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

Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 357 posts

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#261

Post by forgottenpass »

daveloyall wrote: post #218

NB I haven't read all the comments on this page and I apologize if somebody already said this... NB I don't have the correct language to express this idea. I'm even concerned that I might be flat out misunderstood. Consult my own comment history to know where I stand. NB I haven't heard of the author before nor read the apparent criticism. --- The author is a hardcore coder on the autism spectrum and thus fits in wel…

But look, the internet isn't just textmode anymore, and it doesn't exist just in cyberspace anymore. Decisions coders make affect the--blah blah you all know this, software is eating.

So, maybe, just maybe, the hardcore-on-the-spectrum-practically-deterministic-themselves folks shouldn't be the only ones with commit-bits, hm? [...] Because software is eating the world, "Made with love" needs to more than a marketing slogan.

If that is the way you want to frame this, I think your goals are tangential if not orthogonal to the conversation this blog speaks to. You're talking about products, most of the social topics rolling through social media and the tech news are about social interaction in and around development.

Obviously the developers are in a place to put their mark on a product, but that's quite different. They're generally not the decision makers on the product goals and feature set. And to the extent that they can influence the product, that topic has gone entirely unaddressed. Conversation has focused around about software team interaction.

But I don't see how that adds up to building a product "with heart." Some of the grossest software business models and anti-consumer practices come out of NorCal, the epicenter of the brand of progressive politics popular in these discussions.

A comically apt anecdote is of a Facebook employee. The name Facebook let a transgender individual use as their workplace ID was not good enough for Facebook's real name policy for end users. Of course Facebook fell all over themselves to fix it when they got bad press. But if any of the political movements in tech were even tangentially about the products getting built, it would have never been an issue. The business rule that developers were tasked with implementing would have never been commited, or never thought up in the first place.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#262

Post by ceejayoz »

hodwik wrote: post #253
ceejayoz wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly, when diagnosed by a doctor. I'm talking about the "I've never been formally diagnosed but..." and "I think I'm a little on the spectrum" sort of comments that often wind up in threads about programmers being socially awkward. Side note: having Aspergers doesn't make you an asshole.

> " having Aspergers doesn't make you an asshole." My experience of people (medically diagnosed) with Asperger's does not support that statement.

Having difficulty with social interaction due to a medical condition, IMO, doesn't make one an "asshole", any more than a cancer patient who lies in bed all day is "lazy".

It's the people who are aware of and excuse being an asshole by a self-diagnosed "oh I'm probably on the spectrum" statement I've issues with.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#263

Post by ericmo »

exstudent2 wrote: post #184
ericmo wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Feminism isn't a monolith, there are lots of flavors in feminism. Only the most radical feminists are "against" men, but they are far from being a majority. Many feminists actually do talk about "sorority" in that sense of women helping each other, however, many other feminists don't agree with that. First reason is that this would block criticism within feminism, such as the one made in the post. Second reason is th…

I think that the problem is that the extreme feminists are being taken seriously. Journalism in particular seems to be very radicalized. What you end up with is an outsized voice for an extreme minority opinion. I think a lot of the backlash against feminism is about the traction some of the more radical ideas have made. Examples: #killallmen, male tears... There are other extreme examples that have been codified in…

Just to be clear, I don't think radical feminists shouldn't be taken seriously, just the extremely radical shouldn't. There's room for radical feminism, not for hate.

"Male tears" isn't a radical feminist thing, many non-radical feminists use it. Actually, it's quite the opposite, it's men who have always said feminist women (radical or not) are anti-men, so they decided to play along and made a joke about it.

While I think "male tears" isn't anti-men, I do think it could be against hegemonic masculinity, which is when men are told they have to be strong, non-emotional, etc; e.g. the past few days people have been talking about some research that implies that male gamers who harass women (i.e. they comply with hegemonic masculinty) are "losers", and some people have talked about it using #maletears. There's some anti-hegemonic masculinity Schadenfreude going on there. Some people think #maletears create a stigma around men who do cry, but it's also the opposite, it's joking about men who think they can't cry, they should be allowed to cry if they want to.

About the #killallmen, I think it didn't get traction where I live, in Brazil, I hadn't heard about it. I'm not sure what is it about, but I can see how some feminist women would argue that men do assault and kill women every day, systematically, so it could be sarcastic. Also, as something that would instantly backfire, it could be an attempt to destroy feminism from within, but you see, any feminist with a basic understanding of gender theory would immediately see thru that: men are not all equal, just as women are not all equal. So, let's say, if we're killing all men, what do we do to trans women? See, it doesn't work in a feminist framework.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#264

Post by daveloyall »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #237
daveloyall wrote: post #218

NB I haven't read all the comments on this page and I apologize if somebody already said this... NB I don't have the correct language to express this idea. I'm even concerned that I might be flat out misunderstood. Consult my own comment history to know where I stand. NB I haven't heard of the author before nor read the apparent criticism. --- The author is a hardcore coder on the autism spectrum and thus fits in wel…

What does "emotionally brilliant" mean, and how would it benefit users? The best interpretation I can think of is building software which exploits user's emotional responses in order to gain acceptance and widespread usage (e.g. Zynga), but I'm not sure why this is something the world needs more of.

Well, no, not that.

I'm not sure. I myself see the emotional landscape only dimly.

My life got a lot better when two things changed for me.

One: I accepted that some people around me ("that happened to be" female) were remarkably better than I am at understanding my motivations and predicting my behavior than I am. Same for third parties.

A fascinating aside: People (including me) are motivated more powerfully by emotions (like fear) when they aren't aware of them--and many people who don't think they don't experience strong emotions are really quite wrong.

And two: that the goals emotionally intelligent people set are worthwhile, even thought they might sound like complete nonsense at first.

By allowing women into my life (not just the technically apt ones) my life was improved.

Note that I don't ask "how should I achieve X", I ask "what should my goal be in situation Z".

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#265

Post by yummyfajitas »

rmxt wrote: post #245
yummyfajitas wrote: post #209

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Economics did end segregation of Asians, Irish, Italians and Jews. Again, the fact that some groups have been violently unbent does not mean that groups can't unbend themselves. Just because you can cite other examples doesn't mean that the ones I cited don't exist. Incidentally, you are aware that Jim Crow laws were mainly about economic protectionism, right? Raising wages for (white) workers by using guns against t…

These positive claims, whether they are accurate or not, regarding economics, segregation, and oppressed minorities are all fine and dandy in an abstract world. What are your takeaways from such arguments? Is it something along the lines of: "Since all of these other groups managed to unbend themselves when the economic factors were right, we (society as a whole/at large) should wait for other oppressed groups do the…

I've made no normative arguments here.

To amend yours, one such normative claim might be: "Since all of these other groups managed to unbend themselves when the economic factors were right, we (society as a whole/at large) should figure out how the groups (or treatment thereof) which didn't unbend themselves differ from those that did."

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#266

Post by jawnv6 »

angersock wrote: post #214
justizin wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Tilting at those windmills is important, and might be a cause worthy of devoting your life to it, but it's not everyone's calling. "Tilting at windmills" means attacking imaginary enemies, you really can't have it both ways of calling work on eradicating racism, sexism, and other bigotries "Tilting at windmills" and then say it's important. Further, eradicating racism, sexism, etc.. IS EVERYONE'S CALLING. If you do…

Further, eradicating racism, sexism, etc.. IS EVERYONE'S CALLING. I've got a friend who is very white and very male and very straight, and honestly, it's worked out pretty well for him. What is his incentive for abolishing racism, sexism, etc.? That incentive is certainly not outweighed by what he gives up. Your argument (such as it is) is as foolish and baseless as his is practical and repugnant. EDIT: Downvotes as…

If you stock a team of people attacking a problem with people who fit one precise mold, you'll miss out on the breadth of problems that people from other backgrounds face. More importantly, you'll miss out on their solutions to those problems. You're trading global progress for a blip of personal comfort extracted at a high cost from more vulnerable people.

Seriously in the most crass cynical context imaginable, diverse teams should be expected to outperform homogenous ones. For some HN-relatable examples to this 101-level topic, see TNG: The Masterpiece Society, DS9: Melora, or Bill Burr's "Ashy" bit.

Does that explain the "incentive" to not be a bigoted shithead devoid of empathy?

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#267

Post by daveloyall »

forgottenpass wrote: post #261
daveloyall wrote: post #218

NB I haven't read all the comments on this page and I apologize if somebody already said this... NB I don't have the correct language to express this idea. I'm even concerned that I might be flat out misunderstood. Consult my own comment history to know where I stand. NB I haven't heard of the author before nor read the apparent criticism. --- The author is a hardcore coder on the autism spectrum and thus fits in wel…

But look, the internet isn't just textmode anymore, and it doesn't exist just in cyberspace anymore. Decisions coders make affect the--blah blah you all know this, software is eating. So, maybe, just maybe, the hardcore-on-the-spectrum-practically-deterministic-themselves folks shouldn't be the only ones with commit-bits, hm? [...] Because software is eating the world, "Made with love" needs to more than a marketing…

> tangential if not orthogonal to the conversation

Er, sorry. My train of thought was: products need to be less harmful --> the aggregate character of the the industry needs to change --> putting more emotionally competent people in the industry --> overcoming the gender-related conflict in the industry. Which, I think is the conversation.

As to developers cf. management... What sort of developer fails to think about the possible consequences a given product might have on the lives of people they will never meet? #cough#

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#268

Post by jazzyk »

jazzyk wrote: post #228
onion2k wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are many examples of girls being actively refused entry in to technology classes[1] based on their gender. When the education system itself is prejudiced against women it's unreasonable to suggest women aren't getting tech jobs because they're unwilling to put in the effort - they can't because they're blocked from doing so. [1] A recent example http://jezebel.com/girl-fights-library-s-boys-only-robotics-...

I would say this a sample of 1 - and from a biased source, too. My daughter graduated form high-school last year. Not only had I not heard a single case of girls being refused entry to anything - most of the times it seemed like my daughter and her female friends (most of them straight "A" students in a very competitive high-school in the Boston, MA area) were almost harassed to join the math club, the robotics club,…

Please do not downvote just because you disagree - it is against the rules.

I was questioning the statement "many examples of girls being actively refused...", because the poster provided an example of ONE incident. I provided valid observations from my own experience, providing contrary evidence, just to make a point that we cannot form an opinion based on one event.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#269

Post by Lawtonfogle »

Ygg2 wrote: post #252
Lawtonfogle wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But it does exist. Diagnosing it wasn't the issue, it was labeling it as an illness that was. Of course, this opens the big question as to what is or isn't an illness, especially when you begin to look at things given hypothetical accepting societies that may not currently exist.

> But it does exist. Sure it doesn't, but the context was diagnosing it. As in recognizing it as a disease.

Can you diagnose an atypical characteristic without considering it a disease?

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#270

Post by [deleted] »

KingMob wrote: post #251
ianstallings wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No she does realize that and goes over it in the article. She's trying to ask you to respect her opinion regardless. Which obviously went over the heads of many here. Even though all she is essentially saying is "listen to me", you refuse to listen and try to invalidate her opinion. Because "her advice doesn't translate well to others". The only advice she gave was to acknowledge her experiences and perhaps digest th…

I appreciate that she's asking to be heard and acknowledged. But she does suggest she has important advice to offer when she says "why won’t you let me give you what I have?", and my take is that her advice is only narrowly applicable to women like her. I think her offering her "advice" counterproductive, because not only does it not apply to most women in tech, who do not have the requisite ASD traits, it also makes…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN