From: dweddin@uoft02.utoledo.edu
Newsgroups: alt.feminism,soc.men
Subject: Re: a programmer is not an engineer, indeed
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:28:37 EST
Followup-To: alt.feminism,soc.men
Organization: University of Toledo, Computer Services

> 
>>a programmer is NOT an engineer. we engineers have to take math and
>>science courses that the typical programmer couldn't handle on his (or
>>her) best day. once a programmer becomes a software engineer, they have 
>>to run this gauntlet like all the other engineering professions. it's the 
>>fear of these math and science classes that keep women from becoming 
>>engineers...not the old boys network.
> 
> You're right, a programmer is NOT an engineer, and an engineer is NOT a
> programmer.  We programmers have to take programming courses that the
> typical engineer couldn't handle on their best day.  

i doubt it. in my experiece the if you look at most universities, the
ranks of the business and computer science departments are populated
with a bunch of engineering "wanna-be's". 

the running joke in most engineering schools is that when people ask
you your major your freshman (freshperson?) year, you reply...
"i'm in pre-business" or "i'm in pre-computer science"


actually, you are right with respect to the fact that most engineers
are abyssmal programmers. that's because their classes have IMHO far
too few classes. but out in the "real world" (where i've been) the
corporations prefer to hire engineers and teach them to program well
as opposed to hiring you CS folk and teaching you to be engineers.


> Before anyone tries
> to flame me for this, I offer anecdotal proof.  

i think that anecdotal proof is no proof at all. because all i have to
do is give an anecdote of my own where the engineers came out on top
and the hapless CS folk were clueless....and believe you me, i've got
more than you can shake a stick at!

the point is, my anecdotes don't disprove your contentions any more than
your anecdotes prove them.

>........
>deleted anecdote where the good CS students win out while the evil,
>cocky engineers get the "come-upins"
>
>very amusing, muffy.
>........



> 
> By the way, I also took several math and physics courses, as they were
> required by the CS department for a degree in CS.  Math up to Linear
> Algebra (plus probability and statistics) and two semesters of physics,
> to be specific.  Physics is great...*smile*.
>

two comments, first i suspect that you didn't really take REAL engineering
and physics classes, since most schools have different classes for the
hard core science folk and the rest of the world. we used to call those
classes "baby physics" or "baby math" etc.

lets assume for a moment that they were the SAME. i notice that you didn't
mention any classes on Control theory, electro magnetics, signal analysis,
or electric machines....these are all important. certainly more important
than physics ever would be.

regardless, i will also assume from your stories that you are very
intelligent and could have handled the hard core engineering stuff...
but the point is...YOU DIDN'T. now when an employer comes to hire,
he or she looks at the list of classes and the degree and says,

"hey, muffy did well...but didn't take any of the engineering classes
 while fred did well and DID take the engineering classes."

now would it be discrimination if the employer hires fred and not muffy
for a softwre engineering position???? 
 
> Anyway, where do you think this "fear" of math comes from?  

don't know. don't care.  not my problem.


> Math is not dangerous or anything...*grin*.  I sincerely doubt that 
> women are instinctively "afraid" of math and science.

you apparantly are not afraid of them...so maybe you can answer the
question better than i, why didn't you go into engineering with
a specialty in software as opposed to going into CS ??? 

the fields are similar while the job and career prospects are certaily
MUCH better for the engineer. so why CS and not engineering?

  
> Rather, it seems that they get lots of messages from society that 
> a) "women aren't good at math" and b) "it's not 'feminine' to like 
> science".  

if i believed every one when they said "can't" or "shouldn't" i would
be a ditch digger. if women are so easily swayed into dead end jobs,
then they have much bigger problems than discrimination.

> Then, of course, you may
> say that women should resist these messages, and some of us do.

then you will succeed at what you attempt.

> However, men don't get them at all, which seems a little unfair, yes?

where did that come from????

men get the negative messages every bit the same that women do. we just
don't throw in the towel and quit when we have a setback.

and by the way...it doesn't matter if it "seems a little unfair", nobody
said that it was going to be fair. you will have obstacles that others
do not and advantages that others do not.

nobody ever said, gee...let's hire don because we haven't met our quota
of "white-anglo-saxon-protestant-males". it must be nice to be able to
be hired and never fired because an employer fears a civil rights
discrimination case.

seems a little unfair, yes? 

> (And yes, men do get other, equally negative messages, but we're talking
> about math and science here.)

so what should we do, muffy? hire women as engineers who are not qualified
to make up for all the years of negative messages? that would be great
news to me when i drive over a bridge that collapses...


"ayyyyyeeeeeiiiiii, i'm falling....but i'm not bitter because the WOMAN
who designed this bridge was hired as compensation for her not going into
engineering because of all of the negative messages from society....
ayyyyeeeeiiiiiiii".......... *SPLAT*

> 
> Muffy
> --
>

Don.