Slashdot Log In
Women Leaving I.T.
Posted by
CowboyNeal
on Fri Mar 11, 2005 05:40 AM
from the baby-come-back dept.
from the baby-come-back dept.
Deinhard writes "NewsFactor is running a story on the exodus of women from the I.T. field. According to the article, women made up 41% of the I.T workforce in 1996. That number dropped to 35% by 2002 and that "the downward spiral is gaining momentum." While this is certainly a concern, what are the overall effects of such a mass departure?"
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Looking at the distribution ... (Score:5, Insightful)
CC.
Re:Looking at the distribution ... (Score:5, Interesting)
More seriously there are a number of possible reasons for this. I would hazord a guess that a large number of women entered IT for the sake of the $ and now that the $ is harder to get they are moving to other fields.
Not that men didnt do this, but if you look at the major universities they have essentially been bribing women to go into technical fields (engineering, cs , etc.) so I would hazord a guess that those efforts recruited people more interested int he $ than the love of the field.
Of course I could be entirely of base.
Parent
Re:Looking at the distribution ... (Score:5, Interesting)
I'm a CS undergrad at purdue. Our CS undergrad program, as of the start of last semester had 40 women in it. 24 of them are graduating. it's estimated that 6-10 at most are coming in, by figures I've heard. This is down from 10-15% of the department 4 years ago.
This is in a curriculum which has 800 or so undergrads, if I remember correctly.
I'm currently in a 300-level class (a major requirement, no less) that has 80 students, none of whom are female. Last semester I was in a database class that had 50 students, with a single woman in it. The semester before, I was in a class with 150 people, and a grand total of 4 women, and I know that after that class one of them changed majors out of computer science.
As of the end of this semester, 20-26 out of 800+. Those are very discouraging numbers, for women in CS. And the IT curricula in the school of technology aren't faring much better, I'm told.
Parent
Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Easy (Score:5, Insightful)
The closest I could find to an actual example in the article was this gem:
Where "enterprise software" is a link to a company selling something (ie it's an advert). What little credibility the author may have had vanished with that line. Ooooh! Enterprise software! That's some scary stuff you got right there.
I mean it's not like men ever get hit by a car and have to take a few months out (or lose their jobs!), is it? This article is a total fluff piece pandering to those who actually care about the imbalance, ie managers and not (by and large) the techs who just want to work with the best people possible.
Parent
Re:Easy (Score:5, Informative)
Parent
Effects (Score:5, Funny)
Less sex on the job?
Oh, wait, we're talking about IT right?
Nevermind.
Momentum (Score:5, Funny)
Effects (Score:5, Funny)
We will have to get the teas and coffees ourselves.
What about (Score:5, Insightful)
Is it any wonder the people are leaving given that family friendly seems to be a concept completely lost on most companies.
No surprise (Score:5, Insightful)
This Proves It (Score:5, Funny)
Poor choice of dates, and show me the numbers. (Score:5, Insightful)
Start with the two years the mention: 1996 and 2002. 1996 was the start of the dot-com boom. And 2002, a slump after dot-bombs are clearing away.
Where's the numbers in the middle? Did it drop in 1997-1999, in the boom? Did it stay the same until 1999, then drop? Has it been a continuous rate change? Where's the support that it really is a "downward spiral"?
Second, lacking from TFA are actual numbers and places.
Is this the IT market globally, including countries like India, China, Russia, and others? Or is this the IT market in the US? Or perhaps just the San Jose area? Or just Arkansas where the school that ran the survey is at? How many women? Has there been an increase in the number, just less of an increase relative to men? Or has the total number stayed about the same, or dropped? What are the women doing? Are they including women employed as secretaries and managerial operations within the IT business? How about men similarly working in IT companies, but not doing IT? What about the people not in the IT business but doing the work for small companies?
Given the (lack of) data we are shown, their conclusions are not really warranted.
frob
Why is this a concern in and of itself? (Score:5, Insightful)
Am I REALLY The First Person To Say This? (Score:5, Insightful)
TFA talks about women's participation in IT as a percentage of the IT workforce, but that doesn't tell us anything about whether or not women are fleeing IT. Try this as an experiment:
Time 0: 100 IT positions. 40 are women.
Time X: 1000 IT positions, 350 are women.
We've gone from 40% women to 35% women. Have women fled the field? HELL NO.
We need absolute numbers to figure out whether or not there are less women in IT than there used to be, but TFA doesn't seem to have them (or I missed them -- I did R it, of course).
There are loads of girls in IT here in Korea (Score:5, Interesting)
When I came to Korea I was amazed at the ratio, it's approaching 40-50% in my new company. And not just artists but programmers, sysadmins etc.
It's not unusual to see a girl on the subway studying a cisco, C++ or Linux book. There's definitely no sense of uncoolness being in IT - it's not even seen as geeky, just a good career.
So in Korea, only old women are leaving IT
Re:overall effects? (Score:5, Funny)
Apply patches first.
Parent
Re:Eh? (Score:5, Insightful)
What is a concern is if they're leaving because they're being driven out by sexist attitudes or working conditions (not deliberately sexist perhaps, but more likely designed by single men, for single men and with a "you have to change your life, because we're not changing our conditions" attitude). If this is the case then a) that shows a deep ingrained prejedice that belongs in the 50's rather then a 21st century cutting edge industry, and b) we're losing lots of very talented people who can bring whole new ideas and ways of looking at problems into the industry because they were born with a particular set of physical characteristics rather then for any worthwhile reason.
Diversity is good, not just in the operating system and software market but also in the people that produce that software.
Parent
You mean, just like 3 out of 4 men? (Score:5, Insightful)
The dot-con fraud attracted a _lot_ of frauds in this field. The dot-cons were throwing other people's money out the window with both hands, just to show that they can. People with less brains or economic sense than a garden snail, had found themselves in a bunch of money, and had no idea what to do with them... other than show the Joneses that they too can spend like the big boys. Fast cars, huge headquarters, corporate airplanes for a tiny startup, or expensive programmers, it was just conspicuous consumption. (I.e., same as having a massive gold watch, just to show the neighbours who's rich. Doesn't even have to be a good watch: it just has to look blatantly expensive.)
And they hired _anyone_. Literally _any_ drooling ex-burger-flipper was suddenly employable in IT or programming. People who were too stupid to operate a cash register, were ok as "web application developpers" or whatever.
Lots of them, preferrably. Having 20 programmers and 30 artists for a 3 page web site was _cool_. Made the PHB feel like he too can play with the big boys' corporations.
And unsurprisingly, a lot did fake a resume and move into IT or programming. A whole caste of fraudsters was created whose _only_ skill was marketting themselves. They too "deserved" the big bucks, a sports car and a plasma TV, and were not gonna let utter lack of skill and knowledge get in the way of their American Dream.
It had nothing to do with liking to use a computer, or having any skill or inclination. Most not only had none, they didn't even try to learn either. They just "deserved" the money, they didn't actually want to start working for them.
And I don't think that being male or female played that big a role there. If there weren't 50% females there, if anything, makes me suspect they're more honest. Because anything to do with skill or liking computers, it sure didn't have.
Parent
Re:You mean, just like 3 out of 4 men? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, I stand by what I wrote there. From personal experience, 3 out of 4 men I've worked with, were utterly and totally incompetent.
Thing is, men really _aren't_ natural-born tech experts they try to sound like. (And I'm one, so I think I'm allowed to say that.) Maybe a bit more interested in tech stuff, but definitely _not_ naturally inclined to actually be competent at it.
We've just received an idiotic education where if you have a dick, you _must_ do the macho thing and fix your own car/computer/radio/whatever. Most men seem to have had the idiotic notion hammered into their head that if they don't open their car's hood (and ruin the car in the process), it's like admitting sexual impotence or worse. That you have to _prove_ you have a dick, by doing all sorts of stupid or dangerous stuff personally.
But as I've said, that doesn't actually make them competent. They just use massive selective confirmation to promote minor trivial achievements into meaning some technical expertise. "W00t, I changed the oil! I'm such a total expert in car mechanics! I know all about cars!" Not.
And when it _doesn't_ go well, it's selective confirmation to the rescue again. It's quickly shoved behind an excuse and discarded. In 2-3 days it's back to the old, "Hey, I'm still the greatest technology expert ever! I never made a mistake!" (Except those dozens of times which got conveniently "forgotten.")
E.g., dear old dad almost zapped himself to death about a dozen times, rather than just call an electrician. And lemme tell you, getting zapped by a 230V socked it bad enough. Getting zapped by the TV he opened to try to fix himself, now that muscle spasm smashed him into a wall, and left him there for a while. There's some really high voltage inside those. But that, of course, wouldn't stop him from thinking that he's God's gift to any tech device. 'Cause if he wasn't, he'd be like, you know, not man enough.
E.g., every Real Man knows that men are perfect drivers, unlike those women who can't even steer in a straight line. Too bad it's actually false. Insurance company statistics say that, per 100 km driven, a man is _twice_ as likely to cause an accident as a woman is. Unlike the popular myth, according to actual accident statistics, being a macho testosterone machine doesn't make one an expert driver... quite au contraire. It makes one more likely to drive in a reckless and dangerous manner.
E.g., the same pre-conception and selective confirmation goes for computers too. Any idiot who can write 5 lines in BASIC on their parent's computer, or launch someone else's compile script, thinks that his Y chromosome makes him God's gift to computers. W00t, typing those few lines was such a major achievement and surely making him the greatest expert to ever walk the Earth.
Sorry, nope. Being able to "emerge KDE" does _not_ make one a computer expert. And writing a "hello world" does _not_ make one a programmer.
Actual competence starts around the point where your team did a project worth at _least_ 100,000 lines, and which didn't fail miserably. (Of course, that means divided into modules, programs, whatever.) And where your contribution was actually a substantial enough slice of that. (Not like some Wally instances here that just inherited someone else's module and refused to do any changes for _3_ _years_ straight, for fear of breaking code that's well beyond their skill or knowledge.)
Parent
Re:Testing? (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Hmm... kinda makes me wonder (Score:5, Insightful)
I personally know people who left a field or a job precisely _because_ they were passionate about it... and it had turned into something they disliked. E.g., we have at least 3 people here alone, who used to program assembly since the days of mainframes and long before dot-coms, and then left for other completely unrelated jobs (2 of them became marketters and 1 trained to be a usability expert) when basically the job was no longer what they liked to do.
Loving computers and programming is sometimes _the_ best way to _hate_ an IT or programming job, respectively.
People liked coding a smart algorithm or maybe a cute game at home, they had their peer recognition for being good with computer in university, and... then moved into a real world that doesn't even vaguely resemble that. In the real world they:
- got bogged in hundreds of hours of verbal-masturbation meetings,
- were forced to do overtime for someone _else's_ mistake (e.g., the boss being too weak to tell the customer that completely changing the program needs more time and budget),
- were asked to implement blatantly wrong specs, or use the blatantly wrong tools, just because a PHB (own or client's) said so and wasn't gonna take feedback from a lowly peon. (The nice salesman says it's the perfect "solution" for anything, so now go make it work. If it doesn't work, it's your fault, not the nice salesman's.)
- had to wrestle with systems that wouldn't have been the wrong tools as such, but were wrongly configured and piss-poorly adminned by some other corporate department that's above the law,
- had to deal with co-workers that were annoying in a miriad of ways (ranging from the 400 pound stinking geek, to office backstabbers, to people who are utterly incompetent and lazy but awesome at selling snake oil to the boss, to whatever else),
- were forced to do stuff that really had nothing to do with the job they had signed for, such as being the poor-man's marketer instead of a programmer,
- were asked to do blatantly unethical stuff, like to actively lie to a customer,
Etc.
And some of us just learned to shrug and deal with it. Some left the job. And I think it's a bit unfair to just lump them into the same category as those who were in it just for the dot-com's money.
Parent
Re:You're modded as +3 funny but... (Score:5, Insightful)
3 of the best programmers I know are women. That includes my boss, and 2 people that went through the CS curriculum with me.
Now
There's a gender difference in teaching though. Men tend to get called on more than women in classes, and also tend to get taken more seriously than women, all the way back into elementary schools, by both male and female teachers.
Caplan and Caplan's "Thinking Critically about Women and Gender" has a good chapter on educational differences.
Ultimately, the women in IT are just as good as the men, but they're a far smaller sample. There's a lot of piss-poor programmers and sysadmins and support people who are men, and a smaller number in the same positions who are women. If a man screws up, it's more likely to be blamed on his incredible incompetence, where if a woman screws up, you're more likely to draw the attribution that it's because she's a woman.
Parent
Re:Are there really... (Score:5, Insightful)
Women in science aren't in science to "hook a man". They're there to study science.
The women going to college hoping to get married along the way and be a dependent for life are the ones that go into gender-typical classes (ie: elementary education, liberal arts, to a lesser extent management or nursing).
Parent
Re:Women aren't interested in IT? (Score:5, Insightful)
The managers, hence fuckwits (just like men.) Very few managers are not fuckwits. Unfortunately, with one possible exception, on which the jury's still out, the female managers I dealt with were as bad as the usual male manager. By virtue of having contact with more male managers than with female ones, the chances of meeting a non-fuckwit female manager was greatly reduced.
The uninterested--as another poster described, these were the sort of trend-drones seen during the dot-com boom. Once again, fuckwits. Fewer women percentually means fewer non-fuckwits, absolutely. In my case, the non-fuckwit female trend-drone share was nil.
The intimidated--because of the (real or perceived) disadvantages faced by women in IT, these were the mousy, quiet types who never had anything to say. Happens with men too, but as men usually tend to be at least a bit more assertive, it's less common. Not unpleasant to work with, mainly since you never encounter them (they're hiding.) "Oh no I could never do this, I might break it."
The intimidating--taking the previous class a step further, these are the ones who treat every personal encounter as a confrontation. Not man-haters, just insecure people afraid of being fucked by god-knows-what, or unsure of their ability to deal with people trying to fuck them (in a professional manner, mind--no, not that kind of professional manner.) See managers.
The officious--an offshoot of the last category. One of my dearly held stereotypes is that women care more about rules than men do (as in Dilbert's Wally vs. Alice.) These are the types who will throw rules and roadblocks in your face out of principle, because you COULD BE TRYING TO PULL A FAST ONE OH MY GOD. See managers.
The cool ones--don't care, are professional and competent, have the self-confidence to ignore harassment or hit back with wit and style, and understand that there's a job to be done and hey, can't we all just get along. Very rare, but oh so incredibly appreciated. They get things done, are more responsible than the guys, come up with cool, creative solutions, and basically combine all the good sides of a "typical" female personality with a few characteristics making it easy for guys to work with them.
Once again, I realize that most of these stereotypes apply to men as well. I love working with women, if they fall into the latter class. It's just been my experience that a far higher percentage of men tend to be competently agreeable to work with than women.
The main points that I make to women (as with anyone) when talking about IT careers are: (a) don't be intimidated, and (b) don't do this job if you don't love it, and can deal with technical and human shit a lot of the time. Rule #1? Relax, it's a job, get it done and that's it.
Parent