> The underrepresentation of women in open-source software is frequently attributed to women’s lack of innate aptitude compared to men: natural gender differences in technical ability
Maybe I'm just of a younger generation, but I've literally never heard this in my life. The assumption among people my age has always been that women just generally aren't interested in software development at the same rate that men are; not that they're naturally worse at it!
Are you certain that memo was making an argument that "women lack innate aptitude compared to men"? It's been a while since I read it, but it seemed to me that it was arguing that differences in gender representation may be mostly attributable to differences in the degree to which men and women were attracted to high-pressure jobs at Google, rather than because of discrimination in hiring or promotions, and that the gap would be better addressed by making those jobs intrinsically more attractive to women, rather than by hiring quotas.
That was, well, one weirdo and a bunch of laypeople (who were, one suspects, into the idea for political/ideological reasons), though; I don't think many _programmers_ ever believed this.
That assumption is also wrong, and while less insulting on a surface level, I’m not sure it’s any less harmful. Women are interested in all STEM fields but have historically not been treated as capable because they’re women. We have tons of data on that, including experiments where using a feminine or masculine name changes how contributions are received.
>We have tons of data on that, including experiments where using a feminine or masculine name changes how contributions are received.
Your link is to reporting of a viral anecdote shared by an editor for a movie review site. It's also about how clients responded, not coworkers.
Aside from the "experiment" being N=1, easily confounded by any number of factors (such as the simple fact that, from the client's perspective, a supposedly troublesome contact was being replaced at all), and at least partially an excuse for Mr. Schneider to complain publicly about his boss, all of this clearly has nothing to do with "STEM", let alone programming. Historically it has been common in programming circles to receive contributions under pseudonyms (or, for that matter, first-initial-plus-last-name usernames) that don't disclose gender.
The argument you present here is simply not intellectually honest (and I have seen very similar arguments countless times over the years).
> The argument you present here is simply not intellectually honest (and I have seen very similar arguments countless times over the years).
It takes a special kind of gall to accuse another of intellectual dishonesty by using a Wikipedia article as proof and in under thirty minutes in the same thread say that Wikipedia cannot be trusted.
Hard to find a better example of intellectual dishonesty than using a source as proof when it supports your argument and decrying it as unreliable when it doesn’t.
I did not use that Wikipedia article as proof. I used it to cite the well known phenomenon to which I referred. There are plenty of sources available in the article to follow up on.
Furthermore, the article I linked to is clearly distinct along the lines that I described in the other post: it's not trying to paint a historical narrative, but to document a phenomenon noted by researchers.
I had thought this was a place where people don't stalk other users to try to attack them personally. (Also, your attempt to try to identify some kind of hypocrisy is ignoring the actual critique I offered of your own source.)
It’s the same thread, and a fairly short one. I read it again looking for new insights, as I often do, found someone criticising Wikipedia, and looked at the user name. Calling that stalking is delusional. Or, dare I say it, intellectually dishonest.
My initial response was different, and I even thanked you for the correction, but I deleted it and posted a new one after suspecting (as per the above) that you might not be arguing in good faith.
Please don’t try to play the victim when you’re the one who initiated the conversation with personal attacks.
"The argument you present here..." is not a personal attack. It's a statement about the argument. "It takes a special kind of gall to..." is. It's a claim about the person making the argument.
If we change that from "women just generally aren't interested in software development at the same rate that men are" to "women aren't as interested in software development as a career at the same rate as men" then it might not be so wrong.
I remember reading about a large study of pre-college students in OECD countries that found that while the top students in STEM fields were about equally split between boys and girls, for the boys it was more likely that they were only top in a STEM field. The girls were more likely to be top students in multiple fields.
Students tend to go on to the field they are best in. For the top boy STEM students that tends to be STEM. For the top girl STEM students the field they are best in often turns out to be one of the non-STEM fields they are also top in.
This would also require there have to been some enormous _shift_ in these 'innate aptitudes' in the 1980s or so; there were lots of female programmers in the 50s and 60s.
But yeah, I'm 39 and have never heard anyone serious claim that the gender imbalance is due to innate ability.
Back then, the title of "programmer" tended not to describe the person who came up with the logic, but rather the person who punched the holes in the key cards.
It might not just be people assuming they're inferior; it could also be that they have an unwelcoming or uncomfortable culture. For instance, if it's dominated by men who have eccentric interests that the women don't share, that might not seem to be an appealing group to get into. Worse, if it's dominated by men who are all interested in them romantically/sexually to the point where it feels like harassment, that wouldn't be appealing either.
Whenever I see those arguments about unwelcoming culture of programming, I’m thinking back on how I myself got into it. It was mostly a solitary activity with a lot of reading of manuals and tinkering and whatnot. There was not really a “culture” to not “welcome” me. Is everyone else just way more social about their programming activities? Like you show up to a club and feel shunned?
First, it's well-known that women are generally more social (or at least, better trained for socialization) then men. So yes, they're naturally going to worry more about a welcoming culture.
Second, maybe you got into it as a solitary activity as a child (I did too, long ago), but unless you work at a very, very unusual job, it's not at all a solitary activity these days at any normal company.
I think we're long past the point where this is a realistic scenario at least in 99% of situations, what does actually still happen though is coming across articles that fearmonger such for profit whether or not it's true. Those articles tell newcomers they are inferior and do not belong while pretending to be on the newcoming reader's side, despite exploiting them.
>For example, I was describing the comment that started this thread, where someone implied women are inferior programmers.
The comment that started this thread did no such thing. In fact, the entire point of that comment was to argue that this is itself an unfair stereotype of the community (i.e. that such a belief is not prevalent).
It instead quoted a claim from the article - which indeed implies this in a vague, hand-waving way, by citing another paper. When I look at the abstract for that paper, in turn, I don't actually see the claim asserted; the closest it comes is
> Challenges that women face in OSS are mainly social, including lack of peer parity and non-inclusive communication from a toxic culture
Also, that paper in turn describes itself as "a survey of the literature".
The whole thing comes across to me as an act of citogenesis (https://xkcd.com/978/).
Either women are naturally worse programmers and that leads to less interest, or they are less interested in programming which makes women worse programmers.
Unless I am missing another interpretation, both imply women are worse programmers.
Not really sure what you think making up such easily disproved lies does for your case here. The only people who will agree with you on this are people who already agree with some kind of intense dogma.
Nearly every woman I know in the sciences or engineering has a large number of stories of aggressive and inappropriate sexual advances, and in many cases outright sexual assault or rape in the workplace- typically from people in positions of power over them where they felt their careers were at risk simply from refusing the advances. Moreover, in most cases if they tried to report it or ask for help, even through official organization channels they were told there would be additional consequences if they didn’t keep quiet.
My workplace even had a sexual assault in the workplace training course where they coached us to stop co-workers from speaking if they started to disclose being victimized at work, I assume to avoid being legally responsible to respond appropriately.
> Nearly every woman I know in the sciences or engineering has a large number of stories of aggressive and inappropriate sexual advances, and in many cases outright sexual assault or rape in the workplace
That happens about as much in any field as long as you mix genders, so that is no reason to not want a software job.
I disagree, men in computer science are uniquely awkward, unaware, and often rude. I say this as a man in software. It's hard to have a conversation about the weather that doesn't end with me being a bit frustrated. A lot of these guys really don't know how to speak to women, or how to speak in general in a welcoming, calm, non-offensive way.
Maybe it's just the company I'm at but be aware this was also the case in college. It was hard to make friends when it seemed everyone was cosplaying an anime character while simultaneously bragging and trying to make me feel bad for my achievements, or lack thereof.
It's always struck me as absurd that the same group of people can be described like this and then simultaneously blamed for an epidemic of "aggressive and inappropriate sexual advances". (See also: https://slatestarcodex.com/2015/01/01/untitled/)
There are multiple reasons why. You'll notice that I mentioned they're typically rude and self-absorbed. To me, a man, I perceive that as such. But for a woman that could be seen as aggressive.
Keep in mind also the media they might consume. I mentioned anime cosplaying in real life - and I mean it. Now, look at how anime depicts women. They're sexual objects for men's enjoyment and entertainment.
But perhaps the biggest reason is men tend to get... overly confident in male-dominated spaces. This is something I've noticed since I was a child. All bets are off in locker rooms or at the poker table or in an online game. It's an opportunity to say the vilest things imaginable.
>But perhaps the biggest reason is men tend to get... overly confident in male-dominated spaces. ... It's an opportunity to say the vilest things imaginable.
Yep, this is one big reason I hate being in all-male environments or workplaces. Men are usually much better behaved when there's some women around.
I doubt that, as the less women in a field of work, the more likely an individual woman is to stand out and be targeted. Situations that put you frequently alone in closed offices with a single other person also contribute to the risk. Do you really think kindergarten teachers experience these things at work as often as software engineers?
It could also be that women value work/life balance more than men, while the tech industry is rather infamous for poor work/life balance. The fact that most tech jobs are exempt from overtime in the US doesn't help.
It’s not just a matter of values- culturally prescribed gender roles often override peoples personal values and goals. Women are more likely to be legally, socially, and/or biologically required to care for children (the last one refers to breastfeeding and pregnancy).
Men also experience more social pressure to be successful at work, or else are seen as not as worthy of respect as people or as romantic partners regardless of their personal goals and values.
Often it's the opposite. When you aren't very good at something, you have to work twice as hard. I've met plenty of men who thought that programming was cool so they became obsessed with learning how to code without having the innate skills. It mostly doesn't work out, but during that period of time, they were more interested in learning to code than a lot of programmers. And many do try open source. That's why there are a lot of junk pull requests on Hacktoberfest.
Maybe I'm just of a younger generation, but I've literally never heard this in my life. The assumption among people my age has always been that women just generally aren't interested in software development at the same rate that men are; not that they're naturally worse at it!