Security

Gender gap: Why information security needs more women

A new report on infosec spotted significant differences in how men and women prioritize needed skills. Here's why greater diversity in the field matters.

The Information Security field is not keeping up with the bad guys. And, that’s with companies throwing gobs of money, software, and equipment at the problem.

That said, the International Information Systems Security Certification Consortium (ISC)2 and the consulting firm of Frost & Sullivan feel they understand why digital bad guys are winning. Information-Security departments are not paying enough attention to company business objectives, they are unable to communicate effectively with other departments, and team members have a homogenous set of skills.

Women under represented

Gender Gap 1.png
 (ISC)2 and Frost & Sullivan
The two organizations go on to explain why the situation is what it is in their report, Agents of Change: Women in the Information Security Profession [PDF]. Quite simply, the group feels there are not enough women in the Information-Security field. Women only represent 11 percent of the Information-Security workforce which is discordant with other professions where women are near parity with men. According to the report:

“In comparison to representative labor statistics—women in 2012 accounted for 46.9% of the United States total labor force and 51.5% of United States management, professional, and related positions—it is clearly evident that women, at just 11% of the Information-Security profession, are greatly under represented.”

The report did not go into detail as to why the dramatic difference, but did say it was crucial that the status quo change.

Why women are needed

As to why it is crucial to change the status quo, the report was clear. The expertise needed to get Information Security back on track requires skills that are not prevalent and not considered crucial by today’s Information-Security departments. The (ISC)2 news release for the report explains: “While technical skills are integral to developing a strong security posture within organizations, it's important to supplement the proper skills and perspectives necessary to make impactful businesses decisions.”

The news release then hints at why it is important to have qualified women working in Information Security: “The report findings demonstrate that the surveyed women believe a successful information security professional should maintain a variety of skills vs. surveyed men, who believe technical skills should be the priority.”

The group running the survey came to that conclusion based on how participants responded when asked to determine how important the following attributes were:

  • Communication skills
  • Broad understanding of the security field
  • Awareness and understanding of the latest security threats
  • Technical knowledge
  • Security policy formulation and application
  • Leadership skills
  • Business management skills 

Here are the results.

Gender Gap 2.png
 (ISC)2 and Frost & Sullivan

It may seem too close to call, but Michael Suby, author of the report and Vice President of Research at Frost & Sullivan spoke to the significance of the results:

“While graphically the differences seem slight, these differences are nevertheless statistically significant with the exception of technical knowledge—the sole category selected by a smaller percentage of women as very important or important. Our interpretation is that technical knowledge is not becoming less important; rather, other skills that cut across disciplines are growing in importance with both genders, but more so with women.”

Julie Peeler, Director of (ISC)2 explained to Tim Wilson of Dark Reading News why these attributes are increasingly important:

Security is becoming less about technology, and more about people—understanding their behavior, and protecting users as they do their work. The study shows that women tend to value skills such as communication and education—the skills that are currently in short supply.

Final thoughts

The report alludes to it, but I want to come right out and say it. It is all about diversity. Ask any sociologist: cultures or any group of people with a common purpose such as a business, do best when there is a diverse pool of human resources functioning together toward a common goal.

I’m no whiz in the math department, but even I know that 90 percent is about as “un-diverse” as a group can get.

All slides were courtesy of (ISC)2 and Frost & Sullivan.

About

Information is my field...Writing is my passion...Coupling the two is my mission.

119 comments
mburns2013
mburns2013

“The report findings demonstrate that the surveyed women believe a successful information security professional should maintain a variety of skills vs. surveyed men, who believe technical skills should be the priority.”

The men believe technical skills should be a priority, in a technology-oriented field.  What a novel concept.  Note the word "priority", which has meaning, and does not imply that the men surveyed believed technical skills to be the only skill required, just one that is most important.

Based on my twenty plus years in the IT industry I have to support the theory that technical skills are pretty darn necessary to getting the job done.  Sitting around and talking nicely to people and trying to soothe people's feelings doesn't fix the fiber link, reconfigure the router or replace the dead RAID array.  Technical skills do.

With that said, the other skills mentioned are certainly important and the weight they carry varies in regards to the IT position.  Certain positions may weigh more heavily on "people skills" than others.

The bottom line is it takes a compilation of skills to be successful in the IT industry, at all levels and varying by position.  Luckily, most organizations have a team of dedicated professionals, with varying strengths and weaknesses to ensure it all works.

thejokker
thejokker

 I call bullshit...

Does anybody have an idea how easy it is for a political activist masquerading as a social scientist to create a pseudo-scientific study where the sample population has been manipulated and the criteria for defining "leadership", etc. is biased towards a woman's perspective?

How incredibly sexist is the author to assert that woman are significantly superior in every respect except technical ability?  This is a thinly veiled attack on men by radical feminists. 

Why are there not more woman in IT?  It's not rocket science.  Maybe because women are less interested in IT and men are...
hocusfocus
hocusfocus

"The group running the survey ".  This phrase is the primary payload for this entire article, and the series of coordinated articles from a variety of sources designed to peddle this pablum.  The main problem here is that the main body of practioners in this field are required to think, almost all the time.  An effective antidote to most any qualitative, spun, sociopolitical, value-based argument, including this one. 

Who is the author of the All-In-One CISSP study series again, I forget.  Oh yeah: Shon Harris; a woman. Let me see if I've got this right: if you have the skills, talent and energy to tote that barge and lift that bale, then you can make it to the absolute top of the heap in this business, regardless of gender.

Problem solved.

kitekrazy
kitekrazy

What America needs is less political correctness. 

ssaulino
ssaulino

Looks like another topic that has struck the nerve of the IT society and lends more credence to the pussification of Shamerica.  Wow we now have 300lb male football players crying in their milk about being bullied in or out of the locker room.  Is it really necessary to have female competition in all fields.  Ask any self respecting red blooded male, would they rather compete against a female or a male in any field / situation / sport?And you probably would get male as an answer.  To be sure I would expect that the motivation to compete lies in the threat of the competition.  In most cases woman are not looked at as threats by men.  When men are forced to see woman as threats in all cases I have witnessed eventually lethargy, acting out , rebellion.  I ask this, do we want to see more woman as threats to males in any way shape or form? I guess in today's mega cooperate world it's everyone for themselves and leave the family in the dust. Wow I could not love my wife more right now, she earns more respect from people than anybody I know and all she does is raise children and run a kick ass home. All she does ha,ha. more in one day than most people get done in a two days at least at work.  

Now as for diversity, how about those Lions?go Lions go.

Love you Mom! they don't make them like you anymore.

xorx0
xorx0

While there are work environments openly hostile towards females(as there are towards, minorities and homosexuals), I think women prefer careers that are more rewarding and compatible to the fulfillment of their desires. In college I always lamented the fact that the engineering and computer science classes were almost devoid of female classmates. I don't think you can blame that on an environment hostile towards female students. Being a male though, I recognize the fact that maybe I was not aware of some alienation of female students.

Overall I think that females prefer other fields of endeavor such as law and health care. The few females that enjoy technical fields may encounter not only the alpha males in the office in an alpha environment, but also the jealous old white guys from the forties and fifties who felt smugly superior to and didn't have to compete against women and minorities as well as other white guys.

richard233
richard233

 We don't need more women, we don't need less women.  

What we need are competent people regardless of gender who want to do the work.    It is fair to say that perhaps more women should be informed that this is an option and it is reasonable to act to ensure that there is no genuine harassment, but let's try to avoid the point where we end up all walking on egg shells since that is a huge distraction that interferes with productivity and benefits few but the lawyers.
bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

Something I pointed out earlier that I would like to stress...

The (ISC)2 did a study and came to the conclusion that more women need to join the IT Security ranks because of their soft skills. Seriously? THAT was the finding? This can be said about ANY field. Soft-skills are important?!??! You mean someone spent money on this? And the fact that people are swallowing this and even going so far as to write articles about it is absolutely ridiculous.

Baaaaaaa!!! Sheople at their best.

Let's really put this into perspective. The CISSP certification issued by the (ISC)2 requires you to pay $80 a year. The exam costs $600.

You're damn right they would like to see more women in the IT Security workplace. I bet they want to see more women with  CISSP certifications as well.

Baaaaaa!!!

margiemellinger
margiemellinger

Michael, I appreciate your understanding of the need for diversity. I worked 20+ years in IT as a female in a male dominated environment. I greatly appreciated the times that we were diverse and respectful of each other's abilities. When I was in a leadership position I always tried to share the roles and the rewards in hopes that we would experience a level playing field. I don't think there needs to be such a focus on male vs. female but rather the qualities that each brings to the table. It is disappointing that your article can raise so much animosity. It may help if everyone is just really honest with themselves about how we really feel. Everyone who works (mostly everyone) needs a job and we don't like to feel threatened. Everyone, in general, wants to feel appreciated and respected for their unique talents. Sometimes I think "perception" in the workplace has become some kind of an idol. It's really not worth the anxiety that it causes. Honesty and respect are really the two most needed qualities when it comes to diversity of any kind when a group of people are trying to accomplish something worth while.

whitewolf60
whitewolf60

This brings to mind the women who, despite reaching the pinnacle of their profession, choose to use their "bully pulpit" to lament the "glass ceiling" which prevents women from reaching their full potential! Are they implying that they themselves are some sort of "superwoman", able to shatter that same ceiling with nothing more than their cold stare?

No one in their right mind would hire a less-qualified male over a more highly-qualified female in today's white male-bashing environment, and if you come across that someone who is not in their right mind, sue or move on! Yet highly-qualified white males are passed over every day to meet quotas for "minorities" including homosexuals (name one mega-corporation or large governmental organization that doesn't recruit at gay pride parades and through minority-oriented publications!).

Maybe we need a study regarding how, since convincing women that they should eschew home and family for careers and abortions, the income of working couples now provides less financial security than was enjoyed by families in the recent past when the male was the sole provider!

lallen2064
lallen2064

While I have no problem at all with having diversity in the IT workforce, I find the whole gender based hypothesis presented in this article to be sexists, biased and repugnant. 

Are the authors of the study seriously arguing for gender based roles in the IT security world?   In essence saying that the problem is gender based and the solution is gender based?  Both males and females are inherently predestined for respective roles in information security?  If that is the argument, then it is no different than telling women that they can be good stewardesses but not airplane pilots, or telling men they can be good football players, but not good cooks.  

If IT security professionals (men or women) need to have broader skill sets and be better rounded people then that is a training issue or perhaps it indicates a need for change in job definition and required skill sets.  I can't believe we are in the 21st century and hearing arguments that gender is a good method for determining an individuals success in a given IT  profession. 
M Wagner
M Wagner

As an IT professional in a diverse university setting, I can tell you that in our organization, women managers are a valuable asset in a male-dominated field.  Less competent managers are far more likely to be male than female. 

So, I am not the least bit surprised that in a security-conscious setting, a woman's perspective brings a lot to the table.

Gerald_Hilton
Gerald_Hilton

I worked for an American outsource company in the Netherlands.  Six months be fore the big cutback and shut down, crash management was brought in to kill the main part of the profitable side and move the client to Hungary.  Quality went down, and costs actually went up.  Nice revenue loss when you are doing your taxes. 

I knew that the shutdown was coming via e-mail and test messages from a friend on a business trip to Japan 6 (SIX) months prior to the announcement.  Two months before the announcement, office staff and management levels were shooting their moths off in the public areas around the airport about inventory loss and financial mismanagement. 

No kidding!  Both genders are to blame in this fiasco.  Potential clients heard about this vial social media and chatting.  IT Security was totally useless as the upper management and the head office in St. Petersburg, Florida ignored the warnings.  The head of IT was a most capable woman who did everything possible to keep things tight.

All efforts where to late and not enough as personnel where on Facebook and other social medias all the time.  Strange they claimed they where over worked.  Integrity is not gender specific.  The men blabbed the facts, and the women shared the stories of the internet treachery.

Why am I telling you about this?  This is a lesson in how to kill the stacks in any company.  Social media is nice at home, but keep the business at work.  And to the management folks reading this,  SHUT UP AT STARBUCKS AND ON THE GOLF COURSE!!!  Anyone heard about MSPY?  Your company phone really tells a lot about you and what's going on to those istening.

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

Here we go again. These articles show up with alarming frequency. No, we do NOT need more women in InfoSec. If women want the job, they will do what it takes to get it. Is there some Grand Puba somewhere in charge of "under-representation"? In a free society, people will go where they want. We don't need someone forcing what amounts to quotas for a career. That's the sort of thing that happens in dictatorships and we aren't there (yet). How about you Diversity Nazis leave us alone and we will work where our skills and opportunities take us. Enough with this.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

You missed the point of the sub-report.  I believe most posters did not read the report, just this article.  This is not saying that technical is not important.  It says that other skills are also important.  My brother is a security architect.  He is a techy.  Many times he has been praised for his ability to actually communicate with a broader audience.  He has been singled out because many technical peers can not.  It often limits they career options.  When they don't get their way (because of their limited soft skills), they get angry, nasty, and make the situation worse.  I am technical (and a woman).  Technical skills are a part of credibility, but alone they are not enough.  Many of the comments equated soft skills and communications with being soft or emotional.  They are not.  They are about being an overall effective professional.  It you can't get your point across or understand how the other guy/gal is feeling, it can be difficult to negotiate or get funding. 

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

Question:  Did you actual read the reports or just guess at its contents?

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

Both law and health care have "alpha males".  I don't get  the bit about women preferring careers that are more rewarding and compatible to the fulfillment of their desires.  Women and men chose careers for similar reasons.  Believe of not, women don't have the monopoly on certain traits, such as altruism or compassion.  I am seeing more of a trend of  jealous old white guys from the forties and fifties being shown the door because they failed to stay current (they always blame it on their age).

whitewolf60
whitewolf60

@xorx0 Strange that when, according to you, the "jealous old white guys" who "didn't have to compete against women and minorities" dominated American industry, America was the unquestioned world leader in innovation and production; we were clearly on an upward trajectory.

Now that HR departments are more concerned with "diversity" than excellence, we are clearly on a downward spiral.

Don't forget...if you work in the IT field, every concept and technology that you employ was developed by one of those "jealous old white guys", often utilizing pencil, paper, and slide rule!

Our current downward trend is in no small part due to the fact that, when a white male makes, of his own volition, the effort to apply for a position, he is likely to be passed over for a (fill in the blank) whom the employer had to seek out ("recruit") and hand-carry through the process to meet "diversity" goals.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

Actually, it is women in infosec that have been walking on egg shells.  We have been afraid to discuss the elephant in the room.  Little is written on it because we are uncomfortable discussing for fear of being labeled a B*TCH.  Most of the articles I have seen lately are written by men. We are looking for a level playing field based upon our skills and achievements, not whether we play golf or watch sports.   Until someone call you the "C word" during an interview to see if you "fit in with the guys on team", you really don't get the heart of the issue.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

ISC2 does not track gender.  I check with them, ISACA, and the ACFE.  None track gender specifically.  Are you anti-CISSP, as well?

hocusfocus
hocusfocus

@margiemellinger Almost correct it seems.The qualities that each INDIVIDUAL brings to the table.  Everything else seems in order from my perch.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

The male as the sole provider disappeared many moons ago.  My mom always worked.  So did most of my friends mom.  That American fanasty faded away in the 1970s.

hocusfocus
hocusfocus

@M Wagner Diverse, INDIVIDUAL skills.  Both genders well real and figurative dunce caps with equal grace.

vandalii
vandalii

@M Wagner Again, the emphasis should be on diverse skills.  To somehow assume estrogen or testosterone levels are a meaningful measurement of diversity is to play the PC game.  When one measures skill-set diversity, then it is useful.

BTW, whether we like it or not, boys and girls really *are* different, and that's a *good* thing.  And yes, it is the diversity of male-oriented vs. female-oriented attributes that make for a better blend than monolithic or over-emphasized specific skillsets .  But first one must step on the "men and women are equal but are not the same" landmine that will get one castrated and labeled a misogynist without understanding why that is okay.

M Wagner
M Wagner

@mudpuppy1 This isn't about quotas.  It is about an awareness that men and women have very different - but complementary - perspectives.  Having both perspectives in an IT setting brings about a balance.  It is the lucky organization who has the benefit of both perspectives.

bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

@mudpuppy1 Exactly. Women will gravitate towards jobs that fit them. It should not be a surprise that the level of participation in the IT Security workforce is low. Hello!!! They're not interested. Let it be.


And the notion that "soft skills" are needed is a no-brainer. Go read ANY article/book/posting geared towards creating a powerful resume and you will immediately be told how important soft-skills are for ANY field. This is a fact of life. Men in the IT Security field are aware of this and, HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, some of us actually do things to improve ourselves in this area.


When you think about it, these articles are an insult to men yet they are widely celebrated. What does that tell you?

hocusfocus
hocusfocus

@Reese_Roberts Inappropriate behavior at large is an equal opportunity affair.  That it's painful is not specific to gender.  I would believe it if Shon Harris came out and said she was the object of gender-based ridicule at some point in her career (I don't know that she was or is.)  By the same token, she has worked her magic in such a way as reach the top of this profession, and has remained there for quite some time.  So I guess it's a matter of taking your pick, fairness, or excellence.  Because as far back as recorded history goes, the two things don't really seem to occupy the same space, at the same time.

whitewolf60
whitewolf60

@Reese_Roberts Certainly, people of all kinds have experienced adversity in the workplace; white males are no exception.

But it is hard to back up the argument that the past dominance of white males in American industry was due to anything other than their qualifications. After all, that was Americas Golden Age.

To attempt to punish present-day white males because white males in past decades did such a good job is counter-productive.

Note that I use the term "white male" because articles such as this are actually referring to "white women"; women of color are already covered in the "diversity putsch" under the auspices of "minorities". This is why you will often see the phrase "WOMEN (i.e., white women) AND MINORITIES (i.e., non-white women and men)" used by "diversity" advocates. Their goal is to have white men on one side of the issue, with white women and all others on the opposite side. That is a division that must be avoided at all costs.

Please note that none of my comments are meant to offend, and I welcome your point of view. All of us will learn from this sort of discourse.

hocusfocus
hocusfocus

@Reese_Roberts I'll type s-l-o-w-l-y: The study used member monies (presumably), and wasted them on a gender hit piece.  The conclusion flatly states an imbalanced ratio of gender in the industry.  Ratios come from underlying (or alternately, under lying) data.  Data comes from tracking something(s), and writing down what you discover.  Please.

vandalii
vandalii

@Reese_Roberts Umm, the wording of article is pretty specific:

"The (ISC)2 news release for the report explains: “While technical skills are integral to developing a strong security posture within organizations, it's important to supplement the proper skills and perspectives necessary to make impactful businesses decisions.”

The news release then hints at why it is important to have qualified women working in Information Security: “The report findings demonstrate that the surveyed women believe a successful information security professional should maintain a variety of skills vs. surveyed men, who believe technical skills should be the priority.”

How is "surveyed women" is not gender tracking? ;-)

bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

@Reese_Roberts you really make my head hurt. so educated yet so dense. 


i like how you've just put words in my mouth. are you implying I am anti-women? i have said nothing of the sort. this is only your interpretation. the picture you are trying to paint.


but let's address your misgivings...


so they don't track gender? perhaps... but seeing as how they conducted a study to understand the lack of women in IT Security sends a clear message, to those paying attention, that they are INDEED interested in gender.

for someone so educated to miss something so obvious is pretty funny. but hell, you know what they say about those that teach.

vandalii
vandalii

@Reese_Roberts Reese, sorry you (and your mother) missed out on it.  My (mother and my) wife both really appreciated not having to leave the children to be raised by someone else so we could have that Lexus and 3K sq. ft. house.  We chose rather to raise our own children and >gasp< homeschool them.  We scaled back our lifestyle so my paycheck was sufficient.  Most couples won't do that today.  This is pretty far afield of the article, but you brought It up...

whitewolf60
whitewolf60

@Reese_Roberts Actually, it wasn't a fantasy, it was reality, and its fading away coincided with the fading away of the American Dream, a dream that was once reality and is now fantasy.

Even today, in many if not most households where a male is not the sole provider, it is because there is no father in the household.

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@M Wagner @mudpuppy1 Fine. I'm OK with that. We just don't need any "Diversity Czars" trying to tell us what jobs we can have and who we can hire based on some arbitrary thing such as gender (in this case). The very concept that a career field is "under-represented" by any human category and needs to be "corrected" by some officious bureaucrat is ridiculous.

hocusfocus
hocusfocus

@bilbosfeet @mudpuppy1 Men AND Women gravitate towards jobs that fit them.  One of those groups spends quite a bit more time talking about this basic fact of work life as if it were a form of life validation.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

HOLY MOTHER OF GOD, this may be news to you, but WOMEN do things to improve themselves (same as men).  Many women do this while raising families and working full-time.  My own mom get her degree and MBA while working.  I have 3 graduate degrees, publish numerous journal articles, have more certifications than you can shake a stick at, and take courses regularly, I am not an exception, but the rule.   I hope your are near returement because your attitudes are start out of the 1950s. 

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@wendelr @mudpuppy1 It tells me that people who push this garbage aren't interested in getting the best qualified people (male or female), but just in making sure the workforce looks "diverse", whether that be more women or more <insert oppressed minority here>. Here's a radical concept: how about not telling us which non-white male to hire and just let people work where they want and are qualified regardless of race or gender?

whitewolf60
whitewolf60

@Reese_Roberts Certainly, the environments and language in some work environments can be considered hostile towards women. By the same token, I have seen some women cross the very same lines in ways that made me uncomfortable. Civility in the workplace IS a good thing.

A level playing field is also desirable. The problem arises when the degree of "levelness" is measured by calculating whether multiple sub-groups of a certain population are represented in percentages matching those found in the general population.

In the City of Miami, the Mariel Boatlift of 1980 resulted in a 20% increase of the Cuban worker population within a six-month period. The local government and other employers fell all over themselves trying to purge themselves of white male workers to make room for the Hispanic workers necessary to "re-level" the "playing field". Does that sound fair to you?

A Hispanic Lieutenant in the Miami fire department was later quoted as saying "We hire 60% Hispanics, regardless of qualifications". Note that this is not to mention the quotas for American Blacks, various Blacks of foreign origin, females, homosexuals, etc. etc. In fact, the department had one particular employee whose sole function was to serve as a liason to the EEOC. She was...a Cuban lesbian!

The "equality putsch" in the Miami fire department went so far that men and women eventually shared the same restrooms. A former employer who was also a fireman related a story about a visit to the restroom wherein a female "fireperson" assumed the position in the stall next door and promptly "cut the cheese", then said "I hate when that happens" : ) Is this what we want?

I was in the City of Miami personnel office on another occasion, the week after there had been riots in the Haitian community. A higher-up in the department entered the area behind the front counter, where the incoming applications were filed, and instructed the workers to "bring me all the applicants for Police Officer that are Creole speaking" (i.e., Haitians). Should quotas for hiring Police Officers be adjusted based on whether the group has rioted or not? This is insane.

I believe that articles such as this are written for no other reason than to foment conflict and mistrust between groups so that those who profit from manipulation ( as opposed to those who enjoy productive pursuits), including those who view human beings as a resource akin to coal, can pursue their selfish goals.

I also wonder whether those who claim to seek diversity are just ignorant, or liars. Diversity of the human race was achieved through relative separation of groups. An enforced mixing of cultures only results in homogenization in the end, including genetic and cultural traits.

This can most easily be seen in an experiment using various colors of paint. Imagine several colors in separate containers. A "diversity" advocate comes along and recommends that we put all colors in the same container in the name of "diversification". This results in a single color, and it would be impossible to reverse the result.

The same technique is being applied to humans and the end result will be the same. To the uninitiated, diversity appears to have been achieved initially, but in reality, diversity is eventually diminished, then eliminated in the end.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

To be sure, everyone has a horror story.  However, I would challenge most men in infosec to relate experiences that I and other other women in the field have experiences, such as explicit requests for sexual acts, demeaning nicknames, suggestions to hold future events at strip clubs, comments on our bodies, to name a few.  I think many readers failed to actually read the report.  They just assumed it was a request to jump the line.  Looking at the level of many comments gives you insight into the actual problem.  It you substituted the work Blacks for Women, few would be comfortable making these comments.  The report for those you care to actual read it is more about creating a more level playing field which everyone, regardless of race, gender, or sexual orientation, deserves.  

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@Reese_Roberts And your anti-male bias is coming thorough loud and clear. Don't paint us all with your broad brush. Not all of us are like that.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

Actually, you are pathetic.  I have no venom toward you.  I see your brethren constantly.  They can't deal with a changing world, so they rant because they can't deal with it.  It is so sad. 

bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

@Reese_Roberts i don't give a shit why they don't track gender. that's not the point. you talk a lot but make no sense. it's just air passed over vocal cords at this point

keep the ad hominem coming. i want to feel more of your venom.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

They don't track gender, likely because of privacy concerns.  That is a fact which is all I was saying.   However, the tone of your comments, in general,  is the typical angry white guy rant that I have heard so often that it hurts my head.  

bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

@Reese_Roberts nobody gives a shit about your mother. seriously.

and more women in college than men? perhaps... what are these women studying? certainly not STEM

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

A dream for who?  Growing up, most of friends' (in the 1970s) mothers worked outside the home and we were solidly middle-classed.  My mom worked so we could have a better life, such as private school. We all had fathers in the home.  The dad as a sole provider has been basically gone for almost 50 years.  The percentage of women in college is greater than that of men today.  I know more stay-at-home dads than moms.

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@M Wagner @mudpuppy1 Alright, who's the braniac that decided 5 minutes to edit a comment was a good idea?


I wanted to edit my reply to add: Besides, since women are about 50% of the population, how do you get to 50% representation without some sort of quota system?

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@Reese_Roberts I don't know if your response was to me or not, but I was in no way denigrating women. I was railing against the collective mindset that says all fields should have equal representation of whatever.That is hogwash. Everyone should be free to follow his or her dream as he or she sees fit and that they have the skills to accomplish. We don't need anyone telling us what careers to pursue. Diversity just for the sake of diversity is just plain nuts. In fact, that should never be the goal or even on the radar. No one is happy with that going on (except the apparatchiks foisting this insanity on us).

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

I know plenty of professionals, including men, that do nothing to improve themselves.  I like the army term ROADS (retired on active duty status) for these individuals.  My mom worked full-time.  It took 6 years.  She had three kids under 10.  She was always there for us, despite her workload. However, she gave back up by becoming a college professor and dean.  She believed in giving back by assisting others achieve their potential.  She liked to say a dream delayed is not a dream denied.  She was a role model for other older students.  Rather than put others down, she stressed giving a hand to start the journey.   Over the years, I have run CISSP & CISA classes because I continue to follow her model.  I recently dedicated my first book to her.

bilbosfeet
bilbosfeet

@Reese_Roberts Congratulations on all of your schooling and certifications. It sounds like you have read a lot of books. Also, give your mom a gold star for doing what large numbers of professionals do (including myself) with regards to obtaining her MBA while working. I achieved mine in a lock-step 3/4 time program while working full-time. What was your mother's situation?


Seriously though... kudos for doing what professionals are supposed to do AND being a woman. Get over yourself.

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@Reese_Roberts I assume nothing. There you go again, putting words into my mouth. The point of these types of articles is all the same: to accuse white males of keeping you down. It gets tiring and I'm getting tired of hearing it. You listen to these articles, and you come away with the thought that white males are solely responsible for every evil that has ever befallen every living creature in the universe since before the beginning of time and will be paying for it long past the end of time. 

These same knuckleheads are talking about "White Privilege" now. Gee, as a white male, I wish I had some of that "White Privilege". Also, as a white male, I'm a racist, don't you know. Whether I know it or not. I can't help it. It's in the DNA.

This pack of lies and BS is SO getting old.

mudpuppy1
mudpuppy1

@Reese_Roberts Don't put words into my mouth. You misinterpreted what I said. I said nothing of the kind. Take off your anti-male glasses.

Reese_Roberts
Reese_Roberts

If that is the message you get from the study and article, you missed the point entirely.   You also appear to assume that only white male candidates are going to be more qualified than their female or non-white peers, so not hiring a white man is the inferior choice.  And there is the root cause of the issue and why ISC2 did the study.