Yes, but if women want to read about technology they can buy a technology magazine. How much of Men's magazines column inches are given to tech?
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=t3+magazine&tbm=isch
There's a theme there.
"Not fun" (direct quotation).
In majority, women want artistic fun rather then numerical fun.
Again, in majority, women has no interest on benchmark number stuffs, and more interested in which app look more beautiful. Such as "Best sexy looking app top 10" rather than "World fastest super-computer top 10".
In other words, their behavior has not been changed. Only the medium has been changed. It was fashion and beauty stuffs before, and now it just expanded to electronics.
Ie - it could be a case of major conspiracy on the part of publishers (who are all women btw) to keep their readers away from tech. Or they could simply be giving their readers what they want.
They don't. Which is evidence that there is no such unfilled niche.
We're not talking CACM here; we're talking tech magazines that, for the longest time, celebrated conference booth babes.
Reality is that which doesn't go away if you disbelieve or dislike it.
Reality being that which doesn't go away if you dislike it, the reality is that there are no mainstream tech/gear magazines—online or print—that don't use a hypothetical young male as the primary audience for that magazine, doing a disservice to both those young men and the young women who might be interested but aren't interested in the editorial slant involved.
Reality being that which doesn't go away if you dislike it, you're a guy—as am I—and we don't actually get to say that something we like is not sexist in its nature. There are things that I will read that I know are sexist (and not care that they are because I want to read them anyway), but I don't get to pretend that they aren't sexist just because I like them.
Reality, indeed.
If they aren't buying the currently best-fitting magazines (even though they just partially fit the need), then they are showing with their wallets that they don't really want it; and the magazines are completely right to do as they do now instead of throwing resources to serve a nonexistent/tiny market.
If all the women buyers would go to the magazine which currently has the least "male slant", then they'd be 90% of the audience for that magazine, which the publisher would immediately see and they'd get attention.
If noone prints anything even remotely acceptable but the readers would really want it - then they'd get that need filled on online media. Is there a booming audience of women tech bloggers writing for women readers and getting huge audiences + ad income that would justify targeting a magazine directly at that?
There will be articles written by women for women only if they actually put their money where their mouth is - if someone (+ millions like them) are not going to buy the resulting magazine, then saying "there should be a mag like that" is empty talk. Even if it's unfair and sexist, if the buyers aren't there then such magazines don't have a reason to exist - that's reality.
There are just no women reading it. So you might consider the possibility, that maybe - just maybe, women are just not into this stuff. And that women publishers are savvy enough to know what their readers want covered.
Anyway IMO, Alexa stats are not that much trustworthy…
Men's magazines tend to cover far broader interests than women's magazines.
Tech magazines, on the other hand, almost exclusively cater to a young male audience.
As a rule, shit loads.