I'm not a Woman in Tech • Hacker News Board

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#481

Post by refurb » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:06 AM UTC

omegaworks wrote: post #470

jackmott wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Take the "black lives matter" movement. If we followed the OPs advice, they should just protest that "all lives matter" instead, That might have been more effective, even if it isn't as fair or correct. Hard to say, but in the lead up to the the latest US presidential election, there were many movements that I absolutely agreed with that I wish had shut up for just 1 year, because I could seem them fueling resentmen…

>They revolted Hardly[0]. Don't believe the hype. The GOP won using gerrymandering, voter-suppression tactics and clever electoral positioning. Its tools: Voter ID laws and propaganda that deactivated potential voters. 0. https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/politics/2016-electi...

Trump won because he ran a better campaign. It's that simple.

And people voted for him because they liked what he had to say. Not sure why you're looking for some magical reason why he was elected.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#482

Post by spyhi » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:17 AM UTC

Dove wrote: post #318

fruzz wrote: post #14

There's sexism in tech, and to address it you have to call it for what it is. I'm glad her experiences are such that she hasn't encountered these barriers, but other people have, and they need these words and spaces. Take my previous job. Women were objectified on Slack. A woman was groped, though she didn't report it out of concern for the repercussions. In meetings execs, male execs would only address/look at the m…

> but as a group, it's undeniable that there's extra obstacles I'm not sure you can really say that. It's true, women as a group encounter problems with being treated as sex objects, and there are cultural reasons for that, blah blah blah. So women have a unique experience. BUT! Men experience a pressure to succeed that we as women can hardly fathom. Consequently, they wind up in jobs they need , in a way we never wi…

Thanks for saying this--too often people hand-wave away others' problems though, ironically, they may end up inheriting them. Your comment reminded me about an article on how Millennial women are conflicted about being breadwinners. [1] Between chuckling about how I (a Millennial guy) have said many of the quotes nearly verbatim, it dawned on me that as we approach equality in the workplace these women are being now being exposed to what were classically "man problems." I think guys are mostly familiar with those, but I think we also mostly conditioned or compelled endure it in silence, which may lend to the idea that there are "no extra obstacles" for us.

So yes, let's be sympathetic to each others' problems and avoid demonizing each other...you never know, it could end up being your problem.

[1] http://www.refinery29.com/2017/04/148488/millennial-women-ar...

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#483

Post by refurb » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:19 AM UTC

SomeCallMeTim wrote: post #414

kristineberth wrote: post #395

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly I'd be surprised if she had never been harassed in some way. I know a grand total of zero women a decade into their careers who have literally never experienced some kind of harassment. Without being able to speak for her, I can surmise that maybe she just doesn't feel it needs to define her.

> Frankly I'd be surprised if she had never been harassed in some way. 1. She grew up in Denmark 2. She works in the UK From what I've heard, both are far more progressive and egalitarian than the US. If the people you know are based in the US, that could be the distinction. I think the problems here are far worse.

According to this survey, Sweden and Denmark are the worst for sexual harassment in the EU. 80-100% report being sexually harassed in Denmark.

[1]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-de...

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#484

Post by eagsalazar2 » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:22 AM UTC

I know this will never happen but I'd love it if people broke the terms "sexual harassment" or "sexism" into 3 different more specific descriptions of what happened to them:

(1) I got hit on (2) I was discriminated against (3) I was sexually assaulted or coerced

(1) is a lot different than (2) and (3) and a lot of the stories coming out lately basically boil down to (1), a dude was sexually attracted to a woman and he let her know he wanted to hook up with her (not including examples where there were threats or leverage was applied which would fall into (3)).

(2) and (3) are clearly 100% unacceptable and should result in immediate firing and criminal investigation for (3). (1) OTOH reflects a normal and healthy human reality: men want to have sex with women. Men and women hook up via work intros all the time. That is ok and even good IMO. If we talk about (1) separately and without inflammatory language maybe we could as a society even come up with a set of appropriate norms and rules for how people should act on their attraction to each other.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#485

Post by Dove » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:24 AM UTC

FooHentai wrote: post #460

Dove wrote: post #305

That's how I feel about it, too. There is no war. Women are not oppressed, men are not oppressors. We're all just people with problems who need support and compassion. Besides being morally wrong, a tribal approach is limiting. If you can't learn from, if you can't make friends and allies with people from all walks of life, if you must sit in your little castle with the few you count as your tribe -- are you not obvi…

>Besides being morally wrong, a tribal approach is limiting. If you can't learn from, if you can't make friends and allies with people from all walks of life, if you must sit in your little castle with the few you count as your tribe -- are you not obviously much poorer for it? I think so. Well put. I experienced this when moving abroad - Expatriates formed social groups based on their origin country, and their ident…

Fascinating experience. Thanks for sharing it!

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#486

Post by ElvisPeacock » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:25 AM UTC

unidentified103 wrote: post #432

meej wrote: post #267

"You’re victimising me when you do that. You’re indicating that it’s most likely I need special, extra support. Just because I’m female." This is exactly how I felt during my Microsoft internship in 1998 when the internal women's organization, HOPPERS, decided to change their successful "intern buddy" program from opt-in to opt-out. (Well, not really opt-out, because until I got upset with them about it they clearly…

I don't quite understand how a corporate policy like an "intern buddy" can be compared to a ghetto or even how it remotely hurts you in the same way that an unspoken "boys club" office setting would. A corporate policy like that is pretty clearly an impersonal management-type fluff program that does not solve every problem that could possibly arise from sexism, but that serves a resource for a few people desperately…

here comes all the people whose identities are bound up in the need to save you from your environment

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#487

Post by notacoward » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:25 AM UTC

toufka wrote: post #418

notacoward wrote: post #359

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're totally twisting and appropriating what I say. For example... > it is unclear that a "fast-and-overshoot" is any 'better' than "slow and steady" vs any other strategy Nowhere did I say it was unqualifiedly better. I was refuting your absolutist position that "never overshoot" should be a requirement. > essentially saying, 'get with the program' is unhelpful Never said that either. The point I was trying to mak…

Discussion of how best to achieve equity is a 'dilemma', and to frame any answer to the dilemma as 'correct' is not helpful. Starting off a discussion by saying, "As painful as it is, we have to accentuate and perhaps even exaggerate both the problem and present remedies" is a conclusory statement regarding a philosophical dilemma that disregards the author's perspective (as well as many others here). Discussion quic…

> as well as many others here

Appeal to popularity.

> Discussion quickly then becomes both toxic and treacherous

...when people rely on misrepresentation and logical fallacies as much as you have.

There's clearly little more to be said here, so I'll just reiterate my main points. There's a difference between future goals and present actions, but people often conflate the two. The OP's "we shouldn't have to do this (in the future), therefore we shouldn't do this (in the present)" falls into that trap. Your "we should never risk the slightest overcorrection" falls into a different trap, of precluding any but the most inadequate of present actions. As such, it merely reinforces the status quo. Maybe that was the goal. I wouldn't presume to read your mind as you presume to have read mine, but you haven't suggested anything positive here. "Pretend we're already equal" doesn't count.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#488

Post by xxSparkleSxx » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:42 AM UTC

eeeeeeeeeeeee wrote: post #284

paperpunk wrote: post #38

She makes a good point when she says "I’m already here, people. So I’m not the problem you’re trying to solve." I think what a lot of these kinds of posts miss is that efforts to bring women into tech generally aren't aimed at the kind of women who have always done tech, have always wanted to do tech, and participate in the tech community despite their gender. Those women are the die-hards who largely will ignore gen…

I don't consider getting women into tech as the only problem facing our industry. Because once they get in, a lot of them face abuse. Nobody is saying you should get special treatment. Only that we need to acknowledge and label a problem in order for it to have visibility so we can make the problem better. She also says: "I also wish gay rights == human rights. If you throw a parade celebrating women who did awesome…

While true, the more women you get into tech the more than can end up at the top in tech. The more women at the top of a tech company or working in VC, the more diversity we have at the top which (hopefully) leads to the sexist men at the top being held accountable by their peers.

If that can happen, then there will likely be a decrease in abuse towards new comers in the field. Yay!

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#489

Post by tomc1985 » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:48 AM UTC

unidentified103 wrote: post #464

tomc1985 wrote: post #455

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it implies an opinion of weakness to the party offering said "help". Many people do not need or want help and forcing it on them only serves to enforce hidden power dynamics on behalf of the requestor. What I really don't understand is how we men can act so innocent about all this. "Oh, I was just asking a question," "I didn't force her to do anything," "she was free to decline," "what, how could you not want…

So am I supposed to feel equally condescended to by the man in upper management who calls me "sweetie" and the woman who has organized some person to show me around the office and introduce me to people? Okay.

As if condescension was a binary thing...

...and as with much of this stuff, much of it depends on context -- body language, situation, phrasing, intonation, and so on. A perfectly routine request or offer can quickly become patronizing depending on the manner in which it is asked, or by who. The vibe that I got from the original article was HOPPERS was one of those things -- help, ostensibly, but unnecessary and patronizing. Not in the same category as Mr. Sweetie Manager but still offensive.

Re: I'm not a Woman in Tech

#490

Post by CydeWeys » Thu, Jul 06, 2017, 1:49 AM UTC

vec wrote: post #166

humanrebar wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think you're missing qualifiers there because men-only social clubs, for example, have been frowned upon for quite some time now.

True, but that's not a gender issue per se. Women-only programming groups are based on the theory that women are not being well served by co-ed programming groups, as a combination of socially enforced gender roles plus an understandable discomfort at being the only woman in a room. All male groups are generally frowned upon because there's no reason to think the average male would be prevented from participating in…

> I suspect men-only clubs for traditionally female dominated fields, something like an all male kindergarten teacher group, would be broadly accepted as reasonable.

Nursing, home healthcare, child care, veterinary services, social services, and libraries are the other canonical examples besides education of highly women-dominated fields where having male-only employee resource groups might make logical sense.

I'm not sure I agree with you that it would be broadly accepted as reasonable, however, even though I personally would find it reasonable.