Diversity In Technology

"Wow, you know your numbers!" "You don’t look like a tech founder!" At some point, I stopped saying “thank you” and started asking, Why is this surprising? Because these aren’t compliments. They’re low expectations wrapped in politeness. As a woman in tech, you learn to spot it early. The way people are impressed when you’re prepared. The surprise when you have clear opinions.The disbelief when you talk systems, not just vision. It’s not flattery. It’s bias disguised as encouragement. I don’t want to be the exception. I want the baseline to shift. So the next time you find yourself impressed that a woman is confident, sharp, and knows what she’s doing — Ask yourself why that still surprises you.

I’ve been asked more times than I can count: “So, how did you build Clear without any coding experience?” Plot twist: I can code. 🙄 One quick glance at my LinkedIn profile shows it - software engineering internships, projects, technical skills, and yes, a Physics degree from Imperial College London. And yet, I still hear: 👉 “But you don’t look like someone with a Physics degree.” 👉 “No, but who *actually* built your app?” Here’s the reality: as a founder, I do everything; marketing, sales, business development, HR, fundraising… but also tech and product. In fact, for most of Clear’s journey, the bulk of my day-to-day has been tech and product. So, for the record: almost 5 years into building Clear, I’m still bashing out code and shipping features myself. I’m more technical than most CEOs I know. And yet... I keep having to prove it. Someone even told me recently, “It's because your brand just doesn’t make you seem like a technical founder. If you want people to know you're technical, you need to make it clearer in how you present yourself.” Why is that? Do I need to preface every post with a list of programming languages before it “counts”? Should I show up to my meetings with a printout of my latest git commits? What strikes me is that no one has ever asked our CTO - also a Physics grad from Imperial - if *he* can code. Not once. And I know I’m not alone. I’ve had this same conversation with so many female founders who are technical, but somehow aren’t seen that way unless they constantly parade it. It’s worth reflecting on: if we keep asking technical women “can you actually code?” while assuming men can, we’re not just undermining individuals - we’re reinforcing a narrative that erases technical talent when it doesn’t look the way we expect. So, the next time you find yourself asking a technical female founder whether she "can code", perhaps you should start by asking yourself why you're asking that question in the first place. #femalefounder #entrepreneurship #startups #genderbias #diversity

💻 20 years in IT. That’s how long I’ve worked in this industry. In that time, I’ve built my career on technical knowledge, hard work, and a deep love for what I do. But despite that, I still walk into rooms where people assume I can’t be the technical SME. Not because of my experience. Not because of my skills. But because I’m a woman. Over the years, I’ve had to fight harder to prove myself than male colleagues with less experience. I always believed things would get better, that we’d evolve past those outdated assumptions. Sadly, even in 2025, I still encounter that same disrespect, and not just from men. Sometimes, it comes from other women too. Let’s not forget the women who helped shape this industry, Ada Lovelace, Margaret Hamilton, Dorothy Vaughan. They were pioneers, innovators, and leaders. Women have always belonged in tech. 👉 So here’s my ask: If you work in IT, assume the woman in the room knows her stuff. Assume she’s the SME. Assume she’s a badass. Because more often than not, she is. Let’s break the bias. Together. #WomenInTech #GenderBias #InclusionMatters #TechIndustry #STEM #BiasInTech

In 1958, she became NASA's first black female engineer. Born on this day in 1921, Mary Jackson was a mathematician and aerospace engineer at the National Advisory Committee for Aeronautics (NACA), which in 1958 was succeeded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA). She worked at Langley Research Center in Hampton, Virginia, for most of her career - starting as a “computer” at the segregated West Area Computing division in 1951 (she featured in the Hidden Figures book and film). It took two years of working in the computing section before Mary Jackson was offered to work alongside Kazimierz Czarnecki, an engineer working in the 4-foot by 4-foot Supersonic Pressure Tunnel, a 60,000 horsepower wind tunnel with the capacity to blast spacecraft models with winds approaching twice the speed of sound. Together, Czarnecki, an engineer, and Mary Jackson, a mathematician, both worked on experimental tasks in the facility then Czarnecki advised Jackson to enter a training program to enable her to gain promotion from mathematician to engineer. In 1958, after taking engineering classes, she became NASA's first black female engineer. And after a career of 34 years at NASA, Jackson had earned the most senior engineering title available and realized she could not earn further promotions without becoming a supervisor so she accepted a demotion to become a manager of both the Federal Women's Program, in the NASA Office of Equal Opportunity Programs and of the Affirmative Action Program - in this role, she worked to influence the hiring and promotion of women in NASA's science, engineering, and mathematics careers. All images NASA - National Aeronautics and Space Administration #womeninstem #nasa #engineer #engineering #hiddenfigures

How does a news article celebrating women in STEM lead to comments swimming in whataboutism and sexism? The Straits Times recently published an article highlighting the career journeys of six incredible women in STEM with the headline “Women in Stem: Less than a quarter believe they have the support to succeed, says survey”. Yet, the corresponding Facebook post tells a different story, reeking of whataboutism, gaslighting, sexism and and misogyny. These are comments that women in STEM are expected to brush off. How their mere presence in a male-dominated field warrants the theory that their hiring is based on meeting diversity quotas and not the woman’s demonstrated ability. How women in STEM have it easier because of a two-year advantage over men serving National Service.. How women are “generally” less interested in STEM (not because they had different education or exposure to tech compared to men, but age-old societal expectations that never seem to go away). How women overthink and take things too seriously. Even more crucially, it’s disgusting to see how very boldly some men share their negative views so publicly, their full names on display. Because any woman responding or “complaining” about them will be accused as being too sensitive. “Support” isn’t merely scholarships or career programmes that only cater to women. Support is hearing everyone’s concerns out and taking them seriously, even if they are underrepresented. Support is cultivating a safe space for both discussion and diversity of respectful perspectives. Perhaps it is impossible to cater to every type of community. But without taking even the smallest step into change, our communities will continue to grow at the expense of others, led by the loudest voices when the world is so much more diverse. Why wait for International Women’s Day to debate the same questions on how to “get girls and women more interested in STEM”? Sexism and misogyny certainly doesn’t. #WomenInSTEM #WomenInTech #DiversityAndInclusion

Last week, a new Lean In–backed survey found that 78% of men say they use AI at work. 73% of women say they do too. That’s closer than I expected. But that’s not the whole story. Men are more likely to use AI daily or constantly. And that’s where the gap starts to widen. ▶️ Men are more likely to feel confident experimenting with AI and to be recognized for it. ▶️ Women are more likely to approach it cautiously, question accuracy, and think through risks. They are more likely to worry about how their use will be perceived and are more likely to be questioned about it. In other words, employees are not just using AI differently. They are being supported, interpreted, and rewarded differently. AI is quickly becoming embedded in how work gets done and how performance gets evaluated. If recognition doesn’t track with contribution, it shapes who gets trusted, who gets visibility, and ultimately, who advances. New technology doesn’t reset old dynamics. It often reinforces them.

In 1962, astronaut John Glenn had a critical condition before his historic orbital flight. He requested that Katherine Johnson, a brilliant mathematician, personally verify the complex trajectory calculations made by NASA's new electronic computers. "If she says the numbers are good," Glenn reportedly stated, "I’m ready." Katherine Johnson started at NASA’s Langley Research Center in 1953. She was part of the "West Area Computing" unit, a segregated section for African American women mathematicians. These women, often referred to as "human computers," performed the crucial calculations essential for America's early space missions. Their meticulous work was vital, especially as electronic computers were novel and their outputs required human verification. Dorothy Vaughan, who joined NASA's predecessor agency in 1943, was another pivotal figure. She became NASA’s first Black supervisor in 1949 and mentored many, including Johnson. Vaughan recognized the coming importance of electronic computing. She proactively taught herself and her team the FORTRAN programming language, ensuring their skills remained indispensable as NASA transitioned to machine calculations. While Johnson and Vaughan are widely recognized, they were part of a broader group of talented African American women. These mathematicians excelled and made foundational contributions to the U.S. space program, overcoming significant systemic barriers. Sources: NASA, National Park Service, University of Birmingham. #HiddenFigures #WomenInSTEM #NASA #fblifestyle

Only 27% of STEM graduates in Germany are women. In Tunisia, it's 44%, one of the highest rates worldwide. When I tell European founders that more than half of Tunisia's engineering students are women, they usually pause. Then they ask if I'm sure. Yes. Around 56% of Tunisia's engineering students are female. Tunisia didn't stumble into this. Since independence, education has been universal and merit based. Women entered universities in large numbers. No one told them engineering was "for men." Walk into a lecture hall in Tunis today and you'll see rows of women coding, designing, solving equations. I studied engineering in Tunis for 3 years before moving to Germany. The contrast was immediate. More than half of Tunisia's researchers are women. Female engineers lead teams, build products, shape public policy. Europe has a gender gap in tech. Tunisia doesn't. They're 2 hours apart. While Europe hosts conferences about closing the gender gap, Tunisian universities graduated generations of female engineers through consistent education policy. I've seen Tunisian engineering teams where collaboration flows naturally because competence drives decisions. Tunisia quietly built one of the world's most gender-balanced engineering ecosystems. That's worth celebrating. #WomenInSTEM #Tunisia #Engineering #TechTalent #Diversity

There still aren’t enough women in tech. And no, it’s not because we “opt out.” I’ve gone back and forth on whether to write this, because women who talk about their experiences in tech are often labeled as dramatic, difficult, or making it about gender. But silence hasn’t fixed it, so here we are. I’ve loved technology since I was young. I’ve consistently outperformed, stayed late, learned more, shipped more, and cared deeply about the work. And yet, alongside that, I’ve also experienced things in my career that have nothing to do with my skill: - Being inappropriately harassed at work - Being treated as a “distraction” instead of a contributor - Being told I’m not as capable as I think I am or that my brain is less capable because I am female - Being called a DEI hire instead of an engineer - Being asked if a parent “got me the job” - Being talked over, doubted, or underestimated, even with results to back me up None of that made me better at my job. None of that helped the team. And none of that is a rite of passage we should be normalizing. Here’s the part that matters most: This is why women leave tech. Not because they can’t do the work but because they get tired of having to prove they belong over and over again. If we want more women in tech, the call to action isn’t “encourage girls to code harder.” It’s: - Take women seriously the first time - Believe competence doesn’t have a gender - Call out inappropriate behavior when you see it - Stop assuming confidence equals arrogance when it comes from a woman - Make space where women don’t have to armor up just to do their jobs There are so many brilliant, driven, creative women who would thrive in this field if the environment didn’t quietly push them out. I’m still here because I love the work. But I want it to be better for the women coming after me so they get to focus on building, learning, and leading… not surviving. If you’re in tech, you’re part of shaping that future. Let’s do better than we did before. #WomenInTech #WomenWhoBuild #TechCulture #EngineeringLeadership #InclusiveTech #DiversityInTech #EquityInTech #RepresentationMatters #BuildBetterTeams #TechCareers #WomenInEngineering #LeadershipInTech #FutureOfWork #ChangeTheCulture

The Space Race was won with equations… equations calculated by three Black women in the segregated back wing of NASA. For decades, the story of NASA’s achievements focused on white male engineers and astronauts. But behind the headlines were the “hidden figures” who solved the equations that sent John Glenn into orbit and helped Apollo 11 land on the Moon. In 2016, Margot Lee Shetterly’s book "Hidden Figures" (and the film that followed) finally told the world about Katherine Johnson, Dorothy Vaughan, and Mary Jackson. All three started as a “human computer” at Langley Memorial Aeronautical Lab during segregation—forced to eat, work, and pee separately from their white colleagues. 1. Katherine Johnson Katherine started high school at 13. In 1953, she took a job in the all-Black West Area Computing Section, led by Dorothy Vaughan. She was pulled onto a crash analysis project and calculated launch trajectories and orbital reentry paths by hand. In 1960, she coauthored “Determination of Azimuth Angle at Burnout for Placing a Satellite Over a Selected Earth Position.” It was the first time a woman in her division received authorship credit on a NASA report. Then came 1962. John Glenn was prepping for his Friendship 7 orbital mission—the first by an American. He didn’t trust the IBM computers, so he said: “Get the girl to check the numbers. If she says they’re good, I’m ready to go.” Katherine ran the equations. Glenn flew. America won a major battle in the Space Race. Johnson also calculated the rendezvous path for the Apollo Lunar Module. In 2015, at 97, she received the Presidential Medal of Freedom. 2. Dorothy Vaughan She was hired by NACA (NASA’s precursor) in 1943 during WWII and assigned to the segregated West Area Computing unit, where she crunched aeronautics data. In 1949, Vaughan was promoted to lead the West Area Computing Section, making her the first Black supervisor at NACA. But Vaughan saw the next transition coming: from humans to IBM machines. So she taught herself FORTRAN and trained her entire team. Then she led NASA’s first integrated programming section in the Analysis and Computation Division. She retired in 1971 after 28 years. She never got another management title. But all the women she trained carried her legacy forward. 3. Mary Jackson In 1951, Mary landed in West Computing at Langley—working under Dorothy Vaughan. Two years later, engineer Kazimierz Czarnecki pulled her into the supersonic pressure tunnel, where they blasted models with wind at 2x the speed of sound. He urged her to become an engineer. But to qualify, she had to take night classes at a whites-only high school. So she petitioned the city for permission. She got in. She got the grades. And in 1958, she became NASA’s first Black female engineer. In 2021, NASA renamed its DC headquarters in her honor. ----------------- 💡 Follow Justine Juillard for 365 stories of female innovators in 2025.