Hoping not to be mistaken as a chauvinist sshole, a set of honest questions I hope someone (possibly affected by these problems) can help re get an answer to: is it necessary to state your sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, country, age or any other personal indicator when producing code?
Isn't tech beautiful exactly because what matters is problem solving, and letting code be the ultimate super-partes judge?
Wouldn't it be easier to get rid of chauvinists and racists and ableists and any other superset of dumbssess by removing these divisions? Wouldn't said patriarchal idiots feel less threatened by certain groups, and possibly just focus on being good at coding/designing/engineering?
Wouldn't they stop complaining about women or minorities being given a "special", "priviledged", "snowflake" status (and the job offers/funds that come with these?)
Doesn't labelling lead to divisions, and ultimately help push for an orwellian future by removing anonimity?
Again, honestly looking for answers and i'm AS FAR AS POSSIBLY IMAGINABLE from the bro dude image that these questions might lead you to paint over me.
No, I wouldn't say tech is beautiful for that reason. That reason would apply to anything anyone creates, which renders it a bit empty.
No, it probably isn't easier to get rid of <bad people> by ignoring the sex (/whatever) of a group. If you don't highlight "look at what women (/whoever) can do", you commonly get stuck with some people who think women can't produce good code, or aren't as good as men on the whole.
Yes, labeling does lead to divisions. I think it's a case of trying to solve "which is the lesser evil / most expedient/fairest route to equality?"
I agree with those statements, it shouldn't matter.
> Wouldn't said patriarchal idiots [...] stop complaining about women or minorities being given a "special", "priviledged", "snowflake" status (and the job offers/funds that come with these?)
Statements like these drive me up the wall, though. It is no secret that [women in STEM have a 2:1 chance over a man to be hired](http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360) - just because of their gender. Call me a "patriarchal idiot", but that is some true privilege. So much for "equality"
Also, I can't help but think the Mods are pushing this story. 28 upvotes and front page. Give me a break.
> Isn't tech beautiful exactly because what matters is problem solving, and letting code be the ultimate super-partes judge?
This is exactly why I chose tech long before I even realized I needed to choose a career.
Some of us have had great experiences in tech and have made wonderful friends. I have blogged about mine at [1] (it's a bit rambling).
Unfortunately not all are so lucky. If it brings any solace, this is a drawback found not only in tech but in other fields too. [2]
For what it's worth, I do not believe it is a problem specific to tech but endemic to all industries. It is caused by the propensity of certain individuals (men and women) to behave in a less than beneficial way towards others due to mistaken beliefs, childhood environment, life experiences and in very rare cases psychopathic tendencies. Talking about these issues helps us learn from each other, to see the world from the others' perspective and to broaden our views.
While we may have much less impact on the society as a whole, we still can achieve greater impact within our tech community (atleast in comparison). A small step in the right direction.
The progress of women (or any other minority) is spread across the spectrum, with some achieving great success through extraordinary work while others are unable to break the glass ceiling due to lack of experience, avenues and role models. The need for role models and mentors is severely underestimated. They show you what you can do, what you can become and how.
Lets not see tech communities targeted at specific minorities (for want of a better word) as a "special" status but just as a stepping stone for mentoring and guiding the lesser privileged individuals to gain the knowledge and skills that their talents deserve, so that they can integrate with the rest of tech community as equals.
But, how would you want to use your open source code as a resume if you could not be identified? Github and friends are to coders what twitter is for marketers: a "social" media to make money.
> is it necessary to state your sex, gender, sexual orientation, race, country, age or any other personal indicator when producing code?
To answer the text of your question, is it necessary? No.
Here's why it can be good, though. Programming seems to be considered by default (by most people) to be a male activity. If you are a woman considering the field, knowing that there are other women involved may make you feel less likely to be alienated. Just as a man interested in the hobby of knitting knows that he'll spend a lot of time in the company of women and may risk being considered odd (I have a male friend who is a knitter who mentioned this to me). So you may be doing a service to others by announcing these parameters (and potentially at some cost to yourself by doing so, per the WiFi SSIDs mentioned in the article...and worse). Writing a for loop is not inherently male or female, but being around people who casually and unthinkingly make comments about breast size just might turn certain people away from their chosen field.
These stereotypes are both arbitrary and real. If you attended MIT you might even be able to guess when I was there when I say that I think of women there predominantly doing Chem E, Mech E, Biology, Aerospace and EE, while men predominating in CS, Math and Physics. I hear things have become less specific since, which shows both the arbitrariness and yet reality of these stereotypes, and how actual effort can improve things (the institute has been making a genuine, if inadequate IMHO, effort to be more welcoming to women)
10 comments
[ 5.1 ms ] story [ 32.8 ms ] threadIsn't tech beautiful exactly because what matters is problem solving, and letting code be the ultimate super-partes judge?
Wouldn't it be easier to get rid of chauvinists and racists and ableists and any other superset of dumbssess by removing these divisions? Wouldn't said patriarchal idiots feel less threatened by certain groups, and possibly just focus on being good at coding/designing/engineering? Wouldn't they stop complaining about women or minorities being given a "special", "priviledged", "snowflake" status (and the job offers/funds that come with these?)
Doesn't labelling lead to divisions, and ultimately help push for an orwellian future by removing anonimity?
Again, honestly looking for answers and i'm AS FAR AS POSSIBLY IMAGINABLE from the bro dude image that these questions might lead you to paint over me.
Rock on!
No, it isn't necessary to state any of those.
No, I wouldn't say tech is beautiful for that reason. That reason would apply to anything anyone creates, which renders it a bit empty.
No, it probably isn't easier to get rid of <bad people> by ignoring the sex (/whatever) of a group. If you don't highlight "look at what women (/whoever) can do", you commonly get stuck with some people who think women can't produce good code, or aren't as good as men on the whole.
Yes, labeling does lead to divisions. I think it's a case of trying to solve "which is the lesser evil / most expedient/fairest route to equality?"
> Wouldn't said patriarchal idiots [...] stop complaining about women or minorities being given a "special", "priviledged", "snowflake" status (and the job offers/funds that come with these?)
Statements like these drive me up the wall, though. It is no secret that [women in STEM have a 2:1 chance over a man to be hired](http://www.pnas.org/content/112/17/5360) - just because of their gender. Call me a "patriarchal idiot", but that is some true privilege. So much for "equality"
Also, I can't help but think the Mods are pushing this story. 28 upvotes and front page. Give me a break.
This is exactly why I chose tech long before I even realized I needed to choose a career.
Some of us have had great experiences in tech and have made wonderful friends. I have blogged about mine at [1] (it's a bit rambling).
Unfortunately not all are so lucky. If it brings any solace, this is a drawback found not only in tech but in other fields too. [2]
For what it's worth, I do not believe it is a problem specific to tech but endemic to all industries. It is caused by the propensity of certain individuals (men and women) to behave in a less than beneficial way towards others due to mistaken beliefs, childhood environment, life experiences and in very rare cases psychopathic tendencies. Talking about these issues helps us learn from each other, to see the world from the others' perspective and to broaden our views.
While we may have much less impact on the society as a whole, we still can achieve greater impact within our tech community (atleast in comparison). A small step in the right direction.
The progress of women (or any other minority) is spread across the spectrum, with some achieving great success through extraordinary work while others are unable to break the glass ceiling due to lack of experience, avenues and role models. The need for role models and mentors is severely underestimated. They show you what you can do, what you can become and how.
Lets not see tech communities targeted at specific minorities (for want of a better word) as a "special" status but just as a stepping stone for mentoring and guiding the lesser privileged individuals to gain the knowledge and skills that their talents deserve, so that they can integrate with the rest of tech community as equals.
[1] https://www.minvolai.com/my-experience-in-tech-and-its-refle...
[2] https://www.ted.com/talks/naomi_mcdougall_jones_what_it_s_li...
This whole movement of women in tech etc. seems to me completely illogical - you don't fight fire with fire.
Unless I am missing some hidden nobility in it?
To answer the text of your question, is it necessary? No.
Here's why it can be good, though. Programming seems to be considered by default (by most people) to be a male activity. If you are a woman considering the field, knowing that there are other women involved may make you feel less likely to be alienated. Just as a man interested in the hobby of knitting knows that he'll spend a lot of time in the company of women and may risk being considered odd (I have a male friend who is a knitter who mentioned this to me). So you may be doing a service to others by announcing these parameters (and potentially at some cost to yourself by doing so, per the WiFi SSIDs mentioned in the article...and worse). Writing a for loop is not inherently male or female, but being around people who casually and unthinkingly make comments about breast size just might turn certain people away from their chosen field.
These stereotypes are both arbitrary and real. If you attended MIT you might even be able to guess when I was there when I say that I think of women there predominantly doing Chem E, Mech E, Biology, Aerospace and EE, while men predominating in CS, Math and Physics. I hear things have become less specific since, which shows both the arbitrariness and yet reality of these stereotypes, and how actual effort can improve things (the institute has been making a genuine, if inadequate IMHO, effort to be more welcoming to women)
The terminology is annoying in this article.