5 ms·

I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. Because there have been multiple accounts of bad b

I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. Because there have been multiple accounts of bad behavior, both subtle and not-subtle, at tech conferences (https://shift.newco.co/what-its-like-to-be-a-woman-at-a-tech-conference-8a1a299ac82b https://shift.newco.co/what-its-like-to-be-a-woman-at-a-tech..., https://blog.juliaferraioli.com/2014/08/do-you-even.html https://blog.juliaferraioli.com/2014/08/do-you-even.html), but those aren't studies, they're just isolated experiences, so we can ignore those. And there have been multiple accounts from women who won't use a feminine identity online due to harassment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3411627 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3411627), and really talented women who have to endure sexist work environments (http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2011/12/04/meeting/ http://rachelbythebay.com/w/2011/12/04/meeting/), and, occasionally, even much more lively discussions from women on what it's like to work in tech (https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4ioxw9/as_i_sit_in_a_massive_sausagefest_conference_it/ https://www.reddit.com/r/sysadmin/comments/4ioxw9/as_i_sit_i...). But, again, these aren't studies, so we can ignore them. Of course, there have been studies, including one that found feminine names in chats got 25 times more malicious messages (http://www.ece.umd.edu/News/news_story.php?id=1788 http://www.ece.umd.edu/News/news_story.php?id=1788), which would seem to support this woman's experience too ... but, surely, we can find some way to dismiss that, too, right? The important part is that, every time a submission like this comes along, we rush to the comments section to try to shout it down. There are surely some medium.com posts about experiences that other developers have had that we could upvote instead. Preferably, ones from developers who don't happen to be too feminine.

verroq 9y ago
>I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. I am so glad someone on HN is here to tell us exactly why we aren't allowed to have a rigorous discussion when it comes to this topic, in particular. It is interesting how you immediately reframe women getting harassed as misogyny. Nevermind women likely get more attention online as well. Let's have a look at the study [0] you mention. Which measures private messages received from an IRC channel by a bot. Do you honestly not think a female username will receive more attention given the typical gender composition of an online IRC channel? (Who still uses IRC apart from unwashed CS nerds?) 25 times messages likely means there were 25 times more males than females in that particular room. [0] Meyer, R., & Cukier, M. 2006 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.89.3613&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.89.... This point is, without properly establishing a base rate of attention VS harassment, all you can do appeal to emotion. Yes women are being harassed in tech, are they being harassed in at a higher rate than other industries? Is it a specifically a tech problem? Is your solution to the problem to accuse men in the tech industry as misogynists/sexists further alienate both sides from each other when you don't even have proper evidence?
- afpx 9y ago
  You have some very good points, but your tone comes across as emotional and aggressive enough to inadvertently turn off some of your intended audience. So, in your case a little ‘appeal to emotion’ may help. Maybe you guys can meet in the middle.
  - DarkWiiPlayer 9y ago
    The same could be said about the post they replied to though, somebody made a valid point and is met with a sarcastic reply that implicitly equates criticism of a study with trying to invalidate the entire problem the study tries to underline. Let's be honest, be it here on HN, on reddit, or on twitter, this isn't a topic that you can have a conversation about without people on either side getting emotional and somewhat aggressive.
    - afpx 9y ago
      Yep. I jumped in to try to hopefully tone down some of the excitement. I should know better and won’t try again.
- zimpenfish 9y ago
  > 25 times messages likely means there were 25 times more males than females in that particular room. It's somewhat disingenuous to say "messages" when the study is specifically counting only "malicious messages" (and makes no mention of how many non-malicious messages were received.)
- ABCLAW 9y ago
  I like how the unstated assumption that unwashed CS nerds are obviously hostile towards women is not further examined. Namely because that unstated premise is almost exactly the conclusion of the argument you're trying to argue against.
  - verroq 9y ago
    The point is that even with this assumption it still fails.
dandare 9y ago
The only thing I disagree with is the assertion that women in tech (STEM?) have somehow different/worse experience than women in general. Or at least I can not imagine why that would be the case - are educated and intelligent men more sexist than the average Joe? I think the main difference is that in tech we are much more open to acknowledge the problem and discuss it.
- spunker540 9y ago
  Its not so much that men in tech are worse than men in other industries, but women are far more outnumbered in tech. If you assume a constant rate of harassment (say 5% of men harass women per year) then a woman who works alongside 20 men and 5 women (a common ratio in tech) will get harassed more than a woman who works with 12 women and 13 men (a more typical non tech ratio). And in truth I wouldn’t be surprised if as women get more outnumbered the frequency of harassment tends to go up.
- thaumaturgy 9y ago
  > The only thing I disagree with is the assertion that women in tech (STEM?) have somehow different/worse experience than women in general. I'm not sure that's a statement I'd make. I don't think I know enough to say that. It's tempting to let myself get nerd-sniped into a longer, less productive discussion comparing different fields and pontificating on different possible causes, but then I'd be making the same mistake as so many other people here. What we really need in these conversations is fewer people like James DaMore writing dissertations on the subject and more people saying, "hey guys, stop being dumb ass holes." This is a problem that is better resolved by calling out socially repugnant behavior rather than dissecting it.
  - urahara 9y ago
    It would be great to have guidelines prohibiting expressing and promoting damorish views here.
    - anon12345690 9y ago
      "damorish" views? I think that shows that you dont have a good understanding of them to begin with
lr4444lr 9y ago
The OP is suggesting an important question though: what if the vast majority of this ubiquitous harassment comes from a tiny minority of men whom few others here are even aware of?
- creep 9y ago
  Are you male though? These men are everywhere for women. It is a minority of men, definitely, but that minority directs the whole of their psychological issues to women. They won't do this to you, they will rarely do this around you, and if they are around others they do it in a way that's hidden from your eyes. And the thing is, these guys are everywhere on the Internet as well. I think they spawn from 4chan or something. It starts young and the issues just keep building. They are anonymous, consequence-free interactions with women that let them vent their own issues with women. And then they go to echo-chamber forums like 4chan to validate their distorted reality. They won't interact with you because they don't have an issue with you, unless you also advocate for women and make your views public, in which case they will attempt to poke holes in your masculinity.

verroq 9y ago

>I am so glad someone on HN is here to enforce rigorous standards when it comes to this topic, in particular. I am so glad someone on HN is here to tell us exactly why we aren't allowed to have a rigorous discussion when it comes to this topic, in particular. It is interesting how you immediately reframe women getting harassed as misogyny. Nevermind women likely get more attention online as well. Let's have a look at the study [0] you mention. Which measures private messages received from an IRC channel by a bot. Do you honestly not think a female username will receive more attention given the typical gender composition of an online IRC channel? (Who still uses IRC apart from unwashed CS nerds?) 25 times messages likely means there were 25 times more males than females in that particular room. [0] Meyer, R., & Cukier, M. 2006 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.89.3613&rep=rep1&type=pdf http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.89.... This point is, without properly establishing a base rate of attention VS harassment, all you can do appeal to emotion. Yes women are being harassed in tech, are they being harassed in at a higher rate than other industries? Is it a specifically a tech problem? Is your solution to the problem to accuse men in the tech industry as misogynists/sexists further alienate both sides from each other when you don't even have proper evidence?

afpx 9y ago
You have some very good points, but your tone comes across as emotional and aggressive enough to inadvertently turn off some of your intended audience. So, in your case a little ‘appeal to emotion’ may help. Maybe you guys can meet in the middle.
- DarkWiiPlayer 9y ago
  The same could be said about the post they replied to though, somebody made a valid point and is met with a sarcastic reply that implicitly equates criticism of a study with trying to invalidate the entire problem the study tries to underline. Let's be honest, be it here on HN, on reddit, or on twitter, this isn't a topic that you can have a conversation about without people on either side getting emotional and somewhat aggressive.
  - afpx 9y ago
    Yep. I jumped in to try to hopefully tone down some of the excitement. I should know better and won’t try again.
zimpenfish 9y ago
> 25 times messages likely means there were 25 times more males than females in that particular room. It's somewhat disingenuous to say "messages" when the study is specifically counting only "malicious messages" (and makes no mention of how many non-malicious messages were received.)
ABCLAW 9y ago
I like how the unstated assumption that unwashed CS nerds are obviously hostile towards women is not further examined. Namely because that unstated premise is almost exactly the conclusion of the argument you're trying to argue against.
- verroq 9y ago
  The point is that even with this assumption it still fails.

dandare 9y ago

The only thing I disagree with is the assertion that women in tech (STEM?) have somehow different/worse experience than women in general. Or at least I can not imagine why that would be the case - are educated and intelligent men more sexist than the average Joe? I think the main difference is that in tech we are much more open to acknowledge the problem and discuss it.

spunker540 9y ago
Its not so much that men in tech are worse than men in other industries, but women are far more outnumbered in tech. If you assume a constant rate of harassment (say 5% of men harass women per year) then a woman who works alongside 20 men and 5 women (a common ratio in tech) will get harassed more than a woman who works with 12 women and 13 men (a more typical non tech ratio). And in truth I wouldn’t be surprised if as women get more outnumbered the frequency of harassment tends to go up.
thaumaturgy 9y ago
> The only thing I disagree with is the assertion that women in tech (STEM?) have somehow different/worse experience than women in general. I'm not sure that's a statement I'd make. I don't think I know enough to say that. It's tempting to let myself get nerd-sniped into a longer, less productive discussion comparing different fields and pontificating on different possible causes, but then I'd be making the same mistake as so many other people here. What we really need in these conversations is fewer people like James DaMore writing dissertations on the subject and more people saying, "hey guys, stop being dumb ass holes." This is a problem that is better resolved by calling out socially repugnant behavior rather than dissecting it.
- urahara 9y ago
  It would be great to have guidelines prohibiting expressing and promoting damorish views here.
  - anon12345690 9y ago
    "damorish" views? I think that shows that you dont have a good understanding of them to begin with

lr4444lr 9y ago

The OP is suggesting an important question though: what if the vast majority of this ubiquitous harassment comes from a tiny minority of men whom few others here are even aware of?

creep 9y ago
Are you male though? These men are everywhere for women. It is a minority of men, definitely, but that minority directs the whole of their psychological issues to women. They won't do this to you, they will rarely do this around you, and if they are around others they do it in a way that's hidden from your eyes. And the thing is, these guys are everywhere on the Internet as well. I think they spawn from 4chan or something. It starts young and the issues just keep building. They are anonymous, consequence-free interactions with women that let them vent their own issues with women. And then they go to echo-chamber forums like 4chan to validate their distorted reality. They won't interact with you because they don't have an issue with you, unless you also advocate for women and make your views public, in which case they will attempt to poke holes in your masculinity.