i am still struggling to understand how this is important, and why we should care. men have struggles just the same, this is like reverse sexism.
> men have struggles just the same
Yes, men and women both have struggles. But many believe (including myself) that women face many more challenges by virtue of being women, than men do by virtue of being men. Women are more likely to be sexualized in work (and any other) environments, their reactions to events are more likely to be described as "emotional" or "irrational," they are widely considered (without evidence) to be inferior to men in fields like math and science, etc.
Don't forget: until relatively recently, women were widely regarded (in both law and society) as the property or either their father or, once married, husband. This is still the prevailing view in much of the world. And debates like this still go on: http://www.debate.org/opinions/are-women-the-property-of-the...
Under these conditions, it seems natural to expect that women face a lot of unique challenges, to put it mildly--and that expectation is indeed born out by the actual experiences of many women.
Discussing these issues is important because it is a crucial part of our shared efforts to eliminate these phenomenon.
That's absolutely a position you can only take because of your own privilege. Lower income men face arguably the worst discrimination available in the US since they are way over represented in our prisons.
I don't think trying to determine which of the sexes has it "worse" is in anyway a winning proposition or something anyone should be doing.
My only claim is that being a woman tends to be a disadvantage in the same way that being poor or being black tends to be a disadvantage. It obviously is the case that the advantage/disadvantage conferred by one trait (here, gender) is conditioned by other factors. So, it might be that upper-income white women are more disadvantaged relative to upper-income white men, compared to the relative disadvantage of lower-income white women with respect to lower income white men. This certainly seems like a real possibility given, as you say, the unreasonably high incarceration rate of lower-income men. (Though I'm not sure I'm ready to commit one way or the other on who has it worse. I just don't know enough about the lives of lower-income women, frankly.)
Given that we were talking about the software industry, though, it seemed reasonable to relativize the conversation to, broadly speaking, middle/upper income people.
> men have struggles just the same
Was wildly incorrect. It is not.
men and women were both given the same choice of universities and classes in high school. the tech sector did not turn its back on women or minorities, they turned their back on it. now that its profitable they want a piece of that pie.
If the child care industry were representative of men's exclusion from most high paying, socially powerful fields, then I would expect the 'bitching' to begin. But, as it is, the child-care field is not a field that a lot of men would like to get into, it pays fairly poorly, (unfortunately) confers little power or respect, and is largely an anomaly in an economy where most jobs, especially powerful ones are dominated by men.
The "confers little power and respect" bit, by the way, seems to be true of most woman-dominated fields (child care, teaching, nursing...). Do you suppose this is a coincidence?
Its actually not really an anomaly for jobs that pay fairly poorly and confer little power or respect to be dominated by women and/or persistently disadvantaged minorities. (It's really part of the same effect as jobs that pay well and confer power and respect being dominated by white men.)
none of which get neither money nor respect.
But this is hacker news. A site for people in the tech industry, not the childcare industry. We can and should care about representation and participation and opportunity in our industry. We can do something about it here.
Why do you think women feel the need to create websites like this (https://mixpanel.com/i-am-tech/) in the first place if the idea of being a woman in tech is only "historically" eyebrow-raising?
The assumption that sexism is, like racism, one of those things that people used to do in the 1950s, is really not helpful.
Look at the graduation rates for women and minorities from CS programs; then look at the industry participation rates, particularly over time and particularly with reference to seniority. They're not turning their back on tech, they're being driven out.
Don't lie. A simple websearch returns very many hits for people talking about the shortage of men in pre-school and primary school education.
I then scan my recollection for serious papers written about the subject, with results that have been reproduced and represent the consensus view of scientists working in the field. None again.
Therefore, I conclude that my debating whether men's brains are different than women's brains would be an exercise in ignorance, much like those politicians who "proved" there is no global warming by brandishing a snowball.