I don't know whether to be amused or sadden by the way this thread has veered off topic from a list of notable women to a discussion of whether the topic should even be discussed.
Whether women or any other group should be singled out is an important question, but discussing it here muddies the thread and makes it hard to read for those who are interested in the question originally presented: "who are the notable women?". I, for one, do not know enough about my female colleagues and would have liked to keep that topic front and center.
I truly wish that Anonymous Monk had had the wisdom to post his or her views on a separate thread rather than this one. And I also wish that the first monk to respond had chosen to gently redirect Anonymous Monk back on topic rather than take up the bait and argue the point. But sigh... the debate is here on this thread and not elsewhere, so I'm going to, with reservations, add my two cents. So far, this discussion seems to be by men about women and I'm finding it uncomfortable.
For the record. I DO NOT REGRET (loud enough?) having had the opportunity to go to a college that once upon a time admitted only men, hold a highly skilled job, get a business degree from one of the top schools in the world, start my own company, or all of the other things that the women's movement has granted me both the courage and the opportunity to do.
Over 70 years ago my grandmother graduated third in her class with an MBA from NYU (1933). She went on to teach accounting at a vocational school, despite previous experience as chief perfume buyer at Best and Co. Her husband, who graduated in the same class with less significant work experience, went to work on President Franklin Delano Roosevelt's economic advisory committee.
I once asked her why she didn't pursue a more aggressive career. Her explanation? All the women she knew who did never found husbands - apparently in the 1930's it was a rare man who wanted to marry a high powered career women.
Most men would say "do it anyway", but women and men are different. When social structures force women to choose between family and personal development, most women will find a way to compromise so that they can have a family. In my grandmother's case that meant forgoing a professional management career. Instead she donated her considerable management skills to community organizations and eventually was awarded the prestigious Clara Barton award by the Red Cross. During that same conversation she told me that there were many women like her. Many of the social service organizations started in New York City were started, organized and managed for free by women who today would be highly paid CEO's.
Women in the 1940's liked to go to college and run organizations as much as men did - they just had to find different outlets. Today it is the same for women and programming, I suspect. When you change the teaching methods and the social context to fit the interests of women, then the interest in programming becomes apparent.
At lower grades the EYH (formerly the Math/Science network) has sponsored several successful programs aimed at getting young women more involved in maths and sciences. At the university level, Carnegie-Melon has dramatically increased the number of women Computer Science majors by taking this into account. For more information, see:
Part of that context is giving people the vision to say, "People like me do..." - hence the discussion of group-specific role models. Men see "People like me..." more often when they look at men than women. Women likewise see "People like me..." more often when they look at women than when they look at men.
Best, beth
In reply to Re^2: Women in Perl - Ada Lovelace Day
by ELISHEVA
in thread Women in Perl - Ada Lovelace Day
by Anonymous Monk
| For: | Use: | ||
| & | & | ||
| < | < | ||
| > | > | ||
| [ | [ | ||
| ] | ] |