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

"Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

motherjones.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 375 posts

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#111

Post by crazygringo »

fab13n wrote: post #18

> To literally handicap yourself by 50 percent is insanity. This is very PC, but BS nonetheless. At the stage when people can be profitably hired by start-ups, the male/female ratio is nowhere near 50% among technical candidates. I'm not saying that frat culture isn't harmful, nor would I dare to guess why women are underrepresented among development professionals; but defending a thesis with such grossly false asser…

There is one theory which says that men genetically tend to be more "outliers" while women genetically tend more towards the average.

Thus there are far more men than women who are wildly rich and successful, but also far more men than women who are failures or in jail.

If we're talking about start-ups who need to hire from the top 10% of programmers, who might be from the top 0.5% of the population in terms of logical ability, then this theory would actually partially explain the dearth of female programmers. Again, this is just a theory.

But at the same time, blatant cultural insensitivity certainly isn't helping.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#112

Post by batista »

Lewisham wrote: post #85
batista wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>What I find particularly disconcerting about this Van Horn story is not that it happened (which is terrible in and of itself), but that this guy is 28, went through Digg (who never struck me as a company of idiots), already presented a sexist presentation, and still appears at SXSW either by invitation of him or Path. Why would Path or SXSW allow it? Did he not practice this presentation at Path before heading out?…

I really don't see your point here. You think I was being over the top? I don't see how; he's representing Path. Path, you would think, would probably like to represent itself as a diverse, vibrant workplace with exciting, fun, kind people, and not sexist jerks with locker-room antics. I would appreciate it if you'd elaborate on what you think is wrong about this.

>I really don't see your point here. You think I was being over the top? I don't see how; he's representing Path. Path, you would think, would probably like to represent itself as a diverse, vibrant workplace with exciting, fun, kind people, and not sexist jerks with locker-room antics. I would appreciate it if you'd elaborate on what you think is wrong about this.

Sure.

What you suggest is essentially: in order for Path to present itself as a "diverse, vibrant workplace with exciting, fun, kind people", Path has to be:

1) less diverse (throw this guy out for diverging more than is allowed to)

2) no-fun (jokes are no-go unless they are PC)

3) not kind (throw a guy out for making some ho-hum jokes)

I don't even believe that making sexist jokes means that one is sexist or promotes a sexist attitude. Humor has to be irreverent. You can find jokes about every situation, from war to cancer, to race, to gender. They doesn't mean the person that tells them is pro-all those things, or against or those other things. A joke is just a joke --especially if its not targeted at a specific someone, but speaks in generals and groups. Heck --Godwin's law be damned--, there are even holocaust jokes, and even jew comedians are telling them. Are they supposed to be pro-nazi? No-- it's just that a joke is just a joke, it's not a manifestation of one's inner beliefs or his general behavior.

This guy could be the kinder person at Path, and especially helpful towards women colleagues, whereas another "progressive, no-sexist-jokes" guy could be an arsehole of epic proportions. Jokes are not the tool to tell them apart. Behavior is.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#113

Post by aspir »

batista wrote: post #78
Lewisham wrote: post #15

What I find particularly disconcerting about this Van Horn story is not that he wanted to present it (which is terrible in and of itself), but that this guy is 28, went through Digg (who never struck me as a company of idiots), already presented a sexist presentation, and still appears at SXSW either by invitation of him or Path. Why would Path or SXSW allow it? Did he not practice this presentation at Path before he…

>What I find particularly disconcerting about this Van Horn story is not that it happened (which is terrible in and of itself), but that this guy is 28, went through Digg (who never struck me as a company of idiots), already presented a sexist presentation, and still appears at SXSW either by invitation of him or Path. Why would Path or SXSW allow it? Did he not practice this presentation at Path before heading out?…

I'm really more surprised that Path has let presentations like this continue. I've seen 4 separate MVH presentations, with each one being in step with these complaints. and it always leaves a bad taste in my mouth regarding Matt and Path as a company.

I guess it comes down to the repeat occurrence. If it were is first, or even second offense, I could overlook it, but it's a repeated thing. Given that his job (biz dev) is to build relationships with big brands, it also seems like he's ultimately shooting himself in the foot regarding longer play, larger relationships with high dollar companies.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#115

Post by wickedchicken »

stfu wrote: post #14

These "I'm shocked, outraged, sick to my stomach." postings make me always a bit uncomfortable. It seems to me that there are two ways one can approach this subject. On to proclaim that these are intentional acts of portraying females in a negative light and keeping them out of the tech industry. The other, that these are just a bunch of nerds, trying (and in large parts failing) to make coding something "oool" or a…

> It seems to me that there are two ways one can approach this subject.

There are a lot of ways you can approach this subject. I'm going to rely on an example I used before[1]. Let's assume that if you're on this site, you probably build some kind of web technology. Were you aware that a portion of your users are colorblind? Did you just do a mental double-check and go "shoot, I should check up on that?"

You didn't actively do anything against colorblind people, it simply wasn't on your radar. You can go through your entire site design, do A/B testing, deploy, get good results, and still be completely unaware of this. When someone comes up to you and says "I'm colorblind, you should add 'OK' to this green button because it's hard for me to use your site without that," what do you do?

"Sorry! I didn't intentionally mean to make it hard for you to use! I deeply regret that you can't use the site."

or how about

"Hey! Chill out! We were just trying to make a good site and the numbers say we're ok!"

Both of those answers sound pretty awful and insensitive. And yet, these are the responses to your "two ways" listed above. Probably the correct answer is "Oh wow, we weren't aware that was a problem. We're going to go fix it, can you tell us specifically what is wrong?"

Which is exactly the kind of response we need to sexism in technology. It boils down to being aware of how your actions make other people feel, and when an issue is brought up you consider it earnestly. When you figure that out, and learn to handle when you haven't, you can stop "being afraid of accidentally offending someone" (itself casual sexism) and you can actually work to make things inclusive.

One great read on this is Ellen Spertus' MIT AI Lab Technical Report[2].

[1] http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3772919

[2] http://people.mills.edu/spertus/Gender/pap/pap.html

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#116

Post by batista »

frankwiles wrote: post #107
batista wrote: post #89

TL;DR; A guy made some jokes anybody would fine perfectly acceptable (if not ho-hum), and a few tight-arsed politically correct prudes walked out as if he was citing from the Main Kampf, in order to show how anti-sexist they are. Political correctness: or why should the far right monopolize all the moralizing, fear of sexual references and plain old dirty jokes? Progressive people can be prudish squares too. Oh: and…

"A guy made some jokes anybody would fine perfectly acceptable" I don't find those jokes "perfectly acceptable", not even close.

Yes, I can see how a joking mention that "I secured a position in a company buy sending the cofounders nude pictures" can be considered controversial and unacceptable...

in rural Utah, that is. Comedians, from Lenny Bruce to Carlin have used far more controversial stuff --are we, tech people as a group more backwards than the 60's and 70's people that persecuted them?

(That he wasn't a comedian is not a reason to not allow the guy his joke. Or, are there levels of humor only allowable to comedians? I'd take my conferences with any grain of humor one would like to put in them, thank you).

Seriously (or maybe not), humor has to be judged for what it is, not as a manifesto or an agenda.

For example, your "Proposal to make unittest2 more accurate". People could take offense to that, especially if it was presented at a conference "what's with the profanity", "where's his professionalism" etc. You would consider that justified?

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#117

Post by asciilifeform »

moldbug wrote: post #65
dsr_ wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would dare to guess that women are underrepresented among developers PRECISELY because of this culture and the underlying assumptions and attitudes. Gender is irrelevant to logical analysis, which is the foundation of programming. If you don't have parity in your pool of candidates, there's a cause, and it's probably social. Nursing and teaching used to be men's work. Women weren't thought to be capable of it. Too…

You'd dare to be wrong: http://134.173.180.115/berger/pdf/Halpern2007.SciSexDif.Pub....

Do you see any evidence that the rank-and-file software developer lives on the far-right-edge of the bell curve?

Software developers are largely male for the same reason that construction crews and prisoners are - rather than the reason Nobel Prize winners in Physics are.

What, if anything, there is to be gained by encouraging women to join men in wasting their lives away in the IT salt mines, is another question entirely.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#118

Post by ghurlman »

lkrubner wrote: post #77
fab13n wrote: post #18

> To literally handicap yourself by 50 percent is insanity. This is very PC, but BS nonetheless. At the stage when people can be profitably hired by start-ups, the male/female ratio is nowhere near 50% among technical candidates. I'm not saying that frat culture isn't harmful, nor would I dare to guess why women are underrepresented among development professionals; but defending a thesis with such grossly false asser…

I think you misread that paragraph. He does not seem to be writing only about programmers, but about everyone that a startup might need to hire. Read this again: "Shapiro, who has blogged in the past about sexism in the tech industry, notes that "it is a widely understood truth that the single biggest challenge to a successful startup is attracting the right people. To literally handicap yourself by 50 percent is ins…

And not just women either. It's ridiculous to assume that 100% of the best/qualified programmers would want to work at a place like that.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#119

Post by anichan »

127 wrote: post #81
dsr_ wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would dare to guess that women are underrepresented among developers PRECISELY because of this culture and the underlying assumptions and attitudes. Gender is irrelevant to logical analysis, which is the foundation of programming. If you don't have parity in your pool of candidates, there's a cause, and it's probably social. Nursing and teaching used to be men's work. Women weren't thought to be capable of it. Too…

You are trying to build a narrative that it's men stopping women from participating in software development. I find that problematic and harmful. Where is your proof, other than pure conjecture? My own conjecture is that women don't want to do software development because it's boring and difficult. I'm sure they could if they wanted to, they just do not. With a few notable exceptions to the rule.

It might not be the primary reason but it certainly doesn't help. Back in high school, I was really excited to join the robotics team and I really had a passion for it but I only stayed in it for a year before quitting. I was the only girl on the team and the attitude people took with me was infuriating. It felt like such a boy's club.

Sure, you can just pass it off as "boys will be boys", high school boys are stupid and immature. But even the adult mentors were so exclusionary. I had to fight tooth and nail to be involved in the programming and building aspect of the competition even though just wanted to stick me to making their website look pretty.

It took me a couple of years to get that bad taste out of my mouth. I initially didn't even go into college for a STEM degree before I worked myself up to take Computer Engineering.

When you have experiences like that in high school and you hear stories about sexism in the workforce, it's intimidating to enter a field even if you do enjoy it. I'm glad I made the choice I did but the vibe other women get from degrees like CS isn't conducive to promoting a better gender balance.

Re: "Gangbang Interviews" and "Bikini Shots": Silicon Valley’s Brogrammer Problem

#120

Post by Produce »

pharrington wrote: post #91
lotharbot wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "Gender is irrelevant to logical analysis" Brain chemistry is relevant to logical analysis. Gender has significant effects on brain chemistry. There are also social problems that contribute. But the gender ratio would not be 50-50 even in a completely egalitarian society. Women like my wife [0] are rare, partly because of "brogrammers" chasing them off, but also because a smaller proportion of women are interested…

"Gender has significant effects on brain chemistry." Quantify how sex affects the brain in specific ways that effect the likelihood of developing an interesting in programming and being an effective programmer. Until we can do this, essentially saying "physiology affects your organs" is a pretty empty statement.

That's like saying that until we can quantify how far Paris is from London, "Paris is far from London" is a pretty empty statement. Pretty sure that people understood that locations can be some distance away from each other before they could quantify exactly how much distance.
Post reply on HN