old-www/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/x106.html

496 lines
18 KiB
HTML

<HTML
><HEAD
><TITLE
>Why are there so few women in Linux?</TITLE
><META
NAME="GENERATOR"
CONTENT="Modular DocBook HTML Stylesheet Version 1.76b+
"><LINK
REL="HOME"
TITLE="HOWTO Encourage Women in Linux "
HREF="index.html"><LINK
REL="PREVIOUS"
TITLE="Introduction "
HREF="x28.html"><LINK
REL="NEXT"
TITLE="Do's and don't's of encouraging women in Linux"
HREF="x168.html"></HEAD
><BODY
CLASS="sect1"
BGCOLOR="#FFFFFF"
TEXT="#000000"
LINK="#0000FF"
VLINK="#840084"
ALINK="#0000FF"
><DIV
CLASS="NAVHEADER"
><TABLE
SUMMARY="Header navigation table"
WIDTH="100%"
BORDER="0"
CELLPADDING="0"
CELLSPACING="0"
><TR
><TH
COLSPAN="3"
ALIGN="center"
>HOWTO Encourage Women in Linux</TH
></TR
><TR
><TD
WIDTH="10%"
ALIGN="left"
VALIGN="bottom"
><A
HREF="x28.html"
ACCESSKEY="P"
>Prev</A
></TD
><TD
WIDTH="80%"
ALIGN="center"
VALIGN="bottom"
></TD
><TD
WIDTH="10%"
ALIGN="right"
VALIGN="bottom"
><A
HREF="x168.html"
ACCESSKEY="N"
>Next</A
></TD
></TR
></TABLE
><HR
ALIGN="LEFT"
WIDTH="100%"></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect1"
><H1
CLASS="sect1"
><A
NAME="AEN106">2. Why are there so few women in Linux?</H1
><P
>Women stay out of Linux for many of the same reasons they stay
out of computing in general, plus a few reasons specific to Linux.
Many excellent books and research papers have investigated this topic
in depth, but we can only summarize the top reasons why women avoid
computing as a whole. We'll also debunk some common theories about
why women stay out of computing in general.</P
><P
>Three good overall resources for the topic of women in computing
are:</P
><P
>"Unlocking the Clubhouse: Women in Computing" by Jane Margolis and Allan Fisher</P
><P
> <A
HREF="http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262133989"
TARGET="_top"
>http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0262133989 </A
></P
><P
>Women in Computing Keyword List</P
><P
> <A
HREF="http://women.acm.org/search/key_list.php"
TARGET="_top"
>http://women.acm.org/search/key_list.php </A
></P
><P
>(Some of the papers referred to by this list are available online, but not all.) </P
><P
>"Why Are There So Few Female Computer Scientists" by Dr. Ellen Spertus</P
><P
><A
HREF="http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/ellens/Gender/pap/pap.html"
TARGET="_top"
>http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/ellens/Gender/pap/pap.html </A
></P
><P
>Let's start by examining two of the most common explanations for
why there are so few women in computing: "Women just aren't interested
in computers," and "Women aren't as smart as men." The problem with
the statement, "Women just aren't interested in computers," is that it
doesn't actually say anything. It's equivalent to answering the
question, "Why is the sky blue?" with "The sky just is blue." The
implicit argument here is that women are genetically predetermined
from conception to not be interested in computers. Very few people
are willing to say exactly that in so many words, but that is the
message behind the "just aren't" theory. If you are unwilling to
accept that women's lack of interest in computing is genetically
predetermined (and I hope you aren't willing to accept it), you need
to start exploring what environmental causes are involved.</P
><P
>A more explicit version of this theory is that "Women aren't as
smart as men," or any of the usual corollaries--women aren't as good
at some skill as men are, usually mathematics, spatial reasoning, or
logic. <I
CLASS="citetitle"
>Newsweek</I
> regularly trumpets studies
finding gender-related mental differences while ignoring the (far more
common) studies which find no difference at all. Frequently, other
researchers are unable to duplicate the results or find flaws in the
original researchers' methods, but those stories tend to get much
less press. These studies also make no attempt to control for
differences in the upbringing of men and women. For example, studies
frequently show that women have better developed linguistic capability
in some way. This is taken as proof, at least by the press, that
women are genetically predisposed to be more verbal than men. But at
the same time, studies also show that young women are rewarded more
than young men for verbalization. The sheer existence of physical
differences between male and female brains (an idea still in dispute)
is not in and of itself proof that men and women are born with
differences in mental capacity. We still need to separate out what
differences are caused by genetics, and which are caused by the
environment. As a result, if you ask the experts, the only consensus
on gender-related mental differences is that there is no consensus.
This is an area of ongoing research, where results will continue to be
hotly debated for decades or centuries. (My personal opinion is that
men and women do have some innate, genetically based differences which
result in tendencies towards different behaviors, but I won't guess
what they are or how strongly they influence behavior. Human beings
are extremely adaptable creatures, so I suspect the genetic
differences are minor compared to differences in environment.)
</P
><P
>&#13;Something else to keep in mind is that similar arguments have been
made about many other fields when women first began joining them, from
medical science to education. For example, women couldn't be doctors
because they weren't physically strong enough to set broken bones,
would faint at the sight of blood, or didn't have the proper bedside
manner. Those arguments were abandoned when women turned out to be
just as good doctors and teachers as men were. Maybe men will turn
out to be better at computer science than women, but history does not
support that hypothesis.</P
><P
>A good reference for the general topic of measuring differences
between human groups and the motivation behind those measurements is
<I
CLASS="citetitle"
>The Mismeasure of Man</I
> by Steven Jay Gould.
Scientists have been "proving" differences in the brains and bodies of
groups of humans for centuries, although in hindsight both their
methods and their results were flawed. For example, Stephen Jay Gould
reviews the methods of one scientist measuring skull capacity in men
and women of different races (and by implication, brain size and
intelligence). The scientist originally measured the volume of the
skulls by packing them with linseed, which is somewhat compressible,
and confirmed his hypothesis that white men tended to have larger
skulls. When he later remeasured the volume of the skulls with
incompressible lead shot, he discovered that much of the differences
in volume between the skulls disappeared. He had been subconsciously
stuffing the skulls belonging to white males with more linseed than
the skulls belonging to women or non-white men. Keep this story in
mind when you read studies claiming to find that some brain structure
is a different size in men and women.</P
><P
>Now that we've addressed some common misconceptions about women
and computing, let's look at the real reasons why women stay out of
Linux and computing. I personally believe that the tendencies and
behaviors I'm about to describe are the result of the way most women
are raised, in other words, they are the result of gender
socialization. I'm not claiming that women are born less confident,
or anything else, I'm just observing general tendencies in women and
pointing out how Linux culture discourages people with those
tendencies. Many of the reasons I'm about to list also apply to
other underrepresented groups in computing or science.</P
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN127">2.1. Women are less confident</H2
><P
>Women severely underestimate their abilities in many areas, but
especially with respect to computers. One study about this topic is
<I
CLASS="citetitle"
>Undergraduate Women in Computer Science: Experience,
Motivation, and Culture</I
>: <A
HREF="http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~gendergap/papers/sigcse97/sigcse97.html"
TARGET="_top"
>http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~gendergap/papers/sigcse97/sigcse97.html
</A
></P
><P
>For example, while 53% of the male computer science freshman
rated themselves as highly prepared for their CS courses, 0% of the
female CS freshman rated themselves similarly. But at the end of the
year, 6 out the 7 female students interviewed had either an A or B
average. Objective ratings (such as grade point averages or quality
and speed of programming) don't agree with most women's
self-estimation. I personally encountered this phenomenon: Despite
plenty of objective evidence to the contrary, including grades, time
spent on assignments, and high placement in a programming contest, I
still didn't consider myself to be at the top of my class in college.
Looking back objectively, it seems clear to me that I was performing
as well or better than many of the far more confident men in my
class.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN133">2.2. Women have fewer opportunities for friendship or
mentoring</H2
><P
>Like any other discipline, computer science is easier to learn
when you have friends and mentors to ask questions of and form a
community with. However, for various reasons, men usually tend to
mentor and become friends with other men. When the gender imbalance
is as large as it is in computer science, women find themselves with
few or no other women to share their interests with. While women have
male friends and mentors, it's often harder and more difficult for
women to find a community and then to fit in with it. Many women
leave the field who would have stayed if they had been male.</P
><P
>It's true that this is a feedback loop, fewer women in computing
leads to fewer women in computing. It's important to understand that
this feedback loop causes women to leave computing who wouldn't have
left if, all other things being equal, they had been men. This is
important because male classmates often assume their female
counterparts leave the field because they "just aren't good enough."
Women's low self-estimation contributes to this false
impression.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN137">2.3. Women are discouraged from an early age</H2
><P
>Societal pressure for women to avoid computing begins at an
extremely early age. Preschoolers already have conceptions about
which jobs are men's jobs, and which jobs are women's. An excellent
review of studies documenting gender role socialization from an early
age can be found in Dr. Ellen Spertus's excellent "Why are There so
Few Female Computer Scientists?" paper: <A
HREF="http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/ellens/Gender/pap/node6.html"
TARGET="_top"
>http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/ellens/Gender/pap/node6.html</A
></P
><P
>Once you realize that men and women are treated differently
from, practically, birth, it becomes hard to claim that any woman
hasn't experienced discrimination. Sure, if you're lucky, no one ever
explicitly told you that you couldn't work with computers because you
were a girl, but every time you raised your voice, an adult told you
to quiet down, while the boy next to you continued to shriek. This is
a handicap later on in life, when being loud and insistent is the only
way to get your opinion heard--for example, on the linux-kernel
mailing list.</P
><P
>The most striking example of a subtle bias against computing for
women is that, in the U.S. at least, the family computer is more
likely to be kept in a boy's room than in a girl's room. Margolis and
Fisher give several telling examples of this trend and its effects on
pages 22-24 of <I
CLASS="citetitle"
>Unlocking the Clubhouse</I
>.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN144">2.4. Computing perceived as non-social</H2
><P
>Working with computers is perceived to be a solitary occupation
involving little or no day-to-day human contact. Since women are
socialized to be more friendly, helpful, and generally more interested
in human interaction than men, computing tends to be less attractive
to women. I want to stress that computing is only perceived to be a
non-social activity. While it is possible for a programmer to be
relatively successful while being actively anti-social and programming
does tend to attract people less comfortable with human interaction,
computing is as social as you make it. During college, I spent most
of my computer time in a computer lab at the school with several of my
best friends. And recently, I changed jobs specifically in order to
have more day-to-day contact with other programmers. For me,
programming by myself is less fun or creative than it is when I have
people around to talk to about my program.</P
><P
>&#13;Oddly, many occupations which are arguably less social than computing
are still very attractive to women. Writing, either fiction or
non-fiction, is a good example of a field that requires many hours of
solitary concentration to be successful. Perhaps the answer to the
paradox lies in the perception of individual writers as still being
interested in social interaction, and just not having much opportunity
for it.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN148">2.5. Lack of female role models</H2
><P
>Women in computing do exist, but most people aren't lucky enough
to meet a female computer scientist. Women are socialized to be
modest and avoid self-promotion, which makes them even less visible
than they might otherwise be. Mothers and female schoolteachers
regularly protest that they don't know anything about computers. As a
result, girls grow up without examples of women who are either
competent or confident with computers. I encourage all women in
computing to be as visible as possible--accept all interviews, take
credit publicly--even when you don't want to. You may be embarrassed,
but by allowing yourself to be publicized or promoted, you might
change a young girl's life.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN151">2.6. Games, classes aimed towards men</H2
><P
>We all know that most computer games are written by and for men.
They feature non-stop gore and women with unrealistically huge
breasts, but hey, if that's the market, what's the problem?</P
><P
>The best way I know how to illustrate the problem with the
computer game industry is to tell a story from a Salon.com article
(<A
HREF="http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/05/22/e3_2001/"
TARGET="_top"
>http://archive.salon.com/tech/feature/2001/05/22/e3_2001/
</A
>) about the 2001 E3 gaming convention:</P
><P
>
"A creative director for a leading development team cheerfully
described to me how its Q.A. team made a prostitute sport a game's
logo on her body during a combination gonzo video/gangbang session."
</P
><P
>This was only one of many similar stories and events at the
conference. How can an industry that views company-sponsored
gangbangs as somehow appropriate *not* be driving women out of the
computing arena in droves?</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN158">2.7. Advertising, media say computers are for men</H2
><P
>The next time you see a computer ad featuring a person, pay
attention to that person's gender. Most likely, the person is a man.
Frequently, when I do see women in a computer ad, they're wearing
freakish makeup and some form of colorful skintight vinyl, or else
they're acting dumb and helpless and waiting for the man to show them
how to use the computer. Often, they don't appear to actually be
using the computer and are just sort of decoratively posed near it.
Movies and TV shows are no better. When a woman is depicted as a
programmer, often more screen time is spent admiring her shapely body
and kissable lips than demonstrating her competence as a programmer.
Notable example: Angelina Jolie in "Hackers."</P
><P
>Men and women are constantly bombarded with media images which
say: "Men use computers, women don't." It's difficult to overcome
daily indoctrination of this sort.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN162">2.8. Life-work balance more important to women</H2
><P
>Being good at computing is considered to be an activity that
requires spending nearly all your waking hours either using a computer
or learning about them. While this is another misperception, women
generally are less willing to obsess on one topic, preferring to lead
a more balanced life. Women often believe that if they enter
computing, they will inexorably lose that balance, and avoid the field
altogether instead. During college, I was personally very proud of
not spending my leisure time playing computer games because it refuted
the programmer stereotype of being at the computer all day, every
day.</P
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="sect2"
><H2
CLASS="sect2"
><A
NAME="AEN165">2.9. Reasons women avoid Linux specifically</H2
><P
>Linux development is more competitive and fierce than most areas
of programming. Often, the only reward (or the major reward) for
writing code is status and the approval of your peers. Far more
often, the "reward" is a scathing flame, or worse yet, no response at
all. Since women are socialized to not be competitive and avoid
conflict, and since they have low self-confidence to begin with, Linux
and open source in general are even more difficult than most areas of
computing for women to get and stay involved in.</P
></DIV
></DIV
><DIV
CLASS="NAVFOOTER"
><HR
ALIGN="LEFT"
WIDTH="100%"><TABLE
SUMMARY="Footer navigation table"
WIDTH="100%"
BORDER="0"
CELLPADDING="0"
CELLSPACING="0"
><TR
><TD
WIDTH="33%"
ALIGN="left"
VALIGN="top"
><A
HREF="x28.html"
ACCESSKEY="P"
>Prev</A
></TD
><TD
WIDTH="34%"
ALIGN="center"
VALIGN="top"
><A
HREF="index.html"
ACCESSKEY="H"
>Home</A
></TD
><TD
WIDTH="33%"
ALIGN="right"
VALIGN="top"
><A
HREF="x168.html"
ACCESSKEY="N"
>Next</A
></TD
></TR
><TR
><TD
WIDTH="33%"
ALIGN="left"
VALIGN="top"
>Introduction</TD
><TD
WIDTH="34%"
ALIGN="center"
VALIGN="top"
>&nbsp;</TD
><TD
WIDTH="33%"
ALIGN="right"
VALIGN="top"
>Do's and don't's of encouraging women in Linux</TD
></TR
></TABLE
></DIV
></BODY
></HTML
>