Right back at you!I'm guessing if you had the chance to employ a man or a woman you'd choose the man, because you're going to assume he won't be distracted by his "other job." If you don't understand how your presumptions prejudice you, maybe you should think about that for a while.
Fair enough.This is nonsense. I have stated this NOWHERE. I have been trying to get at the root of the disparity. If you are asking what I think, (instead of assuming) I confess I haven't actually spent much time thinking about it.
Actually, I don't think it's "intimidation" so much as lack of interest, as you put it.I was shocked by the article in the OP. In retrospect, I shouldn't have been given my own experiences. I suppose it has always been my assumption that the answer lies in the first question I raised - lack of interest. I have spent my whole life interested in things which don't seem to interest most women and disinterested in things that do. So I suppose it was a natural assumption for me to slip into, however wrong I might have been. Also, given my nature, it's difficult for me to empathise with women who might feel intimidated by the macho culture of IT. I really haven't given it much thought until recently. And if I haven't, you can be sure the vast majority of people in IT haven't either.
Nope, you aren't making any assumptions at all. It's nice to see such objectivity on this forum.BS. In fact, you are dismissing it because you find it unpalatable. You probably haven't even processed anything the women in the thread have said. You've made up your mind and that's that. Much like highlander. You choose to attack my intellectual integrity, rather than face an inconvenient truth. With men like you in the industry, what hope can there be for reform? Rather depressing.
Oh, yeah, that's right ... I said it's the most demanding career imaginable. Nope, no straw men, here.I welcome any and all explanations. But if they don't accord with what I know of the industry, I will challenge them. And you are just wrong to suggest that there are less women in IT because it is the most demanding career imaginable. Spectacularly, laughably wrong.
Exploitative? Really?I don't know if that is the explanation. From reviewing the literature, and from my gut, I would say that probably the main reason is that girls are just not encouraged to pursue IT as a career. They intuit (correctly) that it's not a field that will welcome them. They don't see enough role models and don't have access to mentors. They don't really understand what it's all about and don't prioritise it as a career choice. If they get their first exposure by dabbling about online, they are going to encounter a culture that is broadly misogynistic and exploitative of women and girls, which might be enough to crush any budding interest.
Promotion? That's your metric? In general, one doesn't get promoted, because someone else already has the job. One gets get hired somewhere else to fill a much better position.For those who enter the profession and leave, discrimination cannot be discounted. Women are more likely to be passed over for promotion and given less interesting work. This is merely an extension of the general bias that "IT is not women's work". Beyond that, sexual harassment happens in every field, sorry, that's just a fact. And if you are one of only a tiny minority of women in a given field, statistics dictate you are going to be more likely to face it (since there are fewer women to share the burden). This is simple logic, before we say anything about the specific characteristics of men in IT. Men in female-dominated fields are likely to face the same thing.
And what makes you think your experience is more representative?And what makes you think your experience is more representative?
You're a permie, yes? Employed by the same organisation for many years? I contract. I might work for half a dozen organisations in a year, in different countries. I know where-of I speak. Flexibility varies by country, by sector, and by organisation, however, I maintain that IT is very flexible. More and more people work remotely. In fact, I don't know any organisation that has people on call without providing remote access. People job-share frequently. Several of the women I know work part-time so that they can look after children. So do some of the men.
Straw man.What you have to ask yourself is whether this is relevant to the question under discussion. I don't think you can make that argument convincingly.
Here's a list if the most/least stressful jobs according to APA.
No IT proper in there. Although the job which is the closest fit, comes LAST. Haha!
I think you've been spoilt. Like I say, most IT nerds wouldn't last 5 mins in a REALLY stressful job.
Oh, no! I might look bad?Stop misrepresenting me, you only make yourself look bad.
A fair point.IT people are known for being socially retarded, it's not a stretch to suppose that they treat others with less respect than might be encountered in other professions.
Again, a fair point, but it applies to all professions, not just IT. See "The No Asshole Rule": http://www.amazon.com/Asshole-Rule-C.../dp/0446698202That's almost the opposite of what's been said in this thread. At the lower end (IT support) you find pretty normal people. Anti-social behaviour isnt tolerated because people are easily replaced. These also tend to be customer-facing jobs which require a minimum level of professionalism. Small start-ups and public-sector jobs are also more female-friendly, because lower status, less well-paid.
What you find is that the really brilliant people (who are few and far between) get away with acting like complete assholes because they are so difficult to replace. Everyone in IT knows a few of these guys, and they make life difficult for everyone, not just women (though they often have antediluvian ideas about women too). They also frequently set the tone in subtle and not-so-subtle ways.
FWIW, I agree with the thesis.