Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 212 posts

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#191

Post by chc »

ebiester wrote: post #177
irahul wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Brogrammer," is not a unisex term, no matter how they try to spin it. No one sensible would try to spin it as unisex. I think it's simply an oversight on their part - more stronger than addressing a gathering "hey guys", but on the same lines.

But that's the point -- that kind of oversight happens because of male privilege. It's because it's easy to think of programmers as men, so much that you have an "oversight" about including women. That excludes women, and that's exactly what this kind of stuff needs to be called out. The problem isn't always one data point; but rather, there are a lot of these data points that are easy to dismiss one by one, but lead…

I agree with your overall thrust, but just a point that bugs me sometimes: Your comment would be much stronger without the "male privilege" explanation. That kind of talk has the wrong effect on people who aren't well-versed in feminist literature and there's usually a less broad description for the specific case you're talking about. For example, it's easy to think of programmers as men because working programmers are disproportionately likely to be men.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#192

Post by roguecoder »

I would definitely never apply to a job that advertise a "brogrammer" culture, and I do consider it inherently sexist. In fact, I would go so far as to say that any guy who thinks of himself as a "brogrammer" needs to do some serious soul-searching and start reading bell hooks. Enforced standards of masculinity is patriarchal oppression, just like the objectification of women by those men. Stop defining yourself by your genitalia, get over your homophobia and accept that society is larger than your weird little cultural perspective.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#193

Post by chc »

chernevik wrote: post #121
mikeryan wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not defending bigotry/sexism/etc You're defending the ad. By extension defending any sexism contained within it (actual sexism TBD).

I'm pretty sure that when I defend the right of, say, OWS to protest, I'm not defending whatever it is they're protesting. They went for a breezy tone and forgot to pass it through Legal. I doubt they're sexists. I'm sure sexism would, in this day and age, hurt them more than anyone else.

That's not really the case in the software industry. There really are very few women in the field. That's why we need to call out stuff like this — so that female programmers' lack of visibility doesn't become an excuse to marginalize them.

I don't think it was intentional on the job poster's part, but the fact that he didn't catch how it sounded of proofreading definitely indicates a blind spot to sexism.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#194

Post by chc »

davidhansen wrote: post #92
mattmanser wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason there's a law against it is because bigots that still exist keep women from attaining equality and that's bad, not the other way around. It is in itself bad. You have a strange moral compass to me. I know it's fun to be laddish when you're at college and uni, but cultural fit can often be a polite way of saying 'Hey, I'm a bigot, women are stupid and I'm not employing them above the level of secretary!'. I…

This is not a political site so I'm not going to debate the merits/drawbacks of outlawing bigotry in hiring practices. But one thing that ought to be pointed out is that free markets tend to punish companies, over the long term, that intentionally deny themselves access to talent due to bigotry. Conversely, companies who acquire talent with rational screening procedures will have a competitive advantage over those wh…

This assumes that talented programmers of each sex exist in fixed quantities. That isn't how the real world works. In reality, if you make women feel unwelcome in programming, many who would have been good programmers will just go into different fields, so the entire market ends up losing access to their talent.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#195

Post by mattmanser »

jessedhillon wrote: post #118
ia wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain your first sentence? I'm not sure what you're trying to say. I'm not defending bigotry/sexism/etc. Hopefully, you didn't take my comment that way.

Your original comment was to the effect of 'things are bad if they are illegal, but otherwise they're not.' He's calling you out on your sense of morality because whether a thing is right or wrong does not, to most people, derive from it's legal status. Stealing would still be wrong if it were legally acceptable, which some forms arguably are.

That was exactly my thinking when writing it.

I didn't think you (as in ia) was especially defending it, I was just trying to point out the logic was very wooly. Though re-reading my comment I was a little hot under the collar, so apologies for that.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#196

Post by abbasmehdi »

benwerd wrote: post #152
dgabriel wrote: post #90

Woman programmer here: I automatically assumed they were looking for college aged men. "Brogrammer," is not a unisex term, no matter how they try to spin it.

Male programmer in his thirties here: I automatically assumed they were looking for assholes.

I fell out my chair laughing when I read your comment.

I think it was sexist, but they did say women should apply too. It's hard to spin that one, but I see it as an honest mistake, these guys are obviously new to the "real world".

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#197

Post by roguecoder »

jeffool wrote: post #106
davedx wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How can you be a 'bro' and not be male??

"Bro" has become a word used like "hey guys" in mixed company, or "dude", applied equally to men and women. It's cultural, and like many cultural things, is popularized from chan sites. Starting as mocking the fratguy and Jersey stereotypes, it's now a cultural mockery of itself, like hipsters who hate hipsters. My brother and cousins are increasingly "brotastic", with tough talk, and repeated high fives (followed by…

Calling everyone "you guys" is offensive; it suggests that being a dude is normal and everything else is deviations we can just ignore. I will believe that "dude" is gender-neutral when I can call the guys I work with "ladies" and have it be considered gender-neutral.

1) Yes, even if implicitly. It says "I expect people to conform to masculine norms; everyone else need not apply." Whether or not they specifically set out to exclude women, they did set out to exclude everyone who wasn't willing to tolerate their sexist and exclusionary behavior, who will statistically be more female than male (though plenty of men are excluded too.)

2) Yes it is. Plus, as men stated up stream, it is directly offensive to some men too, and it should be offensive to anyone who doesn't want to work in a field populated by sexist assholes.

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#199

Post by waqf »

chc wrote: post #191
ebiester wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the point -- that kind of oversight happens because of male privilege. It's because it's easy to think of programmers as men, so much that you have an "oversight" about including women. That excludes women, and that's exactly what this kind of stuff needs to be called out. The problem isn't always one data point; but rather, there are a lot of these data points that are easy to dismiss one by one, but lead…

I agree with your overall thrust, but just a point that bugs me sometimes: Your comment would be much stronger without the "male privilege" explanation. That kind of talk has the wrong effect on people who aren't well-versed in feminist literature and there's usually a less broad description for the specific case you're talking about. For example, it's easy to think of programmers as men because working programmers a…

I agree, the "privilege" expression is adversarial and will offend people you might want to get onto your side.

Personally, I instinctively ignore people who use it because it makes me think they either aren't serious about having a coöperative dialogue, or are as tactless as the people they're denouncing.

Incidentally, I've seen it around a lot recently. Is it new, or newly popularized?

Re: Ask HN: Is brogrammer a sexist term?

#200

Post by ebiester »

chc wrote: post #191
ebiester wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's the point -- that kind of oversight happens because of male privilege. It's because it's easy to think of programmers as men, so much that you have an "oversight" about including women. That excludes women, and that's exactly what this kind of stuff needs to be called out. The problem isn't always one data point; but rather, there are a lot of these data points that are easy to dismiss one by one, but lead…

I agree with your overall thrust, but just a point that bugs me sometimes: Your comment would be much stronger without the "male privilege" explanation. That kind of talk has the wrong effect on people who aren't well-versed in feminist literature and there's usually a less broad description for the specific case you're talking about. For example, it's easy to think of programmers as men because working programmers a…

But the point is that we're largely blind to it because we don't have to deal with it.

The point isn't if it's intended to be sexist, or if it is that big of a deal in and of itself. It's a tiny pebble, one that most of us wouldn't notice in and of itself. It's as if most of us have shoes and we're walking over some gravel. Someone who was barefoot would notice every pebble a lot more.

I think that's why mentioning male privilege is important. If we don't think about it, we're more likely to throw a pebble on the ground without thinking of the consequences. More importantly, if we are unaware, we're more likely to dismiss someone who has a valid complaint about a small issue, because they've been dealing with a thousand small issues that combine into one large issue.

Post reply on HN