6 ms·

I have had the misfortune of seeing how very deep this sexism goes- it's not just sexual harassment that's an issue (though I will say, it's the most pressing),

I have had the misfortune of seeing how very deep this sexism goes- it's not just sexual harassment that's an issue (though I will say, it's the most pressing), but also the prejudices women meet in the tech world. It's as if there are two major discussions about women's roles in tech: women are either assumed to be underqualified or over glamorized. Get more women into tech, and then get over having them there.

coldtea 14y ago
>it's not just sexual harassment that's an issue How does discern sexual harassment (between adults with no business ties between them) from flirting? I ask because I've also seen flirting remakers being conceived as "harassement". That "the place was not appropriate" or "it was uncalled for" is not a proper answer I think. There would be VERY FEW relationships and/or marriages if people never approached other people out of the blue and in non-appropriate places (in a conference for example).
- steveklabnik 14y ago
  It's pretty simple: if you're not sure, don't do it.
  - coldtea 14y ago
    Really? That's quite a naive view. Are people (men/women/gay) ever SURE about when to flirt with another person? By this logic, half of the population would have never been born (which might have been a good thing, with respect to overpopulation and all, but that's a different argument).
    - steveklabnik 14y ago
      What you're saying is, "I am willing to possibly sexually assault someone in order to get a date." You're a bad person.
      - coldtea 14y ago
        >What you're saying is, "I am willing to possibly sexually assault someone in order to get a date." No. That's the strawman you made out of what I'm saying. Can you please respond to what I actually said and not put words in my mouth as you please? What I'm saying is: some people can also consider completely casual flirting to be a "sexual assault". As in, when you're flirting you're never sure beforehand if the other part wants your flirt. And in many cases, it takes a little time to win them over (or fail). It's not like there's a standard protocol: "OK, you can flirt me now". And yes, people DO fall in love in tech conferences, or meet possible partners, as they do in ANY other place, including offices and funerals. So they do have the right to approach someone else they like there. >You're a bad person And who are you to tell me that? Apparently in your mind verbally assaulting someone you disagree with and telling them they are a "bad person" is perfectly OK? That's your idea of making the world better by stoping sexism? Introducing hatr-ism?
- nexxy 14y ago
  wow, you are clueless. Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction. get it together.
  - coldtea 14y ago
    >wow, you are clueless. By all means, enlighten me. >Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction. Sure, you need an introduction. I'm not talking about crash pickup lines or jerk behaviour. But if you like the other person, why would you say anything less in a tech conference that what you are OK to say in the park or the library or wherever? Plus, this isn't 1950 Sunday school. People don't just like each other because of a "interest in who they are as a person". People can _also_ like each other on the physical level, and/or have one-night-stands and the like. And modern people don't find anything wrong with that. >get it together. May I suggest you avoid making offhanded remarks about me as a person such as the above?
- flaviusb 14y ago
  Haha, no. You are conflating two things (tell vs ask - ie unrestricted flirting vs social SYN, SYN ACK, ACK). The former can be good, but has massive externalities when allowed at (for example) tech conferences, or any are where you want a 'safe space', whereas the latter is fairly safe, and is not what is usually under discussion. This is a classic coordination problem, which has been solved by game theory. You see, there are actually places that people go to in order to flirt, where that is the primary (or a specific secondary) purpose; singles bars, mixers, dance clubs - there can even be spaces for this kind of stuff inside of other spaces where it would be otherwise inappropriate, for example 'work mixers', or 'geek mixers' at tech conferences. Unrestricted flirting in those locations does not have serious negative externalities, and so is not harassment. So, the solution is to seriously restrict flirting at tech conferences as a form of harassment, but allow SYN, SYN ACK, ACK exchanges, and have people who want to flirt go to singles bars or 'geek mixer' events. Can you understand this?
lisabarone 14y ago
It's not just enough to get women into tech. You have to get them to STAY in tech. Because that's becoming an even bigger problem. We're here. We're vocal. And then we leave because of crappy things that happen to us. It's a lot to ask someone to be put through that time and time again.
- oh_sigh 14y ago
  It's amazing you know the inner lives and decisions of all, or even a large group of women. Tell me where you get your diving powers.
  - steveklabnik 14y ago
    Actually, the statistics show an incredibly high attrition rate. No getting in heads required.
    - oh_sigh 14y ago
      Can you link me to these statistics that you know about? And can you link me to statistics from other fields? And can you link me to statistics which talk about why the women left the field? What if women leave the field because they can't countenance working long hours with little social interaction like many men can? That could account for the high attrition rate while not being because of any sexism in the sector.
      - steveklabnik 14y ago
        Attrition specifically: > The NCWIT reports 56 percent of women in technology companies leave their > organizations mid-way through their careers, representing a significant and > costly loss of talent. Reducing the attrition rate by just one quarter > would add more than 200,000 staff to the IT workforce. http://blog.comptia.org/2012/03/01/attract-women-to-high-tech/ http://blog.comptia.org/2012/03/01/attract-women-to-high-tec... Tons of links: http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2012-06-11-diversity-and-women-in-technology-resources http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2012-06-11-diversity-an... One of my friends has a series of blog posts. Even if you don't care for the text, she makes extensive citations: http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-08-16-the-elephant-in-the-computer-lab http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-08-16-the-elephant... http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-09-08-delicious-data-ethnicity-of-computing-and-the-us-population http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-09-08-delicious-da...
nacker 14y ago
How about a government mandated quota of females in every industry or company? The EU is introducing this kind of enlightened, progressive approach to gender equality on company boards: 'The Commission wants to see more women represented in the making of economically significant decisions and has proposed a minimum harmonisation measure binding on all listed companies to create a level landscape. By 2020 all European listed companies should have at least 40% of their non-executive directors from the "under-represented gender". The Commission considers this project to be part of the completion of the single market project as well as an initiative to remedy an inequality. The measure is expected to impact upon 5,000 companies from across the Union.' http://wedlakebell.com/articles-and-comment/2013/02/08/corporate-board-gender-quota/ http://wedlakebell.com/articles-and-comment/2013/02/08/corpo...

coldtea 14y ago

>it's not just sexual harassment that's an issue How does discern sexual harassment (between adults with no business ties between them) from flirting? I ask because I've also seen flirting remakers being conceived as "harassement". That "the place was not appropriate" or "it was uncalled for" is not a proper answer I think. There would be VERY FEW relationships and/or marriages if people never approached other people out of the blue and in non-appropriate places (in a conference for example).

steveklabnik 14y ago
It's pretty simple: if you're not sure, don't do it.
- coldtea 14y ago
  Really? That's quite a naive view. Are people (men/women/gay) ever SURE about when to flirt with another person? By this logic, half of the population would have never been born (which might have been a good thing, with respect to overpopulation and all, but that's a different argument).
  - steveklabnik 14y ago
    What you're saying is, "I am willing to possibly sexually assault someone in order to get a date." You're a bad person.
    - coldtea 14y ago
      >What you're saying is, "I am willing to possibly sexually assault someone in order to get a date." No. That's the strawman you made out of what I'm saying. Can you please respond to what I actually said and not put words in my mouth as you please? What I'm saying is: some people can also consider completely casual flirting to be a "sexual assault". As in, when you're flirting you're never sure beforehand if the other part wants your flirt. And in many cases, it takes a little time to win them over (or fail). It's not like there's a standard protocol: "OK, you can flirt me now". And yes, people DO fall in love in tech conferences, or meet possible partners, as they do in ANY other place, including offices and funerals. So they do have the right to approach someone else they like there. >You're a bad person And who are you to tell me that? Apparently in your mind verbally assaulting someone you disagree with and telling them they are a "bad person" is perfectly OK? That's your idea of making the world better by stoping sexism? Introducing hatr-ism?
nexxy 14y ago
wow, you are clueless. Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction. get it together.
- coldtea 14y ago
  >wow, you are clueless. By all means, enlighten me. >Approaching someone and engaging in conversation with them out of potential interest in who they are as a person is nowhere near the same thing as making offhanded remarks on their physical appearance without so much as an introduction. Sure, you need an introduction. I'm not talking about crash pickup lines or jerk behaviour. But if you like the other person, why would you say anything less in a tech conference that what you are OK to say in the park or the library or wherever? Plus, this isn't 1950 Sunday school. People don't just like each other because of a "interest in who they are as a person". People can _also_ like each other on the physical level, and/or have one-night-stands and the like. And modern people don't find anything wrong with that. >get it together. May I suggest you avoid making offhanded remarks about me as a person such as the above?
flaviusb 14y ago
Haha, no. You are conflating two things (tell vs ask - ie unrestricted flirting vs social SYN, SYN ACK, ACK). The former can be good, but has massive externalities when allowed at (for example) tech conferences, or any are where you want a 'safe space', whereas the latter is fairly safe, and is not what is usually under discussion. This is a classic coordination problem, which has been solved by game theory. You see, there are actually places that people go to in order to flirt, where that is the primary (or a specific secondary) purpose; singles bars, mixers, dance clubs - there can even be spaces for this kind of stuff inside of other spaces where it would be otherwise inappropriate, for example 'work mixers', or 'geek mixers' at tech conferences. Unrestricted flirting in those locations does not have serious negative externalities, and so is not harassment. So, the solution is to seriously restrict flirting at tech conferences as a form of harassment, but allow SYN, SYN ACK, ACK exchanges, and have people who want to flirt go to singles bars or 'geek mixer' events. Can you understand this?

lisabarone 14y ago

It's not just enough to get women into tech. You have to get them to STAY in tech. Because that's becoming an even bigger problem. We're here. We're vocal. And then we leave because of crappy things that happen to us. It's a lot to ask someone to be put through that time and time again.

oh_sigh 14y ago
It's amazing you know the inner lives and decisions of all, or even a large group of women. Tell me where you get your diving powers.
- steveklabnik 14y ago
  Actually, the statistics show an incredibly high attrition rate. No getting in heads required.
  - oh_sigh 14y ago
    Can you link me to these statistics that you know about? And can you link me to statistics from other fields? And can you link me to statistics which talk about why the women left the field? What if women leave the field because they can't countenance working long hours with little social interaction like many men can? That could account for the high attrition rate while not being because of any sexism in the sector.
    - steveklabnik 14y ago
      Attrition specifically: > The NCWIT reports 56 percent of women in technology companies leave their > organizations mid-way through their careers, representing a significant and > costly loss of talent. Reducing the attrition rate by just one quarter > would add more than 200,000 staff to the IT workforce. http://blog.comptia.org/2012/03/01/attract-women-to-high-tech/ http://blog.comptia.org/2012/03/01/attract-women-to-high-tec... Tons of links: http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2012-06-11-diversity-and-women-in-technology-resources http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2012-06-11-diversity-an... One of my friends has a series of blog posts. Even if you don't care for the text, she makes extensive citations: http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-08-16-the-elephant-in-the-computer-lab http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-08-16-the-elephant... http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-09-08-delicious-data-ethnicity-of-computing-and-the-us-population http://www.rarlindseysmash.com/posts/2011-09-08-delicious-da...

nacker 14y ago

How about a government mandated quota of females in every industry or company? The EU is introducing this kind of enlightened, progressive approach to gender equality on company boards: 'The Commission wants to see more women represented in the making of economically significant decisions and has proposed a minimum harmonisation measure binding on all listed companies to create a level landscape. By 2020 all European listed companies should have at least 40% of their non-executive directors from the "under-represented gender". The Commission considers this project to be part of the completion of the single market project as well as an initiative to remedy an inequality. The measure is expected to impact upon 5,000 companies from across the Union.' http://wedlakebell.com/articles-and-comment/2013/02/08/corporate-board-gender-quota/ http://wedlakebell.com/articles-and-comment/2013/02/08/corpo...