Someone correct me if I'm misunderstanding/misremembering/misinformed, but I think this is a reference to some of the Grand Theft Auto games. It's my understanding that you are not presented with that choice explicitly, and it's a little strange to me that people bring it up in this kind of context. It's a game about being a criminal where you can mug people. Paying a prostitute, she'll naturally have the money you paid her on her person. The fact that "you can pay a prostitute then take the money back" arises as a consequence, not something they added explicitly. Criticism of making a game that incorporates prostitution is one thing. Criticism of making a game where you play a criminal is one thing. But criticising them for "making a game where you can kill a hooker instead of paying her" is imparting more malicious intent than (I presume) was present.

Again, it's totally possible I missed something, and I'd appreciate someone letting me know if that's the case.

I should also note that this isn't intended to take away from the article more broadly.

But, that in itself is sexist. I don't feel like I've slain a beast when I've finished a program. It's more a sense of worry that I'm in a false sense of stillness. When I've finished testing and debugging, it's more a sense of relief that that things are no longer upset in the world.

Does that make me less of a male?

It should be a celebration of the differences between people, and not specifically between men and women.

Performative masculinity is a hell of a toxin.

Very possibly, but not necessarily. It's hard to judge the existence of causation from a correlation in one aspect of this issue. Here is a larger chart, showing multiple fields:

http://gasstationwithoutpumps.files.wordpress.com/2014/06/pe...

You can see the same dips in CS here as in the first graph. However, two other things pop up:

1. The % of women in engineering rises slowly, and the % in CS basically drops _to match it_. This raises the question: is engineering odd in its slow rise, or is CS odd in its initial rise and then fall? Or are both odd? Is it a coincidence they end up around the same place, or not?

2. Large rises occur in some other occupations, well over the 50% mark. Should we be interested in what caused the large rise in biology or psychology, for example? It might be meaningful, but it might not be. There are jumps and changes in all fields, not just CS - perhaps some have significant causes, perhaps some are just side effects (increases in one field must be to the detriment of others)?

Overall, the data leaves us with far more questions than answers, I think.

That is an interesting point about other fields increasing. I don't know if psychology is pulling in women who might otherwise go into CS, but it's plausible that biology or physical sciences might be.

I'm slightly in disagreement about the comment on Admiral Hopper's little hat, cuz it really is a funny little hat. That has nothing to do with her being a woman, it would be a funny little hat on a man too. But I can still see where there's no benefit to anyone in saying anything potentially belittling about Ms. Hopper.

As for that chart itself, I can't help but notice that big drop in the early 00s, during the post dotcom bust. It just sticks out so obviously. A similar decline after 80s boom. I do think what's going on here is more complicated than video games and male laughter. There's pretty clearly an economic component as well.

It could be sexism plays a role on that side too. What if women are less likely to be hired in downturns?

More digging is needed. I don't feel like the core of the answer has been found yet.

If she was a man, I believe she'd have been wearing this hat: http://www.uniforms-4u.com/productimages/3175/big-u-complete...

Is that also a "funny little hat"?

This has nothing to do with any other hat.

For example, waiters wear those funny aprons or other uniforms. Because that way you can tell who is serving the meal and who is buying the meal.

As an aside, in today's U.S. Navy, the clothing is somewhat less important. My cousin was recently promoted to two star, and the ceremony was performed by the Chief of Naval Operations. He hung around for chatting afterwards and I couldn't help myself. I asked why my cousin had more medals on his chest than he did. CNO gave a great reply (he was a submariner, fewer chances for medals) and we agreed that the rigid linking of number of medals to rank has been relaxed in the modern military.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dot-com_bubble#mediaviewer/Fil...

Sounds like something Jack Thompson would say.

"The comments here and a moments worth of overhearing the details of conversations held at any of the employers of coders can attest.

It is not for historical reasons, it is for the reek of sexism and "gamma males" trying to assert themselves as men in the absence of "betas" and "alphas" and failing miserably."