3 ms·

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

by pjc50 2y ago

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.

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

by 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.