I think that the answer to this question is very important. If we operate on the presumption that SV is uniquely awful, then we may be looking for solutions to sexism in all the wrong places.
If you read the article there is data too, btw.
There's also evidence (e.g. in the linked article) that women are indeed treated unfairly.
Not on its own, it's not.
The vast majority of healthcare workers are female. 98% of dental hygienists, and 91% of RNs are women.
There are 3.6m programmers in the US (as of 2017) and 3.5m nurses (as of 2011) - programmers and nurses have relatively similar salary ranges.
Is the underrepresentation of men in the nursing profession worth addressing on its own?
How about electricians? 99% of journeyman electricians in the US are male. Is that worth addressing?
Yes, and there are programmes encouraging men to go into nursing.
I don't believe that's true.
The gender gap is particularly significant in careers that pay well and are growing in numbers, such as those in IT. (It's a problem that most flight attendants are female, but IMHO it's less pressing.)
It's the same reason why after every election there are dozens of articles about white progressives being at odds with the black community, as opposed to just having a general article on race relations in America or whatever.
It does not. Another reading would say, "why is it as awful as it is?"
-- from the article (which includes a link)
Question was asked in the article, ("Where are the numbers?"). [0] For all the posturing on how good SV is at data, the question has to be asked, "Why can't tech companies collect and show data on staff?" [1] The only conclusion I can make is SV tech companies do not see this as an ^authentic^ problem.
Reference
[0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13880515
[1] Staff numbers, pay, diversity, disciplinary actions taken, reported, etc.
My point being, SV companies are so diverse across their actual industries it's probably best to compare them as a region against companies in other major regions.
>Do we have any comparative data that suggests that SV is any more sexist than most industries?
You provide no comparative data. Comparison to other industries is necessary to identify the scale and causes of the problem, which are necessary in order to fix the problem.
How bad does tech have to be for you to acknowledge a problem? Isn't "worse the average female participation" bad enough?
0) https://www.dol.gov/wb/stats/Computer_information_technology...
1) http://kff.org/other/state-indicator/physicians-by-gender/?d...
2) https://bol.bna.com/the-legal-professions-gender-imbalance-i...
Who said I didn't acknowledge there was a problem? The descriptor at issue is awful. The usual conditions for use of the word "awful" require more than just there being a problem.
The alternate hypothesis that I mentioned, that sexism in tech comes from the country as a whole, is not a denial of there being a problem. I don't see how that could be inferred.
>tech is generally worse(0) than doctors(1) and lawyers(2)
Lawyers and doctors are generally highly educated, whereas the majority of the technical workforce has a Master's in some kind of engineering or even less. The educational institutions provide a means to change culture which generally means that cultural changes propagate faster here than in most of the country. As such it's a bit of a biased comparison. This is why, as you mention, there have been "huge improvements" in such a short time span as the last decade.
The gender imbalance is particularly acute in silicon valley and I think SV has an obligation to do something about it. It isn't about whose fault it is.
- causation matters
- SV is not a notable causal locus
- Generally SV companies should be expected to comply with federal laws/norms on inclusiveness but "special action" is unnecessary and mostly self-congratulatory (oh wow this tech stuff is so awesome everyone should do it)
- there is a plausible if isolated and somewhat orthogonal correlation between companies which make money by "breaking rules" and companies where people break rules as relates to acceptable social conduct. In the specific case of companies (AirBnB, Uber) who are essentially being paid by venture capitalists to ignore regulations and hide the money trail it makes sense that such norms may enforce loyalty. It's sort of like David Cameron's porcine bride. However only a small (but highly notorious) fraction of SV companies depend on this.
On the third point I want to note that saying "tech jobs are awesome, why aren't more women in them" is a sneaky way of asserting "tech jobs are awesome" i.e. for everyone. In reality they're okay but it's not like people here are actually happier or anything.
This is a big problem even if there isn't active discrimination by Google (or anyone else).
Why so few women study computer science is an important question. Again, I think it's dangerous to presume the answer without sufficient data.
There are definitely problems in how women are treated in tech, just as there are in every other field with similar demographics that comes to mind. Those problems need to be addressed.
The title of this article is "Why is Silicon Valley So Awful to Women?", though. "Awful". Do you really believe that it's "awful", particularly relative to all other professions?