The only downside of last week’s DevDays in Toronto was the more-abysmal-than-usual gender ratio: it was at least 100:1, and may well have been worse. So, if you’re organizing a tech event of any kind, check out geekspeakr.com — it’s a new directory of women in tech who can speak on topics ranging from Android programming to… um… something techy that starts with ‘Z’. (Forgive me, I have a cold…)
Another great post from OkCupid analyzing the effect of race on response rates at their online dating site. The most impressive thing (to me) is that they’re willing to ask and answer the question in public—it takes courage.
I accumulated a few links this summer about gender equity in computing, particularly in open source. The two that bear re-reading are:
Thought-provoking post from Dru Lavigne about the scarcity of women in open source:
To me, equating “code” with “open source” is so early 90s. The closest analogy I can think of is equating “doctors” with “health care”. While doctors tend to get the glory, there is a whole ecosystem of paramedics, RNs, candy stripers and volunteers, technicians, midwives, administrative staff, etc. and etc. that keep the health care system up and running. As open source projects mature, they go light years beyond a developer scratching an itch into ecosystems containing foundations with administrative staff, advocates, lawyers, conference organizers, trainers, support contracters, technical writers, and so on.
So, at the risk of raising the ire of women programmers everywhere, I propose that the problem to be solved isn’t “how do we get women to program in open source?” but rather “what are the roles in open source and who can we get to fill them?”. I think that projects who can define and enable their roles will be both richer for the experience and pleasantly surprised to see how many women pop out of the woodwork.
I’m not sure I agree, but I’m not sure I don’t…
Two good links:
Mike Gunderloy announced this morning that he’s resigning from the Rails Activists group:
…Anyone who cares to take the time to actually talk to the women who are a part of the open source community will have no trouble getting an earful about how challenging it can be to participate…[p]eople like Audrey Eschright, Aaron Quint, Peter Szinek, and Selena Deckelmann have written about ways to address some of the fundamental problems…
But…a significant number of Rails core contributors – with leadership (if that’s the right word) from DHH – apparently feel that being unwelcoming and “edgy” is not just acceptable, but laudable. The difference between their opinions and mine is so severe that I cannot in good conscience remain a public spokesman for Rails.
So, effective immediately, I’m resigning my position with the Rails Activists.
I realize that some people will see this as an act of prudery on my part, or a lack of a sense of humor, or some other personal failing. That’s OK, I don’t mind. Other people…have attempted to convince me that I could do more good by staying involved with…Rails…and trying to work from within to change things. At this point, unfortunately, I feel sufficiently outnumbered and unwelcome that that option is no longer open.
If more of us had Mike’s courage, this problem would have been solved a long time ago. Three cheers, and thank you.
And speaking of cheers: this is a good time to send some to the members of last week’s open source panel at U of Toronto. When I brought up the under-representation of women in open source (roughly 1 in 200, compared to 1 in 7 for the industry as a whole), they all addressed the issue thoughtfully and head-on. It’s quite a chance from four or five years ago, and very welcome.
Two interesting posts from Noam Wasserman summarizing his research into the gender gap in startups. No surprise, it’s bigger in IT than in biotech. His work focuses on the Massachusetts and California tech hubs; I’d be very curious to see data for Toronto, London/Cambridge, and other centers.
Via Serguei Zinine, a draft paper looking at the effects on students’ financial prospects of graduating during a recession. Charts with results start on pg. 47.
Later: Diane Horton pointed out that they only analyzed men; the word “women” comes up only once in 73 pages. I’m embarrassed that I didn’t notice this myself.
Via Andy Lumsdaine, some practical ideas about how to make open source development less unwelcoming for women. I’d be very interested in hearing from projects that have tried some of these out.
I’m at the “Science in the 21st Century” conference at the Perimeter Institute today. There are 32 people in the room right now: 23 are male and 9 are female, but only one is non-Caucasian, which pretty much matches the numbers in the picture from the conference dinner last night. That’s about the same M/F ratio I see in science grad courses at U of T, but definitely not the ethnic distribution—wonder why? It can’t just be a “seniority effect” — this is a pretty young crowd. We see the same thing at DemoCamp: non-Caucasians are often a majority n sci/tech classes and companies in the Greater Toronto Area, but definitely a minority on Tuesday nights. Thoughts? Michael Nielsen says that SciBarCamp was 50/50…
Beth Noveck: “Designing Digital Institutions: Science in Government 2.0″. Talked about crowdsourcing patent review; wonder if U of T would run a grad course for sci/eng students to teach them how to do this (and as a side effect, get them to do some useful patent reviewing)? Might be a good central theme for a tech reading/writing course.
Eric Weinstein: “Sheldon Glashow Owes Me a Dollar”. His main point seemed to be that radical thinkers need to find wealthy benefactors (Medicis or Gates) in order to have the freedom to pursue really wild ideas. What I took away from it was how fundamentally the influx of physicists into banking is reshaping the language used by the latter.
You can follow the others in real-time on FriendFeed, or better yet, watch videos of the talks on the Perimeter Institute’s site.
Recent Comments