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

Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

thedatingring.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 175 posts

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#111

Post by raganwald »

rfnslyr wrote: post #62
raganwald wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just so you know, your tone is extremely off-putting. It doesn't come across as genuine asking the question, but are instead whining about how you are being forced to change and you don't want to change and don't see why you should budge so much as a single hair on your head. Also the "Why not blacks? Why not midgets?" line is a particularly poor choice. My understanding is that little people do not like being called…

Therefore, ironically, YOU are the entitled one here. You feel you're entitled to carry on as you have been carrying on. By not paying extra attention to females? Buddy, I'm here to get a job done, if my applicant is a woman and she is good, I will hire her. Move on with your bullshit.

I said noting about what you should or shouldn't do, but I did point out that your tone was combative. And your reply is that I have bullshit. Well, that really speaks for itself: You're a fair-minded, egalitarian, meritocratic, open- minded fellow until called on the toxicity of your tone. Then you become fully abusive.

Tell me why anyone should expect that you are this way when discussing gender, colour, and stature, but miraculously transform into an open-minded and welcoming person when discussing technical ideas?

I'm open to discovering new things, but my bet is that you're rude and bullying about everything, not just this topic.

One upon a time businesspeople would drink together, because alcohol would lower inhibitions so it would strip away the false friendliness and you could discover what people were really like.

Now we have the internet, and no alcohol is needed for people to drop the pretence of civility.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#112

Post by jfarmer »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #110
jfarmer wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, folks on HN need to do much less discussing on this topic and a lot more listening. For the most part, HN is collectively blind to issues of power and privilege. For those interested in learning more about privilege, read these two essays by John Scalzi, Being Poor ( http://whatever.scalzi.com/2005/09/03/being-poor/ ) and Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is ( http://whatever.scalzi.com/20…

On the contrary, I would suggest listening to Ram Z Paul ( http://www.ramzpaul.com/ ) You claim that people at HN experience privilege, and in some sense I agree most of us do. And yet as proponent of a progressive agenda, you also have a different kind of privilege. Most normal people will automatically identify you with the "right" side. You will never have to fear being labelled a racist, sexist or anti-Semite. Fo…

You got me.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#113

Post by baddox »

Joeboy wrote: post #107
shantanubala wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privilege exists when the outward characteristics you describe are used as heuristics for filtering good coders from bad coders. Unfortunately, most people are unaware of the heuristics they are using when performing such a task. LessWrong explains some of these errors in reasoning quite well [1][2]. When generalized to an entire population, these heuristics construct a "privilege" because anyone with characteristics…

> As a male, I spend less time worrying about my own safety (in general) - that is a privilege. You're far more likely to be assaulted, although your assault is less likely to be sexual in nature.

You're also more likely to be imprisoned, executed, and conscripted, and less likely to win a custody battle or get the first lifeboat from a sinking ship. But I think listing these things out is pointless in itself. We might as well list every disease we haven't acquired and every injury we haven't sustained.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#114

Post by baddox »

HCIdivision17 wrote: post #104
baddox wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The coin has another side: privilege. Privilege is a simple concept. Privilege is a bogus concept, at least in every manner it has been explained to me. Examine the example you provided. If most elite startup hackers are male, English speaking, 20-40, and white or Asian, then a person giving that characterization would be giving a reasonable one based on observation. What does this have to do with "privilege" or "f…

My impression is that it's an implication of arbitrary social momentum. Where a hacker immediately brings to mind a twenty-something white male, other groups would need to expend more effort to be associated with it. Say a brilliantly clever black woman joined a discussion, she shouldn't stand out, but likely would; that's the social imbalance in play: brilliant and clever may not be the foremost and outstanding char…

> So only feel guilt if you help reinforce the imbalance (like commenting on a girl programming, which carries an implication of noteworthiness (since it was noted) and thus perhaps surprise (which could imply by extension social wrongness)).

Why is it wrong to consider a girl programming to be noteworthy or surprising? If it's true that females are underrepresented in programming or technology careers, which is the whole point of most of this thread, then this reaction seems completely appropriate.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#115

Post by baddox »

jfarmer wrote: post #106
baddox wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm putting up resistance because there is still very little I have heard that makes sense. I do consider myself a skeptic, and I think skepticism is a requirement for critical thinking rather than an obstacle to it.

A person willing to learn says, "That's interesting and it doesn't make sense to me for X, Y, and Z reasons. I'm obviously not getting something and am probably confused about something important." That is not what you're saying. Being a skeptic is orthogonal to having that attitude. Anyhow, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, ... I'll just end it here and you can reply however you'd like or not at all. :)

I said:

> My questions are actually genuine and not rhetorical. I would appreciate responses, or perhaps corrections of my impression of the concept of privilege.

Whether or not I was lying then, I am unable to express any more clearly or convincingly that I am willing to learn.

And I believe I have explained what doesn't make sense to me.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#116

Post by Dewie »

jfarmer wrote: post #96
Dewie wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For those interested in learning more about privilege, read these two essays by John Scalzi, Being Poor ( http://whatever.scalzi.com/2005/09/03/being-poor/ ) and Straight White Male: The Lowest Difficulty Setting There Is ( http://whatever.scalzi.com/2012/05/15/straight-white-male-th... ). I don't know what you want to achieve by posting the first one, since I have never seen anyone with any good arguments who argu…

> Try to read them without being reflexive or poking holes in them. If you find yourself getting riled up or defensive stop and ask yourself why you're feeling the need to respond that way. So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did? If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumping in here to comment. As someone who grew up very poor, it m…

> So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did?

Yes, I know you set up that preemptive shield against dissent. Or preemptive shield against dissent that seems reactionary, or angry, or something of a similarly negative emotive kind. I felt the need to respond because I found it objectionable.

> If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumping in here to comment.

Challenges. Let's see..

As for the first article, as I've already said, I already knew (in an intellectual sense) that being poor is a disadvantage. So yeah, not as if my worldview was shattered there, or that I shake my fist against the skies over not having a harder lot so that I could brag about having overcome it later or something else that might make want to not be from the middle class for some reason. What challenge? I already agreed...

As for the other one, well it didn't really challenge any of my beliefs about gender (in)equality since it actually doesn't give any arguments, anecdotes or data. It's an assertion. With an analogy. If anything I'm mad because of how thoroughly unchallenged I was, and how I don't know anything more about how it might be a woman (which I am not, surprise). If I want to know how it might be to be a woman (or not be a man with my specific attributes), I want to read about other peoples experiences, not a fucking video game metaphor. How is that going to enlighten me in any way? But I've found that men in particular are just supposed to sit down and be handed the immutable facts about gender and society (and from a man no less).

> As someone who grew up very poor, it makes me chuckle that you can't see the connection.

I'm in dire need of enlightenment it seems.

> If you find this comment grating, well, let me translate it into geek-speak: before jumping in to comment, please Read The Fine Manual. :)

Honestly not sure what that last reference is. mmm, something-something console game/board game, I think. -1 geek point to me.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#117

Post by baddox »

MorningInfidel wrote: post #100
baddox wrote: post #27

Unfortunately for this all female team, feminists will accuse them of working to support the patriarchy just as much as the evil men. Sadly, this is actually what prominent feminists in technology believe: https://medium.com/about-work/e82b7ca7de03 (Ctrl-F "support the patriarchy"). For these feminists, women who fail are obvious evidence of patriarchy, and women who succeed are obviously just working alongside the p…

I was all interested to read the article you linked until I saw the by-line. Read some of Shanley's posts on Medium - her opinion can be safely discounted. Not because she's a woman, but because she's a wacko. Thankyou for putting into coherent thought what I was never able to - a lot of these arguments you hear from the 'leg up for women in tech' crowd are just that - unfalsifiable. They can never be wrong.

I don't thinking to appropriate to call her a wacko. I would describe her writings as expertly crafted works of misandry and post-modern obscurantism.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#118

Post by bri3d »

auggierose wrote: post #102
jfarmer wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure what you mean by "solution." To abolish privilege? That's neither possible nor desirable, IMO. Privilege exists wherever there's a differential in power for any reason. The problem is being blind to it and not understanding how it operates in your life and the lives of others. The solution to that problem is being committed to developing a deep sense of empathy.

Well, just lost me here. What is the point of recognising privilege if you are not trying to get rid of it?

1) To understand the perception others may have of of things I say and to know when I don't understand something enough to talk about it. Knowing that my life experience has differed from that of others and that my statements are perceived differently because of my privileged background allows me to more efficiently communicate and prevents faux pas (like the original PG one that caused this whole furor in the first place).

2) To build empathy. Recognizing privilege allows me to more readily understand those who are not identical to myself and relate to them. In addition to making me (I feel) a better person, this enables me to more easily befriend a diverse set of people.

3) By consciously thinking about privilege as a concept, real toxic social and political structures which can be actively deconstructed become even more evident.

I see people complaining frequently about the use of the word "privilege" as though it's some kind of pejorative being used against them; in general, it's not. Rather, privilege is a way of thinking about the effects of one's background on their social and economic position by identifying taken-for-granted advantages that society has granted them.

Frankly when I first started learning about the concept of privilege it seemed obvious to me: of course those with different backgrounds have different sets of advantages. But thinking about the concepts consciously and with the ability to label them has really helped me to both identify inequalities and combat them where I am able.

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#119

Post by Crito »

Dewie wrote: post #116
jfarmer wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Try to read them without being reflexive or poking holes in them. If you find yourself getting riled up or defensive stop and ask yourself why you're feeling the need to respond that way. So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did? If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumping in here to comment. As someone who grew up very poor, it m…

> So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did? Yes, I know you set up that preemptive shield against dissent. Or preemptive shield against dissent that seems reactionary, or angry, or something of a similarly negative emotive kind. I felt the need to respond because I found it objectionable. > If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumpin…

> > If you find this comment grating, well, let me translate it into geek-speak: before jumping in to comment, please Read The Fine Manual. :)

> Honestly not sure what that last reference is. mmm, something-something console game/board game, I think. -1 geek point to me.

http://www.jargon.net/jargonfile/r/RTFM.html

Re: Paul Graham Isn't Keeping Women out of Tech

#120

Post by jfarmer »

Dewie wrote: post #116
jfarmer wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Try to read them without being reflexive or poking holes in them. If you find yourself getting riled up or defensive stop and ask yourself why you're feeling the need to respond that way. So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did? If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumping in here to comment. As someone who grew up very poor, it m…

> So, why did you feel the need to respond as you did? Yes, I know you set up that preemptive shield against dissent. Or preemptive shield against dissent that seems reactionary, or angry, or something of a similarly negative emotive kind. I felt the need to respond because I found it objectionable. > If that's your response, it seems to me like you should really grapple with the challenges they present before jumpin…

> As for the first article, as I've already said, I already knew (in an intellectual sense) that being poor is a disadvantage.

This is not the point of the essay.

> I'm in dire need of enlightenment it seems.

Heh. Ok, I'm out! :)

Post reply on HN