Google's Marissa Mayer: Girls Can Be Geeks, Too
newsweek.com
newsweek.com
Yes, they can do it, they've always been able to do it. Stop pretending it's surprising or 'news,' and you'll have fewer people incorrectly feel women are out of place in technology.
CS was a relatively young discipline in the early '80s, so its share of total graduates has probably grown significantly since then. I'd be willing to bet that growth is due to both more men and more women entering the field, but disproportionately men. CS graduates back then were, in a sense, all "early adopters," so both the men and the women in the field were outside of the mainstream. It could be that men now consider CS to be mainstream, but women don't: among men, the discipline has grown as one would expect, but among women the discipline is stuck at an earlier stage. Of course, this just leads to further questions about why this disparity in adoption exists.
Isn't that called propaganda, and is the job of the government and ad agencies? (And they've both certainly done it successfully for plenty of causes they've decided were important.)
Journalistic integrity is important - even if it goes against your social cause.
This is a very common complaint about journalists, that by reporting on it, they are causing it. It might be a valid complaint, but any attempt to fix it makes it worse.
The whole question of media bias really comes down to the bottom line. If a format of words plus carefully chosen images favored traditionally conservative causes (which for the most part they don't) there would be widespread complaints about right wing media bias. AS it is, I think there is very little remanent of journalistic ethics in mass media.
> Larry [Page] and Sergey [Brin] said, “You know, we have seven engineers, and they’re all guys. But we’ve thought a lot about how we want to start our company, and we’ve read a lot of books, and we know that organizations work better when there is gender balance. So it’s important to us that we have a strong group of women, especially technical women, in the company.”
"Geek" doesn't mean the same thing it used to, or even close to it. Teenage girls running around calling themselves geeks because they spend a lot of time playing angry birds on their phone is a far cry from the MIT Media Lab.
The same goes for latte-sipping hipsters who can use Garage Band on their MBP, or any other person who uses consumer technology as an end-user, then proceeds to proclaim themselves a geek, or FSM forbid, a hacker.
And for the record, many of them consider themselves geeks for legitimately geeky things, not 'playing angry birds on their phone' as you so derisively mention.
I think you'd have a hard time putting together a collection of "Girls can do it, too!" articles that outweigh all the regular coverage of Mayer and her work at Google
Also, why have her wear that photomodel outfit? This is like asking Larry or Sergei wear a suit for photo shoot. I've seen her in many videos from her talks and she tends to wear normal stuff.
Edit: Here's an extensive look at Meyer's outfits: http://gawker.com/5174126/lesley-stahl-investigates-marissa-...
Have you ever seen the show SciGirls on PBS? In the episode "Robots to the Rescue" http://pbskids.org/scigirls/video2?asset=show110 , some high-school girls "team up with" actual roboticists to help develop a rescue robot. I put "team up with" in quotes because the girls totally outclass the roboticists. Sure, the girls are interested in "science" but they are totally not nerds. And they are planning MIT- or CMU-level behavior into these bots, and I don't mean wishful thinking but carefully planned and organized ideas, to the level that I think with more time they would have written the code themselves. (Spoiler: the hardware can't keep up, and the bots do almost nothing useful.) They collect useful data from the experiment and actually advance the project in the time they are there. Really impressive.
Also, my wife is better at math and understanding mathematical concepts than me, so I find myself asking her to help me wrap my head around programming problems, even though she's not a programmer and doesn't know how to code.
“You know, we have seven engineers, and they’re all guys. But we’ve thought a lot about how we want to start our company, and we’ve read a lot of books, and we know that organizations work better when there is gender balance. So it’s important to us that we have a strong group of women, especially technical women, in the company.”
http://www.positude.com/Images/A_Business_Case_for_Women.pdf
You see a lot of diversity at some of these blue chip companies (Coca-Cola, Pepsi, JNJ, AmEx) but maybe that is because they are so large and well known that they have an imperative to be diverse.
Conversely you might have some unknown/private company that isn't really in the public eye and as a result does not have a mandate to have a ton of female senior executives (maybe Aramco?).
eg. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/04/business/04lawsuit.html?_r...
A startup is working hard just to survive. This is a survivorship bias often ignored by media and report likely because its not politically correct.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Womens_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia
Case in point: I read an article in the Financial Times several years back about how Norwegian companies adapted to the quota law requiring 40% of board members to be female. Norwegian companies were kind of at a loss because they normally recruited directors out of a pool of candidates known to their current directors and executives. They knew those traditional candidates very well, often personally, and knew their skills, qualifications, and trustworthiness. Unfortunately, that pool didn't include very many women.
The companies were leery of hiring complete strangers into their boardrooms. Still, they were stuck with it, so they did their best. They identified skills and knowledge that would complement their existing boards and launched international searches for qualified candidates. Just by taking those steps, which most of companies had never bothered with before, they discovered a huge number of stellar candidates with skills that were completely lacking in Norwegian boardrooms. The candidates they found were significantly younger, more accomplished, and more internationally savvy than the usual old boys' club candidates. Result: big win for Norwegian corporations. Instead of looking at a few dozen old Scandinavian men, they started recruiting out of a huge pool of international talent. Being limited to female candidates was a minor factor at that point. At least, that's how the FT presented it.
"oh you're a woman engineer, oh how wonderful!"
How creepy. How about we just call them engineers and call it a day?
What a waste, that company really looked like it might be profitable one day.
* http://webchick.net/files/women-in-floss.pdf
* http://infotrope.net/blog/2009/07/25/standing-out-in-the-cro...
A honest question; as I don't know the reasons and reasoning behind all that.
Really? Does anyone else have a problem with this?