How does biology explain the low numbers of women in computer science?

slideshare.net

9 points·araneae··4 comments

The presentation doesn't really offer any evidence to disprove the explanatory value of biology in addressing the empirical fact that there are low numbers of women in computer science. It just says that assumptions predicated on biological differences are false, without elaboration.

I'm confused. Was there supposed to be a thesis to this? I mean that sincerely; no disrespect to the author. Personally, I didn't need any convincing that the factors which lead to the gender asymmetry in this field are not reducible to biological distinctions per se to begin with. Still, I'm not sure what the point of the procession of slides is; perhaps it was explained in the verbal narrative to which the slides were an accompaniment at a conference, presentation or other event?

Fun little slideshow but it kinda begs the question: If it's not biology, what is it?

This is a question I've often posed to friends of mine, and the responses I've gotten seem to point to societal pressure.

Most women whom I've asked have said that they were told at some point in their careers that they couldn't or shouldn't work in math, science or computers, because they were female. Some of them where good at it in school, but just didn't feel a calling for it, but who I most feel for are some of the women who actually enjoyed it in school, but felt deterred.

I hope that, in general, we stop assuming people do things for biological reasons, unless there is strong evidence otherwise, and even then we shouldn't live by stereotypes.

Of the things it could be, why does it have to be biology?

Pop-evolutionary psychology doesn't rise to the level of a real biological explanation.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com