You ignore underprivileged male hackers because too many other hackers are male? How is that fair?
I'm sorry, but we aren't going to help you. Why? You have the wrong organ between your legs. Next!
Are you sure what you're doing is even legal? What do you do about trans/intersex applicants, or do they not matter to you?
They give large grants to women, not because they are better, but because they are attempting to equalize the gender ratio.
The money is an extra. They won't accept you if you don't think you belong there. You are not entitled to any money. They are a private enterprise who are entitled to attempt to equalize the gender ratio... through whatever means they chose.
But regarding "equalizing the gender ratio", the gender balance for college undergraduates in the USA swung far in favor of women 10 or more years ago. Today, most colleges that want to 'equalize the gender ratio' would have to offer male-only scholarships.
Funding applicants based on sex, race, religion, etc. is very common among private schools of all sorts. Of course this results in sub-optimal funding distribution if your goal is to maximize, let's say, "total cumulative aptitude."
If, on the other hand, your goal is something different, for instance, promoting diversity, such a restriction is perfectly reasonable.
"What do you do about trans/intersex applicants, or do they not matter to you?"
Transsexuals identify with one gender or the other. I want you to guess how many intersex individuals have ever applied that don't also consider themselves either a man or a woman.
ETA: Having read the section on funding I see that the school itself is free, and that Etsy is providing small grants to defray the cost of living in NYC for female hackers. I don't think something like paying room for adults, even if others are neglected, should warrant such vitriol.
Also, should they care if it's legal? How is being unfair in pursuit of a greater good definitely a bad thing? And I presume trans applicants could pitch to be covered as women as they either are or were at one time women, though I expect the most understanding way to treat trans people is as the sex they have changed to and identify with. Same with intersex. So it appears you're using an ugly rhetorical game to cast negative light without saying much at all. It's possible that HS has had no trans or intersex people at their gatherings so it's a moot point anyway.
In short. Fairness need not be ones highest ideal. There are reasons why fairness may need to be traded off for other benefits or fairness over another term. And sorry for my tone. This sort worried impracticality frustrates me. I would have just down-voted and flagged your comment had I been able to log into my own account.
Note that all of this is just curiosity. I'm happy to see such proactive courting of women in CS, but I've never seen anyone else push so hard for it without being explicitly for the advancement of women in CS.
EDIT: reading the site, one segment sticks out at me as seemingly answering my question:
>We're not going to lower the bar for female applicants. It frustrates us a little that we feel the need to say that, and we think it underlines the sexism (intentional and not) that so pervades the programming world.
It's simple statistics that implies this, not sexism. Consider the following assumptions:
A) There are fewer women programmers than male programmers in the world. B) Women programmers and male programmers have an equal skill distribution. C) People apply to the program in ratios reflecting the "real world".
Therefore, the enrollment should also reflect the real world. Clearly, this is false, so one of my assumptions is false - C is the suspect one.
Anyway, I'm extremely happy with what you're doing. Keep up the good work.
There are many hackers from Engineering background and even dropouts or without formal education alltogether.
Assumption C is false: We got more female than male applicants last batch.
Anyway, I'm extremely happy with what you're doing. Keep up the good work.
Thank you!