"I don’t mind taking on a difficult task, I just minded having to do it alone and unseen."
Better to have gotten out of tech, then.
In a culture as dominated by MVP and ship-it-now as we seem to have become, there is not going to be much celebration of craftmanship nor craftsman.
Demand for, yes. Appreciation, no.
~
EDIT:
"Many of them are single, many of them work 70 hour weeks for years and survive with minimal love and compassion and kindness. They are also unseen. There are not many people, and especially very few women, who can truly appreciate their technical accomplishments."
...which introduces a very unfortunate set of circumstances where women in tech aren't interested in guys in tech, because the guys in tech aren't well-socialized or attractive.
Contrast this with, say, civil or chemical engineers: a good friend of mine regularly goes to meetings of the American Society of Chemical Engineers (or something like that?) and the demographics are even and sometimes you even meet nice people and go out. Very different from my experience in the dev world.
Its really depressing when you're talking about how good guys in chemical engineering have it...
I'm a little wary of this line of reasoning, because I don't like to imply that women in tech should be viewed as romantic objects. I'd certainly never date a coworker. So let me phrase it this way. I met my wife in law school and I love the fact that she and I can talk shop and understand what the other does for a living, especially because we're both quite passionate about our careers. At the same time, I think woman lawyers are less likely to be viewed as romantic prospects by their coworkers, precisely because they're not a novelty. Its a dynamic I like better than the one I experienced in software.
"For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code (in front of a client, might I add) – an accusation I didn’t believe anyone would levy at a man"
In over 25 years of being in the software world (and a male), I have accused several other males, and have been accused (esp. in the first half of this career), of being emotionally attached to code. This happens in any and all fields of creative construction.
Not all reference to emotion is a "code" for an antagonistic remark against females.
I sense an ego issue here. The author repeats how she wants males to see her as a teacher. I guess she feels that a purpose of lead role on a project is one of educator. I think that's a misconception of that role.
She says, later in the article, that this may not have been a sexist remark, but at the time it was hard to see that. I think that's someone who's quite good at introspection, in fact, since she anticipated your comment, or the first part of it.
On the second half, I've never been managed by someone who I wasn't supposed to learn something from - have you, really?
Sure, you can learn something from anybody, but often the managers don't have the time to do actual development and dive into specifics, so they end up being taught more than they teach.
A manager is essentially an organizer and decision maker.
I never really believed that the DailyWTF was non-fiction - seriously?
The managers I've had have all had flaws of one type or another, but they've also had strengths that I couldn't gain without years of training/working under them.
I wouldn't last long under someone I didn't respect - that's a recipe for resignation.
>I never really believed that the DailyWTF was non-fiction - seriously?
Again, are you kidding me? It sure has some fabricated pieces, but I've seen tons of similar examples in real life, working with other programmers and project managers.
Heck, you can find tons of DailyWTF worthy material even in Stack Overflow questions and answers, and those are 100% legit non-fiction.
This is a tough rule to follow. I'm a man. I'm talking to a woman. I'm not allowed to say anything that she thinks I wouldn't say to a man, regardless of whether I actually would say it to a man. How am I supposed to know what that set of things is?
Prior to reading this article, I would not have included "you're emotionally attached to your code" in that set because that is something I would say to a man. I can only wonder what other things I do say to men that women think I don't say to men.
It isn't that you said something possibly sexist, the point was she didn't have anything to talk to or reach out to in this regard from a female perspective and that solitude was the issue after the matter. Small incidents like these add up.
Yes, turns out it takes some effort to be aware of power imbalance and work against it. Those words have different social meanings when spoken to a woman than when spoken to a man.
Yes - people management is kind of like project management in that way. There are lots of things that are obviously wrong to do, but very few things that are always going to work.
I think personally I'd consider it a success just to be aware that whatever you're doing now might not be working, or might not work on this particular person - and with this in mind, look for feedback/signals and adjust your behaviour to circumstances.
That's up to you. Maybe that will become more clear as you see the social power imbalance more clearly. Perhaps your framing of the whole situation would change, I don't know.
Nobody is suggesting that this is something you can't say, to anyone, in an appropriate circumstance. The author is merely explaining why it was difficult in this case, and how it made her feel.
If the context hadn't been in front of a client, perhaps she would have been able to ask for clarification of what was meant - and the whole thing wouldn't have cause such a big, hidden reaction in her. The context made this more difficult that it should have been - it is not saying "don't ever say this or you're sexist", that is what you've read into it yourself.
I don't read this as her telling you you're "not allowed" to say something.
I read it as her explaining how this choice of phrase, done likely without any malice, carried with it additional and possibly unintended connotations to her, due to her past experiences.
Despite being well defined in dictionaries, language is, like everything else about the human experience, inherently subjective.
So no, I don't think she's providing a rule for you to follow - I think she's just letting the reader know how a small phrase can have an impact beyond its intent.
i think she realises that this is common criticism against anyone with passion for their work - she is describing an irrational emotional response and basically says as much.
i'll admit i often give the same advice: "don't be precious about your code"
i would never do this infront of a client though - or even infront of other co-workers unless it is a recurring problem and i feel that a bit of shame might help give them a kick into action...
That is not the point of the anecdote. Nobody should have their competency questioned by a coworker in front of a client.
This is why so many men (and a lot of women) don't get the issues that women (and a lot of men) face in technology: people are fucking assholes to each other.
Seriously. It is amazing how many of these problems wouldn't be problems if people just behaved towards each other with even a minimal amount of courtesy. "Praise in public, criticize in private" isn't a hard rule to learn.
I wonder how much of this is due to tech's historic legacy as a safe space for the socially awkward. There's a fine line between a culture where the socially awkward are welcome and a culture where social awkwardness is considered a positive good.
> Not all reference to emotion is a "code" for an antagonistic remark against females.
After what you quoted, she says
> And the truth is, maybe I was, but, nearly everyone is emotionally attached to their code (recognizing this is the first step to behaving rationally about it.)
She seems to realize this and mentions the maybe the same would've been said if she were a man. At the time though, she couldn't see it any other way. And feeling isolated only made it worse.
That, I feel is the more important insight in the article. Because she felt isolated and lacked female mentors or colleagues, she only has the perspective of one woman in tech - herself. The perspective of others in similar situations might have been valuable in helping process the anger she felt and give some much needed encouragement.
Your's is certainly a good point, within the context of seeing this as a cry against sexism.
However I see this post as more of a cry against the general culture of tech. And I think it's a culture women find they go against the grain of more often than man. But many men would agree.
I would certainly agree. We work in an industry characterized by a lot of problematic social interaction that hurts.
It hurts to get banged up over and over again and not feel you have much of a social support structure to right the boat. Female friendships tend to have a caring component that male friendships have less of. And this is therefore s component more lacking in the tech off space, and therefore a component women in the tech space will inherently notice more than men.
Nevertheless men feel it too. Men feel the negative energy and it affects them. Many of them probably internalize it and turn it against each other. The author points this out. They're unsung heros in their own right who are stuck in a tough culture.
This is a great discussion to have: so that we can get away from the army "tough it out" mentality in tech and move toward something that enables us to talk, share, and be caring (i'll even say it -- loving) people for one another.
It's a shame that people in tech are almost always seen as socially awkward. There are so many of us out there who are charming, funny and can converse in a large variety of topics at the flip of a switch. Unfortunately in today's world a book is judged only by it's cover.
I just found this in the latest El Goonish Shive webcomic update http://i.imgur.com/tkZsaNd.png This character has been summing up my views on dating pretty well lately.
As heuristics go, this one has stood the test of time. Then again, one could certainly argue that it assumes some correlates that are no longer true.
That said, if you're getting life advice from webcomics (or even just being reminded of your own life), perhaps it is time to put serious effort into getting out more.
Haha, I hardly take life advice from anybody, much less webcomics :) I have no idea what to do when I "go out" but I've been working on entertaining larger circles of friends. It's easier for me to treat people like individuals instead of generic strangers.
For sure, attraction matters. The point I was trying to make was the stereotyping of tech workers as socially awkward nerds, even though that isn't true for all.
Given two males with the same physical attributes, one being in tech and other say sales/marketing or whatever, which one is the girl more likely to go for? That's my point.
Sexism sucks, and stupid. I am really surprised to read things like that about U.S. which was supposed to be an even society. In a place normally perceived to be sexist, Belarus, girl coders are OK and i never heard about them being joked at or harassed for being girls (while in many other professions this is true, it's hard to imagine a female Belarusian chemical engineer). Maybe because salaries of coders there are so much higher than of almost everybody else, guys don't feel so confident about themselves with them to harass.
"I felt like there were a thousand challenges I had to face alone, that no one else could see. I was usually the only woman where I worked, and I felt so isolated. More than anything else, what I found myself really wanting was for someone to say “I see how difficult it is, and you’re doing a great job. Just keep going.”
Sorry, but it looks like the poster would be unhappy in a number of professions, not just tech. As a manager you're happy when team members come to you to talk about results, not like "I want you to know how difficult and complex this is. It's not done yet, but I'm breaking my balls and I want you to notice how difficult I'm finding it".
It seems to me you're confusing words of encouragement and empathy with an attitude of acceptance at lack of results.
I've had management who gives encouragement exactly as the author describes, and it does help with my own state of mind. It does not make me think I need to try less hard (if anything, the opposite), nor does it give me the impression that they think it's OK I haven't produced results yet - only that they know I'm working on it, and appreciate the effort I'm putting into it. And that my manager is approachable, which is critically important.
In my own role in managing others, I find a bit of empathy goes a lot further than silence when someone isn't . (And that makes it sound more cold than it is - it's not a conscious choice of 'apply empathy, encourage employee, get results', but rather 'hey, it sucks to be in that spot. employee should know that I understand that - even though I still expect results.')
Sorry, but I think you misread that. She isn't saying that about her work. She's saying that about the challenge of being the only woman around, and not only of putting up with sexism but in this case the challenge of worrying about sexism. She didn't say that her manager should be the one she can talk to. In fact, this is a pretty textbook case of why it's helpful to have groups for women in programming, so you can reality check each other with things like 'nah, that guy is actually a giant asshole to everyone, not just you/women'.
> For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code (in front of a client, might I add) – an accusation I didn’t believe anyone would levy at a man.
I have used harsher words towards males, the author just can't take a negative criticism and is using her gender as an excuse instead of facing the facts.
> I don’t mind taking on a difficult task, I just minded having to do it alone and unseen.
If she has all the skills and was unfairly criticised then why can't she get stuff alone?
How the heck does she want to educate others in this case?
In the following paragraph she dissects her reaction and tries to reason about it--seems to come to the conclusion that she was being emotional, which isn't an unreasonable response in that situation.
> In the following paragraph she dissects her reaction and tries to reason about it--seems to come to the conclusion that she was being emotional, which isn't an unreasonable response in that situation.
And follows up with:
> I’ve struggled with this for over a decade now, coming to terms with the humanity of those I believe oppress me.
And the title is: "Sexism and Tech and Love"
> Wow, you must be a riot to work with.
I'm not a diplomat, nor a politician, nor a kindergarden teacher, I'm a programmer, I don't get paid to talk nice to people, I get paid to get stuff done to best of my abilities, and forgive me if I dare use harsh words towards people who deserve it.
Woah there, software development is a very collaborative field. You can be the best programmer on the team, but if you go around putting others down and name calling you are going to sabotage your product.
There are ways to criticize people constructively, and sometimes that requires being nice to others.
We are working in the same team, you screw something up once. I will very politely show you why it's wrong and show you the correct way to do it and maybe tell you a story of when I was "young" I thought the same thing. I will not call you names, because everybody makes mistakes.
However if you for some reason will insist on doing it the wrong way despite the fact that you can't back up your claims, I will call you names, and I won't care a shit about your skin colour/gender/nationality/whatever.
Yes it is a collaborative field, that's why I will do everything I can to make you do your best for the product, however if it's a lost cause, I will call you names.
And you must be a cry-baby nobody would want in his team. See how ad-hominen cuts both ways?
Now, if we are to discuss seriously as adults, what he says sounds correct to my experience to. In teams I've worked with (in over 5 companies), people have said way harsher words than "you're being too emotionally attached to my code".
Not only the project lead -- you can hear such things between team members, even from team member to project lead. And 99% of the time it's not even taken personally -- a little later the crisis is resolved, a decision is made, and people are working together just fine, including having fun together with Nerf guns or what have you, again.
The very words "sexist" and "racist" are really just smear words. They convey no meaningful information and really only serve to attack a person or institution. As soon as I hear either word I assume the user is merely axe grinding and has no interest in conversation.
If I say "Bill is sexist", What precisely does that mean? That Bill hates all women? That Bill generally assumes female engineers are less skilled? That Bill will try to sleep with women he works with? As a statement it conveys nothing. It is nothing more than an attack on Bill.
>The very words "sexist" and "racist" are really just smear words. They convey no meaningful information and really only serve to attack a person or institution. As soon as I hear either word I assume the user is merely axe grinding and has no interest in conversation.
Well, the same applies to me too -- not sure why you commented that to my response.
Although I still believe there are some legitimate cases for the use of such words -- a KKK member is racist. A guy believing that blacks are lazy is racist. Someone like Zimmerman is racist. A guy hiting his wife is sexist. Somebody denying a promotion to a programmer because she's a woman, is sexist.
When these terms are used by privileged people they are, more often than not, misapplied and/or exagerrated to death. They are used as token examples of tolerance, as a show off to how progressive they are.
A man can hit a woman (whether or not he is married to her) for reasons other than her gender. So, no, I'd say this is an invalid statement (unlike your other examples, which seem to be more valid.)
Yeah, that's correct. I was thinking of the example of the guy beating his wife to "put her to place" and show her who "rules the house", but clearly there can be other examples too (and of course men hit men too, all the time).
I have been in meetings where a woman boss cruelly criticized male developers with things along the line of "shit code" "why is this still a problem, do you know what you're doing?"
Yes, there were pressures and yes, she was new to the project so didn't have some of the background insight, but I felt compelled to call the developers privately and apologize as a human that they had to endure the chew.
I think this article would be improved by removing the gender-specific parts. All these things happen all too often in any gender configuration and are real problems. Sexism or its spectre is a distraction.
It's not a distraction, it's a real issue in our industry, and one that isn't going away by plugging our ears when people try and talk about it. Yes, these things can happen to any gender configuration but it predominantly happens to females.
None of the problems she describes have to do with sexism.
She felt isolated, alone, unseen, unappreciated, and unable to teach others. These feelings have less to do with being a woman in tech, and more to do with her own social habits and communication skills.
If she felt alone and isolated, why didn't she socialize with her teammates more? Organize some social events to bring everyone together? If she felt so isolated, what was she doing to address that? Was she isolating herself?
Becoming an effective manager isn't easy or automatic. For someone to learn from you, you need to first develop mutual trust and respect, and that can take time. I certainly have worked for people I wasn't willing to learn from, and that had nothing to do with their gender. I didn't respect them or trust them as a mentor. It sounds like she resented her struggle to be a lead, and blamed it on sexism rather than work on communication skills to learn how to be an effective mentor.
The only sexism here seems to be her viewpoint of the men around her as unloved, unseen, and needy for female attention. If she treated her coworkers that way, or felt the need to distance herself because of this perspective, that might explain why she felt isolated.
Sometimes when we're insecure about something, it makes us more brittle and sensitive. This can make it difficult to be comfortable around others.
Maybe we should first examine if there is a victim there in the first place?
Instead of, you know, taking their word for granted (something not even their own lawyer would do), and spouting silly unwaranted "rape" metaphors against anyone arguing?
This isn't a legal case. When articles are posted by men, people normally take their word for granted. But you're right, the analogy was probably a bit much.
>When articles are posted by men, people normally take their word for granted.
Do they? If anything, most articles on HN are met with a "why was this posted", "this is BS", "not worth our time", "You call that a project, I could code this in a weekend", "you don't know shit about monads" etc attitude.
I haven't seen any shortage of people NOT taking what male posters write for granted on HN.
Are we supposed to conclude that men never feel isolated, alone, or struggle to mentor others? She describes very common feelings and struggles related to working in a corporate environment, and then blames them on her gender.
This made leaving tech her only option, since she can't change who she is. Had she been a little less quick to assign sexism to fairly common struggles, perhaps she could have explored ways to effectively address those feelings.
Didn't you read the article? She addresses exactly the point that men feel isolated, alone, and struggle to mentor others in paragraph 7. She also addresses your idea that she "blames [it] on her gender." Please respond to the article under discussion rather than a similar, but different, article.
There's a startling lack of empathy here. Overcoming feelings of isolation and trying to get more involved is easier said than done for some, and the whole concept of taking something by the horns and just fucking dealing with it, or offering advice by 'telling it like it is' is astonishingly unhelpful to anyone who feels upset or down because of something. Not just sexism, or isolation, but depression, anxiety, loneliness, and all manner of things which will cause a person to feel like they're on the outside looking in, or beyond reproach.
The entire post cries out for such an empathetic response and I'm not surprised in the slightest that none is forthcoming in this thread.
I've had experiences myself relating to this attitude to things, and know that posts like this are incredibly difficult to write, and the emotions are difficult to discuss. I'm glad the author found the courage to publish it.
I'm not trying to say that she should "just deal with it". These are legitimate feelings and struggles, but they have nothing to do with sexism. Her attributing these problems and feelings to sexism prevents any actual discussion of how to effectively address these feelings because that's sexist, obviously she plays no role in this if it's because of her gender.
She's victimizing herself, and by association all of the other women in tech who only work with men. Honestly, I'm a bit defensive here because I'm tired of being told by other women that any problem I encounter at work is because of my gender.
Getting involved is hard, and takes practice. Same goes for mentoring others. Had she simply wrote about those struggles, the comments would be filled with similar anecdotes and empathy from all the people in HN who have been there regardless of gender.
But claiming all of these feelings are because of her gender is, well, sexist.
It sounds like you are so defensive that you're not willing to recognise that any problems could be because of their gender, which is just as likely to be wrong as the people who insist that all problems are because of gender. How do you know that she wasn't a perfectly capable lead with team members who didn't take her seriously because she was female? Do you literally believe that's an impossible scenario?
From the article, while I can't judge her abilities as a lead, at least part of her problems were to do with feeling like she was being treated differently because she was a woman and having no way to verify this. If she was one of a number of women, then it would be much easier for her to check on that feeling and see if it was true. When you are the only one of your kind, you can't look for people with similar backgrounds to look for correlations, so you can't really tell if there is a pattern or not. If I thought that it was completely unrealistic and impossible for any developers to be sexist, then I might write this story off as entirely her own neuroses - but I am not convinced that is the case.
(also, given the numerous comments along the lines of 'you don't like assholes well get out of tech then', I suspect she would have hit pushback no matter how she phrased any stories of struggles with dealing with assholes)
I disagree, at least partially. Feeling isolated, alone, or unappreciated are not, in any way, issues that only happen to women. However, the fact that she was often the only woman at the very least exacerbated these issues. If she had had female colleagues to share experiences with and provide encouragement, she might have come out of it with a different perspective. Female colleagues who already get along with with the rest of the team might have also provided an easier route to socializing with everyone.
I don't think she's trying to highlight that the men she worked with were sexist. She brings up one incident but then acknowledges that was only her interpretation of it at the time. Instead, the more general sexism issue has to do with the lack of women in the tech field. She might have still faced some form of these issues in a team that was more evenly divided, but having that support could help distinguish what's caused by sexism and what's due to other reasons, including her own inexperience or insecurity.
I'm reading responses here and I see a common thread of, "I've said much worse things to other men." You think that excuses you? What makes you think that would ever be acceptable behavior? Why should anyone--regardless of sex--in any situation--regardless of private or corporate or what have you--be treated with anything but the utmost respect?
The entire point of being polite to people is to try to think about how they would feel given your actions and to not try to make them feel unpleasant. You don't just run off at the mouth, oblivious to the impact your words might have on people.
So, given that we all know we live in a society that treats women as "overly emotional", how could asking a woman if she was emotionally attached to her code not be inconsiderate?
Still, I cannot imagine any situation in which "were you emotionally attached to your code" is not a passive aggressive statement. Why not avoid accusations entirely? Why not say something like, "what are your motivations for not rewriting this code?" Let them tell you, "because I spent a lot of time on it." That would tell you exactly the same thing and it wouldn't involve a passive-aggressive, accusatory tone.
Respect and criticism are not mutually exclusive things. There are people I highly respect but who I disagree with and criticize quite often. The reverse is also true, I am quite often criticized and disagreed with but it isn't a personal attack and it isn't disrespectful, it's merely a reflection of differing ideas on how particular features should be implemented, or how certain processes should be done.
I found this quite interesting... nice to read something that isn't just 'lets help women into tech', 'machismo is terrible' or 'sexism is a big problem just for women'.
I can see where she is coming from, but I think that this can only be resolved when many more women work as programmers than they do now.
It's just a fact that men think a lot about sex, if you are the only female person around for like 9 hours of the day, and if you are likeable and somewhat attractive, then all these men will think a lot about having sex with you (and trying to impress you as a result). It is obvious that this might have its effect on workplace interactions, and usually not in a good way.
I am male and I do spend a lot of time thinking about sex. It also affects the way I interact with women as opposed to how I interact with men.
It's just like hunger. When I'm hungry, it's hard to think about things other than food. If I'm talking to someone while hungry, and they have food, it's really hard to focus on the conversation at hand. Worse yet, I will often ask them if I can "get a piece of that".
Aaaaand the predictable gaggle of defensive men in tech swoop in to dismiss and belittle the author's concerns about feeling dismissed and belittled. I long for the day when this industry acquires the maturity and self-awareness to understand just how unwelcome it makes itself for women.
So far I saw and feel empathy for about feeling dismissed and belittled. But the "It's because I'm a girl card" is annoying. Could somebody please consider that this can happen to everybody and it at least possible it has nothing to do with your gender?
> That’s why I was so moved to see men being willing to learn from their female teachers when I took massage. I realized this is not something about men and women, this is not something about human nature, this is something about tech.
The first thought that came to my mind was, maybe it's not something about tech, it's something about her not being as good of a teacher than her massage teacher was.
I don't think this is a gender thing, or at least mostly isn't. Software is really a pretty emotionally rough field in the sense that it's got this hot-dog show-off mentality, people are really blunt with their criticisms, lots of stop energy that you have to ignore, etc.
Personally I've found it hard as a male just because it can be so alienating, antisocial, and generally irritating. One of the toughest things is to put a ton of work into a new product, open source code, etc. and have people just attack you for it... often cluelessly too or just for the sake of bashing something.
Half the comments on this page attack the following quote:
"For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code"
Despite the fact that in the very next paragraph she points out that this was an irrational response provoked by her situation.
The comments here are completely and utterly missing the point of this article. It is about perception, and the subtle, agonizing torture that sexism inflicts on a subconscious level that is ingrained in the tech world on such a deep level that it is extremely difficult to properly reason about.
I do not have very much faith in your conclusions when you are pretending an entire paragraph of the article doesn't exist.
Sexism is a problem in many places, especially in tech, on many levels, degrees and for many reasons. I'd like to focus on one, which is the lack of representation of women in tech, programmers especially. Some of the best programmers I met in school were female, some of my best teachers were female, and some of the most amazing people I've met in the industry are female. I've never been at a company or place where there is only one female and I imagine this is very hard. I also think that it is the root of the problem. Rather than go into detail, I hope someone would chime in because I cannot directly relate to this problem both because I am male and my past experience. I think information from someone with a better perspective on why it is hard to be the lone female, and what prevents other females from becoming programmers.
I would like this opportunity to reemphasize how important women have been to the field of computer science. My mother studied computer science and is the reason I chose to pursue it as well. One of my favorite "bad-ass" (for lack of a better term) contributors was Grace Hopper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper) who created the first compiler as well as the COBOL programming language. I hope that people respond with some of their favorite females in CS from the past or recent years.
<i> she points out that this was an irrational response provoked by her situation.</i>
It's about perception all right, but you're missing the point: she as much as admits that it is her own perception of the situation that might have been the problem. That is, even if the comment wasn't sexist - "just as likely to be said to a man" - she felt shamed because she believed that it was in fact sexist. Then we have commentators on tech sites who'll use her narrative to bolster the women-in-tech-are-victims-of-sexism narrative. Which you can imagine is all very self-reinforcing when scaled up.
“I see how difficult it is, and you’re doing a great job. Just keep going.”
I wish somebody was telling me this too.
"For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code (in front of a client, might I add) – an accusation I didn’t believe anyone would levy at a man."
At my work we accuse each other in "This code is stupid!!!", "Don't be a dick", "That's a fd up code!!". And it's totally sexism when the author expect a different behavior just because it's a she.
I was at a conference once where they ran a contest that had people who'd never worked together pair-programming a solution to a problem neither of them was an expert in. After a period of time, the various pairs presented their solutions to a jury.
One of the pairs started off with a member saying, "Okay, this code is kind of shit, but it's the best we could do," or words to that effect. (It was 5 or 6 years ago; I can't recall precisely what was said.)
The reply from one of the jurors has stuck with me ever since. Paraphrasing, it was something like, "Don't ever say that about your own code. Remember, at some point, you will always work with someone more junior than you. If they hear you commenting like that about your own code, they're going to be much more reluctant to approach you about problems they're having with their own."
It's partly about having a certain level of professionalism, but it's also about trying to create an environment where people feel comfortable asking questions about code they're unsure about, without feeling like they're going to be attacked. Even if you don't mean it that way!
Sexism isn't "man belittles woman". It's assigning traits to sex in such a way to make people feel uncomfortable. A man telling another man to "man up" is just as sexist, as it implies a questioning of the second man's sexuality.
If I write shit code (and I do, because at some point we all do) and for whatever reason I can't fix it (usually time crunch) I call it out even if it's just a comment in the code to say "this is a terrible hack, don't do this". It's important to recognize when code is less than ideal or when you write something that you know you could do better if you had more time to research and think about the solution. Part of becoming a good developer is learning to accept criticism of code not as an attack on the developer but as recognition that there's always room to improve on things and that no one is perfect. It's also about recognizing that sometimes you just have to accept "good enough" and move on even if you'd really like to go for "perfect". At the same time you don't want to throw away your standards and just settle for anything that gets the job done if you don't absolutely need to, which is why calling out kludges and shit code when you (or someone else) writes it is important. Now don't get me wrong, I'm more than happy to call my shit code shit, but I'd at least try to be more tactful of someone else's code.
Oh, I am certain to write code that could be described as "shit" from time to time as well. But for myself, in that situation I try to say, "this is pretty suboptimal, we have better solutions, but not enough time for them right now." as opposed to "yeah, this is kinda shit."
Definitely we don't want developers who are so precious about their code that they can't handle a little criticism, but there are, IMO, better ways and worse ways to deliver that criticism. Think of it like a judge on Iron Chef-- the worst kind of criticism you can give a dish is, "this is terrible". Only slightly less worse is, "this is wonderful!" Ideally, you need reviews like, "This has a bit too much cinnamon, and I think you way overdid the cumin, but overall this is the best shrimp I've had this week."
So why don't you stop belittling everyone at your work, and start trying to give them some support? Be part of the solution instead of continuing to be part of the problem.
Seriously, if you didn't think "I should do that", or especially if you thought "I couldn't do that" - why?
There's a complete lack of any attempt to empathize, just a quick rush to (anecdotally) show how everything is okay, it's just this one thing, she's overreacting, etc. Which is exactly the kind of thing that causes the most problems for women, because the result of these actions is an effective sweeping under the rug of the very real problems facing women in tech. I mean, most of the comments very obviously didn't even read the whole article before rushing in a froth to make a post attacking a single isolated statement.
I had just decided against posting the following flame-bait comment until I read this... Now I can't resist:
"The problem with conspiracy theorists is that any argument questioning the existence of their pet conspiracy can and will be used by them as evidence that the conspiracy exists. They are literally impossible to reason with."
The comparison between massage and tech is not apt because, in very broad terms, tech is mostly about knowledge and problem solving. Massage is mostly about skill.
Both can be honorable careers if practiced honorably, but it shouldn't be surprising that the habits and inclinations of the people in each career differ.
A more interesting comparison would be with other types of engineers or maybe doctors.
EDIT:
To elaborate, FTA:
> I can see that men are sometimes so desperate to be appreciated by me, they try to impress me and this blocks them from learning from me because they will find my criticism very painful.
...or they realize that employee evaluation is a hard problem, and because they are knowledge workers they decided to focus, at least partly, on being correct.
This isn't sexism, this is just a culture she doesn't like.
That's fair, maybe tech culture could be improved, but this idea that it's because of sexism seems like a huge stretch, and the fact that it has to change because she doesn't fit in seems extremely solipsistic on her part.
Lets think like an anthropologist for a moment: tech culture evolved over time with it's own distinct style. Before you look to change it, perhaps understand it? Why it is the way it is? What are its values? Why is she so special that tech culture needs to change to suit her specific needs? Not all people are the same. I probably wouldn't fit in in the culture of fashion, for instance, but that's not their fault, and I wouldn't want the fashion industry to change on my behalf.
For instance, the whole thing about how she felt upset that people didn't want to be "educated" by her. Almost every great leader I've worked under always had the same philosophy that they felt like they were constantly learning things from the people below them. We have leaders, yeah, but I think in tech the culture is a lot more collaborative -- you're in charge, but in a healthy relationship we're both going to learn things from each other. It seems like she was trying to be a mentor for people who didn't particularly want or need it. Again, why is that everyone else's fault? I have empathy for her disappointment, but that's on her.
>What I wanted, deep in my heart, was for someone to say, “Yes, I see this is difficult for you – I see hearing that comment was hard for you because you are worried about the sexist implications, and it was a challenge to maintain composure in front of the client.”
So she wanted us to assume she was a fragile woman, instead of a woman able to take critique (as the comment about emotional attachment to code is)?
Not that I'm saying she is, but, that's how I would interpret what she just said.
Personally, I think these matters could be resolved bybetter communication with coworkers. They need to speak up if they feel uncomfortable in their environment. We can't read your thoughts, and, that goes for other males aswell obviously, but, that doesn't seem to be much of an issue.
As for men trying to impress women, I would very much say this isn't limited to tech. Maybe tech ppl more easily take a liking to their female coworkers, but it's entirely natural to want to impress someone you like.
Hi, I'm the author of this article, and reading these comments made me just think "wow, there is so much pain here."
I assume I'll get made fun of/trolled/whatever for this, but I guess all I really wanted to say in my article was "There were some difficult things I experienced as a woman in tech - but these are not independent of the difficult things men experience. We are all in this mess together."
Sexism is not men discriminating against women, it's a complicated interplay between the roles we are expected to act, and roles we want to act, and all genders suffer for it.
Maybe, also, I wished someone had said "I see how hard it is," when I was a woman programmer. So, in that spirit, to all the male programmers out there "I see how hard it is for you too."
Speaking as a male for a moment here: in my earlier years, the reason I would have had trouble saying something like "I see how hard it is" to a woman would have been because I was not 'man' enough to come out and say something like that. I'd have been afraid the woman might take it the wrong way, like as if I was belittling her. That's how a lot of us do feel, I bet.
When I went back to school for software engineering and talked to my peers via chat late in the night, I really just found that a lot of them are broken. They have low self-esteem, they feel women aren't interested in them because they're nerdy. And so, their interactions with woman -- like walking on eggshells, trying not to embarrass themselves or get humiliated, be outed as "clumsy-with-women", they behave in a rigid way that could possibly be interpreted as being cold and mean to women.
I really do think you're onto something here. If more people took the initiative in communicating feelings of care and love, things would improve.
111 comments
[ 3.3 ms ] story [ 167 ms ] threadBetter to have gotten out of tech, then.
In a culture as dominated by MVP and ship-it-now as we seem to have become, there is not going to be much celebration of craftmanship nor craftsman.
Demand for, yes. Appreciation, no.
~
EDIT:
"Many of them are single, many of them work 70 hour weeks for years and survive with minimal love and compassion and kindness. They are also unseen. There are not many people, and especially very few women, who can truly appreciate their technical accomplishments."
...which introduces a very unfortunate set of circumstances where women in tech aren't interested in guys in tech, because the guys in tech aren't well-socialized or attractive.
Contrast this with, say, civil or chemical engineers: a good friend of mine regularly goes to meetings of the American Society of Chemical Engineers (or something like that?) and the demographics are even and sometimes you even meet nice people and go out. Very different from my experience in the dev world.
I'm a little wary of this line of reasoning, because I don't like to imply that women in tech should be viewed as romantic objects. I'd certainly never date a coworker. So let me phrase it this way. I met my wife in law school and I love the fact that she and I can talk shop and understand what the other does for a living, especially because we're both quite passionate about our careers. At the same time, I think woman lawyers are less likely to be viewed as romantic prospects by their coworkers, precisely because they're not a novelty. Its a dynamic I like better than the one I experienced in software.
Alternatively, maybe the rest of us who accept this as the norm should do a little introspection of our own.
In over 25 years of being in the software world (and a male), I have accused several other males, and have been accused (esp. in the first half of this career), of being emotionally attached to code. This happens in any and all fields of creative construction.
Not all reference to emotion is a "code" for an antagonistic remark against females.
I sense an ego issue here. The author repeats how she wants males to see her as a teacher. I guess she feels that a purpose of lead role on a project is one of educator. I think that's a misconception of that role.
On the second half, I've never been managed by someone who I wasn't supposed to learn something from - have you, really?
A manager is essentially an organizer and decision maker.
Are you kidding me? One of the more basic roles in tech/IT is that of the idiotic, clueless Project Manager (which 90%+ of the time is a male btw).
That's how the Dilbert guy made his millions...
I have tons of stories to tell, but instead I propose you check this: http://thedailywtf.com/
The managers I've had have all had flaws of one type or another, but they've also had strengths that I couldn't gain without years of training/working under them.
I wouldn't last long under someone I didn't respect - that's a recipe for resignation.
Again, are you kidding me? It sure has some fabricated pieces, but I've seen tons of similar examples in real life, working with other programmers and project managers.
Heck, you can find tons of DailyWTF worthy material even in Stack Overflow questions and answers, and those are 100% legit non-fiction.
OK, what are your real life examples? :) I'm trying to see through the myth.
> you can find tons of DailyWTF worthy material even in Stack Overflow questions and answers
Plenty of examples of crappy code on Stack Overflow, not so many examples of crappy managers.
Prior to reading this article, I would not have included "you're emotionally attached to your code" in that set because that is something I would say to a man. I can only wonder what other things I do say to men that women think I don't say to men.
There's lots of guidelines about what not to do. There's less guidance about what to do instead.
I think personally I'd consider it a success just to be aware that whatever you're doing now might not be working, or might not work on this particular person - and with this in mind, look for feedback/signals and adjust your behaviour to circumstances.
If the context hadn't been in front of a client, perhaps she would have been able to ask for clarification of what was meant - and the whole thing wouldn't have cause such a big, hidden reaction in her. The context made this more difficult that it should have been - it is not saying "don't ever say this or you're sexist", that is what you've read into it yourself.
Are you seriously arguing that there's a fundamental difference in the way the sexes harbour grudges? I think you're wrong there dude...
I read it as her explaining how this choice of phrase, done likely without any malice, carried with it additional and possibly unintended connotations to her, due to her past experiences.
Despite being well defined in dictionaries, language is, like everything else about the human experience, inherently subjective.
So no, I don't think she's providing a rule for you to follow - I think she's just letting the reader know how a small phrase can have an impact beyond its intent.
i'll admit i often give the same advice: "don't be precious about your code"
i would never do this infront of a client though - or even infront of other co-workers unless it is a recurring problem and i feel that a bit of shame might help give them a kick into action...
This is why so many men (and a lot of women) don't get the issues that women (and a lot of men) face in technology: people are fucking assholes to each other.
I wonder how much of this is due to tech's historic legacy as a safe space for the socially awkward. There's a fine line between a culture where the socially awkward are welcome and a culture where social awkwardness is considered a positive good.
After what you quoted, she says
> And the truth is, maybe I was, but, nearly everyone is emotionally attached to their code (recognizing this is the first step to behaving rationally about it.)
That, I feel is the more important insight in the article. Because she felt isolated and lacked female mentors or colleagues, she only has the perspective of one woman in tech - herself. The perspective of others in similar situations might have been valuable in helping process the anger she felt and give some much needed encouragement.
However I see this post as more of a cry against the general culture of tech. And I think it's a culture women find they go against the grain of more often than man. But many men would agree.
I would certainly agree. We work in an industry characterized by a lot of problematic social interaction that hurts.
It hurts to get banged up over and over again and not feel you have much of a social support structure to right the boat. Female friendships tend to have a caring component that male friendships have less of. And this is therefore s component more lacking in the tech off space, and therefore a component women in the tech space will inherently notice more than men.
Nevertheless men feel it too. Men feel the negative energy and it affects them. Many of them probably internalize it and turn it against each other. The author points this out. They're unsung heros in their own right who are stuck in a tough culture.
This is a great discussion to have: so that we can get away from the army "tough it out" mentality in tech and move toward something that enables us to talk, share, and be caring (i'll even say it -- loving) people for one another.
The initial stages of attraction seem to have more to do with aesthetics, physiology, and proximity than with wit alone.
That said, if you're getting life advice from webcomics (or even just being reminded of your own life), perhaps it is time to put serious effort into getting out more.
Especially if you read Something Positive. :)
Not Something Positive :)
Sorry, but it looks like the poster would be unhappy in a number of professions, not just tech. As a manager you're happy when team members come to you to talk about results, not like "I want you to know how difficult and complex this is. It's not done yet, but I'm breaking my balls and I want you to notice how difficult I'm finding it".
I've had management who gives encouragement exactly as the author describes, and it does help with my own state of mind. It does not make me think I need to try less hard (if anything, the opposite), nor does it give me the impression that they think it's OK I haven't produced results yet - only that they know I'm working on it, and appreciate the effort I'm putting into it. And that my manager is approachable, which is critically important.
In my own role in managing others, I find a bit of empathy goes a lot further than silence when someone isn't . (And that makes it sound more cold than it is - it's not a conscious choice of 'apply empathy, encourage employee, get results', but rather 'hey, it sucks to be in that spot. employee should know that I understand that - even though I still expect results.')
edit: mismatch paren
I have used harsher words towards males, the author just can't take a negative criticism and is using her gender as an excuse instead of facing the facts.
> I don’t mind taking on a difficult task, I just minded having to do it alone and unseen.
If she has all the skills and was unfairly criticised then why can't she get stuff alone?
How the heck does she want to educate others in this case?
I have used harsher words towards males
Wow, you must be a riot to work with.
And follows up with:
> I’ve struggled with this for over a decade now, coming to terms with the humanity of those I believe oppress me.
And the title is: "Sexism and Tech and Love"
> Wow, you must be a riot to work with.
I'm not a diplomat, nor a politician, nor a kindergarden teacher, I'm a programmer, I don't get paid to talk nice to people, I get paid to get stuff done to best of my abilities, and forgive me if I dare use harsh words towards people who deserve it.
There are ways to criticize people constructively, and sometimes that requires being nice to others.
However if you for some reason will insist on doing it the wrong way despite the fact that you can't back up your claims, I will call you names, and I won't care a shit about your skin colour/gender/nationality/whatever.
Yes it is a collaborative field, that's why I will do everything I can to make you do your best for the product, however if it's a lost cause, I will call you names.
And you must be a cry-baby nobody would want in his team. See how ad-hominen cuts both ways?
Now, if we are to discuss seriously as adults, what he says sounds correct to my experience to. In teams I've worked with (in over 5 companies), people have said way harsher words than "you're being too emotionally attached to my code".
Not only the project lead -- you can hear such things between team members, even from team member to project lead. And 99% of the time it's not even taken personally -- a little later the crisis is resolved, a decision is made, and people are working together just fine, including having fun together with Nerf guns or what have you, again.
The very words "sexist" and "racist" are really just smear words. They convey no meaningful information and really only serve to attack a person or institution. As soon as I hear either word I assume the user is merely axe grinding and has no interest in conversation.
If I say "Bill is sexist", What precisely does that mean? That Bill hates all women? That Bill generally assumes female engineers are less skilled? That Bill will try to sleep with women he works with? As a statement it conveys nothing. It is nothing more than an attack on Bill.
Well, the same applies to me too -- not sure why you commented that to my response.
Although I still believe there are some legitimate cases for the use of such words -- a KKK member is racist. A guy believing that blacks are lazy is racist. Someone like Zimmerman is racist. A guy hiting his wife is sexist. Somebody denying a promotion to a programmer because she's a woman, is sexist.
When these terms are used by privileged people they are, more often than not, misapplied and/or exagerrated to death. They are used as token examples of tolerance, as a show off to how progressive they are.
A man can hit a woman (whether or not he is married to her) for reasons other than her gender. So, no, I'd say this is an invalid statement (unlike your other examples, which seem to be more valid.)
Yes, there were pressures and yes, she was new to the project so didn't have some of the background insight, but I felt compelled to call the developers privately and apologize as a human that they had to endure the chew.
Point is, bosses under pressure can be se-holes.
She felt isolated, alone, unseen, unappreciated, and unable to teach others. These feelings have less to do with being a woman in tech, and more to do with her own social habits and communication skills.
If she felt alone and isolated, why didn't she socialize with her teammates more? Organize some social events to bring everyone together? If she felt so isolated, what was she doing to address that? Was she isolating herself?
Becoming an effective manager isn't easy or automatic. For someone to learn from you, you need to first develop mutual trust and respect, and that can take time. I certainly have worked for people I wasn't willing to learn from, and that had nothing to do with their gender. I didn't respect them or trust them as a mentor. It sounds like she resented her struggle to be a lead, and blamed it on sexism rather than work on communication skills to learn how to be an effective mentor.
The only sexism here seems to be her viewpoint of the men around her as unloved, unseen, and needy for female attention. If she treated her coworkers that way, or felt the need to distance herself because of this perspective, that might explain why she felt isolated.
Sometimes when we're insecure about something, it makes us more brittle and sensitive. This can make it difficult to be comfortable around others.
Instead of, you know, taking their word for granted (something not even their own lawyer would do), and spouting silly unwaranted "rape" metaphors against anyone arguing?
Do they? If anything, most articles on HN are met with a "why was this posted", "this is BS", "not worth our time", "You call that a project, I could code this in a weekend", "you don't know shit about monads" etc attitude.
I haven't seen any shortage of people NOT taking what male posters write for granted on HN.
This made leaving tech her only option, since she can't change who she is. Had she been a little less quick to assign sexism to fairly common struggles, perhaps she could have explored ways to effectively address those feelings.
The entire post cries out for such an empathetic response and I'm not surprised in the slightest that none is forthcoming in this thread.
I've had experiences myself relating to this attitude to things, and know that posts like this are incredibly difficult to write, and the emotions are difficult to discuss. I'm glad the author found the courage to publish it.
She's victimizing herself, and by association all of the other women in tech who only work with men. Honestly, I'm a bit defensive here because I'm tired of being told by other women that any problem I encounter at work is because of my gender.
Getting involved is hard, and takes practice. Same goes for mentoring others. Had she simply wrote about those struggles, the comments would be filled with similar anecdotes and empathy from all the people in HN who have been there regardless of gender.
But claiming all of these feelings are because of her gender is, well, sexist.
From the article, while I can't judge her abilities as a lead, at least part of her problems were to do with feeling like she was being treated differently because she was a woman and having no way to verify this. If she was one of a number of women, then it would be much easier for her to check on that feeling and see if it was true. When you are the only one of your kind, you can't look for people with similar backgrounds to look for correlations, so you can't really tell if there is a pattern or not. If I thought that it was completely unrealistic and impossible for any developers to be sexist, then I might write this story off as entirely her own neuroses - but I am not convinced that is the case.
(also, given the numerous comments along the lines of 'you don't like assholes well get out of tech then', I suspect she would have hit pushback no matter how she phrased any stories of struggles with dealing with assholes)
I don't think she's trying to highlight that the men she worked with were sexist. She brings up one incident but then acknowledges that was only her interpretation of it at the time. Instead, the more general sexism issue has to do with the lack of women in the tech field. She might have still faced some form of these issues in a team that was more evenly divided, but having that support could help distinguish what's caused by sexism and what's due to other reasons, including her own inexperience or insecurity.
So, given that we all know we live in a society that treats women as "overly emotional", how could asking a woman if she was emotionally attached to her code not be inconsiderate?
Still, I cannot imagine any situation in which "were you emotionally attached to your code" is not a passive aggressive statement. Why not avoid accusations entirely? Why not say something like, "what are your motivations for not rewriting this code?" Let them tell you, "because I spent a lot of time on it." That would tell you exactly the same thing and it wouldn't involve a passive-aggressive, accusatory tone.
It's just a fact that men think a lot about sex, if you are the only female person around for like 9 hours of the day, and if you are likeable and somewhat attractive, then all these men will think a lot about having sex with you (and trying to impress you as a result). It is obvious that this might have its effect on workplace interactions, and usually not in a good way.
Please stop. This attitude is offensive to both men and women.
It's just like hunger. When I'm hungry, it's hard to think about things other than food. If I'm talking to someone while hungry, and they have food, it's really hard to focus on the conversation at hand. Worse yet, I will often ask them if I can "get a piece of that".
The first thought that came to my mind was, maybe it's not something about tech, it's something about her not being as good of a teacher than her massage teacher was.
Personally I've found it hard as a male just because it can be so alienating, antisocial, and generally irritating. One of the toughest things is to put a ton of work into a new product, open source code, etc. and have people just attack you for it... often cluelessly too or just for the sake of bashing something.
"For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code"
Despite the fact that in the very next paragraph she points out that this was an irrational response provoked by her situation.
The comments here are completely and utterly missing the point of this article. It is about perception, and the subtle, agonizing torture that sexism inflicts on a subconscious level that is ingrained in the tech world on such a deep level that it is extremely difficult to properly reason about.
I do not have very much faith in your conclusions when you are pretending an entire paragraph of the article doesn't exist.
Oh, also be sure you read that phrase in a male's voice. Because there's no way it would ever be uttered from a woman's in this day and age.
I would like this opportunity to reemphasize how important women have been to the field of computer science. My mother studied computer science and is the reason I chose to pursue it as well. One of my favorite "bad-ass" (for lack of a better term) contributors was Grace Hopper (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper) who created the first compiler as well as the COBOL programming language. I hope that people respond with some of their favorite females in CS from the past or recent years.
It's about perception all right, but you're missing the point: she as much as admits that it is her own perception of the situation that might have been the problem. That is, even if the comment wasn't sexist - "just as likely to be said to a man" - she felt shamed because she believed that it was in fact sexist. Then we have commentators on tech sites who'll use her narrative to bolster the women-in-tech-are-victims-of-sexism narrative. Which you can imagine is all very self-reinforcing when scaled up.
I wish somebody was telling me this too.
"For instance, once I was accused of being emotionally attached to my code (in front of a client, might I add) – an accusation I didn’t believe anyone would levy at a man."
At my work we accuse each other in "This code is stupid!!!", "Don't be a dick", "That's a fd up code!!". And it's totally sexism when the author expect a different behavior just because it's a she.
One of the pairs started off with a member saying, "Okay, this code is kind of shit, but it's the best we could do," or words to that effect. (It was 5 or 6 years ago; I can't recall precisely what was said.)
The reply from one of the jurors has stuck with me ever since. Paraphrasing, it was something like, "Don't ever say that about your own code. Remember, at some point, you will always work with someone more junior than you. If they hear you commenting like that about your own code, they're going to be much more reluctant to approach you about problems they're having with their own."
It's partly about having a certain level of professionalism, but it's also about trying to create an environment where people feel comfortable asking questions about code they're unsure about, without feeling like they're going to be attacked. Even if you don't mean it that way!
Definitely we don't want developers who are so precious about their code that they can't handle a little criticism, but there are, IMO, better ways and worse ways to deliver that criticism. Think of it like a judge on Iron Chef-- the worst kind of criticism you can give a dish is, "this is terrible". Only slightly less worse is, "this is wonderful!" Ideally, you need reviews like, "This has a bit too much cinnamon, and I think you way overdid the cumin, but overall this is the best shrimp I've had this week."
Seriously, if you didn't think "I should do that", or especially if you thought "I couldn't do that" - why?
"The problem with conspiracy theorists is that any argument questioning the existence of their pet conspiracy can and will be used by them as evidence that the conspiracy exists. They are literally impossible to reason with."
Sorry...
Both can be honorable careers if practiced honorably, but it shouldn't be surprising that the habits and inclinations of the people in each career differ.
A more interesting comparison would be with other types of engineers or maybe doctors.
EDIT:
To elaborate, FTA:
> I can see that men are sometimes so desperate to be appreciated by me, they try to impress me and this blocks them from learning from me because they will find my criticism very painful.
...or they realize that employee evaluation is a hard problem, and because they are knowledge workers they decided to focus, at least partly, on being correct.
That's fair, maybe tech culture could be improved, but this idea that it's because of sexism seems like a huge stretch, and the fact that it has to change because she doesn't fit in seems extremely solipsistic on her part.
Lets think like an anthropologist for a moment: tech culture evolved over time with it's own distinct style. Before you look to change it, perhaps understand it? Why it is the way it is? What are its values? Why is she so special that tech culture needs to change to suit her specific needs? Not all people are the same. I probably wouldn't fit in in the culture of fashion, for instance, but that's not their fault, and I wouldn't want the fashion industry to change on my behalf.
For instance, the whole thing about how she felt upset that people didn't want to be "educated" by her. Almost every great leader I've worked under always had the same philosophy that they felt like they were constantly learning things from the people below them. We have leaders, yeah, but I think in tech the culture is a lot more collaborative -- you're in charge, but in a healthy relationship we're both going to learn things from each other. It seems like she was trying to be a mentor for people who didn't particularly want or need it. Again, why is that everyone else's fault? I have empathy for her disappointment, but that's on her.
So she wanted us to assume she was a fragile woman, instead of a woman able to take critique (as the comment about emotional attachment to code is)?
Not that I'm saying she is, but, that's how I would interpret what she just said.
Personally, I think these matters could be resolved bybetter communication with coworkers. They need to speak up if they feel uncomfortable in their environment. We can't read your thoughts, and, that goes for other males aswell obviously, but, that doesn't seem to be much of an issue.
As for men trying to impress women, I would very much say this isn't limited to tech. Maybe tech ppl more easily take a liking to their female coworkers, but it's entirely natural to want to impress someone you like.
I assume I'll get made fun of/trolled/whatever for this, but I guess all I really wanted to say in my article was "There were some difficult things I experienced as a woman in tech - but these are not independent of the difficult things men experience. We are all in this mess together."
Sexism is not men discriminating against women, it's a complicated interplay between the roles we are expected to act, and roles we want to act, and all genders suffer for it.
Maybe, also, I wished someone had said "I see how hard it is," when I was a woman programmer. So, in that spirit, to all the male programmers out there "I see how hard it is for you too."
<3
Speaking as a male for a moment here: in my earlier years, the reason I would have had trouble saying something like "I see how hard it is" to a woman would have been because I was not 'man' enough to come out and say something like that. I'd have been afraid the woman might take it the wrong way, like as if I was belittling her. That's how a lot of us do feel, I bet.
When I went back to school for software engineering and talked to my peers via chat late in the night, I really just found that a lot of them are broken. They have low self-esteem, they feel women aren't interested in them because they're nerdy. And so, their interactions with woman -- like walking on eggshells, trying not to embarrass themselves or get humiliated, be outed as "clumsy-with-women", they behave in a rigid way that could possibly be interpreted as being cold and mean to women.
I really do think you're onto something here. If more people took the initiative in communicating feelings of care and love, things would improve.