5 ms·

That's not what privilege means, it's not an on-off switch. It's just about recognizing factors out of your control that might give you slight advantages over o

That's not what privilege means, it's not an on-off switch. It's just about recognizing factors out of your control that might give you slight advantages over other people. When people talk about "white privilege" they don't mean your life must be great because you're white, they mean regardless of your situation, you have more opportunities because of your skin color, which increases the odds of having a better life. Some people take it too far, but the next time you hear someone talk about privilege, try to interpret it to mean "marginal advantage" rather than "privilege=wealth", because that's probably what they mean. Also, "alienates men who would otherwise be potential allies" doesn't really make sense. Your support for gender equality in tech should not depend on how inclusive and understanding feminists are, it should depend on whether or not you think women deserve equal rights and access in the workplace. Obviously the world is a better place when we all work together and get along, but I think you should strive to make sure your beliefs are not affected by how much you dislike other people who share those beliefs.

Exofunctor 10y ago
This approach may work (I say "may" because most of the time it's not actually backed up by hard evidence free of confounding variables), but it's also lazy; there are vastly more accurate predictors of a priori success rate than race or gender. It's especially lazy for organizations that have access to those more accurate predictors, like universities, to use race and gender instead. More accurate predictors include parental education, family wealth, social connections, etc. Mostly what people would describe as social class.
- burkaman 10y ago
  You don't have to pick just one though, right? Gender clearly has an effect even if it's less predictive than other factors, so why not try to account for every factor you know of?
metaphorm 10y ago
> Your support for gender equality in tech should not depend on how inclusive and understanding feminists are who appointed you the gatekeeper of what another thinking, feeling human being ought to think or feel? maybe you should interpret this as a call to introspect certain trends in feminist politics and communication strategies. if someone tells you "I am feeling alienated because of X" rather than thought-police that person and tell them "no you're wrong and you WILL feel the way I tell you to feel" perhaps it would be of greater utility to consider what the other person is telling you.
- burkaman 10y ago
  I of course do not have any say over other people's feelings, and I think it's obvious that asking someone to strive for something is not the same as forcing them. But the belief that women deserve equal rights is also not just a feeling, it's a core principle that you either agree with or you don't. What I am recommending (not demanding) is that people try to separate feelings and principles, so that your morals aren't determined by who has been nice to you recently.
  - metaphorm 10y ago
    but what you said is "you SHOULD feel this way" not "I have a vision of a better world were we all strive for greater equality". your word choices matter. also, while we're on the subject of communication, I would like to point out that there has been enormous and widespread political backlash that is due in no small part to the poor communication strategy by many leftist movements. many (most?) people absolutely do agree with the proposition "women are humans just the same as men and deserve to be treated as such." a lot of those people, however, really do care about how they are spoken to. tone and language choice matters. it is not effective communication or politics to be constantly making accusatory remarks. people really do respond based on their emotions and will oppose those who have been "mean" to them recently, just because of that mood affiliation.
    - burkaman 10y ago
      I mean we're all human, we all have biases, and we're all affected by interactions, so I get what you're saying. I care about how I'm spoken to as well, I don't mean to act like some superior being unaffected by human emotions. To use your phrasing, I would like to live in a world where equal rights is such a fundamental moral truth that the communication style of its supporters doesn't really matter. I too am frequently annoyed and angered by people marching under the flag of feminism, but I try my best to judge everyone's arguments on their merits rather than their fans. I think everyone would personally benefit from this, it makes life more pleasant, and that's what I wanted to say in my comment. I would also like to live in a world where people give each other the benefit of the doubt. When you read my initial comment, did it really seem more like that I was trying to police someone's thoughts, rather than just recommending a different way of thinking? Especially on a casual internet forum, I generally try to interpret a comment in the best way I can. If someone is really intending to be an asshole then it'll become clear soon enough.

Exofunctor 10y ago

This approach may work (I say "may" because most of the time it's not actually backed up by hard evidence free of confounding variables), but it's also lazy; there are vastly more accurate predictors of a priori success rate than race or gender. It's especially lazy for organizations that have access to those more accurate predictors, like universities, to use race and gender instead. More accurate predictors include parental education, family wealth, social connections, etc. Mostly what people would describe as social class.

burkaman 10y ago
You don't have to pick just one though, right? Gender clearly has an effect even if it's less predictive than other factors, so why not try to account for every factor you know of?

metaphorm 10y ago

> Your support for gender equality in tech should not depend on how inclusive and understanding feminists are who appointed you the gatekeeper of what another thinking, feeling human being ought to think or feel? maybe you should interpret this as a call to introspect certain trends in feminist politics and communication strategies. if someone tells you "I am feeling alienated because of X" rather than thought-police that person and tell them "no you're wrong and you WILL feel the way I tell you to feel" perhaps it would be of greater utility to consider what the other person is telling you.

burkaman 10y ago
I of course do not have any say over other people's feelings, and I think it's obvious that asking someone to strive for something is not the same as forcing them. But the belief that women deserve equal rights is also not just a feeling, it's a core principle that you either agree with or you don't. What I am recommending (not demanding) is that people try to separate feelings and principles, so that your morals aren't determined by who has been nice to you recently.
- metaphorm 10y ago
  but what you said is "you SHOULD feel this way" not "I have a vision of a better world were we all strive for greater equality". your word choices matter. also, while we're on the subject of communication, I would like to point out that there has been enormous and widespread political backlash that is due in no small part to the poor communication strategy by many leftist movements. many (most?) people absolutely do agree with the proposition "women are humans just the same as men and deserve to be treated as such." a lot of those people, however, really do care about how they are spoken to. tone and language choice matters. it is not effective communication or politics to be constantly making accusatory remarks. people really do respond based on their emotions and will oppose those who have been "mean" to them recently, just because of that mood affiliation.
  - burkaman 10y ago
    I mean we're all human, we all have biases, and we're all affected by interactions, so I get what you're saying. I care about how I'm spoken to as well, I don't mean to act like some superior being unaffected by human emotions. To use your phrasing, I would like to live in a world where equal rights is such a fundamental moral truth that the communication style of its supporters doesn't really matter. I too am frequently annoyed and angered by people marching under the flag of feminism, but I try my best to judge everyone's arguments on their merits rather than their fans. I think everyone would personally benefit from this, it makes life more pleasant, and that's what I wanted to say in my comment. I would also like to live in a world where people give each other the benefit of the doubt. When you read my initial comment, did it really seem more like that I was trying to police someone's thoughts, rather than just recommending a different way of thinking? Especially on a casual internet forum, I generally try to interpret a comment in the best way I can. If someone is really intending to be an asshole then it'll become clear soon enough.