3 ms·

I've had an idea I proposed in a meeting ignored, only to be greeted warmly and immediately adopted when proposed later in the exact same meeting... by a woman

I've had an idea I proposed in a meeting ignored, only to be greeted warmly and immediately adopted when proposed later in the exact same meeting... by a woman (and not one higher than me on the "totem pole", either). I didn't interpret it as sexism, but if I'd been a woman and her a man, I guess I probably would have taken it as not just sexism, but egregious sexism, the kind of blatant crap one can hardly believe exists. I gather that's actually one of the nasty things about sexism—it's hard to really be sure when what's happening is sexism, versus when it's just ordinary shitty things that happen to everyone.

altairprime 4y ago
Your anecdote lacks any information on existing social networking that may be in effect, that could provide a gender-agnostic explanation for this outcome. This outcome occurs quite regularly with engineers who disregard social networking with their leadership, regardless of the gender of those who have invested in networking and reap the rewards of it in recognition and “being heard”. You’d need to establish a pattern of refusal to network with non-women, in order to have grounds to pursue a gendered case, given only this anecdote as evidence.
- yamtaddle 4y ago
  Oh, of course. Again, I don't think it was sexism. But something that, under other circumstances, would look very very much like blatant sexism—might not be. Which causes problems for lots of women (I've heard) because they'll hesitate to act on actual sexism, due to all the second-guessing. This is relevant for the study, because "experienced a thing that, viewed through a certain lens, looks a ton like sexism" is something that I could answer "yes" to (more than once, actually! That was just the one that would have most-looked-like sexism if our positions had been reversed)... but I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Without some kind of baseline rate for this stuff, it's hard to tell what's actually going on. Further, as men and women might interpret the exact same events differently, you'd really need an observational study to begin to suss out the reality—a survey's not going to cut it, beyond maybe providing guidance on areas for further research.
  - altairprime 4y ago
    Men don’t need more studies to tell them it’s unethical behavior. They’ll just ignore those studies, same as they’ve ignored the past few decades of them. Men need other men to tell them it’s unacceptable behavior. No further studies are needed to confirm that poppy-cutting behaviors are unethical. Ending support for those behaviors has no downsides. If men, and women, stop tolerating these behaviors, then the world will improve: either the behaviors will stop being perceived (success!), and/or the true underlying cause of the misperceptions of those behaviors will be revealed (success!). This survey indicates that three quarters of women surveyed reported perceiving these behaviors occurring without censure or punishment, so there’s a lot of work left to do by those in power - so, mostly, men - to stop tolerating them. (Women will need to stop as well, but their motivations as the underclass are considerably different from men. That’s no excuse for inaction by men.)
    - yamtaddle 4y ago
      Of course, as I posted elsewhere in this thread: > (Nb. this doesn't necessarily mean that the proposed reforms aren't a good idea) The study just seems to be... kinda useless, due to how poorly it's designed, and the study's what's linked (well, a press-release-type story about the study, anyway). But yes, reducing shitty behavior is nice for ~everyone even if 0% of it turns out to be driven by sexism (which I doubt is the case, but taking the extreme emphasizes that it's good absolutely). However, the most-effective approaches to reducing it may well differ depending on how much of it's driven by sexism, about which this study seems to tell us nothing, despite that sure looking like the angle they're going for.
      - altairprime 4y ago
        Yeah, I wish there was more data on why people do this — but I’d rather see people stop it when they see it, because that works regardless of motivations.
midoridensha 4y ago
It's like this with many forms of discrimination: it can be difficult to really discern the offending person's true motivation. Did they treat you badly because they're a racist or sexist? Or are they just an asshole or an idiot? For a single bad incident, you usually can't tell unless they specifically say something that's racist/sexist; otherwise, you need to see a larger pattern of behavior.

altairprime 4y ago

Your anecdote lacks any information on existing social networking that may be in effect, that could provide a gender-agnostic explanation for this outcome. This outcome occurs quite regularly with engineers who disregard social networking with their leadership, regardless of the gender of those who have invested in networking and reap the rewards of it in recognition and “being heard”. You’d need to establish a pattern of refusal to network with non-women, in order to have grounds to pursue a gendered case, given only this anecdote as evidence.

yamtaddle 4y ago
Oh, of course. Again, I don't think it was sexism. But something that, under other circumstances, would look very very much like blatant sexism—might not be. Which causes problems for lots of women (I've heard) because they'll hesitate to act on actual sexism, due to all the second-guessing. This is relevant for the study, because "experienced a thing that, viewed through a certain lens, looks a ton like sexism" is something that I could answer "yes" to (more than once, actually! That was just the one that would have most-looked-like sexism if our positions had been reversed)... but I'm pretty sure it wasn't. Without some kind of baseline rate for this stuff, it's hard to tell what's actually going on. Further, as men and women might interpret the exact same events differently, you'd really need an observational study to begin to suss out the reality—a survey's not going to cut it, beyond maybe providing guidance on areas for further research.
- altairprime 4y ago
  Men don’t need more studies to tell them it’s unethical behavior. They’ll just ignore those studies, same as they’ve ignored the past few decades of them. Men need other men to tell them it’s unacceptable behavior. No further studies are needed to confirm that poppy-cutting behaviors are unethical. Ending support for those behaviors has no downsides. If men, and women, stop tolerating these behaviors, then the world will improve: either the behaviors will stop being perceived (success!), and/or the true underlying cause of the misperceptions of those behaviors will be revealed (success!). This survey indicates that three quarters of women surveyed reported perceiving these behaviors occurring without censure or punishment, so there’s a lot of work left to do by those in power - so, mostly, men - to stop tolerating them. (Women will need to stop as well, but their motivations as the underclass are considerably different from men. That’s no excuse for inaction by men.)
  - yamtaddle 4y ago
    Of course, as I posted elsewhere in this thread: > (Nb. this doesn't necessarily mean that the proposed reforms aren't a good idea) The study just seems to be... kinda useless, due to how poorly it's designed, and the study's what's linked (well, a press-release-type story about the study, anyway). But yes, reducing shitty behavior is nice for ~everyone even if 0% of it turns out to be driven by sexism (which I doubt is the case, but taking the extreme emphasizes that it's good absolutely). However, the most-effective approaches to reducing it may well differ depending on how much of it's driven by sexism, about which this study seems to tell us nothing, despite that sure looking like the angle they're going for.
    - altairprime 4y ago
      Yeah, I wish there was more data on why people do this — but I’d rather see people stop it when they see it, because that works regardless of motivations.

midoridensha 4y ago

It's like this with many forms of discrimination: it can be difficult to really discern the offending person's true motivation. Did they treat you badly because they're a racist or sexist? Or are they just an asshole or an idiot? For a single bad incident, you usually can't tell unless they specifically say something that's racist/sexist; otherwise, you need to see a larger pattern of behavior.