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

Coding Like a Girl

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 169 posts

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#41

Post by the8472 »

ncallaway wrote: post #11
mrits wrote: post #2

If you worked where I do (on Earth) you will be judged for your gender,age,race,education,social standing, where you grew up, hygiene, personality, religion, etc...

I absolutely don't understand this argument. Person A says "X is happens and is bad". Person B responds "X happens, along with Y, Z, and W." What is the objective of the argument presented by person B? It doesn't refute or disagree with Person A in any way. Is the point to minimize or trivialize X because Y, Z, and W also happen? Does the presence of Y, Z, and W mean we shouldn't make progress on X?

> Is the point to minimize or trivialize X because Y, Z, and W also happen?

It may simply acknowledge that some imperfection will always be present and the cost (not necessarily monetary) of changing that may outstrip the benefits.

For example an extreme divide between the rich and the poor is an issue that many people dislike and would like to see addressed. But at the same time it's a necessary part of capitalism to let people accumulate some wealth. If you couldn't accumulate wealth there would be no incentive to provide better products or services than others. There would be no way of winning the game.

Another example would be the freedom of speech. Defending free speech also means defending some levels of speech you find morally objectionable. Even hate speech to some point. The cost of preventing that hate speech would be payable in freedom.

Similarly some low levels of discrimination will always exist, simply because preventing that would amount to mandating how people must think and how to make decisions. I.e. it would make discrimination a thoughtcrime.

Of course the question is where to draw the line

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#42

Post by jfc »

spiffyman wrote: post #19

I posted this on FB last night and had quite a discussion ensue. I really like what the author has to say about assumptions. As a user group and conference organizer, time and time again I have seen men approach feminine people in the crowd with these just terribly naïve prejudices. "Oh, you must be a junior dev." Or "Who are you here with?" We men should absolutely try to set these poor assumptions aside -- if not f…

That's really the core issue: too many people believe that they can evaluate a person's technical knowledge based on physical appearance, which ends up including gender, race/ethnicity, sometimes even religion (if the person is wearing religious attire).

It's just easier to get to know people instead of assuming.

Also: environments that are unpleasant/hostile/uncomfortable for "people outside the norm" make it difficult for such people to distinguish between sexism/racism/discrimination and legitimate feedback.

For example, playing with one's hair during a presentation is often a sign of nervousness, but it is also a signal that conveys that nervousness to the audience. Is it distracting to some degree? Maybe, but more importantly, it detracts from her authority. Still, I can see why she responded as she did--if you are constantly undermined, under fire or criticized for no good reason, it becomes difficult to filter out which criticism/feedback is actually useful.

Edited to add: Loved the artwork in that article.

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#43

Post by kaybe »

TazeTSchnitzel wrote: post #15
gaius wrote: post #6

The dress story vs jeans, would apply equally to a guy in a suit and tie vs a hoodie.

Wait, are you saying the dress is too formal, or not formal enough ?

Rather, wrong/non-ideal image. There is more than one dimension, especially when it comes to women's clothes.

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#46

Post by polarix »

Something is twisted in all these discussions of gender in tech, it really seems like we're just going around in circles over and over again. I've never read anything that felt like a particularly insightful explication of the cause here.

Is it possible there's something more fundamental in society that this phenomenon is merely a symptom of, and that the fix is not going to be something like "just challenge yourself to detect and resist unconscious bias"? Could there be something inherent in the structure of our framework of social interaction that incentivizes this kind of behavior?

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#47

Post by TazeTSchnitzel »

polarix wrote: post #46

Something is twisted in all these discussions of gender in tech, it really seems like we're just going around in circles over and over again. I've never read anything that felt like a particularly insightful explication of the cause here. Is it possible there's something more fundamental in society that this phenomenon is merely a symptom of, and that the fix is not going to be something like "just challenge yourself…

The gender issues in wider society are the same as those in tech, except tech has a toxic culture and a horrifically skewed gender ratio

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#48

Post by mgkimsal »

rjbwork wrote: post #31
mgkimsal wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Voices going up - as in, asking a question(?) - is annoying whether it's a female voice or male voice.

That's when you're SUPPOSED to end your sentence by going up. That is the natural pattern. Doing it at the end of everything else is the annoying part.

I didn't write that comment very well. I mean, when the voice goes up at the end of a sentence making it sound like a question when the sentence is not a question.

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#49

Post by falcolas »

spcoll wrote: post #9
thomasmarcelis wrote: post #5

One thing I don't agree with, how is the following feedback gender-specific?: “Why are your slides so pink? It’s very distracting.” “Stop pushing your hair behind your ear when you present. It’s very distracting.” “Your voice goes up after every sentence you say.” I feel like this is all valid feedback. Back in university we would also get feedback on our behaviour during our presentations or the look of our slides.

This feedback makes it clear that acting feminine is considered a weakness, instead of a strength. You shouldn't be ashamed to look beautiful, wear dresses and make-up, and present cute slides with a pink theme and occasional kitty picture. This is what the whole "like a girl" is about: if you express your femininity in the things you do and the way you look, people associate that with incompetence.

Bright colors in slides, whether pink, blue, purple, or orange, is distracting in a presentation. It takes attention off the information being presented and puts it on the design choices.

Visual ticks - wringing your hands, messing with your hair, licking your lips - make you appear less confident, and has nothing to do with gender.

The vocal tick - making every sentence sound like a question - is distracting no matter who presents it.

These aren't gender specific criticisms in any way. Regardless, unless you're addressing a gender specific topic, why bring your gender into it in the first place? I'm interested not in the person presenting about algorithms, but the algorithms themselves.

A man would be rightly chastised for presenting a de-duplicaton talk with bright pastel blue slides, pictures of beer, and rubbing his forehead while presenting, why shouldn't a woman?

Re: Coding Like a Girl

#50

Post by partisan »

skj wrote: post #8
thomasmarcelis wrote: post #5

One thing I don't agree with, how is the following feedback gender-specific?: “Why are your slides so pink? It’s very distracting.” “Stop pushing your hair behind your ear when you present. It’s very distracting.” “Your voice goes up after every sentence you say.” I feel like this is all valid feedback. Back in university we would also get feedback on our behaviour during our presentations or the look of our slides.

Especially with the vocal comment, many people get annoyed with female voices when they're in a supposedly serious context. But the thing is that it's not actually some fundamentally annoying or distracting quality of the voice- it's that it's different from what they expect: a male voice. "This American Life" had a great segment about this, targeting "vocal fry" in particular: http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-a…

I remember hearing this episode on the radio some time back.

I am blessed to have worked in places where I haven't been exposed to many people who speak this way. I am surrounded by women, to be sure, but they are worried more about doing a good job than by trying to sound like it by deepening their voices.

It's funny, my mom is a non-native english speaker, having been in the US for 30 years. She heard a few women talking the other day using a well practiced combination of up-talk and vocal fry. She later turned to my wife and asked "Why are they talking like that?".

I do think that you will find that different demographics are more likely to speak this way. It's not the blanket category of "WOMEN". It's likely, from my experience, to be white, younger, professional women, and then, as knock-on effect, women from other backgrounds who work with them. They are probably plugged into the monoculture, have a common vocabulary, and use their vocal affects and vocabulary to filter out people who are not of a similar mind.

It's like when the newscasters all started speaking the same way, emphasizing certain words, movements of the head, a unique cadence that would, in conversation, be considered bizarre.

Nowadays, you are likely to dismiss any newscaster who doesn't speak that way as an amateur or charlatan who is not to be trusted.

Just my two cents. Feel free to give back change.

Post reply on HN