Apple Celebrating International Women's Day With 'Girls Who Code' Partnership and More Throughout March

[mdnz]

The people who think Apple did this out of the good of their hearts really need a reality check. They want more people to code so it's cheaper labour for them. If it wasn't, why not learn them Java or Python? Or any of the other more popular languages (https://www.businessinsider.nl/the-...ng-to-github-2018-10/?international=true&r=US)
Men don't need encouragement to start coding, however there is a huge market of women who don't code.

 

[cmaier]

Same argument could be made we are missing out on lots of male talent because they never got a chance because of focus towards females in education and quotas in companies.

How about making sure it is a problem before coming up with solutions that potentially have huge implications on the social fabric?

Missing out on male talent? Seriously?

When I went to engineering school there was 1 woman for every 8 men. In grad school it was worse. When i got my Phd there was only one woman who got hers the same day. And it wasn’t because women were less capable or less interested.

 

[LizKat]

You replied to literally 1/3 of my original post and think I'm moving goal posts. Get a grip lol.
Dunno where you live, but there is definitely not a nurse shortage here. Nearly every one of my female acquaintances is either in school to become a nurse, or is currently one. Business is booming for nurses. Don't know any males in the field currently. Fine with me. Definitely a female-dominated field and will continue to be. At least until robots take over.

imo when you're in a hospital and in pain, you don't give a damn whether your idea of a nurse is male or female (or an androgynous robot for that matter). That tends to hold true at that moment even if one does have misgivings about intimate care by someone of the same sex --which is sometimes a concern when one's feeling well enough to dive into such matters.

There is globally and generally a nursing shortage which persists despite intensified recruitment. So to me it makes sense that recruiters step up efforts to ensure more people regard nursing jobs as offering equal opportunity to men as well as to women.

[It also makes sense for hospitals to wonder whether understaffing and the ensuing treatment of daily staff reassignments like a meat market is why there's such churn but that's food for some other thread. ]​

On balance my opinion is that this thread probably brings out a lot of issues that are not directly related to Apple's celebration of International Women's Day.

I remember being pleased when an aunt of mine, who was once a regional executive of the Girl Scouts program in the USA, gave me a little pin issued on the first designated International Women's Day. I was a little surprised at the gift because I wasn't actually such a big fan of the Girl Scouts while I was one, feeling that at least back then it seemed to cater to a somewhat glossed over view of "a proper place" for women in society. I wasn't sure the GS were at all into "equal opportunity" issues back then. To me in my youth, they were about getting merit badges for knowing how to put a meal on the table and mitre the corners on a bedsheet. I knew all that when I was nine or ten, so... [shrug].

I still have the pin, and the note that came with it from my aunt, which was the real surprise and is what I treasure: "This is just the beginning!"

The thing is, the beginning of the emancipation of women from "proper place in society" has also been the beginning of a new look at outmoded constraints on men as well. Sometimes any of us are capable of forgetting that.

We owe it to our next generations, in my opinion, to ensure that we don't put artificial barriers --including dismissiveness-- to success in any field a boy or girl might be interested in as a child. It takes work to get there and the sooner a kid engages seriously in something he or she finds interesting, the more doors that engagement opens to professional expertise in future.

I might not be thrilled if a niece of mine wanted to become a firefighter. I might be less thrilled if a nephew of mine wanted to become a dancer. Not in either case because of explicitly challenging and dangerous occupations requiring physical strength and training. Nope. It's because of the potential for harassment that either men or women can still experience for no good reason if they choose to immerse themselves in preparation for occupations that used to be considered gender-specific.

So I figure my indicated contribution at my age is at least to point out where we are sometimes still blind to advancements we've made. More men and women are engaged in careers they do find rewarding no matter what "some people" think about their choices. I'm happy Apple has chosen to recognize International Women's Day and I don't take that as any kind of slur or ill wishes for my male kinfolk or friends.

 

[Apple2GS]

Men are more interested in programming and technology, just look at the percent of men on this site. Women are more instetested in other things. What is the problem that is trying to be solved?

 

[cmaier]

Men are more interested in programming and technology, just look at the percent of men on this site. Women are more instetested in other things. What is the problem that is trying to be solved?

More men are interested because since the 1970s women have not received the same exposure in early childhood to computers as men, and have been discouraged from considering careers in technology. Prior to that most programmers were women.

The problem to be solved is simply to provide exposure to the girls and show them that it’s a legitimate option, then if they are still not interested nobody is forcing them to become coders.

 

[Retsiem]

Missing out on male talent? Seriously?

When I went to engineering school there was 1 woman for every 8 men. In grad school it was worse. When i got my Phd there was only one woman who got hers the same day. And it wasn’t because women were less capable or less interested.

Your observation is hardly surprising. There are no/very few women in the upper echelons of chess or science.

Conclusion
Male and female mean IQs are about equal below the age of 15 but males have a higher mean IQ from age 15 on. The effect of sex differences in IQ is largest at the high extreme of intelligence. Since many of the more prestigious roles in society are associated with high IQ, the lack of female representation in these roles may be partially due to fewer females being competitive at the highest levels. This does not mean that females should not be given equal opportunity to demonstrate their abilities as this would create an worsened artificial 'glass ceiling'.

(http://iqcomparisonsite.com/SexDifferences.aspx)

(Jensen, A. R., & Reynolds, C. R.; 1983)

(Lynn, R., & Irwing, P.; 2004)

The male:female ratio in high-intellect clubs like Mensa is about 2:1. That's because of IQ differences.

The differences between the sexes are numerous and biological in nature. That's why, if everyone is treated equally, you'll get unequal outcomes.

 

[lunarworks]

More men are interested because since the 1970s women have not received the same exposure in early childhood to computers as men, and have been discouraged from considering careers in technology. Prior to that most programmers were women.

The problem to be solved is simply to provide exposure to the girls and show them that it’s a legitimate option, then if they are still not interested nobody is forcing them to become coders.

What happened in the 1970s? Computer programming gained prestige and good pay, and men wanted those positions. The dirty secret that's regularly hidden is that prior to that programming was considered a menial job for women, like data entry.

By the way, here's the woman who helped man get to the moon:

 

[LizKat]

Men are more interested in programming and technology, just look at the percent of men on this site. Women are more instetested in other things. What is the problem that is trying to be solved?

Uhh... confirmation bias, for one thing.

 

[cmaier]

Your observation is hardly surprising. There are no/very few women in the upper echelons of chess or science.


(http://iqcomparisonsite.com/SexDifferences.aspx)

(Jensen, A. R., & Reynolds, C. R.; 1983)

(Lynn, R., & Irwing, P.; 2004)

The male:female ratio in high-intellect clubs like Mensa is about 2:1. That's because of IQ differences.

The differences between the sexes are numerous and biological in nature. That's why, if everyone is treated equally, you'll get unequal outcomes.

Right now there is a political agenda to abuse the power of the government to enforce equal outcomes. The only way to do this is to negatively discriminate against successful and intelligent people. And many of those happen to be white/asian men.

Now the US is not isolated from the rest of the planet and competing with communist China.
The Chinese regime does not care about enforcing equal outcome.
And that's why we will eventually be taken over by China.

Nonsense. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.ps...-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight?amp

 

[KGBguy]

So, when will they be celebrating a dude's day, or a dude's month?

So far a white male is the most discriminated person today.

 

[carpeicthis]

And that is a problem why?
[doublepost=1551376022][/doublepost]

So you really think parents teach their girls to like pink and play with dolls? Or could it be these differences in gender are part of human nature?

Man, if associating pink with girls is part of human nature then you may want to talk to the vast majority of human history, since that association was popularized in the 1940s. While you're at it, you could chat with my pink loving 6'4" grandfather who was in the front line with the Marines on Iwo Jima.

 

[CarlJ]

Maybe they simply have less interest in such things as coding?

This is precisely what this kind of program is trying to change, though - they're not going to learn enough in a couple hours of class to become software developers, they're simply going to get exposed to the fun/excitement of programming. It will spark that interest of which you speak. And that will cause some of them to think, "hey, this is really cool, and I have some aptitude for it", and they may go on to pursue a career in software development.

It's not that all little girls are born naturally wanting to play house, and all little boys are born naturally wanting to blow up stuff - they gravitate towards those things because that's what society throws at them, those are the messages we constantly give them, "this is your expected/intended role" (mostly - I have a niece who likes unicorns and mermaids, but also very seriously wants to be an astronaut when she grows up, and she could very well do that). This kind of program is simply showing girls, "hey, coding is fun, and you can do it, and it's okay for you to do this".

If all messages (about what you can do, what you're expected to do, how you should fit into society) were presented to both boys and girls equally, then we'd likely see more female software developers. But we have a long history of not doing that, of slanting the message in obvious - and not so obvious - ways, giving boys and girls very different messages. This program is a small step towards leveling that playing field.

 

[definitive]

Less interest doesn't mean no interest.

Also, the most notorious hacker in my high school was a girl. This was back in the days of Novell NetWare.

Was her name Zoe Quinn?

 

[lunarworks]

Was her name Zoe Quinn?

Wow, you just named the only woman on the planet who can hack.

I've got a lot of respect for Zoe and the crap she still has to go through to this day.

 

[Apple2GS]

Uhh... confirmation bias, for one thing.

Nice reply: “Uhh dot dot dot. Not answering the question. Emoji “.

 

[augustrushrox]

Or is it because they are taught from very early age "what is or girls" and "what is not for girls"?


Do you have any idea how powerful childhood programming is?

 

[Marekul]

Man, if associating pink with girls is part of human nature then you may want to talk to the vast majority of human history, since that association was popularized in the 1940s. While you're at it, you could chat with my pink loving 6'4" grandfather who was in the front line with the Marines on Iwo Jima.

And girls playing with dolls, did that also start in the 1940s? Girls being different from boys, having different interrests and priorities, physiological difference in genders? When did all that start?

Also your grandfather is not representative of general male population. I am sure there also exist boys who like to play with dolls.

 

[tkermit]

Missing out on male talent? Seriously?

When I went to engineering school there was 1 woman for every 8 men. In grad school it was worse. When i got my Phd there was only one woman who got hers the same day. And it wasn’t because women were less capable or less interested.

How did you come to the conclusion that women were just as interested as men?

 

[barbu]

Just gonna jump in here. Just because you were a child at one point in time and know of females doesn't automatically make someone's argument invalid. The two are not correlated at all. I, too, was a child once. Also I know many females (as you might imagine by my stunning and captivating smile), but that doesn't automatically invalidate any arguments!

They are called women. Unless you’re a Ferengi.

 

[LizKat]

Right now there is a political agenda to abuse the power of the government to enforce equal outcomes. The only way to do this is to negatively discriminate against successful and intelligent people. And many of those happen to be white/asian men.

When I was in high school in the late 50s, there was clearly no agenda to enforce "equal outcomes". Equal opportunity laws and such were about half a decade away. So... there was an agenda to enforce the status ****ing quo.

Spoiler: And it worked, didn't it

I was tenth in my class of 300 with straight As in math and science, wanted to go to U Mich for pre medical and then medical school, and was counseled to become a nurse instead (not a nurse with a bachelor of science degree, "just" a nurse).

Why?

Because becoming a doctor was "a long road to hoe for a woman."

Because I was "destined" to marry and have kids, and nursing was "handy to get a job with" after my kids would be in high school if I "became bored" in not having to look after those children so much any more.

Because it "wouldn't be fair to take up a space a man needed" in order to be able to get a good job and support his family.
​

You like that last one? Said to me with a straight face in the late 1950s. It was a time when women were still practically chattel when married off to a man, whether or not he was going to have a good job and support a family. To that counselor, higher education of a woman held all the merits of educating a kitchen drawer full of pot stirring implements. What's the point of a smart kitchen drawer, everything you need is in there somewhere, probably. Just rummage around and take what you need.

Welcome to enforcement of outcomes sans even the equal opportunity.

Fortunately I had a grandmother who said the polite equivalent of **** That and encouraged to me to go to college and major in whatever the hell I found interesting.

As it turned out, even though I doubled back and did two years' worth of pre-med courses after college while working in tech fields in support of investment banking and contract law, etc., I ended up rejected from med schools as a 31-year old applicant, female, with all manner of deficiencies I'd not imagined I had... Duke's medical school even stipulated that they felt they "owed it to the community to provide doctors with the longest possible period of productivity." Yale put me on the waiting list and encouraged me to reapply the next year. I thought about that for a minute and realized in a year I was going to be a year closer to a perhaps more subtle version of the letter I had already got from Duke.

See Duke University (and all med schools) ware operating at that point after a lot of civil rights laws had kicked in, so they couldn't just come out and repeat the old saws offered me by my highschool counselor back in what I figured were the dark ages. But seriously, imagine my surprise at some old white guy still trying to ring up a reprise of the dark ages way out into the 1970s.

Sure, I got over some pretty poor guidance, but not over the realization that for some, "equal opportunity" is such a fearsome thing that to them it does mean "outcome".

For the rest of us, "equal opportunity" merely means a chance to try to compete. I found a way to climb the tech ladders that an economics degree from a liberal arts school had provided... but much of the time I was trading on sheer wit to get a foothold in an entry level job --anything: administrative assistant, financial analysis clerk-- and settle for mediocre payscales while taking any opportunity to demo that I had the smarts to merit further technical training and advancement.

I found on balance that my liberal arts education did open doors back then to women trying to get into scientific or mathematically oriented fields, including computer programming and related tech, but only because back then those fields were very new and the demand far far outstripped the supply.

In both computing-related tech now and in more traditional STEM occupations, there's still a sort of confirmation bias, where the gender of the preponderance of employees still tends to define the sort of employees they are looking to get more of. But that's all it is really: confirmation bias.

 

[Retsiem]

Nonsense. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/beautiful-minds/201207/men-women-and-iq-setting-the-record-straight?amp

The study you quoted uses a sample group of adolescence:

Flynn looked at IQ scores from ages 14-18 and found 5 modern states where he could get standardization samples with at least 500 people of each gender.

Girls enter puberty about two years earlier than boys. (http://www.pamf.org/parenting-teens/health/growth-development/pre-growth.html)

As explained in my earlier post, IQ differences do not manifest until after puberty is completed.

 

[LizKat]

Nice reply: “Uhh dot dot dot. Not answering the question. Emoji “.

My tacked on phrase "among other things" -- and the emoji -- cover a lot of turf if one has even the slightest sense of humor. I realize not being able to endure a light moment in online debate now and then can be problematic for some people.

I didn't intend snarkiness there, just a little comic relief after the onslaught of such earnest efforts to prove women haven't the innate ability to learn how to add 2 and 2 and get 5 the same as men can.

Confirmation bias is the source of some systemic inequalities of opportunity. Not perceiving this possibility should be a clue to its very existence, especially when deciding that "equal opportunity" is anything more than that, such as a mandate from on high to assure "equal outcomes".

Of course one may unconsciously resist efforts to level the playing field if one fears outcomes might change and not favor the status quo, aka "how we are and how we like it". That's a big part of confirmation bias.

If I work in a place full of gay black women running a dress and tailoring shop, and the shop's name is not something obviously oriented to either its staffing or its clientele, like maybe its name is "Google",,,, then I might not think to offer a job to some straight white guy wandered in on a lunch hour just because I had a help wanted sign in the shop's window. Get it?

 

[cmaier]

How did you come to the conclusion that women were just as interested as men?

By talking to women who were steered out of tech careers by teachers, parents and peers.

 

[barbu]

You can’t reason someone out of a position they didn’t reason themselves into. Manbabies fear a level playing field because they are, on average, average. If they don’t bully half the population out of their precious tech sector, how will they be able to compete? Much easier to ignore the fact that women and minorities are consciously and unconsciously excluded from certain fields and soothe their fragile egos with their perceived superiority and “facts” (their word for their implicit bias, of which they are, and will remain, ignorant)

 

[iGobbleoff]

LOL, damned if you do, damned if you don't.

"We want equality, we want to be recognised"

"We want our own day, our own gyms, our own safe places, no men!"