Re: Effect of Gender in Learning Ada - OT

[Robin KAY <komadori@myrealbox.com>]

Peter Richtmyer wrote:

> Robin KAY <komadori@myrealbox.com> wrote in message 
> news:<1051447321.38985.0@iapetus.uk.clara.net>...

[snip]

>> A single
>> sex enviroment of any significant size is indicitive of something having
>> gone wrong.
>
> These topics are very complex... let me just expound a bit more.

[snip]

What I was trying to say was that assuming that the sexes are roughly on 
average equal in abilities and given a fair and non-discrimatory hiring 
process the probability of employees of only a single sex being hired is 
low. Therefore (IMHO) the disadvantages[1] of a quota system outweigh 
the advantage of preventing a single sex environment in the few 
situations where it might occur under a fair and non-discrimatory hiring 
process. My (evidently badly worded) comment was solely directed at 
Frode's implication[2] that quotas were needed in order to prevent 
single sex enivronments.

[1] a) reduced quality of employees becuase meeting quotas must be taken 
into account as well the ability of candidates, and b) belief (either by 
themselves or by coworkers) that employees who count towards a quota 
might not have been hired otherwise.

[2] Frode said "Have you worked in an all-male environment? The only 
thing worse is perhaps an all-female environment" in response to "Quotas 
are a form of discrimination in themselves".

> Though I still do not agree that every software group (or any group)
> must be proportionate to the applicant pool on the basis of ...

Neither do I, though I can see how you might have misread that from my 
reply to Frode. I was only saying that the make up of the employee pool 
is likely to resemble that of the applicant pool. If you have you two 
sexes in the applicant pool but only one sex in the employee pool then 
it suggests something fishy is going on (e.g. someone's been dumping 
synthetic estrogens in the water *bad pun* ^_^').

> Robin's last sentence above should (IMHO) have a "possibly" between
> "is" and "indicative". So many factors ...

I was using 'indicative' in a suggestive sense.

> enough for now :-)

Yes ^_^'.

-- 
Wishing you good fortune,
--Robin Kay-- (komadori)