211–220 of 294 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've decided to protest against protesting against definitions, on the grounds that they're words and protesting against them will redefine them to something that someone else will protest against, ad infinitum, and I don't want to die from a stack overflow ;)
I wasn't quite that clever when I was in elementary school.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Feminist discourse is usually 1 dimensional. No, it's not. It really, really isn't. You only notice the stuff that mentions female-victim/male-perp because you don't really care enough about the issue to notice anything further. There is heaps of feminist discourse on women judging women and limiting their options by doing so, the topic of this article. And there are plenty of complex narratives rather than black and…
A) Those edge cases you speak of are not part of the dominant discourse. When woman on woman sexism is approached in the dominant discourse it's in the form of... >In the few cases where other women are shown as the problem they are framed as victims of patriarchal socialization not responsible for their behavior. B) You're making some big assumptions about my awareness of sociology.
B) You're not giving much to address those assumptions.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's laziness. Instead of recognizing that everyone got where they are now by a different path where they learned different things and appreciating the diversity of knowledge that creates, it's so much easier to say, you should have known that.
It's laziness, and it's also lack of empathy.
Like: "there's a tiger behind the bushes!". Not everyone knows that, since the tiger is difficult to spot. Everyone however knows what a tiger looks like, and what danger or source of food it represents. So, anyone who doesn't understand that sentence is an idiot.
Conversely, if someone who tells you that stars are Balls of Gas Burning Billions Miles away[2] is plain crazy… unless it's your which doctor, of course. That one knows ways you don't.
Except that the last two paragraphs are now bullshit. A few centuries ago (very recently, by evolutionary standards), our world became more complicated, and our instincts haven't quite caught up yet.
Laziness? Lack of empathy? Yeah, sure. But the effort required to expect the inferential distances we actually have to deal with is very real. Heck, I wouldn't be surprised if that last paragraph fell short for anyone who isn't familiar with the LessWrong Sequences[3]. Sorry.
[1]: http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Inferential_distance
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What I like is when I tell people what I do and they realize it has a direct impact on the economic recovery of the United States, and then suddenly they feel silly for making fun of me for not using decorators in python. At that moment, they realize that their sub-culture, while enjoyable in itself, is not 42. I liken it to this (perhaps badly translated, perhaps misappropriated) Chinese saying: "If your philosophy…
Maybe I missed this somewhere else in the thread but ... what do you do? I feel like I can't quite grok your comment without that context.
Does that help?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's laziness, and it's also lack of empathy.
I have observed that it is far easier to naturally empathise with one who has many similarities to you rather than empathise with another who is radically different from you. The latter actually requires conscious effort.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't know, I also sometimes work as a programmer with fashion people and I just made some time to learn all the references. These days I work as a sort of fashion person for a chip manufacturer. I can hold a conversation about Haskell and I wear designer clothes to the office. Do both. When you're being Othered, ask questions, listen, and adapt.
I think his point is that you should avoid mocking people who don't happen to know about your sub-culture.
I'll agree though, people could always be more empathetic.
I am a female software engineer. I also cannot stand sci-fi and love fashion, romantic comedies, painting my nails and all kinds of girly shit. I can gush over a beautiful Hermes scarf or my favorite chambray shirt one moment, and automate the fuck out of the iOS app testing process the next. (Just an example that the author, because she's in testing, might be interested in.) If nothing else, we share our love for programming. So, the next time you dismiss a girl because she dare wear heels and has never seen Star Wars, you might be missing out on a friend.
I totally get that it has been your experience that girls who are into traditional girly shit are lame and not worth talking to, but maybe it's because you're not giving them a chance. What happened to not judging a book by its cover?
(Unless you don't like Arrested Development. Then I hate you. :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's probably why, when building a skyscraper, modern construction practices dictate that all the subcontractors just "do their own thing" and sort out with each other when it's OK to put in walls, pipes, wiring and structural alterations. The N^2 communication overhead is OK, because PMs are just useless overhead anyway. I heard sometimes building projects fail because the PM only understood what was supposed to b…
That would be great if software were exactly analogous to building skyscrapers, and developers were idiot construction workers who do nothing but put the sheetrock and nails where they are asked. (Note: I am not saying that construction workers are idiots, I am saying that programmers are not idiot-construction-workers.) There is not just one way to organize a project.
At the level of abstraction of PM, software is exactly analogous to building skyscrapers, building a rocket, producing a theatre production or capping deepwater horizon.
You are right that there is not just one way to organise a project. However, if the project is being organised at all, at least one person is doing project management.
It's just that the acting PM(s) may not be formally trained it in, or have "PM" as their job title. That's fine.
As someone who values intelligence, I tell her, that it may require her to do more hardwork, but she can be actually beautiful+intelligent at the same time. I'm thinking about taking her to some start up events with me,to meet other women, so that she knows, and their is someone to look up to for her.
Thanks to this post, for making my decision firm.