Apple's diversity report [1] states their tech employees are composed of 79% male, 22% female.
Facebook's diversity report [2] shows 85% males in tech vs 15% female.
Google's is pretty much the same, and you can compare them all with interactive graphs [3].
Note the dominance of white and male in the graphs.
The programs you mention for women are great, I agree. These are the steps we need to take if we want women who are interested in technology to come forward join our field. But women are not more easily hired. If that were the case then it would be reflected in, you know, reality.
[1] http://www.apple.com/diversity/
[2] http://techcrunch.com/2014/06/25/facebook-diversity/
[3] http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/20/9179853/tech-diversity-sco...
"We are not trying to ensure there is an "arbitrary number" of certain types of people working in our field."
You are a walking Poster Child for hypocrisy.
I am pointing at data showing a large disparity in tech employment relative to the population. Women are equally as capable as men when it comes to tech, so we should expect equal representation. We don't get equal representation because of existing cultural biases against women in this field.
It's the same reason we don't get equal representation of men in many "women's" fields where men are clearly as capable as women.
Are you really that ignorant?
> Women are equally as capable as men when it comes to tech, so we should expect equal representation.
And why are there not more women collecting trash or sweeping our streets (90% male)?
And why are there not more men teaching our children in K-12 (80% female)? Obviously men are just as capable and just as smart.
This is conjecture.
> We don't get equal representation because of existing cultural biases against women in this field.
As is this.
You are pointing to data and making your own conclusions that the data simply isn't complete enough to show.
They can make the entry level for women lower and get those numbers simply due to the lack of women applying in the first place. That would mean it would be easier for a qualified women in the industry to get a job than a man of equal qualification. Which is ManlyBread was saying.
Reality tends to change when you, you know, actually understand logic and statistics.
Not if you actually look at the graphs. Just taking the Apple data at random, the US numbers are
54% white, 18% asian, 11% hispanic, 8% black, etc.
The 2010 US census numbers are:
64% white, 5% asian, 16% hispanic, 12% black.
So whites are actually underrepresented, while there are 3.6x as many asians.
It directly contradicts your claim about the data.
Yes, the above is partly tongue-in-cheek (I realize that not all employees are programmers). I am just trying to make a point that companies hire from a pool of qualified candidates (with college degree usually being the "qualified" selector). So if the pool consists of 18% women, companies will likely not have more than 18% women as programmers.
As to why 18% of computer science graduates are women is a completely separate discussion from the topic at hand.
[1] http://fortune.com/2015/04/20/the-pervasive-bias-against-fem...
Women here get hired easier (because US companies have the same policy for quotas, Intel is notorious for this), I know women who got an internship purely because they were women, there are free bootcamps and classes targeting women... not to mention all these special programs EU has for women who want to start their own company (and yes, these programs are for women exclusively). I have yet to see a program or class targeted specifically for men.
So exactly what disadvantages are you talking about?