>third "women in STEM" event this month on my university
>not even some leftist SJW country but pepe Poland
>most women i know on my faculty are dumb and get all their assignments from beta orbiters
>woman after a bootcamp still has a higher chance of employment than man with education
why is it even allowed? whats the point of pushing women into technology when they are uninterested in it?
to get male fags a boner
>look cute
What a terrible cisgender heteronormative abelism. Thanks G-d she's a woman of color at least, but it's just a -1 axis of oppression. We shouldn't resort to half measures in such important area as tech industry.
>posing in underwear because no one gives a fuck if she codes or not
>meaningless sticky's in the background to make the picture look more profesionnal but it only makes it look laughable
>the sticky's are not even IT related they are just a bunch of safe space pandering women shit like (1 on 1 interviews,video series,personal journey telling)
>her shirt and face already tells me that she only pretends to be into coding because she wants to catch a wealthy programmer guy
>"it is important to have more women in tech because women want to solve different problems - the kind that are life changing" so you are saying medical equipment related software,operating systems,and software used by space stations and all that shit written by males are not life changing?
this picture just makes me want to gon on a woman killing rampage so much
>those sticky notes
>when they are uninterested in it
they aren't...?
like we just generally associate more sciency things for guys ever since birth
and as a result there are mostly only adult males in it, giving young women less female role models to look up to, etc.
it's a cycle
not sure why you even care at all
they absolutely are, women will choose stem out of necessity, but in rich countries they can afford to take a major in hair styling or whatever
gdzie pracujesz
>role models
Marie Curie didn't have a role model and just did her shit on self-curiosity alone.
Mainly because she thought for herself and didn't create glass ceilings above her head by establishing "amazing, impossible to surmount" role models.
Your whole post is diarrhea.
Also women had the chance, time and time again, to create role models among themselves.
They didn't. This discussion is basically a reiteration of what came first, the egg or the chicken.
>so desperate for attention you pose in briefs
Yes, one counter-example completely nullifies the massive gender disparity clear in STEM fields.
You're a fucking imbecile.
>women will choose stem out of necessity
Don't tell me we should expect a massive influx of Ananyas to accompany their Pajeets.
In a discussion about the correct mentality and the incorrect mentality, one example is enough.
You are assuming gender disparity is a problem.
It's not. It's irrelevant. Just like there will forever be a disparity between the rich and the poor because intelligence and capability discern them,
so will there always be a gender disparity.
Look at your shitty countries in the West.
The more gender equal, the more negative your birth rates, the more gender unequal cultures are replacing you.
That's the reality. As far as ideology goes, you can stick it where it belongs, in the shitter.
You should go to a third-world country sometime, dumbass.
Why is this nigress wearing granny panties?
get redpilled, son
tldw it's the kikes
Depite the evidence proving this wrong, it's nature and nurture, both not one or the other, which means no matter how pushy you are you are not gonna make it even, stop.
The faces vs objects experiments when newborns, countless others, even in monkeys that have 0 influences by society show the same results, woman and man like different things.
We are a sexual diamorphic species for a reason. Evolutionary psychology is not a meme.
Where is the woman in all of those man jobs that are the low end of the spectrum that no one wants, where is the woman in all the deaths in jobs? Where is the woman in the suicide rates?
Women and men are different, get over it.
>Languages:
>HTML, CSS
>Java, JavaScript
This is pajeet tier
More IT workers -> lower wages
Women are bad at negotiating wages -> lower wages
That's it. That's all there is to it.
Nothing will nullify the competence disparity in STEM. Men are better at everything except getting pregnant.
Intelligence and capability aren't what separate rich and poor. There are plenty of rich dumbasses and capable poor people.
sure is cheaper than getting a large screen and having Trello or a kanban board
>traditionally male dominated field
>not at all physically demanding
>not at all dangerous
>relatively high paying for time invested in HTML """"coding""" bootcamp
Dumb rich people lose it all while intelligent poor and mid-tier people fill in the vacuum and become part of the discrepancy, turning into the very thing they shat upon in the past.
No matter how much you want to feel good about yourself by clinging onto alternative values for self-esteem, it doesn't change the fact that rich people who get there, and rich people who manage to maintain their wealth, are way above everyone else in skill and intelligence.
The disparity is still there.
If any idiot and dumbass can become rich and stay rich, then go ahead and do it. Prove it.
Why the fuck she is not wearing pants?
Because it's an underwear ad with #girlkoding plastered on it for social points.
Look at the bottom right.
>be in 3d world shithole
>go to college
>study computer engineering
>30 % of my classmates are female
>they are just as interested on the subjects as anyone else and get the same average grades
Why is the US struggling with this?
Every time I read these posts I have to wonder if US people is particularly dumb, because Latin America doesn't have this problem (nor any "minority" problem).
Why can't you guys get your shit together, stop focusing on "X is different than me, therefore is evil" and just do your goddamn work?
And then you wonder why the Chinese and Indian get joba. You're all wasting your time with shitty internet drama!
>he thinks rich people can afford to be dumbfucks when they are not acting like it
Yeah, such an easy life being rich.
You are in the sight of everyone, and the more money you have the more visible you are to society.
The more people want to fuck with you.
Random people down to maids want to slip on a banana in your premises to get your money.
Politicians and other rich people want to take over your assets because you are competition, and you have to lobby back.
The market and economic system is set up such that you will have to play the game and invest and build smart because hoarding money is bad for monetary velocity.
The whole legal system is against you unless you learn to play it.
Even you fucking family becomes your enemies, the thinner the blood and the farther from your closest, the worse it gets, albeit even close family can scheme and fuck you over riches. Down to play psychology over whether you wife will decide to up and go with half your assets.
There's a good reason it is said that so long as you are in the lower half of the 6 digit income, you are having the most stable and easy life. You are yet to become relevant and visible for the big powers to care, and you don't have just enough income yet to truly incite the desperate and the frauds.
>whats the point of pushing women into technology
So that the entire field isn't such a huge homoerotic virgin spaghetti sausage fest that it is.
I'm a Polandfag, too. I graduated CS from a university in 2005. There were literally three (3) girls on my year and they were all extremely smart and competent (one of them was getting a second degree in maths at the same time). So were the few women I had a chance to work with professionaly. I wish there had been more, because all things equal, I'd _much_ rather deal with women than autistic neckbeards and therefore I wholeheartedly support "pushing women into tech".
>most women i know on my faculty are dumb
Blame your shit school for not weeding out dumb people.
Yes, most women are stupid, but so are most men and so is 90% of Sup Forums. Encouraging women into tech is not a bad thing (it's actually a terrific thing unless you're a faggot). What's bad is gender (or race, for that matter) quotas resulting in lowering education and/or employment standards for particular groups. Luckily, we don't have quotas in our protofascist theocratic shithole of a country, so stop whining and stop being a homosexual gay faggot.
Women were actually pretty prevalent in "programming" if you'd call it that. Back in the late 40s through the early 70s, you had a plethora of women in programming. They were writing hard assembly to big database computers but they were still technically programming. These were very trivial and redundant tasks though. The US government hired a bunch of band teachers as programmers for their DARPA program simply because musically competent individuals would understand the means of translating numeric instructions into machine code much more intuitively than regular plebs.
>computer engineering
>computer
>engineering
My favourite meme.
The reason rich countries have a bigger sex-divide in the workforce is because when you're not starving and pooing in the streets, you're more free to pursue your interests.
Environmental pressures minimize, biological pressures maximize.
>Poland
fuck off
>Back in the late 40s through the early 70s, you had a plethora of women in programming.
They were called secretaries.
Their sole work was:
a. Using the phone.
b. Putting cards, stamp sheets, and code sheets into the correct slots on machines; which were brainstormed by men.
c. Connecting and disconnecting plugs and jacks as per instruction from lead programmers and operators which consisted of men.
Refer to pic related.
You take the term "programmers" and "coders" very extremely and stupidly vaguely.
And don't forget that during Medieval Europe, there were many black men and women who were knights and nobility in European society, just like in the movies!
That's just the name my retarded college gives it. It's more of a math and logic career plus networks and opsec, with a couple of courses on C and Assembly programming. For some reason they force me to see chemistry and, too.
So, you're saying that you're interested more in frivolous Internet dramas and pushing retarded agendas than to actually be competitive in your line of work and make money? Americans are stupid after all.
No there are even less women coders than in the 1980s
Now that every women spends a decade hearing about the horrible discrimination they will face... we can be sure it'll be even less.
why this same thread every week OP? Do you just hate women or something faggot?
Good.
Dumbfucks who abandon something because they heard stories were never invested in it in the first place.
There's a good reason all the diversity slots that should have been logically taken up by "educated" 1st world white women who are ahead of the rest of the world, are instead being taken up by Indians, Asians, Muslims, etc.
Because the later don't give a fuck about how much mud is flung their way, they thirst for their ambition no matter what.
White women on the other hand are whiny spoiled bitches. Only good for fucking and nothing else.
I don't just mean secretaries. Read "From Airline Reservations to Sonic the Hedgehog". Fucking horrific book title, but it's a wonderful historical overview of business computing. Women were often hired, in lieu of men often because of economic and neurological (men vs women "thinking") factors, to write large amounts of machine code for big computers. I don't just mean punch cards for loom machines. I'm talking accounting and airline reservation mega computers.
>You take the term "programmers" and "coders" very extremely and stupidly vaguely.
I'm not debating that these weren't really programmers. They were, more or less, just putting instruction down into machine but it was more than just flipping switches and punching cards.
>chance of employment
It's 100% of you're not retarded.
>And don't forget that during Medieval Europe, there were many black men and women who were knights and nobility in European society, just like in the movies!
"Programming" big computers from the late 40s to the early 70s wasn't a thing engineers would do. It was literally just translating mathematical instructions for computers and then manually inputting said translation into the computer.
Screw you tbqh. I may not speak for most women here, but if I were "uninterested" I wouldn't be doing what I'm doing: writing a FOSS RPG Maker clone in C89. Tool of choice: nano. Development platform: home PC I've converted into a secure LAMP server. Testing platform: anywhere, because if I write cross-platform code, I can just download it off my server on even a school library or something and build it there. I'll also have you know I've switched between Windows and different Linux distributions at least ten times. It's dumb, but it's exactly the kind of dumb you'd expect from a techie. I'm also unpopular by choice: I have literally no friends, not even unpopular friends, because I can't be arsed to stop coding. I take care of myself and everything, so I'm decent looking, and I've been asked out a few times, but you know what, I always end up standing boys up, and you know why? Because I cannot be fucking bothered to stop coding. It's a real problem actually. I feel pretty bad about it, but oh well, life goes on. Point being, fuck all y'all, I'm every bit as much a nerdy loser who writes code in a small dark room while chuckling about dank memes as any man might be.
TL;DR
Blogpost.
>makes a claim like "a durrrrr women can't code" that requires a lot of text to refute
>sees a rebuttal that contains a lot of text
>refuses to read it
There's a saying:
The smart people differ from the stupid in that smart people can explain complex things with few words in a simple manner.
You are obviously dumber than a log, and as thick as one too.
>WOMMIN DON'T CODE!!!
Actually, there are plenty of examples of women coding back in the 70's.
>THAT DOESN'T COUNT!!! TO BE A REAL® PROGRAMMER™ LIKE ME YOU NEED TO HAVE A PENIS!!!!!!!1!1!1!1!
Never change, Sup Forums.
It's not a matter of explanation. I could have summed up my post very briefly: "I'm a woman genuinely interested in technology and I can code." Frankly no explanation is needed. The problem is that if I'd said that, you would have assumed I didn't actually know what I was talking about. I must therefore provide the evidence packaged with the claim.
I suppose now you're going to tell me that the smart people differ from the stupid in that smart people can prove things others find difficult to believe, and can prove them with little evidence in a simple manner. Because that's the only way that quote could be taken to apply in this particular situation.
To which I say, that's horseshit. To someone intent on not believing you, a proof with little evidence is not a proof.
TL;DR
Blogpost reply.
You are becoming dumber and dumber the more you post.
Are you a virgin by any chance? Only virgins talk this much.
>You are becoming dumber and dumber the more you post.
You don't actually know that without reading what I'm saying. Your little quote up there doesn't count as proof. If you'd read what I'm saying, you'd understand why.
...
Why would i read blogposts by virgins? I like when smart people talk because their words have form, simplicity, and directness, and you are not one of them.
You talk too much. It's like seeing a cow with chronic diarrhea.
>Why would i read blogposts by virgins?
Because these ones prove you wrong.
How do they prove me wrong if i didn't make any statements in the first place?
It's as they say, virgins talk too much and seek intellectual competition everywhere to compensate. Alas.
>How do they prove me wrong if i didn't make any statements in the first place?
Statement:
>whats the point of pushing women into technology when they are uninterested in it?
>they are uninterested in it
Another:
>The smart people differ from the stupid in that smart people can explain complex things with few words in a simple manner.
These are the two statements my posts disprove.
Those subjective statements weren't made by me, so you are yet again making pointless walls of texts that are nothing but subjective opinions.
user, prostitutes are cheap these days.
Go get one, male or female whatever is your fancy. Seeking intellectual brawls on the Internet isn't the way of the mentally sound, or the sexually sound for that matter.
>Those subjective statements weren't made by me
If the first one wasn't made by you, you had no business replying to me.
The second was brought up by you.
I made it my business to reply to you and remind you that you need to get a grip on your life. I am being helpful here.
Also your posts can't disprove that intelligence is found in simplicity, since every smart person in history emphasized this in biographies and interviews, and you are not one of them.
user pls. Lose your virginity.
>Also your posts can't disprove that intelligence is found in simplicity, since every smart person in history emphasized this in biographies and interviews, and you are not one of them.
My posts disprove that intelligence is EXCLUSIVELY found in simplicity, which was the claim made, and is the entire foundation of your stance.
Nowhere do I mean to deny that intelligence is INCLUSIVELY found in simplicity.
When it comes to speech, intelligence is indeed exclusively found in simplicity, because anything beyond that has a term called "pseudo-intellectualism".
See all scientific articles by smart people: Simple, ordered, get to the point.
See all scientific articles by students and stupid people: 100 pages explaining something that takes 10.
You user, are an example of virgin pseudo-intellectualism. You over-estimate yourself.
>When it comes to speech, intelligence is indeed exclusively found in simplicity
My posts disprove that notion.
Your posts only prove one thing: You need to lose your virginity and lose your unwarranted ego. It's sad seeing such a person waste their mind on Sup Forums.
You are too proud to see a psychologist, so it's up to me to help you user.
On the contrary, my posts disprove the notion that intelligence is found exclusively in simplicity.
Look at yourself user. You are obsessed with debating the concept of intelligence.
That's the trait of a pseudo-intellectual.
It shows a yearning for something you don't have.
But don't worry. Everything will be fixed after you buy a prostitute and are mentally reborn.
Everything you say here rides on the notion that intelligence is exclusive to simplicity, which I've disproved. Therefore, none of it means anything to me.
I understand user. You yearn for intelligence so much that you would go to any length to twist its definitions and lower its standard so you can meet the qualifications of that lowered threshold.
It takes a lot of brain to make something complex look simple, and you hate that part.
So it's best to remove it from the equations.
Alas, a pseudo-intellectual virgin isn't convincing though.
My only purpose here has been to be a counterexample to the claim that women are uninterested in technology.
I'm taking your notion of "intelligence" that you keep bringing up to mean aptitude of the counterexample I provided, because that's the only meaning that made sense in context.
user, you overthink and you pseudo-intellectualize.
I am not at all surprised by the mental mistakes you make.
But i urge you, and i mean this with all my heart and without any irony; as a friend, i urge you to lose your virginity.
This is very important. Instead of buying that GPU you wanted, get 2 or 3 prostitutes and have an oiled orgy or something.
You'll notice your stupidity turning into intelligence soon afterwards. Even Stephen Hawking experienced this and look at him now.
Are you suggesting that when you said this: You DIDN'T mean, by calling me dumb, to suggest I was wrong when I said this?: Because if that's not what you meant, this has been a huge misunderstanding and a huge waste of my time.
user, i don't even know what you said in the first place, it's not worth my time to waste energy on pointless arbitrary debates made by inexperienced walls of text.
My only goal is to cure you from your problems.
Your pseudo-intellectualism and your virginity.
I urge you to act before it is too late, and have a self-reflection period.
>made by inexperienced walls of text
But I didn't make the debate, this guy did. To know a very simplistic essence of what I said to him, you need only have read my first three words:
>Screw you tbqh.
And the debate isn't pointless. Men have social power, and it's important that as many of them as possible know there are women who are good with technology, so they don't shut down our opportunities.
The debate is pointless.
The only thing not pointless is that the consequence of us living in this world of limited resources ends up in you having less access to the resources while I have more.
Men who have social power are accompanied by women who can take away half or most of it with a simple paper and signature. They don't.
Because in the end, it's not about women or men,
it's about MY women and MY men; and YOUR women and YOUR men. If MY woman can be successful while 99% of others fail, that's perfect.
The fact that you don't see this nuance proves you need to lose your virginity to regain your mental potential.
What a disgusting suggestion. I'm not protesting the myth that a female programmer can't make a living. I'm protesting the fact that a female programmer can't make an HONEST living, IN PROGRAMMING. It is NOT pointless to try to appeal for that right.
Why the fuck is she not wearing pants? I don't get it. Why?
It is pointless. The market is oversaturated and the quality of all software everywhere was at a constant decline for the past decade concurrent with saturation.
You want an honest living? So do a hundred millions of others. 1$ a month for each of them is $100m monthly deficit. 10$ a month is $1bil monthly. Keep going up.
Get a grip on reality, because outside of the Internet you are living in it, and reality isn't benevolent nor merciful nor does it care about justice and honesty.
You are competition, and to a competitor you have no rights, you have no worth, you have no value. It's either our platter, or yours.
>You want an honest living? So do a hundred millions of others.
Sure, and there's no good reason everyone who gets one should be a man.
>Get a grip on reality, because outside of the Internet you are living in it, and reality isn't benevolent nor merciful nor does it care about justice and honesty.
>You are competition, and to a competitor you have no rights, you have no worth, you have no value. It's either our platter, or yours.
I don't believe that's really how everyone thinks. But if it is, then if I can frustrate enough people into admitting as much, I'll have decent fuel for a revolution.
>Sure, and there's no good reason everyone who gets one should be a man.
Their women also get it. You are just the wrong woman, and this is the crux of the matter that makes you butthurt.
No matter how much you war against men, you aren't warring merely against men but also their wives and girlfriends and sisters and mothers who will defend that man before they would ever agree with you on anything.
Your fight is pointless from the beginning because it is stranded outside of reality.
>a revolution
KEK
>Their women also get it.
>Their women
>Their
That's not an honest living. That's just a living.
>No matter how much you war against men, you aren't warring merely against men but also their wives and girlfriends and sisters and mothers who will defend that man before they would ever agree with you on anything.
Sure.
>Your fight is pointless from the beginning because it is stranded outside of reality.
And yet look how far we've come.
This is just another step. There already IS a revolution. I'm not the head of it, I'm just a hand. There are many more like me. It's rather sad that not many of them actually know how to code, but I can help with that.
This fight is NOT pointless. We're part of reality, too. And we can change the nature of reality as a whole, by making ourselves a BIGGER part of it. That's what we've been doing since the 1800s.
>And yet look how far we've come.
Nowhere. As this post points out:
>Look at your shitty countries in the West.
>The more gender equal, the more negative your birth rates, the more gender unequal cultures are replacing you.
>replaced
>by poor countries that don't have nukes
lol
All those diversity slots that should have gone to white women, instead going to Indians and Muslims.
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
Pakistan and India have nukes.
If this is a reflection of your education, you don't deserve the honest living you are asking for.
>All those diversity slots that should have gone to white women, instead going to Indians and Muslims.
Or both.
I merely said they're poor, not that I approved of it. Global equalization of wealth would be nice.
Also, feminism will eventually overtake countries currently behind us in women's rights as well.
>Also, feminism will eventually overtake countries currently behind us in women's rights as well.
What a joke.
The sole reason you have any traction is that you have the good luck to be able to guilt a few white people in the West.
Feminism is like those extinct animals. It has found a perfect climatic and geographical pocket that's shielding it temporarily, but its extinction is set in stone once that wall is broken down.
The fuck are you going to guilt Slavs, Muslims, Indians, Asians with?
Not only do you not understand their cultures,
not only are they all proud of their histories no matter what,
not only can you not pull any privilege shit on them,
not only have you given them victim cards such that they don't give a shit about any guilt tactics you could use,
not only have half of them already experienced Communism and Marxism and know the spiel you are playing in the West with feminism down to its core,
but all of them have past history to excuse later atrocities.
Feminism sees no relevance outside of the West, and even there among "tolerant" society, you have garnered animosity from 50% of the population.
>The fuck are you going to guilt Slavs, Muslims, Indians, Asians with?
Their women. And if they don't respond well to that, we are going to privately provide their women with concealed firearms. That's the plan.
Yeah yeah. Good luck. You are going to need as much of it as there is empty space in the universe.