7 ms·

It seems to me that this is where the men on the team can help: As a man, I'd volunteer to take notes. Of course, this may not be tempting, because you may be

It seems to me that this is where the men on the team can help: As a man, I'd volunteer to take notes. Of course, this may not be tempting, because you may be on the kind of team where you just know that, if you volunteer to do some thankless task, you'll be stuck with it forever. And that is an entirely different kind of problem. But it's a problem that should not be covered up by deploying sexism.

enginous 15y ago
That's true, and an even more powerful response of a man in this position is to deal with the problem less passively by (a) pointing out the trend without making a big deal, (b) suggesting that the team rotate more often, (c) proceeding to lead by example by taking notes. This may be even too subtle a message for a problem as severe as this one, but it at least signals that not everyone within the team will tolerate this behavior, without claims of sexism backed by little evidence.
ComputerGuru 15y ago
As a man, I've handled this by being the one to turn it into an obvious sexist thing by making a joke aloud "yeah, Sarah, boss says it's your turn to take notes again because, you know, you're the only girl at the table :P. Ha ha ha ha." Everyone laughs, boss realizes what he's doing, Sarah is off the hook.
- ckpwong 15y ago
  Yes, your comment may get Sarah off the hook, but I'd probably feel even more offended by that comment than by the boss' request. If she has the courage to display any disdain over your overtly sexism comment though, perhaps the boss would take (mental) note. At the same time, the boss may not even be aware of the sexism in the initial request--he/she may rationalize the request/decision after-the-fact, even if it were made in a sexist light at a subconscious level. In that case, that comment may end up offending both the boss and Sarah. (And yes, women in management sometimes are more sexist against female subordinates than male counterparts.) If you follow up your comment with an apology and an offer to take notes, however, everyone will feel better.
  - lordlicorice 15y ago
    How is that remotely offensive? I think you need to re-read his post.
    - mirkules 15y ago
      If you worked in a "traditional" corporate environment, you would know why it's offensive. General rule of thumb is, don't say it if you wouldn't say it to your mother. I certainly wouldn't say that to my mother. Edit: to elaborate, corporations aren't concerned with being labeled as sexist. They are worried about being sued because of sexism, because it's one of the toughest kinds of corporate lawsuits to defend against, and one of the most lucrative kinds of lawsuits for the plaintiff. (IANAL though)
  - mst 15y ago
    His turn of phrase suggested to me that said overtly sexist common would me delivered with sufficiently dripping sarcasm to make it clear he wasn't in favour of the idea. I think I might say "yes, boss, because the possession of a penis renders one incapable of note taking, obviously" instead but that's more about the turn of phrase of my sense of humour than anything else.
- georgieporgie 15y ago
  And I, in turn, would blurt out, "yeah, Sarah's a girl because she doesn't menstruate. Hahaha" and everyone would grow more uncomfortable. Edit: it's really sad that HN has such a devotion to using the word "girl" to describe women. It's flat-out demeaning, whether you want to admit it or not.
  - hermannj314 15y ago
    I found an article about racism in the antebellum South and the cultural norm of referring to an adult black man as a "boy". I never really considered that calling a woman a 'girl' was a way to demean or lower them in status (I do use the word on occasion). I think the key difference is that I would never address a woman as a girl ("Come here, girl") but I may refer to someone as a girl if she in her 20's or younger ("Hey, that girl dropped her college id, can you give it to her?) Or I might say "Do you want to see if any of the girls in accounting want to go to lunch?" Is this really the bar for modern-day sexism?
    - JonnieCache 15y ago
      In modern feminist circles they have apparently settled on "lady" as a dignified compromise between the infantilising "girl" and the sometimes undesirably serious "woman."
    - georgieporgie 15y ago
      How is it not demeaning and condescending to call an adult woman by the word used to describe the immature state of her sex? Why can't you simply say "women"? What's the impediment? Why do you so cling to "girl"?
      - hermannj314 15y ago
        I agree that there are contexts where calling a woman a "girl" is demeaning and condescending. This is clear. And I think labeling a word as "demeaning" requires one of two things: a subjective component (the response of the person at whom the word was directed believing the word was demeaning) or an objective component (the intent of the speaker of the word intending it to be demeaning). I think if we agree with this, it isn't hard to fabricate examples where calling an adult female a "girl" is, in fact, demeaning. Now if we agree on that, then to make any absolute claim that calling a woman a "girl" is demeaning then we must either make some universal claim about the intent of all those who use the word or a universal claim about the reaction of all those that hear it. I think either of those claims might be overreaching. Or maybe I'm just setting the bar too high. We obviously live in different parts of the world with different social expectations for language use. Beyond a certain point, arguing about when it is ok to say woman or girl is just pointless bickering over divergent cultural expectations and nothing more. I respect your viewpoint, you have definitely made me think. I now consider myself a Level 3 misogynist (up from 1).
gurkendoktor 15y ago
> Of course, this may not be tempting, because you may be on the kind of team where you just know that, if you volunteer to do some thankless task, you'll be stuck with it forever. That is only the second thing that came to my mind. The other "danger" is being the only guy to act like that, then looking like a desperate "white knight" to the brogrammer crowd. Which sucks, because these exist and can be terribly creepy, and that gets you onto the women's side of the sexism. Not that it is a valid reason, of course.
- ErrantX 15y ago
  You have to be careful how you do it as well. Because I offered to do a task like that (it wasn't note taking, I think it was making tea) saying something like [names changed] "Chris, I'm not sure why Amy is always asked to make the tea! I'll happily do it". Which I thought was politely volunteering whilst also publicly raising my bosses problematic behaviour - an educational experience. I got glowering dagger stares from "Amy", and afterwards she told me she felt humiliated because I'd exposed her as a target of sexism, which made her feel like a failure. Which is awful that it had come to that (and in retrospect I was an idiot...). So; use this approach with caution! Edit: though in my defence "Chris" did improve no end after that; giving"Amy" only her fair share of mundane tasks, etc.
  - olliesaunders 15y ago
    Amy shouldn’t be blaming herself for being the victim of sexist behavior. You could have tried to convince her of that. Even though you didn’t, you weren’t an idiot here. Aside from her internal negative reaction, the situation was actually improved.
    - jasonlotito 15y ago
      From the sound of it, she's not. She's blaming ErrantX. What I gather is, she didn't feel offended, and rather, by him doing what he did, make her feel as if others saw her as being "offended." I think that is much more likely the case. The question is, should ErrantX be offended for other people? If he's offended, he should speak up. But being offended for other people implies they are also offended. And, if they aren't, sends the wrong signals.
__abc 15y ago
I don't understand the "as a man" part. That's further propagating the problem. I'd rather we point out "sexist behavior" to help make it stop vs introduce an even more subtler sexist behavior In your senario: You, as a man, aware that she as a women, can get treated differently, so you will then treat her differently based on that. You see, you are still treating her differently, where ultimately, no one treats her differently. Reminds me of this quote from Morgan Freeman in an interview Wallace: Black History Month you find... Freeman: Ridiculous. Wallace: Why? Freeman: You're going to relegate my history to a month? Wallace: Oh, come on... Freeman: What do you do with yours? Which month is White History Month? Wallace: Well... Freeman: Come on, tell me. Wallace: I'm Jewish. Freeman: OK. Which month is Jewish History Month? Wallace: There isn't one. Freeman: Oh. Oh. Why not? Do you want one? Wallace: No. No. Freeman: Alright. I don't either. I don't want a Black History Month. Black history is American history. Wallace: How are we going to get rid of racism...? Freeman: Stop talking about it. I'm going to stop calling you a white man. And I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man. I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman.
- arien 15y ago
  Exactly. The moment we stop looking at "men" and "women" or "black" and "white" and start looking at "people" is when these things are truly sorted out.
  - n_time 15y ago
    This is never going to happen, and IMHO should not. Equality is not equivalency and none of us are colour blind. The key is accepting differences when they ARE there. That said, class is a way bigger difference than race. :P EDIT: I'm definitely not saying that the subjective perceived differences in gender and race are real, or that bigotry and ignorance are cool.
    - arien 15y ago
      We are all different, but that doesn't mean we must be treated different at all times. At work we are all workers. We may be treated differently depending on our position within the company, because that is relevant to our job and duties. But how is it relevant and useful to treat employees or colleagues differently because they are this or that? Does it bring any more profit, productivity or anything positive at all? We can't be looking at these differences all the time, because most of the time they do not matter at all within the context. This is what people don't get.

enginous 15y ago

That's true, and an even more powerful response of a man in this position is to deal with the problem less passively by (a) pointing out the trend without making a big deal, (b) suggesting that the team rotate more often, (c) proceeding to lead by example by taking notes. This may be even too subtle a message for a problem as severe as this one, but it at least signals that not everyone within the team will tolerate this behavior, without claims of sexism backed by little evidence.

ComputerGuru 15y ago

As a man, I've handled this by being the one to turn it into an obvious sexist thing by making a joke aloud "yeah, Sarah, boss says it's your turn to take notes again because, you know, you're the only girl at the table :P. Ha ha ha ha." Everyone laughs, boss realizes what he's doing, Sarah is off the hook.

ckpwong 15y ago
Yes, your comment may get Sarah off the hook, but I'd probably feel even more offended by that comment than by the boss' request. If she has the courage to display any disdain over your overtly sexism comment though, perhaps the boss would take (mental) note. At the same time, the boss may not even be aware of the sexism in the initial request--he/she may rationalize the request/decision after-the-fact, even if it were made in a sexist light at a subconscious level. In that case, that comment may end up offending both the boss and Sarah. (And yes, women in management sometimes are more sexist against female subordinates than male counterparts.) If you follow up your comment with an apology and an offer to take notes, however, everyone will feel better.
- lordlicorice 15y ago
  How is that remotely offensive? I think you need to re-read his post.
  - mirkules 15y ago
    If you worked in a "traditional" corporate environment, you would know why it's offensive. General rule of thumb is, don't say it if you wouldn't say it to your mother. I certainly wouldn't say that to my mother. Edit: to elaborate, corporations aren't concerned with being labeled as sexist. They are worried about being sued because of sexism, because it's one of the toughest kinds of corporate lawsuits to defend against, and one of the most lucrative kinds of lawsuits for the plaintiff. (IANAL though)
- mst 15y ago
  His turn of phrase suggested to me that said overtly sexist common would me delivered with sufficiently dripping sarcasm to make it clear he wasn't in favour of the idea. I think I might say "yes, boss, because the possession of a penis renders one incapable of note taking, obviously" instead but that's more about the turn of phrase of my sense of humour than anything else.
georgieporgie 15y ago
And I, in turn, would blurt out, "yeah, Sarah's a girl because she doesn't menstruate. Hahaha" and everyone would grow more uncomfortable. Edit: it's really sad that HN has such a devotion to using the word "girl" to describe women. It's flat-out demeaning, whether you want to admit it or not.
- hermannj314 15y ago
  I found an article about racism in the antebellum South and the cultural norm of referring to an adult black man as a "boy". I never really considered that calling a woman a 'girl' was a way to demean or lower them in status (I do use the word on occasion). I think the key difference is that I would never address a woman as a girl ("Come here, girl") but I may refer to someone as a girl if she in her 20's or younger ("Hey, that girl dropped her college id, can you give it to her?) Or I might say "Do you want to see if any of the girls in accounting want to go to lunch?" Is this really the bar for modern-day sexism?
  - JonnieCache 15y ago
    In modern feminist circles they have apparently settled on "lady" as a dignified compromise between the infantilising "girl" and the sometimes undesirably serious "woman."
  - georgieporgie 15y ago
    How is it not demeaning and condescending to call an adult woman by the word used to describe the immature state of her sex? Why can't you simply say "women"? What's the impediment? Why do you so cling to "girl"?
    - hermannj314 15y ago
      I agree that there are contexts where calling a woman a "girl" is demeaning and condescending. This is clear. And I think labeling a word as "demeaning" requires one of two things: a subjective component (the response of the person at whom the word was directed believing the word was demeaning) or an objective component (the intent of the speaker of the word intending it to be demeaning). I think if we agree with this, it isn't hard to fabricate examples where calling an adult female a "girl" is, in fact, demeaning. Now if we agree on that, then to make any absolute claim that calling a woman a "girl" is demeaning then we must either make some universal claim about the intent of all those who use the word or a universal claim about the reaction of all those that hear it. I think either of those claims might be overreaching. Or maybe I'm just setting the bar too high. We obviously live in different parts of the world with different social expectations for language use. Beyond a certain point, arguing about when it is ok to say woman or girl is just pointless bickering over divergent cultural expectations and nothing more. I respect your viewpoint, you have definitely made me think. I now consider myself a Level 3 misogynist (up from 1).

gurkendoktor 15y ago

> Of course, this may not be tempting, because you may be on the kind of team where you just know that, if you volunteer to do some thankless task, you'll be stuck with it forever. That is only the second thing that came to my mind. The other "danger" is being the only guy to act like that, then looking like a desperate "white knight" to the brogrammer crowd. Which sucks, because these exist and can be terribly creepy, and that gets you onto the women's side of the sexism. Not that it is a valid reason, of course.

ErrantX 15y ago
You have to be careful how you do it as well. Because I offered to do a task like that (it wasn't note taking, I think it was making tea) saying something like [names changed] "Chris, I'm not sure why Amy is always asked to make the tea! I'll happily do it". Which I thought was politely volunteering whilst also publicly raising my bosses problematic behaviour - an educational experience. I got glowering dagger stares from "Amy", and afterwards she told me she felt humiliated because I'd exposed her as a target of sexism, which made her feel like a failure. Which is awful that it had come to that (and in retrospect I was an idiot...). So; use this approach with caution! Edit: though in my defence "Chris" did improve no end after that; giving"Amy" only her fair share of mundane tasks, etc.
- olliesaunders 15y ago
  Amy shouldn’t be blaming herself for being the victim of sexist behavior. You could have tried to convince her of that. Even though you didn’t, you weren’t an idiot here. Aside from her internal negative reaction, the situation was actually improved.
  - jasonlotito 15y ago
    From the sound of it, she's not. She's blaming ErrantX. What I gather is, she didn't feel offended, and rather, by him doing what he did, make her feel as if others saw her as being "offended." I think that is much more likely the case. The question is, should ErrantX be offended for other people? If he's offended, he should speak up. But being offended for other people implies they are also offended. And, if they aren't, sends the wrong signals.

__abc 15y ago

I don't understand the "as a man" part. That's further propagating the problem. I'd rather we point out "sexist behavior" to help make it stop vs introduce an even more subtler sexist behavior In your senario: You, as a man, aware that she as a women, can get treated differently, so you will then treat her differently based on that. You see, you are still treating her differently, where ultimately, no one treats her differently. Reminds me of this quote from Morgan Freeman in an interview Wallace: Black History Month you find... Freeman: Ridiculous. Wallace: Why? Freeman: You're going to relegate my history to a month? Wallace: Oh, come on... Freeman: What do you do with yours? Which month is White History Month? Wallace: Well... Freeman: Come on, tell me. Wallace: I'm Jewish. Freeman: OK. Which month is Jewish History Month? Wallace: There isn't one. Freeman: Oh. Oh. Why not? Do you want one? Wallace: No. No. Freeman: Alright. I don't either. I don't want a Black History Month. Black history is American history. Wallace: How are we going to get rid of racism...? Freeman: Stop talking about it. I'm going to stop calling you a white man. And I'm going to ask you to stop calling me a black man. I know you as Mike Wallace. You know me as Morgan Freeman.

arien 15y ago
Exactly. The moment we stop looking at "men" and "women" or "black" and "white" and start looking at "people" is when these things are truly sorted out.
- n_time 15y ago
  This is never going to happen, and IMHO should not. Equality is not equivalency and none of us are colour blind. The key is accepting differences when they ARE there. That said, class is a way bigger difference than race. :P EDIT: I'm definitely not saying that the subjective perceived differences in gender and race are real, or that bigotry and ignorance are cool.
  - arien 15y ago
    We are all different, but that doesn't mean we must be treated different at all times. At work we are all workers. We may be treated differently depending on our position within the company, because that is relevant to our job and duties. But how is it relevant and useful to treat employees or colleagues differently because they are this or that? Does it bring any more profit, productivity or anything positive at all? We can't be looking at these differences all the time, because most of the time they do not matter at all within the context. This is what people don't get.