Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! ×
Businesses The Almighty Buck IT

Women Still Underrepresented in Information Security (betanews.com) 374

An anonymous reader shares a report: Women make up only 11 percent of the cyber security workforce according to the latest report from the Center for Cyber Safety and Education and the Executive Women's Forum (EWF). The survey of more than 19,000 participants around the world finds that women have higher levels of education than men, with 51 percent holding a master's degree or higher, compared to 45 percent of men. Yet despite out qualifying them, women in cybersecurity earned less than men at every level and the wage gap shows very little signs of improvement. Men are four times more likely to hold C and executive level positions, and nine times more likely to hold managerial positions than women, globally. More worrying is that 51 percent of women report encountering one or more forms of discrimination in the cybersecurity workforce. In the Western world, discrimination becomes far more prevalent the higher a woman rises in an organization.

Women Still Underrepresented in Information Security

Comments Filter:
  • Yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:41PM (#54046353)

    ...garbage disposal and off-shore drilling too! Come on women, WTF!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by sycodon ( 149926 )

      What is with these SJW's incessant push to make sexes equally represented in ALL industries???

      There will be more women in some industries and more men in some industries.

    • Re:Yeah... (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jodka ( 520060 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @07:17PM (#54047469)

      ...garbage disposal and off-shore drilling too! Come on women, WTF!

      Good point, much like one in a Camille Paglia interview [vice.com] published yesterday.

      It is an absolute outrage how so many pampered, affluent, upper-middle-class professional women chronically spout snide anti-male feminist rhetoric, while they remain completely blind to the constant labor and sacrifices going on all around them as working-class men create and maintain the fabulous infrastructure that makes modern life possible in the Western world. Only a tiny number of women want to enter the trades where most of the nitty-gritty physical work is actually going on—plumbing, electricity, construction. Women have played virtually no role in the erection of those magnificent towers in every major city in the world. It's men who operate the cranes or set the foundations or wash windows on the 85th floor. It's men who troop out at 2:00 AM during an ice storm to restore power to neighborhoods where falling trees have brought down live wires. It's men who mix the stinking, toxic cauldrons to spread steaming hot tar on city roofs. Last year in a nearby town, I drove by a huge, chaotic scene where emergency workers in hazmat suits were struggling with a giant pipe break, as raw sewage was pouring into the street. Of course all those workers up to their knees in a torrent of thick brown water were men! I've seen figures indicating that 92 per cent of people killed on the job are men—and it's precisely because men are heroically doing most of the dangerous jobs in modern society...

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by rubypossum ( 693765 )
        Feels good eh? Being all right and righteous? Because I have a friend who runs a crane with a construction crew. The simple fact she's on the team is a constant issue for the men, they can't seem to get over it. Sexual harassment is a daily issue and she's learned to simply not say anything or make waves. She was no accepted on the team and the standards for her work are twice that of her co-workers because of the constant review. Despite these limitations she's persisted and eventually gained some respect
        • Re:Yeah... (Score:4, Interesting)

          by serviscope_minor ( 664417 ) on Thursday March 16, 2017 @07:12AM (#54049777) Journal

          Feels good eh? Being all right and righteous? Because I have a friend who runs a crane with a construction crew. The simple fact she's on the team is a constant issue for the men, they can't seem to get over it.

          My recent forays into manufacturing have given me some view into this, after visiting the contact manufacturer's factory to get things kicked off. It's not that the people are nasty or rude; the company I'm at has rather more women than is usual for the area (i.e. more than zero in senior and technical roles) and I dunno, but the reaction has been a bit peculiar. Like some of the guys don't quite know how to talk to a female senior technical person or CEO.

          And that's of course when they have a huge incentive to be nice because we're paying them lots of money. But some of the guys there seem kinda confused and panicy. It's been odd and interesting to witness it close up: it's very different from the creepy stalker behaviour I've seen at conferences.

  • Nothing in IT offers job security. STEM roles are just far too insecure and unstable in general, is the problem. Of course, that's the problem for older men quite often too.

  • Enough (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:47PM (#54046407)

    Shut the fuck up already. If there are fewer women it's because fewer of them are interested not because evil men want to keep them out.

    • Re:Enough (Score:4, Insightful)

      by BlueCoder ( 223005 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:33PM (#54046793)

      Correct.

      IT and engineering in general is an anti social interest. The best people in the industry are very independent and highly socially deficient if not emotionally deficient. Being on light on the autism spectrum is actually a job qualification.

      Women simply are predominantly more social and less aggressive. Women are suited for IT management. The fewer women that are doing it the fewer women that want to do it.

  • by Frosty Piss ( 770223 ) * on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:48PM (#54046415)

    Yet despite out qualifying them, women in cybersecurity earned less than men at every level and the wage gap shows very little signs of improvement.

    Hereâ(TM)s an idea I'd like to float, something that I've never heard considered before: Perhaps there simply isn't a legion of women who want to work in the cybersecurity world?

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward

      Only 0.3% of dry wall installers are women. We need more female drywall installers! Over 95% of office assistants are women. We need more male office assistants!

    • Here's an idea I'd like to float, something that I've never heard considered before: Perhaps there simply isn't a legion of women who want to work in the cybersecurity world?

      Here's an idea I'd like to float, something that I've never heard considered before: Perhaps there is a physical difference between men and women . . .?

      Whoa...there's some things baby I just can't swallow
      Mama told me that girls are hollow

      Uh-uh...
      What's inside a girl?
      Somethin's tellin' me there's a whole nuther world

      Ya gotta pointy bra...ten inch waist
      Long black stockings all over the place
      Boots...buckles...belts outside.
      Whatcha got in there yer tryin' a-hide?

      Hmmm?
      What's inside a girl?
      Ain't n

    • Hereâ(TM)s an idea I'd like to float, something that I've never heard considered before: Perhaps there simply isn't a legion of women who want to work in the cybersecurity world?

      I've heard it many times, and it's likely true. However, that question just raises another, why don't women want to work in the cybersecurity field?

      • by gtall ( 79522 )

        For the same reason they tend to stay away from STEM fields. STEM fields reward individual success, not team success. Women are social, individual success has less importance to them than working in a supportive team that is doing well.

        • For the same reason they tend to stay away from STEM fields. STEM fields reward individual success, not team success. Women are social, individual success has less importance to them than working in a supportive team that is doing well.

          Care to provide supportive data? I know most of my STEM career has been spent working in teams, but maybe that's an outlier.

        • You've clearly never worked on/in a hen floor/industry. 'Supportive team' my ass.

    • That may explain why there are less women in the field but it shouldn't explain why a woman should earn less at the entry level like your quote states.

      • If the wage gap from the quote corresponds to identical salaried positions, then you might have a point regarding entry level wages. If, however, it corresponds to hourly wage positions, and annual incomes are being compared (as often occurs in these types of click-baity articles), then, given that plenty of data suggests women generally put in fewer hours than men, men will generally earn more over the course of a year. Unless you advocate cutting men's real wages, or force everyone to work identical amoun

  • by waspleg ( 316038 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:49PM (#54046421) Journal

    continues unabated.

  • We have 'Switft on Security', whoever HE is. What can go wrong?

  • by drnb ( 2434720 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:53PM (#54046451)
    Don't women get a say? Must they be 50/51% of every field? Maybe pushing women towards a particular field is no better than pushing them away from a particular field. Remove any barriers but let them choose. Maybe some fields are not inherently interesting, we have evolved to have different capabilities and perspectives. If this results in preferences so be it. Let people do what they prefer.
    • by TimothyHollins ( 4720957 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:04PM (#54046569)

      Letting women choose as individuals would run contrary to modern feminism where women must exist only as representatives of the group.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Thelasko ( 1196535 )

        Letting women choose as individuals would run contrary to modern feminism where women must exist only as representatives of the group.

        It also runs contrary to modern statistics. The data suggests that women as a statistical group have different career experiences than men. The question is why?
        Do women have different capabilities? Why?
        Do women have different preferences? Why?
        Are women given fewer opportunities?

        We have seen these stories over and over, but we haven't seen answers to these questions.

    • by epyT-R ( 613989 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:07PM (#54046603)

      Individual choice derived from conscious, unconscious, and environmental factors? Are you kidding? That's fascism!

      • Individual choice derived from conscious, unconscious, and environmental factors? Are you kidding? That's fascism!

        I think it's the unconscious and environmental factors part that people are getting hung up on.

    • Remove any barriers but let them choose. Maybe some fields are not inherently interesting, we have evolved to have different capabilities and perspectives. If this results in preferences so be it. Let people do what they prefer.

      Perhaps they believe they won't succeed in some fields so they don't try. In that case, their barrier is their own prejudice.

      • by drnb ( 2434720 )

        Remove any barriers but let them choose. Maybe some fields are not inherently interesting, we have evolved to have different capabilities and perspectives. If this results in preferences so be it. Let people do what they prefer.

        Perhaps they believe they won't succeed in some fields so they don't try. In that case, their barrier is their own prejudice.

        That seems an issue of preparation, of introduction to the field. That's the sort of barrier I would remove. Recall "shop" classes in high school? Similar thing, everyone takes a required "intro to programming" type shop class. For those that happen to be somewhat interested they can take the elective more advanced version of that shop class. Not unlike the successful model of decades past.

        • That seems an issue of preparation, of introduction to the field. That's the sort of barrier I would remove. Recall "shop" classes in high school? Similar thing, everyone takes a required "intro to programming" type shop class. For those that happen to be somewhat interested they can take the elective more advanced version of that shop class. Not unlike the successful model of decades past.

          I know my education in the 90's had exactly that. 8 weeks of shop, 8 weeks of programing, 8 weeks of home economics, 8 weeks of art, 8 weeks of health. Everyone had to take those classes.

          • That seems an issue of preparation, of introduction to the field. That's the sort of barrier I would remove. Recall "shop" classes in high school? Similar thing, everyone takes a required "intro to programming" type shop class. For those that happen to be somewhat interested they can take the elective more advanced version of that shop class. Not unlike the successful model of decades past.

            I know my education in the 90's had exactly that. 8 weeks of shop, 8 weeks of programing, 8 weeks of home economics, 8 weeks of art, 8 weeks of health. Everyone had to take those classes.

            Honestly though, I think it still has to do with gender roles in our society has a whole. I remember enjoying shop, programing, home ec., and art class. I was surprised to find sewing just as satisfying as wood working. I think it has to do with making something with my hands. However, I still lean towards the shop and programming activities to this day, and it's probably due to the stigma society puts on home economics as "women's work".

          • These days, with ubiquitous computers, if a kid isn't programming well before high school, the ship has already sailed.

        • That's a great idea, but I think you'll still wind up with fewer women interested in programming. Being interested in programming means you're willing to spend hours and hours alone in front of a screen, cursing in frustration at life, the universe and everything. Few men and fewer women voluntarily put up with that kind of abuse.

          There will never be a point, though, when the feminists say "oh, women just don't want to do these shitty jobs." They'll still blame the men.

  • questionable study (Score:4, Insightful)

    by gravewax ( 4772409 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:54PM (#54046463)
    comparing education levels and pay in cybersecurity makes me immediately question this studies conclusions. Anyone working in this industry will be aware that beyond your first job interview your degrees mean less than nothing. Experience and industry knowledge is what earns pay levels in cybersecurity and I am not aware of any of my female colleagues that get paid less for the same job.
    • Well, you aren't aware of any women who are paid less than their male counterparts! So that must mean every woman in every place in your country must be paid exactly the same as their male peers.

      • no it doesn't, but it is not exactly a huge community. What they need to be comparing is time in industry, experience levels and skillsets, having more degrees does make them out qualify someone with less degrees. I would be surprised if proper comparison showed a disparity in pay levels, who knows maybe it does but the point is this study is looking at incorrect measurements. Woman certainly are under represented in the industry as a whole and I think part of that does come down to the culture. But some o
    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      It actually mentions in the summary and TFA that they found the same thing even at C level (3% difference after amounting for qualifications, experience, age).

    • by slew ( 2918 )

      comparing education levels and pay in cybersecurity makes me immediately question this studies conclusions. Anyone working in this industry will be aware that beyond your first job interview your degrees mean less than nothing. Experience and industry knowledge is what earns pay levels in cybersecurity and I am not aware of any of my female colleagues that get paid less for the same job.

      I think you can even extend that to your first job interview. Nearly everything I know about computers and computer security did not come from any classes I took at University. For me, it all came from hobby time.

      When I interview NCGs (new college grads), I have no interest in their degree at all except why they wanted to pursue that degree. I spend all my time trying to figure out what motivates them to learn outside the classroom and see if they have a natural curiosity for the subject. I'm not inter

  • Individual Choice (Score:4, Insightful)

    by jimmifett ( 2434568 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:57PM (#54046487)

    Not all ppl, let alone girls, are capable of IT related jobs, especially security. For most individuals, a career in IT comes from a passion about tech at a young age. If a child is not passionate about some aspect of IT, no amount of funding of gender discriminating STEM programs is going to entice someone into the field.

    • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      I don't buy it. I wasn't interested in electronics until I was a teenager. I leaned it, learned to love it and appreciate it an art form, found I had a talent for it.

      Exposure in early years helps, but isn't a requirement.

    • by houghi ( 78078 )

      It is good that you look at the underlying factor. However the question goes deeper. WHY are boys more passionate in things that lead to STEM and girls into things like kindergarten teacher and HR?

      In all the companies I have worked HR is at least 75% female and at many it is 100%. So what causes these passions? Nature or nurture. More and more it is clear that it is nurture. one test: People have asked to watch a kid and play with a kid. They had no idea what the sex of the kid was. They had both boys and g

  • So what? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by JustNiz ( 692889 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @04:57PM (#54046497)

    >> Women make up only 11 percent of the cyber security workforce

    So what? Thats called FREEDOM TO CHOOSE. Everything shows that's actually by their choice, partly because women are just not mentally as suited as men are to doing jobs like programming.
    https://www.netnanny.com/learn... [netnanny.com]

    If you're gonna get up in arms about numeric gender equality, you should be more bothered about why only 9% of nurses are men. Yeah thought not.
    http://www.beckershospitalrevi... [beckershos...review.com]

    • Not just that (Score:5, Insightful)

      by s.petry ( 762400 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:13PM (#54046637)

      Women are obtaining 61% of the Masters degrees in the US, the majority of which are NOT STEM RELATED! A PoliSci degree does no good for IT, let alone a specialty like IT Security. Can I take my 4 year Mathematics degree and instantly work in the Medical field? How about being a Sociologist? Journalist?

      Once again we have pure propaganda creating a false narrative with a single fact where hundreds would need to be analyzed. Do sane people actually have to contemplate why many people call "Leftism" a mental disease?

      • To be fair, the women making these reports on sexism probably don't have degrees that involved a course in statistics.

        More seriously, whenever politics gets involved people throw honesty in the shitter and will deceive as much as they can get away with in order to convince you they're right.

      • by creimer ( 824291 )

        A PoliSci degree does no good for IT, let alone a specialty like IT Security.

        I had a General Education A.A. degree when I started my technical career 20+ years ago as a video game tester. I later went back to school to get a Computer Programming A.S. degree. I'm currently doing InfoSec and studying for InfoSec certifications.

        Can I take my 4 year Mathematics degree and instantly work in the Medical field? How about being a Sociologist? Journalist?

        The average person will have five or six careers during their lifetime. Each career transition will require training to get started. What you learned from your four-year mathematics degree can be applicable to different and seemingly unrelated fields.

        Do sane people actually have to contemplate why many people call "Leftism" a mental disease?

        What does t

        • by JustNiz ( 692889 )

          >> The average person will have five or six careers during their lifetime.

          I'm not convinced thats true of Software Engineers at least.
          All the "real" Software Engineers I've ever met might change companies but would never change careers.

          Time and again I've seen people hired for software engineering positions that obviously are doing it for the money rather than any interest, passion or innate ability for it (a very common indicator is that their degree is in some other totally unrelated field such as s

      • Women are obtaining 61% of the Masters degrees in the US, the majority of which are NOT STEM RELATED!

        Why is that the case?

        • Choice!

          Choices are based generally on two things.
          1. Aptitude testing (if you suck at it you probably won't do it)
          2. Personal Life Goals

          There is no triple secret back room meetings with men claiming "We will help women into and through master level degrees in all areas except for STEM. If a women goes into STEM we won't pay the college bills and we won't hire them.

          Belief in such is worthy of institutionalization for insanity.

          • Choices are based generally on two things. 1. Aptitude testing (if you suck at it you probably won't do it) 2. Personal Life Goals

            Assuming that's true, why don't women make their life goals a career in STEM?

            • by s.petry ( 762400 )
              Selective reading, I'm not impressed. Lets try a circular argument, go back and read that post again. If you still don't get it, pay very close attention to that last sentence.
      • Women are obtaining 61% of the Masters degrees in the US, the majority of which are NOT STEM RELATED!

        A problem is arising out of that as well. Mates. As a gender most women want to "marry up" when dealing with men as mates. But the numbers speak for themselves. It becomes a huge issue when her degree is in one of the "fries with that?" degrees like gender studies, where careers are rare. You have a lot of women, and very few guys that meet her demands.

        I've been on record after workingg for years to try to get young ladies interested in STEM, and overwhelmingly, they are not. Not interested in the least.

  • by NotARealUser ( 4083383 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:00PM (#54046535)

    I remember having a conversation with a woman tech executive at a very large company. She told me that she has done everything in her power to attract women into the field and specifically into their workplace. Yet, she was unable to break through this imbalance. And this was the top tech exec at the company and she said they just could not maintain the levels of females in the workforce in their company that she wanted. It was, in fact, far, far, below the levels she wanted.

    After being in the tech industry for years, I can honestly say that I really do not encounter the implied institutional discrimination in the tech industry. Is there an imbalance in representation? Yes. However, I feel like these imbalances are indicators of other things. It could be cultural things. It could be something else. Maybe even in specific companies, there is a problem. But I feel like these statistics are more of indicators of some other cause than discrimination within the tech industry as a whole.

  • by Joe_Dragon ( 2206452 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:01PM (#54046543)

    If we had unions to fight for work-life / family time in IT jobs! then would we be having this talk?

    • by jimmifett ( 2434568 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:50PM (#54046933)

      A very large number of IT ppl would never join a union, because they have analytical minds and can see the pointlessness of giving a chunk of their paycheck to a group that only claims to look out for them, but instead makes themselves comfortable.

      A lot of IT ppl believe in meritocracy, not socialism, and would rather avoid the industry destruction they've seen in the automotive market. Bad enough when an incompetent manager is kept around to lead a group, worse still when you can't shake off an incompetent team member skating by bc unions.

    • You've never worked in an environment with a union have you? All they do is take a $100 or so dollars a month from your pay check (maybe more since it's been a while I've had the unfortunate experience of being in a union shop). When you do need their help they come back saying management can do what they want but you have to give them unwavering support like a cult member. Ask no questions, pay your dues, cross no picket lines, and don't expect anything from them.

      • by creimer ( 824291 )

        Ask no questions, pay your dues, cross no picket lines, and don't expect anything from them.

        You're doing it wrong. When my father had a problem he went straight to top, asked the receptionist which bar the union head was hiding in, and, after she blurts out the bar name, we confronted him in the bar. While father talked to the union head, I stood behind him to make sure he didn't run away. Union heads don't like messing up their $1,000 Italian suits.

  • Bull fucking shit (Score:5, Insightful)

    by PeeAitchPee ( 712652 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:04PM (#54046573)
    If women were really cheaper, companies would be hiring them in droves to reduce cost.
    • Correct. The reality is that women are more expensive for companies given they still end up doing more stuff at home, spend more time on kids and such, so where with a man one person may suffice for a job, in case of women maybe 2 need to be hired to cover for each other when either takes off in the middle of everything.

      However they are also more expensive in costs that are not immediate but are hanging out there: government turned women into a protected class and as such they are more dangerous (unexpected

  • There are two kinds of people in this world, those that discriminate, and liars. Discrimination is innate to the human condition. Our brains are lazy and take shortcuts in decision making. [wikipedia.org] The sooner we all acknowledge this fact, the better.

    Once we acknowledge everyone discriminates, we can stop blaming "other people", and DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT! Everyone is guilty, even the victims. Lets all agree to try harder. The way I see it, it's the only way the situation will improve.
  • by creimer ( 824291 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:08PM (#54046615) Homepage
    There are three women (10%) on the InfoSec team that I'm on at work. All three are team leaders. They kick ass in technological knowledge, carrying the work load, and getting stuff done on time. The few men who had problems with this found jobs elsewhere.
    • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:30PM (#54046775)

      This piece of fake news is not about those women. Those women compete on merit and do not need anything given to them for free because they happen to be female. I know quite a few women engineers and scientists in the same class. No, this news is about a type of woman that wants a high salary and a leadership positions solely because she happens to be a women.

  • by xvan ( 2935999 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:20PM (#54046687)
    So only 11% of workers are female but 10% of managers are female and 20% of C level workers are female and somehow that proves information security female under-representation is because gender discrimination on the field. Who makes this articles?
  • by Chas ( 5144 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:25PM (#54046735) Homepage Journal

    Sorry, but any job category that has an actual 1:1 male:female ratio is a statistical fluke. Period.

    If women want better representation in a given field, the jobs are there. They simply need to have the qualifications to earn them.

    And "has a penis" isn't among the qualifications.

    Women have equality of opportunity in this country.
    But that's not enough for some. They want equality of outcome. Regardless of how stupid the idea is.

    In short, anyone, man, woman, any of the umpty-zillion and one self-defined whatevers, if they believe in equality of outcome over equality of opportunity, please do humanity a favor and make sure these people never breed.

    The human race is already collectively stupid enough as it is...

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Thelasko ( 1196535 )

      Women have equality of opportunity in this country. But that's not enough for some. They want equality of outcome.

      If women have equality of opportunity, then with a large enough sample size, why don't you expect an equal outcome?

      • Because there isn't equal interest.

        • Because there isn't equal interest.

          Why isn't there equal interest? Is there something innate about STEM that women aren't interested in? Or is it individuals trying to fit a self imposed stereotype? e.g. "I can't do STEM, because I'm a girl." If so, why does that stereotype exist?

    • And "has a penis" isn't among the qualifications.

      So slapping my dick against the server rack is not an essential step in troubleshooting!? I should have known that interview with Microsoft was fake.

  • by Jody Bruchon ( 3404363 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:26PM (#54046745)
    The underlying assumption is that women want to be "represented" in this field in the first place. Dread the thought that women might not want to do something enough to make the head count ratios match that of the general population.
  • by gweihir ( 88907 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @05:27PM (#54046751)

    Women earn about the same for the same work. Deviations are below 5% and it is unclear whom the favor, as this is below the margin of error of such studies. Women are generally not "higher qualified" than men, even if they have more degrees in absolute terms. There are degrees that are easy to get and those that are a lot harder to get. Women have more of the former than men. This whole thing is just a specific type of women trying to make it easy for themselves and get things for free.

    That said, these claims just show one thing: It is easy to lie with numbers if you just leave the right bits out. And it shows that people with an agenda like this one are not above lying.

  • by campuscodi ( 4234297 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @06:43PM (#54047295)
    And of course the site uses an image of two supermodels to portray women in infosec :)))) No wonder they're underrepresented
  • Comments like more women have Master's degrees than Men related to InfoSec skills how?

    And it seems like they're talking discrimination at the management and above level. That's something that's hardly limited to InfoSec

  • The survey of more than 19,000 participants around the world finds that women have higher levels of education than men, with 51 percent holding a master's degree or higher, compared to 45 percent of men. Yet despite out qualifying them...

    That's quite a leap.

  • by Notabadguy ( 961343 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @08:06PM (#54047723)

    And men are underrepresented in teaching and nursing.

    And white people are underrepresented in professional sports.

    Except NASCAR...where we need to conscript minorities.

  • by erp_consultant ( 2614861 ) on Wednesday March 15, 2017 @11:45PM (#54048695)

    Men are underrepresented as Pre-School teachers. It is overwhelmingly women. Where is the outrage over that? Asian men are underrepresented in the NBA. African American women are underrepresented as Librarians. Who gives a shit?

    This reminds me of that idiotic argument that female tennis players at Wimbledon should make the same as the male competitors. Yeah - except that the men play 5 sets (not 3 like the ladies do), and the audience is overwhelmingly larger for the mens events (and, by extension the advertising dollars). Yet Wimbledon succumbed to political pressure. Same tactic here I suppose.

  • I work for a public organization, where they would absolutely salivate over hiring any underrepresented group.
    In our last round of basic technician hiring, 150 or so people who applied for two positions.This was a job posted well ahead of time, to most of the government jobs websites.
    Only two women applied. Of them, one failed the first written exam, and the second failed her hands on test because she didn't want to lift a PC ( job description included lifting 50 pounds occasionally).
    The management was tearing out their hair trying to figure out why this was happening.

Usage: fortune -P [-f] -a [xsz] Q: file [rKe9] -v6[+] file1 ...

Working...