This was posted 6 years 5 months 26 days ago, and might be an out-dated deal.

Related
  • expired

Free Workshop: Django Girls: Learn How to Make Web Applications for Beginners 18/11 @ Common Code HQ (Abbotsford, VIC)

130
Free Workshop: Django Girls: Learn How to Make Web Applications for Beginners 18/11 @ Common Code HQ (Abbotsford, VIC)
Go to Deal
AssociatedPvdegoede on 30/10/2017 - 18:02 djangogirls.org (149 clicks)
Last edited 31/10/2017 - 12:41 by 1 other user

If you identify as a woman and want to learn how to make web applications, we have good news for you:
We are holding a one-day workshop for beginners!

When: November 18, 2017 from 9am-5pm; Install party on November 16, 2017 from 5:30pm-7:30pm
Where: Common Code HQ, 8 Studley St, Abbotsford VIC 3067
Bring: Laptop, charger, water bottle & learning mindset
Cost: Free! Need assistance in getting to Melbourne from regional Victoria? Email us!

Thursday evening will be our install party where we install all the necessary requirements for the workshop and you'll get the opportunity to meet your fellow participants and coaches. It's pretty casual. If you can't make the Thursday, that's ok! It doesn't disqualify you from applying. If you can't make it on the Thursday for the install party, we'll help get you sorted for Saturday beforehand to give you the most amount of time to work on the actual tutorial.

We believe the tech industry will greatly benefit from bringing more women into technology. The future is female. We want to offer you the opportunity to learn the basics of programming in a safe environment. Who knows, maybe you'll even end up transitioning careers! We're here to support you and your journey.

Apply for the workshop!

Do you identify as a woman? Do you have a laptop? Then you're eligible to apply for our workshop! You don't need to know anything technical – our workshop is for women who are completely new to programming. It's a great non-confrontational introductory workshop.

Don't identify as a woman? That's ok! We accept applications from men as well. However, women will be given preference. There are only 60 spots available.

By becoming an attendee you'll:

  • learn to create your first website
  • be fed by us during the events
  • meet other women looking to learn new skills
  • connect with experts who work in the field
  • learn the basics of programming with mentors that do this everyday
  • find out how to switch your career with your new skills

Mod: Just a reminder to please be respectful in conversation.

Education

Related Stores

djangogirls.org
djangogirls.org

closed Comments

  • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 18:49

    Targeted offer - please update the title to reflect as such.

    [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 18:49 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
    • Wokstar on 30/10/2017 - 19:02

      We accept applications from men as well. However, women will be given preference

      Did you read this part?

      • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 19:22
        +1

        TBH, no.

  • syousef on 30/10/2017 - 18:51
    +3

    A lot of female programmers I have known are excellent programmers. Many better than many of the men. I have no problems teaming up with, mentoring or learning from a female. All I give a damn about is how well they can design, code, communicate, document. Anything else would be wasteful as well as disrespectful. (I'm also married so not on the prowl in any way shape or form). I would hope the future cares more about your abilities and enthusiasm than your genitals and chromosomes. Otherwise I identify as alien and want off this planet.

    • PJC on 30/10/2017 - 18:59
      +3

      Stop the world! He wants to get off!

    • jv on 30/10/2017 - 19:09
      +9

      Many better than many of the men

      and many are not…

      you are just generalising…

      • Diji1 on 30/10/2017 - 20:06
        +4

        I believe they call it virtue signalling where the person claims to be amazingly virtuous by making statements about acting normally.

        • syousef on 30/10/2017 - 23:08
          -3

          I believe they call it a straw man when you claim someone has claimed to be amazingly virtuous but they said no such thing.

    • cdaddy on 30/10/2017 - 19:10
      +1

      Strange that…given they are still human

  • jv on 30/10/2017 - 19:05
    +8

    However, women will be given preference.

    Sounds like DISCRIMINATION to me…

    http://www.lawhandbook.org.au/11_01_03_victorian_anti-discri…

    • 2be8 on 30/10/2017 - 20:05

      Yes, it is discrimination, but that doesn't mean it is illegal.
      e.g. see http://www.abc.net.au/news/2009-12-04/27506

      Under Victorian law, organisations that do not enjoy a permanent exemption from the Act are allowed
      to discriminate, but only if they can justify doing so. VCAT will consider the reasons provided and
      attempt to strike an appropriate balance between competing rights and interests.

      Disclosure: I have been a mentor at this and similar events before. I haven't checked 'associated' because I'm certainly not a representative of the organisation, and I want to ensure that nothing I say is interpreted as representing any kind of position of the organisation, official or unofficial. I don't know what their official stance is.

  • jv on 30/10/2017 - 19:07
    +3

    Do you identify as a woman? Do you have a laptop? Then you're eligible to apply for our workshop!

    Here's a pic of the person running the training…

    jv on 30/10/2017 - 19:07 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
    • PJC on 30/10/2017 - 19:29

      There doesn't seem to be a link there.

    • kahn on 30/10/2017 - 19:32

      Be prepared for some hands-on learning, ladies.

    • Htb on 30/10/2017 - 20:47

      What JV that's you??… Finally got to visualise you…😅😂🤣

      • jv on 30/10/2017 - 20:52

        What JV that's you??

        If it was, I'd have to check the "I am associated with Djangogirls.org" checkbox…

        I doubt they'd accept me after my comments in the 'jugs' deal the other day…

  • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 20:11
    -2

    Jesus this is a dumb "event".

    If you identify as a woman and want to learn how to make web applications, we have good news for you:
    We are holding a one-day workshop for beginners!

    So basically, all are welcome. Good! Why even state anything sexist like you have?

    BTW: Anyone who's looking to go to this, their website demonstrates a severe lack of understanding of web principles… so good luck.

    • Duck Mode on 30/10/2017 - 20:20
      +3

      Women are often underrepresented in programming so this is obviously one of those attempts at encouraging women to get into STEM fields. Is it really that hard to see or understand?

      • jv on 30/10/2017 - 20:54
        +2

        Women are often underrepresented in programming

        Why is that?

      • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 20:58
        +8

        So are in the garbage collection department. Why don't we encourage that too, while we are encouraging.

        • Duck Mode on 30/10/2017 - 23:11
          +2

          A bunch of programmers aren't encouraging absolutely everything so therefore they need to shut up?

        • [Deactivated] on 31/10/2017 - 11:05

          @Bortholemew: A bunch of bad programmers are encouraging discrimination and inequality. Yes they need to shut up.

      • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 22:00
        -4

        No they aren't. If I have 5 bananas and 1 apple. Am I misrepresenting the population of apples by saying I have 1 apple and 5 bananas?

        What a bloody joke the world is in now.

        Girls aren't in IT because they aren't in IT. There's sexism devoted specifically to them, so don't cry about how they are "misrepresented".

        Last time I checked, free scholarships, more chance in a job application and less competition = benefits all round. But you know, I only checked an hour ago so they all could have changed. What a disaster of a theory you got there.

        • Duck Mode on 30/10/2017 - 23:21
          +1

          I said underrepresented, not misrepresented. You are misrepresenting and misunderstanding what I am saying.

          I'm really tempted to be just as rude to you back, but you just need to examine honestly with yourself why you're angry over something that doesn't actually oppress you or anyone. I know you feel it does, but you appear to not understand the context.

          Seriously, you might want to consider counselling.

        • [Deactivated] on 30/10/2017 - 23:31

          @Bortholemew: Yes. I know what you meant, you are just wrong.

          I'm not rude. I'm accurate. If the facts upset you, that's because they are cold, hard facts.

          No, I understand the context. I understand it 200%.

          Counselling on what? Learning how to stay ignorant? No thanks. I'm going to stick with realistic figures and demonstrations.

        • Duck Mode on 30/10/2017 - 23:45

          @StoneSin:

          No, you don't understand. You like to think you do and that you are the supreme God of Logic, but really, you're just doing what you can to protect your own ego. The sooner you drop it, the sooner you can see things with a less biased lens.

        • DeWalt on 31/10/2017 - 02:43

          @Bortholemew: why under represented? Do you assume all careers must have 50% of representation?

          "Present in inadequate numbers or amounts; insufficiently represented"

          I don't believe ANY career path should have quotas (especially 50%, eg. In law where women are far more prevalent). If opportunity is denied, then you have a case for under representation.

          As for why the numbers in different careers differ (and it's perfectly acceptable), take it from a feminist. Her evidence is robust.
          https://m.youtube.com/watch?list=PLytTJqkSQqtr7BqC1Jf4nv3g2y…

          In summary, your argument for underrepresented is flawed, unless you purely look at numbers. Lies, damn lies and your statistics.

        • DeWalt on 31/10/2017 - 03:00

          While bartholomew is playing word games, you missed your mark. Bartholomew's argument about underrepresentation is about quotas. You've tried to say that but you've avoided the evidence. There's seriously good evidence to challenge bartholomew. I hope this will help you in future.

          "Meanwhile, men make up only 10% of nurses, only 20% of new veterinarians, only 25% of new psychologists, about 25% of new paediatricians, about 26% of forensic scientists, about 28% of medical managers, and 42% of new biologists.
          Note that many of these imbalances are even more lopsided than the imbalance favoring men in technology, and that many of these jobs earn much more than the average programmer. For example, the average computer programmer only makes about $80,000; the average veterinarian makes about $88,000, and the average pediatrician makes a whopping $170,000."

          http://slatestarcodex.com/2017/08/07/contra-grant-on-exagger…

          We either insist on equal representation in all careers, or we don't. If you don't, there's no underrepresentation. It's purely a preference. See my other link for career preference and how it plays out in the real world. I'm pro-choice and pro-preference.

          Underrepresentation is a deceitful term and that is almost solely applied to men and IT when discussing careers. You are right that it's not an accident. It's very dishonest.

        • [Deactivated] on 31/10/2017 - 11:02
          -3

          @Bortholemew: No, I understand perfectly. There is nothing in this area that I do not know.

          It's clear though you have no idea what you're talking about and are trying to push some weird falsehood in every direction, waiting for something to budge. Tough luck buddy, you kno' nottin'.

        • [Deactivated] on 31/10/2017 - 11:03
          -1

          @DeWalt: There is good evidence. I've got 5 bananas and 1 apple. Apples are cheaper, yet I still have 1 apple. What does that tell you?

        • FabMan on 31/10/2017 - 23:36

          @StoneSin: "No, I understand perfectly. There is nothing in this area that I do not know."

          I don't care about the discussion, but this is definitely a big ego writing here.

        • [Deactivated] on 01/11/2017 - 10:53
          -1

          @FabMan: Facts didn't work. So convincing her that I have every idea of what I'm talking about when her only rebuttal is "you don't know nottin'", that's all I can do.

          I am correct on this matter. Don't care if it's egotistical to know that or not.

        • FabMan on 01/11/2017 - 12:16
          -1

          @StoneSin: But you didn't share any facts. What you wrote could be called your interpretation, your opinion or the truth as you see it.

          Not wanting to be nasty, but share some facts on it and maybe people will believe you. As I wrote before, I do not care about the subject, so don't share it with me.

        • [Deactivated] on 01/11/2017 - 13:10
          -1

          @FabMan: Incorrect. I wrote only facts.

        • FabMan on 01/11/2017 - 14:14
          -1

          @StoneSin:

          "No, I understand the context. I understand it 200%." 200% is not possible, 100% is a possibility but unlikely as it is near impossible to know 100% about anything. So you didn't write only facts.

        • [Deactivated] on 01/11/2017 - 16:53
          -1

          @FabMan: Figure of speech. 200% is double 100%. Both of which are whole.

          No, I am correct.

        • FabMan on 01/11/2017 - 17:58

          @StoneSin: Figure speech is not a fact, therefore you didn't write only facts.

          How long, can this keep going on?

        • [Deactivated] on 01/11/2017 - 19:21

          @FabMan: Figure of speech can be a way of expressing a fact.

          The world is round, like a basketball.

        • FabMan on 01/11/2017 - 23:13
          +1

          @StoneSin:

          "Figure of speech can be a way of expressing a fact.

          The world is round, like a basketball."

          As a figure of speech, you can say a basketball is round or that the earth is round. However, factually a basketball is spherical, and the earth is oblate spheroid. So it appears you do not know what a fact is.

          Can we end this, preferably with you doing some studying?

        • [Deactivated] on 01/11/2017 - 23:14
          -1

          @FabMan: Incorrect. But you're allowed to be wrong. :(

        • FabMan on 01/11/2017 - 23:29

          @StoneSin: I've been wrong before, but not in this discussion.

        • [Deactivated] on 03/11/2017 - 06:13
          +1

          @StoneSin:

          What does that tell you?

          That you are a banana lover.

  • Phreebee on 30/10/2017 - 20:30
    -5

    I identify as a man but feel inferior because I desperately need sewing lessons to fix all my blouses and pants which keep popping buttons and tearing at the crotch. But I feel too intimidated by all the woman-identifying people in sewing class who roll their eyes at me so mean like. Someone PLEASE start a "if you identify as a man" sewing class for all us man-identifiers who simply CAN'T STAND all them woman-identifying sewers in the world and so need affirmative action to positively discriminate against the lot of 'em! Thanks. And, yeah - can anyone here spare a bigger blouse to help a brother out?

    Phreebee on 30/10/2017 - 20:30 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
  • Moderatorneil on 31/10/2017 - 12:27

    Just a reminder to please be respectful in conversation.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join