Walk a Mile in my Shoes
-
You're right. Elaine is really a MMA trucker called Harold. The good Anna Jayne is actually Englebert Humperdink, and Chris' disproportionate number of lady team members are all Transformers. Let's not forget Ali P - she's really Dalek Dave. On the other side, JSOP is really Cindy Crawford.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
On the other side, JSOP is really Cindy Crawford.
If only I'd got someone to take a photo when we had dinner a couple of months ago... (Me & JSOP, not Me & Cindy!) Iain.
I am one of "those foreigners coming over here and stealing our jobs". Yay me!
-
I've worked with several women developers. One thing I've observed is that the group is small enough that when you have the inevitable loser, she can't get lost in the crowd like the loser male programmers often can. Another observation is that most good computer programmers I know already had a deep interest in computers and/or electronics in high school. I don't know if women are interested at the same rate, but the ones that are get a lot of peer pressure from other girls (and some guys, but mostly girls) to be interested in something else. My daughter, now 22, noticed this when she took several auto mechanics classes in high school. Besides learning that she could get the guys to do anything for her (something she's been gifted at since she was an hour old), she found that while guys in general would be surprised that she knew more about cars than them, they'd soon accept it, but most the girls she knew or met wouldn't. It was never clear why not, but they just didn't. Computers aren't much different. (Why aren't there more women in auto sports? Because there aren't many twelve year old girls doing Karting and rebuilding engines. Unfortunately, there is a lot of discrimination at that age, though mostly from mothers [most the dads I know love when their girls to do car things with them], but it's also because twelve year old girls in general just aren't that interested in cars.)
VERY GOOD POINT!!! Funny how women who gripe about discrimination never mention discrimination from other women. They just assume that those women have been beaten down by the male discrimination machine. Nearly ten years ago I saw a survey where men and women were given a list of jobs and asked what they would expect to earn in those jobs. Women had lower expectations across the board.
-
Respectfully, one experience does not quantify a rational conclusion.
Did I say there was any conclusion in there? I just retold personal experience.
"WPF has many lovers. It's a veritable porn star!" - Josh Smith
As Braveheart once said, "You can take our freedom but you'll never take our Hobnobs!" - Martin Hughes.
-
The inertia of the male "geek-dom" (nerd, computer sciences, engineering, ...) makes it hard for women to get on board.
Watched code never compiles.
Maximilien wrote:
The inertia of the male "geek-dom" (nerd, computer sciences, engineering, ...) makes it hard for women to get on board.
Well said. When I walk around the labs of the computing building in my uni, the male competitive geekery theme is quite aggressive (think of a room with 20 or 30 Comic Book Shop Guys all trying to outshout each other) and perhaps a factor that drives away women to some degree. In my compsci undergrad, there were about 100 students in second year, four of which were female - I was very disturbed by that extremely low number.
-
This was in the CP Newsletter today so most of you will have seen it. Women in Technology[^]
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
I sent the article to my daughter - she found it rather insightful. She is in her 3rd year in University studying Physics & Mathematics and had experienced some of the same comments and insinuations that the article's author mentioned. "You're only in the program because you're a girl"... she's on a full-ride merit-based scholarship. The push by the university to get women in the techie degrees is independent of her scholarship process. My daughter received several science and math awards in high school - some at the local level, one at the state level, and is now a paid tutor for 2nd year mathematics students at the university. She's good at math, likes to solve problems, good at working in groups, and a natural leader. Her professors and employers realize her potential - her fellow students [the males] can often be twits. Encouraging "those who can" "to do" is important for any profession... I don't want my doctor, auto mechanic, or roofer to be some affirmatively-promoted marginal student. Changing any [insert-non-merit-based-group-identifier-here]-dominated profession or group to accept the best-qualified candidates (skills, skills, skills), as stated in the article, seems to be the hightest hurdle. And, Great Article, thanks for posting! :-D
-Bob
-
This was in the CP Newsletter today so most of you will have seen it. Women in Technology[^]
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
In the blog (via the link), there is a side-bar quote "People mistakenly assume that affirmative action is about granting minorities undeserved privileges. In it’s purist form, affirmative action is about allowing minorities natural talents to flourish by removing artificial, unfair barriers and decoupling the true skills required to succeed in a profession from the cultural baggage that builds naturally within an insular community." This may be the intent and it may be your belief and that of the blogger; however, it frequently not the manner in which Affirmative Action is implemented. All too often, Affirmative Action is implemented by either actually or figuratively adding "points" to the actual score earned by someone simply because they are a "minority" and, therefore, assumed to have been previously oppressed with the result that they would have scored better if they hadn't been oppressed. I am a male IT professional and I can tell you that I have experienced reverse discrimination in the name of Affirmative Action. I have been told that the reason I wasn't hired was that the company needed to achieve a certain "Affirmative Action Score" (apparently, there is a point system for rating the minority vs non-minority employees). I have also been called a Male Chauvenist Pig both for holding a door for and not holding a door for the same female programmer. I have been accused of discriminating against a female programmer because I found and corrected flaws in the logic and implementation of her code. Affirmative Action is a form of discriminating in favor of someone because a real or perceived limitation of opportunity, prior oppression, or previous discrimination against that person. Unfortunately, discrimination for one person, by definition, means discrimination against another. To argue otherwise opens the door to the claim that discrimination against blacks in the last century was actually not discrimination against the blacks but discrimination for the whites. I have always assumed that there is no reason to expect that anyone can't be an excellent IT professional simply because of their race, color, creed, sex, etc.; I have also assumed that there is no reason to expect that anyone can be an excellent IT professional simply because of their race, color, creed, sex, etc. Perhaps, if there are fewer women entering the ranks of the IT professionals, the fault doesn't lay at
-
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
All in all software development is taught via mentorship and camaraderie.
Well, that's an interesting take on it. I did have an amazing mentor (male) when I was 21 and fresh out of college and I soaked up all he had to teach me - he was close to retiring. But I think that I mostly learned by all the usual ways: experience, making mistakes, reading, trying things out and hard work. Also I love what I do and have a passion for it.
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
Part of mentorship is giving you tasks to help you gain experience, allowing you to make mistakes, giving you room to try things and work hard. Without a co-worker to vouch for you and giving you that leeway, you would have been fired the first week. Over the last year I have been a mentor to a male fresh college grad and female with 4 years experience. So far the male has outperformed the female. Over the past 20+ years I have worked with a number of females, some have done an excellent job and some haven't. If anything I have encouraged the females more because I recognize they are under-represented. Anyway, the ones that had the skills, the interest and the determination succeeded whether male or female.
SS => Qualified in Submarines "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm". Winston Churchill "Real programmers can write FORTRAN in any language". Unknown
-
This was in the CP Newsletter today so most of you will have seen it. Women in Technology[^]
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
Interesting article. The comparison between "code cowboys" and "good developers" caught the most of my attention. I found it mostly accurate, but I disagreed with two points: First, it isn't true that good developers necessarily have a life outside their jobs. It is as senseless as claiming all good lawyers can and do play golf in their weekends because otherwise they haven't achieved self-actualization. I know a couple of guys who are awesome developers (yes, they even get the "I am just a part of the team" and "I appreciate your efforts despite the fact you can't think in a structured way" stuff), yet don't have anything to do in their free time besides trolling the internets. And if you call that a life, well... Second, amazing capacity for abstraction and creative thinking don't separate "code cowboys" from "good developers." The difference is actually knowing what you should use those abilities for. "Code cowboys" use their capacity for abstraction and creative thinking to do things nobody finds useful, like optimizing two picoseconds per loop iteration using code ten times as complicated, without even documenting, because it should be obvious to anybody who knows their math; filling the user interface with two times as many controls, just to give users the opportunity to control parameters whose existence they didn't even know in first place; and, in general, as the article says, finding complex solution to problems, thus proving their brilliance. I would like to add a point that wasn't included in the comparison: "Good developers" can estimate accurately (well, more or less accurately, according to their experience) how much effort will take them to do a particular task. "Code cowboys" overestimate their own ability to do work, because they think of the algorithmic issues first, so real-life issues that are beyond the differences between linked lists and arrays tend to catch them by surprise. Thus, they are always rushing to meet the deadline.
If you can play The Dance of Eternity (Dream Theater), then we shall make a band.
-
I don't really have a point on my own account as I can't say that I have experienced much discrimination myself and I've worked in many different countries (including Holland) as a software professional. What I do notice is that so few women appear to be here on CP. In the industry in general the proportion is supposedly 10% but I can't see many women here. :((
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
There will always be women. :cool: When I was a kid I wanted to be a writer. It was fascinating to me how imagination can take you to places that nobody has been before. However, my marks seemed to indicate that I am better at math. Mathematics is an ugly duckling. It hides more power than most languages. But it requires patience and no greed. Thus, I became a programmer. It is practical. And I discovered that even though I may not be creative enough for the artistic world, I am resourceful enough for the world of 'men'. ;) I like working with men. They know what they want most of the time and they are much more predictable than women are. I haven't had trouble with discrimination. If anything it amuses me or flatters me. For example, I got this comment from PIEBALDconsult: "Thank you, kind sir"[^] (Thank you, PIEBALDconsult). It has been said that 'Genuis is 1% talent and 99% hard work'... I'd like to think that women soften the landscape a bit sometimes.
I would imagine if you could understand Morse Code, a tap dancer would drive you crazy. -- Mitch Hedberg (American Comedian, 1968-2005)
-
You forgot the lovely Corinna.
Cheers, विक्रम (Got my troika of CCCs!) Need sig - urgentz!!!
Yeah, Corinna's awesome.
Daniel Vaughan Twitter | Blog | Microsoft MVP | Projects: Calcium SDK, Clog | LinkedIn
-
The inertia of the male "geek-dom" (nerd, computer sciences, engineering, ...) makes it hard for women to get on board.
Watched code never compiles.
I have to agree. I believe that the discrepancy in the number women developers is clear evidence that there is a problem in the industry. It's not a level playing field, and arguments that suggest that women should be treated equally is part of the reason why it has proven hard for women to find a foot hold. I'm all for affirmative action actually. Cheers, Daniel
Daniel Vaughan Twitter | Blog | Microsoft MVP | Projects: Calcium SDK, Clog | LinkedIn
-
Here's one I know. ;)
Daniel Vaughan Twitter | Blog | Microsoft MVP | Projects: Calcium SDK, Clog | LinkedIn
-
Ennis Ray Lynch, Jr. wrote:
All in all software development is taught via mentorship and camaraderie.
Well, that's an interesting take on it. I did have an amazing mentor (male) when I was 21 and fresh out of college and I soaked up all he had to teach me - he was close to retiring. But I think that I mostly learned by all the usual ways: experience, making mistakes, reading, trying things out and hard work. Also I love what I do and have a passion for it.
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
In my experience, the biggest difference (and, as I see it, the crucial one) is that the "budding" female coders I have met (that is, the ones starting out - don't you dare misinterpret, guys...) are much less prone to take chances and test stuff - they have an annoying (to me, anyway) tendency to throw their hands up in the air and say "I don't know how to do this!", to which I invariably respond "Neither did I - but I learned". Male coders, including the n00bs, seem to be more willing to "wing it", that is: They will try and (mostly) fail a couple of times but they will eventually learn - and at the same time they will find confidence in the fact that they CAN LEARN STUFF ALONG THE WAY, rather than finding confidence in that they KNOW STUFF ALREADY. I won't get into any discussion on how or why this is, or even if this is a common occurrence - I have only limited experience on the subject. It might as well be that my pond is too small, and all the other ducks are too much alike. A question for the masses, though, is: If I encounter a coworker (any profession, color, shape, form or persuasion) that seems to lack the confidence that he or she CAN LEARN STUFF ALONG THE WAY, how should I counter this? When I get the reaction "I don't know this!" what should I respond? How can I relate the fact that (most) failures are OK, as long as you learn enough from them not to repeat them?
-
In my experience, the biggest difference (and, as I see it, the crucial one) is that the "budding" female coders I have met (that is, the ones starting out - don't you dare misinterpret, guys...) are much less prone to take chances and test stuff - they have an annoying (to me, anyway) tendency to throw their hands up in the air and say "I don't know how to do this!", to which I invariably respond "Neither did I - but I learned". Male coders, including the n00bs, seem to be more willing to "wing it", that is: They will try and (mostly) fail a couple of times but they will eventually learn - and at the same time they will find confidence in the fact that they CAN LEARN STUFF ALONG THE WAY, rather than finding confidence in that they KNOW STUFF ALREADY. I won't get into any discussion on how or why this is, or even if this is a common occurrence - I have only limited experience on the subject. It might as well be that my pond is too small, and all the other ducks are too much alike. A question for the masses, though, is: If I encounter a coworker (any profession, color, shape, form or persuasion) that seems to lack the confidence that he or she CAN LEARN STUFF ALONG THE WAY, how should I counter this? When I get the reaction "I don't know this!" what should I respond? How can I relate the fact that (most) failures are OK, as long as you learn enough from them not to repeat them?
@streamcap That's a really good question, and as far as I am concerned, this behaviour is directly related to what I like to refer to as "Residual Attitude Syndrome" (I just made that up). I have seen it in every workplace, in every role I have ever held, and it is the neck-breaker of many businesses; you can have a successful product and a heavily desired service, but when staff have the incorrect attitude to their work or co-workers, the entire thing can fall apart instantly. For example: Jenny, Jane and Julia are all employees at XYZ Pty Ltd. They all work in the same department, and have just welcomed a new staff member, Jessica. Jessica doesn't really know how to perform in her new role, so she watches the three girls and learns quickly, VERY QUICKLY! She learns that it is ok to take that extra ciggy break when the boss is not on site. She learns that it is expected that she joins in on the bitching sessions, lest she becomes the one bitched about. She learns that it's normal to just do as much as she needs to get by, and that leaving at 5pm, no matter the workload, is the way it works here. This situation can be scary, because if you repremand one person in the group, you risk alienating your staff from your managers even further, you risk isolating individual staff members from each other and you can watch as they tear each other apart passive agressively. All of this is extreme compared to your situation, but the fundamental solution is the same. You need to transform the attitude of your workplace to one of a respectful and harmonius nature. This doesn't mean painting the walls green and aligning furniture from north to south. No feng sheui needed! It is about these simple rules: 1. DO NOT EVER act condescending, or disrespectful to your co-workers, even if you are responding to the same behaviour from them. Reacting is NOT the way to move forward. Targeting someone will NOT fix the problem, it will drive you further from them. If you have to repremand someone for their behaviour or attitude, do it on the sly, away from others, and explain to them that this is not an attack on them alone. 2. Life feeds on life, as attitude feeds on attitude. This means that if the majority of the office is happy, the rest will soak this up. Attitude is completely contagious. 3. Don't be afraid to sever the troubled workers, even if it is your most important worker. If you have to fire the main instigator of negative behaviour, then DO IT! Just make sure they don't have an opportuni
-
This was in the CP Newsletter today so most of you will have seen it. Women in Technology[^]
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
I generalise, but it shows my experience: I think the problem is that computing has been built by men with male-like thinking patterns, which is very different to female-like thinking patterns, and its very hard for female to enter such a strong male-like environment. I believe that if we get more female-like thinking into computing it would bring it closer to the users we are coding for... I have only worked with 1 female coder before, she had a lot of potential but was constrained by male-like thinking leadership, if she had more freedom I think she would have done better. Not that I blame the male-like leader, it is the norm... We need women to push into the computing field, even if it is a though push...
____________________________________________________________ Be brave little warrior, be VERY brave
-
Here's one I know. ;)
Daniel Vaughan Twitter | Blog | Microsoft MVP | Projects: Calcium SDK, Clog | LinkedIn
-
Part of mentorship is giving you tasks to help you gain experience, allowing you to make mistakes, giving you room to try things and work hard. Without a co-worker to vouch for you and giving you that leeway, you would have been fired the first week. Over the last year I have been a mentor to a male fresh college grad and female with 4 years experience. So far the male has outperformed the female. Over the past 20+ years I have worked with a number of females, some have done an excellent job and some haven't. If anything I have encouraged the females more because I recognize they are under-represented. Anyway, the ones that had the skills, the interest and the determination succeeded whether male or female.
SS => Qualified in Submarines "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm". Winston Churchill "Real programmers can write FORTRAN in any language". Unknown
Sorry people, but youv'e got it all wrong about female coders. go back to to cave man days and think what male hunters needed to know. Fistly, they had to have a mental picture of their wide geographical surroundings so they could picture their journeys to and from the cave; this knowledge corresponds to the language reference manual. Secondly they need that male ability to think ahead to catch the wooly mamoth; this is the programmers ability to write code correctly nearlt every time by mentally saying "now what if I do this....". Meanwhile, back at the cave, Mrs Cave Woman is trying to keep the place clean and tidy, feeding the children wooly mamoth broth and having a sleep. She has no need of the fine qualities of Mr Cave Man. Thus over the next few hundred million years, men still retain their mental qualities and so make much better coders than girls.
-
Sorry people, but youv'e got it all wrong about female coders. go back to to cave man days and think what male hunters needed to know. Fistly, they had to have a mental picture of their wide geographical surroundings so they could picture their journeys to and from the cave; this knowledge corresponds to the language reference manual. Secondly they need that male ability to think ahead to catch the wooly mamoth; this is the programmers ability to write code correctly nearlt every time by mentally saying "now what if I do this....". Meanwhile, back at the cave, Mrs Cave Woman is trying to keep the place clean and tidy, feeding the children wooly mamoth broth and having a sleep. She has no need of the fine qualities of Mr Cave Man. Thus over the next few hundred million years, men still retain their mental qualities and so make much better coders than girls.
I can't argue with your logic. And there are always outliers, those that don't fit the norm. I was just saying that the female types get some advantages; extra encouragement, scholarships to keep affirmative action types happy, etc., and they are still only represented by about 10% of the coder population. Same thing with pilots. There must be something different between typical men and women that causes them to be so under represented.
SS => Qualified in Submarines "We sleep soundly in our beds because rough men stand ready in the night to visit violence on those who would do us harm". Winston Churchill "Real programmers can write FORTRAN in any language". Unknown
-
This was in the CP Newsletter today so most of you will have seen it. Women in Technology[^]
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca
The following refers to the US, and may or may not correlate well to conditions in your part of the world. In the late 90's, the number of women in software programs was trending upward. This halted and even reversed in the early noughts. This coincides with 2 other trends: (a) outsourcing and (b) higher numbers of women college grads, more now than men and this trend continues. My theory is that women have recognized that the software field really is not much fun anymore, at least as practiced in the typical US business, is far less lucrative than it once was, and that there are now lots of other options for women in fields that used to be male-dominated but no longer are. I.e. we have found better things to do.
-
The following refers to the US, and may or may not correlate well to conditions in your part of the world. In the late 90's, the number of women in software programs was trending upward. This halted and even reversed in the early noughts. This coincides with 2 other trends: (a) outsourcing and (b) higher numbers of women college grads, more now than men and this trend continues. My theory is that women have recognized that the software field really is not much fun anymore, at least as practiced in the typical US business, is far less lucrative than it once was, and that there are now lots of other options for women in fields that used to be male-dominated but no longer are. I.e. we have found better things to do.
I don't think it's much different in the UK. You would think that with more female college grads you would automatically get more women in the technology business - just keeping the percentage the same. It seems that the percentage is dropping fairly rapidly. And what about all the women who entered the field in the nineties - are they not still around? I've been in this business a lot longer than that! Thanks for your input.
It’s not because things are difficult that we do not dare, it’s because we do not dare that things are difficult. ~Seneca