Hacker News Reader

Comment by corpMaverick | Hacker News Reader

> I don't think CS is a high social status field at all.

I totally agree with you. I believe this is one of the factors why women hesitate to enter the field. They are more socially aware than we are.

Also, even in IT areas, technical capable people are relegated. We get good salaries but we don't get fancy titles. We are the only profession that allows to be managed by outsiders. Financial firms(and finance departments) are always headed by a experts in the field, same with lawyers, architects and finance. But we are managed by people that are not experts.

View on HN

> I believe this is one of the factors why women hesitate to enter the field. They are more socially aware than we are.

Totally agree. I remember talking to a girl in math class, who, while she liked the idea of using Python to solve problems, when I tried to extoll the virtues of CS to her so that maybe she'd take more courses, she regaled to me how her dad is a programmer and how miserable his job appeared to her.

>we don't get fancy titles

Some people get titles like "code ninja", although I suppose "fancy" isn't really the right word for that.

Yes we make ourselves look like clowns rather than professionals. It's terrible I don't know why we're doing this to ourselves.

Immature is the word that comes to my mind. And yes, that generally doesn't produce much respect (or attraction from other sex), does it

Right, a lot of FAANG companies' offices look like kindergartens. I get that all of the perks are "cool" to someone, but to me it's just embarrassing.

It also doesn't help that the perceived uniform of the programmer is a hoodie or an ironic t-shirt and chinos style of pants or similar regalia.

Like, that just doesn't look cool. I've been saying this for years. It's no wonder it doesn't look sexy nor command much respect. Especially not compared to a guy wearing a well tailored suit.

Sure, it feels good, but that's the same rationale for wearing crocs. You feel great until you look down and realize you're wearing crocs.

"Especially not compared to a guy wearing a well tailored suit."

I think you got it wrong. That suit guy has to wear it, because his trade demands it, most likely for that image which has to be conveyed. That programmer can afford to wear that hoodie and still to demand his salary, yet nothing limits him to the hoodie outfit, you see?

Fair enough, but the topic at hand are the potential reasons why programming, as a whole, not only doesn't command must prestige/ respect, but in some sense kinda seems like a joke to outsiders.

And my contention was that programmers choosing to dress in hoodies and casual pants doesn't seem to help, whether they have a choice to wear it or not nor whether it has any bearing on their salary.

To put it in other words, person might see a programmer guy in a hoodie on his way to the office, and that guy might very well command a six figure salary, but that's not the observer's perception or first thought.

I'm not arguing about which is right or just, I'm just arguing about the reasons of why things are the way they are.

And maybe, you might think: who cares? Let them think that. Which, again, fair enough. But in the overall grand picture, if a lot of people have similar perceptions, it might not bode well for our profession overall. I mean, it's not just about attracting the opposite sex, it's also, as some already stated, inspiring more people to do take up computer science.

I get the digs at the other clothes, but what exactly is wrong with khaki pants? Which is what I assume you mean by "chinos."

They're trying to attract young kids who haven't made the connection that forgoing ping pong table real estate and "cool" office perks would mean larger compensation packages for themselves.

Oh yeah. Even when I was in my mid twenties, when I visited a Google office during some software event, I felt that the decoration was too childish and frankly ugly.

The testing or whatever tips on the toilets also felt a little invasive.

Titles like that are hardly common though. I never encountered anyone who called themselves a "code ninja" at the FAANG I worked at. That term seems to be a kind of recruiter stereotype/cliche rather than one professionals actually use.

My job title, as it was printed on my employment offer and paycheck, at a start up that was located a few blocks away from the Google HQ in Mountain View in 2014 and staffed by plenty of xooglers, was "Front End Hacker". Six figure job.

Not that it disproves your statement that the titles are uncommon, but hey, I just want to stand up and say "Hey, us professional hackers and ninjas and cowboys are REAL!"

The same people that don't consider the tech industry professional are the same people that wouldn't hire Tavis Ormandy because he has a tattoo on his lower arm or doesn't wanna wear a suit every day. Yea so I'd rather wait out the boomers and be comfortable.

Because there is no 'we' doing it to 'ourselves' :)

If you want there to be a 'we', that would be called a workers' union.

'Professional' is when you have a strong union that forces companies to treat you as a human being, something they'd much rather not bother with.

It seems deeply embedded historically. The "Traitorous Eight" split off over petty discontent like starting hours and suit requirements as opposed to a desire for more money or something higher minded like their projects with potential being ignored.

The entrepreneurial disruption mentality historically has been a "we are sick of your bullcrap and trappings, you idiots haven't been listening so we'll start our own".

That it has worked repeatedly and utterly devestated many titans corporations run by "professional" men in suits effectively validated their iconoclasm and rejection of the standards of old. It may be arrogance but there were enough validating moments to understand why.

Suits have taken on a negative connotation. It is implicitly seen as hidebound dinosaurdom and an admission of form over function. Sort of an assumption that if they are wearing a fancy suit then they are an empty suit.

True, though I'd say the main reason there are practically no women in CS is because women tend to be more social, and software engineering is one of the least social professions in existence. I would never recommend this profession to anyone who doesn't have the personality to be in front of a computer alone all day working on tedious puzzles.

Manufacturing firms (e.g. auto manufacturers) are very often managed by outsiders.

Please don't assume everyone on HN is male.

I don't think anyone are assuming everyone is, but assuming a specific reader is male is gonna be correct more often than not

> They are more socially aware than we are

Sorry for the confusion. We as in "We men" not as in "We HN readers". I was just speaking as a man.

Yawn

Making baseless complaints like this doesn't help your crusade.

>They are more socially aware than we are.

Is there any evidence that women are more likely to choose careers with high social prestige?

I find this doubtful, since in North America at least the traditionally female-dominated job sectors seem to be the ones with lower social prestige. Compare the prestige of a nurse with a cardiac surgeon: which is more stereotypically male?

This also isn't true in places other than North America. In countries like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, there is way more gender parity in IT than in the USA.

In poorer countries like the ones you listed, the benefits of a higher paying job are more likely to outweigh the social costs than they would be in a more wealthy country. So the social aspect becomes less important.

Are we really sure? China was said to be different, and yet when I worked there, we were called out for having worse gender diversity than our stateside counterparts. It turned out that while China produced many more female CS graduates, they didn’t stay in technical positions long enough to solve gender diversity problems after graduation.

India also has problems it seems, eg http://bwsmartcities.businessworld.in/article/Is-India-Inc-C.... I wouldn’t say any country has really solved this problem.

In India its not, lot more males compared to females.

You are saying nurses, teachers and social workers have “low social prestige”? People worship the ground these folks walk on for their “selfless sacrifice” and what-not.

>People worship the ground these folks walk on for their “selfless sacrifice” and what-not.

People in Canada at least don't do more than pay lip service to those professions. They're remunerated poorly and yes, they have low social prestige.

If you wanna pick up a girl at a bar, do you lie and tell her you're a nurse? No, you tell her you're a cardiologist.

Nobody really respects nurses and teachers. Not saying I like it, but that's how it is.

> I believe this is one of the factors why women hesitate to enter the field.

That's assuming women are after social status, which is a strong claim.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com