As someone who lives in an area where forced busing still occurs, the result is actually quite different. The middle class students are sent to private schools, charter schools, homeschooled, or the families move away altogether. If they go to the public schools, they can't learn because of the disruptive students who are bused in. The parents resist all efforts to raise the property tax base because their children don't attend public schools anymore, and so why should they pay for them? And so the schools lose even more money.

I also have super curly hair. I only use conditioner, no shampoo unless my scalp needs extra cleaning, which is very rarely. And I use hair products like gel and spray. Conditioner combed through my hair and then rinsed out removes all hair products. Check out the DevaCurl starter kit - it has "NoPoo" shampoo, which is shampoo without harsh sulfates, conditioner, gel, and spray. Their products are great for curly hair.

And we wonder why there aren't more women in tech.

I'm not a fan of the male-stereotyping in the article. At best, it's unproductive, at worst, it insults men and so they stop listening.

A lot of the responses here on HN though demonstrate exactly why many women leave software engineering. Read these responses and ask if you like your mother, wife, girlfriend, or daughter working with people who have these attitudes. In an all-male group, the level of misogyny is camouflaged because there are no women to talk about. When there's a woman around, it's exposed, because she is both a target of any misogyny PLUS all the discussion about the drama created by it. Most women cope by becoming "one of the guys" and laughing along when someone makes a sexist remark. The stereotype of the un-made-up geeky female hacker exists because a lot of women notice the difference in how they're treated when they wear a skirt, heels, nice hair, and make-up, as opposed to jeans, sneakers, ponytail. It's a lot easier to dress sloppy and not be made a target.

Another problem is that a significant amount of workplace happiness derives from having friends at work. It's a lot harder to make friends when you're the only woman and you occasionally wonder, "does he really view me as a friend? or is he flirting? that sounded like flirting." Or consider networking - the best way to advance your career. How do geek guys network? It's not usually golf. Networking with geeky guys usually involves late nights gaming, coding, drinking beer (in my experience). I'm not comfortable going to my single coworkers house to play video games and drink beer until midnight, or staying at work coding with a couple coworkers after everyone else has gone home and the secret mini-fridge in the server room has been opened. It could lead to a bad situation with lots of misunderstanding that could ruin a career. Best to just avoid it.

If it wasn't a wide-spread problem, then why does every single woman in the industry feel like it's something she has had to deal with personally? I've been in the industry 5 years and I'm considering leaving because I feel my gender is holding me back. I'm smart and hard working and I can do really well in a field where being a woman isn't going to hurt my career.

All the other professions are high-risk and require significant physical strength. Men are generally more comfortable with high-risk, high-reward jobs, and have a physical strength advantage over women.

Computer Science is not high-risk and does not require significant physical strength.

So why choose computer science as an area to push for more women to participate in?

It seems like the opposite of equality.

"Here are a bunch of dangerous, yet lucrative career tracks, but I think more women should be programmers because it's safer than climbing a ladder."

Women are more risk averse than men. It's a well-known evolutionary strategy for men to choose high-risk/high-reward pursuits.

Also, you completely ignored my point about these careers being suited to physically extremely strong people, which are disproportionately men (due to biological differences).

Women should be programmers because they are as mentally capable as men, and they can handle the minimal physical requirements. If a woman is just as strong as a male lumberjack/fisherman/etc, and perfectly fine with the risk, then she should be able to do that job as well.

(More than 500,000 people are treated in the US for ladder-related injuries.)

It's absurd to be fulling willing to believe, on average, that physically a woman is weaker than a man, but for some reason her brain ( a physical structure! ) is identical in all areas of ability.

I didn't say smarter. You made that up.

If you're willing to accept that men and women have different physical characteristics and different aversion to risk, why then must the brain have an exemption when it comes to ability? Why can't men be more comfortable programming a computer?

And the more important question, why should there be an effort to lure women into computing?

>And the more important question, why should there be an effort to lure women into computing?

well, that's a fair question but what about the opposite? "why should there not be an effort to lure anyone into computing?"

there are a lot of people who have a genuine interest in computing, but don't enter it because of either lack of role models or social pressure. so, they are really missing out on something that may make them happy as adults, and for reasons beyond their control. not beyond their ability.

another factor i've noticed a lot in my career, working as a programmer but interacting with a lot of creatives, is that a lot of people, perhaps young women, are not interested in spending a huge amount of time alone, which may be the only pre-requisite to learning computing - being interested in finding out how stuff works more than going out with your friends and/or succumbing to peer pressure to be sociable. computing isn't something you can do with a group of people. you can sit in the same room but ultimately you need to focus for long periods of time without distraction. i just haven't met a lot of people in my life who can/want to do that, and aren't already in a field that needs that focus.

I second (or third) the recommendations of seeing a psychologist and upping your level of physical activity. Try to find a psychologist who isn't a pill-pusher. I also recommend the books "Feeling Good" by David Burns and "The Highly Sensitive Person" by Elaine Aron. One thing that helps me figure out if I'm ok with where I am and what I have is imagining that I'll lose it tomorrow (not in a bad way). If I'm tired of where I live, I imagine I'm moving tomorrow, if I'm unsure about my job, I imagine it's my last day here. It helps me appreciate the good things about my situation. However, I'm definitely one of those people who doesn't appreciate what they have until it's gone.

You might find the book "The Highly Sensitive Person: How to Thrive When the World Overwhelms You" by Elaine Aron helpful. Shyness isn't the same as being highly sensitive, but sensitive people are often considered shy.

Violin, wanted to go pro when I was a teen.

I must agree with brlewis. Another way to look at it is Option 1: Spend 50% of your time honing your skills, gaining valuable experience Option 2: Spend 100% of your time honing your skills, gaining valuable experience Another thing to consider is how awesome it is to work with people who are as good as you (or better), love what they do, and have things to teach you. Even if option 2 pays less, take the cut and get the experience that will propel you into a higher pay bracket. BTW, none of the supremo hackers I've worked with have begrudged me time to play with some cool new tool - as long as I willing to share my knowledge.