back to article Despite best efforts, fewer and fewer women are working in tech

Women are still losing ground in the computer science and IT fields, despite corporate pledges to improve gender diversity in their ranks. This according to research carried out by Accenture and Girls Who Code, which found the overall percentage of women in computing jobs is set to decline in the coming years from 24 to 20 per …

  1. alain williams Silver badge

    Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

    As long as men & women (gays/straights/..., black/white/..., etc) have the same opportunity to follow an interest, get educated and compete for jobs on the same footing as everyone else: what else do you want ? Some jobs require temperaments, abilities that not everyone has - so they can go and chose something else.

    There are those who look at Attainment and blame industries/... for an imbalance without looking to see if it what women (in this case) actually want to do.

    Should we complain that in the UK only 0.5% of midwives are men ?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

      I agree completely. To be honest, I wouldn't be surprised if there are less men too (leaving the robots alone in the field). Today's iT isn't that mysterious anymore, it's all trend based and you need less and less people every day. Especially in software where everything lately seems to have a shelf life of 2 years before it's no longer "cool" or rightfully replaced.

      1. Notas Badoff

        Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

        Some of the negative aspects of the industry are not by any means new. And now that more people know about them, well even the kids will self-select earlier.

        I keep a copy of "Soul of a new machine" for the times when someone mentions a child is "interested in computers as a field". It's a text that is both the best case for and against being 'interested'. If after reading it you are awed by the unique miracles you can create, you're 'our' kind of people and probably nothing could stop you from getting in on the action. On the other hand, if you are depressed at what happened to the individuals who toiled in the basement to produce the miracles, then it is a wake-up call and warning not to get involved in any way at all.

        Enabling self-selection is a good thing. The last two kids reading my copy, one went into statistics and accounting, the other into submarining. I see two forms of intense stifling containment I couldn't imagine enduring. They see it as way better than what I do.

        Hmm, maybe I've got bad genes...

    2. streaky

      Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

      As long as men & women (gays/straights/..., black/white/..., etc) have the same opportunity to follow an interest, get educated and compete for jobs on the same footing as everyone else: what else do you want ?

      This is fighting talk to some people though you're totally right. Pay transparency is a problem but beyond that...

      It's something I've talked about a lot in the past, it's not even a classroom issue (forcing IT on people who don't enjoy it be they male or female is a recipe for all sorts of disasters even if they end up working in the field). It's far more fundamental than that; it's about what kids are doing when they're 3 years old, 4 years old, until there's changes there there'll never be real gains on "equality" as a numbers game.

      I know a lot of women who work in tech and some of them are a lot smarter than me and I couldn't be happier, but I don't think forcing the issue helps on a fundamental issue, partly the issue (to the extent there is one outside of statistics, and not the positive this is useful data statistics) is generational but if you look at the way kids play today there doesn't seem a "fix" in the works, not really in the sort of numbers some groups want anyway. I'll be retired before there's gender parity as a numbers game and I'm not that old.

      1. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

        I wonder what it is about these engineering jobs...

        Systems Engineer

        Female Median Annual Salary: $72,300

        Male Median Annual Salary: $71,500

        Electrical Engineer

        Female Median Annual Salary: $66,000

        Male Median Annual Salary: $66,000

        Mechanical Engineer

        Female Median Annual Salary: $61,100

        Male Median Annual Salary: $60,400

        Videographer

        Female Median Annual Salary: $39,300

        Male Median Annual Salary: $38,800

        Computer Repair Technician

        Female Median Annual Salary: $31,500

        Male Median Annual Salary: $31,500

        ...that could be replicated elsewhere in industry?

        1. Kristian Walsh Silver badge

          @Pompous Git - Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

          Minority participants showing a higher median income is a sign that there are barriers to entry. (Consider an opposite situation: why are the very few men working in the women's fashion industry disproportionally clustered at the top?)

          Basically, the problem with women in tech is that the secondary school environment* is stacked against girls developing interest in computing, so only those with a strong aptitude for it will persist with it. This self-selected removal of "okay" and "average" from the pool that applies to university means that only the top tier of females with IT ability ever participate in the workforce; to use arbitrary percentiles, those salary surveys could be comparing the top quarter of all females with IT ability to the top three quarters of all males with IT ability.

          * "environment" doesn't just mean teaching and subject options; it also means the perception of what a tech job is, and the kind of person who does it. After twenty years in this business in various settings, I can recall hardly any emotionally-stunted egomaniacs with dubious personal hygiene, but that is still the stereotype of what "good with computers" means.

          But it's not just female engineers - we're losing well-rounded people in general. The mess we're in is a result of too many companies hiring people who can churn out code, rather than people who understand the needs of other humans - the poor bastards who will have to use that code.

          1. Pompous Git Silver badge

            Re: @Pompous Git - Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

            why are the very few men working in the women's fashion industry disproportionally clustered at the top?

            The fashion houses have been corporatised. Women still predominate at the fashion mags and design. It's noticeable that women were better represented in the past. So I'd say it's likely less a problem with tech, but more down to ownership by large corporates. Heck, when I had two contractors working for me in the 90s, one was a bloke and the other was a blokess. But then I was strictly small biz.

            I don't know because I've had next to nothing to do with the coding side of IT, but I'd suggest that it's corporatisation that's the problem.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

      Why bother with this at all?

      Before you downvote me please consider this

      1) With all this outsourcing going on and most of it going to India where it is even more male dominated it matters little if we get more women into IT because there won't be jobs here for even the men.

      2) With all the impending automation of life, the universe and everything and not just in IT there will be mass unemployment (or according to Jeremy Corbyn, we have it now but he aint seen nothing yet) in IT and manufacturing as the 'robots' take over.

      That means we will be left with more and more unemployed people (male and female alike). Why would a woman want to enter a profession that is doomed to die like buggy whip makers. They'd be better off becoming undertakers.

      I know that this is overly doom laden but the trends are all there for everyone to see. But the mega corps had better watch out because if we, the great unemployed get too large in numbers, we won't be able to afford to by their products and where will you be then eh?

      1. streaky

        Re: Equality of Opportunity, not Attainment

        @AC that's a completely different situation that will need a completely different economic system, it is useful today to understand if there's a problem and what that problem looks like. I don't think gender parity as a numbers game is necessarily a problem or assuming it is fixable by brute force though.

  2. tekHedd

    Yup, women are smarter.

    So, expose women to tech earlier in life, and they run like hell. All this proves is that you'll have to lie more convincingly about how awesome it is if you want to inflict tech careers on more women.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Yup, women are smarter.

      Steady on. Im a miserable, bitter and angry bastard because of the people that oversee IT...not because of IT itself.

      I think the problem is cultural.

      In 2016 its still ok for your average 20 to 30 something to say "I dont really know computers".

      I get asked some truly basic shit more often than is reasonable.

      If the level of ignorance was repeated elsewhere the results would be hilarious.

      We'd have fully trained mechanics parking cars in Tesco for people and Cartographers pointing the way to the front door.

      Older than 50...I kinda get it, set in your ways etc etc. But if you born 1985 onwards. Theres no excuse.

      If we killed off the acceptance of being technically retarded we might...*might*...get more diversity in tech since a more diverse group would feel it necessary to learn the basic skills which is a gateway to other things.

      You don't know what you want to do until you've tried it or have developed an interest for it on some way.

      IT isn't a straightforward industry to enter. Theres gazillions of possible skill permutations, a vast and weird pecking order, different industry sectors etc etc.

      First question you'd likely get asked if you wanted to be a neurobiologist ... Which med school are you going to?

      First question if you decide you want to enter IT ... Which area of IT? Thats a big question with a vast number of possible answers. Especially given all the professional overlap.

      A brain surgeons skills wont ever massively overlap with a podiatrist.

      But a programmers skill will have consiserable overlap with a DBA. Yet they are distinct professions.

      1. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        'In 2016 its still ok for your average 20 to 30 something to say "I dont really know computers"...Older than 50...I kinda get it, set in your ways etc etc.'

        Amongst tech people it also seems to be OK to say "I don't really know history".

        The Intel 8080 was introduced in 1974. That's 42 years ago. It was preceded by the 8008 and 4004. So your 50 year-olds were just kids at the time. They weren't the ones who were going to set those early micros to work. It was people who were already mid-career with enough experience of earlier generations of mainframes and/or minis to see the possibilities. A little calculations should show you that in fact we're in our 60s & 70s now.

        There seems to be an assumption that people over 50 can't possibly understand about computers. Wrong!

        1. Pompous Git Silver badge

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          There seems to be an assumption that people over 50 can't possibly understand about computers. Wrong!

          Not to mention we can remember that there seemed to be more women in computing back in the "Dark Ages". I can't remember any of them complaining about "gender imbalance". It seems to me that the ones doing the complaining aren't in IT. If they are that pissed off about the "gender imbalance" why the fuck don't they eat their own dogfood?

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          "There seems to be an assumption that people over 50 can't possibly understand about computers. Wrong!"

          When I see those statements I usually point out that "people over 50" (as of today) invented computers.

          1. Andrew Moore

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            My eldest daughter told me that I didn't understand the internet; I replied that I, and people like me, invented the internet.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            When I see those statements I usually point out that "people over 50" (as of today) invented computers.

            That's well over 50 given that I'm in my 70s and the first generation stuff is only marginally younger then me.

        3. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          @dr syntax

          "There seems to be an assumption that people over 50 can't possibly understand about computers. Wrong!"

          yes obviously its not impossible . sombody made those 8080s in 74 - but this was around the time that industry experts were saying things like " there will only ever be a need four 4 computers on the planet" and suchlike - so not everyone had to learn them . it was only literally about 1995 when computers appeared in the houses of "normal people" for the purpose of doing stuff OTHER than pissing around with a computer

          1. Steve the Cynic

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            @Prst. V.Jeltz

            "sombody made those 8080s in 74 - but this was around the time that industry experts were saying things like " there will only ever be a need four 4 computers on the planet" and suchlike - so not everyone had to learn them . it was only literally about 1995 when computers appeared in the houses of "normal people" for the purpose of doing stuff OTHER than pissing around with a computer"

            Your timescales are a little off. The four-computers thing was Thomas J Watson, chief of IBM, speaking in *1943*, when working stored-program computers were still five years in the future, and he actually said "five", not "four".

            And I would contest the 1995 figure as well, although the discrepancy there is more like five or six years, and depends a little on how exactly you define the edges of "pissing around with a computer". I myself used a (home) computer in 1984 as what amounted to an advanced form of typewriter (Scripsit on a TRS-80 Model III), although I wouldn't class my family as "normal people" in this context.(1)

            (1) My mother worked as a programmer at LEO in the 1960s, and my father worked all his career in what amounts to IT support, sometimes outsourced, sometimes in-house. When some of the last LEO IIIs to be decomissioned were finally turned off in the late 70s, the aluminium honeycomb side panels from the racks made their way into our house as floor panels for the loft.

            1. jelabarre59

              Re: Yup, women are smarter.

              Your timescales are a little off. The four-computers thing was Thomas J Watson, chief of IBM, speaking in *1943*, when working stored-program computers were still five years in the future, and he actually said "five", not "four"

              I've heard that story was mis-quoted. What some sales manager said *to* TJ Watson was they expected to sell five computers *on that particular sales junket*. And they actually sold more on that trip round.

          2. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            in 74 - but this was around the time that industry experts were saying things like " there will only ever be a need four 4 computers on the planet" and suchlike

            I stand by my statement that it seems acceptable for people in tech to not know history. Without checking the exact date I think you're about a quarter of a century out.

          3. Vic

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            industry experts were saying things like " there will only ever be a need four 4 computers on the planet"

            And in context, they were right.

            They weren't talking about PCs. They were looking at shared compute centres where users would log in and run their code - what we'd now call "cloud".

            Vic.

        4. tiggity Silver badge

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          As someone in their 50s .. I soldered together an acorn atom computer kit (6502 processor) as a schoolkid.and got to grips with coding assembler with it (no choice, so little memory that BASIC was too resource hungry)

          1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge
            Joke

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            "I soldered together an acorn atom computer kit (6502 processor) as a schoolkid.and got to grips with coding assembler"

            Yeah teenage girls really love that stuff - i cant see why they dont carry it on to the workplace

      2. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        I get asked some truly basic shit more often than is reasonable.

        I don't think this is at all constrained to either IT, or either sex. Fifty percent of the population are below average intelligence. Live with it...

        Kerry Packer once remarked about the Dean of the University of NSW that "He's the most intelligent fuckwit I've ever met."

        1. Big_Boomer Silver badge

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          It is the curse of the highly intelligent to be surrounded by idiots, it's also basic statistics. Intelligent people can still be selfish @r$eholes though.

        2. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          Don Nutbeem ex-vc soton.ac.uk by any chance?

      3. J.G.Harston Silver badge

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        "you want to enter IT ... Which area of IT?"

        That's very pertinant. It also needs people able to answer that question. In my experience at school I was passionate about "computing" and the careers advisor guided me towards a university "computing" course and I then spent three years wondering when the course is going to actually get to some "computing".

        It wasn't until the VERY LAST SEMESTER when I actually did any real actual "computing", by which I meant microprocessor programming, hardware interfacing, digital electronics, system design, stuff I'd been doing myself for six years. I spent two and a half years doing stuff at a lower level than anything I'd already done, some stuff I'd actually done as examined projects at 'O' level, convinced I must be reading the course summary wrong and that surely we'd get onto some "real" computing soon. Even by the last semester when we got onto "real" computing, it was stuff I'd done for 'O' level technology SIX F*****G YEARS EARLIER!!!!*

        *F****G HELL, I've only just worked that out.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          "you want to enter IT ... Which area of IT?"

          Yes, a very good question and very much to the point. When I was thinking of getting into computing, back in the very early 1970s, I remember having a beer with an experienced civil servant who offered to advise me. He agreed that computing was a promising field, and when I asked him which specific jobs he recommended, he replied,

          "Sales, accounting and personnel".

          He was spot on, of course. That's where the money was and is, and probably always will be. Plus it's much easier to get into management through those departments.

          1. J.G.Harston Silver badge

            Re: Yup, women are smarter.

            If you want to be a manager, why T.F. are you applying for a technical job?

            I just CANNOT understand this thinking "I wanna be a manager, I know, I'll apply for an engineering job." Apply for a f***g manager's job you f****t.

            Additionally, the personnel process that says: this person is a skilled and competant engineer, I know, let's stop him from doing what he's good at and force him to be a manager.

            1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge
              Flame

              Re: Yup, women are smarter.

              yeah but i have no respect for managers who have never done a real job , preferably the one they are managing.

              Hence when i hear the term "Cabinet reshuffle" all I hear is "Bunch of privileged assholes that have no intellectual worth or knowledge of anything useful because they all studied politics and navel gazing at Cambridge ensuring that they never do get any better or achieve anything because they're too busy sucking each other off, guzzling the public money trough and SWAPPING JOBS just for the hell of it - thereby proving that any idiot could do it, and who cares so what , good on em , its only all our futures they're playing with its not like its something important.

      4. DavCrav

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        "In 2016 its still ok for your average 20 to 30 something to say "I dont really know computers".

        I get asked some truly basic shit more often than is reasonable."

        Get to the back of the queue! I'm a mathematician and we've had numbers for quite some time, significantly longer than we've had computers, either the original human type or machine. The number of people who say they can't do basic arithmetic is probably comparable, and possibly heavily overlapping, with the tech illiterati.

        1. Dr. G. Freeman
          Facepalm

          Re: Yup, women are smarter.

          Some see it as a badge of honour, "Oh, I don't know Maths".

          Does my head in, if they were illiterate then they'd be ashamed, but to be innumerate is to be almost cool in their mind.

          1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

            re I dont know maths

            @Dr G

            "Does my head in, if they were illiterate then they'd be ashamed, but to be innumerate is to be almost cool in their mind."

            nope - plenty of people are all too quick to proudly announce "I've never read a book in my life"

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Yup, women are smarter.

      Hey girls, why don't you do a job where your ability to enter or progress in your career will be assessed by people who are utterly unable to do so: people who think "expert in C++" on the CV of a new Indian graduate is a much better fit that "20 years of programming and design in very many languages including, C, C++, Java, Objective-C " on the CV of a 45 year old (too old, surely?)

      This is why we have offshore code that is of the level MyFirstProgram.bas whilst utterly technically illiterate managers reward themselves with bonuses as the company slowly crashes and burns. What's the point of testing experts when the clients still accept shonky beta-ready (if that) products? What's the point of performance engineers or good DBAs when you can just pile on the tin to speed up dumb programming and schemas? What's the point of good programmers when you can get a team of -- is it Lithuanians now? -- to crank out a load of shoddy code that can eventually be massaged into some kind of (barely) acceptable state? Where it seems normal for managers at games companies to monitor the "productivity" of their most talented uber-devs by counting f***ing keystrokes (probably actually an inverse measure of quality)?

      Info Tech stinks at the moment. Data breaches, massive pwnability in all sorts of products, even cars FFS and utterly unscalable web sites that crash on launch, huge cost overruns (and functionality under-delivery) in the public sector at least. We need to tolerate such failures less -- much less -- as if they were physical engineering projects. People who manage these huge cockups need to pay for their corner cutting --- at the moment they benefit from it.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        "People who manage these huge cockups need to pay for their corner cutting --- at the moment they benefit from it."

        Well, then hit up your education department. Some schools once replaced ASM for VB for embedded design. I know of 1 state college right now that replaced C with Java then replaced Java with Javascript for required learning of system designs for mobile communications. I'm not saying that the get rich quick people aren't the source of the problem...but.

        goodbyeWorld.js

      2. J.G.Harston Silver badge

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        "Hey girls, why don't you do a job where your ability to enter or progress in your career will be assessed by people who are utterly unable to do so: people who think "expert in C++" on the CV of a new Indian graduate is a much better fit that "20 years of programming and design in very many languages including, C, C++, Java, Objective-C " on the CV of a 45 year old (too old, surely?)"

        Oh, please please please, I want to give that so many upvotes.

      3. wheelbearing

        Re: Yup, women are smarter.

        Two big factors driving this acceptance of crap quality / safety in mainstream products / services.

        A) There are too few financial decision makers at the very top (CEO/CE/MD/main board directors) who have a very good grasp of IT fundamentals. This applies even / or especially to UK based technology companies - and I would include banks, ISPS and retail among the grouping "technology companies".

        B) Short term-ism is driving most big public company investment decisions, and given that shortcomings in tech investment will often take a three or four years or more to "bear fruit" (which is the same kind of timescale from when the management decision was made to when those who made the decisions move on - these types are rarely around to pick up the shit and then the next reorganisation / merger / acquisition comes along and hides the costs of their failures), results of which are usually picked up by shedding more of the workforce, more outsourcing/offshoring.

    3. yoganmahew

      Re: Yup, women are smarter.

      Yes, they are smarter. I'm in my late forties, senior tech, mainframe. Four of my female colleagues, same age same grade, quit tech roles to either leave altogether or go into the business side. Why? Agile, ITIL/ITSM, permanent oncall, absolutely atrocious ignorant parachuted in management and the whole "ten graduates for the price of you" thing. It's an appallingly toxic environment and not because it's sexist. Many of the very senior management are female, from CIO down. They've built this macho BS culture that is killing the joy out of the job. My female colleagues have more sense than to trudge along in interminable disappointment.

  3. JustNiz

    >> "The study, which polled 8,000 respondents in the field and used data from focus groups and ethnography, found that in many cases girls lose interest in tech and engineering careers at the secondary school and university levels"

    So this report is confirming that women aren't doing STEM/CS by THEIR choice, and because they have a free choice to do something they find more interesting.

    >> "Rather than attempt to funnel more women into computer science, the study suggests that computer science courses be integrated into other applicable fields..., where women comprise a larger share of the student base."

    ...so basically "fix" the problem by removing women's choice to avoid studying STEM/CS. Thats a perfect example of fucking retarded PeeCee thinking that is not only directly insulting to women, but fucking oppressing them. So much for free will I guess

    .... and please remind me why "only" 20% of CS grads being female is actually a problem in the first place?

    ... and if such gender imbalance in the workplace is indeed a problem, then why are none of these PeeCee muppets at least equally up-in-arms about only 4% of nurses and just 2.3% of Pre-K/Kindergarten teachers being male?

    1. Craigness

      Inconsistent approach

      To get more girls interested in physics they changed the syllabus to focus more on the social impact of physics and less on...actual physics, because girls are interested in social impacts of things apparently. Now, to get girls interested in something they're not very interested in, they inject it into everything they are interested in, which is the opposite of how they approached the "problem" in physics.

      As ever, what boys want or need is completely ignored. But if boys lose interest in physics because of all that social impact nonsense it will at least make the gender imbalance less problematic.

      1. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: Inconsistent approach

        to get more girls interested in physics they changed the syllabus to focus more on the social impact of physics

        This actually goes back a long way. My brother was studying for his degree in Engineering (having discovered that mathematics wasn't going to find him any interesting work) in the late 1970s. My mother came home from work to discover him crying. When she asked what was wrong, he showed her the essay he had just had marked. He'd been given 19/20 for it.

        My mother said she thought he'd be pleased, but he disagreed. His previous essay had received a very low mark, so in retaliation he'd written the most egregious bullshit he could think of.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Inconsistent approach

          https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0312204078/ref=olp_product_details?_encoding=UTF8&me=

        2. IanRS

          Re: Inconsistent approach

          Sounds like the title of my PhD thesis (quite some time ago). Fed up with the ridiculous overblown titles on academic papers, which were probably an attempt to get as many keywords as possible into the citation indices, I proposed a completely over the top, three line long, title for my thesis. My supervisor accepted it without question.

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Inconsistent approach

        @Craigness - really? That's a shame, if so. I went for a degree in physics because I found the subject fascinating. The only gender slant I'd've thought worthwhile adding to it at all is to ensure that all students are made aware of the women who have done great things in science in the distant past despite the huge hurdles they had to overcome. After 2-3 generations of women having equality of opportunity in the sciences, the role-model problem sorts itself out.

        I'd agree that too much emphasis on social impact stuff would be a negative (hey; quarks don't care about social impact - theyre a concept we created to try to explain what fundamentally exists in the univers) I do think it's germane to touch on the subject of social impact a little Aside from cases where ethics crop up (eg; some working on nuclear energy worrying about the increased power for destruction they'd also given humanity as a result), IMO it's also good to point out the far-reaching and sometimes unexpected effects scientific research can have on daily life, and to arm science-geeks with some ammo for when non-geeks ask them what good is all the esoteric stuff they're working on. But 99% of the time? Just the physics, please!

        1. Pompous Git Silver badge

          Re: Inconsistent approach

          The only gender slant I'd've thought worthwhile adding to it at all is to ensure that all students are made aware of the women who have done great things in science in the distant past despite the huge hurdles they had to overcome.

          How about "all students are made aware of the women who have done great things in science in the distant past"? Hurdles exist for both sexes. Presumably the men of Hypatia's time were unable to overcome those that led to her becoming head of the Neoplatonist School in Alexandria ca. 400 CE.

          Most of the truly egregious discrimination against women in physics appears to be quite recent. Thinking in particular here of Amalie Noether here. Oh and Cecilia Payne-Gaposchkin.

    2. John H Woods Silver badge

      the problem

      Surely we would have more insight into this problem (if indeed it is a problem) by establishing why the gender imbalance exists. If it is because females don't want to do these sorts of careers, it doesn't matter --- not even if IT would be improved by having more females.

      If there is inequality, real or perceived, let's address it. But simply analysing the numbers, even the trends in the numbers, is not going to give us the answers we need.

      1. Youngone Silver badge

        Re: the problem

        I know it's a small sample size, but my former boss is a woman, and her University IT class had 4 women, all of whom are now either not in any IT field, are in management or sales.

        For what it's worth, she reckoned "chicks just don't really dig computers".

        Not my words.

        1. Pompous Git Silver badge

          Re: the problem

          For what it's worth, she reckoned "chicks just don't really dig computers".

          Is that because chicks=dumb-clucks?

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: the problem

            No, it's because MOST women are more interested in work that has a greater element of human cooperation and communication.

            Needless to say, all such assertions have a statistical basis. Some women are terrific nerds, and accomplish at least as much in technical fields as any man. (Offhand, think Grace Hopper or pretty well any of the fictional roles played by Sandra Bullock). And some men are very socially-oriented, fluffy-headed, and disinclined to do exact technical tasks.

            But on average, men tend to be further towards the "systemizing" end of the autistic spectrum, and women closer to the "empathizing" end. (See Simon Baron-Cohen's work, for instance "Zero Degrees of Empathy").

            1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

              Re: the problem

              >No, it's because MOST women are more interested in work that has a greater element of human cooperation and communication.

              I think you will find that officially men and women are exactly identical, are equally interested in the same things and the only reason there is a gender inblance in field X is because of a patriarchal male oppression (note this argument does not apply to any field where men are not welcome)

      2. jelabarre59

        Re: the problem

        Surely we would have more insight into this problem (if indeed it is a problem) by establishing why the gender imbalance exists. If it is because females don't want to do these sorts of careers, it doesn't matter --- not even if IT would be improved by having more females.

        I've often suggested the reason there are fewer women in IT is because they're smarter than us males, and stay the f*** away.

  4. Diogenes

    Gender or viewpoint imbalance ?

    In the media we see a great diversity of gender& race(to some extent age) , but almost everybody regardless of gender, race, age etc etc holds similar positions on CAGW, Brexit, Trump etc etc.

    A long time ago I remember reading that despite making up a few %age points of the population(iirc <10%) , an overwhelming %age of devs(iirc >80%) were of 2 Meyers-Briggs personality types. I am always struck by a Jobs interview from about the time of Windows 3.1 in which he contrasts Apple & Microsoft, which basically boil down to MS employs only techies, whereas Apple employs artists, poets musicians etc - which is why Apple products were more 'beautiful' and had more 'soul'.

    I have been showing my classes some of the Google Android Channel videos on youtube on development patterns.It has been interesting listening to the comments my few girls (1/22, 2/22 6/30 and 1/6) make about one presenter (female) in particular relating to her appearance rather than what she says... often with a related comment about computing making you fat.

    1. Diogenes

      Re: Gender or viewpoint imbalance ?

      Another suggestion... pay a bonus for males to 'identify as female.

      After all we are being told gender is just a social construct.

      Opens popcorn waits for heads to explode,

      1. Pompous Git Silver badge

        Re: Gender or viewpoint imbalance ?

        Another suggestion... pay a bonus for males to 'identify as female.

        After all we are being told gender is just a social construct.

        Perhaps it's time we blokes complained about the "gender imbalance" in prostitution... After all only 20% of prostitutes in the US are male.

    2. jelabarre59

      Re: Gender or viewpoint imbalance ?

      ...which he contrasts Apple & Microsoft, which basically boil down to MS employs only techies, whereas Apple employs artists, poets musicians etc - which is why Apple products were more 'beautiful' and had more 'soul'.

      They must all be Dada-ists, then, because I find Apple design entirely incomprehensible.

  5. Nolveys

    "Why, hello young lady. I understand that you have studied hard and are about to take your first job in field of IT."

    "Yes, I want to be an author."

    "Oh, so you want to write technical documentation?"

    "No, I wish to write fiction. I am here because I need to understand the nature of futility."

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Coat

      I hear quacking[1]

      If she gains the insight she seeks then it's NOT futile.

      [1] Quacking of a pair-a-ducks.

    2. Korev Silver badge

      Couldn't you just buy her a Dilbert book?

  6. arthoss

    The guys have a point

    After all IT is a means towards something. The motivation to work in IT has to be something else than just working with computers - for most people. So teaching IT as part of something else is a good idea in my opinion. It should be normal school stuff as biology and others (programming, managing systems, installing servers) this way you can decide earlier about it.

    And about social component, which I think is relevant for men too: I studied Physics and I quit and became something else (a programmer) because I got bored to be 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, alone in a lab with humming machines and well, compared, it was easy. At least in IT you have colleagues in the same room most of the times.

    1. wayne 8

      Re: The guys have a point

      My favorite times were when my desk was in the computer room with the machines and no other humans. The hum of the machines allowed me to think clearly. No distracting conversations. Not having to listen as someone on a headset walks around giving a presentation on a conference call.

      Now I ride a motorcycle in the desert. The sound of the machine and the open vistas with nary a human in view.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: The guys have a point

        Now I ride a motorcycle in the desert. The sound of the machine and the open vistas with nary a human in view.

        If that's a job, I'd like to apply.

        Even though he was a Frog, that Jean Paul Sartre was right that hell is other people. He'd have done alright in IT, I reckon. Does backing him on this one make me a French Existentialist? Better add that to my CV for the motorbike in the desert role.

        1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

          Re: The guys have a point

          >>Now I ride a motorcycle in the desert. The sound of the machine and the open vistas with nary a human in view.

          >If that's a job, I'd like to apply.

          Apply to the foreign office, say you want to take back the middle east and will provide your own robes.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: The guys have a point

            Apply to the foreign office, say you want to take back the middle east and will provide your own robes.

            Mmmm. I like the idea of robes. Maybe not mixed with motorbikes, though. And, I was thinking more Arizona desert. Or Atacama desert. Or 99% of Australia.

            The Middle East is a bit crowded with multiple groups trying to serially "take back", and I'd rather wait until it has quietened down a big bit.

    2. hplasm
      Devil

      Re: The guys have a point

      "At least in IT you have colleagues in the same room most of the times."

      Jeez- give me the humming machines every time!

  7. Jos V

    gender imbalance problem?

    I've always said this. The mix in work environments should be the same as the mix coming out of colleges/universities. End of. If the root problem is education, then fix it there, and kick out the idiots from the corporations and HR offices trying to enforce their PC discrimination.

    When I was in college I could at least brag about knowing the name of all the women in the campus. All 5 of them that was. Out of about 400 students.

    There were no social studies in this one. We did find it funny to weld fellow student's projects to workbenches though. Or exploit any of the available holes in Novell netware stacks to take over other's systems. Oh how we laughed.

  8. techulture

    Self-selection ...

    ... someone wrote and it would because they have learned this:

    https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/if-you-think-women-in-tech-is-just-a-pipeline-problem-you-haven-t-been-paying-attention-cb7a2073b996#.b7nz1ap5q

    https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/the-real-reason-women-quit-tech-and-how-to-address-it-6dfb606929fd#.luwlj9vek

    1. You aint sin me, roit

      Re: Self-selection ...

      I'm not sure all of https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/the-real-reason-women-quit-tech-and-how-to-address-it-6dfb606929fd#.luwlj9vek is entirely reasonable...

      "A study by the Center for Talent Innovation found that 27% of women in tech feel stalled in their careers and 32% are likely to quit within one year."

      You feel stalled in your career... and quit within one year?

      What kind of expectations do these people have? Do they expect to be working on ultra-secure, super critical systems from the moment they enter the door?

      What happened to a bit of humility, learning the ropes from more experienced people (yes, maybe they are middle-aged men, doesn't mean they are past it) and knuckle down to the job they are given?

      The problems of gender inequality aren't going to be solved unless commentators are critical about the attitudes of some of the people they are trying to help.

      1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

        Re: Self-selection ...

        What it didn't say is that 98% of men feel stalled in their career and 99% are likely to quit within one year

  9. crediblywitless

    I've been saying "the best year for women going into graduate CS/IT jobs was 1984" for 30 years now. All of the "women into IT" initiatives since then have achieved Absolutely Nothing.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      All of the "women into IT" initiatives since then have achieved Absolutely Nothing.

      The "problem" of under-representation has only ever been invented by the chattering classes - the sort of beard and sandals that read the Guardian here in the UK. And that';s why these schemes deliver nothing, first because the underlying problem may have traces of truth, but isn't a substantive economic or social threat. Second, because nobody with any talent, knowledge or skill would want to waste their time, or be contaminated by association with a "diversity push".

      And it is a good thing that these daft schemes aren't successful: If we push more women into IT, then (unless we assume that these female IT types are currently housewives which is presumably a worthless role to Graun readers?) then they displace male labour, and move female labour out of occupations where women are more heavily represented. Thinking about that, how many of your tech colleagues would you want retraining as nurses? How would you like my egg-headed, cynical, mono-syllabic Mr Logic persona teaching your kids anything?

      Sadly, chattering classes have the upper hand. The whole Westminster bubble thing locks politicians and policy makers away from the real world (hence their shock and horror at the Brexit result). But even now we've got Mrs May threatening gender quotas for company boards, muttering that interview screening ought to be on the basis of "blind" CVs. There's a grave danger that we will stumble into a world where the idiots do define quotas by company, by profession and function. And that will be the end of times, because you can't stop at company boards, or gender. It will be ethnicity (down to sub-types), sexuality (again down to all the whiney infighting factions of LGBT), religion (all those tech types who put "Jedi Knight" on the census may find this works in their favour outside of IT, but inside IT....).

      Would it be un-PC to suggest the rounding up and gassing of Guardian readers?

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Would it be un-PC to suggest the rounding up and gassing of Guardian readers?

        YES, it would be, but that doesn't make it wrong...

  10. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    If you don't know how, we'll teach you. If you don't want to, we'll make you.

    The title of this comment was said to be a standard saying in the Red Army, where it applied to activities like parachute jumping and "wet work".

    Today, it seems to be finding ever greater application in Western societies. Like the Red Army, they are controlled by elite minorities who know, far better than people themselves, what is good for them.

    The proposal that equal numbers of young women and young men should somehow be compelled to enter the IT industry reminds me of a recent story in The Daily Mail (where else?) revealing the horrible fact that many women over 50 lose interest in sex. Of course this has been well known for millennia - it's called the menopause - and there are obvious natural reasons for it. But what fascinated me was The Daily Mail's reaction: we must find ways of making women go on enjoying sex, no matter how old they are. Of course if people want to become IT experts, or to go on enjoying sex into middle and old age, good for them. They should be helped as much as possible. But the "politically correct" attempt to force square blocks into round holes is profoundly anti-libertarian and un-British.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: If you don't know how, we'll teach you. If you don't want to, we'll make you.

      But the "politically correct" attempt to force square blocks into round holes is profoundly anti-libertarian and un-British.

      Rubbish. Being observational rather than judgemental, we persecuted an assortment of minorities over the centurys, and the British "sense of fair play" is only within the rules that the establishment set. I'd characterise Britain as enlightened, but not in the slightest bit libertarian. Skirting around the evidence of history and socially contentious issues, just look at either drugs, or assisted suicide - Britain is still firmly rooted in Victorian religious paternalism, with no regard to the rights of the individual. Look at the enthusiastic attempts to regulate and ideally stamp out vaping. The zealous control of tobacco and increasingly alcohol, the whole War on Pubs, the ongoing War on Free Speech.

      I'd say we're still better off than 95%+ of the world, and equal to almost all other Western democracies, but lets be clear that as an entity, Britain does want to force square pegs into round holes.

  11. Andrew Moore

    The main thing to watch here is "barrier to entry"- as long as no one (including women) are being stopped from entering the field then the numbers would indicate what interest there is. On the other side of the coin, there's a 5:1 gender split (female:male) in marketing jobs.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Most women simply aren't interested in technology and those that are, are very good and often better than their male counterparts.

    I don't think this has anything to do with education at any level. Despite what some would have us believe, men and women are different. It's as simple as that.

    From an early age, boys are interested in some things, girls another. Where girls show an interest/aptitude in engineering/technology they should be encouraged. But you cannot force them to be interested. Give them an equal opportunity, but if they aren't interested, then so be it - even if it does mean that women are "under represented" in some industries.

  13. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

    so?

    "Despite best efforts, fewer and fewer women are working in tech"

    i'm gonna keep my comment is short as possible for readability and flow of the literary structure etc.

    here it is:

    --------

    So?

    ---------

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I've got to say.....

    Thanks to the cultural change in the west, certainly in the UK, I suspect there will be even less female interest in unexciting fields like IT, etc. The majority of young girls I see have even less interest in anything technical or non-front facing like programming, etc.

    Ultimately, we have education which provides access to IT courses to either gender, and everyone is afforded the same opportunity at that level.

    If girls don't want to take up the course, why should we actively be trying to change their mind just to make up a gender imbalance? That's almost verging on subversion.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: I've got to say.....

      well my company failed miserably to help this imbalance the other day , but more importantly they failed to promote a young (female) helpdesk member to "support technician" , and wrecked the facade of

      "learning on the job"

      "do well and you move up"

      "staff development"

      "Personal Progression"

      "investors in people"

      "loyalty"

      and employed some outsider who may or may not be better , but certainly knows less about our particular environment.

  15. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    The reason is obvious.

    Its very hard to accuse a computer of sexual harassment.

    Conversely men find that dealing with something that behaves rationally is a huge relief.

  16. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

    its not the only imbalanced area

    There is a huge gender imbalance in:

    Professional snooker players

    Beauty Therapists

    Tyre fitters

    midwives

    Joiners

    Secretarys

    Auto electricians

    hairdressers

    regular electricians

    will somebody think of the children!

  17. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

    theres a real imbalance in the "getting your tits out in celebrity magazines despite being an unheard of nobody" industry.

    The women are all over that one . They all want to be the next Kim Kardashian - and talking them round from that to "doing computers" is gonna be a hard sell.

    1. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      I also want to be the next Kim Kardashian, talking them into letting me be is the problem. In the meantime I'll need to do computers

  18. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    So, to paraphrase: "If women don't want to do IT, trick them into it. It's for their own good, the poor darlings".

  19. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Paris

    Maybe this is a good point for El Reg to remove the 'Paris' icon?

    1. JudeKay (Written by Reg staff)

      Re: Paris

      We'll never forget PARIS! Heresy

    2. Yet Another Anonymous coward Silver badge

      Re: Paris

      >Maybe this is a good point for El Reg to remove the 'Paris' icon?

      We'll always have Paris

  20. Bruno de Florence

    Men & women do not have the same relationship to knowledge. There is no symmetry or correspondence. They approach it each in very specific ways.

  21. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Next generation

    I wouldn't be surprised if the trend reverses itself in 10-20 years. Anecdotally, young kids these days seem to have dropped the stigma against girls (in particular) doing nerdy stuff. If that trend survives adolescence, we should see more entering the workforce with genuine self-taught tech skills, with or without CS degrees.

  22. Brian Allan 1

    Have we ever considered that females might just be too smart to go into computer science!?

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like