giving women an express
lane through the application process.

 _> You discard what is a step backward, and only use what is a step forward.
Small step backwards are still backward steps._

Do you have any source to prove this is a step backwards? Because one of the
largest and most resourceful tech companies in the _world_ happens to disagree
with you, so you're going to need a little more to back yourself up than, "Nuh
uh!"

And please don't throw around "scientific method" as though it applies here.
You're not bringing in any new information. You're just stating your own
opinion and then acting as though it's fact.

~~~
belorn
A appeal to authority fallacy will get you nowhere. I will counter your appeal
to Google with my appeal to Mozilla. Mozilla believes in a mentor program and
non-exclusive aid, which is exactly the right way to approach imbalance. It
also helps that it has been proven to work in eliminating gender bias.

If you want sources, do you own research. like I said, Sweden education system
tried and failed and that fact is not hard to find for yourself. Others has
published articles such as
[http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/affirmative....](http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v5n2/affirmative.html)
which paints the discussion as an debate with two sides. I do however like to
point out that the only side that actually do research on the efficiency of
preferential treatment programs are those who are against them. I have yet to
see any study that show preferential treatments to be beneficially.

Can you provide _any_ source what so ever that preferential treatments has
ever worked to eliminate gender bias? Ever? Surely such sources should be all
over the web?

~~~
ceol
_> It also helps that it has been proven to work in eliminating gender bias._

 _Another_ unsubstantiated claim. It's like you don't understand how claims
work. Saying whatever you believe as though it's fact doesn't make it so.

 _> like I said, Sweden education system tried and failed and that fact is not
hard to find for yourself._

First: It's not my job to prove your argument for you. Second: According to
you, Sweden apparently tried gender- _exclusive_ classes. Hacker School isn't
excluding men from its program. It's just providing a way for women to pay for
expenses. Those are two very different things.

 _> Others has published articles such as_

That article actually proves you wrong...

 _> > These programs have brought or accompanied significant gains for women
and minorities. In the past 25 years, black participation in the work force
has increased 50 percent and the percentage of blacks holding managerial
positions has jumped fivefold. In 1970, women comprised only 5 percent of
lawyers compared to 20 percent today. Twenty-five years ago, the student
population at University of California, Berkeley, was 80 percent white
compared to 45 percent today._

So, they _are_ beneficial, and they _do_ work.

~~~
belorn
> It also helps that it has been proven to work in eliminating gender bias. >
> Another unsubstantiated claim.

Sorry, I thought you could your own searches. If you can't be bothered to do
your own research, and can provide any sources of your own, why should anyone
care what you got to say?

any, for the incurrable lazy:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6NvCH7A8Vs](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6NvCH7A8Vs)
and
[https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/Mentors](https://wiki.gnome.org/GnomeLove/Mentors)

> Sweden apparently tried gender-exclusive classes

No, they did not. They added a simple rule that said: If a person enrolling in
a class would become a minority in that class, then that person deserve some
preferential treatment. The end resulted was that over 80% of the time this
rule triggered, it was a white male, trying to enter a white female dominated
class room.

> That article actually proves you wrong...

Apprently a lack of reading skills...

The article ends on:

 _> > Few people question the need to eliminate racial and sexist barriers
that exclude minorities' and women from full participation in society.
Preferential treatment programs may be one means toward this goal. But these
programs also raise ethical issues that direct us to consider their potential
benefits and harms, the justice of compensating groups for past harms and
present disadvantages, and the fairest way to distribute the burdens of
compensation. _

And it talks about what those temporary measures where designed for:

 _> > First instituted in the 1960s and 1970s by employers and educational
institutions in response to pressures from civil rights groups, federal
legislation, and court rulings, preferential treatment programs seek to
rectify the effects of past and ongoing discrimination against women and
racial minorities._

And last:

 _> > Nor is it clear that even those minorities and women qualifying for
preferential treatment benefit from such special consideration. Recent studies
reveal a high dropout rate among minority college students admitted under
affirmative action programs. At U. C. Berkeley, for example, only 45 percent
of black students admitted in 1984 had graduated by 1989 compared to 73
percent of Anglos. The high rate of failure that follows the award of
employment and educational opportunities to minority individuals unprepared to
meet the challenges of higher education reinforces feelings of inferiority
among members of these groups. _

they _are not_ beneficial, and they _do not_ work.

------
evincarofautumn
Nice to see a simple story of encouragement. My peer group is fortunately
pretty diverse in terms of culture and country of origin, but it misses out on
a realistic distribution of sex, which I think is important as well.

As a “white male programmer”, I’ve always been uncomfortable with an
imbalanced group; now, being in a relationship with a female programmer, I’m
exposed to a lot more of the actual iniquities.

We should consider this as a high-priority bug in our industry.

~~~
hingisundhorsa
As a “<insert ethnicity here> <insert gender here> <insert sexual orientation
here> programmer”, I've always been uncomfortable with race based or gender
based or orientation based policies. Google would have been better off taking
the time evaluating each participant and then making a judgement on whether
that person would benefit from additional help. That would be better for
everyone rather than blindly assuming every female needs assistance or every
"insert ethnicity here" needs assistance.

~~~
1qaz2wsx3edc
It's perplexing that to avoid gender discriminations, the solution is to
discriminate against genders. I don't like these, I think they further the
stigmatism that is native to our industry about gender discrimination.

Specifically I'm bothered by direct benefits due to gender, I have no issue
with educational programs as long as they remain open to all.

I don't want to end up in a workforce where people are working because it was
a good financial decision from yesteryear. I want to work with people who are
truly excited about what they do. And choose it for no other reason then it
was: fun, interesting, and exciting. Those would be awesome people to work
with. Welcome!

~~~
ceol
If I have ten apples, and you have five apples, giving us both five apples
doesn't make us equal. Likewise, giving both men and women grants (which are
readily available anyway for both genders) doesn't suddenly fix the imbalance
of women. It requires a targeted solution.

 _> I don't want to end up in a workforce where people are working because it
was a good financial decision from yesteryear._

Well then you're barking up the wrong tree, because there are _plenty_ of men
who got into computer science because it's lucrative. On the other hand, if
you told a woman, "Hey! Want to earn an upper-middle class income? All you
have to do is spend every work day of your life dealing with crude jokes at
your expense, boys' club mentalities, and an industry that has little more
than contempt for you!" I doubt many would jump at the opportunity.

The problem with sorting by how "truly excited" they are is that some women
might not know how interesting programming is to them. They were never given
the opportunity, and every time they got close, they were shunned or pushed
back because of their gender.

If you truly, honestly cannot see these grants as anything more than "reverse
gender discrimination", I'd have to say you're part of the problem.

~~~
tomp
This comment would be OK if we were talking about the profession of lawyers,
or doctors, or investment bankers, but programmers?!

Programming is an ideal career for the introverted and "socially awkward". You
don't need formal education, you don't need to talk to people, all you need is
a computer and a book or internet connection, and most importantly, curiosity
and desire to explore and learn about computers. You can't blame the lack of
any of those on "boys' club" or "glass ceiling"; the best programmers are
self-made, and nothing is stopping women from becoming top-notch hackers.

I think you are focusing on the wrong problem. Yes, it's true that men
outnumber women in the field of programming, but guess what: non-programmers
outnumber programmers much much more! Less than 5% of the people I know are
programmers, and I work as a programmer. Why don't we try to make this
profession more interesting to _everybody_ , instead of focusing on just 50%
of the people?

~~~
ceol
_> nothing is stopping women from becoming top-notch hackers._

A lot is. Contrary to your comment, programmers have to interact with other
people in order to participate in the industry, whether they're in college
learning or have just taught themselves and are looking for a job. I've had
quite a few female friends tell me about high school teachers and college
professors who told them, straight to their faces, that programming was "for
men" and they don't belong. There are still plenty of _male_ employers who
pass over perfectly qualified candidates just because they're women; plenty of
_male_ classmates who harass women with "get back in the kitchen" jokes. One
of my friends even dropped out of the program all together because of it.

 _> Why don't we try to make this profession more interesting to everybody,
instead of focusing on just 50% of the people?_

Because in order to make it more interesting to _everybody_ , we need to _even
out our numbers_. Otherwise, when we open up the field to everyone, all we're
going to do is inflate the numbers without changing the ratio.

The _total number_ isn't the problem; it's the _ratio_.

~~~
tomp
> high school teachers and college professors who told them, straight to their
> faces, that programming was "for men" and they don't belong. There are still
> plenty of male employers who pass over perfectly qualified candidates just
> because they're women; plenty of male classmates who harass women with "get
> back in the kitchen" jokes.

And what is this kind of announcements/programs doing to change that?

~~~
icebraining
I believe the idea is counterbalancing negative with positive discrimination
until the culture starts to change (which is more likely to happen if there
are more women in the profession).

------
SilkRoadie
We need more women in the industry but I am not sure this is the way to do it.
It is specifically for those "who cannot afford to live without an income
during Hacker School." What does this mean exactly?

To me it sounds like getting those who are poor or not well off into
programming. I like that idea as much as getting more women into programming.
What I don't understand is why this would be limited to women only.

I have never been a fan of positive discrimination. Wouldn't it be better to
advertise more to women to try to get more applicants this way? Perhaps go
into local schools to rustle up a more diverse selection of people to be the
next generation of programmers. Perhaps use the money to give away raspberry
pi systems to the underprilliaged kids to inspire them to get going young?

It is nice of Google and it seems like a decent inititive. I do feel though
that the money could be used in a far more effective way.

------
mostafaberg
Consider this, what if the title was "Google sponsors over $150k of grants for
male programmers" ?

~~~
CmonDev
Then it would've been sexist. Did no one tell you being a white straight
healthy male is a crime?

~~~
dwaltrip
Life isn't fair. People are born into random circumstances outside of their
control that vastly affect the quality and direction of their life. Sociey has
developed in an imperfect fashion, and has many issues. These problems are
complex, and there is no silver bullet. Some people are trying to create a
positive impact, and hopefully make things a little better. Meanwhile, you sit
here bitching about "reverse discrimination". What is your better solution?

~~~
CmonDev
How about "Google sponsors over $150k of grants for programmers with most open
source contributions" or "Google sponsors over $150k of grants for programmers
that win an online hackaton for newbies" or "Google sponsors over $150k of
grants for programmers with best school grades or most impressive hobby
projects"?

~~~
dwaltrip
Don't they do many of these types of things? I highly doubt this is is their
only grant. Also, how do you determine what is too much and too little to put
towards a certain issue? Seems a little presumptuous.

------
wiradikusuma
Google also give significantly more (+$2000) to female winners in Google Cloud
Developer Challange 2013.
[https://www.google.com/events/gcdc2013/about.html](https://www.google.com/events/gcdc2013/about.html)

~~~
janjongboom
I'm very surprised about this. If Google would say that teams that only
consist of men, or white people would get $2K extra everyone would explode.

~~~
mcv
> If Google would say that teams that only consist of men, or white people
> would get $2K extra everyone would explode.

Surely you can understand why? The industry is already dominated by white men.
They (we, in fact) don't need extra support to enter and get accepted by the
industry. We don't suffer lots of subtle forms of harassment and
discrimination, simply for being different from the norm.

I don't think money by itself is the solution, but in order to make the
industry more accepting of women, it helps if people get used to women in the
industry, which means there need to be more women in the industry, which means
some additional encouragement is probably necessary. Addressing the sexism in
the industry in the absense of women doesn't seem to work very well. We need
more women in order to become more accessible to women.

That said, I do think it's odd to do this through larger prizes for women in a
contest. Encouragement programs and networking events seem like a better way
to do this. Then again, in sports, it's generally male competitions who tend
to have far more prize money.

~~~
Al-Khwarizmi
Yeah. I'm sure women will "get accepted in the industry" much more if every
man who looks at them is thinking "she's being given $2K extra for winning the
same prize as me" or "I wonder if she's working here for her merits or because
she took advantage of one of those positive discrimination programs".
Brilliant idea.

~~~
enneff
I'm a man and I would judge a woman just as I judge a man: by their actions.

~~~
belorn
While a noble view, its is obviously not shared by Google. They would rather
judge a woman on the basis that she is a woman.

~~~
ceol
They aren't just letting any and all women in while telling the droves of men
to shove it. They're saying that if you are a woman who _already qualifies_
for Hacker School who _cannot pay for expenses while attending_ , then they
will give you some money to help out. They aren't some bouncer at a club
pulling the velvet rope back for everyone who checks the "I am a woman" box on
the application.

~~~
belorn
Why would that matter? Surely, only those with expenses for attending hacker
school can ask for a grant that repays expenses for attending hacker school.

Those with expenses for attending a chocolate factory visit can not ask for
this grant. That should not be considered when judging who should be granted
money regarding expenses for attending hacker school. The chocolate factory
has nothing to do with this grant.

~~~
ceol
_> Surely, only those with expenses for attending hacker school can ask for a
grant that repays expenses for attending hacker school._

They aren't repaying. They're paying. The grant is given so that they don't
have to pay.

Do you understand exactly what the grant is doing? It's giving money to women
who already qualify for the school but can't afford the expenses of living in
NYC during their time there. This has nothing to do with chocolate factories
or whatever you're talking about.

~~~
belorn
Out of the people who is attending the school, they give a grant to those who
qualify the requirement of being a woman. That it. No other qualification or
requirements made.

Its true they don't care about chocolate factories. They also don't care about
the qualification for attending the school. The way Google will judge the
people attending the school is on the single aspect of gender. This is what I
said in my first post. Rather than judging people based on their actions, they
would rather judge a woman on the basis that she is a woman.

------
knackernews
This looks like a great program that hits the right audience - people who know
how to code, and will surely end up programming professionally when they're
done. Unlike the many bootcamps popping up that make minority kids write toy
apps and hope they'll take up computer science later. A good use of Google's
money.

Also, that guy has a very strange last name.

~~~
gcb0
those bootcamps at least focused on real, contemporary, problem. by focusing
on socio economic classifications... though it ended up being the regular
anything-is-good-for-the-poor crap of content.

this is just cheap advertisement for the sake of holier than thou.

if anything it creates the "women need handicap" mentality where it didn't
existed before.

------
Lizzardhisss
As a chick thinking about a career change towards programming, I find this
very interesting...

~~~
eru
Go for it. In the worst case, you have a secret weapon in whatever other non-
coding career you are pursuing.

~~~
psbp
Not according to a majority of commenters in the Obama coding thread.

~~~
Lizzardhisss
Well, I'm in the gaming industry right now, so at the very least learning how
to code could just fill out my skill set. I think there is a difference
between pushing something like coding vs teaching or nursing. Yes, in many
cases pushing people to enter those fields where there was a deficit at the
time will flood them with applicants later on. However, we aren't really
building many more schools or hospitals. But more and more companies need
people who can code. And more and professions rely on, or at least benefit
from knowing how to code. Years ago animation had nothing to do with coding,
but now knowing python or action script is almost required.

~~~
eru
Any profession that teaches computing can benefit from some coding skills.
(And similarly, any profession where you ever produce some written words can
benefit from learning how to write well.)

~~~
eru
'teaches' -> 'touches'.

------
StefanKarpinski
Wow. Congrats! This is huge.

------
garthdog
Keep it classy guys.

~~~
adamors
Articles like these always remind just how rampant sexism is on HN.

------
dvanduzer
Wow, a hundred and fifty thousand dollars could pay a female programmer's
salary for an entire year!

This sends a strong signal to the rest of Silicon Valley: there's no such
thing as a Google Glass ceiling.

------
willwill100
Sounds pretty sexist to me

------
donpark
Come on guys. Google is doing the right thing here which is funding what they
think is right.

Will they achieve the result they seek? Not likely.

Will they feel good doing this? Definitely.

------
voidr
I find this sexist, it discriminates against men. If it would be the other way
around we would see an endless stream of blogposts on HN complaining about how
sexist Google is. This right here is a good example of the damage the
hypocrite feminists are doing to the industry.

Programming should not be about how you were born, it should be about skills
and merit.

------
synthesizer
And since lady engineers usually get paid less, that money will go a long way!

~~~
adamnemecek
You are misunderstanding what the money is for.

