6 ms·

As a recently graduated computer science student with deep experience working with startups, notedly with highly experienced women developers and staff within t

As a recently graduated computer science student with deep experience working with startups, notedly with highly experienced women developers and staff within those startups, I find groups like this deeply troubling. I believe what these groups advocate for on paper and what they knowingly actually advocate for are very different. IMO these groups foster division and group-think that makes learning harder for all involved and if anything promotes the portrayal of toxic culture as a purely gendered issue along with wrapping everything under a poorly though-out victim mentality. Some of the best female developers I've come to know both as co-workers and mentors (although I'm a man) avoid these groups and find them counter-productive. Some have even been banned for just speaking on the issue of these groups, regarding their "real" benefit. I acknowledge there are problems with tech culture, but pro advocacy and labeling of any groups involved will never be a productive way to solve these problems.

j45 8y ago
Genderism can be exclusionary, especially when the mindset of the "wider" group they belong to is truly not one of inclusivity. Genderism also takes voices away from visible minorities who are often excluded by these groups as well. We talk a lot of about diversity, and this word has been in many ways, commandeered by genderism. Diversity is not only gender diversity. But it seems to be the diversity we can hear most about at times. Diversity for me is ensuring anyone with the potential can develop the talents to execute from any diverse background. (Happy to improve this defintion). If using pro-women groups as an example, the issue is not the women. It's men. Existing decision making powers and structures need to change behaviour. Focusing on Humanism may be another approach. Everyone is a citizen in humanity, and adjusting the structures and powers within that context might set bars and standards for behaviour can be set within it.
- arcaster 8y ago
  I strongly identify with humanism in this regard. I also agree there are problems with existing structures, but I think unanimously working against these structures fares better for "oppressed" groups than just labeling the opposing group as "evil". For instance, I have worked in circumstances where women use similar rhetoric created in these groups to foster a toxic culture that affects everyone negatively. Again, I cannot stress enough, toxic culture affects everyone. If we don't start developing new approaches that are less reminiscent of methods used to remedy elementary school playground scuffles, we'll just keep seeing more articles / threads titled "Why Networking is only hard for <women / insert some group here>". Furthermore, an un-intended side-effect of these kinds of gendered / tribalist approaches is that they empower companies / organizations to use them for profit. For example, the number of coding bootcamps that target and exploit women under the guise of "fighting for equality" is disgusting and nauseating.

j45 8y ago

Genderism can be exclusionary, especially when the mindset of the "wider" group they belong to is truly not one of inclusivity. Genderism also takes voices away from visible minorities who are often excluded by these groups as well. We talk a lot of about diversity, and this word has been in many ways, commandeered by genderism. Diversity is not only gender diversity. But it seems to be the diversity we can hear most about at times. Diversity for me is ensuring anyone with the potential can develop the talents to execute from any diverse background. (Happy to improve this defintion). If using pro-women groups as an example, the issue is not the women. It's men. Existing decision making powers and structures need to change behaviour. Focusing on Humanism may be another approach. Everyone is a citizen in humanity, and adjusting the structures and powers within that context might set bars and standards for behaviour can be set within it.

arcaster 8y ago
I strongly identify with humanism in this regard. I also agree there are problems with existing structures, but I think unanimously working against these structures fares better for "oppressed" groups than just labeling the opposing group as "evil". For instance, I have worked in circumstances where women use similar rhetoric created in these groups to foster a toxic culture that affects everyone negatively. Again, I cannot stress enough, toxic culture affects everyone. If we don't start developing new approaches that are less reminiscent of methods used to remedy elementary school playground scuffles, we'll just keep seeing more articles / threads titled "Why Networking is only hard for <women / insert some group here>". Furthermore, an un-intended side-effect of these kinds of gendered / tribalist approaches is that they empower companies / organizations to use them for profit. For example, the number of coding bootcamps that target and exploit women under the guise of "fighting for equality" is disgusting and nauseating.