On sexism in the tech industry - rebuttal

The example of African Americans carrying the legacy of slavery with them is not a fair comparison to women. African Americans are a group of people who, whilst now large and diverse, mostly share a common history which in the grand scheme of things was not all that long ago. You could use Native Americans or Jewish people as similar examples. Women don't have a shared history in the same way. Women have suffered terribly throughout history (and in some countries they still do now) by either horrible violence, being treated by second class citizens or both. However there was no one cultural atrocity which affected all women.

I'm aware of ways in which women have been persecuted. I'm also aware of how people have been persecuted based on race, religion, sexuality, age. Those things all contribute to my understanding of history, and I think it's extremely important not to ignore them, but not ignoring them, and not being weighed down thinking about them every day are very different things.

Stories like you describe - I can honestly say that I don't have a story like that. It might be that I've been extremely fortunate and I'm in a small minority. It might also be that I try very hard not to jump to conclusions. I don't want to unfairly judge people based on what is probably an entire harmless gesture, but I completely understand why other women do. When writing my post I started to wonder if I was weird because I didn't fear being raped. If the article could have that effect on me, isn't it possible that articles and comments like this are actually detrimental to that problem?

Finally, I don't think that "I'm concerned about the gender gap in tech. I think it's an important thing for us to be talking about" was what the original article was about. It's probably what the original intention of the article was, but it's not how the article turned out. I actually see the gender gap talked about a lot (both by women and men). I barely go a day without seeing someone or other talk about it on Twitter. My Twitter feed clearly is by no means a representation of the whole industry as a) there is a definite bias towards UXers and designers, and b) it's an entirely self-selected list on my part. However it does show that these discussions are already happening, amongst some communities at least, on a regular basis.

I think that an article that was truly about the gender gap in tech would actually talk about the gender gap in tech. There were so many issues that the article actually could have talked about - disparity in pay, women being overlooked for promotions, women getting unfairly let go or not hired because of pregnancy, women finding that their opinions are ignored or not even asked for, women feeling left out because the guys go for drinks after work and they're not asked to go with. The article did briefly touch on speakers at conferences, but for me personally that's a less important issue. I go to conferences a couple of times a year; I go to the office 5 days a week, 48 weeks a year, and issues like pay and promotions affect my whole life.

That last paragraph is something I regret not putting in my original post as it helps to demonstrate that I was not criticising the intention of writing the article; I was criticising the way it was written and the things that it chose to concentrate on.

I can't blame your friend for accommodating their foolish demands. He treated them no worse than they deserved for it, and refusing would have made it a waste of everyone's time.

> gone home after work and changed

I guess I'm wondering whether she thinks her coworkers are incapable of judging her genuine merit, or something else is going on.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2012/06/im-not-y...

In particular: "so many of the attitudes her work unveils are of an 'unconscious nature,' which makes beating them back particularly difficult" and "male leaders may think they are elevating women, not stifling them."

There's other research suggesting that "being made aware" of the problem helps male leaders adjust behavior.

http://www.20-first.com/690-0-improving-the-gender-balance-a... (see the section on "diversity training")

And this article about the effect of belief that an organization is meritocratic on fairness:

http://m.theglobeandmail.com/report-on-business/careers/care...

There's significant pressure to not talk about sexism directly and just address this as a conflict between two individiuals (see antirez's rant) -- even though the research says that talking about about sexism and fairness concepts changes the behavior of management.

Let's just say "I know a gal" who was fired from a company in the Valley because of that very discrimination. She had a master's degree and had been at the company almost 1+ year when she discovered that than the guy she was training, a dropout art school student whose "industry experience" amounted to working at Home Depot as a cashier was earning more. When my friend asked for equal pay for equal work, citing Obama's signing of Lily Ledbetter, her employers cut her salary to hourly, started writing her up for even the most minor infraction, and eventually ended up firing her. From what she tells me, she was unable to afford legal representation, Silicon Valley attorneys literally laughed at her (said they would not take the case for free), so she ended up signing a stack of legal mumbo jumbo that literally raped her of all her legal rights.

Think of the actions that are alleged to have taken place.

What are the motivations of these actions? How does the villain profit by those actions?

Why would an employer pay a long time employee with a Masters degree less than a new hire with no experience, and then prefer to fire her rather than bring her salary up to par.

When given evidence of this unfairness, especially in light of Lilly Ledbetter as well as the Equal Pay Act of 1963, why is it that there were no attorneys willing to take this case.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence and the story is entirely OUT of line with what we know of the behaviors of lawyers as well as the behavior of modern HR departments or CEOs or managers.

Because it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge that this kind of shit can (and does) happen in an industry you like to idolize?

So now you're speculating, and actually being pretty insulting, about my inner states of mind in at least two regards.

Since you don't know me, you might find it less insulting, more productive, and more persuasive to stick to fact based questioning:

    1) Show the claim is rather common and not extraordinary
    2) Provide motives for this behavior to occur
    3) Provide reasoning why lawyers wouldn't take this case in a heartbeat.

Numerous female friends have had the same experience. I don't think it's about coworkers. I think it's more to do with idiotic dudes thinking that pretty woman in a dress just a priori cannot be a software developer.