"Lighten up"

I agree it's regrettable. But it does seem necessary.

I think the point where it happened was when we, collectively, noticed that people were exploiting professional power asymmetry for their own sexual gain. Often at the cost of another human's dignity and self-respect – not to mention career prospects.

I don't think you can diminish somebody's complaints and then follow up with "this is not to diminish your complaints".

Sounds like another argument for more people to read "How to Win Friends and Influence People"[1]:

For the people making sexist comments, there are lots of interesting stories and points in there. But obviously you can't force people to read the book, and expect any difference!

However, it is very applicable for the OP also. Take for example this overview of one chapter:

    How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment:

    Begin with praise and honest appreciation.
    Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly.
    Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person.
    Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.
    Let the other person save face.
    Praise every improvement.
    Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to.
    Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct.
    Make the other person happy about doing what you suggest.

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influenc...

If you walk around alone in an unsafe neighborhood at night, you're asking for trouble. If you don't have a choice but to be in an unsafe neighborhood, hunker down and get to a point in your life when you can afford a safe neighborhood.

In the programming world, this translates to : become a great programmer, and you will find yourself in a great programming environment (birds of a feather...). If you really love programming, you will get to that point eventually.

Great programmers love programming, and love learning from other great programmers even more. That's why they'll never offend another great programmer or risk it all by indulging in bad behavior. (You can actually substitute "great programmer" here with "great any-profession". There might be exceptions, but in 15 years of programming, I haven't met any.)

When you don't have these types of programmers around you, whats left is the (sub-)average programmer, and the concomitant sexist environment.

Also, by wearing a low-cut blouse to a professional environment, you drive away those people who actually contribute to a good environment, leaving behind those that don't.

Biologically, men's brains light up when they see a woman's cleavage. The people who value you as a programmer will avoid you, because they recognize what's going on in their heads, avoid the distraction, and the risk of offending you. Heck, some of them might not even look in your direction. My advice is the same one I give my daughters: wear a scarf - it prevents the over-heating problem you mentioned. Its the same reason I wear boxers, rather than walk around in shorts.

You don't need to lighten up, just hunker down.

Replying here since we reached the thread root.

> >You have given nothing to support the argument that treating someone as subservient based on gender 'ultimately does us good.'

> I never said this. Quote me where I said this, or I will be forced to regard you as a liar.

You said, in the context of the OP's complaint about "'subtle' sexism":

> We need to distinguish between small harms that ultimately do us good and large harms that are sending society on a destructive course.

If you weren't arguing the poster's issue with subtle sexism as was one of those small harms then you've just been going on a random tangent.

If someone accuses you of saying something you didn't mean, it's not necessarily because they are lying or making things up. It could be a misunderstanding, a misinterpretation or a lack of clarification on either side. Further, if someone summarizes or distills your argument and cannot source that summary verbatim, that also doesn't mean it's a lie or inaccurate.

> And I never said "small issues don't matter". Why make things up?

You said this:

> There are much bigger, structural problems to worry about right now. It's like we're on a boat with a hole in the bottom and every interest group is complaining that their feet are getting wetter than all the others.

which implies that people shouldn't be complaining about their feet getting wet because there's a bigger issue. It very much implies that you think small issues should be ignored in favor of the large issues.

Why is it wrong to ask for people to attempt to refrain from being subtly sexist? Is it really that difficult of a thing to do?