Yes, self selection as a response to perceived discrimination, or "lack of fit", is different from outright discrimination. But no less a problem, and certainly not unchangeable!
Would you settle for "close enough"? I would guess that Sweden is probably close enough. So, what's the fraction of CS students in Sweden who are female? If it's close to the fraction in the US, then the US is also probably "close enough" (in that specific way, by that measure).
> that while males are more fundamentally interested in things, females are more fundamentally interested in people.
Even assuming this, code is about people and getting more people into it that center their work around people is how tech is going to advance in the long term.
The way software engineering is taught gives people the wrong idea. The hardest problem in tech is "what does my user want and how is that different from what they need?"
All these defenses are laughable when put in any other context. Try answering "why black people don't code" with a straight face and ignoring systematic disadvantages. I have not seen it down without exposing a bigot.
I've seen the "each group has its reasons" fluff as well, but those defenders are happily living in a world where only one type of group makes good programmers. Out of a whole world of groups, only this type of person can write code.
The narrative that this lecturer understands all disadvantaged groups because he's from one himself is a false narrative. Using that to build credibility for his arguments is laughable journalism.
> The narrative that this lecturer understands all disadvantaged groups because he's from one himself is a false narrative. Using that to build credibility for his arguments is laughable journalism.
I think that was in there to show that he's likely not a bigot, because that seems to be the default assumption about anyone that doesn't go along with the dogma of the far left these days.
Your comment gets me wondering though, in the case of the question about "why black people don't code": Are we able to pick apart the causality of "systematic disadvantages" vs "each group has it's reasons"? I ask because the "systematic disadvantages" narrative is seductive and there is a lot of anecdotal evidence, but I'm not sure I've seen a nice data on the subject that could prove one way or the other why it really is that "black people don't code".
Usually most of these questions are asked with horrible methodology and pseudoscience wrapped around bigotry.
I would like to see someone answer the ‘question’ of “why women dont code” and “why mass shooters are mostly white men” with the same methodology.
One could say:
Devil’s Advocate: “After all, 58% of mass shootings in the past 35 years were committed by white men. The data is clear. Is this not due to probably the inherently violent and psychopathic nature of white men?”
If you have problems with this statement, then why, and why aren’t your methodological concerns similarly mappable on simplistic “why women don’t code” arguments?
Why must everyone like and do everything in exactly the same identity-label proportions? Universities have had to close over 171 men's wrestling teams, 84 men's tennis teams, 56 men's gymnastics teams, 27 men's track teams, and 25 men's swimming teams because of Title IX in order to make it “fair” for women, instead of everyone able to work towards what they aim or invested in similarly without limitations based on bias or identity labels? Instead, predictable automatic outrage and taking things to unreasonable, spun extremes that shutdown any rational or intellectually-honest debate.
Maybe women don’t want to code 80 hours a week and not have a family (me neither tbh) or be involved in wrestling as much as men (me neither also)? Why does that realization need to be judged (does it not fit a proscribed narrative?), or is the underlying message more about social justice warriors pushing their agenda of hate and man-shaming while ostensibly being pro-equality and pro-equity?
It’s like an entitled child throwing a tantrum “Reality you say? lalala-fingers in my ears-lalala-knee-jerk response that you’re a sexist, racist and -ist for saying anything unapproved-lalala”
10 comments
[ 14.6 ms ] story [ 931 ms ] threadPersonal choice in a clearly gender egalitarian society is still personal choice.
Even assuming this, code is about people and getting more people into it that center their work around people is how tech is going to advance in the long term.
The way software engineering is taught gives people the wrong idea. The hardest problem in tech is "what does my user want and how is that different from what they need?"
I've seen the "each group has its reasons" fluff as well, but those defenders are happily living in a world where only one type of group makes good programmers. Out of a whole world of groups, only this type of person can write code.
The narrative that this lecturer understands all disadvantaged groups because he's from one himself is a false narrative. Using that to build credibility for his arguments is laughable journalism.
I think that was in there to show that he's likely not a bigot, because that seems to be the default assumption about anyone that doesn't go along with the dogma of the far left these days.
Your comment gets me wondering though, in the case of the question about "why black people don't code": Are we able to pick apart the causality of "systematic disadvantages" vs "each group has it's reasons"? I ask because the "systematic disadvantages" narrative is seductive and there is a lot of anecdotal evidence, but I'm not sure I've seen a nice data on the subject that could prove one way or the other why it really is that "black people don't code".
It's a lifetime of small or direct disadvantages working towards the overall trend.
There are data-based studies showing how individual factors impact.
I would like to see someone answer the ‘question’ of “why women dont code” and “why mass shooters are mostly white men” with the same methodology.
One could say:
Devil’s Advocate: “After all, 58% of mass shootings in the past 35 years were committed by white men. The data is clear. Is this not due to probably the inherently violent and psychopathic nature of white men?”
If you have problems with this statement, then why, and why aren’t your methodological concerns similarly mappable on simplistic “why women don’t code” arguments?
Maybe women don’t want to code 80 hours a week and not have a family (me neither tbh) or be involved in wrestling as much as men (me neither also)? Why does that realization need to be judged (does it not fit a proscribed narrative?), or is the underlying message more about social justice warriors pushing their agenda of hate and man-shaming while ostensibly being pro-equality and pro-equity?
It’s like an entitled child throwing a tantrum “Reality you say? lalala-fingers in my ears-lalala-knee-jerk response that you’re a sexist, racist and -ist for saying anything unapproved-lalala”