The link isn't to the mobile version. The site must have auto-detected your browser as "mobile" and redirected you (as it did to me). You need to visit http://cacm.acm.org/?mobile=false which seems to set a cookie that lets you visit the original URL without redirecting.
Sorry, I don't want to be an "ally for women", that to me sounds like needless victimisation. What I do support is focusing on technology and being excellent to each other.
Politics are boring. I don't care how many women are on computing. Why would I? I don't. If they want to collaborate and join, they should be welcome but not given special treatment.
But we all need role models to model ourselves after and sadly, there is a lack of women role models in computing. I'm not saying they don't exist - but it is an predominantly male profession.
Think back to why you got interested in computers, wasn't it because you had someone to look up to? Perhaps some family member or a computing legend?
Women also need women role models and those usually just don't randomly appear - there is a certain critical mass that might have to be created with other methods, perhaps with encouragement from the so called "allies" the article mentions, although that might not be the best way to put it.
Young women have to look at it as a viable career option to work in computing, and for that to happen they need someone to pave the way.
> But we all need role models to model ourselves after and sadly, there is a lack of women role models in computing. I'm not saying they don't exist - but it is an predominantly male profession.
We can dispute that.
>Think back to why you got interested in computers, wasn't it because you had someone to look up to? Perhaps some family member or a computing legend?
It was because I saw someone playing videogames in the computer at my mom's job. He was a man, but in no way he was a role model. He could've been an alien and I still would only be fascinated about the computer. I didn't care for the guy at all.
>Women also need women role models and those usually just don't randomly appear - there is a certain critical mass that might have to be created with other methods, perhaps with encouragement from the so called "allies" the article mentions, although that might not be the best way to put it.
I fail to see why should I care.
>Young women have to look at it as a viable career option to work in computing, and for that to happen they need someone to pave the way.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. This is what you say. What you really want is special treatment for women in computing e.g. quotas, grants and internships.
I do not care for any of that. The way I see those things do more harm than good.
Bear in mind that the social status of medicine, law, and STEM has (at least by my observations) remained fairly constant during that period, but that of computer science has sky-rocketed.
Do you have an explanation for the decline that doesn't call for a change in the way that women are treated in tech?
I don't know why it dropped. I don't presume to know the reason. Although I'm sure there are some people who feel pretty certain about what happened.
Why does it matter? If we are already treating each other excellently, as I suggested, and women still won't join computing, then I don't care. If we aren't treating each other in a civil manner, then by all means that what we should do.
I'm in no way advocating special treatment for women. I want to be clear about that.
That doesn't seem to be disagreeing with any of the points listed. Is it just the word "ally" you don't like?
Treating people equally and civilly is a political decision. It's not happening in a lot of places, and if you really want to step in and change it, that's politics.
The nice thing about computing is that everyone starts behind, but with a computer with Internet connection and the disposition to learn; You can get ahead.
(The difference being that if you accept that there are deep cultural problems in STEM environments wrt diversity, anyone who isn't a white male starts further behind)
The bad thing about computing is that a computer with an internet connection can deliver a whole world of hate right to you. Often by the same media (email, twitter, etc) as the information you'd need to get ahead.
To me, that graph looks like the tech industry transition from hobby to industrial/business tool. Pre-1985, there weren't many colleges even offering computer science degrees, so any data from that era could easy fall apart due to small sample bias.
I don't think anything necessarily "happened" to women in tech. You could just as easily say that as computer science became a more established field, men swarmed it because it was interesting to them.
I often wonder how helpful messaging like this is. Although it's probably true that large-scale change is necessary, I suspect that there are a lot of potential allies out there that this kind of post turns away.
Specifically, I think that if you tell a random man in computing that he needs to "help build a movement" (point #2 from the OP) to be considered an ally to women, then there's a decent chance he'll just say "welp I guess I'm not an ally" and close the tab.
I've seen similar arguments both ways within LGBT+ groups. Is someone an ally if they verbally support your cause, vote for supportive politicians, etc--but don't organize rallies with you?
22 comments
[ 2.4 ms ] story [ 43.2 ms ] threadPolitics are boring. I don't care how many women are on computing. Why would I? I don't. If they want to collaborate and join, they should be welcome but not given special treatment.
Think back to why you got interested in computers, wasn't it because you had someone to look up to? Perhaps some family member or a computing legend?
Women also need women role models and those usually just don't randomly appear - there is a certain critical mass that might have to be created with other methods, perhaps with encouragement from the so called "allies" the article mentions, although that might not be the best way to put it.
Young women have to look at it as a viable career option to work in computing, and for that to happen they need someone to pave the way.
We can dispute that.
>Think back to why you got interested in computers, wasn't it because you had someone to look up to? Perhaps some family member or a computing legend?
It was because I saw someone playing videogames in the computer at my mom's job. He was a man, but in no way he was a role model. He could've been an alien and I still would only be fascinated about the computer. I didn't care for the guy at all.
>Women also need women role models and those usually just don't randomly appear - there is a certain critical mass that might have to be created with other methods, perhaps with encouragement from the so called "allies" the article mentions, although that might not be the best way to put it.
I fail to see why should I care.
>Young women have to look at it as a viable career option to work in computing, and for that to happen they need someone to pave the way.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions. This is what you say. What you really want is special treatment for women in computing e.g. quotas, grants and internships.
I do not care for any of that. The way I see those things do more harm than good.
http://apps.npr.org/dailygraphics/graphics/women-cs/child.ht...
Bear in mind that the social status of medicine, law, and STEM has (at least by my observations) remained fairly constant during that period, but that of computer science has sky-rocketed.
Do you have an explanation for the decline that doesn't call for a change in the way that women are treated in tech?
Why does it matter? If we are already treating each other excellently, as I suggested, and women still won't join computing, then I don't care. If we aren't treating each other in a civil manner, then by all means that what we should do.
I'm in no way advocating special treatment for women. I want to be clear about that.
Treating people equally and civilly is a political decision. It's not happening in a lot of places, and if you really want to step in and change it, that's politics.
The points listed in the article talk about treating women in a special way.
I don't think anything necessarily "happened" to women in tech. You could just as easily say that as computer science became a more established field, men swarmed it because it was interesting to them.
Specifically, I think that if you tell a random man in computing that he needs to "help build a movement" (point #2 from the OP) to be considered an ally to women, then there's a decent chance he'll just say "welp I guess I'm not an ally" and close the tab.
I've seen similar arguments both ways within LGBT+ groups. Is someone an ally if they verbally support your cause, vote for supportive politicians, etc--but don't organize rallies with you?