zlacker

[return to "Sex and STEM: Stubborn Facts and Stubborn Ideologies"]
1. jentho+Bq[view] [source] 2018-02-15 14:35:35
>>andren+(OP)
I’m a CS graduate and female founder. I disagree with many parts of this essay, but I actually agree with this part: “The sex difference in interest in people extends to a more general interest in living things, which would explain why women who are interested in science are much more likely to pursue a career in biology or veterinary medicine than computer science“

I believe that, at age 18, women have more sophisticated social lives and care more than boys do about relationships with people. But I think the perception that CS is less beneficial towards people or that technologist don’t work with people as often as other professionals is false. My job as a PM at Google was incredibly social, and I felt had a huge impact on “living things”, much more so than my female friend’s role as a psychology researcher or operations associate at an insurance company. There’s a belief in society that all CS grads do is sit in caves alone and make video games, whereas the truth is that they have beautiful offices, close-knit teams, a lifestyle with time for friends, a lot of influence, and a huge impact on real people’s lives through the software they create.

Now, a related problem is that CS actually is less social for woman than in it is for men. I had very few friends in my advanced classes, whereas the dudes took those classes together in packs. I benefited a huge amount from women in CS community at my university because I felt like I knew more people in my classes, could sit, chat, and work with them. IMO, all of the dollars going towards women in STEM that this author criticized are and should continue to target these two problems: that CS is perceived as less to do with “living things” and that it actually is less social for girls because there isn’t a strong community.

◧◩
2. seanmc+aK[view] [source] 2018-02-15 16:48:39
>>jentho+Bq
During my career, I’ve noticed many female programmers and even PhD-level researchers switching to PM roles. PM and UX have better representations than developer roles, though I don’t think that this should be counted as success towards the overall problem.
◧◩◪
3. jentho+qN[view] [source] 2018-02-15 17:12:12
>>seanmc+aK
This actually goes to my point - PMing is more social than coding, and there are more female PMs and UX designers so those fields also feel more social for the women in them (easier to make friends, more feminine community).

Re:success - In my eyes, success is when women have better representation as engineers, makers, and technologists. A PM and UX designer could be a great engineer and technologist, although it's hard to keep your technical chops when you're not coding regularly. So I agree...

[go to top]