4 ms·
I've considered it carefully. I didn't expand on it because I know my opinion is usually not welcome (eh) here and also there is no way to come out looking good
by ad404b8a372f2b9 6y ago
I've considered it carefully. I didn't expand on it because I know my opinion is usually not welcome (eh) here and also there is no way to come out looking good when arguing with people who position themselves as fighting against prejudice even if you care about social issues and it's exhausting.
As you say, it's the most limited interpretation of the problem. It's to the level of the master-branch or black-list/white-list controversies. I believe sexists are unwelcoming (to say the least), and sexism breeds a toxic work environment. I'm sure this image has been used by sexists, as has every resource in every field up to this day. I do not believe this image is sexist or unwelcoming nor that changing it will do anything to improve the work environment for women in tech.
I think these requests are overall harmful: They're a rhetorical mirage that does nothing to help the people they claim to stand for while disenfranchising normal people in the process by reframing them as bigots. They are part of a broader pattern of ideologically motivated battlegrounds in (SV) tech and serve only to classify people as allies or enemies. You yourself frame it as dichotomy between people who care about injustices and people who care more about preserving an old joke (clearly assholes if they put a joke over the inclusion of their colleagues). I'd ask you to consider that people who share your beliefs do not have a monopoly on kindness and mercy and the human heart, and to consider furthermore, given the polarization of the American political discourse, whether this is the right way to build a welcoming environment.
I say all this from personal experience, as a minority who's unlucky enough to have the most privileged people on earth fight for him (but not really) one well-meaning frivolity at a time. I say unlucky because in the process every space for us online has been hijacked and paradoxically I have less of a voice than before and meanwhile everything is still pretty shit to be honest.
- CJefferson 6y agoI would ask on what basis you think this image is not sexist or unwelcoming? You are allowed to think that of course, I'm just curious. I have a small sample size but I have been in a conversation with my wife and some of her female friends (who all had whom have CS degrees), and they all agreed they dislike the use of this image.
- panta 6y agoPeople can be sexist or unwelcoming. An image is just an image, it's an inanimate object, it doesn't have opinions of its own. It's the meaning one attaches to it that can be sexist or not - so it's in the eye of the observer. To me, women and men have the same dignity, conferred by being a human being, so I don't see a picture of a woman as sexist (in the same way that I don't see a picture of a man as sexist). Even nude art images are not sexist. Of course there have been people seeing, even using, images in a sexist way. But this should lead us to condemn those behaviours and those perpetrators. Otherwise it would be akin to saying that kitchen knives are evil because sometimes they have been used to kill people. No, kitchen knives don't have any moral connotation, it's behaviours and people that can be evil (and usually even then, the same person is not pure evil all the time). EDIT: having said this, if an image is making some people uncomfortable, we can use a different one. But in my view this seems just avoidance, a quick way out, which is going to make the original problem worse in the long term, because sexist people will remain sexist, only less discernible, in "stealth mode".
- CJefferson 6y agoI agree a single naked image of a woman is not sexist, but why is it that almost every semi-naked image or person I see in tech is female? They are used in advertisements and as "booth babes". If the image wasn't sexist, then there should have been a 50/50 chance of the standard image we use for images being a clipping of a naked man -- but I believe that would never have become a standard image used in CS. I can't prove that, but I strongly believe it.
- panta 6y agoRegarding tech, I guess it's because it's still a field where (unfortunately) there are more men than women, and since men are attracted to women, advertisement agencies use this fact to capture the attention of the audience. It's these ad people that are sexist or at least using sexual attraction as a leverage. The day a field will have more women than men, they could switch to using semi-naked male imagery (even though there could be different dynamics in play that dictate the rules). The effect is unfortunate of course, because a male dominated field becomes less compelling for women and thus creating a negative spiral.
- neilv 6y agoSounds like you have a thoughtful and nuanced rationale. I'll have to think about it. For now, I'm wondering what the effect would be, if we were all, e.g., still using the Lenna image in things we publish. Would that be discouraging to people, regardless of what nuanced rationale we could in theory give for why we continued to use it? Also, when inquisitive children read ahead and learn on their own, and come across these articles, would they, e.g., pick up on and be influenced by outmoded, restrictive gender roles?
- panta 6y agoVery well said. I have the impression that some of these fights against injustice are turning into fights against a set of labels and are effectively just sweeping the real problems under the rug. It's very well possible to be a racist even when totally avoiding the use of master-slave terminology in software, as it's possible to be inclusive and non-racist when using it. Having a binary view on concepts or people is never good in my opinion.