An overview on women in tech (and on this blog)

By Judith Astelarra, emeritus professor, Department of Sociology, Autonomous University of Barcelona.

I must say that when I was invited to participate in this debate several months ago I did not like the question. Now I think that it was a provocative question that lead to very interesting answers. However, I still have doubts about the question because I feel that if what we want is to analyze the absence of women in the sector of technology, do we need to play this provocative game of making a transvestite of Steve Jobs?

Steve Jobs was an outstanding creator, everybody has agreed on that. Traditionally the creators in any field, had been considered beings who had an exceptional individual talent that was emphasized in its work. However, individual genius can only be put into practise and recognized in social and cultural contexts. It is society that allows the creative talent to be developed and, what is equally important, is responsible for the recognition of the value of the creation. Gender is part of this social context related to creation, but there are other factors as well.

«We can look at the women that are now in these fields, even if they are a minority, to see if they make a difference»

Most of the answers to the question about Steve Job have spoken about how the gendered dimension of society and culture, characterized by inequality for women, have been an impediment for women’s incorporation in the technological field in terms of creation, production and recognition (the “icon”).

Others answers have stressed the individual characteristics of technological creation be it men or women. Only a few have dealt with Steve Jobs as a creator and tried to relate it to gender. In this sense, I liked very much the analysis made by Gillian Marcelle. In describing Steve Jobs as a woman most of the answers either spoke generally of the situation of women, or plainly admitted that they did not know whether it would make such a difference. Henry Jenkins spoke about Bill Gates, what was very interesting because here we deal with two men, in the same field and time, who shared gender but were different.

All these answers could have been just the same if Steve Jobs had not been in the question and all we were dealing was with the issue of women and technological creations. What makes me uneasy about it is that, even if it is not the intention, the proposal of replacing Steve Jobs by a woman leads to a sort of confrontation between men and women.

«Finding places in which both genders can collaborate is also part of the feminist proposal of creating new realities»

I have been a feminist from the late 1960 and early 1970 when I was doing my PhD at Cornell University. When we started, women’s inequality was not even a social, cultural and political issue. We needed to be loud and confrontation was part of it. But now, the situation is different. Obviously inequality still exists and we need lobbies and political movement to deal with it. But the problem is now recognized and there are women now in the fields from where they were excluded. We can evaluate what we have done to correct inequality and look for new things to do. But, we can also look at the women that are now in these fields, even if they are a minority like in the technological field, to see if they make a difference. Not just give hypotheses of “what if” that cannot have rigorous answers.

I liked very much the answers that stated the need of social innovation in technology, no matter what the person’s gender is. I think that finding places in which both genders can collaborate is also part of the feminist proposal of creating new realities. Here we can play the game “what if”, not changing the past but looking at the future, because in this case imagination can be used. Starting from the problems that the TIC have today and the new lines that should be developed in the future, we can think of a woman (even if imaginary) that can play the role that men like Steve Jobs played in the past. We would not be using a man as a reference, we would be using women’s experiences and realities today. An endeavor that can be shared between this new outstanding woman and the men of her time. A pluralist proposal that does not discriminate anybody.

But in spite of my doubts with the question I really think that the debate has been very interesting.

ICTs are not synonymous with knowledge society and woman is not synonymous with gender

By Gloria Bonder, Director, Gender, Society and Policies Area, FLACSO Argentina

Women, in Latin America and in most regions, are a minority in technology production, and this is one of the most significant digital gender divides. The research we have carried out from the UNESCO Chair in Women, Science and Technology in Latin America confirms this. However, the results enable us to state that gender inequalities in this field do not only concentrate on this issue. Age, ethnicity, educational and socio-economic level and area of residence (urban/rural) are some of the determinants that have a significant influence on the construction of this techno-cultural environment.

Only an uninformed view would lead us to state that the first step has to be increasing the number of women in technological production. Looking more closely, we realize that change does not start there.

«Creating technology with gender awareness is a first step towards a society that is more receptive to both women and men's ways of thinking and innovating»

Encouraging the interest of more women in technology careers, reversing the stereotypes that associate ICTs with the male world, promoting the full participation of women in technology-based enterprises and encouraging strategic appropriation of ICTs by both women and men, are some of the links of this chain that must be strengthened.

Having (more) women in technological production does not ensure an information/knowledge society that is more inclusive, diverse and attentive to their needs, desires and interests. However, if the person who creates technology (either male or female) does so with gender awareness, we will have taken a first step in overcoming inequalities, and in the construction of an information/knowledge society that is more receptive to everyone's ways of thinking, innovating and transforming, both men and women.

If Steve Jobs had been a woman, perhaps the only difference would be the Apple logo.

Different genders, different worlds

By Joanne McGrath Cohoon, Associate Professor, University of Virginia.

Gender inequality persists. Both data and personal reports from transgendered people make this reality clear. For example, transgendered men received more workplace respect and more opportunities to speak than they had as women. Their observations illustrate how subtly and profoundly gender affects our lives, even the lives of exceptional people.

Culturally, gendered expectations of others and ourselves interact with race and class to shape our language, our interrelations, and our beliefs about what we might achieve and where we belong. Organizations in our immediate environment also affect us at each stage of our lives —schools; businesses; churches, temples, mosques; etc. Each has its own set of policies, practices, and local cultures that differentiate more or less between men and women. So, if Steve Jobs had been a woman, he would have lived in a different world than the world he knew as a man.

«Jobs lived in a world where technical interests, technical education, and aggressive business behavior were appropriate. Had Jobs been a woman, his behavior may not have been interpreted in such a positive light»

Steve Jobs, the man, lived in a world where technical interests, technical education, and aggressive business behavior were appropriate. Investors saw potential for his success, because Jobs fit their expectations for technical business genius. Employees tolerated his eccentricities because they saw him as a successful leader. Had Jobs been a woman, his behavior may not have been interpreted in such a positive light.

Stephanie Jobs, the woman, could have behaved in the same ways, but her behavior would have been interpreted differently. By violating expected behavior for women, she would have incurred harsh judgments about her likability, even if people thought her competent. And being thought competent would require performance several times better than Steve would have needed.

Stephanie would have had less opportunity than Steve to develop skills that contribute to success in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM). She might have been explicitly discouraged from taking elective STEM courses. Had she taken the courses anyway, she would have experienced isolation, stereotype threat, and less encouragement than her male classmates. Investors would likely have failed to see beyond her femininity to recognize her vision and ability to carry it out. Employees might have labeled her a crazy bitch and refused to contribute their passion in fulfillment of her dreams.

«Stephanie Jobs might have been wildly successful as a high tech entrepreneur and innovator, but she would have had to overcome many more barriers than Steve overcame»

Stephanie Jobs might have been wildly successful as a high tech entrepreneur and innovator, but she would have had to overcome many more barriers than Steve overcame. An astonishing achievement would have been even more spectacular, unless of course, the world changed at the same time Steve’s gender changed. 

It is difficult to know whether we are moving toward a world where Steve and Stephanie have equal chance of success. Obviously, women are advancing in education and economic independence in many countries. Yet, even in those countries where women seem to have the most parity with men, occupational gender segregation persists: women, more than men, are in fields with fewer economic rewards, less autonomy, and lower job satisfaction.

What if Steve Jobs had been a woman?

By Juliet Webster, Gender and ICT Programme (IN3, UOC) Director

We have seen huge improvements in gender equality in recent decades. Women have made major advances in key areas of social life: in the world of work, in educational access and performance, and in securing and exercising political and social rights.

However, there are persistent and stubborn forms of gender inequality. The gap between men's and women's pay remains significant: throughout the EU, women earn on average 18% less than their male counterparts with equivalent qualifications and experience. Women also remain remarkably under-represented in top jobs, disappearing from career ladders as they ascend. Even though today women make up about 60% of university graduates in the EU (often with better qualifications than their male counterparts), they are only 16.1% of board members of Fortune 500 companies. And persistent labour market segregation means that women continue to be over-represented in low-status, low-skill, and low-paid service jobs. This both bolsters inequality and simultaneously under-utilises a huge potential talent pool.

«We are seeing major transformations in our ways of communicating, working, accessing services, being citizens —transformations in which gender identities and relations are central—. But where are the women shapers of these changes?»

Despite this stubborn lack of progress, at another level we are seeing major transformations in our ways of communicating, working, accessing services, being citizens —transformations in which gender identities and gender relations are central—. But where are the women shapers of these changes? About 25% of all employees work in high technology knowledge intensive services, but only 2.4% of those are women. These are occupations which have high-status, high influence, and high pay. Given the centrality of these activities and their associated technologies to us all, it is deeply worrying that women are so noticeably under-represented there.

It is sometimes assumed that if women do not enter computing, engineering or other technological occupations, it is because they simply do not want to. In our increasingly individualised societies, in which we all apparently exercise autonomy, self-determination and, above all, choice, feminist ambitions to dismantle patriarchy and its structuring social relations are often seen as outdated. Yet women have been fairly consistently under-represented in —and sometimes actively excluded from— technological work over time and across cultures. This points to a deeper problem. Power relations, differences in access to both technical and social capital, stereotypes, and constrained social roles, all affect the real choices that individual women can exercise in their educational and career pathways. This is well-known. There is much less consensus about how to address these issues in practical terms, and what implications —for women, for societies, and also for the technologies— would flow from a more equal gender balance in technological endeavours.

«In a society where we all apparently exercise autonomy, self-determination and, above all, choice, feminist ambitions to dismantle patriarchy and its structuring social relations are often seen as outdated»

So what if Steve Jobs had been a woman? During the late 1970s, when both Jobs and Steve Wozniak were building their first computers and simultaneously the Apple company, computing was a highly masculine playground. It had not always been so, but by the time these two men, and their counterparts in other computing companies, were constructing the forerunners of today's world-dominating computer systems, women had been edged out of the field, never to return in significant numbers. What would have happened if they had remained, and had played a central, or even a dominating, role in the development of today's systems? Perhaps, instead of Microsoft, Google and Apple, we would today have high-tech companies founded and run by women? Perhaps more pluralism of approaches to computing? Different designs? Different labour practices? Who knows which revolutions would have happened —how the sector, the technologies, and our Information Society, or societies, would have unfolded— if we had had not only a Steve Jobs but also a female, equal, counterpart to him.