Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
22 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Stéphane Ducasse
Dear happy hackers, 

Thales is looking for an expert and passionated guy in UI related technologies for rapid prototyping in Smalltalk (Pharo). 
I do not know if there are nationality constraints. 
Position is located at Brest. 

You can contact 
for more information.


Stef




--------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ducasse
03 59 35 87 52
Assistant: Julie Jonas 
FAX 03 59 57 78 50
TEL 03 59 35 86 16
S. Ducasse - Inria
40, avenue Halley, 
Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
France


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

=?utf-8?Q?ThalesSyste=CC=80mesAe=CC=81roporte=CC=81sPosteMaquett?= =?utf-8?Q?ageIHM2017=2Epdf?= (125K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Jigyasa Grover
Or maybe a girl or simply a developer to be gender neutral ;)

Just in case, Happy International Women's Day to all the amazing women out there.
Keep rocking !

Best
Jigyasa Grover
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Ron Teitelbaum-3
Happy International Women's Day!!

All the best,

Ron Teitelbaum

On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:12 PM Jigyasa Grover <[hidden email]> wrote:
Or maybe a girl or simply a developer to be gender neutral ;)

Just in case, *Happy International Women's Day* to all the amazing women out
there.
Keep rocking !

Best
Jigyasa Grover



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Thales-is-looking-for-a-UI-expert-in-Smalltalk-and-Pharo-tp4937527p4937831.html
Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Uko2
In reply to this post by Jigyasa Grover
I bet that if an expert and passionated girl in UI-related technologies applies they will not reject her.

> On 7 Mar 2017, at 21:06, Jigyasa Grover <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Or maybe a girl or simply a developer to be gender neutral ;)
>
> Just in case, *Happy International Women's Day* to all the amazing women out
> there.
> Keep rocking !
>
> Best
> Jigyasa Grover
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Thales-is-looking-for-a-UI-expert-in-Smalltalk-and-Pharo-tp4937527p4937831.html
> Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Esug-list mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Thales is looking for a UI expert in Smalltalk and Pharo :)

Jigyasa Grover
Thanks Ron !

Uko, it's all about the passion & skills and not the gender ;)

Cheers

Best
Jigyasa
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

getting more women in Smalltalk

Stéphane Ducasse
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Hi

I would like to raise a bit the debate.
Now if many people would do more for this community I would have the time to write mails but I dont. Sorry about.
I’m feminist and probably more than you expect.

So let us transform such energy into something positive:
Propose some concrete actions to get more women in Pharo/Smalltalk so that we see what we can do.

Because you see I’m more used to do things than to talk.
And since I’m talking too much it implies that yes I’m doing a lot more than you think

Stef


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

SergeStinckwich
On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 8:40 AM, Stéphane Ducasse
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi
>
> I would like to raise a bit the debate.
> Now if many people would do more for this community I would have the time to write mails but I dont. Sorry about.
> I’m feminist and probably more than you expect.
>
> So let us transform such energy into something positive:
> Propose some concrete actions to get more women in Pharo/Smalltalk so that we see what we can do.
>
> Because you see I’m more used to do things than to talk.
> And since I’m talking too much it implies that yes I’m doing a lot more than you think

Thank you Stéphane for raising this important issue.

With Jigyasa Grover, we would like to push a concrete action to have
more woman in Smalltalk. We are looking for companies (or individuals)
that are interested to help us pushing Pharo to the Outreachy program:
https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/

Outreachy helps people from groups underrepresented in free and open
source software get involved. This program funds internships. These
internships are open internationally to women (cis and trans), trans
men, and genderqueer people. Additionally, they are open to residents
and nationals of the United States of any gender who are Black/African
American, Hispanic/Latin@, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native
Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.

The program is similar to Google Summer of Code, but only for certain
set of people & the internship stipend has to be provided by the
organisation themselves hence we need at least 6500USD for
participating in the program i.e. sponsoring at least one participant.

Pls read more about it here :
https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs
https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs#Action

Are there any companies willing to sponsor so we can have Pharo as an
Outreachy organisation ?
If anyone is interested, please send a private email to Jigyasa (in CC) and me.

The list of  companies who already sponsor the program is here:
https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/#sponsors

Thank you for your help.
Regards,
--
Serge Stinckwich
UCN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Stéphane Ducasse
I would like to understand what do we get if we would pay 6500 $
I could not make it. 

Stef


I would like to raise a bit the debate.
Now if many people would do more for this community I would have the time to write mails but I dont. Sorry about.
I’m feminist and probably more than you expect.

So let us transform such energy into something positive:
Propose some concrete actions to get more women in Pharo/Smalltalk so that we see what we can do.

Because you see I’m more used to do things than to talk.
And since I’m talking too much it implies that yes I’m doing a lot more than you think

Thank you Stéphane for raising this important issue.

With Jigyasa Grover, we would like to push a concrete action to have
more woman in Smalltalk. We are looking for companies (or individuals)
that are interested to help us pushing Pharo to the Outreachy program:
https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/

Outreachy helps people from groups underrepresented in free and open
source software get involved. This program funds internships. These
internships are open internationally to women (cis and trans), trans
men, and genderqueer people. Additionally, they are open to residents
and nationals of the United States of any gender who are Black/African
American, Hispanic/Latin@, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native
Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.

The program is similar to Google Summer of Code, but only for certain
set of people & the internship stipend has to be provided by the
organisation themselves hence we need at least 6500USD for
participating in the program i.e. sponsoring at least one participant.

Pls read more about it here :
https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs
https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs#Action

Are there any companies willing to sponsor so we can have Pharo as an
Outreachy organisation ?
If anyone is interested, please send a private email to Jigyasa (in CC) and me.

The list of  companies who already sponsor the program is here:
https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/#sponsors

Thank you for your help.
Regards,
--
Serge Stinckwich
UCN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/

--------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ducasse
03 59 35 87 52
Assistant: Julie Jonas 
FAX 03 59 57 78 50
TEL 03 59 35 86 16
S. Ducasse - Inria
40, avenue Halley, 
Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
France


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

NiallRoss
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Dear all,
    I agree with the rebuke that (I think) Stephane is courteously
implying here.

The Smalltalk community - and the recruiter, I sure - are delighted when
new Smalltalkers join us.  Stephane puts a lot of work into helping that
happen.

Quite apart from the fact that 'guy' has been a neutral term for a long
time, it is a just cause of irritation when people obsess on words.

             Just my 0.02p
                   Niall Ross

Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

>Hi
>
>I would like to raise a bit the debate.
>Now if many people would do more for this community I would have the time to write mails but I dont. Sorry about.
>I’m feminist and probably more than you expect.
>
>So let us transform such energy into something positive:
>Propose some concrete actions to get more women in Pharo/Smalltalk so that we see what we can do.
>
>Because you see I’m more used to do things than to talk.
>And since I’m talking too much it implies that yes I’m doing a lot more than you think
>
>Stef
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Esug-list mailing list
>[hidden email]
>http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
>  
>


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

SergeStinckwich
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
As far as I understand the Outreachy program:

- sponsors give money for one organization (minimum 6500 USD to pay
for one internship) but you can give more :-)
- money is use for internships given by the organization
- after the org has received money for one internship from one
sponsor, other sponsors of the program can give also money to this org
also.
- Sponsors will have their name&logo here:
https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/#sponsors

Basically this is the same than Google Summer of Code, but internships
are sponsored by companies.

Regards,


On Wed, Mar 8, 2017 at 2:51 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I would like to understand what do we get if we would pay 6500 $
> I could not make it.
>
> Stef
>
>
> I would like to raise a bit the debate.
> Now if many people would do more for this community I would have the time to
> write mails but I dont. Sorry about.
> I’m feminist and probably more than you expect.
>
> So let us transform such energy into something positive:
> Propose some concrete actions to get more women in Pharo/Smalltalk so that
> we see what we can do.
>
> Because you see I’m more used to do things than to talk.
> And since I’m talking too much it implies that yes I’m doing a lot more than
> you think
>
>
> Thank you Stéphane for raising this important issue.
>
> With Jigyasa Grover, we would like to push a concrete action to have
> more woman in Smalltalk. We are looking for companies (or individuals)
> that are interested to help us pushing Pharo to the Outreachy program:
> https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/
>
> Outreachy helps people from groups underrepresented in free and open
> source software get involved. This program funds internships. These
> internships are open internationally to women (cis and trans), trans
> men, and genderqueer people. Additionally, they are open to residents
> and nationals of the United States of any gender who are Black/African
> American, Hispanic/Latin@, American Indian, Alaska Native, Native
> Hawaiian, or Pacific Islander.
>
> The program is similar to Google Summer of Code, but only for certain
> set of people & the internship stipend has to be provided by the
> organisation themselves hence we need at least 6500USD for
> participating in the program i.e. sponsoring at least one participant.
>
> Pls read more about it here :
> https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs
> https://wiki.gnome.org/Outreachy/Admin/InfoForOrgs#Action
>
> Are there any companies willing to sponsor so we can have Pharo as an
> Outreachy organisation ?
> If anyone is interested, please send a private email to Jigyasa (in CC) and
> me.
>
> The list of  companies who already sponsor the program is here:
> https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/#sponsors
>
> Thank you for your help.
> Regards,
> --
> Serge Stinckwich
> UCN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
> Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
> http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/
>
>
> --------------------------------------------
> Stéphane Ducasse
> http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr
> http://www.synectique.eu / http://www.pharo.org
> 03 59 35 87 52
> Assistant: Julie Jonas
> FAX 03 59 57 78 50
> TEL 03 59 35 86 16
> S. Ducasse - Inria
> 40, avenue Halley,
> Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
> Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
> France
>



--
Serge Stinckwich
UCN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC)
Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk
http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Jigyasa Grover
Dear Stephane, Serge and everyone else

Glad to know that this community is working to bring in diversity from all sphere and strives for inclusion. A little step of either using she/he or a gender neutral term would encompass all :)

As Serge rightly pointed, we are working to associate Pharo Consortium as an organisation with various Open Source Programs worldwide like Google Summer of Code , GNOME Outreachy  and many others.

Let's keep this spirit alive !

Cheers.
Jigyasa Grover
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Dave Mason
With respect, it is not about obsessing on words.

Male privilege is so ingrained - particularly in the tech world - that we honestly, and with good intent, think that words like "guy" are neutral.

In the interest of establishing some empathy, think for a moment how you would feel if people normally referred to you as "gal" or "girl" or a group to which you belonged as "gals". If you heard that someone was looking to hire a gal, would you think it included you? (The plural form *is* sometimes considered gender-neutral, but personally I have to work to think of it that way; and the singular clearly refers to a male.)

Almost everyone I know in the tech field, including *everyone* I've met in the ESUG community considers ours to be a gender neutral discipline, and bemoans the fact that things aren't more balanced. Unfortunately, that doesn't always translate to inclusivity (including language).

Unfortunately, English doesn't have a single sylable, gender neutral, noun for groups of individuals. French has "gens", but the best that English can do is "people". For individuals, it's worse as neither language does better than "person" (which interestingly is feminine in French - "la personne").

I'm sure many consider this discussion to be irrelevant  and off-topic and "just want to get back to programming".  Me too, but I want lots of female colleagues, and colleagues from other races, countries, and backgrounds, so I'm willing to make all the efforts I can to make that happen - including language, grad-student supervision, undergrad mentoring, co-authoring papers, and funding.

Thanks,  ../Dave

On 12 March 2017 at 04:56, Jigyasa Grover <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Stephane, Serge and everyone else

Glad to know that this community is working to bring in diversity from all
sphere and strives for inclusion. A little step of either using she/he or a
gender neutral term would encompass all :)

As Serge rightly pointed, we are working to associate Pharo Consortium as an
organisation with various Open Source Programs worldwide like  Google Summer
of Code <https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/>   ,  GNOME Outreachy
<https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/>   and many others.

Let's keep this spirit alive !

Cheers.
Jigyasa Grover



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Thales-is-looking-for-a-UI-expert-in-Smalltalk-and-Pharo-tp4937527p4938275.html
Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Ron Teitelbaum-3
Women are excellent programmers, are very disciplined, work well in groups and are overall are much better at encouraging people to work together than men I know (including myself).  Any community that pushes females out of programming is doing themselves a real disservice.  I would say the same thing for politics too.  We need more women participation if we want things to get better.  

My $0.02

All the best,

Ron Teitelbaum 

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 2:07 PM David Mason <[hidden email]> wrote:
With respect, it is not about obsessing on words.

Male privilege is so ingrained - particularly in the tech world - that we honestly, and with good intent, think that words like "guy" are neutral.

In the interest of establishing some empathy, think for a moment how you would feel if people normally referred to you as "gal" or "girl" or a group to which you belonged as "gals". If you heard that someone was looking to hire a gal, would you think it included you? (The plural form *is* sometimes considered gender-neutral, but personally I have to work to think of it that way; and the singular clearly refers to a male.)

Almost everyone I know in the tech field, including *everyone* I've met in the ESUG community considers ours to be a gender neutral discipline, and bemoans the fact that things aren't more balanced. Unfortunately, that doesn't always translate to inclusivity (including language).

Unfortunately, English doesn't have a single sylable, gender neutral, noun for groups of individuals. French has "gens", but the best that English can do is "people". For individuals, it's worse as neither language does better than "person" (which interestingly is feminine in French - "la personne").

I'm sure many consider this discussion to be irrelevant  and off-topic and "just want to get back to programming".  Me too, but I want lots of female colleagues, and colleagues from other races, countries, and backgrounds, so I'm willing to make all the efforts I can to make that happen - including language, grad-student supervision, undergrad mentoring, co-authoring papers, and funding.

Thanks,  ../Dave

On 12 March 2017 at 04:56, Jigyasa Grover <[hidden email]> wrote:
Dear Stephane, Serge and everyone else

Glad to know that this community is working to bring in diversity from all
sphere and strives for inclusion. A little step of either using she/he or a
gender neutral term would encompass all :)

As Serge rightly pointed, we are working to associate Pharo Consortium as an
organisation with various Open Source Programs worldwide like  Google Summer
of Code <https://summerofcode.withgoogle.com/>   ,  GNOME Outreachy
<https://www.gnome.org/outreachy/>   and many others.

Let's keep this spirit alive !

Cheers.
Jigyasa Grover



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Thales-is-looking-for-a-UI-expert-in-Smalltalk-and-Pharo-tp4937527p4938275.html
Sent from the ESUG mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Antony Blakey-3
A am so hesitant to enter into this, but ...

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 20:53, Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ... overall are much better at encouraging people to work together than men I know (including myself).

My experience is different. Women who are truly not constrained by expectations of how women should behave, are just as likely to be introverted, or aggressive, or have any of the other negative (and positive) traits that *all* human beings have. In particular, they do not make better managers by virtue of their sex, nor are they more cooperative.

I suspect you didn't mean it this way, but it's a form of sexism to portray women as somehow intrinsically superior in some 'warm and fuzzy' way, as though those 'soft' skills are somehow biological. In a truly equal society, that would be as much of a stereotype is the idea that women just aren't nerdy or techie. Women can be bitchy, manipulative, corrupt etc etc, as you would expect from any human being. IMO it is also important not to fall into the error of 'the virtue of the oppressed' (as long as there is oppression).

Yes, we absolutely should have a level of participation that reflects the surrounding social distribution, but not because it will make things any 'better', but more that any representational inequality indicates yjay some form of systemic discrimination or disincentive is at work.

Antony Blakey
-------------------
Ph: +31 623 281 557


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Ron Teitelbaum-3
Hi Anthony, 

No I absolutely do mean it this way and there is some good research to back it up. 


All the best,

Ron

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 6:58 PM Antony Blakey <[hidden email]> wrote:
A am so hesitant to enter into this, but ...

> On 12 Mar 2017, at 20:53, Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> ... overall are much better at encouraging people to work together than men I know (including myself).

My experience is different. Women who are truly not constrained by expectations of how women should behave, are just as likely to be introverted, or aggressive, or have any of the other negative (and positive) traits that *all* human beings have. In particular, they do not make better managers by virtue of their sex, nor are they more cooperative.

I suspect you didn't mean it this way, but it's a form of sexism to portray women as somehow intrinsically superior in some 'warm and fuzzy' way, as though those 'soft' skills are somehow biological. In a truly equal society, that would be as much of a stereotype is the idea that women just aren't nerdy or techie. Women can be bitchy, manipulative, corrupt etc etc, as you would expect from any human being. IMO it is also important not to fall into the error of 'the virtue of the oppressed' (as long as there is oppression).

Yes, we absolutely should have a level of participation that reflects the surrounding social distribution, but not because it will make things any 'better', but more that any representational inequality indicates yjay some form of systemic discrimination or disincentive is at work.

Antony Blakey
-------------------
Ph: +31 623 281 557


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Antony Blakey-3

On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 at 00:03, Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Anthony, 

No I absolutely do mean it this way and there is some good research to back it up. 


This study, and all others like it, operate in the context of the existing social structures i.e. women being trained in certain ways, and moulded by society. So such behaviour and ways of interacting is in no way intrinsic to their sex. The very attempts that we are making towards equality, will, ironically, eliminate this difference. When the sexes are equal, raised in equal environments with no sex-specific induction into ways of thinking or modes of operation, then there will be fundamentally no difference in the interaction styles and potentials. This is my point about this way of thinking i.e. 'women are better at X'. Any quality that can be ascribed to a group that is not strictly biological, must be environmental. And hence will be socially determined. The idea of non-discrimination applied from birth would seem to preclude such qualities being correlated with intrinsic characteristics.

And as a direct counter-example - what would those studies say about trans-women and trans-men? If the response is 'well, it depends how they were raised', then there goes the biological link.

Hence, my point that to say that women are intrinsically better (or worse) at anything, or have intrinsic qualities, means that you are either ascribing such qualities to biology, or making a distinction that is fundamentally dependent on existing forms of discrimination i.e 'women raised/trained/moulded in this-or-that society are ...'.

But this is so off topic for this list at this point ...

Cheers,

Antony Blakey.

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Ron Teitelbaum-3
Hi Antony,

There is no reason to believe that it is not biologically based.  There are a number fo traits that have strong evolutionary bias including the ability to see colors, hear sounds, smell food, reactions times etc that are isolated to sex chromosomes for a reason.  The aggressive hunter skills do not necessarily translate well to a  gatherer society.  

As much as I would like to think that eventually, a equal society will lead to the decrease in the differences between men and women, it is not the case now and any systematic bias against women, saying that men can do just as well, ignores qualities that are severely lacking and are in need in today's society, diplomatic corps, scientific and engineering fields, and leadership in general.   

I don't know that those skills will make a positive or negative contribution to the world but we have tried the other way long enough and frankly, I do not think society is benefiting from the current situation.  I for one would like to see women take on greater leadership roles.  

Again this is my own opinion, you are welcome to yours.  

All the best,

Ron

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:41 PM Antony Blakey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 at 00:03, Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Anthony, 

No I absolutely do mean it this way and there is some good research to back it up. 


This study, and all others like it, operate in the context of the existing social structures i.e. women being trained in certain ways, and moulded by society. So such behaviour and ways of interacting is in no way intrinsic to their sex. The very attempts that we are making towards equality, will, ironically, eliminate this difference. When the sexes are equal, raised in equal environments with no sex-specific induction into ways of thinking or modes of operation, then there will be fundamentally no difference in the interaction styles and potentials. This is my point about this way of thinking i.e. 'women are better at X'. Any quality that can be ascribed to a group that is not strictly biological, must be environmental. And hence will be socially determined. The idea of non-discrimination applied from birth would seem to preclude such qualities being correlated with intrinsic characteristics.

And as a direct counter-example - what would those studies say about trans-women and trans-men? If the response is 'well, it depends how they were raised', then there goes the biological link.

Hence, my point that to say that women are intrinsically better (or worse) at anything, or have intrinsic qualities, means that you are either ascribing such qualities to biology, or making a distinction that is fundamentally dependent on existing forms of discrimination i.e 'women raised/trained/moulded in this-or-that society are ...'.

But this is so off topic for this list at this point ...

Cheers,

Antony Blakey.

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Santiago Bragagnolo
Normally when I look for reasons for doing something, pros and cons, is because I'm wanting to be sure, and I'm wanting to not do a mistake. Maybe I'm trying to excuse myself on something i did wrong, or maybe I am looking for a reason for not doing it at all.

If I add any of this reasons to the word woman, I feel shivers on my spine. 

So, let not ask why to put us together. This question does not makes any sense. Because the very first division we did as society is really unfortunate, and it does not make sense either. 

Going back to the subject: how to bring women to the community, It's a really hard question. I would check what kind of careers are chosen by women, in the lines where we can be useful, and take technology to this places, under a feminist flag in a pro feminism program. Try to mix their needs with ours, and a start a cycle of creative development. As Thibault, by example, he does with his attempt of mixing art and coding. 

Basically, to build a bridge based on the need of their professions or future professions, is a way to do something. 

Now, what are those ?




On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 at 01:27 Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Antony,

There is no reason to believe that it is not biologically based.  There are a number fo traits that have strong evolutionary bias including the ability to see colors, hear sounds, smell food, reactions times etc that are isolated to sex chromosomes for a reason.  The aggressive hunter skills do not necessarily translate well to a  gatherer society.  

As much as I would like to think that eventually, a equal society will lead to the decrease in the differences between men and women, it is not the case now and any systematic bias against women, saying that men can do just as well, ignores qualities that are severely lacking and are in need in today's society, diplomatic corps, scientific and engineering fields, and leadership in general.   

I don't know that those skills will make a positive or negative contribution to the world but we have tried the other way long enough and frankly, I do not think society is benefiting from the current situation.  I for one would like to see women take on greater leadership roles.  

Again this is my own opinion, you are welcome to yours.  

All the best,

Ron

On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 7:41 PM Antony Blakey <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Mon, 13 Mar 2017 at 00:03, Ron Teitelbaum <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi Anthony, 

No I absolutely do mean it this way and there is some good research to back it up. 


This study, and all others like it, operate in the context of the existing social structures i.e. women being trained in certain ways, and moulded by society. So such behaviour and ways of interacting is in no way intrinsic to their sex. The very attempts that we are making towards equality, will, ironically, eliminate this difference. When the sexes are equal, raised in equal environments with no sex-specific induction into ways of thinking or modes of operation, then there will be fundamentally no difference in the interaction styles and potentials. This is my point about this way of thinking i.e. 'women are better at X'. Any quality that can be ascribed to a group that is not strictly biological, must be environmental. And hence will be socially determined. The idea of non-discrimination applied from birth would seem to preclude such qualities being correlated with intrinsic characteristics.

And as a direct counter-example - what would those studies say about trans-women and trans-men? If the response is 'well, it depends how they were raised', then there goes the biological link.

Hence, my point that to say that women are intrinsically better (or worse) at anything, or have intrinsic qualities, means that you are either ascribing such qualities to biology, or making a distinction that is fundamentally dependent on existing forms of discrimination i.e 'women raised/trained/moulded in this-or-that society are ...'.

But this is so off topic for this list at this point ...

Cheers,

Antony Blakey.
_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org

_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

jtuchel
I am not sure I am qualified to answer and hope for a few comments from
female Smalltalkers

I usually feel quite uncomfortable in this topic. Just recently I asked
an honest question on Twitter about how to market our product to both
women and men (and any other gender, ftm) without making things sound
"overly politically correct". This question alone was countered by the
argument that the question per se is sexism, because it is unrespectful.
So by asking the question, I felt like being attacked as a chauvinist.
This is not helpful at all...

OTOH, if I just say I'm male and can't comment, I don't help either. So
what can I do?

In the case of Smalltalk, I guess there is not so much gender-specific
that can be done. As a small community, we can hardly get more women
into IT. Woman who already have a foot in IT and need to decide what
language or technology to use probably first look at a few alternatives
that can offer value for their goal. I'd suggest this is not gender
specific ;-)

Here we should focus on questions like "what can Smalltalk offer to make
current projects faster, better, easier, cheaper, funnier"?

Smalltalk excels in a lot of areas, but not much in the ones that are
attractive to young developers these days. People need to build cool
mobile applications to make money. Their web applications need to make a
great impression next to AngularJS, Ember and such. We cannot really
show much in that area, can we?

If our technology isn't helpful for them, people (of all genders) will
look elsewhere, no matter what nice a community we are.

So I am not sure we have gender problem. Looking through our diverse
mailing lists and forums, I don't think I can find much traffic that
would shy women (or gay, or transgender people) away. I think the active
Smalltalk forums are helpful, welcoming and almost completely free of
any offending comments compared to other IT communities.

I hope our female community members feel the same and feel welcomed and
supported. I would be surprised if they don't. If not, I hope they speak
up and help us work on it.

Our main problem is that we are working in a technology that is great in
all things code quality, refactoring, elegance, maintainability,
testing, explorative research and such, but we have poor support for
most of today's mainstream technologies. This is what keeps our
community small and doesn't help in attracting women.

Sorry if this again is ignorant towards the problem (like my Twitter
thread), I didn't intend it to be. I think we should first ask ourselves
what would be needed to attract more people into the Smalltalk niche,
and am relatively sure our community is friendly und supportive already.

I am not sure if programming courses exclusively for girls would be
helpful. Here in Germany, some schools tried to separate classes for
Math and Physics, and thus help girls find their fascination for these
among girls, but the results were not really game-changing. The theory
behind that was that girls might shy away from saying something in class
because the boys would make fun of them if they give wrong answers. But
it seems that was not the problem.


Joachim


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: getting more women in Smalltalk

Antony Blakey-3

> On 13 Mar 2017, at 11:18, [hidden email] wrote:
>
> I am not sure if programming courses exclusively for girls would be helpful. Here in Germany, some schools tried to separate classes for Math and Physics, and thus help girls find their fascination for these among girls, but the results were not really game-changing. The theory behind that was that girls might shy away from saying something in class because the boys would make fun of them if they give wrong answers. But it seems that was not the problem.

In Australia studies have shown that single sex classes for STEM in primary and secondary education leads to better outcomes for girls. The conclusion is that a) boys are more aggressive at answering, and overestimate their competence, and that exactly the opposite applies to girls. OTOH, boys do worse in single-sex situations, but then educational outcomes for boys are getting *comparatively* worse across the board in Australia, because outcomes for girls are improving. But there is a significant drop-off when it comes to career choices, so the  improving educational results aren't necessarily translating.

We have a variety of affirmative action programs in Australia to help deal with this issue, although most are focussed on helping Aboriginal students, whose life, health, educational and career outcomes are a national disgrace.

Antony Blakey
-------------------
Ph: +31 623 281 557


_______________________________________________
Esug-list mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.esug.org/mailman/listinfo/esug-list_lists.esug.org
12
Loading...