

The biggest deterrent for women in tech - dangrossman
http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2013/04/30/the-biggest-deterrent-for-women-in-tech/

======
mnicole
I'll highlight these since it comes up here a lot (and is the second comment
on that page, right underneath the ever-expected kitchen joke) --

> _Geek technology culture not appealing:_

> Women: 20.6% Men: 34.3%

> _Dispel stereotypes that boys are better than girls in math and science:_

> Women: 48.9% Men: 31.0%

Working in technology _is_ appealing to girls, but growing up being told
that's not what girls do is what hurts.

~~~
GhotiFish
Well, there's no doubt that fathers would react negatively to a son playing
with dolls, immersing themselves in fashion, or healthcare.

Is there such a pressure on girls? Do the mothers feel unnerved if their
daughters start fiddling with lego?

~~~
mnicole
The issue is even having those LEGOs to begin with, rather than worthless new
[pink, sparkly] fashions for her Barbie. Personally, I was obsessed with
American Girls because of how they represented historical times and had
stories about their experiences living back then, even though my parents
couldn't afford the dolls themselves. I also enjoyed having a dollhouse
because it allowed me to problem-solve spatial situations while keeping
design/foot traffic in mind. Having one that was modular/extendable would have
been amazing, too. Little stuff like that.

------
Goladus
_What do you think are the top deterrents for women NOT going into technology-
related careers today? (More than one response allowed)_

1\. Choosing a career based on a desire for work/life and family balance that
doesn't involve 60 hour weeks or waking up at 2:00 AM to answer a pager alert.

2\. Choosing a career based on a desire for self-actualization and personal
fulfillment instead of what best pays the bills.

3\. Dropping out of difficult technical education courses in college in favor
of less demanding classes, because there is not enough pressure to think about
providing for oneself.

 _What do you think it will take for women to be successful in the technology
field? (More than one response allowed)_

Bleak reality. Technology jobs are useful and pay well. The more women are
forced to care for themselves instead of relying on a husband, their parents,
or the government, the more likely they will choose technology careers.

Of course, as more women that enter the technology market, salaries will drop
(for everyone).

 _How optimistic are you about the future of women in technology?_

Not optimistic at all. I don't think people are looking at the right problems.

~~~
jacalulu
I choose a career in tech (graduated from Mechatronics Engineering at
Waterloo, worked at Microsoft for 2 years and just got accepted into YC S13).
I'm personally offended by your generalization of what you feel is deterring
women to enter tech.

1\. I never had a problem working hard, 60+ hours, nor did any of my female
friends growing up. 2\. A tech career can be great at self-actualization. You
build cool shit, and can make new things that can change peoples lives. It's
awesome. 3\. Seriously...you actually believe that smart women are thinking
about lowering their life goals in anticipation of marrying up?

Women absolutely care for themselves. I'm not saying there aren't still women
who don't, but this view that a female will be taken care of was never
something that entered into my head, nor anyone else I know.

The biggest obstacle I had to overcome was not seeming "cool" while I signed
up for a computer engineering class in highschool. Peer pressure was a hard
obstacle to overcome back then, but I am so glad I did.

~~~
Goladus
_I'm personally offended by your generalization of what you feel is deterring
women to enter tech._

Of course you are offended. That's why reasonable, more detailed examination
of generalizations such as mine rarely happens and you certainly don't hear
about it. It makes people awkwardly uncomfortable and you can't have that on
CNEntertinment, unless it's delivered by an over-the-top caricature you don't
have to take seriously. Instead you have equally absurd generalizations based
on popular opinion that make everyone feel warm and fuzzy.

 _1\. I never had a problem working hard, 60+ hours, nor did any of my female
friends growing up._

Nor do any of the women I know. In fact most of them work as hard as I do or
harder. I am not surprised at all to find smart, hard-working women in
technology. STEM degree stats suggest women make up nearly 20% even in the
most male-heavy fields like Computer Science and Physics. The relevant
demographic is not necessarily you or every woman you know, but the
hypothetical women that would make up that 10-30% gap in the gender balance.

Or, from the perspective of companies wanting to hire more capable engineers
at cheaper salaries, the point is not to address the imbalanced gender ratio,
the point is to maximize the pool of talent by whatever means available.

 _2\. A tech career can be great at self-actualization. You build cool shit,
and can make new things that can change peoples lives. It's awesome._

Of course it can be. But what percentage of people going into STEM fields
admit that it was their first choice and one made without much regard for
earning potential? It certainly was not my first choice. I originally wanted
to be a professor of music theory. I looked at the employment prospects and
job markets and opted to pursue technology instead. In fact many of the people
I've worked with in technology started out with different ambitions and wound
up here because they were smart, resourceful, and needed money.

 _3\. Seriously...you actually believe that smart women are thinking about
lowering their life goals in anticipation of marrying up?_

I believe that all women will marry up if they can and that dedicating time
and attention to raise a family does not represent lowering of life goals. I
also think that regardless of what one may want or what they may decide with
their brain, most people will accomplish less if they do not face pressure.

 _Women absolutely care for themselves. I'm not saying there aren't still
women who don't, but this view that a female will be taken care of was never
something that entered into my head, nor anyone else I know._

And you are working in a technology field.

Of course women take care of themselves. The question is how much pressure are
they under to do so relative to the pressure faced by a man with similar gifts
and opportunities.

------
incision
_> What do you think it will take for women to be successful in the technology
field?_

 _> Equal pay for men and women with same skill sets: Women: 65.5%, Men:
46.8%_

Clearly two different perceptions.

Off the top of my head, I'd expect any gender wage gap in tech to be small
relative to other fields.

A quick search seems to bear that out [1][2][3].

1: [http://www.pcworld.com/article/2031357/gender-gap-in-tech-
sa...](http://www.pcworld.com/article/2031357/gender-gap-in-tech-salaries-its-
all-gone-dice-reports.html)

2: <http://www.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat39.pdf>

3:
[http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/news/2013/04/09...](http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/labor/news/2013/04/09/59698/the-
gender-wage-gap-differs-by-occupation/)

------
WalterSear
Just because an opinion is popular, that doesn't necessarily make it a fact.

------
stretchwithme
Remember the dawn of computing? There were no women!

And no men. How did men do it without role models?

I don't know. How did they discover America without role models? Or climb
Everest? How do they do anything when everyone says it can't be done?

Its a mystery. Especially if you pay no attention to biology.

~~~
krapp
But at the dawn of computing it was all women. It was considered womens' work,
akin to secretarial duties.

~~~
GhotiFish
From what I've read, none of them were programming, the job was to transcribe
programs for the computers. That's what they were advertising as a secretarial
duty. That doesn't suggest attitudes have suddenly done this strange 180 in
the past few decades. The job was just replaced by compilers.

~~~
KMinshew
You may want to revisit your history then - a woman wrote what is widely
considered, by both men and women, to be the first computer program, an
extremely complicated algorithm (<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ada_Lovelace>).
During WWII, women were "recruited to do ballistics calculations and program
computers. Around 1943-1945, these women "computers" used a Differential
Analyzer in the basement of the Moore School of Electrical Engineering to
speed up their calculations." In 1949, Grace Hopper was the first programmer
of the Harvard Mark I, known as the "Mother of COBOL", and developed the first
ever compiler for an electronic computer, known as A-0. In the late 1950s,
orbital calculations for the United States' Explorer 1 satellite were solved
by the NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory's all-female "computers", many of whom
were recruited out of high school.

While attitudes may not have done a 180, your inference that early women
computer scientists were "not programming" and only transcribing is factually
incorrect.

------
voidr
I stopped reading here:

> "It provides access to jobs purely based on merit and results and really, in
> some ways, neutralizes some of the gender discrimination that exists around
> the world."

The fact is that Elance does not neutralize anything, except their reputation
by stating such BS. If I would be sexist, I could simply reject women on
Elance the same way I could do in person.

