7 ms·

Yours is a beautifully written and well-considered reply. As someone who has had both academic and career success (and failures), I know I am capable as a deve

Yours is a beautifully written and well-considered reply. As someone who has had both academic and career success (and failures), I know I am capable as a developer and able to contribute meaningfully to technical discussions. As a person of color, however, I have also experienced harassment by police, suspicious looks from shop owners, and outright hostility from drunken young men. So, whenever I encounter what appears to be irrational anger or inexplicable disrespect, I cannot help but wonder and worry that I'm being poorly treated because of my race, even when I suspect that's not the case. The person who treats me poorly need not necessarily be discriminating against me because of my race, but I can never know and, of course, unless someone is calling me racial epithets such poorly behaved people are unlikely to admit bias. It's sort of like being bullied in elementary school, and then high school, and then college, and then as a working adult. You never outgrow the bullying. Indeed, the bullying seems to get worse as one matures and loses the youthful physical characteristics which people often read as non-threatening. So regardless of intention (and sometimes because of it), feeling discriminated against can be partly the result of lifelong experience and is probably fairly characterized as a form of post-traumatic stress disorder. EDIT: remove two instances of repeated "as"; add "often"; remove comma; change pronoun.

lakechfoma 9y ago
Well said. I didn't understand this at all until the post yesterday "Walking While Black". Essays like that and comments like this are eye openers and should be spread wide to people of privilege. Perspective is powerful
manigandham 9y ago
How does that work if the usernames are anonymous? Saying you feel targeted does not mean you are being targeted.
- saint_fiasco 9y ago
  I think what they mean is that because of their experiences they have less tolerance for hostility than you do. Most of the time people are verbally hostile towards you nothing terrible ends up happening so you eventually learn to ignore minor hostility. However if you had the sort of bad experiences minorities have, you would learn to be wary of minor hostility, as it is often the precursor to major hostility or even physical harm. You know how evolutionary psychologists often attribute human stupidity to adaptations that made sense in prehistoric times? Like your instincts tell you sugar is good for you because it used to be found mostly on fruit and nutritious berries, but nowadays the instinct leads you to eat junk food. In the modern world sugar has nothing to do with high food quality (just the opposite) but the instinct remains. For minorities, their instinct to recoil at minor hostility is like that, except that instead of an ancient adaptation to deal with the life at the Savannah, it is the habit that helped you keep your sanity this very morning at the office when your asshole coworker yelled at you. In Stack Overflow nobody is going to yell at you or punch you or try to get you fired, but the instinct remains.
  - manigandham 9y ago
    If you have less tolerance, how is that anyone else's problem? Some people are also more prone to sunburn than others, but we don't say the sun needs to be less bright. You are in control of your own feelings. Yes, StackOverflow should generally have better language and reworked rules around content, voting and moderation, but that has nothing to do with how susceptible you are to comments on the internet. Also why is it that minorities always comes down to not being male or white when half the planet is female and most of the planet is not white? Do we not have any other dimensions? It's a rather meaningless definition when used in context of a globally accessible site with anonymous user accounts where the audience already has a major commonality (interest in software development) that is far more inclusive than any irrelevant physical trait.
    - saint_fiasco 9y ago
      If some people are more prone to sunburn than others then you shouldn't have a developers' technical conference outdoors in the summer on a tropical area. It may not be your problem or your responsibility to prevent other people's sunburns (they can buy their own sunscreen, right?) but I hope you realize that ignoring their preferences is shitty behaviour that will give you(r website) a bad reputation. And it's not like protecting your conference from sunlight will benefit only the albinos. Sunburn resistance is not the same as immunity, so everyone benefits at least a little. Same with SO, even people with thick skin will benefit at least a little from a less toxic environment.
      - the8472 9y ago
        > even people with thick skin will benefit at least a little from a less toxic environment. That argument is not entirely solid. After all the toxic environment is also the same environment that provides those answers. So if those two were positively correlated then decreasing toxicity could also drive down the answer quality. A cartoony scenario would be a stack overflow where everyone is busy assuring everyone else that their questions are good, non-stupid questions and they should be praised for asking them and wasting a lot of time on those instead of answering questions. Of course we're unlikely to be at a global optimum here, so things can certainly be improved. You should just be more careful about analyzing those tradeoffs.
- mistersquid 9y ago
  I agree feeling targeted does not necessarily mean one has been targeted, and I do think that sometimes the feeling of being targeted is the result of past experience (comparable to post-traumatic stress disorder). Though SO usernames are often pseudonymous, they are not always anonymous. For example, some SO profiles contain photographs of the user. Mine does. Also, sometimes I search for information about users with whom I interact. I imagine others do the same. We both agree "being targeted" is different than "feeling targeted". A third thing that is different than both of these is "being affected". That is, even if someone from a marginalized group is not being targeted for being a member of a marginalized group, the negative effects of perceived hostility may be larger on people from marginalized groups than on people from dominant groups. Not always, but sometimes, and this is what SO seems to be taking to heart. A few comments have suggested one solution is to improve the climate for everyone by welcoming new users with all their inexperience rather than discouraging them by enforcing standards of contribution achieved by elite longtime users. I wholeheartedly agree. By encouraging newbies who don't yet know much, SO stands to grow its ranks and help newbies become experienced contributors. As a former educator, I know encouraging students in the directions they are doing well is much more pedagogically effective than tearing down students when they make mistakes. Communities like SO would improve if they not only discouraged negativity but also encouraged non-elite participation. HN is one such community that does this well and the quality of the content here speaks for itself. EDIT: reword first sentence; change "old-hands" to "experienced contributors"; add comma in second sentence.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
oe7Ahwur 9y ago
I do not like this line of reasoning because it basically advocates walking on eggshells around everyone since it is not possible to model the potential fragility of mind of billions of humans. I read some arguments that being drive-by downvoted without comments somehow made people unwelcomed. And you add to that that this is practically a form of PTSD. If I am supposed to model people at the other end of the screen as "my downvote might trigger PTSD" then, mildly put, I do not find that model to be very helpful. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems like some sort of game-theoretic trap. Disclaimer: I don't see myself as a kind person and asking me to spend extra mental energy just to be nice is like asking for a pound of my flesh. Thus the above may be motivated reasoning to ignore people who complain about the lack of kindness.
- Mithaldu 9y ago
  > I don't see myself as a kind person and asking me to spend extra mental energy If you can't be kind, then the preferred action from you is for you to save your energy for the days when you can be kind. That's better for everyone involved.
  - GyYZTfWBfQw 9y ago
    Define "kind" and define "better for everyone".
    - Mithaldu 9y ago
      If you don't know the meaning of those yet, save your energy for the day when you do.
      - GyYZTfWBfQw 9y ago
        This is not an argument, nor a definition. To save you the "energy", I'll remind you of the fact that these terms are extremely subjective. If you know what's "better for everyone" please share it with me, because I would like to know so I could act accordingly. I would also like you to tell me the means through which you came to that conclusion. Failure to provide me with the necessary information will, in my opinion, confirm that what you were doing is just mere virtue signalling. I believe it would be better for everyone if you told me what you believe[1] is better for everyone, so everyone who reads your comment might act accordingly in the best interest of others[2]. [1] Note that it's subjective. [2] Where "best interest of others" is defined by you, which is subjective and probably inaccurate. On what basis do you have the nerve to claim you know what's better for everyone "involved"?
bayindirh 9y ago
> It's sort of like being bullied in elementary school, and then high school, and then college, and then as a working adult. You never outgrow the bullying. Indeed, the bullying seems to get worse as one matures and loses the youthful physical characteristics which people often read as non-threatening. It's not just the appearance of the people who bullies you. Bullying forces you to become more closed, and changes you fundamentally while you learn to resist it. Unfortunately, resisting bullying needs one to unlearn "inherent (baseline) trust" when meeting with new people, and unlearn "implicit trust" which is reinforced with the duration of civilized communication and relationships, because bullying can come from the least expected person at most unsuspected time. Also, continuous bullying warps one's perception about discussion. Any sign of escalation causes any bullying victim to just change the subject and feel bad about itself, because bullying starts with (generally intentional) disagreement, then this disagreement is used for a basis for physical or psychological bullying. Bullied people may not hate from themselves, but they cannot be content with themselves either. They always think that something is wrong with them, and feel powerless to correct it, because continued bullying is only possible when the victim is bullied regardless of his/her character, intention, behavior or capacity. Prolonged bullying really leaves deep wounds like trust issues, complete lack of self confidence, fear of communication and feelings of inferiority. These wounds are very hard to heal, because as time passes and one grows up, society thinks that these issues are over and doesn't care. Also, people don't seek help since these features are considered part of the character and deemed fixed after a certain age, but they are not. Good friends, and a really caring person can change everything if the person wants to heal. It's hard, but not impossible. How do I know this? Because I'm bullied for 10 years straight. Edit: Clarify sentences.

lakechfoma 9y ago

Well said. I didn't understand this at all until the post yesterday "Walking While Black". Essays like that and comments like this are eye openers and should be spread wide to people of privilege. Perspective is powerful

manigandham 9y ago

How does that work if the usernames are anonymous? Saying you feel targeted does not mean you are being targeted.

saint_fiasco 9y ago
I think what they mean is that because of their experiences they have less tolerance for hostility than you do. Most of the time people are verbally hostile towards you nothing terrible ends up happening so you eventually learn to ignore minor hostility. However if you had the sort of bad experiences minorities have, you would learn to be wary of minor hostility, as it is often the precursor to major hostility or even physical harm. You know how evolutionary psychologists often attribute human stupidity to adaptations that made sense in prehistoric times? Like your instincts tell you sugar is good for you because it used to be found mostly on fruit and nutritious berries, but nowadays the instinct leads you to eat junk food. In the modern world sugar has nothing to do with high food quality (just the opposite) but the instinct remains. For minorities, their instinct to recoil at minor hostility is like that, except that instead of an ancient adaptation to deal with the life at the Savannah, it is the habit that helped you keep your sanity this very morning at the office when your asshole coworker yelled at you. In Stack Overflow nobody is going to yell at you or punch you or try to get you fired, but the instinct remains.
- manigandham 9y ago
  If you have less tolerance, how is that anyone else's problem? Some people are also more prone to sunburn than others, but we don't say the sun needs to be less bright. You are in control of your own feelings. Yes, StackOverflow should generally have better language and reworked rules around content, voting and moderation, but that has nothing to do with how susceptible you are to comments on the internet. Also why is it that minorities always comes down to not being male or white when half the planet is female and most of the planet is not white? Do we not have any other dimensions? It's a rather meaningless definition when used in context of a globally accessible site with anonymous user accounts where the audience already has a major commonality (interest in software development) that is far more inclusive than any irrelevant physical trait.
  - saint_fiasco 9y ago
    If some people are more prone to sunburn than others then you shouldn't have a developers' technical conference outdoors in the summer on a tropical area. It may not be your problem or your responsibility to prevent other people's sunburns (they can buy their own sunscreen, right?) but I hope you realize that ignoring their preferences is shitty behaviour that will give you(r website) a bad reputation. And it's not like protecting your conference from sunlight will benefit only the albinos. Sunburn resistance is not the same as immunity, so everyone benefits at least a little. Same with SO, even people with thick skin will benefit at least a little from a less toxic environment.
    - the8472 9y ago
      > even people with thick skin will benefit at least a little from a less toxic environment. That argument is not entirely solid. After all the toxic environment is also the same environment that provides those answers. So if those two were positively correlated then decreasing toxicity could also drive down the answer quality. A cartoony scenario would be a stack overflow where everyone is busy assuring everyone else that their questions are good, non-stupid questions and they should be praised for asking them and wasting a lot of time on those instead of answering questions. Of course we're unlikely to be at a global optimum here, so things can certainly be improved. You should just be more careful about analyzing those tradeoffs.
mistersquid 9y ago
I agree feeling targeted does not necessarily mean one has been targeted, and I do think that sometimes the feeling of being targeted is the result of past experience (comparable to post-traumatic stress disorder). Though SO usernames are often pseudonymous, they are not always anonymous. For example, some SO profiles contain photographs of the user. Mine does. Also, sometimes I search for information about users with whom I interact. I imagine others do the same. We both agree "being targeted" is different than "feeling targeted". A third thing that is different than both of these is "being affected". That is, even if someone from a marginalized group is not being targeted for being a member of a marginalized group, the negative effects of perceived hostility may be larger on people from marginalized groups than on people from dominant groups. Not always, but sometimes, and this is what SO seems to be taking to heart. A few comments have suggested one solution is to improve the climate for everyone by welcoming new users with all their inexperience rather than discouraging them by enforcing standards of contribution achieved by elite longtime users. I wholeheartedly agree. By encouraging newbies who don't yet know much, SO stands to grow its ranks and help newbies become experienced contributors. As a former educator, I know encouraging students in the directions they are doing well is much more pedagogically effective than tearing down students when they make mistakes. Communities like SO would improve if they not only discouraged negativity but also encouraged non-elite participation. HN is one such community that does this well and the quality of the content here speaks for itself. EDIT: reword first sentence; change "old-hands" to "experienced contributors"; add comma in second sentence.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

oe7Ahwur 9y ago

I do not like this line of reasoning because it basically advocates walking on eggshells around everyone since it is not possible to model the potential fragility of mind of billions of humans. I read some arguments that being drive-by downvoted without comments somehow made people unwelcomed. And you add to that that this is practically a form of PTSD. If I am supposed to model people at the other end of the screen as "my downvote might trigger PTSD" then, mildly put, I do not find that model to be very helpful. I can't quite put my finger on it, but it seems like some sort of game-theoretic trap. Disclaimer: I don't see myself as a kind person and asking me to spend extra mental energy just to be nice is like asking for a pound of my flesh. Thus the above may be motivated reasoning to ignore people who complain about the lack of kindness.

Mithaldu 9y ago
> I don't see myself as a kind person and asking me to spend extra mental energy If you can't be kind, then the preferred action from you is for you to save your energy for the days when you can be kind. That's better for everyone involved.
- GyYZTfWBfQw 9y ago
  Define "kind" and define "better for everyone".
  - Mithaldu 9y ago
    If you don't know the meaning of those yet, save your energy for the day when you do.
    - GyYZTfWBfQw 9y ago
      This is not an argument, nor a definition. To save you the "energy", I'll remind you of the fact that these terms are extremely subjective. If you know what's "better for everyone" please share it with me, because I would like to know so I could act accordingly. I would also like you to tell me the means through which you came to that conclusion. Failure to provide me with the necessary information will, in my opinion, confirm that what you were doing is just mere virtue signalling. I believe it would be better for everyone if you told me what you believe[1] is better for everyone, so everyone who reads your comment might act accordingly in the best interest of others[2]. [1] Note that it's subjective. [2] Where "best interest of others" is defined by you, which is subjective and probably inaccurate. On what basis do you have the nerve to claim you know what's better for everyone "involved"?

bayindirh 9y ago

> It's sort of like being bullied in elementary school, and then high school, and then college, and then as a working adult. You never outgrow the bullying. Indeed, the bullying seems to get worse as one matures and loses the youthful physical characteristics which people often read as non-threatening. It's not just the appearance of the people who bullies you. Bullying forces you to become more closed, and changes you fundamentally while you learn to resist it. Unfortunately, resisting bullying needs one to unlearn "inherent (baseline) trust" when meeting with new people, and unlearn "implicit trust" which is reinforced with the duration of civilized communication and relationships, because bullying can come from the least expected person at most unsuspected time. Also, continuous bullying warps one's perception about discussion. Any sign of escalation causes any bullying victim to just change the subject and feel bad about itself, because bullying starts with (generally intentional) disagreement, then this disagreement is used for a basis for physical or psychological bullying. Bullied people may not hate from themselves, but they cannot be content with themselves either. They always think that something is wrong with them, and feel powerless to correct it, because continued bullying is only possible when the victim is bullied regardless of his/her character, intention, behavior or capacity. Prolonged bullying really leaves deep wounds like trust issues, complete lack of self confidence, fear of communication and feelings of inferiority. These wounds are very hard to heal, because as time passes and one grows up, society thinks that these issues are over and doesn't care. Also, people don't seek help since these features are considered part of the character and deemed fixed after a certain age, but they are not. Good friends, and a really caring person can change everything if the person wants to heal. It's hard, but not impossible. How do I know this? Because I'm bullied for 10 years straight. Edit: Clarify sentences.