Live data from Hacker News

Nevertheless, She Coded

dev.to

211–220 of 398 posts

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#211
post #196

I wish comments were scored in a way that was weighted by the degree of bravery it took to write them. What a shame that most of the top comments here are boring, stand-up-for-the-vulnerable types agreed with by the majority— "women face difficulties in tech, and we should help them whenever we can"—while the downvoted posts are the ones trying (not necessarily successfully) to arrive at politically incorrect truths.

All debates are bravery debates. https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/06/09/all-debates-are-braver...

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#212
post #149

Earlier quoted context omitted.

this just means there is a negotiation skills gap. there are a million parameters you can compare people on and determine who makes more money in life. good looking people make more on average too. If you're bad at negotiation it has nothing to do with being a man or woman. Are we supposed to nationalize or socialize individual negotiations?

Except for two things: 1. Women are expected (societally) to be more accommodating and compliant throughout most aspects of their lives, meaning they have less practice and comfort negotiating. 2. Even when women do negotiate, they end up being penalized for it, probably because of the expectations mentioned in point 1. See http://www.newyorker.com/science/maria-konnikova/lean-out-th... . Underlying study is here: ht…

I agree with the parent on negotiating and I think your points are valid too. There's no one individual parameter in this discussion if you're looking to improve.

I did see something in the article you noted that I'd like to question though:

> that is, when their credentials have already been screened and they are in the interview phase—the focus shifts away from their competence and toward their social skills. That effect is absent for male candidates.

I think it's possible that this is not hiring managers trying to screw over candidates or make it harder for women, but it's a likely bias from past experiences based on a team environment where men and women differ because of our inherent differences.

Anecdotally, I've only seen women get nasty with other women to the point where it brews and stews and becomes problematic in a team environment. If women don't like men - they seem to navigate that better, perhaps because of your point in #1. Nonetheless, if men don't like other men - many times they'll blow up on each other but it doesn't linger. I've been in physical fights with great friends of mine, we've said nasty things, and in most cases the next day we let it go.

Just in the last couple years, I've had to let go several senior women because they were causing stress and anxiety with other women employees. From my experience - it's more likely I'll have a cultural issue with a female (with other females) and it's more likely I'll fire a man due to competence. Navigating cultural problems is much harder than making a decision based on lack of production. Everyone generally understands when people are fired from incompetence.

That being said - everyone has their own biases. It's not supposed to enter the picture in hiring but these considerations are often more subtle and are usually in consideration of one's current team and culture they wish to preserve. If you have some really strong personalities, male or female, you might be expressing concerns about social skills because you're trying to avoid a potential clash, not because you're out to get women. I wouldn't hire a male drill sergeant to work with my team which is more laid back and collaborative either.

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#213
post #200
post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The same people who call attention to gender diversity also speak out for racial diversity. This particular piece focuses on gender because of today's being International Women's Day. http://www.newyorker.com/business/currency/why-cant-silicon-... http://www.theverge.com/2015/8/20/9179853/tech-diversity-sco... https://medium.com/tech-diversity-files/thought-on-diversity...

>The same people who call attention to gender diversity also speak out for racial diversity Why don't I ever see it being discussed on HN?

Because we have enough difficulties discussing basic issues of gender equity, without trying to deal with intersectional and allied issues. Walk before you run!

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#214
post #196

I wish comments were scored in a way that was weighted by the degree of bravery it took to write them. What a shame that most of the top comments here are boring, stand-up-for-the-vulnerable types agreed with by the majority— "women face difficulties in tech, and we should help them whenever we can"—while the downvoted posts are the ones trying (not necessarily successfully) to arrive at politically incorrect truths.

They are. The mechanism greys them out quickly due to downvotes followed by ungreying later due to upvotes if the post was substantive with citations. It's what happened to me early on countering BS that was popular.

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#215
post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because women are subconsciously undervalued as workers. This discussion is complex and it's not entirely obvious how much of the pay gap is caused by discrimination, but this is one stupid argument.

There are software companies composed of all men (or 95% men if we want to be a bit more relaxed). Successful ones - as in making profit. Where are all-women (or 95% women) companies? If you can get away with paying them less, where are all the capitalists exploiting the market inefficiency and getting rich in the process? Hell, nowadays companies like Starbucks[0] routinely put social causes first, profits second. S…

If women are underpaid because they're (consciously or not) undervalued as workers by entrepreneurs, then those same entrepreneurs are unlikely to visualize a net salary savings. You're basically saying: if women are as good as men but you can pay them less, why not hire women? And the answer is that the same factors that lead to women being underpaid lead to not seeing them as interchangeable hire with males.

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#216

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If they make less than men, why don't companies hire women alone? Don't they want to save money on salaries?

This is an argument that I have yet to see being addressed to my satisfaction. If recent raises / salaries in the tech industry outside of Silicon Valley are any guide, companies love to save money on salaries. So I honestly have no idea why all the men I work with haven't been replaced by women being paid 95% or whatever the claimed pay gap is. And remember, this is in the US, where you can legally be let go because…

Because paying women less goes hand in hand with seeing them as not being comparable to male hires?

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#217
post #173

If ever I had a notion that an expression of solidarity for women in tech was unnecessary or quixotic, the response to this article on this very forum would be sufficient to dispel it.

From what I've seen, there are less African-American and non-white hispanic men in tech than there are white and Asian women, yet I never see this discussed. Is this not an important issue as well? Will skewed racial ratios only be handled after gender parity has been achieved? Or do they not matter at all?

> yet I never see this discussed

Weasel words. The discussion happens, it is out there, you can find it. Who is to blame if you ignore it?

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#218
post #196

I wish comments were scored in a way that was weighted by the degree of bravery it took to write them. What a shame that most of the top comments here are boring, stand-up-for-the-vulnerable types agreed with by the majority— "women face difficulties in tech, and we should help them whenever we can"—while the downvoted posts are the ones trying (not necessarily successfully) to arrive at politically incorrect truths.

Very much this. It's the easy, trite, safe, politically correct position to take. You get a pat on the back for being a good moral upstanding person according to the mores du jour. You feel good. No hard conversations are had. It becomes a cult. People are burned at the proverbial stake for not subscribing to the Geocentric model.

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#219
post #196

I wish comments were scored in a way that was weighted by the degree of bravery it took to write them. What a shame that most of the top comments here are boring, stand-up-for-the-vulnerable types agreed with by the majority— "women face difficulties in tech, and we should help them whenever we can"—while the downvoted posts are the ones trying (not necessarily successfully) to arrive at politically incorrect truths.

It is incredibly hard to have a good discussion about this topic. I think it is getting better on Hacker News, but there is still a lot of work to do.

I sometimes write about such topics, but can't get much traction. A few of my pieces have gotten a few thousand page views, mostly on HN, but most of what I write is largely ignored. If you want something meatier, you might enjoy my personal blog.

Best.

Re: Nevertheless, She Coded

#220
post #173

If ever I had a notion that an expression of solidarity for women in tech was unnecessary or quixotic, the response to this article on this very forum would be sufficient to dispel it.

From what I've seen, there are less African-American and non-white hispanic men in tech than there are white and Asian women, yet I never see this discussed. Is this not an important issue as well? Will skewed racial ratios only be handled after gender parity has been achieved? Or do they not matter at all?

Because those are typically flagged and down voted even faster on here because there are less people to unflag and upvote
Post reply on HN