The Ada Initiative: Salaries for women to participate in open source(lwn.net)
lwn.net
The Ada Initiative: Salaries for women to participate in open source
http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/428075/3824bdd3ce2f7151/
6 comments
To offer a possibly way oversimplified theory: In a typical workplace, sexual harassment and random acts of male chauvinism are constrained by corporate culture, so at least from my experience, women can be somewhat comfortable being themselves as paid programmers.
From my experience in open source projects, the number of trolls trolling is quite a bit higher, especially when the primary channels for communication are mailing lists and IRC, which people have an easier time being trolls on due to anonymity and lack of face to face interaction. Not having a boss to yell at trolls for trolling or not having the possibility of getting cockpunched for saying something stupid might be another factor.
From my experience in open source projects, the number of trolls trolling is quite a bit higher, especially when the primary channels for communication are mailing lists and IRC, which people have an easier time being trolls on due to anonymity and lack of face to face interaction. Not having a boss to yell at trolls for trolling or not having the possibility of getting cockpunched for saying something stupid might be another factor.
Is there a lot of sexual harassment/chauvinism on wikipedia also?
Personally, I've observed vastly more sexist/chauvinistic behavior on Facebook (where women seem quite happy to contribute) than on OSS mailing lists, but that may just be an artifact of the people I interact with.
Another question: can anyone think of other free/for-pay intellectual activities which do/dont exhibit a gap? We can compare OSS to paid programming, Wikipedia to Demand Media, are there other comparisons of this sort one can make?
Personally, I've observed vastly more sexist/chauvinistic behavior on Facebook (where women seem quite happy to contribute) than on OSS mailing lists, but that may just be an artifact of the people I interact with.
Another question: can anyone think of other free/for-pay intellectual activities which do/dont exhibit a gap? We can compare OSS to paid programming, Wikipedia to Demand Media, are there other comparisons of this sort one can make?
[deleted](1)
You may find these reports on gender in open source interesting.
http://flosspols.org/deliverables/D16HTML/FLOSSPOLS-D16-Gend...
http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/lin3_gender.pdf
The findings include that women aren't disinterested; instead, they're excluded in a number of ways which often aren't obvious to those who contribute to the problem.
Some other good resources can be found at
http://www.linuxchix.org/women-open-source-free-software-bib...
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Resources_for_men
http://flosspols.org/deliverables/D16HTML/FLOSSPOLS-D16-Gend...
http://opensource.mit.edu/papers/lin3_gender.pdf
The findings include that women aren't disinterested; instead, they're excluded in a number of ways which often aren't obvious to those who contribute to the problem.
Some other good resources can be found at
http://www.linuxchix.org/women-open-source-free-software-bib...
http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Resources_for_men
Your first two sources are interesting, though somewhat tangential to the question I was asking.
Of the key findings of the first, most provide little insight on the question I'm asking: why women are less willing than men to work gratis?
Claims 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 simply suggest women are less skilled than men, which should also preclude them from working for pay. 1.2.5 is no explanation at all - many corporate environments with plenty of women are considerably more hostile than open source communities. 1.2.6 is an incorrect stereotype - see my link to the ATUS.
1.2.1 is interesting - it suggests women strongly prefer a collectivist environment to an individualist one. As a person who's done little more than fix typos, it's worth asking: is wikipedia also a more individualist environment than Demand Media [1]? Is OSS more individualist than the typical corporate environment?
1.2.2 seems to contradict other parts of the report - women both get a "high level of attention" and are unable to get attention (further in the report.) Not sure what to make of this one. [2]
The second report strongly suggests women can't cut it in software - they lack the dedication (claim 1), are unwilling to work with mentors who are different from them (claim 2), they can't handle a text interface (claim 4), they can't handle competition (claim 6), and other women won't help them (claim 7). But the problem is, all of these claims apply equally well to for-pay software [3]. (Claim 5 is actually not a cause, but a result.) Only claim 3 suggests an actual difference between gratis software production and for-pay production - the use of gendered pronouns. (I'll hypothesize that HR does search and replace to eliminate these in big companies.)
So near as I can tell, the only relevant claims made by these reports are that either gendered pronouns or an individualist environment lead women to be unwilling to contribute. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there is an individualism/collectivism gap between OSS and for-pay software. That's an interesting hypothesis.
Another testable implication of that theory: women would be less likely than men to work as individual (i.e., non-accenture) contractors or work for startups, preferring instead the collectivist environments of big companies. Is this true?
[1] I recall reading that most Demand Media workers are women. Would love it if someone with more knowledge could confirm/deny this.
[2] Also finding the methodology of this report weak. To determine attention received, why take a poll rather than just running an experiment? I.e., post some newbie questions on mailing lists with male and female names, and measure the results.
[3] Maybe there is a gap caused by corporate use of Visual Studio as opposed to OSS use of emacs/vi?
Of the key findings of the first, most provide little insight on the question I'm asking: why women are less willing than men to work gratis?
Claims 1.2.3 and 1.2.4 simply suggest women are less skilled than men, which should also preclude them from working for pay. 1.2.5 is no explanation at all - many corporate environments with plenty of women are considerably more hostile than open source communities. 1.2.6 is an incorrect stereotype - see my link to the ATUS.
1.2.1 is interesting - it suggests women strongly prefer a collectivist environment to an individualist one. As a person who's done little more than fix typos, it's worth asking: is wikipedia also a more individualist environment than Demand Media [1]? Is OSS more individualist than the typical corporate environment?
1.2.2 seems to contradict other parts of the report - women both get a "high level of attention" and are unable to get attention (further in the report.) Not sure what to make of this one. [2]
The second report strongly suggests women can't cut it in software - they lack the dedication (claim 1), are unwilling to work with mentors who are different from them (claim 2), they can't handle a text interface (claim 4), they can't handle competition (claim 6), and other women won't help them (claim 7). But the problem is, all of these claims apply equally well to for-pay software [3]. (Claim 5 is actually not a cause, but a result.) Only claim 3 suggests an actual difference between gratis software production and for-pay production - the use of gendered pronouns. (I'll hypothesize that HR does search and replace to eliminate these in big companies.)
So near as I can tell, the only relevant claims made by these reports are that either gendered pronouns or an individualist environment lead women to be unwilling to contribute. It wouldn't surprise me at all if there is an individualism/collectivism gap between OSS and for-pay software. That's an interesting hypothesis.
Another testable implication of that theory: women would be less likely than men to work as individual (i.e., non-accenture) contractors or work for startups, preferring instead the collectivist environments of big companies. Is this true?
[1] I recall reading that most Demand Media workers are women. Would love it if someone with more knowledge could confirm/deny this.
[2] Also finding the methodology of this report weak. To determine attention received, why take a poll rather than just running an experiment? I.e., post some newbie questions on mailing lists with male and female names, and measure the results.
[3] Maybe there is a gap caused by corporate use of Visual Studio as opposed to OSS use of emacs/vi?
Those are highly biased reports. Moreover, all the issues raised in these reports apply to big open source projects where women are claimed to be excluded.
For argument's sake, let's assume that this is true. What about individual projects then? Surely no one can exclude the primary author from his own project. Where are the female counterparts to Daniel J. Bernstein, Fabrice Bellard etc.?
For argument's sake, let's assume that this is true. What about individual projects then? Surely no one can exclude the primary author from his own project. Where are the female counterparts to Daniel J. Bernstein, Fabrice Bellard etc.?
All these initiatives to help women in tech, make me ponder if the same courtesy is extended to men in fields dominated by women. Is there the same desperation to attract new male recruits? The same incentives? For example, does anyone know of similar initiatives to increase the number of male elementary teachers or nurses?
There are some initiatives, though they're pretty recent and most are still at the stage where governments have commissioned somebody to study the problem and come back with a report, but not implemented anything. It seems the main ones to be implemented are informal ones, like greater advertising to try to encourage men to enter the teaching profession, and unofficial preferences given to men in hiring, if equally qualified men and women apply for the same position. This paper has a survey of some of the responses: http://eng.kedi.re.kr/upload_data/kedi_jrn/07_Maleteacher.pd...
The organizations, communities behind those female dominated fields need to feel there is a value in increasing their representation of the male perspective.
I don't think communities feel that nursing or elementary school teachers are missing out on the male perspective.
Society is still exploring how to handle the wide variance in what individual women and men want to do with their lives, what men as a group and women as a group are culturally interested in doing, and what men as a group and women as a group are innately interested in doing.
I don't think communities feel that nursing or elementary school teachers are missing out on the male perspective.
Society is still exploring how to handle the wide variance in what individual women and men want to do with their lives, what men as a group and women as a group are culturally interested in doing, and what men as a group and women as a group are innately interested in doing.
Apart from a few activists, I don't think computing communities feel we are missing out on a female perspective [1]. But for some reason, this attitude is often a point of criticism by the activists. Why is that?
(Incidentally, nursing does need men - a lot of men are uncomfortable having a woman assist them in personal care activities. More male nurses = increased patient satisfaction.)
[1] Near as I can tell, the only place we could possibly be missing out is in some UX fields, and even there it seems that empirically-minded men are doing a good job (see: Facebook, Zynga, Apple).
(Incidentally, nursing does need men - a lot of men are uncomfortable having a woman assist them in personal care activities. More male nurses = increased patient satisfaction.)
[1] Near as I can tell, the only place we could possibly be missing out is in some UX fields, and even there it seems that empirically-minded men are doing a good job (see: Facebook, Zynga, Apple).
You are definitely suffering from a lack of female perspective :-) Women are raised with different priorities and different habits of mind, different strengths and mental and emotional tools.
The communities that don't feel male teachers/nurses are important are definitely suffering from a lack of male perspective. That's the point I'm making - the moment you flip the genders in grhino's argument, you immediately get objections.
(That said, in general I don't think gender balance matters much. Either women's different priorities/habits/strengths result in them producing good code, or they don't. It's only in unusual cases involving human interaction where it actually matters - e.g., doctors/nurses working on your privates.)
(That said, in general I don't think gender balance matters much. Either women's different priorities/habits/strengths result in them producing good code, or they don't. It's only in unusual cases involving human interaction where it actually matters - e.g., doctors/nurses working on your privates.)
There are organizations that specifically encourage men to join nursing.
http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-receives-recognition-e...
http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-receives-recognition-e...
If you're male and you want to teach, going into elementary education is one of the riskiest choices you can make. Our attitude has a distinctively negative attitude towards males in these domains -- men aren't supposed to want to work with children, and if they are, then they must be perverts and molesters. This attitude has gotten worse and worse over the years. A man being alone with a child is sufficient to cause a panic in a passer-by. And since we've raised children to be increasingly afraid of strangers -- which is another word for men -- we place men in a situation where their entire lives can be ruined by one mischievous child telling one fib. This is the society we've made, and I don't think a few initiatives here and there are going to change this prevailing (and institutional) misconception, at least not for a long time.
"The Ada Initiative—named for Countess Ada Lovelace, the world's first woman open source programmer..."
Or rather, the world's first programmer, who was also a woman and open sourced her programs.
Or rather, the world's first programmer, who was also a woman and open sourced her programs.
Some research shows that the majority of OS core developers are FT paid employees, not volunteers:
http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1248869
In addition, there's research showing that OS culture is both explicitly and implicitly unfriendly to women: http://www.ncwit.org/cultureos
In addition, there's research showing that OS culture is both explicitly and implicitly unfriendly to women: http://www.ncwit.org/cultureos
From what I understand at a cursory glance the salaries are meant to be for the members of the organization, not for programmers working on open source projects (which would be a bad idea for so many reasons...)
"It is clear from the FAQ that TAI hopes that fundraising will provide the financial resources to allow the organization to dig into projects that are difficult or impossible for all-volunteer organizations to take on."
This implies to me that it will actually pay programmer salaries. Why would this be a bad idea? Most open source software is developed by developers paid to do so.
Secondly, I certainly hope that Valerie Aurora does more than administer the project. I want my union mounts!
This implies to me that it will actually pay programmer salaries. Why would this be a bad idea? Most open source software is developed by developers paid to do so.
Secondly, I certainly hope that Valerie Aurora does more than administer the project. I want my union mounts!
I think when they use the words project and program to describe their work, they don't mean software. Their focus seems to be on "helping women get careers in open technology through recruitment and training programs for women, education for community members who want to help women, and working with corporations and projects to improve their outreach to women."
The initiatives they have listed so far are
* Development of guidelines and policies to encourage women’s attendance at conferences, recruitment of women to your company, and participation of women in community projects. * Workshops to train community members and employees on practical skills for encouraging women. * Public relations advice for developing and maintaining a women-friendly reputation. * First Patch Week, a week in which companies and communities sponsor open source software developers to mentor women while they write and submit their first patch. * Women in open technology and culture survey, a survey of a representative cross-section of projects and communities to develop a baseline for measuring progress in women’s participation. * Improving women’s participation in Wikipedia and other open data projects.
This seems very different from, and more valuable than, paying programmer salaries.
The initiatives they have listed so far are
* Development of guidelines and policies to encourage women’s attendance at conferences, recruitment of women to your company, and participation of women in community projects. * Workshops to train community members and employees on practical skills for encouraging women. * Public relations advice for developing and maintaining a women-friendly reputation. * First Patch Week, a week in which companies and communities sponsor open source software developers to mentor women while they write and submit their first patch. * Women in open technology and culture survey, a survey of a representative cross-section of projects and communities to develop a baseline for measuring progress in women’s participation. * Improving women’s participation in Wikipedia and other open data projects.
This seems very different from, and more valuable than, paying programmer salaries.
I used to think the reason women didn't contribute to open source was simply a lack of relevant skills - programmers are primarily not women. But Wikipedia exhibits a similar disparity, and I seriously doubt there is a skill gap in writing neutral point of view articles on every topic. The data on wikipedia strongly suggests my skills hypothesis is wrong.
An interesting empirical question: do women contribute to open source proportionately to their involvement in programming for pay? A quick google search finds weak evidence [1] that they do not:
http://www.oscon.com/oscon2009/public/schedule/detail/10173
http://infotrope.net/2009/07/25/standing-out-in-the-crowd-my...
If not, then that might indicate a more general phenomenon: women are less willing [2] to contribute (gratis, at least) to the informational commons than men. It's an interesting question, and I'd love to see more data/speculation.
[1] This is the only primary source I've found. A number of other secondary sources cite this one.
[2] Wikipedia demonstrates the issue is not skill. Women's contributions to Facebook strongly suggest the issue is not free time. The ATUS also suggests time is not a factor - women have about as much free time as men (men spend 8.1 hours/day on work related, household and care providing, women spend 7.85 hours/day). http://www.bls.gov/news.release/atus.t08.htm