Exactly... We can draw exactly zero conclusions regarding gender inequality in the tech industry without a control sample...

Sure we can - let's say we look at the fashion industry and see it's just as bad there - or even worse. So what?

That doesn't mean that as an industry we should put up with gender inequality. Gender inequality is an incredibly irrational historical artifact and in times where it's so hard to hire excellent employees - creating a gender equal workplace gives employers an edge.

This sort of data can give employers the confidence that investing in fixing the problem would indeed help giving them an edge over other workplaces since the problem is so widespread.

I agree with most of your points. Gender equality is an important issue in society at large. But the makers of this site are drawing a tech-industry-specific conclusion, so they should at least attempt to present unbiased data.

Is that serious?

We can draw the conclusion that MOST women in tech are sexually harassed! What comparison is required? Why does it need to be worse than other industries to require examination and action?

It's like saying, "Well, we know 500 people were killed in Chicago last year, but that doesn't tell us anything until we find out how many people were killed in London, Beijing, and Tegucigalpa."

Well if your conclusion is that Chicago is a significantly less safe place to live than other densely populated cities, then yes, you'd need that data.

The conclusion is just that SV has a problem. That's why it's called "Elephant in the Valley". It isn't called, "Elephant in the Valley that doesn't exist in other places".

My wife for example received 100% of sexual advances on the way to and from workplace and none at workplace (yet). The percent of women who received unwanted sexual advances outside industry is definitely much higher than 60% so I think they are quite protected in the industry. That's why I encourage more women to get into tech and also to work more overtime hours; it statistically minimizes the chances of receiving unwanted sexual advances.

Why is this relevant? Why not solve the problem in our industry, instead of pointing fingers?

It is very relevant. I want more women in tech. (I think the problem is they don't want to do the job, but let's put that aside.) Studies like this only reinforce the already existing negative stereotypes about "nerds in tech", in both sexes.

You claim this is a problem. Here's a simple solution: Make tech companies segregated by gender. What about that? The thing is, I presume, people who did the study don't want to solve a problem of "unwanted sex advances" in the workplace. They want to solve a problem of not enough women in tech. And this is not the way to go about it.

It is also an interesting question, and I am genuinely curious. I also doubt women actually choose the career based on amount of unwanted sexual advances, and having the numbers could finally put that stupid theory to rest (if it's false, of course, maybe it's not, I dunno; but based on the above provided link, it probably is false).

I think they want to solve the problem of harassment in tech. "Not enough women in tech" is a trailing indicator for a number of factors, that being one of them.

Yes, "How are other fields doing" is a question that can be asked - but it is one of the least interesting ones. Suppose that every other industry is at 40%. Or suppose they are all at 60%. It doesn't change the fact that ours needs to seriously deal with it. (And as seen by ~1/3rd of the comments in this thread, is more interested in splitting hairs.)

> I think they want to solve the problem of harassment in tech

Fine, why choose tech then? Are they biased? It simply doesn't make sense.

If they want to help women, they could perhaps start in an industry where it's most likely to be a problem (and I'd bet it's somewhere where women are doing low paid job). Here's why - we probably already know at least a partial solution, just look at what are the other industries doing. You don't get either information without a survey.

Because, the authors...

Work in tech.

So yeah, they are biased in wanting to get their industry in order. There is no ulterior motive, here, and no reason to get so defensive.

I don't think they have ulterior motive, I just think they go about it (whatever is it they are actually doing) in a completely wrong way.

I think that these "unwanted sexual advances" may come from the fact there is power differential, i.e. hierarchy and bosses. Maybe we could try to eradicate that first, that is, have more cooperatives (democratically owned and run companies)? In tech, these would be pretty easy to set up due to low investment requirements..

Fallacy of relative privation

http://www.logicallyfallacious.com/index.php/logical-fallaci...

I think you might have a fallacy of missing conclusion here.. i.e. I didn't make any. I just asked a (actually genuine) question.

Quick Google, but see [0]. Moreover, there's no doubt that 60% is a clear majority, which is striking, to be honest.

EDIT: And I forgot the link :)

[0] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/19/1-in-3-women-sexual...

Your link says 31% of women in STEM were harassed. 60% is some distance from that, don't you think?

Good point, there are two possibilities here:

1) There is a bias in the cited sample (not the huffpo's, the op's).

2) Silicon Valley is one sleazy place.

I want to be open minded because I as a man am someone oblivious to a lot of these issues, but it might be called for if we had some details on the OP's study.

Agreed. I don't necessarily outright disagree with the OP, I just get the impression that we're missing some of the facts. And not getting a complete picture can do just as much damage as entirely ignoring it.

What are you trying to accomplish by asking that (seemingly rhetorical) question?

Are you implying that 60% is an acceptable number because it may hold in other industries? Are you implying we should only focus on the industry with the highest rate of sexual harassment? Or are you implying that it's unfair to examine tech as a separate industry?

The fact is that tech is a particularly female-unfriendly industry, and it merits examination in isolation. Yes, we should examine all industries, but there's nothing wrong with a subset of people focusing on a subset of different industries.

I think there should be a state agency (employing women only) doing the examination the same way there is IRS for taxes but it should be funded by a tax applied to each woman's salary. They could be called FBI (Feminist Bureau of Investigation) and have their own SWAT (special women attack team) like IRS.