There is a reason several people have pointed out facts to you. You clearly want to deny the fact that women were very much a part of computer ENGINEERING
You’re just being pedantic. Women were extremely pivotal in the creation of computing [insert more specific subfields if you want, doesn’t change anything]. Your comments certainly all read as refuting this. It’s not controversial to the non-incel community.
Im only talking about computer engineering no other aspect of computing. It only seems like Im being pedantic because it has taken you this long to realize the point I have been making from the start which to be clear is entirely uncontroversial in history circles.
Oh so then perhaps you can link to these 1940-1960 statistics that somehow neatly and consistently segmented out computing roles into easy to define categories despite the fact that it was a new field and the lines between subfields were and always have been changing? Got a link handy?
My point is that engineering us a specific job with a specific definition and the ENGINEEERS were not all women.
I never said anything about any other aspect of computing so the rest of your post is just a straw man you added for no reason.
The person who coined the term software engineer was a woman.
And that is relevant to my point how?
There is a reason several people have pointed out facts to you. You clearly want to deny the fact that women were very much a part of computer ENGINEERING
No Im denying they were the MAJORITY of computer engineers. This is an easily verifiable fact. You can look it up with the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
You’re just being pedantic. Women were extremely pivotal in the creation of computing [insert more specific subfields if you want, doesn’t change anything]. Your comments certainly all read as refuting this. It’s not controversial to the non-incel community.
Im only talking about computer engineering no other aspect of computing. It only seems like Im being pedantic because it has taken you this long to realize the point I have been making from the start which to be clear is entirely uncontroversial in history circles.
Oh so then perhaps you can link to these 1940-1960 statistics that somehow neatly and consistently segmented out computing roles into easy to define categories despite the fact that it was a new field and the lines between subfields were and always have been changing? Got a link handy?
Oh weird, apparently no such link