Women in tech: Gender parity or forced quotas?

Norway is seen as a country that has greater gender neutrality than the rest of the developed world, yet has one of the largest gender disparities in the tech industry. Country's with less gender neutrality, like in the developing world, have a more equal distribution of the sexes in these work forces. Certain anthropologists suggest that this is because in a world where people are free to choose they are more likely to adhere to their own personal preferences.

One question I have concerning women in technology is, considering that there is an imbalanced ratio of genders present in this industry, if it's naturally occurring why are people trying to change it. Here in Montreal, the employment services YES is really pushing in technology. But if the trend is that women are less likely to gravitate towards this kind of work why are we as a society then trying to promote it?

I also agree with the quotation in the first post, won't quotas serve to disenfranchise the women who choose to be there? If women are generally less geared towards technology and we do nothing to promote their presence in the industry doesn't that better serve the women who do choose the industry?

I see women being treated equally and equal representation of the sexes in various industries as two different things, and these moves to balance ratios seems redundant in the fight for equality.

Canadian Women in Technology (CanWit)has a mentorship program for girls and women who are interested in tech careers. Their studies have concluded that by the time girls reach grade 8 or 9, they've already chosen their course. When surveyed, girls overwhelmingly stated that they feared interest in tech careers would make them unpopular among their peers, even subject them to ridicule. That's the kind of messaging coming down to them. Even after achieving a high degree of academic success, women are second choice when it comes to secure appointments and leadership roles. When I worked in computer science, I watched a brilliant Palestinian Canadian scholar, with numerous publications and research grants amounting to more a million dollars, get passed over as Department Chair in favour of a less talented, non-productive 50-something white guy who skated along on one minimal NSERC grant. It had been years since he'd published to any degree other than adding his name to grad student work. Fortunately the Faculty of Science finally got with the program and appointed the woman to head CS some years later. Women don't choose to reject tech careers so much as they are discouraged by negative social stereotyping and diminished career choices. Just take the case of my eldest daughter who worked in IT for years, enduring sexual harassment from her married boss, watching as her male coworkers got training and advancement while she was told she was only hired because the owner thought she had a nice ass. She's back in school now, studying to be a systems analyst, and is breezing through her courses.

http://canwit.ca/

Not to mention women who wind up not getting an education because they are saddled with kids, or are in families where the priority goes to the boys, or numerous other factors.

No, women aren't inclined toward technology at all:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bertha_Benz

Be sure to read the part about how, while on the world's first test-drive of a car, she brainstormed how to repair and refuel it in a world with no parts shops or gas stations.

Never mind the false assumption that so-called traditional women's work isn't itself highly technical. It's just not valued or paid that way.

Couldn't agree with you more TB. A friend's partner, an engineer with a very bright future, took a 6 month mat leave. Upon return she found that most of her responsibilities had been farmed out and that her hours had been cut. Constructive dismissal, if you will. Last I heard her job was eliminated and my friend and his partner were taking the company to court. There are many more women in engineering than there used to be, but the dominant male culture remains intact.

I think outside obligations are viewed as problems in the workplace as things currently stand, though.  Not just kids, but aging parents who need attention, for example.  In addition to workplaces often lacking compassion for people who have others depending on them, up until now, these obligations are seen to apply disproportionately to women, unfortunately.  I'd really like to see that change.

The worst part of the Pax Dickinson caper is that he's not that unusual.  If he was just some bizarre anomaly, you know, you could just dismiss him and hope he continues to be his own worst enemy as his career circles the bowl.  Sadly, he's just one of many. 

Just look at what happens when women start designing video games and talk about inclusivity and story lines - death threats, rape threats, threats to harm their children, horrible stuff.  So much so that they leave:

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/08/16/video-game-writer-leaves-company-after-threats-against-her-children/

http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9014450/Death_threats_force_woman_to_suspend_blog_cancel_talk_at_O_Reilly_conference

Dickinson isn't the problem, he's just the symptom.  Like the rash from the measles.  First you have to find a way to kill the virus.

Interestingly enough, this is something that is also going on in the skeptic/atheist community.  Google "elevatorgate" (but only if you've got a strong stomach).  A lot of the female defenders of the dudebro skeptics (I'm looking at you, Penn Gillette) are playing the "I'm female and I'm not offended by rape jokes/sexual harassment/sexist jokes, so X is being a professional victim" game.

I have always had a lot of male friends, and at some points in my life they've outnumbered female friends.  Some of them have, from time to time, gotten their noses out of joint when called on behaviour where they haven't examined their biases.  The good ones get over it and learn.  Some of them are going to be harder to educate than others.

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2015/jan/23/wikipedia-bans-editors...

Wikipedia’s arbitration committee, the highest user-run body on the site, has banned five editors from making corrections to articles about feminism, in an attempt to stop a long-running edit war over the entry on the “Gamergate controversy”.

The editors, who were all actively attempting to prevent the article from being rewritten with a pro-Gamergate slant, were sanctioned by “arbcom” in its preliminary decision. While that may change as it is finalised, the body, known as Wikipedia’s supreme court, rarely reverses its decisions.

The sanction bars the five editors from having anything to do with any articles covering Gamergate, but also from any other article about “gender or sexuality, broadly construed”.

Editors who had been pushing for the Wikipedia article to be fairer to Gamergate have also been sanctioned by the committee, but one observer warns that those sanctions have only hit “throwaway” accounts.

“No sanctions at all were proposed against any of Gamergate’s warriors, save for a few disposable accounts created specifically for the purpose of being sanctioned,” said Mark Bernstein, a writer and Wikipedia editor.

In contrast, he says, “by my informal count, every feminist active in the area is to be sanctioned. This takes care of social justice warriors with a vengeance — not only do the Gamergaters get to rewrite their own page (and Zoe Quinn’s, Brianna Wu’s, Anita Sarkeesian’s, etc); feminists are to be purged en bloc from the encyclopedia.”