3 ms·

> A person with a PhD in human things and who deals in human problems and human solutions cannot ever be Technical no matter how dense her statistics are, how m

> A person with a PhD in human things and who deals in human problems and human solutions cannot ever be Technical no matter how dense her statistics are, how many conferences she speaks at, and how comprehensively she has given examples of generating outcomes that are often beyond engineering to generate (change over time; impacts on humans; making legible even an imperfect approximation of just one single emotion). These things can be useful, interesting, valuable, heartrending, inspiring and memorable to tech, but they cannot be legitimate. This is clearly falsifiable, so I'm not sure what the idea is behind dragging this essay out for miles. The author doesn't feel like they're a technical person, fair enough, you do you and your labels. However there are plenty of people out there who tick all of those boxes despite you saying it can't be done. I know many people like this and they're often the best of both worlds, they bring a balanced and well rounded world view to bat.

pjc50 2y ago
> This is clearly falsifiable No it isn't. (Elaborate? You first.)
- deleted 2y ago
  [deleted]
- sanderjd 2y ago
  They were saying that they know of counterexamples to this statement.
  - pjc50 2y ago
    I'd be very impressed if someone can find a woman in tech who's never had her input dismissed due to "not being a technical person". The frequency of such events goes down but is difficult to bring to zero.
    - bluGill 2y ago
      I have no doubt that every woman in tech has been dismissed due to "not being technical". Even as a man I've been disrespected as not technical - I fit all the tech stereotypes. I'm well aware of the social norms that are against woman in tech that don't apply to me. However there are a lot of well respected women in tech and with not much effort they can find places where they are respected.
    - sanderjd 2y ago
      You're probably right about that, but I don't think that's the criterion? I think "considered to be non technical" is quite a bit different than "has at least once been dismissed as insufficiently technical". I work with a number of women who are clearly "Technical" in the sense of this article, even if they have been dismissed a number of times as you say. I'm totally with you (and presumably the author) that this kind of dismissal is really toxic. But I also feel like there's a no true scotsman thing going on here; if you say "actually I know Technical people who fit the author's description" the retort is "well the article isn't talking about those people!".
- Etheryte 2y ago
  As an example that nearly everyone here will now, Evan You, the creator of Vue.js, Vite and etc, has a degree in art and art history. By any metric imaginable, he's also deeply technical with a very strong track record.
  - pjc50 2y ago
    You missed the most important criterion in that list which Evan You does not match.
    - timr 2y ago
      If you're trying to imply that the whole thing is about gender, then I submit that even the author disagrees with you: > I am structurally incapable of being Technical because in the world we have built, Technical must always be conditional for people like me, buffeted around by some unearned privileges and some undeserved exclusions as mediated by people’s perceptions and the current social location of my gender, class, race, ideological perspective, the role-related identities that the label put on my work gives me, and all of the other categories our brains are using to slice up this planet in between meteor strikes. So it's not just gender, it's a whole litany of stuff, including class, race and "ideological perspective" (whatever that means) that prevents "being technical". You could be forgiven for missing this, though: the article isn't trying very hard to have a coherent point. Perhaps another reason the author isn't "technical" is an inability to write clearly.
edent 2y ago
The author isn't asserting that they feel this way. They are saying that the world doesn't see them as technical. And it is demonstrably true. Go to any (technical) conference and see how even the most technical people are denigrated or dismissed if they don't fit into the preconceived notions of the audience. Or, to simplify, https://xkcd.com/385/ https://xkcd.com/385/
- satisfice 2y ago
  But why does it matter? How is this worth spending life energy on? It’s reading a long essay by a girl who wasn’t invited to a classmate’s birthday party. Just make your own community, and call it whatever you want.
  - edent 2y ago
    I don't know how to explain to you that other people have feelings and are worth treating as humans.
  - artimaeis 2y ago
    She spent a lot of words making really solid arguments about how segregation has taken hold in some of the most influential and profitable sectors of the modern world. Let’s not pretend that casting people from it does not have consequences. The technocracy does not tolerate other communities - that’s also another of her points. The powers that drive this machine are malignant and constantly striving for monopolization and domination. Competition has become a thing to be avoided, rather than relished.
    - arkh 2y ago
      > The powers that drive this machine are malignant and constantly striving for monopolization and domination. Competition has become a thing to be avoided, rather than relished. So, Ayn Rand was right in her diagnosis?
      - artimaeis 2y ago
azeirah 2y ago
That is not what this is about. It's about being treated as non-technical because you happen to be a woman in tech. The reality of being a woman in tech comes with serious problems, and how we're treated is one of the biggest contributors to those problems.
- Edman274 2y ago
  This point is so obvious and self-evident that I'm really amazed that anybody is acting as if that's not the central thesis of the essay. One of the first links is to a PDF with a title by Mar Hicks called "Sexism is a feature, not a bug." Every single time someone argues sincerely or otherwise that sexism is no longer a problem in software development communities, please think back to the time that all these self described hackers couldn't read an essay spelling out in detail that the "technical" designation is socially constructed by everyone else without your permission and often is along gendered lines - they all read that, missing the point, and said "sure you can!" How many of these same commenters have described and will go on to describe a colleague with more mathematical, statistical, and scientific rigor than they and be like "oh, she's not that technical"? Will it be all of them?
  - satisfice 2y ago
    I just don’t get why it matters. So, redefine and reclaim whatever you want technical to mean! The term is constructed, SO CONSTRUCT IT THEN. Every single human is excluded from some club they might otherwise want to be a part of. Exclusion and inclusion, in some proportion, is the human condition. The author is a psychologist. Okay. I am a high school dropout who studies and uses psychology and sociology in my work. I am never going to be called a sociologist or a psychologist. I accept that. But I am those things, in some real and practical sense. I am a scientist and a philosopher and I am not swayed by anyone claiming those identities who tells me I’m not. They don’t have to include me in their reindeer games and I won’t waste an erg of my energy asking them to. I am technical. I am a man. I judge whether other people are technical, or for that matter whether they are men. My judgements may or may not influence other people. So what? I read the essay because I was trying to understand what her motivation is. What is her project? I’m still not sure. I don’t buy that exclusion and othering and lacking “full humanity” should or do matter (they are facts of our existence… now what? complaining about them mostly creates hostility because power is real and powerful people will act to defend themselves.) Still I found it thought provoking and endearing in a weird way. It was a usefully irritating essay by someone very different from myself.

pjc50 2y ago

> This is clearly falsifiable No it isn't. (Elaborate? You first.)

deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
sanderjd 2y ago
They were saying that they know of counterexamples to this statement.
- pjc50 2y ago
  I'd be very impressed if someone can find a woman in tech who's never had her input dismissed due to "not being a technical person". The frequency of such events goes down but is difficult to bring to zero.
  - bluGill 2y ago
    I have no doubt that every woman in tech has been dismissed due to "not being technical". Even as a man I've been disrespected as not technical - I fit all the tech stereotypes. I'm well aware of the social norms that are against woman in tech that don't apply to me. However there are a lot of well respected women in tech and with not much effort they can find places where they are respected.
  - sanderjd 2y ago
    You're probably right about that, but I don't think that's the criterion? I think "considered to be non technical" is quite a bit different than "has at least once been dismissed as insufficiently technical". I work with a number of women who are clearly "Technical" in the sense of this article, even if they have been dismissed a number of times as you say. I'm totally with you (and presumably the author) that this kind of dismissal is really toxic. But I also feel like there's a no true scotsman thing going on here; if you say "actually I know Technical people who fit the author's description" the retort is "well the article isn't talking about those people!".
Etheryte 2y ago
As an example that nearly everyone here will now, Evan You, the creator of Vue.js, Vite and etc, has a degree in art and art history. By any metric imaginable, he's also deeply technical with a very strong track record.
- pjc50 2y ago
  You missed the most important criterion in that list which Evan You does not match.
  - timr 2y ago
    If you're trying to imply that the whole thing is about gender, then I submit that even the author disagrees with you: > I am structurally incapable of being Technical because in the world we have built, Technical must always be conditional for people like me, buffeted around by some unearned privileges and some undeserved exclusions as mediated by people’s perceptions and the current social location of my gender, class, race, ideological perspective, the role-related identities that the label put on my work gives me, and all of the other categories our brains are using to slice up this planet in between meteor strikes. So it's not just gender, it's a whole litany of stuff, including class, race and "ideological perspective" (whatever that means) that prevents "being technical". You could be forgiven for missing this, though: the article isn't trying very hard to have a coherent point. Perhaps another reason the author isn't "technical" is an inability to write clearly.

edent 2y ago

The author isn't asserting that they feel this way. They are saying that the world doesn't see them as technical. And it is demonstrably true. Go to any (technical) conference and see how even the most technical people are denigrated or dismissed if they don't fit into the preconceived notions of the audience. Or, to simplify, https://xkcd.com/385/ https://xkcd.com/385/

satisfice 2y ago
But why does it matter? How is this worth spending life energy on? It’s reading a long essay by a girl who wasn’t invited to a classmate’s birthday party. Just make your own community, and call it whatever you want.
- edent 2y ago
  I don't know how to explain to you that other people have feelings and are worth treating as humans.
- artimaeis 2y ago
  She spent a lot of words making really solid arguments about how segregation has taken hold in some of the most influential and profitable sectors of the modern world. Let’s not pretend that casting people from it does not have consequences. The technocracy does not tolerate other communities - that’s also another of her points. The powers that drive this machine are malignant and constantly striving for monopolization and domination. Competition has become a thing to be avoided, rather than relished.
  - arkh 2y ago
    > The powers that drive this machine are malignant and constantly striving for monopolization and domination. Competition has become a thing to be avoided, rather than relished. So, Ayn Rand was right in her diagnosis?
    - artimaeis 2y ago

azeirah 2y ago

That is not what this is about. It's about being treated as non-technical because you happen to be a woman in tech. The reality of being a woman in tech comes with serious problems, and how we're treated is one of the biggest contributors to those problems.

Edman274 2y ago
This point is so obvious and self-evident that I'm really amazed that anybody is acting as if that's not the central thesis of the essay. One of the first links is to a PDF with a title by Mar Hicks called "Sexism is a feature, not a bug." Every single time someone argues sincerely or otherwise that sexism is no longer a problem in software development communities, please think back to the time that all these self described hackers couldn't read an essay spelling out in detail that the "technical" designation is socially constructed by everyone else without your permission and often is along gendered lines - they all read that, missing the point, and said "sure you can!" How many of these same commenters have described and will go on to describe a colleague with more mathematical, statistical, and scientific rigor than they and be like "oh, she's not that technical"? Will it be all of them?
- satisfice 2y ago
  I just don’t get why it matters. So, redefine and reclaim whatever you want technical to mean! The term is constructed, SO CONSTRUCT IT THEN. Every single human is excluded from some club they might otherwise want to be a part of. Exclusion and inclusion, in some proportion, is the human condition. The author is a psychologist. Okay. I am a high school dropout who studies and uses psychology and sociology in my work. I am never going to be called a sociologist or a psychologist. I accept that. But I am those things, in some real and practical sense. I am a scientist and a philosopher and I am not swayed by anyone claiming those identities who tells me I’m not. They don’t have to include me in their reindeer games and I won’t waste an erg of my energy asking them to. I am technical. I am a man. I judge whether other people are technical, or for that matter whether they are men. My judgements may or may not influence other people. So what? I read the essay because I was trying to understand what her motivation is. What is her project? I’m still not sure. I don’t buy that exclusion and othering and lacking “full humanity” should or do matter (they are facts of our existence… now what? complaining about them mostly creates hostility because power is real and powerful people will act to defend themselves.) Still I found it thought provoking and endearing in a weird way. It was a usefully irritating essay by someone very different from myself.