We're still here. Based on my personal experience, there are plenty of reasons why geek girls are avoiding CS. For starters, I've had to deal with a few of my classmates make lame jokes,like boobs and brains being an inverse ratio and following that up with "Oh hey, you're not flat chested. Haha." It's a no win situation for me. If I complain, I'm too sensitive. If I say something back, I'm a bitch. I've also had problems with one of my professors, who seemed think women only took CS classes because they were gold diggers in search of a MRS degree. Most of the guys in my classes are decent, if occasionally awkward when we do group projects together. But the ones who aren't tend to be the ones who go out of their way to be an ass.
I think the article nailed it with this quote: "These roles would probably be ideal for women who prefer to be in communication-focused roles, if they know computer science and can communicate to all parties involved." My husband and several of our friends work at the same company. They are write code. All the women on their floor are relegated to "communication-focused" roles, like project/product managers. I've also run into this when people at my husband's office ask what I'm majoring in. When I say computer science, everyone's reaction is "Great! We could always use another project manager! You should talk to so and so about an internship." They look sort of baffled when I explain that no, I want to write code, not manage coders.
"They look sort of baffled when I explain that no, I want to write code, not manage coders."
Good for you. Sorry about all the jerks.
Since the studies apparently show that women are opting out because they prefer communication focused roles, others figure that all women are like that and would never want to be in the trenches writing code. And, indeed, many (or even all) of the women they have at that company may prefer those roles.
But even if many people are bad about stereotyping others based upon their past experiences, there are definitely places where people will be happy to see you program as long as you have the aptitude and the interest.
Unfortunately, one thing you will likely have to deal with throughout your career is programming departments dominated by male-centric attitudes and humor. (This can range from benign to outright offensive, depending on the people involved.) I don't really have any helpful advice for that. Then again, I spent a couple of years working in a very female-centric office, and that was a strange experience, too, so I guess that can work both ways. The last thing I want to do is to talk you out of programming, but you should go into it with your eyes open on this one.
I really enjoy coding, so I plan to stick with it. I am hoping that programming jobs will be similar to other jobs I've worked, in that where you work does make a difference as far as "corporate culture" goes. I've been researching internships, and I've found a couple of companies that might be a good fit. I'm sure I'll find somewhere to fit in doing what I want, but I also expect to have to look a bit harder for it than the average male CS major would. But hey, isn't that what internships are partly for?
KDE has had kind of an odd history with female contributors. At the time that I wrote that article, women were leading up every non-development part of the project (translation, documentation, usability, promotion / events, financial / political organization, artwork), but still only made up maybe 1% of the devel team.
My theory at the time was that (a) most people that were majoring in CS in the late 90s got into computers because they played computer games as teens and (b) in the early 90s games were much more targeted towards stereotypically male themes, but I'd have expected things to level out a bit more by now since the primary draw of computers shifted to the internet, which had a more level gender pull.
"They look sort of baffled when I explain that no, I want to write code, not manage coders."
Not to condescend, but that will change in ten years.
I base this not on your gender, but on the observation that there are very few old programmers. Everyone debates the reason for this (i.e. is it age discrimination, or is it programmer preference?) but the fact remains that most programmers end up doing other things as they age.
Just out of curiosity, what is the cut off point between young and old programmers? If it's somewhere between 40-50, I would agree that you see fewer programmers in this age range. But I think that also has something to do with fewer positions available at the top compared to all the junior level positions.
If you assume the average programmer will start their career by their mid 20s, ten years seems a little early for "old" programmers to start a mass defection. I would not be surprised if many of the commenters here could be considered "old programmers" by that definition. I don't have a big sample, but in my experience, you're not an "old" programmer until you hit 45-50.
"most programmers end up doing other things as they age"
You base these statements upon what data? Your own observations? Then maybe you need another set of glasses.
There are several million hackers that would disagree with you. Too bad you haven't had a chance to meet too many of them. Probably would have been interesting for both of you.
There's nothing wrong with managing programmers. It was just the assumption that I didn't want to "get my hands dirty" because I was female that bothered me.
I don't know if it's common for project managers to contribute code in other companies. At husband's company, it is pretty much unheard of for for a project manager to write code. Project manager tends to be more of a technical writing/managerial position in his company. There's nothing wrong with that. But I have no wish to be a full time technical writer/manager.
At a company such as Microsoft, you can become a software architect. This means you can focus on the major design issues and have developers implement your design. You can write code, but you don't have to write that much.
As you grow older, you will want to write less code and focus more on software architecture and management of programmers.
Ah, ok. That makes more sense, although it is quite different from what my husband's company considers "managing coders" to be. That does sound more in line with what I want to do long term. Thanks for giving me a different view.
"There's a perception that being a computer science major leads to a job as a programmer and you sit in a cubicle where you type 12 hours a day and have no interactions with other people"
Actually, entering my first job at a large software company, I was pleasantly surprised by how many people maintained lives outside their jobs. Fixing up houses, teaching Sunday school, racing bikes, volunteering. I believe a hobby is not really a hobby if its what you do for a living. And when Halloween
rolls around, I'm reminded how many people have real responsibility (e.g. Children)
"Some studies have shown that as soon as girls turn 12—and maybe now it is even younger—they're so into their social image and being liked by boys that they dumb themselves down so not to be seen as a geek," Yusupova said."
I wonder if this has more to do with western high schools than our culture at large. I dropped out on my twelfth birthday. While I did encounter social pressure to move into more sanctioned roles, this was opposed by teachers encouraging me to find what I liked and do it well. I was very lucky -- this isn't something afforded to most high schoolers. It has helped me grow into these interests.
Call me crazy and out of touch with reality, and this is only partly off topic: but I'm one of those guys who still doesn't understand why people go bonkers to see a girl who knows her way around a computer, much less plays a video game.
Then again, my current love interest is a Network Security student so...maybe I'm just naive anyway.
It's nice to be able to share things. Presumably it could also get too much (computer stuff all the time), but couples of the same profession seem to be quite common. Besides, computers are among the most interesting things, especially because most other things can be analyzed in terms of computers.
People aren't analyzable by computers, at least on an individual basis. Women tend to be more interested in individual relationships than men, and you can't have a relationship with a computer.
In my opinion, it is pretty obvious from the clearly differing motivations of the genders why there is such a gender divide in academics. Maybe it has to do with intelligence, but "intelligence" seems to largely be determined by what a person loves and focuses their time on, i.e. genius is 1% inspiration and 99% perspiration.
Today, we measure intelligence in quantitative/technical terms, and men are much more interested in technical subjects than women. Who memorizes thousands of intricate statistics about hundreds of people they'll never meet? Who gets bored stiff by that stuff and wants to share personal experiences instead? The difference here is quantitative vs qualitative.
So, again, I think it's pretty obvious why there are barely any women geeks. People only think it is a big issue because they think it is important for women to be self determined, and you have to be technically smart to succeed in what we consider success (career, wealth, material goods, etc). I think our modern worldview is way too narrow.
"Women tend to be more interested in individual relationships than men, and you can't have a relationship with a computer."
OK, firstly, my Mac started crying when he read that. Poor mac!
Secondly, the broad generalisations that you make about men and women is exactly the problem. Here's a hint: Women working in IT, and particularly programming, are there precisely because we too are interested in technical subjects and having very analytical minds. The problem is, as roadtripgeek has already alluded to, men see us in the workplace, and make the assumption that we are just like the hairdresser, or the secretary that they talk to on coffee breaks: into communications more than cold hard code.
I look at my situation. My entire floor at the ofice is taken up by programmers and their direct managers. I am the only woman on the floor. It's not the technical conversations that get me, it's all the other crap. Guys that want to talk about poker, or brewing beer, or the football results, or how they got lucky with a hot babe in the carpark of the Sheraton last weekend. Or it's when they decide to use a clip from a porno film as the test flow for a new product that we are working on. Or the fact that a few of the guys have decided that, seeing as I'm the only woman on the floor, that I shouldn't have a bathroom all to myself, and who won't even put the damned seat back down after they have finished pissing!
It's all that crap that makes IT unattractive for women, not the actual work itself.
Personally, like many of us here on HN, I'm working on my exit strategy - work for myself, where I can still code my little heart out, without having to put up with all the male bonding crap that I'm automatically excluded from in the workplace.
Voted up for the crying Mac, but other than that I have to say you dish out just as many stereotypes as you complain about receiving. I am male but I don't care about beer or football, and I would never spread porn in the workplace. If I got lucky with hot babes frequently, maybe I would brag about it - but I wonder, what exactly would you be interested in talking about with men? Seems to me that relationship issues are one of the common themes of human conversation.
Stereotypes? Where? I wasn't making generalisations, I was describing my daily work environment! The fact that you identify that environment as being stereotypically male rather proves my point, don't you think?
The whole point of my post is that it is a general observation. If the genders naturally have this qualitative vs quantitative distinction in their interests, then the lack of women in quantitative disciplines is a straightforward implication.
I can see the problem if women don't naturally have such interests and they're somehow forced to be this way through societal expectations. But is this really the case?
If the reason that there are less women in technical subjects is that their minds have been crippled by their upbringing (at a higher rate, for these particular subjects), then that is an important problem.
I think that is partially true based on anecdotal evidence from a friend who tutors students in math. But still, there seem to be intrinsic differences between the genders in the general nature of their interests.
I don't think this is bad. Women are obviously much smarter than men in certain areas of life and it has been said that behind every great man there is an even better woman. What needs to happen is for us to realize the mind's quantitative abilities are not the only important aspect of the mind.
Anyways, I don't think women should be purposefully kept from quantitative disciplines. I think the system should be entirely merit based and if women want to be technical then they should do the same work as men.
I deny that the theory of genetic male/female differences in what interests one has (or tends to have) is plausible. I think it is like astrology. One takes something, and says it causes something else, for no reason. One needs an explanation of how it causes it.
Of course there are observed gender differences. Culture can explain that. We can actually explain how culture could cause all of the observed effects. With genetics there isn't any explanation.
What about physiology, such as the differences between the brains? Also, until we completely separate procreation from reproduction, men and women will have different social roles, which underlies the cultural influences you mention.
I think the article nailed it with this quote: "These roles would probably be ideal for women who prefer to be in communication-focused roles, if they know computer science and can communicate to all parties involved." My husband and several of our friends work at the same company. They are write code. All the women on their floor are relegated to "communication-focused" roles, like project/product managers. I've also run into this when people at my husband's office ask what I'm majoring in. When I say computer science, everyone's reaction is "Great! We could always use another project manager! You should talk to so and so about an internship." They look sort of baffled when I explain that no, I want to write code, not manage coders.