www theguardian com/technology/2016/feb/12/women-co nsidered-better-coders-hide-gender-

File: eng.jpg (45KB, 687x389px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 687x389px

>77 cents on the dollar

File: never_go_full_guardian.jpg (502KB, 1187x1200px) Image search: [Google]

502KB, 1187x1200px

>>56218791
>the guardian

Okay.

I do the same as an Indian desu senpai

>>56219050
very progressive.

>>56219004
>interaction engineer
What

>>56219050
>Multiple articles about poo

>>56219050
>Is there anything worse than a man who cries?

Isn't the feminist argument that men DON'T cry enough? That our social reinforcement of toxic masculinity has coerced men from their first breath as newborns into concealing their emotions away from everyone else and bottling them up even to the point of a nervous breakdown?

>>56219147
Well at least she has a job. A shitty, useless affirmative action job, but still a job.

>>56218791
is that a girl with a thinkpad?
hnnnggg

>>56218791
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2016/feb/12/women-considered-better-coders-hide-gender-github

The Guardian isn't banned here.

>>56219243

It should be.

Because a man will code faster and a girl most likely only code if she is good at it besides that there are way more men coding so its more likely that lots of shits get through bringing our score down tests like these do not count and are pure shit cancer emily

Put 100 females vs males cs students against eachother and give me those results

I'm thinking of making my own open source license that precludes anyone from posting the source to github.

File: elliot-rodger-santa-barbara-killer.jpg (92KB, 599x337px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 599x337px

>>56218791
fuck those swines

>>56219050
convince me to be a leftist

ive never met a girl coder

are they autistic?

>>56219471

pretty much any girl heavy into tech is autistic.

File: screencapture-www-theguardian-com-technology-2016-feb-12-women-considered-better-coders-hide-gender-github-1471919928556.png (1MB, 681x4171px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 681x4171px

>>56218791

File: 1465100892701.png (1MB, 1357x1281px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1357x1281px

>women
>coding
pick one

"women who make a big deal out of being female suck at coding"
news at 11

>>56219556
How does she have a job

>>56219243
Gives new meaning to the term pull rug, amirite?

Also, if there were fewer women and it just happened that more of those women got accepted and fewer men within the sample were accepted, wouldnt that mean that the women were at about even numbers and that this is just a perspective with a cheap agenda?

>>56219556
Please tell me this is an joke.

I think they are confusing all of us who crossdress while programming desu senpai

>>56219147
Probably an inflated job title for a UX designer.

>>56219596
what i mean to say is

out of 500 women we accept 390
and that out of 1000 men we accept 760.

doesnt that technically mean that with 5 fewer women accepted we'd be at an even rate?

>>56218791
>woman are better code-monkeys than man
Of course, that's true, because most code-monkeys are poo in the loos. Real man don't do "coding" jobs so they're missing from the cancer called github.
Yes, woman are better than Pajeet.

>>56218791
>Wow you're all sexists.
You needed a news article to tell you that?

>>56219050
>Bottom right corner

I see you left some hope in there for those of us that made it all the way through

>>56219645
10 fewer, not 5 fewer, going by the rates you provided.

have 20 autistic coding girls
have 2000000 coding men comprised of a mixture of hipsters, pajeets, and autistic people

>girls have a better aproval rate

wow, never would have seen that coming

>>56219702
next they are going to say that men are better clothes-designers/hair-dressers

>>56219224
>girl

File: totally comparable.png (47KB, 623x306px) Image search: [Google]

47KB, 623x306px

>>56219596
>>56219645
Here's the full study, look for yourself.
https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/

>>56219533
>white woman
>two niggers
wow how new and refreshing

>>56219606
https://www.instagram.com/p/5c1WXeESvD/

>>56219533

Ok whoever inserted the meritocracy edit, thats not funny

>>56219004
>>56219556
these will never cease to trigger me

>for a moment I thought I was on /pol/

File: Screenshot from 2016-08-23 07-47-16.png (64KB, 795x579px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 795x579px

Nice peer-reviewed study OP. Really made me think.

>>56219729
>user not on google plus
read: male

>>56218791
>>56219243
Cool non-controlled study bro. What if... (now stick with me here) what if... the women who felt the need to disclose their gender were ones contributing lower quality or unnecessary code? There's no control group here. It could certainly be argued that women who felt the need to disclose their gender in their profile were of a different disposition than those who didn't, from a psychological standpoint, and this could have an effect on the work they produce or how they chose to present it.

>>56219594
she doesn't.
she makes money from marketing shit on Instagram and other sites.

#JustWyminPrivilege

You cis fucking scum.

>>56219594

thats her job, click baiting on instagram

They hide their gender because it isn't relevant when you know what you're doing. They don't need the safe pillowy confines of a scapegoat to explain away their shitty code.

>>56219050
Weird how inconsistent this seems. What are they trying to propagate? Women are meant to do whatever they want to, but men need to strictly follow stereotypes to make women feel comfortable? Stuff like that makes me really angry.

What a dumb article. Any profession that has a strong gender bias due to societal or historical reasons will end up having a minority of workers in the lesser gender who are far above average in terms of skill.

This is because when something isn't targeted towards your gender you enter it (usually) for reasons of genuine passion and desire not simply because it's there.

While programming has become trendy in the last few years any woman who was doing it a decade ago was doing it simply because she loved programming, so of course she was good at it, she had a much stronger desire to learn than some guy who fell in to it just because 'well I like computers I guess'.

Where's the article on why all the best hairdressers in the world are men?

>>56219681
my mistake youre probably right

>>56219147

>anyone can be an engineer

welcome to the regressive left

>>56222390
mechanics of effort!

>>56219823
>https://www.instagram.com/p/5c1WXeESvD/
Lol at the comments.

It pretty much feels like men are good at nothing these days.

Women are better parents, better coders, better science fiction writers, better engineers, better leaders, better doctors, better drivers, artists, animators... etc.

What does that leaves men, labouring in factories, working the soil in farms, being ground pounders for the armies under the command of female generals, being locked in breeding facilities constantly undergoing tests to maintain their value as a genetic source?