Live data from Hacker News

I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

qz.com

381–390 of 391 posts

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#381

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't claim it is my own observation. I got it from a feminist talking about how maybe the reason men are resisting women's ingress into male-dominated professions is because when women find the traditionally male workplace environment unsatisfactory, they expect the environment to change to suit them.

As a man in a pretty male-dominated profession, (Military) I can say that this is the case. It's exacerbated by blatant sexism, but the biggest rational fear is that women expect the environment to change when they arrive and that this change will be detrimental. The current culture and environment has been tried and proven to work, and they're fearful of a change in that culture impacting success. Having worked with…

Is the male military really "proven to work"? Perhaps a more feminine influence would have better outcome, with less dead and destroyed on all sides of international conflict. Who nows?

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#382
post #376
post #347

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It all depends on which country one speaks about. Many European countries, have shared leaves between parents.

As I said, it's not only the parental leave that is an issue. Often later on one parent decides to only work part time. Usually it is the mother.

I guess I may be biased, because on our office guys also do that, which makes me wrongly extrapolate the common situation.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a man that is not a member of a protected minority complains about profanity, the powers that be tell him to suck it up. If a protected minority complains, the user of profanity may be fired (see: Adria Richards)

Sad but true. That is a cross we'll have to bear until everyone else gets rid of their crosses first. :(

Yes true. But for now, I would rather shut the fuck up that make women on the team uncomfortable. I'll reserve my profanities to gym's locker room.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it would be better if the women stayed home and did whatever it is that they do there? Unfortunately, the economy over the last 40 years has demonstrated that that option is sub-optimal. Or did you mean by "time under the PC microscope" and "garden variety politically incorrectness" that you are ok if other people are uncomfortable, as long as you aren't?

Unfortunately, the economy over the last 40 years has demonstrated that that option is sub-optimal. Huh? Explain? I don't even know what you are referencing.

My favorite explanation comes from the Economist[1]:

"The increase in female employment has also accounted for a big chunk of global growth in recent decades. GDP growth can come from three sources: employing more people; using more capital per worker; or an increase in the productivity of labour and capital due to new technology, say. Since 1970 women have filled two new jobs for every one taken by a man. Back-of-the-envelope calculations suggest that the employment of extra women has not only added more to GDP than new jobs for men but has also chipped in more than either capital investment or increased productivity. Carve up the world's economic growth a different way and another surprising conclusion emerges: over the past decade or so, the increased employment of women in developed economies has contributed much more to global growth than China has."

[1] http://www.economist.com/node/6802551

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#385

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>If your friends at work refuse to meet you away from work for your crucial sex talk, they may be uncomfortable with it too. If someone is uncomfortable with something they should speak up. If someone says they are uncomfortable with something that should be respected (within reason). Its not that hard when everyone just behaves as adults instead of spoiled sheltered children who cannot communicate with each other

I can't imagine why people wouldn't want to speak up so other people can judge whether or not their discomfort qualifies as "reasonable" eyeroll

I only said that because you can't prevent all discomfort to everyone. Its not possible and there's a good chance fixing one persons discomfort will just make someone else uncomfortable, hence within reason.

And even so they should still speak up. Even if someone has some unreasonable discomfort (ie it makes me uncomfortable when you wear red) it may be so minor that it can easily be avoided. You couldn't expect people to not wear red, but if a co-worker said that to me i'd probably just try to not wear red.

Without communicating/talking about it, reasonable or not, there is absolutely no chance of the situation getting better.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#386

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is because official statistics use penetration as the definition of rape. "Forced envelopment" (women raping men) is not counted as rape.

How is that even possible to have the exact same act be counted differently solely based on who is the aggressor?

Dunno, ask the FBI.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#387
post #217

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Systemic sexism is widely documented. Oh? >This ranges from pay gaps Which are a deliberately misleading "problem" feminists like to complain about, but which don't actually exist. >harsher views on overweight women vs men Where? You mean personal preferences? Like how short men are viewed harsher than short women? That is not systemic. >to sexual assault Where the actual systemic problem is that the government deli…

I accidentally deleted a line when I was typing; I meant to write "Male rape is predominately a result of the way the United States does incarceration and needs to be discussed in that context; the parent isn't saying that male rape victims 'don't count' " Also, you clearly didn't bother to glance over any of the data I provided. You probably should, especially about the extremely well documented gendered pay gap. De…

Yes, I did see your "data". Comparing the average income of all men to the average income of all women does not establish a pay gap. The average of all women works fewer hours than the average of all men, work less demanding jobs, and has less experience. Comparisons of men and women with the same amount of experience, working the same hours, in the same job show there is no difference in pay.

I have no idea why you have such a hard time with the FBI rape stats, googling "forced envolpment" would get you what you want: http://www.good.is/posts/the-fbi-expands-its-definition-of-r...

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well now you know. It's a French noun, and most French nouns that refer to people add an extra "e" in the feminine form. It even works for a lot of names (Jean vs. Jeanne).

Yes. The footnote I saw referred to that spelling as "the French spelling"... so (since I'm not French or in France) I think I'll continue to use the other one like every other time I've seen it.

I'll just leave these here:

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fianc%C3%A9

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/fianc%C3%A9e

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#389
post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's an incredibly uninformed opinion you've got there Thomas! HR tends to be the first line of defence between a job seeker and a hiring manager. The majority also conduct the phone interview and occasionally the first face to face interview. Finally, who do you think hires other HR staff? So, yes. Human resource people are hiring managers. More so than most.

I've never worked for a company in which HR had any real influence over selection, but then, I've mostly worked for startups. We have HR. They don't screen. I might suggest ratcheting back "incredibly uninformed".

I stand by my statement. I have nothing but respect for your obvious and substantial success but as you say yourself, you've mostly worked for startups. Whilst you're clearly more informed than most on all things tech & startups, in this one particular area, you're point is clearly ill-informed.

The vast majority of established organisations with 100+ staff have a HR department and in Europe, the HR department usually screens CV's and are regularly involved in phone screening and/or first stage interviews.

Re: I understood gender discrimination once I added “Mr.” to my resume

#390
post #270

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a man in a pretty male-dominated profession, (Military) I can say that this is the case. It's exacerbated by blatant sexism, but the biggest rational fear is that women expect the environment to change when they arrive and that this change will be detrimental. The current culture and environment has been tried and proven to work, and they're fearful of a change in that culture impacting success. Having worked with…

Thanks for sharing your perspective. It's especially valuable since you are working in a historically male institution. It'd be interesting if you wrote about more of your experiences and observations on this topic (like a blog post). I would be excited to read it.

Women in the military is a really, really complicated topic. It'll take a long post to do it justice; you could easily write several books on the subject.

First, as you have said, the military has always been a male-dominated institution. The first time that we actually started putting large amounts of women into uniform was during World War 2. We took women for clerical jobs so that more men were able to fight on the front lines. The recruiting slogan was "Free an Man to Fight."

The military has always been seen as a catalyst for social change. It's arguable that the integration of black and white soldiers was the first step in the civil rights movement, and the end of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is probably going to be seen as the first step of the federal government ending de jure discrimination of gay people. With this in mind, a lot of feminist lobby groups are trying to do the same thing with women with the exact same goals.

The problem is that men and women are much further apart than these other integration challenges. Black men and white men are culturally different, and there were a lot of problems with integration. I'd say that there still are problems; if you look at a battalion, you'll notice that all the black guys hang out with each other, all the Hispanic guys hang out with each other, and so on. However, everyone is still able to function as a unit. The same is true for gays. I'd say that it's mostly because most gay men stay in the closet for their terms, (lesbians are almost universally accepted) but the repeal of DADT didn't really have much of an effect on anything because a gay man is still basically the same as a straight man when it comes to doing work.

This is not so with women.

Similar to firefighting work, the military is a very physical job. Everything ends up being physical in some shape or form, and it really doesn't matter which MOS (Military Occupational Specialty) you pick, you're going to end up doing something physical as a matter of your daily duty. There are particularly egregious cases where they stick women into Ordnance, but even a job like avionics technician involves doing hard labor (Ha, you thought you'd use a soldering iron all day? Guess your recruiter didn't tell you that you have to take off all the hydraulic lines before you can take the control box out. Have fun).

There's a very clear double standard that is communicated, and it's insidious for several reasons. When a man "falls out" (can't keep up with the rest of the unit) of a run, his life sucks. In my shop, falling out means you just volunteered to run with the master sergeant at 2:00 in the afternoon. It's summer in Arizona, and it's usually around 115 degrees. Not a good time. We have a guy who isn't very good at running; as a result, he gets to run every day at 2:00. He is pretty miserable. He's definitely getting better, though.

When we had a female sergeant, she also fell out every time. The response was indifference because, "well, she's a woman and it's just par for the course that women can't keep up with men." It's also implicit that said sergeant could make the case that the master sergeant is only making her run at 2:00 because she's a woman. The case would go, "Your standard is too high, and you know that I can't keep up. You're being a big meaniehead and you're only making this standard because you're sexist." The master sergeant's career would be fried before you can say "Equal Opportunity." An EO case is a career-ender.

Because this issue can't be dealt with in the open, (it's verboten to say that women are simply not as physically capable as men) you have a lot of people who pay lip service to the "We're all equal" party line but snicker at women in leadership positions. And, sadly, it's justified in many cases. This aforementioned double standard also get applied to promotion along with daily life, and it's a kick in the teeth when you're a lance corporal obeying a corporal who is, by all objective measures, a worse Marine than you. That applies to either gender, but it just so happens that due to affirmative action, there are a lot of women in leadership positions who have no business being there. Couple that with the fact that women make just over 6% of the Marine Corps, (small sample size) and you get sexism.

I don't really feel like going into the sexual harassment / assault part and the fraternization, as that's just shitty behavior that can be remedied by court-martialing people and setting a clear standard. In any case, the real problem is the double standard. If you apply a double standard, then you get sexism. If you hold everyone accountable, then you get genuine respect. Doing so, however, would drastically decrease the number of women in the military. I personally think that's a good thing if it means that the remainder are respected and valued.

Post reply on HN