marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk) (07/07/88)
After reading the discussion on the technical core, a question came to mind: why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if anything)? I want to distinguish the difference between a wizard and a local expert, because it seems that it's a lot easier to become a local expert by just taking on the messier details of a project and becoming knowledgeable about that project (or specific system). I see a wizard as having a broader base of knowledge, being someone who understands the ideas and the implementations of systems, someone who is relied upon to know the answers and almost always does provide the solutions. With more women working in the "technical" side of computers, I would expect to see more and more female local experts, growing from there into wizards. However, I don't see this happening; the local experts still tend to be male, even if there are women who have been there longer. And I know of no female wizards. I don't understand why this is so. A first possibility is that people still don't believe down deep that a woman can be as technically competent as a man, and subsequently won't go to her even though she has the knowledge. This would decrease her opportunities to exercise her knowledge, and thus miss a lot of oppotunities to learn more. I guess I don't understand this because women are supposed to be (through their socialization) good support people - who better to help fix problems? Another possibility comes from a comment made on soc.singles awhile ago (I don't remember by whom - sorry I can't place the credit where it is due), in which the author said that when giving aid, if the recipient is a male it will be "Let me show you how to do X"; if a woman, it will be "Let me do X for you". This would certainly decrease the amount of a woman's experience. These are just some first impressions that came to mind. I look forward to any insights others have had into this phenomenon. Note that I don't see it as a problem, per se; rather as a puzzling set of circumstances. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Marcia Bednarcyk ADDRESS: (hplabs, sun, ucbvax, uunet)!hpda!marcia "Sweaty Snugglebunnies."
shebs%defun.utah.edu.uucp@ames.arc.nasa.gov (Stanley T. Shebs) (07/07/88)
In article <11734@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk) writes: >[...] why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if >anything)? First off, I wish to nominate at least one counterexample: Sandra Loosemore, a veteran :-) PhD student at Utah and a (former) 5-year employee of Evans & Sutherland, who has hacked all kinds of software, from user interface tools to graphics routines to machine-language internals of Lisp systems, and who is well-versed in the technical literature as well. She has mentioned occasional annoying sexist incidents at E&S, but has also had a woman manager most of the time, so it's been better than one might expect from a company with a large Mormon contingent. (I speak up, because she's too modest, and may not read this group anyway) >I don't understand why this is so. A first possibility is that people >still don't believe down deep that a woman can be as technically >competent as a man, and subsequently won't go to her even though she has >the knowledge. This would decrease her opportunities to exercise her >knowledge, and thus miss a lot of oppotunities to learn more. I guess >I don't understand this because women are supposed to be (through their >socialization) good support people - who better to help fix problems? A "true wizard" is basically anti-social. She doesn't care much whether or not people come to her for help; she learns on her own, by playing around with the system and its software. The old joke was that wizards were "red meat" people - they live behind a locked door near the computer, you slide your problems under the door, and they slide the answers back (this was before the days of e-mail). There's a slot in the door where you throw in red meat every so often, to keep them fed. Seriously, "true wizardry" seems to involve devoting the majority of one's time and energy to the machine. I know very few wizards with well-balanced personalities and fully developed social skills (this should garner a few flames!). It's no surprise that most wizards are men, since this fits the default male socialization perfectly; spending one's days in isolation interacting only with a computer, is little different from traditionally male occupations like driving a truck, plowing a field, or drilling for oil. Yes, truckers talk to each other and roughnecks work as a team; but fundamentally, the jobs focus on machinery and nature, and any human interaction is either part of break time or the minimum necessary to accomplish a task. In the same way, wizards' interactions seem to be recreation-related, as in Usenet :-), or directed only toward a specific problem. So here's a next-level question: assuming that you agree with the above analysis of wizards, is the inherent nature of wizardry and hacking such that it must always remain the province of "male" types? To put it another way, is it possible to "feminize" wizardry, in the way that some feminists have advocated for technology in general? If so, what might have to change about computers themselves to make this possible? stan shebs shebs@cs.utah.edu
fester@math.berkeley.edu (07/07/88)
In article <11734@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk) writes: > >After reading the discussion on the technical core, a question came to mind: >why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if >anything)? I don't think the answer is nearly so much "what is preventing them" as "what is not encouraging them." It is true in any field that the people who advance the most are those who have been 'mentored' throughout their career. (No, not *every* *single* *individual*, but close.) This is because the most efficient method of acquiring information is being taught, told, or shown it. It is not the best way to learn. It is not the most challenging. It IS the most efficient, in terms of time/knowledge tradeoff. The human factor in computer science is, as far as I can see, larger than in any other field. In computer science it plays a dual role: not just information exchange, but also social context. If you read the book "Hackers", for example, you get a very clear sense of how much computing was a social context, a way of life, far more than an intellectual pursuit. E.g., it was true for me that in college computer science was attractive because when I got there, some of the department members were "really cool". (No flattery intended, Eric :-) So were the women majoring in it, when I started. As they graduated and the "cool" department members disappeared, I lost interest. So that there are two important roles the human factor plays in computer science: providing a social context, an enjoyable environment, a reason to do it; and creating an information flow. My sense of why there are no women wizards is that women don't integrate well in the current hacking scene, and we don't have any of our own. So the human factor is simply not available to women. The existing environment isn't *our* idea of fun, (I do think it is as much 'we don't like them' as 'they don't like us') and the information isn't available because there aren't any women yet who HAVE it in order to pass it on. And yes, men are more reluctant to pass on the "secrets", the little details of computing, to women than to other men (in my experience.) These statements are not meant to be absolutely categorical (i.e. some women doubtless get along really well in the typically 99% male hacking environments and manage to get both the social support AND information one needs to do well) but they *are* often true and are being offered for further discussion on the issue. Lea Fester fester@math.berkeley.edu
Q2816@pucc.princeton.edu (Roger L. Lustig (CBD, Inc.)) (07/07/88)
In article <11734@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bedn >After reading the discussion on the technical core, a question came to mind: >why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if >anything)? >I want to distinguish the difference between a wizard and a local expert, >because it seems that it's a lot easier to become a local expert by just >taking on the messier details of a project and becoming knowledgeable about >that project (or specific system). I see a wizard as having a broader base >of knowledge, being someone who understands the ideas and the implementations >of systems, someone who is relied upon to know the answers and almost always >does provide the solutions. Hm. I guess this area must be atypical then. PUCC's top systems people are split about 50-50, men and women -- and they ARE wizards, because the system is a very idiosyncratic, customized one. The undergraduates who dispense advice -- are they wizards of a sort? We hired one of the chief ones when she graduated, partly because of her wizardry, local expertise, whatever. The supervisor of all these people is DEFINITELY a wizard of a sort, and a woman. >With more women working in the "technical" side of computers, I would >expect to see more and more female local experts, growing from there into >wizards. However, I don't see this happening; the local experts still tend >to be male, even if there are women who have been there longer. And I know >of no female wizards. Is Grace Hopper a wizard? >I don't understand why this is so. A first possibility is that people >still don't believe down deep that a woman can be as technically >competent as a man, and subsequently won't go to her even though she has >the knowledge. This would decrease her opportunities to exercise her >knowledge, and thus miss a lot of oppotunities to learn more. I guess >I don't understand this because women are supposed to be (through their >socialization) good support people - who better to help fix problems? I've worked in several places -- big corp, university, small biz. There have been women at all levels of expertise, wizardry, etc. And the best support people were very often women. (I pointed the wife of a grad student toward a part-time programming job; she quickly learned everything there was to know about everything and became director of user support for a business school with two dec-20's.) Am I just lucky in picking jobs, or what? Roger Lustig (Q2816@PUCC.BITNET Q2816@pucc.princeton.edu) Die Gedanken sind frei! Wer kann sie erraten?
eugene@eos.arc.nasa.gov (Eugene Miya) (07/07/88)
It appears my recommendation about ASK has not been forwarded.
Marcia raises an interesting questions about women wizards.
This is a question I asked some years ago. It is my opinion
we do now have them, only they are widely separated. More will come
with time.
Maybe a decade ago it was rare to find women in computing. Women then
had to be careful when associating with keyboards, this I learned while
working at JPL. I met some of the most technically compentent women
there as well as some suprising incompetent men [still there]. They had
to be careful with their associations: with men [note I had no "interest"
in any of them, but two were bosses], equipment, organizations, etc.
But several summers ago, I started being invited to dinner by different
groups of summer students [Join us!], Sure! That stigma was gone.
We did talk about women hackers during some of those dinners, and we all
concluded that they did not fit the stereotype of man hackers as
unclean, etc. So we should not look for a particularly similar
physical type. Remember that wizards, hackers, and "other strange
personalities" aren't confinded to computers [See Atlanta article on Erdos].
Patience.
Another gross generalization from
--eugene miya, NASA Ames Research Center, eugene@aurora.arc.nasa.gov
resident cynic at the Rock of Ages Home for Retired Hackers:
"Mailers?! HA!", "If my mail does not reach you, please accept my apology."
{uunet,hplabs,ncar,decwrl,allegra,tektronix}!ames!aurora!eugene
"Send mail, avoid follow-ups. If enough, I'll summarize."maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) (07/08/88)
Marcia, But look at how it works... The original hackers, the guys that PBS had the profile of, were mostly men the average person would call "nerds," antisocial, socially inept....that's why they were in their garage building computers instead of out dancing, right? :-) I'm serious, I knew some of them. The guys who talk Forth and sleep with their mother boards. So then there's this in-club of these fellows, who stay up for nights in a row hacking with each other and more and more similar fellows join them and there are all these role models for what a real hacker/wizard should be. A role model. And that is NOT a woman. So there are no/few role models and an in-club mentality that is the equivalent of an old-boys network... rituals, even. And these fellows aren't comfortable with women by and large, so a woman who tries to get in to the club, well, she's an alien species. She may be tolerated, but she doesn't fit in, belong. Probably she gets discouraged, leaves, quits. And besides, so many women get routed into support or applications and NOT into the deep technical inner sanctum, anyway. Still. Although that's changing, but slowly. Slowly. And you miss the point, you see, because the wizards aren't really support types. Sure they give solutions, but they're not HELPERS, not service oriented. The do what they do and if it helps you, fine. But helping you is not the goal: solving the puzzle IS. And they have to be gutsy and a demon and all those things women are still just learning to be in pursuit of a goal that doesn't help others. Little girls and their dolls, little boys and their machine toys. Erector sets. Computers. No, we're still a long way from breaking down all the barriers. We're not excluded, maybe, but we're sure not included. Valerie Maslak
skyler@violet.berkeley.edu (07/08/88)
I think that one thing which may well prevent women from becoming wizards is purely and simply technophobia. My mother is _convinced_ that she cannot handle any equipment more complicated than a toaster oven. (This, from a woman who was working at her father's lab using an electron microscope in the forties.) She simply won't use the stereo unless someone else is around to turn it on for her. It doesn't matter that all she has to do is push one button--the fact that it has so many buttons completely intimidates her. She is also intimidated by cars. I was determined not to be like that, so I learned a lot about cars from (male) friends of mine who loved to work with them. They loved teaching me about cars. They thought it was great that I wanted to learn and were never condescending. My mother couldn't believe that I understood about cars and whenever I took a long drive she would try to talk me into taking some male along-- any male, whether or not he knew anything about cars. For her, it was connected to genitalia. I think that it is also connected to gender. It is male to be good at dealing with mechanical/electronic things. So, a woman has to give up some of her femininity to be good at those things and risks not being attractive to men. By being good at male things, a woman competes with them and might alienate them. I think that I have gotten over many of those attitudes, but I think they creep out sometimes. And those attitudes also justify a certain laziness in myself. I initially learned about Unix just to learn how to word process. A friend sat me down at a terminal with three sheets of paper that had commands on them. Slowly, I have learned more but mostly by friends (mostly male) showing me how to do something. The laziness comes in when I sometimes feel as though I don't want them to tell me how or why something works--I just want them to make it work. Obviously, not all women are like that. But, I think that if you pushed you would find that many women feel that they give up some femininity to be good at computing. -Trish
zwicky@pterodactyl.cis.ohio-state.edu (Elizabeth D. Zwicky) (07/08/88)
In article <11796@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> skyler@violet.berkeley.edu writes: >I think that one thing which may well prevent women from becoming >wizards is purely and simply technophobia. >My mother is _convinced_ that she cannot handle any equipment more >complicated than a toaster oven. (This, from a woman who was working >at her father's lab using an electron microscope in the forties.) She >simply won't use the stereo unless someone else is around to >turn it on for her. It doesn't matter that all she has to do is push >one button--the fact that it has so many buttons completely intimidates >her. There's more than one sort of technophobia being considered here. I have problems with the stereo at home - partly intimidation, and partly in its nature, since there are some complicated dependencies to remember, and besides you have to remember that the CD player is on the button marked VCR. On the other hand, I certainly pass for a wizard around here. Hell, I can even do strange things with RS-232 cables (how many of you have hooked up a printer with paperclips?). Knowing how a printer works has not made me any more able to deal with the telephone system, or the stereo system, or my car. Similarly, my mother could use a PC a little, but not play a cassette tape. She didn't like word processing, but she found it less intimidating than the stereo, because it made more sense. Partly this has to do with computer interfaces. You can put a tape in my car cassette player backwards (I know, I did it and it was a near thing whether we were ever going to get it out again), but you can't do the same with our quarter-inch tape drives. Guess which one makes me more nervous? The person who I know who is most scared of computers is a man, and one who tinkers with lots of technological marvels. He doesn't think of a computer as a piece of hardware; he sees it as some sort of demon familiar. After a great deal of encouragement, he still has the classic beginner's fear that he's going to hit the wrong key and make the computer explode. This from a person who plays with cars, which are more expensive than PCs and full of flammable liquids. A lot of women are afraid of computers, but I don't think it's the same as being afraid of cars and stereo systems. Elizabeth
brad%looking.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET (Brad Templeton) (07/09/88)
Yes, I think Grace Hopper qualifies. But I'm not sure when I hear the word "Wizard" it conjures up "top support person" or corporate programmer. To me that means the true creators of the industry. The ones who made the big discoveries or wrote the landmark programs almost single-handedly. Folks like Bill Gates, Dennis Ritchie. There are only a thousand or so of these people in the world, perhaps. They are almost all men, with Admiral Hopper one of the very few exceptions. This is the question we should answer. I have a general answer, later.
tjw@uunet.UU.NET (Terry J Wood) (07/09/88)
When I worked for Digital Equipment Corp, in Software Services, I found
that the most of the "Software Wizards" were women. At one point there
were also more female managers, project leaders and Corporate account
managers than male.
I also remember one customer who was "suprised" to find that his
"salesman", software services manager, and DEC project leader were all
female. (At this customer site, when my software services manager came
to meet the customer the first time, his secretary tried to give my
manager a typing test -- what else could Jeneane have been there for -- we
laughed about THAT one for a while).
Actually, in Software Services, if you were a white male, you were in
the minority. From the postings I've been reading here, I assume that
this is not the case in the rest of the world.
If you're looking for a company to work for where all that seems to
matter is how hard you work (not your race, sex or how many degrees you
have (if any)) I'd recommend DEC SWS in Pittsburgh.
Terry
--
(UUCP) {decwrl!allegra,bellcore,cadre,psuvax1}!pitt!cisunx!cisvms!tjw
(BITNET) TJW@PITTVMS
(Internet) tjw%vms.cis.pittsburgh.edu@vb.cc.cmu.edu
(CC-Net) CISVMS::TJWbooter%deimos@ads.com (Elaine Richards) (07/09/88)
In article <11790@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> sri-unix!maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) writes: > >Marcia, > >But look at how it works... > >The original hackers, the guys that PBS had the profile of, were >mostly men the average person would call "nerds," antisocial, >socially inept....that's why they were in their garage building >computers instead of out dancing, right? :-) I'm serious, I knew >some of them. The guys who talk Forth and sleep with their mother boards. That was the first Hackers Conference held about 2-3 years ago. > [in-club of dudes clustered together imagery] > >And that is NOT a woman. So there are no/few role models and an >in-club mentality that is the equivalent of an old-boys network... >rituals, even. And these fellows aren't comfortable with women by >and large, so a woman who tries to get in to the club, well, she's >an alien species. She may be tolerated, but she doesn't fit in, >belong. Probably she gets discouraged, leaves, quits. Not necessarily. Easygoing people are welcome anywhere. I was invited to, and attended the second Hackers Conference and did not feel like and alien or that I did not fit in. At worst, I felt a little star struck by some of the interesting people there. I joshed people around, came off in a non-threatening way (yes, many power hackers are shy) and did not walk around like a Bundle of Issues the way many women do in such circumstances. Also, I am pretty androgynous and a lot of bash- ful men feel a little threatened by super-fem women (and macho men I might add :-)) As for getting discouraged by hacking, that happens periodically where I feel like the asteroid among the stars. Every time I have admitted I feel ...well..inadequate, I get a big pep talk. I have had pep talks from John Gilmore, Don Hopkins, Erik Fair, half of UNIPRESS, etc. There are exclusionary types. When I have mentioned their names to Notables in the UNIX World, the word "asshole" usually passes wizardly lips. Old boy types are scorned and they more often than not do that exclusionary shit to novice male hackers too. They seem to think that hacking is a fraternity Hell Week where you haze the frosh. > >And besides, so many women get routed into support or applications >and NOT into the deep technical inner sanctum, anyway. Still. >Although that's changing, but slowly. Slowly. > It is changing, yes. It is visibly changing too. Support work in a tech company pays a hell of a lot better than support work in most other professions. I am pretty much a sysadmin type and the pay is twice what I was getting as a paralegal. Seeing a woman at the console is a good way of reminding the Old Boys that women can jockey a mainframe around, thakyouverymuch. >And you miss the point, you see, because the wizards aren't really >support types. Sure they give solutions, but they're not HELPERS, >not service oriented. The do what they do and if it helps you, fine. >But helping you is not the goal: solving the puzzle IS. >And they have to be gutsy and a demon and all those things women are >still just learning to be in pursuit of a goal that doesn't help >others. > Pull a wizard into your puzzle. If your puzzle is interesting, you will get all kinds of help. >Little girls and their dolls, little boys and their machine toys. >Erector sets. Computers. Gee, I had both :-) > >No, we're still a long way from breaking down all the barriers. >We're not excluded, maybe, but we're sure not included. > >Valerie Maslak Well, it ain't a picnic, but it is no Vale of Tears either. ER
jbuck@epimass.EPI.COM (Joe Buck) (07/10/88)
In article <11843@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> brad%looking.uucp@RELAY.CS.NET (Brad Templeton) writes: >To me that ["wizard"] means the true creators of the industry. The ones who made >the big discoveries or wrote the landmark programs almost single-handedly. >Folks like Bill Gates, Dennis Ritchie. > >There are only a thousand or so of these people in the world, perhaps. >They are almost all men, with Admiral Hopper one of the very few exceptions. Well, there's Adele Goldberg, one of the authors of Smalltalk and a key member of the Xerox PARC group who invented most of the key ideas you see in Macintoshes and such. Certainly she should count. She does get recognition -- she's been president of ACM and was the keynote speaker at Usenix. -- - Joe Buck {uunet,ucbvax,pyramid,<smart-site>}!epimass.epi.com!jbuck jbuck@epimass.epi.com Old Arpa mailers: jbuck%epimass.epi.com@uunet.uu.net If you leave your fate in the hands of the gods, don't be surprised if they have a few grins at your expense. - Tom Robbins
cook@Alliant.COM (Dale C. Cook) (07/11/88)
In article <11787@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> Q2816@pucc.princeton.edu (Roger L. Lustig (CBD, Inc.)) writes: >Hm. I guess this area must be atypical then. PUCC's top systems people >are split about 50-50, men and women -- and they ARE wizards, because the >system is a very idiosyncratic, customized one. > Hmmm. I work for a small post-start-up (how's that for coining a word?) company. We absolutely don't have the luxury of hiring anyone on any other basis but performance. I'm on our key new R&D project. One of the two managers on the project is female. The key logic designer is female (and the best!) Our ADA internals person, female, is reputed to be one of, if not the, best in the country. Our Fortran person is female. And so on. I think high tech is one of the least descriminatory industries simply because it is relatively easy to measure and reward competitance. Any similar/different experience out there? -- - Dale N1US VOICE: (617) 486-1343 ARPA: cook@alliant.alliant.com SMAIL: 1 Monarch Drive UUCP: ...linus!alliant!cook Littleton, MA 01460
tron@tc.fluke.com (Peter Barbee) (07/12/88)
This is slightly off the track - but only slightly. Some have said there are few wizards because, in part, wizards are basically anti-social beings who, in fact, emulate the default western male stereotype. In another current discussion someone mentioned that at least some times men make more money and are advanced faster than women because some men (and I think the men who advance fastest and make most) are much more single- minded in their pursuit of career. So here we have two points which indicate the desirability of workers who will be very singleminded, anti-social, career beings. Is this in fact desirable? Will companies continue to promote people who ignore the rest of their lives instead of individuals who have a balanced life? Is the goal (profit for the company) best served by people who think of nothing else? Is that goal actually worthwhile, even for the company? Peter B
maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) (07/12/88)
[I've put together three of Valerie's separate postings on the same subject. TR] ======================================================================= Peter, Anti-social career-obsessed... Come on down to Silicon Valley. We created the archetype. Or at least perfected it. Never in one place has there been concentrated such a mass of Johnny-One-Notes. Almost no community service, charitible contribution (H&P aside), participation in the arts... politics...just the glow of the scopes and the terminal screens.... Homo entrepreneurus. ================================================================ First of all, we're all starting to talk about too many things under the banner "WIZARDS." Do we mean visibility, managerial rank, authority, do we mean the hackers, the underground, or what? I mean the almost-mythical figures that we all talk about, the inheritors of the lore, the code...the inner sanctum. The ones who talk mostly to each other.:-) But secondly, I want to talk about perceptions, because Elaine's response to my posting about wizards was a classic in "woman-think." She describes attending the Second Hackers Conference... and being awed being aware she needed to be nonthreatening thinking that being androgynous was helpful... And she talks about how all the male wizzes are glad to give her pep talks. But Elaine, what if you gave them information. What if you took a budding young male wiz aside and showed him the error of his ways? How would that go over? Would you be sought out next time or avoided? Would you have to be careful not to bruise his ego? More careful than if the sexes were reversed? Would he be more comfortable getting advice about his bug from a man? Would YOU be more comfortable getting advice than giving it? And what about those of us who are...um...zoftig, not androgynous. Are we out of luck? Condemned to forever be cuddly not taken seriously because we don't look male enough, are too out of place? And do we constantly have to have our radar out as to whether we are nonthreatening? Do you think the males at the SHC were constantly doing checks on how they were being perceived, or were they spending the energy on other things? And yes, support in computers pays more than support in other areas; that's why I'm here, too. But support is support, and it's not where the action is. Just because we are technical support doesn't mean we're still not at the bottom of the hierarchy...plus ca change, etc. See, it's what I mean by woman-think. We accept everything we have to do to fit in, to survive in a male-oriented environment, as a given, as no big deal, the way the world is. We don't hear what we're saying half the time. The whole thing is internally very subtle. Valerie Maslak ======================================================================== Joe Buck uses the words "member of the group that..." I think that's one way that female wizards get lost...they allow themselves to be perceived primarily as contributors, team members, rather than unique individuals. The reasons for this are many... but it's often been my experience that I can say something at a meeting that is virtually ignored, and then hear it being attributed as the brilliant idea of someone else who was at the meeting.. not deliberate thievery, just someone not registering the source because it came from a woman. Like background noise... Valerie Maslak
jls@uunet.UU.NET (Jonathan Schilling) (07/12/88)
The software industry has enough "hackers" and "gurus" as it is. The really successful people at the jobs I've had have been those who've combined great technical abilities with great software engineering and software engineering management abilities. This has been true in an applications shop as well as at two system software companies (application generators, compilers). To design something so that it's elegant, usable, and can be maintained; to handle client/user expectations and pressures; to handle unrealistic attitudes of marketing and upper management; these are what go into making the stars. Doing this requires as much technical excellence as anything else, but it also requires judgment and dedication. What it does *not* require is the hacker personality that was described in several postings. The folks I have in mind haven't been single-minded, socially inept, or any of that. They haven't devoted all hours to their job except for fairly infrequent crunch periods. They're just bright people who like their work but like a lot else also. A number of them have been women, and (no surprise) they've been just as good as the men. You certainly don't need to be part of the hacker subculture (which may well be somewhat difficult for women to get into at the present) to be a star in software. If anything, hacker/guru types have been looked down at in the places I've worked, for being too narrow and obsessed with the minor details of one system. It's ability and judgment that really matter, not the amount of arcane knowledge you possess. Of course, women who want to be hacker/gurus should be able to. But a disinclination towards doing that should not be considered an impediment towards a career in software. Jonathan Schilling
patterso@hardees.rutgers.edu (Ross Patterson) (07/12/88)
Strangely, in the IBM side of the business (where I hail from), women figure quite prominently. The Vice President of SHARE (the largest IBM user group) is Cecilia Cowles, of Cornell. The SHARE VM Group has long been led on a number of issues by Sandra Hassenplugh (Tower, Perrins, Forster and Crosby) and Melinda Varian (Princeton). All three have titles in a whimsical group known as the "Knights of VM" (nomination and designation by public acclaim), have international reputations, and are at the center of what would otherwise be called an Old Boy network. While I can't say for certain, I expect that their recognition influence stem to soem degree from their constant participation in a computer conference known as VMSHARE, run by and for the members of the SHARE VM Group. VMSRE has been in existence for over 15 years, and women have always played an equal-or-better role in its discussions. I and many other Systems Programmers of both sexes are indebted to them, and VM would be a much worse off place without their efforts, knowledge, and willingness to help others. Ross Patton Rutgers University Center for Computer and Information Services
@hamlet.bitnet:tan@devvax.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Greer H. Tan) (07/12/88)
In article <11734@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bedna rcyk) writes: > >After reading the discussion on the technical core, a question came to mind: >why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if >anything)? This is definitely and interesting question. Does this have something to do with biology? Or society? Coming from M.I.T. ... I was considered a pretty good expert in UNIX, and I always wondered why I couldn't derive as much pleasure in finding out the little intricacies of the system like some of my male counterparts ... I really thought it was just me. I mean, I learned what I had to ... but you would never find me spending hours on writing a shell script to "do something neat" just for the heck of it. My boyfriend on the other hand would have loved to do nothing more ... My sister describes herself as virtual memory. She doesn't actually know everything, but she knows how to get to it ... where as most men *are* disc memory ... they actually *know* the stuff off the top of their heads! Perhaps if a study were done as to how logical and factual knowledge is stored and how some other things are remembered by people and then a study on what women tend to remember and what men tend to remember ... then perhaps we will understand more about what we don't have as many technical guru-ettes. Why is it that most women tend to remember dates, clothes, places and such better than most men? Usually when there is a sentimental value to the time, person or place? I can't think of any more examples of general imbalance of male and female tendencies ... but I'm sure there are many. Of course there are exceptions to every generalization ... but, for the most part women tend to notice details and think about the finer points of life and men tend to see the bigger picture in a much more less complicated sort of way. Greer
ix665%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (Sue Raul) (07/13/88)
In article <11844@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> booter%deimos@ads.com (Elaine Richards) writes: >>Little girls and their dolls, little boys and their machine toys. >>Erector sets. Computers. >In article <11790@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> sri-unix!maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) writes: >Gee, I had both :-) It seems that the real point isn't whether it's dolls vs erector sets and computers, because there are so many other ways a child's "universe" can be biased. Think of the father who buys his son a glove and a bat, a football and boxing lessons instead of the computer. The boy has no better chance to master high-tech than the girl with the doll. And neither of them stand much of a chance of learning to paint or grow flowers. If you want to give a child all possible opportunities to choose its preferences and discover its aptitudes the list would have to include all kinds of items: add: musical instruments drawing and painting materials books - fiction, non-fiction, poetry, empty pets, a fish tank, trips to the zoo (future biologist, zoologist, animal trainer) a garden (a future in agriculture, or botany) material, needle and thread, or sewing machine (the future designer) kitchen utensils and basic ingredients (the future master chef) part-time work, paper route, lemonade stand (future employed) etc. All this just opens up avenues that the doll, erector set, baseball glove and computer doesn't. In other words, lets not limit our children's futures by thinking about only those stereotypical items in our immediate surroundings. For computer people, one would think that if they as a child were denied technical/mechanical/mathematical challenges then that's "what their child will get." But what about being denied piano lessons or ice skates because mommy and daddy were too poor or were never exposed to these when they were kids? With computers being a part of life of many professions these days, we can only look forward to a time when using a computer will be as commonplace as knowing how to drive a car is today. Farmers use computers, biologists use computers, musicians use computers, etc. So, discrimination doesn't start or end with whether there's a computer in the little girl's life or not - it may not be in a little boy's either, as is true for hundreds of other items. The least a parent may want to think about is, within their budget, allow exposure to all sides of "being human" - the intellectual (computers, fun math book problems), visceral (sports, dance), mechanical (erector sets), creative (music, art, designing), nature/organic (microscopes, gardens and pets, or books on animals and zoo visits, geological artifacts and books), spiritual (as suitable to your religious beliefs and values). just a few thoughts, Sue
fortin%zap.UUCP@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Denis Fortin) (07/14/88)
In article <11734@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> marcia%hpindl8@hplabs.HP.COM (Marcia Bednarcyk) writes: > > After reading the discussion on the technical core, a question came to mind: > why are there no women computer wizards, and what is preventing them (if > anything)? Hmmm. I have missed the main discussion, but upon reflecting on this paragraph for a little while, I realized that I do know a woman whom I would consider a VMS wizard. I guess the idea that there are no women wizards might come from the fact that women are still far from representing 50% of the workforce in the computing field, and since wizards reprensent a very small percentage of that workforce also, there must be even fewer women wizards! How many people out there DO know women wizards? -- Denis Fortin, fortin@zap.uucp fortin%zap.uucp@larry.mcrcim.mcgill.edu | CAE Electronics Ltd uunet!utai!mcgill-vision!zap!fortin | The opinions expressed above are mine
abostick@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (Alan Bostick) (07/15/88)
In article <12002@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> patterso@hardees.rutgers.edu (Ross Patterson) writes: > >Strangely, in the IBM side of the business (where I hail from), women >figure quite prominently. [ much stuff on women involved with SHARE deleted ] >Ross Patton >Rutgers University >Center for Computer and Information Services But SHARE is on the users' end of IBM. Within the corporation, when one reaches a certain level, IBM as an institution is as hidebound and patriarchal as you can find anywhere. A woman of my acquaintance (whom I decline to identify) is in the upper levels of management of a firm acquired some time ago by IBM. She has told me many times of how the (almost entirely male, aged 50+) people from IBM at her level in the hierarchy she encounters seem to live in an alternate universe in which feminism never existed. She says she is called "honey" and "dear" all of the time, is frequently mistaken for her own secretary, and makes a point not to take notes at meetings, lest she be elected by acclamation as meeting secretary. The glass ceiling is quite real at IBM, she says. Alan Bostick ucbvax!unisoft!gethen!abostick
shore@ncifcrf.gov (Melinda Shore) (07/15/88)
In article <12107@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> cook@Alliant.COM (Dale C. Cook) writes: > I think high tech is one of the least >descriminatory industries simply because it is relatively easy to >measure and reward competitance. Any similar/different experience >out there? Yes. In my last job I was the first woman hired onto the technical staff and I'm the only woman on the technical staff at this job, as well. At the last position we eventually hired more women into both entry-level and senior positions, but it still wasn't unusual to hear senior members of the the technical staff referred to as "pretty girls." Also, there was a lot of pressure for the women to move into management-type positions and out of technical roles. On the other hand, I was working at a university several years ago and women there were treated very professionally. It obviously varies considerably from site to site, but I think it's a mistake to assume that there are no problems. -- Melinda Shore shore@ncifcrf.gov NCI Supercomputer Facility ..!uunet!ncifcrf.gov!shore
jsb@uunet.UU.NET (The Invisible Man) (07/15/88)
In article <12007@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> sri-unix!maslak@decwrl.dec.com (Valerie Maslak) writes:
)But Elaine, what if you gave them information. What if you took
)a budding young male wiz aside and showed him the error of his ways?
)How would that go over? Would you be sought out next time or
)avoided? Would you have to be careful not to bruise his ego?
)More careful than if the sexes were reversed?
)Would he be more comfortable getting advice about his bug from a
)man? Would YOU be more comfortable getting advice than giving it?
)
I always found it easier to get technical advice from women rather than men.
Women were less arrogant & had less need to show off all they knew (and hide
what they didn't know). In addition women tended to have more 'people skills',
i.e. they didn't treat me as an AI program. (Of course there were exceptions
to these generalizations.) Perhaps women end up doing support rather than
developement because they are better at it. Perhaps support is lower paying
because "women do it".
--
"Notitiae gratia notitiarum"
jim (uunet!actnyc!jsb)lsc@Sun.COM (Lisa S Chabot) (07/16/88)
I suggest we conduct this discussion not as
Why aren't there any women wizards?
but rather as
Show us the women wizards!
Or in other words, if we start from a position of "there aren't any",
we'll have a harder time acknowledging the testimonials pouring in of
well-known women wizards.
I know all of us aren't perfect at times, but you're going to have to at
least check in your wizard badge (or turn it upside down, or something
to indicate temporary disgrace), if you complain that no one shows you
how to do something. The more effective mode is to demand help or a
demonstration--come on, now, us hackers are well-known for uncomfortable
notions of social graces. Barring that, another method is to always be
around so that they can't do something with the computer without you
watching and getting in the way. And there's always the tried and true,
hack-it-yourself-til-it-works, but this has limits, and if you init the
system disk too many times [where "too many" is a locally-defined
qualifier], you'll get booted out. Still, there are worse things!
--like being uninformed.
I'll admit: these graces are re-learned. A good little girl isn't heard
asking such questions and she doesn't have printer toxins all over her
hands. On the other hand (which is cleaner), we're all adults here.
Some of us have or will have to learn to make compromises between how
we're expected to act and how to get things. What's the worst those
coworkers can say: she works all night because she can't get a date.
Does a real wizard _care_? ("Boys steal your compute cycles.")
If you're thinking of a model woman wizard as:
she's gorgeous and a demon on the keyboard too!
you've got your priorities bungled. Wizardry comes first. An air of
insouicance towards those petty things (life, salary, recognition) is
one of the most highly cultivated skills of those of us who crawled under a
keyboard.
Okay, so the above may not The Best Way For All Womankind in Computers.
Yes, well, that's because there isn't one, mostly because there's more
than one of us. Still, I'm happy. Yes, in the past, I've had male
coworkers take credit for my ideas. That's easily dealt with--stop
having ideas in their presence or, if you're devious, feed them bad
ideas on the side. Didn't you ever deal with the twit who tried to
copy your answers in grade school?
Off to commune with the caffeine dispenser!
lsc
All power corrupts, but we need electricity.rogerk@mips.com (Roger B.A. Klorese) (07/19/88)
In article <12111@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> fortin%zap.UUCP@Larry.McRCIM.McGill.EDU (Denis Fortin) writes: >How many people out there DO know women wizards? I would mention the name of Pat Shanahan, who was the compilers project leader and is now, I believe, the performance manager at Celerity. But Pat would, I suspect, object to being called a "woman wizard" rather than just a wizard. ;-) -- Roger B.A. Klorese MIPS Computer Systems, Inc. {ames,decwrl,prls,pyramid}!mips!rogerk 25 Burlington Mall Rd, Suite 300 rogerk@mips.COM Burlington, MA 01803 I don't think we're in toto any more, Kansas... +1 617 270-0613
rsp@pbhyf.PacBell.COM (Steve Price) (07/20/88)
In article <12209@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>, shore@ncifcrf.gov (Melinda Shore) writes: > In article <12107@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> cook@Alliant.COM (Dale C. Cook) writes: > In my last job I was the first woman hired onto the technical > staff and I'm the only woman on the technical staff at this job, as > well. At the last position we eventually hired more women into both > entry-level and senior positions, but it still wasn't unusual to hear > senior members of the the technical staff referred to as "pretty > girls." On National Public radio this AM I heard a report about "career women" in Japan that makes me think that American sexism, while deplorable and in urgent need of being hauled to the dump, is not as bad as that in Japan. In most offices women are never offered a chance at technical positions or careers of any kind, unless you consider clipping articles from newspapers for male researchers, typing male writers articles into computers, emptying ash trays and making coffee for the "boys" a career. The women are openly referred to as "our office flowers" and "praised" for the "beauty" they bring to the "drab office". They wear corporate uniforms, but are expected to add colorful items to their dress to contrast with the dark male corporate suits. One woman of 25, a graduate of a Canadian university and fluent in four languages, told how she worked for a foriegn investment firm because all of the few Japanese firms that would bother to hire her paid less than half of her foriegn corporation's salary. Another married Japanese career woman talked about how nearly impossible it was for a Japanese woman to expect to find a Japanese male who would consider marriage to a career woman. Her salary, committment to her vocation, and her drive would all combine to scare the Japanese male, I guess. The piece concluded that there was little hope for change in this situation because gender roles are so rigidly type cast in Japan and that the over- whelming majority of Japanese women say that they do not care to suffer the grief of working towards a career. (On a "positive" note, a Japanese career woman said that Japanese culture gives great sincere respect to women who mananage their traditional domestic affairs with diligence. This brings great joy to most Japanese women, she implied.) In the obvious cultural, economic rivalry that now exists between American and Japanese society, I think it would be amusing and satisfying to see millions of educated, agressive American career women show the Japanese that there are still a few things that their ancient culture can learn. Steve Price pacbell!pbhyf!rsp (415) 823-1951
daveb@uunet.UU.NET (David Collier-Brown) (07/21/88)
In article <12003@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> ix665%sdcc6@ucsd.edu (Sue Raul) writes: |It seems that the real point isn't whether it's dolls vs erector sets |and computers, because there are so many other ways a child's "universe" |can be biased. And some of the ways one avoids biasing the child's universe may be seen as themselves biased... A close friend and serious techie (in biology) carefully placed her teen-aged daughter in a religious private school. She did so to prevent the stereotypical behavior of her teen-aged peers from turning the daughter away from getting a good grounding in math and the sciences. When I have mentioned this as a positive measure, various people have commented on how "sexist and narrow-minded it is to send a girl to a girls' school". As it happens, the choice was based on real, factual evidence of university registration and marks in the sciences of students from that class of school being better than those of the non-segregated schools in the area. --dave (out, out demn'd stereotypes!) c-b -- David Collier-Brown. {mnetor yunexus utgpu}!geac!daveb Geac Computers Ltd., | Computer science loses its 350 Steelcase Road, | memory, if not its mind, Markham, Ontario. | every six months.
alainew%tekcae.cax.tek.com@RELAY.CS.NET (Alaine Warfield) (07/24/88)
Adele Goldberg is known as the Mother of Smalltalk. She is one of the original architects of the Smalltalk language and environment and co-author of the definitive Smalltalk books. She is now the president of Parc Place Systems, a spin-off of Xerox Parc.