So she’s a dev who does modelling. Good for her? But what’s the big deal?
If the picture showed some ugly guy with the same list of skills, nobody would bat an eye. The list of languages seem like pretty regular set of languages (with the exception of MIPS, where I guess it means MIPS assembler, but most people who studied computer science pick up the one or the other random weird language by the wayside).
Of course, the comments of these idiots that are attacking her are idiotic, but I think the author of the text on the picture is falling for a similar pitfall, being surprised that someone who does modelling would have an intellectual carreer next to it.
All of them (except of course the dev in question) fall for the same idiotic misconception: They believe a woman can either be intelligent or good looking.
What a waste
Yeah it must suck to be able to travel the world and do photoshoots for a living, while also being a software engineer on the side (probably a better one than those commenters too)
Does she give lessons?
Ok but… What about that white top? Am I the only one that thinks it’s freaking weird? 🤔
It’s made of balloons to match the skirt!
Wait… That’s a skirt? 😱
Guess what, if that was some pumped-up muscle-bound male model that was 3/4 naked walking down the runway, people would be saying similar things about him too.
You’ve seen a lot of instances of similar comment pileups about male model/coders like Ashton Kutcher?
A well known Hollywood actor is the best example you could come with up? Try harder atleast
What do you mean? How is that a bad example?
I hate when people think they are smart.
I’m confused. Who are you implying is stupid, me or the person I was replying to?
The person you are replying to. I don’t know if you are stupid, but you haven’t said anything to make me think that.
Ah, thanks for clarifying. I am stupid, I just didn’t think I’d demonstrated that here. 😂
Bullshit
Dolph Lundgren Chem-E and when folks bring it up, no one expresses doubt
There is the entire term of “dumb jock” and countless videos and memes of muscle bound gym rats who are stereotyped as being stupid just because they lift weights, but sure, pretend that this is some kind of sexist thing.
Exactly
Lead engineer = doesn’t write code anymore, management role
I wish i could do half of what she pulled off. Life would be fullfilling.
I admire her. Excelling in two radically different areas.
Studying in 3 if you really want to look at it. Comp science, modeling, and theater
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyndsey_Scott
Pretty impressive!
Amherst College is not an easy school to get into, either. It’s easier to get into some ivy league schools.
Source: applied once and was not lucky.
Basically they’re scared and intimidated. Here is a person who is beautiful and intelligent and has made something of herself and that highlights their own inabilities.
I think sexism is only part of the problem, they’d have a similar response to a male model who had a successful tech career.
That’s certainly a part of the problem here, but let’s be honest: how often do tabloids or other low effort media publish such “inspirational” stories that turn out to be absolute bullshit. Like the 10 year old who invented some quantum stuff, but actually his father just let him play around with some tools in the lab.
This story here unfortunately fits exactly this pattern, but apparently just happens to be true.
Even when they’re not factually bullshit, the rhetorical framing is often ick. I’m disabled, and something that I, and a lot of other disabled people hate is “inspiration porn”. It’s patronising as hell, and most frustratingly, if you try to call it out, people get extra offended because they refuse to see how otherising and infantilising people isn’t the same as advocating for them.
I’m involved in technology and race mountain bikes on the side. Other than the occasional “it must be nice to be fit” comments from the neckbeard techbros, they’re not as openly hostile to me as they are to women who are in tech. There is definitely a strong sexism part of the equation.
I’m sorry to tell yuu this bro, but nobody gives a shit about mountain bike racers. I don’t think a bunch of poorly socialized boys who were proficient with computers were ridiculed by mountain bike racers when they were young. Good looking people on the other hand…
What kind of school did you grow up in to not have the nerds vs athletes click battles?
We did have it, it’s just that mountain bike racers were considered nerds too.
It’s not necessarily being “scared and intimidated”.
We’re just conditioned that when someone at the top of their field talks about their hobbies / interests / skills outside that field, it’s very often a very shallow level of skill. Why? Because being at the top of your field in almost anything takes a lot of focus. You don’t really have time to develop other skills / hobbies.
There are countless examples. Actors or athletes who release music albums that are just awful. Celebrities who write really amateurish novels which would sink into obscurity if they didn’t have a famous person’s name attached.
Making the problem worse, often the entourage of those rich and famous people is filled with sycophants who heap praise on the celebs. That leads them to believe that they really are good at their hobbies.
Then there’s the fact that the world is so hungry for celebrity gossip and special interest stories that “journalists” often get a tiny nugget of information and use it for the basis of an entire article. So, if a celebrity mumbles something about liking their backyard barbecue, it will spawn countless articles about how that celeb is an expert at the art of BBQ, they might release their own branded BBQ sauce, their skills were endorsed by some celebrity chef, etc.
So, given all that, it’s perfectly reasonable to be skeptical when you hear something like “This [insert celebrity type here] can [insert hobby here] like an expert!”
You know damn good and well that if this was a hot dude that could do these things, the comments towards them wouldn’t be nearly as hostile.
deleted by creator
You’re moving the goal posts. I said if this was a hot dude the comments wouldn’t be nearly as hostile. Both of us know this, but you’re busy insisting these incels are only making these comments because the media or some bullshit. You know they’re doing it because they’re jealous and you’re no better for trying to justify their bullshit.
But didn’t you move the goal posts first?
No. I made a pretty clear statement that if this was a hot dude, the commenters wouldn’t be as hostile. That’s setting the goal posts. Saying I said they’d be praising the man is moving them.
And you made that statement on a post that was about a different statement.
“This [insert celebrity type here] can [insert hobby here] like an expert!”
The original post doesn’t say “like an expert”, but you continued to create a strawman argument focused mostly on this aspect.
What’s the point of your comment? “There’s sexism, sure, but it’s only 90% sexism!” Why downplay what’s going on? How often do you SEE THIS happen with men shitting on men? Come the fuck on.
No, no. The vast majority of people who are interested and good at computer science are men or male. It is the truth. The world is also replete with women who say things like this, but basically can only write hello world to the console.
But exceptions exist and people who don’t fit the common stereotype absolutely deserve to be allowed to do what they’re good at.
Motherfucker, women used to be the vast majority of programmers. A woman was the one who led the team that wrote the code to get to the moon. She also coined the term ‘software engineer.’ So don’t give us that bullshit that the vast majority that are good at computer science are men. And no, the world is not replete with women who claim they can choose but can only print to the console. Where the fuck have you come across that?
People like you are the main barrier for women getting into programming.
Absolute moron. I knew damn-well that you were going to mention Hamilton at some point because every simping imbecile does. Every single exception to the general rule, that males are more interested in IT in general, is proclaimed across the world as though it disproves said rule. Look, these women are smart, capable and deserve all the success they’ve attained. That does not mean there is not a general rule.
People who are generally smart and capable should not care about my approval to enter into programming. They’d do it because they love it, not for someone’s approval. Frankly, if some woman doesn’t enter into programming because of something some rando like me said online, I very much doubt she was much interested in it to begin with.
The vast majority of people who are interested and good at computer science are men or male.
It didn’t start that way. Women were the backbone of computer engineering. But like everything, men grew terrified of women’s ability, and so did everything they could to put women down in order to hold on to their illusion of power.
That is changing. Women are increasingly becoming immune to the opinions of men.
Lol, I’m sure. They invented the integrated circuit, the instruction set, and most modern day programming languages. But all of their achievements were hidden by mean, jealous men.
Typically, smart and powerful people have the wherewithal and know-how to not let that happen, let alone en masse. That’s part of why we might consider them smart.
The reality is that there were many female computer operators. Engineers and inventors, not so much. A few exceptions, but they were, as I have said, the exceptions.
Women were not the backbone of computer engineering. They were the ones who did the computing before we had machines that could do so quickly.
Engineering refers to designing the components and while some women have contributed to this field the overwhelming of the design of parts has been done by men.
So you learned enough about the history of computing to make claims like this, but not enough to know that practically all the first programmers were female and some even pioneered theory, techniques, and languages? For example Grace Hopper, who you are erasing from history here.
I call bullshit. Either you purposely ignore these facts, or your sexism prevented them from being remembered when you learned them.
Don’t forget Ada Lovelace, the first computer engineer and the namesake of the Ada programming language.
She was a okay mathematician that did indeed “get” Babbages nonexistent machine (I forgot the name of it, analytic engine?). She wrote incredibly simple software for it. Who knows what she would have accomplished if she had a proper computer, but she didn’t and we’ll never know.
In the immediate Postwar years there were indeed some gifted women in the field, but they were never the majority.
My point is that engineering us a specific job with a specific definition and the ENGINEEERS were not all women.
I never said anything about any other aspect of computing so the rest of your post is just a straw man you added for no reason.
There is a reason several people have pointed out facts to you. You clearly want to deny the fact that women were very much a part of computer ENGINEERING
No Im denying they were the MAJORITY of computer engineers. This is an easily verifiable fact. You can look it up with the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The person who coined the term software engineer was a woman.
And that is relevant to my point how?
Grace Hopper literally invented the first software compiler.
If you dismiss software engineering as a form of engineering, then you have no qualifications to be an engineer and no business even commenting.
Im not denying that some women played a part. Im objecting to the claim they were the majority. They were not the MAJORITY
Why do you think the human computers weren’t the majority of people creating the first electronic computers?
Because we know who those people were. They were all men.
The original post didn’t say the word ‘majority’. I did not say the word ‘majority’. Hell, you didn’t even say the word ‘majority’, until that last comment I’m responding to anyways.
You said the word ‘backbone’. Well, when you think about it, aren’t compilers like the backbone of software engineering?
You’re not gonna get very far writing your new fancy game by manually flipping all the bits one by one with a panel of switches, you need a compiler.
Yeah very true, and credit where credit is due. The majority of “computers”, when that was a job title, were women who were very good at running quick calculations.
Yes, they were incredibly talented mathematicians
I’m not so sure I’d call them “mathematicians”, but they were very good at what they did.
Wouldn’t that be the next most accurate term since we took their job title and applied to to a machine?
She triggers envy easily. Envy manifests differently as it triggers different faults, fears and flaws in fellow humans.
I admire her discipline, and and envy it. Good for her.
Still… I’d be skeptical because the internet lies about EVERYTHING. ALL THE GOD DAMN TIME. It is fucking tiresome to constantly need to double check every fucking statement.
Not everything needs to be fact checked.
Whether this is real or fake, it doesn’t matter. I’m never gonna encounter her in any way, there is no relevance in it. If I read stuff like that, I think “good for her” and move on.
What’s the point of being super sceptic of something that has no impact on you?
I felt my bigotry and own bias so I had to check it out to prove my asshole self wrong.
That’s a fair point^^
I’m not sure tbh. This reeks of a regular techbro sexism, not a regular insecurity. Intelligent male model will be a point of envy, not hate
841st fastest growing company in the us
Weird flex, but ok
Well, the US has a shitload of companies, it’s not bad
The whole fastest growing metric is stupid tho. You can be fastest growing straight into bankruptcy, thats what most startups with marketing specialists as CEOs do.
Yeah
I can hire 5000 people at once, but will only be able to pay them for a day before I need to fire them.
But I would be fast growing!
Better to have a consistent company imho.
There’s like 33 million registered companies in the U.S. 841st is pretty good
It is, but it does sound pretty funny
Yeah, it reminded me of the navy seal copypasta xD
yeah right xD oddly specific.
So is “I have X points on Stack Overflow”.
Also, I’m on the iOS tutorial team for somethingorother.com.
Nope, not really.
Ain’t to many shitposts on stackoverflow and the raywenderlich website is one of the best ios programming resources. This shit is respectable.
27k points on SO is respectable. I’ve got 20k and that wasn’t easy. There are shortcuts, but to find those you’ve also got to be clever.
What is that…new… sentiment that i am feeling… 🥰
I manage a software engineering organization at an aerospace company and if I had to rank all my folks, the women would be disproportionately high on the list. It boggles my mind that anyone would discount someone’s programming ability because of their gender.
Last time I checked, I didn’t type with my penis. But to be honest, I didn’t try yet. Maybe I’d be able to increase my performance.
I wonder if that’s the underdog effect at work
Where I am? Possibly, but I think it’s also possible that we have an environment that appreciates diversity, so talented people who have had to put up with crap other places tend to stick around here. People who don’t face any sort of discrimination might be as likely to leave as they would anywhere. Several years ago, we had a few consecutive years of downsizing, so the people who remained were all pretty sharp.
I really love the environment where I work. Brilliant people doing some very cool stuff, and most are really nice to deal with. I would enjoy having dinner with every single one of my employees.
Sure. I’ve known several crappy women programmers, but they get pushed out of the industry. The guys are more likely to fail upward.
Same in aviation
I don’t get it either. I work with many, many really smart engineers. About half are women.
Half? How? I work at an aerospace electronics company and the male to female ratio is ridiculously high. I never understood why. It would be refreshing to work at a place with a more even ratio. The few women I work with are really smart and have moved up the management chain quickly.
Depending on the culture in your country bias can sit pretty deep. I live and work in a country that’s very egalitarian on the surface. But people here have a strong and sometimes subconscious belief that: A women aren’t really intelligent but rather diligent and B women aren’t good in math/logic.
When you grow up with these biases as a girl you don’t have much interest in even trying to take up a hobby or even try to study something that is said to be only achievable by intelligent and highly logical people.
When you try it regardless people basically put you under a microscope and you have to proof constantly that you are somehow not what they believe is in your biology. It will surely show up someday when you make a mistake or don’t know about something.
I havent looked into it much but one reason seems to be stereotypes driving girls and women away from stem: Gender stereotypes about intellectual ability emerge early and influence children’s interests
A study on American kids but Im sure the same happens elsewhere. Its annotated and a great read just for the methods they used.
Since these stereotypes wont disappear soon we should let our kids know such ideas are made up and stuff so they wont buy them when exposed.
The company I work at makes rocket engines (e.g., the ones on SLS/Artemis). When I go to university job fairs, the number of women who come to our booth is miniscule. The women interested in tech tend to be much more clustered around the very socially conscious companies, like for green energy. Sometimes there’s more interest couching it as supporting human space flight, but we do a lot of defense work, too.
I’m not in the tech field, but most of the people in my office are women and, as a man, it’s so refreshing not having to deal with other guys’ loud macho bullshit. I never liked it, it always made me feel uncomfortable.
“This paper presents the largest study to date on gender bias, where we compare acceptance rates of contributions from men versus women in an open source software community. Surprisingly, our results show that women’s contributions tend to be accepted more often than men’s. However, women’s acceptance rates are higher only when they are not identifiable as women. Our results suggest that although women on GitHub may be more competent overall, bias against them exists” nonetheless.https://peerj.com/preprints/1733/
Oh, I remember reading that one (or an article about it). Frustrating.
I don’t think it’s mostly gender… Programmers aren’t usually those that have won the genetic lottery, I can count on one hand the amount of drop dead women engineers I’ve met in my field, they definitely exist, but they are super rare.
If we leave out fields that revolve around beauty and adjust for intelligence required in the specific field of work i am not sure, if beauty is actually negatively correlated with engineering.
I don’t see a higher rate of beautiful people on the train to work, than i see at work. I just see more on the train, because there is more people overall.
It may have more to do with her being a model than with her gender. I’m not saying it didn’t influence the comments, just that being a model probably had more weight
You can’t change the looneys mind with reason. Don’t try
Not on a site that is just a shittier version of reddit, anyway.
What?
Anyone not hating a random woman they’ve never met is clearly mentally deranged /s
Or maybe I meant this isn’t about gender and a male model would get similar comments. But yeah say whatever suits your propaganda 😂
Except for the fact that everyone in this thread knows that’s an insanely false claim
It’s almost like they don’t know who Ada Lovelace, Grace Hopper, Radia Perlman, etc. are.
Some fragile male egos in this thread. Looking forward to your complaints about the Barbie movie. Sad and pathetic.
