Does Bitcoin have a Gender Gap Problem?

[SPC_Bitcoin]

I didn't get interested/involved with bitcoin because of the community, although it has been helpful.

Question is, what drives a person regardless of sex to seek an alternative currency?
-awareness that fiat and that system are on the verge of collapse?
-frustration with current money systems?
-desire for freedom?
-investment opportunity?


I could go on. let's get to the motivation side of the equation, rather than the "women avoid technology and geeky stuff"

[1713513791]

1713513791

[1713513791]

1713513791

[foggyb]

It is incredibly sexist to claim that fewer women are at extremes in personality, political stance, or intelligence. This is equivalent to saying that all women are similar. Such a statement is patently false.
...

It is actually true for many intelligent tests that while the means are nearly identical the distributions are not, so neither sexist or anything else.  See eg:
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2010/07/great-male-variability-it’s-a-fact-but-it-can-sometimes-be-deadly/#mbl

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx

Plus many more.

IQ tests were designed by males and initially applied to test differences between males, who were the primary school population at the time. It is no surprise that the test accentuates the intelligence variability in males. This does not prove that males are more "variable" than females, only that a test designed to measure male variability shows greater male variability than females.

Those are the standards for intelligence that exist. Sure, if we slanted the test for females, then they would 'win'. If women do match up as well as men, then they should have no problem with a standard human intelligence test. Its not a popularity contest.

[dree12]

It is incredibly sexist to claim that fewer women are at extremes in personality, political stance, or intelligence. This is equivalent to saying that all women are similar. Such a statement is patently false.
...

It is actually true for many intelligent tests that while the means are nearly identical the distributions are not, so neither sexist or anything else.  See eg:
http://www.aei-ideas.org/2010/07/great-male-variability-it’s-a-fact-but-it-can-sometimes-be-deadly/#mbl

http://www.iqcomparisonsite.com/sexdifferences.aspx

Plus many more.

IQ tests were designed by males and initially applied to test differences between males, who were the primary school population at the time. It is no surprise that the test accentuates the intelligence variability in males. This does not prove that males are more "variable" than females, only that a test designed to measure male variability shows greater male variability than females.

Those are the standards for intelligence that exist. Sure, if we slanted the test for females, then they would 'win'. If women do match up as well as men, then they should have no problem with a standard human intelligence test. Its not a popularity contest.

Are you aware of for whom this test was initially designed?

The IQ test was originally designed for school-aged children. At that time, many women did not attend school. Thus, it primarily measures the mental aptitudes of men, and that is the population that it differentiates best. If I decided to measure intelligence with height, for which there is definitely a correlation, it may work well initially with men. When I then apply this test to women, the scale is not useful for comparing across genders because of physiological differences.

Many of the "standards" were designed long ago for a primarily male population. It is unfair to claim that these tests are appropriate for all people when they were designed for only a subset of people.

[tinus42]

Are you aware of for whom this test was initially designed?

The IQ test was originally designed for school-aged children. At that time, many women did not attend school. Thus, it primarily measures the mental aptitudes of men, and that is the population that it differentiates best. If I decided to measure intelligence with height, for which there is definitely a correlation, it may work well initially with men. When I then apply this test to women, the scale is not useful for comparing across genders because of physiological differences.

Many of the "standards" were designed long ago for a primarily male population. It is unfair to claim that these tests are appropriate for all people when they were designed for only a subset of people.

Were these standards never updated / modernized? I find that hard to believe.

[foggyb]

Are you aware of for whom this test was initially designed?

The IQ test was originally designed for school-aged children. At that time, many women did not attend school. Thus, it primarily measures the mental aptitudes of men, and that is the population that it differentiates best. If I decided to measure intelligence with height, for which there is definitely a correlation, it may work well initially with men. When I then apply this test to women, the scale is not useful for comparing across genders because of physiological differences.

Many of the "standards" were designed long ago for a primarily male population. It is unfair to claim that these tests are appropriate for all people when they were designed for only a subset of people.

Were these standards never updated / modernized? I find that hard to believe.

Agreed. I'm not saying women aren't intelligent, just suggesting that these intelligence tests have an actual purpose beyond superficial equality issues.

[franky1]

lol

the IQ test was designed for all, aimed at measuring the intellect of children. its about maths and puzzles. which both males and females can accomplish. there is nothing sexist about IQ tests.

what is sexist is the Ego of men.. those with high IQ will show off, join mensa and get books deals to write about their lifestory being smart. where as women are not as ego-centered to publicise their intelligence.

thus it is found that male EGO's make statistics look more favorable to males. because the statistics look at how many men vs women are in mensa. not how many men/women get the minimal IQ requirements to join.

and this point is proven by the OP. he based his idea that women don't understand bitcoin, not based on talking to women, but based on how many, or lack of women there were at a convention.

to those that actually have girlfriends, wives etc. we all know when arguing with a women, us men will never win. they are very clever and whitty to get what they want, in many ways. and they are subtle about it too. they dont show off their intelligence they do it with cunning and strategy...

once the naive hormone induced bitcoin fans make sense of this, and that bitcoin conventions become more about official business instead of dating hook-up spots. you will see a few more women turn up.

[defaced]

I hope my wife never finds my bitcoin wallet or im gonna have to figure out a way to block bitmit. 

[cowandtea]

For Bitcoin to succeed in the long term we need market acceptance. Going to Bitcoin meetups and conferences it seems to be a small number of women, and an even smaller number of minorities. There are plenty of women doing great things in the Bitcoin space, but if you look at our demographics as a whole women are a very small portion. Coinblog lists the number around 2.5%, which is just dismal to say the least. So my question to you is:

1) Is the number of women in Bitcoin only tied to the fact that there is large disparity between women and men in Computer Science?
2) Has Bitcoin as a community been hostile to women?
3) If we do have a problem, how can we fix it?

Most women don't play computer games, they don't even know computer much or graphic cards much.

[dree12]

For Bitcoin to succeed in the long term we need market acceptance. Going to Bitcoin meetups and conferences it seems to be a small number of women, and an even smaller number of minorities. There are plenty of women doing great things in the Bitcoin space, but if you look at our demographics as a whole women are a very small portion. Coinblog lists the number around 2.5%, which is just dismal to say the least. So my question to you is:

1) Is the number of women in Bitcoin only tied to the fact that there is large disparity between women and men in Computer Science?
2) Has Bitcoin as a community been hostile to women?
3) If we do have a problem, how can we fix it?

Most women don't play computer games, they don't even know computer much or graphic cards much.

Do you have the stats to back this up, or is this from preconceived notions? It seems the latter is unfortunately common in the Bitcoin community.

[fattypig]

Women are on average more risk-averse than men. Bitcoin is risky. When Bitcoin becomes more mainstream there will be more women who use Bitcoin.

This, that's what make women more capable at something.

[pyra-proxy]

Funny story with me, while my wife probably will never post on here.  She was averse to the whole voodoo of Bitcoin, until I provided her with deposits into our savings/gas card/pre-paid card/other purchases from bitcoin earnings, now she's on it like a hawk.  If she's at home and my miners go down she's letting me know right away to get those cash boxes running again lol.... it's kind of funny but true.  I'm sure there are more women involved in Bitcoin than what is represented on these forums.  It's also not an overly social topic she's likely to be bringing up with her friends etc. but she's keeping an eye on it more all the same in my house.

Honestly fear how nasty the first big bitcoiner divorce will go down... after all w/out the priv key, how do you split the bitcoins...

[franky1]

Most women don't play computer games, they don't even know computer much or graphic cards much.

??
hmm i see the opposite, i see women playing Wii games all the time, facebook games, online bingo games, which when combined far outpace the amount of call of duty/Warcraft population

and what do graphics cards have to do with bitcoin anymore.. i think your stuck in the past, much like your sexist comments.

its more likely that these people with sexist comments don't themselves see many women in their life to actually judge what women know or don't know. after all while sat at home playing your xbox how many women cross your path everyday? maybe the girls you do hook up with that from your experience dont know much about computing is more of an admission of the 'type' of girl you prefer, rather then a observation of ALL women in general.

now if you went to a work place you would see more women working cash registers, being secretary's, PA's, receptionist's, accountants, etc (computer roles). while the men are in the warehouses or restocking shelves, mending things, etc.

women these days are more handy with a cellphone, ipad then men are.

but this thread totally proves the point of why women don't attend bitcoin conventions, because of the mindset of men here do not respect women, do not see them as equals, as intelligent or as business savvi.

so that is what needs to change to get more women involved.

[BitTrade]

From a psychological perspective, specifically looking at jungian personality, there is an easy explanation.

If you look at the poll taken of bitcointalk members, you will see that bitcoiners are overwhelmingly "INTJ" and "INTP" personality types (meyers-briggs).  Among these types, males outnumber females about 3:1 over the general population.  

[franky1]

From a psychological perspective, specifically looking at jungian personality, there is an easy explanation.

If you look at the poll taken of bitcointalk members, you will see that bitcoiners are overwhelmingly "INTJ" and "INTP" personality types (meyers-briggs).  Among these types, males outnumber females about 3:1 over the general population.  

on the development sub forum i agree with you. but in the main bitcoin forum area i believe they are more like this:
comedy trolls(ESFP) 10%
basement dwelling trolls(INFP) 10%
donators/investors(ENFP) 40%
coders(INTP) 20%
project developers(INTJ) 20%

you will never know exactly how many women are into bitcoin because the last time a few females i know of personally signed up, they were receiving personal messages from members once people realised they were female..

so most females use the anonymity of bitcoin to its max, by never telling anyone what gender they are and ignoring silly polls

[Timo Y]

It is incredibly sexist to claim that fewer women are at extremes in personality, political stance, or intelligence.

Why is it sexist? Being at the extremes does not imply superiority, neither moral nor functional.  For example, well-balanced people tend to do better in the modern workplace than people with extreme personality traits.

"Freakish" people are not better than "average" people, they are just different, that's all.

This is equivalent to saying that all women are similar.

No, it's equivalent to saying that most women are similar, as are most men.  

That is not an excuse for Bitcoin's gender gap.

The word "excuse" implies that the gender gap is something pathological that needs to be fought.  In fact, it's just a result of fewer women being interested in bitcoin than men.

You know what is really sexist?  Claiming that women ought to be more interested in bitcoin, even after the fact that they have chosen not to. That is basically treating them like children who "don't know what's best for them".

[Mike Christ]

From a psychological perspective, specifically looking at jungian personality, there is an easy explanation.

If you look at the poll taken of bitcointalk members, you will see that bitcoiners are overwhelmingly "INTJ" and "INTP" personality types (meyers-briggs).  Among these types, males outnumber females about 3:1 over the general population.  

on the development sub forum i agree with you. but in the main bitcoin forum area i believe they are more like this:
comedy trolls(ESFP) 10%
basement dwelling trolls(INFP) 10%
donators/investors(ENFP) 40%
coders(INTP) 20%
project developers(INTJ) 20%

you will never know exactly how many women are into bitcoin because the last time a few females i know of personally signed up, they were receiving personal messages from members once people realised they were female..

so most females use the anonymity of bitcoin to its max, by never telling anyone what gender they are and ignoring silly polls

PFFFT I don't even have a basement

Anyway, AFAIK most people here are INTX (as in <85% based on the last poll), and NTs in general are predominantly male.  No, not all the NTs here are working on projects related to Bitcoin, but they're definitely the vast majority.  I'm fairly certain the last poll was in the main Bitcoin forum, or at least somewhere most people would've found it, so I see no reason to mistrust it.

[geniusboy91]

Women
Just wait. Computer science isn't a male-dominated field any more, and actually is projected to become female-dominated in the future. Bitcoin will follow.

I'm not sure where you get this data. As personal experience goes, in my Computer Engineering classes, if there are about 100 people per class, there has never been more than 5 girls.

[franky1]

PFFFT I don't even have a basement

Anyway, AFAIK most people here are INTX (as in <85% based on the last poll), and NTs in general are predominantly male.  No, not all the NTs here are working on projects related to Bitcoin, but they're definitely the vast majority.  I'm fairly certain the last poll was in the main Bitcoin forum, or at least somewhere most people would've found it, so I see no reason to mistrust it.

i can disprove most peoples belief that over 85% of them think they are strategists or engineers.. most men when doing tests exadurate their positives and undervalue their negatives..

such as. teenage gamers that stay home all day.. most of the world would say they are loners.. but to them. they are communicating with the world via the internet so they will always put social skill questions as being a high rating..

also. being objective. while these same teenage gamers set an objective of staying up 40 hours to watch a TV series marathon or get to level 50 Uber god mode on a game. thus thinking to rate objectivity as high.. their family will see that they havnt taken a shower or done the chores for 3 months.. same with neat and orderly.. he looks into his computer case and sees all the cables all zip tied nicely... but ignores the laundry basket in the corner.

these tests should be taken with a pinch of salt

[Gabi]

I understand why women would avoid meetings, but the gender gap is huge even on the forum, and on a forum you are just a nick and the sex does not matter.

Most women don't play computer games, they don't even know computer much or graphic cards much.

??
hmm i see the opposite, i see women playing Wii games all the time, facebook games, online bingo games, which when combined far outpace the amount of call of duty/Warcraft population

This isn't exactly helping    Playing farmville and wii and bingo isn't exactly something to be proud of in my humble opinion  

[b!z]

I understand why women would avoid meetings, but the gender gap is huge even on the forum, and on a forum you are just a nick and the sex does not matter.

Most women don't play computer games, they don't even know computer much or graphic cards much.

??
hmm i see the opposite, i see women playing Wii games all the time, facebook games, online bingo games, which when combined far outpace the amount of call of duty/Warcraft population

This isn't exactly helping    Playing farmville and wii and bingo isn't exactly something to be proud of in my humble opinion 

The only game you should be proud of playing is Candy Crush