I'm a guy, and I place higher importance in the latter (with women) more than the former.

There's a few technologies I actively try to avoid (.NET, etc.) but otherwise I'm open minded.

But I am much more peculiar on what kind of company environment and culture I want to work for. Call me trivial, but I really, really, don't want to work for any company that forces me to wear business casual (or worse). It's not just the dress code that irks me, but the wider culture it typically implies.

In fact, the reason I'm adverse to certain tech like .NET is also related to company type/culture that would use such tech, more so than the actual tech itself. I happen to like C#.

> In fact, the reason I'm adverse to certain tech like .NET is also related to company type/culture that would use such tech, more so than the actual tech itself. I happen to like C#.

This is interesting to read - what does a .NET company type look like to you? (And follow-up, does that stereotype assume developing on Windows with .NET Framework; does it hold for .NET Core?)

Every C# project (and programmer) I've ever worked with has been obsessed with "Enterprise" code laden with boilerplate, excessive use of design patterns, and hundreds of tiny 3 line classes that force you to jump around in the editor.

Generally these projects are not fun to work on and having colleagues that spend significant chunks of time "refactoring" or talking about refactoring is not fun.

Even saying this is going to open a bunch of sealioning from these types ( https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/873260-sea-lioning) but that's just my experience.

C# has pretty good support for lambdas and implicitly typed variables these days, so a lot of the enterprise stuff is overkill. Implementations in C# could look more like Python while being more type safe but they tend not to.

I'm a long time .NET developer and I love the framework, language (C#) and developer tools (I use Jetbrains Rider). However, if there is one thing I have to find that I do not like it is this. It is extremely common to find over-engineered .NET codebases, and the developers will just blindly follow some best-practices document from Microsoft without asking themselves whether all of it is necessary.

I once had a developer commenting on one of my blog posts who was very angry that I did not use a proper layered architecture in the blog post :)

One does not simply retrieve a record from the database. One must first declare a type to represent the database's view of the record and copy it into a repository layer. Next a type shall be declared to translate the repository's view of the record to a domain layer. Another type shall translate the domain layer's view of the record to the controller layer's view...and so on.

I've been working at a .Net shop for the past year. There a tendency to see encyclopedic knowledge of OOP design patterns almost as a form of currency.

C# itself is an ok language. It's just the culture around developing web applications with .Net that's painful.

At my workplace, we're currently transitioning from C# to Typescript. As you can imagine, it's not pretty. Key to this is how Microsoft have managed to encode much of the misdirection inherent in .Net webapp development, into the Azure API surface.

I dunno...

Now I sound as dogmatic as the community I'm accusing of dogmatism...

I am curious how that C# -> TypeScript transition is going, and how it is structured.

I was in a project that involved a team of mostly traditional enterprise .NET devs writing a greenfield app in Python (language choice mandated from up top). The result was basically something that was designed like a dogmatic enterprise .NET application, only using Python abused and wrangled to fit that style.

After that project was done, for subsequent work, the team split into two camps - one camp that despised being forced to work with Python and continued to write Python in enterprise .NET style, and one camp that decided to explore more about Python and try working in more "Pythonic" style. Code review sessions were full of emotions and drama.

Pretty much everyone in the first camp eventually left, either for other internal teams that were still working in .NET, or for other companies.

Yes. This sounds a lot like my current experience, except for the language involved (TS in my case) and the team split (I'm the one with less .Net experience). I like to think I'm experienced enough to see it as a valuable opportunity to learn something that's not just about code and product...

Anyway, everything else you mentioned sounds uncannily similar.

Makes you wonder how such a culture develops. The only constant appears to be Microsoft development tools, curiously.

Mostly of the "software/tech as an unrespected cost center" kind. Ties in with my other bit about "must wear business casual". Now I know not all companies using .NET are like that of course, but a huge majority do seem to be. Disclaimer: I started my career, and spent most of it, as a .NET dev.

Does anyone really use .NET Core in production? Maybe in certain locales and industries only? I've been on the job hunt for a while, talked to and interviewed at numerous companies, and I've yet to encounter a single company advertising that they use .NET Core.

Stack Overflow uses NET Core. I think the reason you don't see it in the wild as much as is because NET Core is pretty new. Stack Overflow migrated in late 2018. That's really about when NET Core became mature enough to use in production for new development, never mind legacy. Most companies feel no pressure to use NET Core - their huge amount of legacy software still works and can be maintained on NET Framework. Not to mention Windows-based tech like WPF and WinForms only just got support with NET Core 3 which was released 7 months ago. Companies with 'unrespected cost centers' as noted are especially conservative.

I've been using .NET Core on prod for like 2 years

Friends from other companies are also using .NET Core whenever they can, so yea.

Eastern Europe here.

Not to diminish your opinion, but you (and I) are each only one data point.

The point of these surveys is to tease out the trends, since data points like us are noisy.

You have to imagine this is largely that women can't take company/workgroup culture for granted like many men can.

What do you mean? Are women more adversely affected by certain types of common work environments?

Speaking from experience: Bro culture. When going to work feels like sitting in the corner of a seedy frat house trying to ignore the stench in the air. Regular beer/bar outings. Outside of bro culture there is the standard issues women deal with in the work place.(Being ignored/hepeating/mansplaining.) So having a higher priority for good office environment and work place culture makes sense.

That usually has more to do with the age of the people you work with than the company culture.

I'd imagine that is correlated to the significantly higher percentage of non-cisgender/non-male people who report harassment and abuse in workplaces.

Another data point against the wage gap being a result of sexism

Women are more likely than men to adjust their work schedules in order to provide childcare[1] because we have entrenched gender expectations about who "should" shoulder what responsibilities in a heterosexual relationship.

[1]https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/10/01/women-more-...

Having a human growing inside you for 9 months creates a pretty special and undeniable bond.

No men have yet given birth (yet?).

And how does growing a human make someone more qualified to shuttle kids back and forth to after school activities?

I know your question is not serious, but there are actually a large number of genetic behavioral differences between men and women that make them more easily accustomed to child care.

It's no surprise that the childcare/teaching industries are almost entirely made up of women.

My question was genuine, if absurd. And I would ask the same of you: Which “genetic behavioral differences,” specifically, make someone more qualified to shuttle kids back and forth to after school activities?

There’s also some research that over-representation of women as K-12 teachers is responsible for the growing education gap where men are falling behind women. It isn’t just women who are held back by gender stereotypes.

I think your questions assume a lot of things:

- Women do most of the shuttling of kids? I've yet to see any evidence of this.

- There are differences between the genders, but 'genetic behavioral differences' is a very broad and deep assumption regarding nature vs nurture and opens a whole other spectrum of basic questions.

- Over representation of a gender in some particular field. Being equal does not mean we all have the same aptitudes and interests.

I wonder why no one addresses the lack of representation of males in some highly female dominated sectors. For example male nurses are a minor fraction of the number of female nurses.

It's interesting to see that women ranked "Family friendliness" lower than men in this year's survey however. 11.7% for men, 10.7% for women.

Perhaps an indication that men are (rightly!) starting to expect paid parental leave? That’s encouraging :)

Except people who have flexible schedules are generally paid more.

Working flexible hours when the company chooses the hours normally pays more but working flexible hours when you choose the hours normally pays less.

No, it means you're a consultant and charge premium.

How do you tie this correlation to the negative of that causation?