Why is the lack of women in IT and software development positions a problem? No one seems to have an issue with the lack of male nurses or school teachers.
If a woman genuinely wants to develop software or become a systems administrator, There is nothing keeping them from jumping through the same hoops of fire everyone else has to. Things in this field are fucked up enough without having to deal with affirmative action hires.
>Why is the lack of women in IT and software development positions a problem?
it's not a problem. the problem is that radical feminists are trying to gain power. feminists are the hitler of the 21st century.
something about the patriarchy, and how it prevents women from reaching their true potential, probably how none of the original UNIX team had to work for their accomplishments because male privilege just handed it to them, etc.
Seriously, "feminists" have no ground to stand on these days unless they're actively trying to free women from the kebab menace, because there are women with real problems these days, but most "feminists" just completely ignore this and whine about being paid less when they do less work.
They'll claim that women who enjoy the status quo are simply victims of the patriarchy, or any combination of things that contradict each other but who the fuck cares, vagina powers.
There's no winning with feminists.
I guess because we have a shortage of genuinely good CS people (at least in the US). (note that we have a lot of shitty programmers, though) Women seem like the group easiest to get more out of.
Plus, we have the whole girls-in-STEM bandwagon for politicians to hop onto. They don't have to make any hard decisions, and they get free vites or at least PR.
Who knows - maybe in 30 years the neckbeard stereotype will be replaced with a new one? Either way we get more cute coworkers, so w/e
That they can't be programmers because this man's shirt and jokes about USB dongles hurt their feelings.
Calling oneself a "feminist" no longer has anything to do with women's rights or opposing anti-femininity in society, it's just a status symbol that privileged, sheltered people apply to themselves to kiss up to their vain peers. The result is homely shrews piggybacking on the successes of civil rights crusaders so they don't have to actually work hard to get ahead in life.
Bitter manchildren calling themselves "MRAs" (because apparently "masculist" is too big of a word) are exactly the same, they just lack the same political clout as feminism does.
>I guess because we have a shortage of genuinely good CS people (at least in the US).
People like me have tried getting into that line of work, but are barred by lack of experience and by not being friends with the CIO. That's why I gave up, dropped out of school, and got a job that actually values me and my time.
The fact of the matter is that there are significantly less females then males in the industry. Although the few women programmers at my job are just as competent as there male counter parts, they are without a doubt, the minority. I think that we like to see ourselves as a progressive industry and that causes us to strive for equality but it has not been fully realized yet.
I think it is true that there is *some * prejudice against girls in CS. Not enough to justify the massive push for it, but there is some discrimination - people are more likely to assume that an overconfident male tech is competent than a female one. I'd sure love some of those easy scholarships, though - it's easy as shit to resent then, and then you just get labeled a sexist.
>women are stupid and frail children that are more held back by their oversensitive feelings than the severely autistic
Both misandristic landwhales and misogynistic permavirgins ardently believe this, and they dedicate their lives to arguing with each other anyway.
Truth really is stranger than fiction, because no published fiction writer could possibly be nihilistic enough to make up something like this.
I'd agree with you on the facts. Sure, it's true that there are more men in the field, and that women drop out of the pipeline more than men do. To address OP, I think that the answer is hypocrisy. Logically, there should be a push for male teachers and nurses, but it doesn't fit with the whole buzzfeed-feminism thing.
Why is there such a surge of people these days, leftist and rightist, that desperately want people to be reduced to completely predictable biological machines with no free will, personality or independent thought? When we just spent literally centuries trying to get rid of this retarded way of thinking and ended up with a far more viable meritocratic society?
Are some people really so worthless that they're willing to strip away their last remaining shred of value just so they don't have to try at anything?
>women literally tell you that they won't enter a field because of dongle jokes
>attempt to police humor perceived to be offensive at any opportunity
>constant crusades in the media against "cyber-bullying" an almost exclusive experience to young girls
>Why do you autistic permavirgins think women are irrational and over sensitive?
Gee, I don't know.
So you're against objective data that explains that men are more adept at certain things and women at other things?
Why is this concept of human sexual dimorphism so difficult to swallow?
No need to bust out the big words, sweetheart.
You're not fooling anyone.
If women weren't this emotionally frail, you wouldn't be making a generalization against an entire gender.
Also, I'd like to point out that what you just did could be considered a form of hypocrisy.
>my exposure to the opposite sex is limited entirely to Tumblr blogs
People having free will is not a recent sentiment, you retard, it's the basis of the silly religious beliefs that most modern people subscribe to.
No, I'm against retards citing objective data that they know exists but have never actually seen for themselves. Sexual dimorphism in human intelligence is measurable, but still minor compared to the similarities shared between most human beings.
>No one seems to have an issue with the lack of male nurses
But that's so incredibly wrong.
Just about every single medical facility will hire a fresh-out-of-school male nurse over a female with experience because they're both physically more capable (a necessity in the nursing profession due to fat/combative/disabled patients) and don't come with office drama built in.
Also, literally the only people who give two shits about the gender gap in the IT/development professions are radical feminists whose tech knowledge ends at how to browse Facebook on their iPad.
Also, as already stated,
>complaining about men is easier than becoming as competent as men
But there aren't enough of them out there - I (the stickler) want a whole lot of studies with a whole lot more details.
Honestly, though, the whole thing is pretty stupid. You go to any Soc or Psych 101 class and they can talk about differences in the ways men and women think, but we can't talk about it in public. Would it be such a bad thing I'd I was able to say that women have an easier time emphasizing with others than me and that I have an advantage in thinking logically? Preaching to the choir, I guess.
(replace "men" with "autists" and this thread becomes 10x better)
I'm guessing you're either coming onto me, and thus should fuck off back to >>>/lgbt/, or contending that everyone who says women aren't all frail morons IS a woman, in which case you should fuck off back to >>>/v/.
>Also, I'd like to point out that what you just did could be considered a form of hypocrisy.
Who's the one spouting big words they don't understand again? (^:
This country is way to politically correct. We fear lawsuits, not feminist extremists. It was a better day when we had military veterans as politicians, then their spoiled lawyer kids come about.
You have to quit with the pseuso-anti-intellectualism or whatever you're doing too. He was just being condescending - you can call a guy "sweetheart" if you're talking down to them.
You have free will but you don't eat your own shit. Free will /=/ evolution had no impact on biological differences between sexes.
Look to Sweden for a case in point. They have bended over backwards to try and enforce gender equality in all fields, and the past decade has seen a sharp rise to disproportionate representation. Schools are banning gender pronouns, toy stores can't label products for girls or for boys, they're constantly told they can do anything they like, and what do they choose? Women enter careers focused around interaction, social experience, and care while men enter STEM, business, and labor.
Given free will, humans will choose what is natural to them.
This shit right here is the problem. Let's totally ignore what the fuck is saying because he called me a name. Let's just completely forget what the fuck this thread is about.
Oh, come the fuck on, when was the last time "sweetheart" was used in that fashion on 4chan? He's being the same kind of retard as the people who shout "SHIIILLLLL" when people post anything positive about a brand or product they dislike.
>Free will /=/ evolution had no impact on biological differences between sexes.
You're clearly strawmanning anyone who says biology isn't everything as a moron that thinks biology means nothing. We can count more observable biological differences between males and females now than we ever could, but the mental differences between the sexes is still remarkably similar.
I never even said less women in computing is a problem going unsolved. I personally don't care.
Eh, he's only kinda wrong.
Early civilization appeared between 12,000BCE and 9,000BCE during the Neolithic Revolution with city-states emerging as early as 9100BCE at the start of the Agricultural Revolution (beer is over 10,000 years old and predates the first permanent structure).
Homo Sapiens (modern humans) are officially 200,000 years old, though it is heavily debated when they started using tools and even more heavily debated on when they started having complex social interactions outside of family groups.
I really don't understand how they turned a whole country into some social experiment like that.
Why the fuck are the swedes taking this shit?
This is coming from a 3rd generation turk by the way.
Stop this shit.
You can pretty much chalk it up to white guilt.
The UK is next.
I mean, they've set the precedent that muslims can get away with just about anything so long as they can blame it on their culture.
There are few women in IT because of series like Big Bang theory, where the only woman protagonist is dumb and unable to do anyyhing with computers and technology, why Sheldon and the likes are "tech-able", but have 0 social skills. It's not the fault of the series however. It's a whole culture. Women discriminate nerdy guys at HS, so those nerdy guys eventually end up hating women. Because women hated them when they were young. It's a vicious circle. Permavirgins beta will say that women are too dumb to use computers, while feminist landwhales will complain about them being rejected. Both sides have a limited sight of reality.
>Women discriminate nerdy guys at HS
This is caused by their boyfriends. They tend to be dumbfucks taking it out on the smarter kids.
I'm not saying all of them, but it's a substantial amount.
Women follow their men. That's just a fact of life.
Vague statement making it impossible to refute, but any evidence that could enforce it is easily implemented to be the right amount to qualify as "remarkably similar."
The fact is men and women desire different things, excel at different things, and approach problems differently. This makes the vast majority suited to completely different jobs.
>It's boyfriends' fault. Yes and no. It's like the chicken and egg problem, because "popular guys" at HS follow girls so they will get one. If girls discriminate nerdy guys, a lot of potential smart guys will totally reject STEM fields so they can get girls. And by that way, girls will act like whores to nerdy guys (interacting with them only if they need to, taking advantage of the fact that the nerdy guy has had almost no contact with girls).
And "humanity" has a very vague and subjective definition.
>humanity means when did humans become humans (Homo sapiens)?
~200,000 years ago
>humanity means when did H. sapiens start using complex tools (IE, more than bash something with rock or jab something with stick)?
Depends on which professor you ask, but ~120,000-60,000 years ago
>humanity means when did H. sapiens start having complex social interactions?
Depends on which professor you ask, but ~80,000-45,000 years ago.
>humanity means when was beer invented (this is apparently a legit, peer-reviewed standard of chronology)?
During or before 9350BCE, so ~13,500 years ago (the cache they found was still drinkable, lol)
>humanity means when did humans build the first permanent settlements and start farming?
9120BCE, or ~11,000 years ago
Most places define "modern humans" as when H. sapiens became a separate species. The majority of the rest go off when humans started having inter-clan social interactions since "humanity" is tied so closely with "society" in common usage.
Statistics measure what, not why. No actual arguments have been presented, only personal opinions, presented as arguments.
Acting like you're a purveyor of politically incorrect reality doesn't make what you say a fact. You're just gambling on the fact that refuting what you say is magnitudes more work than saying it to begin with.
You're literally contending that sexual dimorphism is more biologically determinant than ANY OTHER ASPECT of a human being. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see why this is stupid.
how does one's predispositions affect what they WANT to do in life? by your logic there should be literally zero female programmers or male homemakers, it's the just world fallacy
both sexes have generally similar IQs, the differences in mental functioning are largely related to personality. if people thought of computer work as a girly thing, girls would easily be the majority
although, there are many shows which target men, and also portray men as stupid
e.g. 100% of beer ads and 90% of car ads show the guy being an idiot with one purpose in life, which is to drink beer or buy 4WDs (and mostly he's buying the car to seek approval of his woman, too).
>Statistics measure what not why
And despite liberals believing the why was culture and gearing EVERYTHING in Sweden at fighting preconceived notions of gender roles, women STILL made the same choices that those in other countries did.
Sweden's case shows at the very least that culture is not the reason that men and women enter different fields.
>sexual dimorphism is the biggest determinant
I never said that.
>It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see why this is stupid
Apparently it takes one to argue about it because you haven't provided a single compelling argument or piece of evidence you just kept saying:
>t-thats just your opinion
>there would be 0 female programmers
Why? Do you think biology is that black and white? That's not how it works. Otherwise we wouldn't have people who commit suicide or forgo having children despite our obvious natural inclinations to survive and reproduce.
The lack of women isn't a problem. The prevalence of shitlords and discrimination turning women away is the problem.
"Women can't program" or "women suck at math attitudes" is what's under attack here.
The tech industry is the biggest "boys club" and as a result, has become a sexist shithole.
>And despite liberals believing the why was culture and gearing EVERYTHING in Sweden at fighting preconceived notions of gender roles, women STILL made the same choices that those in other countries did.
I don't think you're arguing with me as much as you're arguing with a caricature that only exists in your head.
>Sweden's case shows at the very least that culture is not the reason that men and women enter different fields.
Or that you don't understand the difference between culture and politics. You can't legislate tradition.
>I never said that.
Not verbatim, since this way you can heavily imply something without having to stand by your own words. (^:
>Apparently it takes one to argue about it because you haven't provided a single compelling argument
You posted no citations or evidence, so neither will I.
Of course we're going to disagree on principle. The difference is that you're so far up your own hershey highway that you think your opinions are facts.
sure, but I'm saying that the portrayal of men and women in the media is just acting on stereotypes.
Men are dumb with beer, and women are dumb with computers.
I don't think that the media is the ones to blame for the stereotypes, but they do encourage it.
I can't take you seriously when you're attacking misogyny using reaction pics from inherently misogynistic things like anime-styled video games featuring sexualized shrine maidens.
I won't refute anything coming from the quads of absolute and divine truth.
Still, my point is that media encourage stereotypes, which encourages media to dusplay them, which encourage more stereotypes...
I guess I was trying to say that even though ads portray men as dumb with cars, most people understand that the ad isn't portraying most men, just a few
I'll agree with you, as having a generally dumb women in a show like tbbt is somewhat reinforcing that real stereotype
this thread is total shit but this shit right here just saved it
get it? shit? eh? EH/?
>you can't legislate tradition
Except you can force laws on language, media representation, marketing towards children, and much more so... yes you can. What the fuck do you think the USSR was doing?
>I'll just put words in your mouth and act smug with le meme face =^]
Put the words "Sweden Occupation Gender" into Google. Literally all of the relevant links from actual research is PDF links, which force my phone to immediately download it instead of providing a direct link or opening in my browser.
An intellectually dishonest man who refuses to adhere by his own requests of others is not worth getting me out of bed to turn on my PC.
Enjoy your echo-chambers. I'm sure some day people will suddenly stop being influenced by tens of thousands of years of evolution forcing sexes into exclusively different functions.
People actually do have a problem with the lack of male nurses since female nurse can't do much when a patient gets ticked off. Source being that I've been to a psych ward.
I'm also sure the need for more male teachers is a thing too.
>Except you can force laws on language, media representation, marketing towards children, and much more so... yes you can. What the fuck do you think the USSR was doing?
So, people are biologically deterministic when you like it and completely susceptible to environmental manipulation when you don't. Right,
>Enjoy your echo-chambers. I'm sure some day people will suddenly stop being influenced by tens of thousands of years of evolution forcing sexes into exclusively different functions.
So, yes, you are arguing with a caricature that only exists in your head because arguing with someone who merely has different opinions from your own is too much work.
Here, I'll humor you: I'mm a transfox pyrogendered Maoist demigirl and you're triggering me, your objective facts and reality aren't part of my political narrative. Is this what you wanted to hear?
that comic is completely accurate though in how it portrays feminists who behave like that
they unapologetically hate men, are extremely vocal and rude and completely fail to realize their hypocrisy even when its waved in front of their faces
no where does the comic imply every feminist is like that, though it shows why the word feminist has been significantly poisoned by a significant number of people that identify as one
It won't be problem once everybody can get on board with the fact that, in general, man and women think and act differently, and those differences lead to different career choices.
Men have a natural drive to master things and to compete. It's the reason why men are almost always the top players in any type of game, whether video game or not. It's also what drives more men than women to competitive and challenging careers, like IT.
Feminazis can't get over the fact that perhaps the reason there are fewer females in IT is because fewer women want to be in IT. The few that do want to be in IT understand that they need to be just as competent as any man if they want to compete in the field.
It's especially aggravating when the actual point isn't wrong, but everything the author does to get it across is a load of bullshit that makes you want to disagree on principle. It's like /pol/ talking about affirmative action.
>It's like /pol/ talking about affirmative action
When the fuck did this place become infested with SJWs?
/pol/ is full of the worst kind of garbage but they are spot on with affirmative action. Go read a book or two by Thomas Sowell.
All /pol/ and anti-SJW shit aside, I really am bothered by multiple above-the-fold articles this year that I have seen striving for equality in the tech field/Silicon Valley. One article was saying there wasn't enough mexicans/blacks and one article was saying there wasn't enough women. None of the articles managed to say why that matters, but that it's just bad.
>Every remotely successful civilization ever had the same sexual dimorphism
kek, you took a nonsensical statement and added "remotely successful" to try to no-true-scotsman your way out of arguing an unfalsifiable claim
you still have yet to prove that
>all men and all women want the same exact things as every other member of their own sex
>predisposition = desire
and now you have to prove that women have literally never contributed to a hard science ever
>you can't legislate culture
>yes you can
>hah! So biology isn't deterministic of everything!
What? So despite the fact that I never said biology is deterministic of EVERYTHING, you're still going to parrot that line at sobering completely unrelated? You realize my point was that culture isn't at fault for gender representation in the workforce. To which you stated that culture can't be legislated despite recent history showing otherwise.
A population's biology is a product of the environment, that's what evolution is all about. The best suited to a particular environment thrive. It obviously take a long time to make any serious changes on a physical level to a population.
>you're just strawmanning!
I said biology is the main reason why women don't get into STEM. You're saying it's culture. One side has 50k years of history, the other has failed social experiments.
Actually, males in teaching do get a lot of shit even though there's no evidence that they pose a threat to students or are subpar at their jobs.
Theoretically, they should be worse across the board because women have better social skills, but biology is no match for sapience.
Name a single one that didn't that 1) lasted longer than a few centuries. 2) had a footprint larger than Vermont. And 3) made a basic contribution to the history of science.
This. Also feminists have an obsession with being men. Their perception of strength is male attributes. So they pick the male dominated careers that are the most physically undemanding that women can do. Since it is much harder to get oil rig workers, which are private businesses to lower their standards then it is for firefighters which are public sector and they dont care if someone dies in a fire as long as women can live the fantasy that they are being useful.
Kind of like this:
Lots of potential female genius stays undiscovered because women have it so hard to get into tech, that's why we assume they do have great talents and make it super easy for them to get into tech!
>You realize my point was that culture isn't at fault for gender representation in the workforce.
Yes, your point is simply wrong, because the government cannot magically change culture on a whim. Russians were still Russian during the Soviet regime, no matter how much Stalin wanted that not to be. Why do you think he killed tens of millions of people?
Culture is dynamic and evolves with people, it's not something you can dictate with votes and bills. If anything, it's much harder to overcome than biological differences--you can't fix beliefs with gene therapy.
>A population's biology is a product of the environment, that's what evolution is all about. The best suited to a particular environment thrive. It obviously take a long time to make any serious changes on a physical level to a population.
Oh, christ, now you're saying upper body strength is a prerequisite for programming ability?
>I said biology is the main reason why women don't get into STEM. You're saying it's culture. One side has 50k years of history, the other has failed social experiments.
They had computers fifty thousand years ago? Do tell.
because if some dude decides he'll become an RN and steps into class, his fellow nursing students don't lose their shit the second he doesn't show a interest in licking their yeast and cheeto stained vagina
>No one seems to have an issue with the lack of male nurses or school teachers.
No one seems to have an issue with the lack of female mine workers too, or jobs that are bad for your health or have you bear other great risks
It's not equality they want it's power
do you know any hispanics, women and blacks that are into tech and good at what they do? even if you can come up with a few examples, anon's statement still holds in general. there are lots of hispanic wannabe indie mobile game developers but they're for the most part incompetent amateurs.
Then why are women obsessed with it? The answer is, they wish they were men. But they are not or ever will be. I dont go to knitting parties and be surprised when everyone there is an old woman then rant about it on facebook when I get home.
I can't think of many white guys that are good at tech, either. Most people in general are shitters.
>all women are feminazis
Look, I'm sorry your GF dumped you for Jamal, but we should be objective here.
>it's a child like greed
>sees something they want and dont have
GIMMIE DAT. MINE.
>it's not yours. you can work at getting one yourself
NOT FAIR. GIMMIE
>no, you have to work for it
YOURE MEAN. I HATE YOU.
there's no shortage of male nurses or teachers you incredible buffoon, do you live in the fucking 1950s??? or are you some kind of ape going "hurr hurr teacher is girl job, nurse is girl job, there no men!!!"
20f here. Starting diploma in ICT next year. There is no selective bias in employment. If you have the qualifications, you'll be accepted no matter what gender you are. I have encountered no discrimination there.
I noticed a lack of encouragement growing up. While I was taking apart chairs, computers, researching mobile phone specs and inspecting the circuitry of my toys, no other girls were interested in things like that. Usually their parents would look at me and say my interests made me a tomboy, and that definitely coloured my female friends' view of technology and what would be thought of you if you liked it and were curious about it. I was buying myself robotics kits at 10 to pass time while my dad was still giving me Barbies and make up sets for Christmas (they were nice gifts but overall technology won my attention more). I made friends with boys more often than not because they were freer to have interest in it and given more encouragement to be interested in that because it was "technical" and "intellectual".
At times I would put my kits away and try to play with dolls so I'd have something in common with other girls but it didn't have the same spark as reading an instruction manual and creating something from nothing like technology did. I could do girly things but overall I liked doing things with my hands.
I have no idea how many women will be in my diploma course next year. I hope there will be a few. I want to encourage other people to get involved with technology too, and I plan to start my own security company and run seminars to encourage other girls and women to take up technology as a valid interest and a tool and show them what they can do. I wish I'd had that when I was younger to reassure me that I could be interested in technology and still be seen as a normal girl. No doubt it has put off countless other brilliant minds that would have been so valuable in this age with a little push.
>If a woman genuinely wants to develop software or become a systems administrator
They don't. They don't want to work as either, they want the Hollywood perception of those jobs, which are noticeably less work than the reality. They want the programmer job that lets them quickly solve a problem, impress everyone and sack off for a coffee and a cigarette.
Of course when they discover the reality is that it's a long, tough and difficult job they wimp out and blame men for not making it open enough to women, as if they're kids that need coddling. On my entire graduation year less than 10% of the grads were women and they were mostly from 'business and IT' courses.
You're damn right I mad.
Damn, that's depressing, but I'm also very glad they fought their way to that position. They're paving the way for other women to follow in their footsteps every day and it makes me really happy to see that.
But it is a progressive industry, it hires anyone based on ability. There's a lack of women coming through uni with the correct qualifications so they can't hire women that don't exist.
Where do I find a waifu with similar interests?
I don't want to depress you more, but they seem to have no particular interest in hacker culture. Here, in Spain, Computer Engineering is a very easy career to get in (although not to complete), so, a a lot of females got here because they were rejected in other areas.
No, not at all. I liked both, but technology held my attention more. I played with dolls to socialize with other girls for the most part and it was fun. I want to convince girls (and boys!) that it's okay to play with dolls AND tech, and that you are not less of a girl or doing anything wrong. With women, I want to convince them that learning a new programming language is no different to Spanish etc. It's a valuable tool that can open all sorts of doors. Equal interest in anything, basically.
>My CE class has 4 girls out of ~50 people.
The balance is about the same here, in a nordic country where women have better rights than men, yet they choose not to go for STEM fields.
>I have no idea how many women will be in my diploma course next year. I hope there will be a few.
There'll be three not including you.
Two won't know what the fuck they're doing and only turned up because they use Facebook and think that's what computing is. Don't make friends with them, they're leaving at the end of the first year latest. Don't get into groups with them either unless you like doing an entire project yourself (serious choice there, I always did like it).
The third one will be just as competent as most of the men on your course...which as you are about to learn means she's probably adequate at most. Most of your class full stop will not be very good even by graduation, she'll be no different.
You retarded permavirgin, what she says is that learning to program is learning to do useful stuff, just a learning a human language is.
What you think is that she says that human languages are the same as programming languages.
I'm 99 % sure that she didn't meant that.
Sorry, what I meant was that it's a different form of communication to learn. Just pulled something out of my head. If I didn't put it in a way like that then I probably wouldn't garner any interest from an audience that didn't know anything about it. My bad.
>I was taking apart chairs, computers, researching mobile phone specs and inspecting the circuitry of my toys
>I was buying myself robotics kits at 10
>At times I would put my kits away and try to play with dolls so I'd have something in common with other girls but it didn't have the same spark as reading an instruction manual and creating something from nothing like technology did
those don't seem like things a normal person would do, just saying.
Awesome. Even if it's only one girl I'll be happy with that, but even then I don't mind. As long as I'm learning about something I'm passionate about, I don't mind who I'm learning with if they're just as passionate.
If you've got any better ideas to explain programming to people that are intimidated by it to conjure interest without being patronizing, then I'm all ears. When I am properly qualified in the field then I will be better equipped to explain it to novices in a way that's better understood.
>I don't mind who I'm learning with if they're just as passionate
Ah shit I hate to do this but no, most of them will not be passionate. I am a britfag and recently completed my degree, I met two people in the entire time I would classify as overtly passionate about the subject, the rest were apathetic at best and grudging at worst.
but it's not fun for everybody, including most women. they're afraid of failure and don't want the slightest challenge. they're inherently lazy and don't want to exert themselves, neither physically nor mentally.
Oracle is an awful company, I can confirm. I have to work with the fuckers and it's hell.
Also, we should embrace more female workers into the industry because lord knows it's too much of a sausagefest already.
I'm in Sweden and my CE classes are usually 1/5 girls.
While there definitely are more woman here now than before most do indeed choose to go to the more classical female occupations.
>mfw my data structures teacher was hot 30 something year old Portuguese woman
Expressing negative expectations for "most" of an entire gender is not something that is helpful while saying that if they try like everyone else in the field they will be fine. It is a fruitless exercise of proving a point that is neither relevant nor accurate.
Yeah that was intended as a statement about college/university more than a statement about computing. The fact is that for some utterly baffling reason people spend lots of time and money studying things they don't give a fuck about and would an hero if they had to do for the rest of their lives.
You know what happened? College graduates that didn't follow a STEM related degree. Sure law degrees are great as well but other than that business and English degrees don't pay well unless you landed an internship earlier. Equality is a very easy subject to understand. Somehow these 3rd wave feminists decided to advocate a very easy subject. Others saw how easy it is to advocate and in their minds they think they are the change by telling others to change.
You don't need a partner from inside the job.
It would be awesome but it just doesn't happen because of what you just said.
Most engineers and shit will get a good gf because of their salary so they will be their providers while they fuck Tyrone when their engineer boyfriend is outside.
It is a stereotype. But it is so strong it eventually becomes real. Although most IT workers end up non-virgin, everythin related with women are hard for us at young ages. Harder than for normalfags.
At school it was the girls who were top of the class in science and maths but by 16-17 something switched in their brains and they lost all interest. When I entered sixth form my physics class was 50% female but by the second year it was 100% male. No discriminaion, we were all sitting in silence learning all the time. Women are just not interested in tech.
Business studies major here, I can't find shit in my field as well. You need to socialize and attend events, or have someone introduce you.
Fucking sucks having to study in all male class, no motivation.
But from where if not work?Lets say you rolledup into town with no friends, got a job in the most autistic of engineering fields, how on earth do you meet women?
>STEM autists chatting up women in bars
Zoe Quinn man, look it up. She started this massive shitfest and ten people like Anita Sarkeesian join the bandwagon and cry "muhsoggyknee", when really no one gives a shit.
I know the irony is hilarious
To answer OP, there's no reason there should be more women in CS or similar fields, if a girl wants to do CS, awesome, it'd be cool to have a few more girls around, but all the people forcing this shit down people's and young womens' throats, it's really no wonder they don't want to get into the field.
The only article of his that did mention her game: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2014/01/08/admission-quest-valve-greenlights-50-more-games/#more-183169
>At school it was the girls who were top of the class in science and maths but by 16-17 something switched in their brains and they lost all interest.
they just want DICK, literally. they start sleeping around, having lots of different boyfriends and that's basically what they spend their time doing.
Meanwhile, in the real world outside of the basement OP lives in.
>I wanna be a nurse bros.
>Cool brah. They make decent bank.
>I wanna be a software engineer /g/ / slashdot / reddit.
>OMG GTFO! WOMEN SUCK AT PROGRAMMING! THIS IS A GENTLEMAN'S CLUB, FUCK OFF!
>I want an easy job where I'm paid a lot
>I not only want it, I'm entitled to it
Every woman ever.
If you loved dicks and they were all around you begging to be stroked wouldnt you also lose interest in your autistic hobbies and enjoy yourself. Face it if women were as easy as women are men wouldnt bother trying to achieve anything.
This whole thread needs to be nuked into oblivion.
Why aren't more women in IT? It's because they've been groomed from a young age to be less interested in technology since it is associated more with males. This isn't true for EVERY person but it is quite obvious that parents both knowingly and unknowingly groom their kids to stick to their respective gender code in order to make them more normal and better prepared for society and its norms.
Are all women uninterested in tech? No.
Are all women capable of being in the IT field? Yes.
Is there gender/sex discrimination in the workplace? Probably, but not nearly as much as even 20, let alone even longer ago. Not enough to have an effect on finding employment.
I do think this whole new wave feminist thing is bullshit. I identify as a feminist, that is, I believe all people should be treated equally regardless of gender or sex. I've honestly never really experienced any blatant sexism in my life or even witnessed it. Even my gf says that she has never been told she could NOT do something because she was a girl.
>It's because they've been groomed from a young age to be less interested in technology since it is associated more with males.
Which is why they always need the latest iphone or macbook.
>It's because they've been groomed from a young age to be less interested in technology since it is associated more with males.
What about cooking? Growing up it's seen as a motherly chore, but most professional chefs are male. Not everything is a brainwashing conspiracy by the patriarchy. Dismissing biology as a factor in how a human is shaped, pretending we're all born as equal, empty canvases - that is some serious social engineering, marxist bullshit. It's also convenient how the "grooming" of boys that leads to them becoming car mechanics isn't a hot issue amongst feminist "equality" warriors. My guess is they see these people making good money in the IT world "by just doing something on a computer" and they reckon, hey that looks easy, why aren't I in on it?
>My guess is they see these people making good money in the IT world "by just doing something on a computer"
That's a good point actually. Think about how this feminist programmer thing correlates with the ease of use of computers.
The easier computers got to use, the bigger noise women were making about not enough women in CS.
"Hey I can use a computer"
Note that it's disconnected from the difficulty of developing souring up. It's getting more difficult, and that correlates with the number of CS females going down. There used to be loads of females in CS, but in the 70s-80s, it shot down. Women played a significant part in the advent of modern computing, but selected themselves out of what it became.
>females used to be discriminated based on their gender
>"WE DON'T WANT THAT WE WANT TO BE MORE THAN A GENDER WE ARE CAPABLE OF ANYTHING MEN ARE"
>fast forward to 2014
>"WE WANT TO GET HIRED BECAUSE WE ARE WOMEN IT DOESN'T MATTER IF WE'RE NOT CAPABLE FOR THE JOB"
That's because I'm talking strictly about the equality of men and women, which is pretty much what's been argued in this entire thread. I even specified that when I said "I believe all people should be treated equally regardless of gender or sex."
I'm no expert on the subject. I think you kind of answered it yourself though. It's not that women don't cook, it's that women generally don't cook professionally. Many women are home cooks for the family. When you pursue it as a profession, it's generally in a very hectic environment with a lot of yelling/stress which doesn't cater to women. Actually, I don't think the professional chef caters to men or women, it seems like a really shitty job with little pay, long hours, stressful work. Who the fuck wants to yell or get yelled at for hours on end in a hot ass kitchen?
I'm also not saying that men and women are the same biologically, but they are both pretty much capable of whatever the other one can do. No, I do not mean reproducing and all that biology shit you want to throw at me. I mean that they are capable of pursuing and succeeding at almost any profession they want, as in the context of this thread.
>Is there gender/sex discrimination in the workplace? Probably, but not nearly as much as even 20, let alone even longer ago. Not enough to have an effect on finding employment.
>Not enough to have an effect on finding employment.
Confirmed for being an oblivious misogynist.
Haha, like I said I'm not an expert on any of this stuff and I doubt anyone else in here is either. When I said that there is probably gender/sex discrimination in the workplace I was thinking about some misogynist small business owner in the deep American south who refuses to hire a female employee. Obviously there are still some sexists in the world just like there are some (probably more) racists. It would be stupid to ever assume that there is never any level of discrimination in the world. I seriously doubt that any corporate recruiter or person in charge of hiring would discriminate against a competent woman in today's world with businesses that actually matter.
God forbid I respond to people, right? If this is a discussion board (it is), why would I post and then leave if I'm here for discussion? I also don't think you understand what relevant means because I posted some pretty relevant information contributing to the topics/context of this thread. Fuck off faggot nigger get rekt xD
You're full of shit. Firstly, more women in CS results in more chances to get laid for your average male CS student.
Need I go on? This alone deconstructs your entire nonsense.
Unless you want to claim that people who work in CS are stupid.
Yeah, no shit, that's why I fucking said that in my reply. Note the part where I said: "Obviously there are still some sexists in the world just like there are some (probably more) racists. It would be stupid to ever assume that there is never any level of discrimination in the world."
>Are all women capable of being in the IT field? Yes.
No. Why would all women be capable of it when a minority of men are?
> It's because they've been groomed from a young age to be less interested in technology since it is associated more with males.
Not really, though that doesn't help. I'd say a bigger cause is that they've been taught to disproportionately fear failure.
If women are possible to become equal, and their potential is equivalent to that of men, why does it make a difference if more women join technology or not?
I think it is traditional that men work together better. But that's just because of tradition right? So the real goal to having men and women more equal is not to improve sharing of ideas because women can contribute anything more than men can with each other. It's because of this: >>45835386
fixed my sentence to be more clear:
>So the real goal to having men and women more equal is not to improve sharing of ideas because women can contribute anything more than men can with each other.
The real goal is not to have men and women become more equal in workplaces so that they can improve sharing of ideas because women are supposed to be equal and can contribute as much as any man. It's because of this: >>45835386