11 ms·

What are either of those statements based on?

by tomlock 10y ago

gozur88 10y ago
Experience. There are tons of women in the workforce. It's unexceptional to the point you wouldn't even notice, even in tech. If you read an article that said "Bob the mailman was beaten to death by local residents because he was good at his job" would you think "Yep, that sounds like the whole story"?
- tomlock 10y ago
  >Experience. There are tons of women in the workforce. It's unexceptional to the point you wouldn't even notice, even in tech. Interestingly, noir_lord noticed and you can see that in his comments on this article. I have the impression that many, many people notice how exceptional and small the presence of women is in tech. No news article has the "whole" story, so why single this one out? They are necessarily a digest of the events.
  - gozur88 10y ago
    I'm singling this out because whatever they left out was critical to understanding the story.
    - tomlock 10y ago
      Could you explain to me what critical information you feel is missing?
      - gozur88 10y ago
        The reason. If people are attacking her there's a reason. It might not be a good reason, but there's a reason.
        tomlock 10y ago
        But the article states what it thinks the reason is. You clearly think that reason isn't plausible. Could you help me understand what reasons you would find plausible?
        gozur88 10y ago
        >But the article states what it thinks the reason is. Oh, does it? When you read this: "...this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology." it seems reasonable to you? Do people generally receive "horrific threats" because they're good at their jobs? I don't see any point in speculating about what's actually going on here. It's pretty clear whatever it is isn't in the article, though.
        tomlock 10y ago
        > Do people generally receive "horrific threats" because they're good at their jobs? If by people you mean women, then yes. You don't seem able to say exactly why you find this so hard to believe. Could it be that your experiences are limited?
        gozur88 10y ago
        It could be. Probably not, at my age, but you never know. More likely, the people reading this and assuming the root of the whole thing is, incredibly, a woman who's being attacked for doing a good job (and not being a tax collector or similar government functionary) are simply credulous.
        tomlock 10y ago
        So the older a person is, the more their experience is likely correct? Turns out a lot of old people (the majority) oppose gay marriage. Do you feel like they are right? Since there seem to be some people who believe the account in this article and others that don't, what in your mind is the experience that people have been exposed to that changes their minds? It seems like you're saying they are purely irrational. Do you have any evidence which suggests that? I'm really interested because so far you've provided no content to suggest why someone should join you in your incredulity.
      - malandrew 10y ago
        The evidence that supports this statement: "...this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology." I'm not going to say it's not plausible that that is the reason like others are saying. Personally, I'm doubtful, but I'm willing to entertain that that actually is the reason. Assuming that actually is the reason, what evidence supports that statement. Are there numerous troll comments that we can read with our own two eyes that unambiguously demonstrate that the trolls were motivated by her skill? If there isn't, then I would expect the statement to be ""...this person received horrific threats." Either there is evidence that supports the statement that begins with "because..." or there isn't. That evidence is clearly omitted.
- GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
  She also had the audacity to do things like 'talk at conferences'. In general, a good thing to do in lots of situations is listen to people about their lived experiences, and after listening to women talk about being in this industry for a while this sort of thing becomes just 'a particularly horrible example' instead of 'something totally incomprehensible.'
  - gozur88 10y ago
    >She also had the audacity to do things like 'talk at conferences'. Sure. That would be believable if the year were, say, 1850.
    - cyphar 10y ago
      I don't really understand why you think that there was no harassment (or that Jessie deserved it or did something to rile the community against her). The solution to problems like this isn't to deny it. I've worked with her online for several years and she's an awesome hacker, and I'm not aware of anything she did to "deserve" being harassed.
      - RealityVoid 10y ago
        I do not think that OP doubts the existence of harassment, I think he doubts the causes of it. The cause written, "this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology" does seem pretty unlikely. On one hand, this comes off kinda' bad, as if we're looking for the real reason this person is being harassed, looking if they deserved it or not. No matter what prompted this harassment, this is wrong, terrible and should not happen to _anybody_ no matter the sex, position or actions of that person. But, I still have my curiosity as to what reason these harassers might have. They might be simply sexist but that seems a little exaggerated, considering there are other women that have exposure and don't seem to suffer the same level of harassment. I enjoy greatly reading Julia Evans's posts for example, and I haven't seen signs of harassment over there - maybe I haven't been paying attention. There might be something specific that this person did that made the harassers angry - I repeat, this is not to incriminate miss Jessie Frazelle, and she might not have done anything wrong, but something made the attackers angry, maybe something complety ridiculous. What would that thing be? If there is a thing this person did, this harassment might have originated even if she were a man. Maybe it's not such a sex thing after all? It seems there are plenty of public people that get death threats and are harassed, and these things are generally tailored to the sex of a person - women get killed an raped, men get killed and told to suck a dick. I don't know, I'm just confused - it's true there aren't many women in tech, and I'm as welcoming as possible but there are certain issues that I don't understand and don't know how to approach, but trying to solve them requires actually understanding them beyond a short article and evasive tweets.

What are either of those statements based on?

by tomlock 10y ago

What are either of those statements based on?

Experience. There are tons of women in the workforce. It's unexceptional to the point you wouldn't even notice, even in tech. If you read an article that said "Bob the mailman was beaten to death by local residents because he was good at his job" would you think "Yep, that sounds like the whole story"?

tomlock 10y ago
>Experience. There are tons of women in the workforce. It's unexceptional to the point you wouldn't even notice, even in tech. Interestingly, noir_lord noticed and you can see that in his comments on this article. I have the impression that many, many people notice how exceptional and small the presence of women is in tech. No news article has the "whole" story, so why single this one out? They are necessarily a digest of the events.
- gozur88 10y ago
  I'm singling this out because whatever they left out was critical to understanding the story.
  - tomlock 10y ago
    Could you explain to me what critical information you feel is missing?
    - gozur88 10y ago
      The reason. If people are attacking her there's a reason. It might not be a good reason, but there's a reason.
      - tomlock 10y ago
        But the article states what it thinks the reason is. You clearly think that reason isn't plausible. Could you help me understand what reasons you would find plausible?
        gozur88 10y ago
        >But the article states what it thinks the reason is. Oh, does it? When you read this: "...this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology." it seems reasonable to you? Do people generally receive "horrific threats" because they're good at their jobs? I don't see any point in speculating about what's actually going on here. It's pretty clear whatever it is isn't in the article, though.
        tomlock 10y ago
        > Do people generally receive "horrific threats" because they're good at their jobs? If by people you mean women, then yes. You don't seem able to say exactly why you find this so hard to believe. Could it be that your experiences are limited?
        gozur88 10y ago
        It could be. Probably not, at my age, but you never know. More likely, the people reading this and assuming the root of the whole thing is, incredibly, a woman who's being attacked for doing a good job (and not being a tax collector or similar government functionary) are simply credulous.
        tomlock 10y ago
        So the older a person is, the more their experience is likely correct? Turns out a lot of old people (the majority) oppose gay marriage. Do you feel like they are right? Since there seem to be some people who believe the account in this article and others that don't, what in your mind is the experience that people have been exposed to that changes their minds? It seems like you're saying they are purely irrational. Do you have any evidence which suggests that? I'm really interested because so far you've provided no content to suggest why someone should join you in your incredulity.
    - malandrew 10y ago
      The evidence that supports this statement: "...this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology." I'm not going to say it's not plausible that that is the reason like others are saying. Personally, I'm doubtful, but I'm willing to entertain that that actually is the reason. Assuming that actually is the reason, what evidence supports that statement. Are there numerous troll comments that we can read with our own two eyes that unambiguously demonstrate that the trolls were motivated by her skill? If there isn't, then I would expect the statement to be ""...this person received horrific threats." Either there is evidence that supports the statement that begins with "because..." or there isn't. That evidence is clearly omitted.
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
She also had the audacity to do things like 'talk at conferences'. In general, a good thing to do in lots of situations is listen to people about their lived experiences, and after listening to women talk about being in this industry for a while this sort of thing becomes just 'a particularly horrible example' instead of 'something totally incomprehensible.'
- gozur88 10y ago
  >She also had the audacity to do things like 'talk at conferences'. Sure. That would be believable if the year were, say, 1850.
  - cyphar 10y ago
    I don't really understand why you think that there was no harassment (or that Jessie deserved it or did something to rile the community against her). The solution to problems like this isn't to deny it. I've worked with her online for several years and she's an awesome hacker, and I'm not aware of anything she did to "deserve" being harassed.
    - RealityVoid 10y ago
      I do not think that OP doubts the existence of harassment, I think he doubts the causes of it. The cause written, "this person received horrific threats because she's good at her job and out teaching others how to use an up-and-coming programming technology" does seem pretty unlikely. On one hand, this comes off kinda' bad, as if we're looking for the real reason this person is being harassed, looking if they deserved it or not. No matter what prompted this harassment, this is wrong, terrible and should not happen to _anybody_ no matter the sex, position or actions of that person. But, I still have my curiosity as to what reason these harassers might have. They might be simply sexist but that seems a little exaggerated, considering there are other women that have exposure and don't seem to suffer the same level of harassment. I enjoy greatly reading Julia Evans's posts for example, and I haven't seen signs of harassment over there - maybe I haven't been paying attention. There might be something specific that this person did that made the harassers angry - I repeat, this is not to incriminate miss Jessie Frazelle, and she might not have done anything wrong, but something made the attackers angry, maybe something complety ridiculous. What would that thing be? If there is a thing this person did, this harassment might have originated even if she were a man. Maybe it's not such a sex thing after all? It seems there are plenty of public people that get death threats and are harassed, and these things are generally tailored to the sex of a person - women get killed an raped, men get killed and told to suck a dick. I don't know, I'm just confused - it's true there aren't many women in tech, and I'm as welcoming as possible but there are certain issues that I don't understand and don't know how to approach, but trying to solve them requires actually understanding them beyond a short article and evasive tweets.