Making Programming Masculine

In the April 1967 issue of Cosmopolitanmagazine, sandwiched between such conventional women’s magazine fare as “ e Bachelor Girls of Japan” and “A Dog Speaks: Why a Girl Should Own a Pooch,” appeared a curious little essay entitled simply “ e Computer Girls.” e “computer girls,” as the article explained, were the female “computer programmers” who taught the dazzling new “miracle machines” called computers “what to do and how to do it.” ere were already more than 20,000 women working as computer programmers in the United States, argued the article’s author, Lois Mandel, and there was an immediate demand for 20,000 more. Not only could a talented “computer girl” command as much $20,000 a year, Mandel condently declared, but the opportunities for women in computing were ešectively “unlimited.” e rapid expansion of the computer industry meant that “sex discrimination in hiring” was unheard of, and anyone with aptitude –male or female, college-educated or not – could rise to the top of the eld. And not only were women in computing treated as equals, but they actually had many advantages over their male colleagues. Programming was “just like planning a dinner,” Mandel quoted the noted computer scientist Dr. Grace Hopper as saying, “You have to plan ahead and schedule everything so it’s ready when you need it. Programming requires patience and the ability to handle detail. Women are ‘naturals’ at computer programming.” It would be easy to dismiss “ e Computer Girls” as a žuš piece, a half-hearted attempt by Cosmopolitan to capitalize on contemporary interest in the computer revolution. And indeed, there are elements of the article that would support this conclusion.