I'm not a Woman in Tech • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#201

Post by garrybelka » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:28 PM UTC

RUG3Y wrote: post #24

treehau5 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm left believing that my only choice is to have no opinion. I learned this lesson a long time ago from the role models in my life that ended up getting burned because of having a differing viewpoint from whatever societal winds were blowing. I, and I realize probably cynically, now only elect to share, post, tweet, or whatnot whatever only can positively benefit my "brand". Sometimes I have to act like my own PR…

I'm with you but I pretty much opted out of social media entirely. If I do participate, it's generally for the purpose of keeping in touch with someone or watching a band's tour schedule. Sharing opinions is just not "safe" anymore.

What you can't say http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html

... with its scope extended to any imaginable opinion without exception.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#202

Post by throwanem » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:29 PM UTC

root_axis wrote: post #165

nazgul17 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Social media can become mass media, and it's not up to you to decide if and when that happens. In the past, you could just vocalise your opinion, and it would not survive many hops in the real-world social network. So yeah, you can express your opinion, but your chance of being crucified for it has risen significantly.

> In the past, you could just vocalise your opinion, and it would not survive many hops in the real-world social network. In the past, "vocalizing your opinion" meant debating friends over drinks, the difference today is that every person with an opinion deliberately leverages modern technology to broadcast that opinion to as many people as possible, and the more that receive it, the better. Naturally, people who dis…

> Naturally, people who disagree will respond... the system is working as intended.

Interesting elision. Will you expand upon it?

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#203

Post by matt_wulfeck » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:30 PM UTC

treehau5 wrote: post #9

serg_chernata wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Watching from the sidelines as a white male, I have to say that I find these kinds of situations so confusing. Some people want these differences to be highlighted, while others like yourself want the complete opposite. I'm left believing that my only choice is to have no opinion. Though I lean towards your stance across the board.

> I'm left believing that my only choice is to have no opinion. I learned this lesson a long time ago from the role models in my life that ended up getting burned because of having a differing viewpoint from whatever societal winds were blowing. I, and I realize probably cynically, now only elect to share, post, tweet, or whatnot whatever only can positively benefit my "brand". Sometimes I have to act like my own PR…

> because if I learned anything, anything you say can and most likely probably will be used against you.

Even right now, writing on a niche message board using a fake name, I'm hesitant to voice my honest opinions about anything related to race or gender or other topic like that. it's like there's an army of internet people waiting for you to mess up and will punish you with controversy and/or honestly try and get you fired.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#204

Post by swampangel » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:30 PM UTC

humanrebar wrote: post #113

mrexroad wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinions about -only events aside, there's a difference between a homogeneous group of people choosing to be together, and a group of individuals who were barred from using specific toilets, water fountains, seats, education opportunities, jobs, etc. Comparing segregation to voluntary -only events is a gross misunderstanding of how things were.

I think you're missing qualifiers there because men-only social clubs, for example, have been frowned upon for quite some time now.

Since you can't really eliminate backroom dealing, male only social clubs can have the practical effect of excluding women from equal participation/opportunity, at least as long as groups like "C level exec" are disproportionately male.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#205

Post by Latty » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:30 PM UTC

monksy wrote: post #172

Latty wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While there are obviously cases of unions bullying companies, there are many, many more cases of companies bullying employees - unions were originally intended (and still are, in most cases) as a defense against bullying by creating an equivalently powerful entity, not a way to bully. The rest... it strikes me as incredibly hypocritical - you blame these people for creating groups for support and social which you thi…

My point is that if you create the alternative computer club. You're never going to solve the root issue. You're just going to create 2 groups, with their own mentality, fights over the same audience, fights over resources, and conflict between both groups. When they're self-isolating groups, they stop integration. > "only boys like computers" That's a self-limiting belief that can only be fixed by the person who bel…

> That's a self-limiting belief that can only be fixed by the person who believes it. Telling the person who believes it is not going to work. They'll always have doubt.

100% agree. The reality is that person's belief (and in general, the cultural expectation) won't change until that behavior is normalised. People stop being racist when they interact with people of other races and get used to it. The same is true of everything else. If more women are programmers, people stop thinking of it as a male-only thing.

It's a chicken and egg problem - the girl's computing groups are a man-made egg to kick-start that cycle. Those girls will grow up an integrate, and that creates a normality of it which will eventually make those groups redundant.

There are existing barriers to entry from cultural expectation and pressure from peers. If you create an artificially isolated environment so these minorities can pursue their interests without that pressure, it bypasses those barriers, and those people will, in future, tear them down just because they exist.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#206

Post by mindcrime » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:31 PM UTC

richmarr wrote: post #88

Caveman_Coder wrote: post #44

You can and should have an opinion, its a part of being a discerning human being trying to navigate this world. It doesn't mean you should never listen to others opinions, but having your own informed opinion is a good thing. If others tell you that you can't because you're a white male, tell them to piss off. EDIT: Downvotes for saying that a white male should have an opinion??

I haven't downvoted you but... "informed" is a tricky beast. Many people, but especially white men, especially engineers, think that they're qualified to comment on fields where they are a novice. (see Dunning-Kruger and others) In the field of discrimination, women and minorities are statistically more experienced; so on the whole you'd expect them to hold more informed opinions than white men. At the best of times…

In the field of discrimination, women and minorities are statistically more experienced; so on the whole you'd expect them to hold more informed opinions than white men.

Maybe so, but I think it would be a mistake to understate the extent to which white men can experience discrimination. That is, there are far more parameters on which one can discriminate than just gender and ethnicity. For example, you could be a white man who is short. Or fat. Or short and fat. Or an atheist. Or who speaks with a Southern accent. Or a short, fat, atheist who speaks with a Southern accent.

The point is, everybody experiences at least some discrimination. As such, Caveman_Coder's position is understandable, even if his language could have been a little less inflammatory.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#207

Post by notacoward » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:32 PM UTC

The thing that makes these kinds of discussions so difficult is that people often aren't clear (even in their own minds) about eventual goals vs. immediate actions. Absolutely, inclusion and color/gender/whatever blindness is where most of us would like to be eventually. Unfortunately, pretending we're already there doesn't get us there. It just preserves the status quo. As painful as it is, we have to accentuate and perhaps even exaggerate both the problem and present remedies. If you're not willing to take even the tiniest risk of over-correction, you're practically guaranteeing permanent under-correction.

I'm sure the OP is quite sincere. I find her attitude laudable in its way. Unfortunately, I also find it a bit non-generalizable and counter-productive. We don't yet live in a world good enough for that prescription to work.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#208

Post by throwanem » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:34 PM UTC

lmm wrote: post #110

te_chris wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Absolutely. People are rarely willing to talk about class in these discussions, but the reality is that not only have we created an industry with a gender imbalance, we've created an industry with a culture that prioritises the values of one class (middle/upper-class urban men) over everything else. Thus you have 'casual' workplaces with games consoles, beer, lame forced socialising, chill zones etc in which some peo…

My experience is exactly the opposite - "professional" workplaces are all about middle/upper-class values of dress/speech/behaviour and only comfortable for those with a middle/upper-class cultural/educational background, while the SV-casual workplace is a lot more welcoming for those of us from working/lower-middle class.

I've found the opposite to be true. Perhaps you have assimilated more effectively than I.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#209

Post by badcede » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:35 PM UTC

mercurysmessage wrote: post #125

adventured wrote: post #120

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree that feminism is promoting equality. I think I'm approaching it exactly right. Your response is conceptually exactly why I no longer post opinions as myself on social media now. If this were a personal discussion on Facebook or Twitter, the left's censorship/control attack wave would be rolling in right now, calling me countless labels (instead, here you'll just get downvotes, your life won't be ruined and…

Because you don't want to hear others opinions.

Nobody wants to hear others opinions.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#210

Post by swampangel » Wed, Jul 05, 2017, 4:35 PM UTC

DamnYuppie wrote: post #92

mrexroad wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Opinions about -only events aside, there's a difference between a homogeneous group of people choosing to be together, and a group of individuals who were barred from using specific toilets, water fountains, seats, education opportunities, jobs, etc. Comparing segregation to voluntary -only events is a gross misunderstanding of how things were.

Well it is my understanding that it was a whites-only back in the day. Now it is a not-whites only which really doesn't seem as different to me as you comment indicates it really is. It is just a different group of people telling others what they can and can't do.

If you were white in 60's America, you didn't have to check ahead of time if a given restaurant would serve you food. If you're white now, you still don't have to check.

If you're not white, things are different.

Can you think of some examples of when you were unexpectedly forbidden from participating in an event/group/etc? Did you have access to alternatives?