February 7, 2008

On Confidence, Geekdom, and Desire

Category: F/OSS,Geekitude,Gender,Politics,Tech — Biella @ 6:22 am

So a few folks left some interesting comments in response to my link to the article on the rise of the alpha-girl based on the research of Harvard psychologist, Dan Kindlon. My response to both Joe and Karl is that it is worthy to lower the barriers to entry not because girls will change the cultural ecology of geekdom in positive ways (though they may) or because geekdom is inherently “omg totally awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” but for a much more mundane reason: it may allow girls to follow interests and eventually discover a passion. I think it is a great idea if more women were involved in geekdom and open source development not because it is inherently great but because I am sure there a lot of women out there who would enjoy it (and by extension, I am sure a lot who would not). By highlighting this article I am not advocating some forced hacker-female-labor-migration-policy but pointing to the fact that social conditions outside of geekdom play a role in ensuring more participation among women. But let me explain a few things before I argue my position a little further.

First a little clarification, especially now that I have read the article. By “alpha” the author does not mean dominant, aggressive, and totally jerky, which is what might immediately come to mind when you read/hear alpha (especially if one knows any alpha-geeks or alpha-lawyers for that matter, who are much worse, imho). And I certainly don’t want any more alpha-anything (alpha-women, alpha-dogs, alpha-cats, alpha-hamsters ) given our world is already chock-full of alpha-jerks. By using the term, the author basically means confidence, which apparently is on the rise among girls, leaving them much more likely to be go-getters, undaunted by explicit and implicit barriers and obstacles and thus more likely then ever to enter arenas that have been thought of as traditionally male or in fact totally dominated by males. If this trend is indeed in place, I think it is great and I hope that this eventually translates into more girls/women populating traditionally male areas whether it is neurology, movie directing, hacking, or surfing.

What I appreciate about the article is that his research can help us question the idea that women are naturally averse to competition due to their estrogenic hormones while boys, brimming with testosterone, just love it and exude it. I never identified with that conventional well-worn script, in part because I guess I am fairly confident and somewhat competitive. Being in academia for the last 10 years, I have witnessed a lot of really confident women that have helped inspire me and keep me going, especially when times got rough.

What is fascinating about the article (and by extension probably his book) is that gender parity and equity and changes in the psychological makeup of women have not changed overnight but have taken a much longer time to settle in place. We are only now bearing the fruits of structural and educational changes first instituted decades ago and that tackled some serious forms of discrimination. As a result, we are seeing girls and women donning a deeper confidence that may help them participate with more success in the arenas they want to whether it be sports or in the workplaces (though there are certainly still major barriers and issues, which are addressed in the article).

So why would someone want to participate in the world of free software and hacking in particular? My first answer is there may be any number of reasons why anyone, female or male or transgender or whatever, may want to do so—for the love of technology, to feel an intense belonging to a community who share your passions and who work together to create something with a lot of value, to enjoy the challenge of learning, to spread freedom to every corner of the earth, etc… It is not that geekdom is inherently fun and exciting but that it will be interesting to some slice of the population—men or women (or other)—and what is the harm in lowering the barriers to entry, especially if it brings enjoyment and frankly a lot of economic security too?

There are a number of girls/women who already find it worthwhile and I am sure many more who would. And the point is not to create some “policy” to make sure that we shuttle women into hackerdom but as a society we should equip them with the necessary psychological tools so that if they think this is worthwhile, and discover that they love it, etc, they will dare to venture in there and more importantly, stay if they want to.

In terms of Karls point that “a lot of people are professional geeks in part because they’d have trouble being anything else; like being gay, it’s not a “choice,” I think that is far too narrow of an assessment, not to mention an outdated caricature of geeks. While there is certainly a class of socially awkward geeks (if that is what you mean??), I would say they are in the minority though they may certainly stand out precisely because they are the odd ducks and because the stereotype is so entrenched. Many geeks I have met, while they may pretty darn focused on geekdom, also have full and rich lives/personalities that cannot be easily collapsed into one immutable personality type. Yes they may be obsessed with tech but aren’t doctors, academics, musicians, lawyers sort of fanatical too? I spend like my whole week working on academic stuff (part of necessity, part out of love). And at least hacking has way better conferences and economic perks, which may help explain why people stay :-)

Finally, I think you assume a little to strongly that we do what we do because we have a pre-formed existing desired to do so. While I think this is the case for many things (and I knew the minute I learned about anthropology, I wanted to be one, which was odd but it proved to be correct), I think desire is also formed as much through experience and hence the importance of exposure to different worlds and experiences. I know that there are many things I could have never imagined I would have loved–karoake and sailing are two things that come to mind—until I tried them about both took some degree of courage. In the later case, it took a lot of guts to move onto some ship at the age of 18 instead of going to college and I am so glad I did. This is an instance where confidence and an initial curiosity led to discovering a love and passion I never knew I had. So if desire can be formed and not just expressed, I think it is key to make sure people have all sorts of opportunities to cultivate the passions they never knew they had.

2 Comments »

  1. Hi there !!!

    Thanks for the support, it’s the first time i read about a men talking so good about women in Free Software world.. Particularly, i think, it must be very hard for guys to realize how hard it’s to be a girl these days, and mots a geek girl, with all that marketing stuff about how a woman should be or should look like, and all the society, specially man pushing you to be like that.. So you gotta have a very strong personality if you want to be what you want.. and have what you want…

    With this i say: stronger the women are now, stronger are going to be in the future…a strong mother always going to have a stronger daughter..and YES!!! stronger son… so you guys win anyway… ‘cuz no matter how much you try to deny it your mother had affected you in some way..

    Thanks!!!

    PD: sorry about my english..

    Comment by Maria — February 7, 2008 @ 7:11 am

  2. Going a bit off topic, Karl articulated a point that was interesting and something I have flirted with in my own mind, this idea that geeks, like gays, are born. On this point I’m going to drop any PC-ness and just share some of my own experiences — and perhaps prejudices.

    First, the whole debate on whether homosexuality is innate or environment/choice is ongoing and I suspect it is not only one thing for all people. I believe there are biological predispositions that can be influenced by the environment/choice. I have often thought the same thing with respect to two of the subcultures with which I have most strongly identified: geekdom and goth. First, on the goth, I had absolutely no idea what this genre (or EBM or industrial) when I was in high school, but I do know from what I listened to on top 40 radio my favorite bands were the Cure and Depeche Mode. And, when I was scanning the radio and came across a music program on Towson State University and first heard Nine Inch Nails I was absolutely blown away: it gave me chills. Like now, unfortunately, I was not very social and had few friends and can safely say this was not a matter of peer influence. I only learned what the genres were called when I got to college. Nora and I have discussed whether our shared musical interests are innate: we think so. Somehow, we are predisposed to that type of music which is then fulfilled and shaped by its culture.

    On geekiness, I wanted to be “scientist” even in elementary school and was consumed with computers from the start. (Of course, now having RSI and a bit more maturity I now look upon this personality trait with some regret and chagrin.) An exciting Friday night for me in middle and high school consisted of hanging out with a bunch of 40-year-olds at a nearby chess or computer club. (I remember going to dinners with the guys from “The Science Lab” BBS that worked at NASA and at JHU — on Hubble — that was great.) Even before BBSs my Dad (a suspected genetic and environmental influence) belonged to a mail-based computer society that send us hundreds of pages of program printouts that we would then manually type into our Bally Arcade Machine (a great early gaming machine with a BASIC cartridge). I mean, this is some seriously fucked up geek shit ;) .

    When I majored in computer science in undergrad I remember only one woman, who was an exceptional student. We studied a lot together because we both wanted to do well, but, even so, she wasn’t geek. I expect she managed a 4.0 in CS. She could knock out the problem sets, but I remember asking her what kind of processor her computer had (one of those fancy new 486′s?) and she didn’t know, nor did she care.

    When I arrived at MIT, that confirmed my prejudices that there was something innate, but also capable of cultural generativity. And, I met female geeks. ;)

    So I suspect this belief in “innateness” is shared among geeks, and also why it can be a sometimes closed community in as far as it is skeptical non-geek interventions. (Though I agree with everything you said Biella.) I also think this is why the autism-spectrum/asperger’s syndrome thing is of interest to geeks who do think there is some genetic/cognitive aspect of this personality type. I viewed Stallman’s 2006 article “The Curious Incident of Sun in the Night-Time” (http://www.linux.com/articles/54595), a riff on the very good “The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time”, as a tacit acknowledgment of the rumors that he is somewhere on that spectrum. Hence, while there are certainly structural issues and gender bias involved in the inequalities in various disciplines, I’ve explained them at least in part by recourse to this innate differences hypothesis. (And, honestly, in terms of career development JD, MD, and MBA make more sense, and there are plenty of women in those disciplines, though there is still a problem of a glass ceiling.)

    Finally, I heard a recent news story in which it was said that girls also fall within the spectrum but because they are expected to be more social, and are forced to learn more social skills, they don’t suffer quite as much as boys later in life — we also know that active intervention at a early age by teaching children empathic and social skills is useful in autism. This, then supports Karl’s contention that we should perhaps be intervening in keeping boys away from a discipline that allows them to relate to the world primarily through a screen.

    Comment by Joseph — February 7, 2008 @ 8:10 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. | TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

XHTML ( You can use these tags):
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong> .