Women in infosec: Real-life experiences and challenges

https://www.helpnetsecurity.com/2017/02/23/women-infosec-real-life-experiences/

 

https://www.welivesecurity.com/2017/04/17/women-cybersecurity-slowly-surely-change-coming/

 

I've worked in places where people were hired/promoted based on nice theories of "inclusiveness" and other idiocies.
The result was always the same: we the competent, the normal, would have to work harder to compensate. And let's not go into the deviousness and twistedness that many of these "minority" people introduce to an otherwise relatively functional system.

I wish Political Correctness would stay out of tech forums.

 

Did you check an article? There's no talk about hiring people based on gender. It's just about promoting cybersecurity careers to women and breaking stereotypes about technical jobs.

 

Yes there is:

It's ideology driven, as usual, nothing to do with real life. Because here at Wilders we know why tech is mostly male: because we are naturally inclined to these fields. It's mother nature, not sexism (whatever that is).

 

You can liken the gender gap in this field to that of the armed forces. And like the armed forces, there will continue to be a gender gap, a sizeable one! I like that incentives are being provided. But don't expect legions of women to invade this traditionally male-dominated area. It ain't natural and the numbers speak the truth. From a few hundred fighting in the US Civil War (disguised as men) to just under 16% enlistment 153 years later, with a largely open door since 13 years. Extrapolate?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_military

Is this to be taken at face value or can an intuitive leap be made? I'd think the absence of direct contact and a pay check would soften this implied perspective. And I am profoundly against quotas for quotas' sake. But an open door is a very, very good thing for someone already actively looking for it.

 

I suppose that I can be considered an expert in this area. Although the field is overwhelmingly male (and many ARE actually in the basement), I personally have never felt any discrimination either in promotion or in pay; quite frankly I always wondered if being female was an advantage. I have no issue being the token woman as long as the bonuses keep making me swoon.

And as far as an initial hire is concerned, if one goes to the right school and gets the proper degrees (in addition to having the proper arrest record) it really doesn't matter what sex or race a person is. And having mandated quotas I would find insulting to those who actually have achieved something.

 

Well, I still don't see it

Don't know who we here on Wilders is? Do you think that all members share your opinion?

 

The hilarious thing is, I agree with Joxx on a few salient points! Including the deviousness! Indulging in BS and sneaky little tactics in order to draw out some venom against women. Guilty! But the attitudes I suspect are like his serve to suppress and inhibit those female member/readers who would otherwise feel welcome to contribute. But there is the glaring absence of that evil root: money! Can someone who taught anatomy and physiology at the graduate university level and not much older than her students also be a vocal member of this forum? Why am I here anyway? For me to know and you to find out.

 

It is much the same in engineering. The prospect for employment in top engineering positions is still not optimal. There are women who have broken through, proven their mettle and garnered respect, but it was probably a tough slog.

It is who you know, not what you know that opens doors that are seldom left ajar.

 

This

I've lived in 3 different Countries and had more jobs/professions I can count with my fingers, always worked where there were women and never noticed this "discrimination" we are bombarded with by so-called experts and progressive good consciences .

This again

 

I didn't know that anyone could be naturally inclined towards anything, let alone infosec...

I'm not from the field to know, but I have already seen some talk wheels about other fields like engineering, science etc in which it was given to understand that women are not as capable as males to deal with mathematics, physics etc.

Women have really entered the job market recently, some more retrograde men (to say the least), feel uncomfortable with them giving orders, etc. This sort of thing is even easier to happen in male dominated fields, which have never before had to deal with women at work.

I believe that this situation will improve over time, and the sooner the better.

BTW, although I am not a libertarian (I still need to study hard to have a solid political orientation), Hayek is very interesting and his criticism of the state is of fundamental importance for a society that has slowly been killing its freedom.

Sorry for my bad english.

 

When computers wore a skirt. Their was a documentary on this not that long ago. Discovery channel maybe? If you never heard of this. 1935 to 1970 is a very long time. If I wasn't retired I might consider a sex change
There is a section on my link to films and interviews.

https://crgis.ndc.nasa.gov/historic/Human_Computers

 

Hmm, consider this: I love progressive trance music yet virtually all the composers are male. But the door is open, isn't it? There are "natural" throttles for women and their roles in certain (male-dominated) fields. That is a fact. But when a few break through the barriers, they can outshine the majority of the men. That is also a fact. I can see through the lip service for "women's equal rights." But I also see the progress in revealing opportunities and making them reachable by example, like in these InfoSec articles.

 

Did you look at my post?

 

There were practically no women in civil engineering, for example, today is different. The point is, what does not seem "natural" to us today, tomorrow can be. Notice that there is no "necessarily" in the world (as it is, unless you involve religions that "know" each other's role) in relation to what we can and can not do as men or women, there are ideas that are built In relation to what we are or should be. But nothing guarantees what may or may not be natural tomorrow for one or the other sex, that is, it seems to me problematic these views that there is something "natural" or "necessary," especially in these matters.

 

"Natural" in this context mustn't be confused with "insurmountable." I was not only commenting on the current state of certain affairs but about the at-times glaringly negative, old school attitudes booming in this also male-dominated security forum--something which I had a way-good bit of silly fun with .(Oh god, lmao!!) No worries! Please know I am female who knows of overt gender discrimination only from history classes. And all of what you say I concur with and respect.

A fundamental point I neglected to emphasize.

Not only that, I read your post, specifically the linked article you provided. An eye-opener, and something I sure didn't know.

Edit: I did say, like the armed forces, there will continue to be a gender gap. That doesn't mean gender discrimination. Some fields will always have more of one gender than the other. It's only natural.

 

That I can agree with.

 

Naturally=By nature; inherently. I'm not talking about trends.
People are so indoctrinated they can't even read anymore (let alone reason as some perplexing posts show). But since Hayek tickles your curiosity there's hope for you.

 

Some jobs that require physical strength, for example, it is understandable that there are more men, I have nothing to disagree with.

My criticism was concerning the use of the word "natural" to justify some things which is obviously the result of a historical construction. If for many, many years women were set aside in science, for example, it is understandable that today we must strive to make science more egalitarian. Not that we should create quotas or things of the sort (although I do not be against quotas in ALL situations), but rather teach scientific method, mathematics, physics, biology, to all, not only to a certain gender.

We (people) are all dogmatic, it is good that we have you to show us the "Truth".

 

I know, you're lucky.

 

I actually think it's kinda cool to see women active in the security industry, it's not something that you expect to see.

 

http://blog.emsisoft.com/2017/04/22/women-in-science/

 

https://www.infosecurity-magazine.com/news/poll-young-women-worry-skills-tech/

 

I have been following the James Damore saga on Ars. He has supporters but overall most disagree with his assumptions and conclusions. I think we all suffer from social conditioning and Damore didn't get in to that aspect as much as he should have. He clung to biology and politics. Conformity sure can damper choice.

Women in Tech - surveys continue to deliver the same results year after year, decade after decade. Maybe we should stop beating this dead horse.

As far as IT goes, changes are on the wind. Microsoft is already projecting far less reliance on in-house IT in the near future, if they get their way. They also give the impression that end users will need no more than a dumb terminal to do their work. In the distant future, AI may envelop system engineers too. Software companies are salivating at the prospect. AI operates 7/24/365 and there is no hiring/firing procedures to fret over. The displaced employees will all be working for Droids-R-us.