And, no one should have any issue reporting those people to their employers. If you act like scum, particularly with your employer in your profile, society should punish you.
People are always so quick to jump to this line of reasoning when popular opinion agrees with them. Would you be fine with losing your job for wrongthink if - or rather, when - social opinion swings the other way? It doesn't matter if you're right or wrong - you should be punished for disagreeing with society! Societal retribution for "wrongthink" is not the right answer. It's how you end up with LGBT losing their jo…
How is this post not in violation of this guideline?
>Please respond to the strongest plausible interpretation of what someone says, not a weaker one that's easier to criticize. Assume good faith.
As a guy, both reading this article and the horrendous comments in this thread I kind of want to put a female avatar picture on my social media accounts. Just to see what it's like to be in someone else's shoes...
I recall using a very attractive photo of a woman (not a model as that would be too obviously fake) on a forum and asking about salary ranges in a city.
The next morning, the thread had over a hundred replies and I even got one private message offering an interview. I hadn’t even linked to my work.
That said I think this has a lot more to do with attractiveness and race than gender. Anytime you see someone post a photo of an attractive man holding a cute animal on /r/aww the comments from women are equally extremely cringey and weird.
I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. Because there have been multiple accounts of bad behavior, both subtle and not-subtle, at tech conferences ( https://shift.newco.co/what-its-like-to-be-a-woman-at-a-tech... , https://blog.juliaferraioli.com/2014/08/do-you-even.html ), but those aren't studies, they're just isolated experiences, so we can ignor…
The OP is suggesting an important question though: what if the vast majority of this ubiquitous harassment comes from a tiny minority of men whom few others here are even aware of?
Are you male though? These men are everywhere for women. It is a minority of men, definitely, but that minority directs the whole of their psychological issues to women. They won't do this to you, they will rarely do this around you, and if they are around others they do it in a way that's hidden from your eyes. And the thing is, these guys are everywhere on the Internet as well. I think they spawn from 4chan or something. It starts young and the issues just keep building. They are anonymous, consequence-free interactions with women that let them vent their own issues with women. And then they go to echo-chamber forums like 4chan to validate their distorted reality. They won't interact with you because they don't have an issue with you, unless you also advocate for women and make your views public, in which case they will attempt to poke holes in your masculinity.
Actually, people are colder and more abusive towards those less good-looking. The case described in the article is not due to beauty. It's because people think it's a bot or at least a fake photo. That's what irritates them.
But then why would you harass a bot?
Because it's an emotionless inanimate thing, so it's a safe place to play around with saying things you otherwise never could?
"Rude people are sexist" or "Sexist people are rude" is about the only conclusion you can draw here (maybe not even that, correlation != causation etc etc) It doesn't even come close to showing how "sexism is everywhere". For all we know the sample could be entirely edgy 12 year olds. Tell me again how this self-admittedly "non-rigorous scientific study" proves "sexism is everywhere"? It could easily be that more att…
"Rude people are sexist" still means we have a 'systemic' problem of sexism. In fact, one might argue that rude people being sexist are worse than polite people being sexist. Because the rude people are more disruptive over all. The statement 'sexism is everywhere' does not mean 'almost all people are sexist'. Instead, it means 'almost all women suffer from sexist attitudes in most areas of their lives. If 10% of peo…
You're exactly right. This is a minority of men. Which is why, as a woman, I think we need to examine why this minority has such deep seated issues with women. It's not men in general, it's the fringes of society, and the fringes are very telling of the society as a whole. they represent all our fears and mistakes, because these fears and mistakes become all that they can perceive.
I don't think you can generalize the results at all, when the product was a "meme generator" for which the target group is reddit, 4chan, etc. Because inside those groups are some really depressed, miserable and angry lonley single male (teens) who are horny, but got mostly rejection (or beeing ignored) from women in real life ... where they would not even dare to talk to them. But so they built up great anger becaus…
> I don't think you can generalize the results at all, when the product was a "meme generator" for which the target group is reddit, 4chan, etc.
So we're selecting a socially maladjusted population here, then trying to generalize to society as a whole?
And, no one should have any issue reporting those people to their employers. If you act like scum, particularly with your employer in your profile, society should punish you.
Your personal views should not affect your employment. Take your facism elsewhere.
Depends on the views. I'll never hire a bigot, and I'll fire anyone on the spot who expresses bigoted views.
I always assumed these messages were automated helper bots, I didn't realize they are people on the other end. Now I feel a little bad about being so curt when I use them like I'm searching an FAQ.
Without reading this article, I would never, in a million years, have believed there was an actual human being manually operating any of these "chat popups". I probably still won't believe it, but now when I see these things I have to think there's a 99.9% chance it's a bot rather than 100% chance it's a bot.
As a guy, both reading this article and the horrendous comments in this thread I kind of want to put a female avatar picture on my social media accounts. Just to see what it's like to be in someone else's shoes...
I did this with job applications when I was getting rejected using my real name and sex. I changed it from Joe to Joanna and re-applied. Every single company that turned me down originally called me back when they thought I was a female developer...so from my perspective, their shoes look pretty good...It was an interesting little experiment...turns out my experience was good, but my sex was wrong for the "desired" team makeup.
The point is that even with this assumption it still fails.
No, the point is that you can't assume "unwashed CS nerds" are troglodytes towards women while simultaneously trying to say tech doesn't have a problem with women. Your final paragraph is particularly telling. Re-read it and think about the equivalences you're trying to draw. Edit: >The point is that the distribution of genders are likely overwhelmingly male. Do you just intentionally ignore the fact that without the…
No one said unwashed CS nerds treat women any differently to other men. The point is that the distribution of genders is likely overwhelmingly male. Thus even if a small percentage of that male population exhibit sexist behaviour, the tiny proportation of females would get most of the abuse, and more abuse than the average male.
Work on your reading comprehension before spitting out snark.