Data Suggests CoC + Outreachy Hasn't Helped Increase Female Participation In Debian

[AsuMagic]

Same as Mozilla management firing developers. Wondering why, because they are males?

grow up

[keikun007]

After reading this thread, I am saddened to find me seriously considering avoiding Phoronix. It looks like a small (but loud) share of the community does not understand what feminism or generally programs involving under-represented groups are about.

.....

PS/for the record:
1) underrepresented groups never take your (IT) job away or get the internship position of your son. If anything, they strengthen the industry by providing a new interesting perspective. When job loss happens, it is often because an asian country can do roughly the same just cheaper.
2) anyone suggesting that woman are dumber/have no clue in whatever context is a moron. This is scientifically false and is known for a long time.
3) if programs like this did benefit only 1 person, it was worth it. It did not cost you anything.

Your whole response is wrong as it's based on emotions rather than facts. It's the culprit of why any discussion regarding these subjects are doomed to fail, people want to believe in this and find meaning behind the lack of evidence to support their views by appealing to emotion or some silly theory. please go back to my 2 previous posts and see if in any of them I sounded like a bitter man afraid of woman an also try to reply to my questions wit some facts....

[pal666]

community does not understand what feminism or generally programs involving under-represented groups are about

here's woman's take on feminism https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V67r48_4Ol4

[crystall]

the most intriguing for me is that no one is fighting for diversity to be increased in female predominant areas, like nurses. When man chooses these career paths that are predominantly female, they also suffer prejudice. Is it because people want woman to be in higher paid jobs? I believe it is, in which case the solution would be leveling some jobs value perception, not forcing people to be represented by big numbers in areas where their interest is low compared to the other gender. Just walk in a computer science class in university anywhere in the world and count how many females there are. of course there will be less of them n the offices. on the other hand, addressing the prejudice and barriers any people suffer when choosing a "gendered" career path that is not suited for them, should definitely be done.

Funny that not so long ago women were simply barred from those courses. And depending on where you lived non-white people too. But the fact that those groups are underrepresented in STEM has nothing to do with that. Nor with harassment. Oh no, it must be because they have "different interests".

[crystall]

It's funny, here is a thread full of men telling what women are interested in. Don't you see the irony in this? Nope, you clearly don't.

[ms178]

After reading this thread, I am saddened to find me seriously considering avoiding Phoronix. It looks like a small (but loud) share of the community does not understand what feminism or generally programs involving under-represented groups are about.

It is hard to be confronted with the realities out there in the world, isn't it? Another user already posted a video about Norway and that egalitarian societies underscored these differences in choices of professions between the genders. I'd say it is rather sad to see that a small (but loud) minority can push their political agenda into universities, the whole public sector, companies and even open source communities and won't even accept that the measures they pushed for were flawed from the ground up.

It is of key importance to society to provide opportunity to groups that are under-represented in areas. It has been prove time and time again that this has predominantly consequences ranging from better work environments to more diverse ideas (that many or may not translate into business). This does NOT mean that the intended outcome is a perfect split of jobs and/or salary by population. However, it means that people, which would not otherwise have the chance to participate, get exposed to the field/job/task. They may not have other chances to get that exposure and may not even look for it on their own initially.

Wait a second, diverse thinking (in the sense as being open to new ideas) doesn't mandate to select certain criteria such as gender, race, origin of birth, sexual orientation or skin color and to privilege some at the cost of others. But that is what affirmative action programs (or equal opportunity programs) are all about, just ask asian americans who need to score higher marks to get into prestigious universities than other minorities (see: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/01/u...s-lawsuit.html - and while Harvard was not intentionally harming asian minorities, the court ruling made it clear that their selection process was far from perfect and that these side effects need to be taken into account).

Look it this way: did you really "like" school, math, playing that instrument, or competitive sport, when you were very young? Usually, we tend to be very bad at it initially but get better to great over time with enough exercise.
This also happens to boys btw -> it is not a bad thing to get exposed and have a minimal understanding of fashion, art, .... Then we have a trend that k12 school performance of males lags females..

There are a lot of debates in education science about the gender differences and performance in school. Accepting that both sexes pursue different interests would be a good starting point. You can also put as much effort into teaching French to a gorilla as you like, the results will be limited by its individual abilities in the first place, that is not a question of gender or race (therefore I am all for equality of chances). Also there are different questions which could be asked instead, such as: What can we do to support young women to better cope with having both, a stressful career and a family?! Maybe better childcare would have a bigger impact than the other programs? [I was brought up in the GDR, where childcare was great albeit state-centered and women were highly represented in the workforce.]

[keikun007]

Funny that not so long ago women were simply barred from those courses. And depending on where you lived non-white people too. But the fact that those groups are underrepresented in STEM has nothing to do with that. Nor with harassment. Oh no, it must be because they have "different interests".

source? these courses didn't even exist. you have Scandinavian countries with abysmal equality levels and yet woman are choosing humanities over science and that's just fine. no are is more important than the other and woman indeed can do what they want. I welcome each and every woman that wants to be a truck driver, astronaut, developer or whatever and i hope more do but not because someone is deciding for them or offering them a ridiculous incentive that'll just make them reluctant to loom past

[mppix]

keikun007 I don't know why you feel addressed; your post was not the worst but let us dissect it is you wish.
FYI, I reject that my post was emotional; also FYI, I am not here to convince anyone.
However, I posted because this should not be a safe space bubble for reactive content (again, don't take this personal).

the most intriguing for me is that no one is fighting for diversity to be increased in female predominant areas, like nurses. When man chooses these career paths that are predominantly female, they also suffer prejudice. Is it because people want woman to be in higher paid jobs?

Considering that many western countries don't have enough workers in jobs like nurses (and need immigration), a higher male involvement could help and can benefit these occupations. Man in these jobs can face prejudice and feel marginalized. However, it is NOT the same.
Higher paying jobs tend to come with social status. A male nurse or elementary school teacher may be viewed as an underachiever by his peers/society. This can be elevated if he contributes (much) less to the household income than his mate.
Why would anyone "fight" for a lower paying less favorable job?
The important bit here is "social status". For example, a housewife raising well educated and competent kids does one of the most important jobs in society. They will pay our pension and run the future. However, she will never get much acknowledgement for it outside of her family.

I believe it is, in which case the solution would be leveling some jobs value perception, not forcing people to be represented by big numbers in areas where their interest is low compared to the other gender.

It is not about "equality of outcome" as in perfect split of jobs/salary. It is about "equality of opportunity". The latter is MUCH harder to evaluate and it is in part why the article can be easily misunderstood: the project was NOT a failure even if the number of woman did not go up.

Just walk in a computer science class in university anywhere in the world and count how many females there are. of course there will be less of them n the offices. on the other hand, addressing the prejudice and barriers any people suffer when choosing a "gendered" career path that is not suited for them, should definitely be done.

STEM is historically male dominated in the western world (interestingly less so in ex-sowjet countries). However, there is a good (and increasing) share of females in engineering/computer science. However, this is not the point. The problem is that from the females that start computer science many drop out. The female share in many academic jobs tends to decrease dramatically as you go up in rank to PhD student, postdoc, researcher, professor...
There are many reasons for that but workplace culture is a relevant factor.

addressing the prejudice and barriers any people suffer when choosing a "gendered" career path that is not suited for them, should definitely be done.

This is what it is all about and it looks like we still have a long way to go reading posts here (again, not really yours)

[keikun007]

It's funny, here is a thread full of men telling what women are interested in. Don't you see the irony in this? Nope, you clearly don't.

the only people trying to tell woman what they should do is the groups creating artificial measures to attract woman to areas they are probably not interested enough to have a relevant volume. value woman who are in every area instead, that'd be great! so a teacher won't feel downplayed compared to an engineer for instance. what you do is exactly the opposite, STEM is just another area and it so happens to be high paid. I don1t see the same commotion for increasing the number of woman in the construction field.

[keikun007]

keikun007 I don't know why you feel addressed; your post was not the worst but let us dissect it is you wish.
FYI, I reject that my post was emotional; also FYI, I am not here to convince anyone.
However, I posted because this should not be a safe space bubble for reactive content (again, don't take this personal).


It is not about "equality of outcome" as in perfect split of jobs/salary. It is about "equality of opportunity". The latter is MUCH harder to evaluate and it is in part why the article can be easily misunderstood: the project was NOT a failure even if the number of woman did not go up.


STEM is historically male dominated in the western world (interestingly less so in ex-sowjet countries). However, there is a good (and increasing) share of females in engineering/computer science. However, this is not the point. The problem is that from the females that start computer science many drop out. The female share in many academic jobs tends to decrease dramatically as you go up in rank to PhD student, postdoc, researcher, professor...
There are many reasons for that but workplace culture is a relevant factor.


This is what it is all about and it looks like we still have a long way to go reading posts here (again, not really yours)

nothing taken personal. Woman in modern western society that choose career over family has the exact same opportunities than man to choose their path. I am originally from a third world country and most of my female friends are in the STEM area, they chose to do so. I agree they probably faced more resistance in job interviews or even telling theis family they would do a "male" course but they still did it and are all successful.

Currently I live in a post soviet country and it's considered to have the worst pay gap between man adn woman. when you dig in the data you see that the country had to impor labor for the tech industry and the majority is male, local woman are happily ocuppiyng more established jobs instead of venturing in te startup sector. My university paper was extcly on this subject and the findings and data corroborate with the way i think, i would appreciate data implying woman has less opportunities. as for the outcome, I believe that will never change as long as we have our biological differences preserved as is

edit: I am not being reactive or unreasonable, I just feel like this debate is treated in a shallow basis and people with a so called progressive agenda tend to take it to heart instead of rationalize.