Nerds and Male Privilege

I wonder how much of this acknowledgement can be done effectively as a group vs. as individuals. It seems like individuals can change their behavior very well this way, which eventually trickles to the community, but I've come to be a bit disheartened on the group side.

In a thread not long ago, I made a comment calling out an article (of an article about Steve Jobs, not gender) for expressing a (to me) particularly exasperating form of the "pedestal" side of female-discouragement. (http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3229502) If I recall correctly, the score of my comment fluctuated a bit before hitting 10, then going back down to 2. I didn't find any of the responses particularly thoughtful, but clearly it is a contentious issue.

A number of recent call-outs by women about conferences seem to indicate that accusations of sexism without 100% proof of sexist don't fly in our community, much as anything without 100% proof tends to fall flat. However, one of the most frustrating parts of sexism (and related problems) is that they are subtle and often subconscious. This discourages me.

What a waste of time, this article. There is a great case to be made for treating every human as a person, and not a member of the class, but he did not make this case.

First, the author complains that women get treated only as sexual objects in most games/comics/etc. Ok, that could be. It's not in Halo or Bioshock, the only games I play, but let's look at the data. So then he mentions opposing view - that men get sexualized too, and then instead of addressing that objection calls it sexist and dismisses it. Really? I would expect some stats, not simply "only sexist would say that" kind of reply. He does this repeatedly throughout the article - not addressing an argument, but simply labeling it with an ugly label and moving on. FWIW, the picture of batman he posted looks sexualized to me, as far as I can judge those things.

Then he just goes to make unsubstantiated broad claims. But of course pointing out lack of substance would be sexist, reflexive and defensive of me :)

A few choice quotes: "A man who's strong-willed or aggressive won't be denigrated for it". In my neck of the woods he will. I did, and I saw others going out of line getting a talk.

"...nor are men socialized to 'go along to get along'." Same thing here, I've seen it all the time.

You are intentionally misrepresenting my comment. I vehemently disown any meaning you apparently see in it.

What I am saying is that if we attempted to talk about, say, allegations of racism in the YC process (a fairly popular discussion around here), it would not be effective to talk about 19th century Alabama.

If you did, everyone would just say, "well hell, we're not lynching slaves for sport, there clearly isn't actually a problem here."

Trying to base a discussion about sexism in the tech industry on something talking about comic book stores is similarly flawed. The tech industry is not the comic book store community. Everybody outside that community knows they are disgusting sexist pigs. It therefore bears little insight.

You may as well try to base the discussion on something about sexism at truckstops or stripclubs. Either would be equally effective starting points for a serious discussion.

This article is built on a bunch of assumptions and stereotypes which is terribly ironic given the subject matter. Some of it may be true but some of it just very wrong.

Men can expect that their presence at an event won't automatically be assumed to be decorative or secondary to another man.

Not really. Ask the benchwarmers for a high school sports team.

Despite the growing presence of women in comics, as publishers, editors and creators as well as consumers, a preponderance of men will either treat women at conventions as inconveniences, booth bunnies or even potential dates.

I can't comment on comic books but in the books, movies and TV shows I want I've actually found the exact opposite is increasingly true. There's a strong temptation to make the female characters super-human creatures with a PHD and a shotgun. Always a witty comeback. Always the most moral and ethical characters.

Men are also not going to be automatically assigned into a particular niche just based on their gender.

Tell that to some straight guy who happens to like female-centric things. They're going to be assumed to be homosexuals most of the time.

And when they are seen as customers, they're often automatically assumed to be buying one of the designated "girl" properties

Perhaps in the same way a man strolling around certain types of stores popular with females would be seen?

One of these is welcomed into geek culture with open arms, the other has to justify their existence in the first place.

Says who?

makes women feel unwelcome in fandom

Tell that to all the rapid female Twilight fans.

Is there a term for the ridiculous rhetorical tactic of insisting that any attempt to refute one's claims as being illogical is itself only further proof of the claims made? I stopped reading when he said this:

"I will pause now for the traditional arguments from my readers...Got all of that out of your systems? Good.

Because that reaction is exactly what I'm talking about."

Why bother having a discussion with someone who sets up their argument to be that those who disagree with their argument are only proving the point?