7 min read
Common knowledge connects non-gender conforming males and programming. With some eventually transitioning into females) . Let’s call this anecdotal phenomenon the Programmer Feminization Effect (PFE). Took this up to familiarize yourself, if the term is foreign. Process which stereotypically goes like this:
a teen is sampled from the general population (let’s call him X)
X does some programming
X experiments with (at least) gender presentation
We have 3 events and we’re looking for causal relationships of 1, 2 causing 3. Hypotheses for the origin are nonexclusive, they may be different for different persons. Here we focus on the hypothesis that the very practice of programming (step 2) is conducive to PFE.
Assumptions
GNC stands here for gender non conforming as adjective or gender non-conformity as a noun. That's relative to gender assigned at birth, so treating femboys, crossdressers on a continuum with trans people.
We’re talking about mainline individuals, not rare XXY, XYY, etc, etc cases.
Summary of previous research
Some reddit posts discuss the issue from a couple of angles, that’s the main source for the research here:
For each of the stages, we have a different set of factors that contribute. For each factor there is a corresponding hypothesis that it is the dominant one.
For stage 1 we have sampling hypothesis - people who start programmming belong to groups with higher than baseline propensity to GNC. Some argued that early teens who are bad at sports or socially awkward like working alone with a machine, without social stresses. Another argument was that programming is a disembodie escape mechanism from GNC thoughts. ‘Programming is a great way to ignore dysphoria.’, ‘escaping from meatspace’. Many self-reports see two events as disconnected, hinting that the effect is over-memed. Other commenters were vary of introspection.
It is a fact that many women and GNC people pioneered the field. Some say that is still reflected, by reincarnation or a different mechanism. That would suggest that IT in general has some intrinsic feminine quality.
The IQ hypothesis, suggested by @Outsideness is that late MtF transitioners are ‘Jews of gender’(sic), having the highest IQ of all gender groups. To the extent that open-mindedness is correlated to both IQ and GNC, it is also possible. Some posit a snowball effect, where open-minded people with GNC proclivity create tolerant spaces. Then people join for the open and high IQ vibe, allowing subsequent GNC osmosis.
Another selection effect postulated on reddit is that MtF transitioners socialised as males matching IT memed as masculine interest.
Here we can see that a predictor of gender non-conformity could be less of investment in the AGAB and periodic physical isolation.
One of the oft-discussed hypotheses is autogynephilia, said to be frequently arising from porn use. From online comments it is certain that this factor is present for some persons.
For stage 2 we have a host of different factors
- ‘copycat effect’ - once the feminity of programming is established in a culture, self-identification as a programmer leads to subconscious search for role models, from the pool of known figures of the profession. Less personal ingroup memes are embraced too, such as socks.
- 'epxloration in isolation effect' - person with even average GNC proclivity will explore GNC more in proportion to isolation experienced. Insofar as programming, IT skills and internet usage are correlated, such a person is more likely to search and find a supportive group. One commenter summarizes: ‘Dissociation. Distancing from people with same assigned sex leading to higher degrees of social isolation -> more time in solitary pursuits on average. Possible higher incidence ASD/broader autistic phenotype.’
- Another comment talks about subcultural influence: ‘Because if I can prove P=NP then it's just a hop, skip, and jump to proving M=F. Also cyberpunk, particularly the gender-role subversive stuff.’
- Another argument mentioned there is the financial independence of IT career allows for covering the medical cost of realizing GNC aspirations. This is not directly PFE, as that’s later in the Markov chain of GNC behaviours. Here we’re interested in the ‘let’s code! - let’s try on these thigh highs!’ state transition. And this financial argument might be applicable both at stages 1 and 2.
Female and male mindsets
This theory postulates that step 1 is not the whole story, that step 2 activities play a role in GNC tendencies.
Let’s take a step back, and let’s think how males and females feel and think about the work of their lives and legacy.
This is spiritually instinctive stuff, if you’re not getting this, sorry.
The male mindset, the epitome of which was in the Bronze Age is incremental;
- build body ability
- build connections with buddies
- build body count of females - siring many sons
- build army / ingroup
and repeat, all of these are integers, nomadic qualities
in the ideal conqueror scenario - Ghenghis Khan, for example it’s an exponential trend
Is the female mindset built around Logos? Possibly.
Females didn’t conquer, Amazons are usually portrayed as defensive warriors, politically isolationist.
Biologically a woman is not able to have as many children as a man, therefore quality trumps quantity. And less risk aversion, as less possible inclusive fitness benefits.
Manosphere says that women are always ready to switch to a better man. That genetic history of being conquered and physical submission resulting in pregnancy. Rape induced adaption doesn't lend to being described as noble. Trading up to those with more power.
There we see, it’s not an incremental mindset. It’s about keeping afloat, not building high. Rinse and repeat, but there is no grand picture where rise is present. At least not directly, but by other persons.
Generalizing, let’s suppose that the female mindset is less about material pursuits. Imagine a small shopkeeper losing their shop and wares in a flood, a product of their whole life. A man would be devastated. A woman would stay fine and say: ‘ at least my children are still fine’.
One last thing describing these two mindsets is the approach to post-mortem legacy. Masculine mindset treats legacy as the Outside, a value in itself, something to be cared for and preserved. He wants his kids, inheritors to maintain and develop this legacy - that’s his expectation, it’s beyond him. Because it’s at best a large scale project (state, company, idea), benefitting all of his offspring, counted in hundreds, if not thousands.
On the other hand, femenine approach of legacy is short term, more personal. Archetypal queen ( Lioness of Cintra) cares more about protecting offspring, headstarts certain genetic descendants. ( vide Giego Caleiro’s post on facebook, ‘why women are more cruel’, idk if it’s still there).
X chromosome activation
Sorry, one more thing.
Basically the question is - can males use that femenine mindset as a possible mode?
Nietzsche’s last men certainly, in that case as a failure mode to be precise.
Scientifically, read about the prehistory of Y chromosome. Horrifyingly reminiscent of spinal catastrophism.
Since at least 150 mya males have prided themselves in possession of something extra compared to the females. And it’s not what you’re thinking, it’s y chromosome, small and redundant, full of errors.
At the first glance, for a male to exhibit femenine features, just suppress the Y chromosome. What about the reverse? For a female to exhibit male features she’d need to have all functionalities of Y chromosome. Modern medicine does boast impressive FtM transitions, but on the face of it, the task is harder. And natural suppression of Y chromosome code would definitely be adaptive at times.
PFE intrinsic femininity of programming theory
Programming mindset deactivates the social / genetic Y chromosome programming(sic!). Given two mindsets, Masculine Bronze Age one and Feminine Young Girl mindset (‘seducing by consuming’) , programming is clearly in the second one. Why is programming feminine?
There’s a lot of passivity, admission of incompetence, languages, frameworks outside specialty. Then even once you get started, there's always limits - learning curves that you can’t all do at once, getting rusty if out of practice. On the project level, many few months, each of them not necessarily connected to the next one, pure capitalistic alienation. It’s serial monogamy of work relationships of a few months, years at best. Companies and people left the 'pairing for the whole life] paradigm. You switch companies, people you work with every few years, always on the move. Getting a bit of experience under your belt? It has diminishing returns from scale. And without your own company you’ll never make it big. Why invest in intergenerational wealth? Why not a bit more cash to spend on a young girl lifestyle?
Masculine programming sure exists in some cases, Terry A. Davis being a prominent example. What’s the pattern for masculine programmers? James Gosling, Dennis Ritchie? Buildup of strong structures, incremental process that outgrew them. Like planting a tree, watering daily - small habits adding to incremental change that adds up like compound interest.
Do you do programming and are a male? Do you wanna be feminized, for identity or fetish reasons? I won’t shame any of that.
But there's a chance that this path doesn’t fit your postmodern self concept. If so, consider paying attention to the incremental processes in your life - be it a side project, sports or family. Big Capitalism wants you to be a slave young girl to the produce - consume paradigm. By building something that’ll outlast you, one day you’ll be able to say ‘exegi monumentum’…