Archive for February 2007
Posted February 27, 2007 at 8:54 AM | Tagged as: Web Stuff, Women! | 7 Comments
Wow. This whole gender diversity thing really took off, but I wonder if it’ll continue, or if it’s dying. If you haven’t gotten in on it yet, read Virginia DeBolt’s summary at BlogHer. Some opinions I’ve enjoyed on this topic come from:
I also thought more about Eric Meyer’s comment about publishing, and it took me back to the publish or perish concerns that many scientists and researchers have. Am I a woman scientist? pointed to this paper, which, while relating to the biological sciences, reiterates what I’ve learned about academic paper publishing both in general and in the computer science field.
There is a clear difference between men and women in science with regard to the quantity of their research output. On average, males publish more papers than their female counterparts, a trend that is consistent across scientific disciplines and exists even when obvious mitigating factors are taken into consideration. The causes of this difference are mysterious … However, it may also be a consequence of social factors.
I believe that all of the above is true of publishing in the Web world.
The study also goes on to state that while women produce fewer papers, their papers are generally rated as being of better quality than those produced by men, and are more often cited in other research. I don’t want to extrapolate this particular statement and apply it to the Web world, but it’s something to think about.
Getting back to quantity, however… if the bulk of publications are produced by men, one might assume that the tendency to publish is more male than female. And thus arises another concern that I have — that, in order for women to gain more prominence in our field, we’re expecting them to behave like men. Is this fair? Is it right?
Robert Scoble said on Shelley’s blog that one has to learn to beg [for links] via email and/or face-to-face meetings… men do this far far more often than women do. I also took issue with this, because, again, the expectation is that women should do what men do to get noticed.
I know it’s been done already, but I’ll again ask all of the people involved in this ongoing conversation to to stop and think not about what women can do to get noticed or be seen as an expert, but what they can do to help identify, encourage, and support women. The confidence to ask for links or the opportunity to publish or speak may need to be socialized more with women first — you can’t just expect them to be told to do something in order to see change.
And I’ll ask the women out there to think about what we can be doing to help raise awareness of what we do as individuals, about what we contribute to the field, and how we should be promoting these things to the industry. What can we do to promote opportunities to contribute, what opportunities can we create for ourselves, and how do we foster this ongoing dialog?
While it was a man who helped to reignite this discussion, I ultimately think that women need to own it. I don’t want to say that we’ve all been happy to take a back seat and be content with what we’ve got, because I know that’s not true… but unless we continue to fuel this discussion, and unless we take ownership of steering it and educating others, we won’t see many gains made.
Posted February 24, 2007 at 4:16 AM | Tagged as: Web Stuff, Women! | 11 Comments
Jason Kottke has kicked the ant hill over again. After reading criticism over the gender imbalance in the list of speakers at two recent conferences, he did some research on the numbers for other recent and upcoming conferences. The numbers vary drastically, as do the events, but still, none achieve parity. (Though one, BlogHer, makes it all the way to 100% female presenters.)
Yes, I find this upsetting and frustrating. But I know that the organizers of the conferences I attend are making efforts to achieve a greater balance and I appreciate that. Would I stay away from a conference or event that wasn’t trying to achieve gender balance? No way! In the spirit of Bryn Mawr, I would go and be my brilliant female self and intimidate the men. And if I found the conference to be valuable and enjoyable, I’d try to engage the organizers in a conversation about including more women, and I’d haul along more people (both women and men) to try to change the culture, bit by bit.
That’s about all I was going to say on this matter… until some other comments on the topic came up. Interestingly, out of the blogs I follow, only one woman has commented on the topic so far. Meanwhile, two men whose blogs I follow have also commented, and it is to their posts that I feel the need to reply.
First, to Eric Meyer. He’s made himself loud and clear that, in planning a conference, diversity isn’t important, but things like marketability are. My question to him is: How does one become marketable if one isn’t given an opportunity to participate in the first place? I know that we all like to think that this blogosphere thing is an equalizer and puts men and women on a level playing field, but let’s be honest: it doesn’t. It may give everyone a voice, but not everyone is listening. Not everyone is in the “inner circle”, and it seems like the only way in is to do something groundbreaking. Unfortunately this leaves out all of the folks working very hard, day in and day out, who still have valuable experience and knowledge to contribute.
This somewhat brings me to his concern of “brand appropriateness”. I’m not entirely sure what he means, but I’m betting it has something to do with getting people who work for “big name” companies and organizations. AOL, the company that both Eric and I used to work for, is a pretty big brand. Yet the standards-compliant redesign of AOL.COM in 2004, which was built by two women (Annette Graber and me), and the mega-huge standards-compliant redesign in 2005, which enabled the opening-up of nearly all AOL content to the Web, the front-end for which was architected, managed, and about nearly 100% built by two women (Kate Chipman and me), went largely unnoticed. Why, because it was AOL? Or because the only people who were talking about it were the women involved in it? I know the answer isn’t a simple one, but the issue of gender when it comes to recognizing technical achievement is one I could analyze for a long time….
But to get back to Eric’s post, my final comment to him is this: You’re a recognized leader in a field that’s out to create change on a massive scale. Knowing what it takes to create such change, I can’t believe that you would say that it’s not important to have diversity in a group of speakers at an event which promotes and provides training around the change you want to realize! Diversity on stage is the key to including and engaging the broadest possible audience. Yes, women may attend AEA, but how many more attend when you have women presenting? How many more would attend if the number of female speakers increased? How much change would that then create in the industry?
And sure, if you want to be crass about it, how much more money would that make you?
So, enough with Eric. I’m disappointed that he’s pandering to an audience instead of enlightening them, but I’m not brandishing a pitchfork. Everyone’s entitled to their opinion and I’m glad he’s made his known. Though, to be equally honest, it will affect decisions I make about attending AEA in the future.
Now, onto Tantek’s question to those who are waiting for invites to speak somewhere: “Why are you being so passive?”
Passive, me? In the past year, I’ve submitted proposals to all of the conferences I’ve planned to attend and I’ve contacted individuals who are planning various events that don’t seek proposals to express my interested in participating. But that’s about all I have time to do. After all of that proposal-writing and networking (and don’t forget the day job and volunteering in between!), if you’re not accepted or invited then it’s not because you didn’t try.
Tantek also asked why we accept having this conversation of diversity with specific criteria, like gender. I’d say the simple answer there is that you need some context in which to start the conversation. But I agree with your sentiment, that there has to be more to the discussion. I know that gender mix alone does not diversity make — and keep in mind, I attended Bryn Mawr, a women’s liberal arts college with an excellent track record in socio-economic diversity and a good-and-continually-improving one in racial diversity, where there’s even a club for “lesbian left-handed eskimo midget albinos”! (Just kidding, that was a Dead Milkmen joke. But at Bryn Mawr, it could happen.)
To wrap up this post (my longest ever), let me say that along the path to achieving equality and diversity, I think some segregation is good. Let those who don’t want to include women do their own thing. The women have started to organize and are kicking off their own initiatives, like BlogHer and Women2.0. If you don’t know the names of many prominent women now, I’m very sure that, as time progresses, you will…
Posted February 21, 2007 at 12:10 PM | Tagged as: Computing, Geekout, People I Admire, Technology, Women! | Comments Off
Woo hoo! From the latest ACM Press Release (emphasis mine):
ACM, the Association for Computing Machinery, has named Frances E. Allen the recipient of the 2006 A.M. Turing Award for contributions that fundamentally improved the performance of computer programs in solving problems, and accelerated the use of high performance computing. This award marks the first time that a woman has received this honor. The Turing Award, first presented in 1966, and named for British mathematician Alan M. Turing, is widely considered the “Nobel Prize in Computing.” It carries a $100,000 prize, with financial support provided by Intel Corporation.
Congratulations, Fran! (See my pictures of Fran at GHC 2004.)
Over at USA Today, Kevin Maney has a great article on Fran. He tells her story and comments on the lack of women in technology fields at the same time.
Maney writes, “Allen, now retired from IBM Research, started in computing in 1957 — a time when tech companies, believe it or not, seemed like wide-open and exciting places for women to build careers.” This echoes the sentiments expressed to me by Milly Koss last year, when she told me the story of how she was hired by Eckert-Mauchley just after getting engaged (typically a death knoll for a woman trying to start a career in the 50’s).
I love how Maney confronts the hype around girls and women not being suited for math and science — head on. “First of all, it’s ridiculous to suggest that girls are less predisposed to math and science. Allen is not a freak of nature. Instead, something happened to the technology profession — and to public attitudes about it — to scare off girls.” I couldn’t agree more.
I remember first learning about Fran Allen, back when I was an undergrad. (Deepak encouraged us to learn about the history of computer science and, in particular, about the role of women in its history.) Ever since, she’s been a role model to me, and I know she’s been a role model and mentor to many other women as well. I’m so excited for her to receive this award, not only because it acknowledges her valuable contributions and dedication to the field, but also because it will make her story better known to scores of people (especially young women) considering a career in computing.
Posted February 14, 2007 at 1:35 PM | Tagged as: Geekout, Quotations, Web Stuff | Comments Off
My Valentine’s day gift to you… a geeky tee that you can buy for yourself or your sweetheart!
Ah, the button element. Overlooked by some, but loved by those that know it and use it. With the power of button, you can make style great-looking form buttons in any browser. I was introducing someone to its awesomeness yesterday, when the idea for this tee came to me.
Get one now!
Posted February 11, 2007 at 5:09 PM | Tagged as: Bryn Mawr, Current Events, People I Admire, Women! | Comments Off
It’s official! Earlier today, Drew Gilpin Faust (Bryn Mawr ‘68) was unanimously confirmed as President of Harvard!
You probably need no reminder, if you’ve heard the news, but she is the first woman to hold this office (as well as “the best candidate”, according to the senior fellow of the Harvard Corporation). As Drew herself said, “I’m not the woman president of Harvard. I’m the president of Harvard.”
CNN has the AP story, and the Harvard newspaper, The Crimson, live-blogged the announcement.
Also, don’t miss Bryn Mawr’s write-up and Drew’s 2001 Commencement speech.
