News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution by naasking on Monday August 21, 2017 @08:33AM (#15064066)
What other STEM fields are you referring to?

Using CS as a tool to solve other problems is a different proposition than the study of CS itself. I don't see why they'd have to be connected in people's minds in the way you're suggesting.

For instance, undergrad math enrollment is almost at gender parity, but postgraduate math study has similar gender ratios to CS. This is because you need an undergraduate degree for teaching and other careers, and so the interest in pursuing math for maths sake appears to be much lower among women. This could be for a number of reasons, some of which might be fixable to improve ratios, but some may be innate.

http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger...

Re:How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution by tptacek on Monday August 21, 2017 @12:26PM (#15065676)
Wrong on both counts. Mathematics PhDs are issued at a ~70/30 ratio, substantially higher than that of CS PhDs (and way higher than CS undergrad degrees) --- this despite mathematics being among the small number of heavily gender-segregated STEM fields.

Further: almost nobody practicing computer science in the industry has a PhD. There are, believe it or not, places where having a doctorate is frowned on. For the degree that actually matters --- the bachelors --- math has as you say something approaching parity.

Tell me again about the innate limitations women have performing in STEM.

Re:How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution by naasking on Monday August 21, 2017 @03:35PM (#15067137)
> Mathematics PhDs are issued at a ~70/30 ratio, substantially higher than that of CS PhDs

It drops from ~50% to just under 30%, where CS degrees hover between 18-22%. Frankly, that's not "substantially higher than CS".

> Tell me again about the innate limitations women have performing in STEM.

No one is making that claim except people like you who love tearing down absurd straw man arguments. Please read more carefully and stop making assumptions.

Re:How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution by tptacek on Monday August 21, 2017 @03:58PM (#15067344)
You've ignored one argument in favor of hinging your entire argument on a double-digit improvement in women's participation in mathematics not being "significant"?
Re:How Women Got Crowded Out of the Computing Revolution by naasking on Monday August 21, 2017 @04:14PM (#15067473)
What argument have I ignored exactly? Your CS PhD argument has bearing on anything that I've said as far as I can see.

Finally, it's not a double-digit improvement, but of course we can quibble endlessly over how meaningful that exact number is, but it's irrelevant. The number is still piss poor compared to undergrad enrollment, indicating that women don't pursue higher math degrees for various reasons.

The link I initially provided cited evidence that they're interested in undergrad maths because of opportunities it provides outside of pure maths. It's not apparent that similar opportunities exist for CS undergrad degrees, which would be one explanation for the disparity in undergrad math and CS. So I'm still not seeing how anything you've said bears on this at all.

Certainly graduate maths have more women than does CS. So what? What exactly do you think this proves in light of the above?