From female computers to male comput♂rs: Or why there are so few women writing algorithms and developing software

Abstract

Software development is one of the few professions in Europe and the USA from which women are disappearing. Current explanations range from unproven assumptions that women cannot write algorithms to insights into the misogynistic culture of this profession. This article argues these explanations are inadequate, and illuminates how forms of masculinity constituted within software development put women in the ambivalent position of being either female or a coder, but not both. Using a poststructural theoretical position to analyse materials from a qualitative, interview-based study, we identified three constitutive ontologies of the person circulating within the profession. The Comput♂r is presumptively male and can merge with the machine, although a subset, Geeks, cannot demerge from it. The Human, presumptively female, can communicate with people but not the machine. The Ideal developer claims the best of both, that is, adept at writing algorithms and communicating with people. These ontologies are informed by a theory of the body circulating within software development whose norms are unattainable by women. Female bodies are envisaged as ‘flesh’, and male bodies as a futuristic merger of body and machine. This Janus-faced theory excludes female developers from practising their profession.

Beyond the brink: STEM women and resourceful sensemaking after burnout

“…Unlike other contemporary settings that have been increasingly marked by fewer instituted pathways and orienting patterns-such as boundaryless, hybrid, kaleidoscope, or protean (Sullivan & Baruch, 2009)-STEM careers remain steeped in historical, political, and gender-based cultures and "rules and typifications" (Duberley et al, 2006(Duberley et al, , p. 1138. Sociological accounts of STEM, in particular, have highlighted persistently gendered structures and ways of working, for example, hierarchy-based decision making and the rigid adherence to protocols and institutionally driven benchmarks (e.g., Glass et al, 2013;Price et al, 2014;Sassler et al, 2017;Tassabehji et al, 2021). STEM careers therefore represent an overinstituted professional realm that requires significant resource investment.…”

“…This is particularly salient given the contingent position of women in STEM workplaces and the strictures of these environments which remain, above and beyond other occupational contexts, the “male domain” (Makarova et al, 2019, p. 1), not only demographically but also in sociocultural notions of success and the performance of work. A study by Tassabehji et al (2021), for instance, took a novel approach to understanding gender equality in a STEM environment by exploring the discourses, structures, and factors that ensured men's inclusion at work—an important adjunct to understanding the exclusion of women in STEM environments. Their findings revealed sociocultural signifiers that simultaneously paved the way for men's success and created impossible binds for women, for instance, the reification of machines and related technocratic and mechanistic work practices that valorize the masculine and denigrate feminine ideals.…”

Gendered hybridity in leadership identities: a postfeminist analysis

“…Thus, our data analysis focused on identifying postfeminist constitutive discourses as delineated by Gill (2007) in her explication of the cultural phenomenon of postfeminism. Through identification and analysis of the words and phrases articulated by our interviewees, we traced the postfeminist discourses that their utterances related to, were located in and which made them sayable (Tassabehji et al , 2021). Although many other discourses could be identified in the interview data, our use of postfeminism as an analytic device influenced the discourses we focused on.…”

“…Our study is underpinned by poststructuralist principles whereby genders, persons and identities are seen as neither natural nor stable. Rather, they are understood to be fluid, fragmented, contradictory and “performatively constituted within norms and through interaction” (Tassabehji et al , 2021, p. 1301). From this theoretical location, we approach leadership identity as inscribed and regulated from cultural raw material (Lees-Marshment and Smolovic Jones, 2018) that is articulated through the constitutive force of postfeminist discourses (Benschop and Lewis, 2022).…”

Hidden in the limelight: A feminist engagement with innovation studies

“…Today, the very definition of a computer is of a machine, a term that Katherine in Act 1 shows used to be related to women's computational work. Thus, the foundational role of women in the development of the profession has historically been wiped out (Tassabehji et al, 2020). Today, in fields such as software development, women remain at the margins; only 4% of professionals are female developers (Ratcliffe, 2015).…”