3 ms·

Which misogynists? The ones who made threatening/abusive comments on Twitter? Or are you calling anyone who disagrees with Richards's handling of this situation

Which misogynists? The ones who made threatening/abusive comments on Twitter? Or are you calling anyone who disagrees with Richards's handling of this situation a misogynist? If the former, don't worry. Those people don't represent the tech community, they are kids who hang out on imageboards and spread hate. To everyone. Including men. Do I need to provide some examples of /b/ tarring and feathering male victims on the internet? Or can we all agree that trolls attacking people online is nothing new? If the latter, then your logic is broken. And I'd argue that anyone who subscribes to said logic doesn't have the mental capacity to work in tech, so we don't have to worry about deterrence; they'd be filtered out anyway.

wpietri 14y ago
I'm going to keep worrying. I agree that those people don't represent the tech community. On the other hand, their behavior has caused legitimate fear among women in tech about speaking up. And it's not like the tech community rose up as one against the hatemongers: there was a lot of quiet and not-so-quiet support for how things turned out. There was plenty of aggressive examination of what Adria Richards did, with a lot less focus on anybody else, or on anything that led up to what she did. So I believe that Ryan McGreal is right in saying the misogynists had a victory. A partial one, though; good things have come out of it as well.
- obstacle1 14y ago
  I fail to see what "rising up" against an army of random alt accounts on Twitter would have accomplished. Those are people completely irrelevant to the scene, we don't work with them, they don't contribute to our culture, we're not responsible for their actions, we're not even affected by their actions (no, being tweeted at is not being affected). Not addressing them is the best course of action. Further I don't really see evidence of this having caused more fear among women in tech. In fact one of the more popular blog responses was written by a woman, speaking out against _both_ Adria Richards and the Twitter Idiots. Guess she forgot to retract into her shell for that one. >There was plenty of aggressive examination of what Adria Richards did Which is how it should have been. She handled the situation in a shockingly ridiculous way. _Shockingly_. And it turned out she had a history of doing such shockingly antagonistic things to anyone who wasn't black and/or a woman. People must know that being a member of a "protected class" isn't a license to be a complete asshole, and it isn't a license to abuse your professional standing to further your political cause. We need to foster a culture of civility all-around. This is what the "woman fired for calling out sexism" crew is missing. Maybe those who are still shilling the extremist "OMG SYSTEMIC MISOGYNY" line should head to pyvideo.org. A good number of the talks at the con were given by women. THESE women were the ones "speaking out" -- as part of the community, on merit, rather than as shameless ideologues. Two of the best talks I've seen from this year were given by women: Jessica McKellar's and Julia Grace's. There are plenty of women out there who, for whatever reason, don't feel excluded from tech and who frankly kick ass professionally. I wonder why this is? Less unsubstantiated political BS, more meritocracy. That is the road to solving the gender "problem" in tech. Not hiring "developer evangelists" who don't code/build/do anything and whose jobs are rife with potential for ideological abuse.
  - wpietri 14y ago
    > I fail to see what "rising up" against an army of random alt accounts on Twitter would have accomplished. To let women know that they will be supported when speaking out against sexism. To let everybody know we defend our own. > I don't really see evidence of this having caused more fear among women in tech. Keep looking, then. I've seen plenty of it. > And it turned out she had a history of doing such shockingly antagonistic things to anyone who wasn't black and/or a woman. That claim has been debunked: http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-the-surface-that-amanda-blum-article-on-adria-richards-is-not-what-it-seems/ http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-th... > She handled the situation in a shockingly ridiculous way. That's a matter of perspective. I hope that I would have handled it differently. But given the thousand-paper-cuts thing, I can't say that I would have. She didn't fire the one guy who got axed. The guys making the jokes are not being discussed by name. All she did was post a conference pic and a summary of what they said in public. I'm not seeing anything particularly horrible. The one negative outcome for the one guy, firing, could have come just as well if she'd complained to his boss. > A good number of the talks at the con were given by women. And you know why? In good portion because of the hard work of the people you anonymously denigrate here. Because of decades of effort to make tech, and everything else, less of an old boys' club. Because however much you scoff as systemic misogyny currently, you don't have to go back far in time to see something that even you will recognize as systemic misogyny. That you don't see it now could mean you are incredibly perceptive. Or it could mean you are just like the guys back then who couldn't see the systemic misogyny that benefited them. > Less unsubstantiated political BS, more meritocracy. Well when you get around to understanding why a sexually charged environment keeps women of merit out of tech, drop me a line. Then maybe you'll be ready to do something to further the meritocracy you're seeking.
    - obstacle1 14y ago
      >To let women know that they will be supported when speaking out against sexism. To let everybody know we defend our own. Unfortunately in this case it was also imperative not to give the impression that one condoned Richards's actions at the conference. >Keep looking, then. I've seen plenty of it. Your anecdote vs. my anecdote. Nobody wins this round. >That claim has been debunked First off, that blog post doesn't debunk anything. Everything Blum wrote still stands. Second, that wasn't what I was talking about. Try these: https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313946261055221760 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313946261055221760 >I'm not seeing anything particularly horrible People shouldn't have to fear political zealots tarring and feathering them publicly without a chance for defence or private resolution. Foster a culture of civility, not trigger-happy ignorant activism. >Because of decades of effort to make tech, and everything else, less of an old boys' club As far as I know the first programming language ever was arguably written by a woman. Women have _always_ been in tech, always will be in tech. The barriers are so much lower than sensationalist ideologues would have us believe. Especially vis-a-vis other industries. Here if you have chops, you're in. The women making things happen at PyCon are evidence of this, are role models for tech-leaning young women to look up to; evil snake oil salespeople whose only real skills are yelling loudly, as we had in this case, have no place in tech and are themselves discouraging women from entering the field. >understanding why a sexually charged environment keeps women of merit out of tech Skilled women aren't running away from tech because men could possibly say "penis" within earshot of them. Someone who takes extreme offense at a dongle joke to the degree that it prevents them from working in their preferred industry probably aren't mature enough to live in the real world, much less hold down an actual job. There's nothing sexually charged about penis jokes. Penises are for urinating too.

wpietri 14y ago

I'm going to keep worrying. I agree that those people don't represent the tech community. On the other hand, their behavior has caused legitimate fear among women in tech about speaking up. And it's not like the tech community rose up as one against the hatemongers: there was a lot of quiet and not-so-quiet support for how things turned out. There was plenty of aggressive examination of what Adria Richards did, with a lot less focus on anybody else, or on anything that led up to what she did. So I believe that Ryan McGreal is right in saying the misogynists had a victory. A partial one, though; good things have come out of it as well.

obstacle1 14y ago
I fail to see what "rising up" against an army of random alt accounts on Twitter would have accomplished. Those are people completely irrelevant to the scene, we don't work with them, they don't contribute to our culture, we're not responsible for their actions, we're not even affected by their actions (no, being tweeted at is not being affected). Not addressing them is the best course of action. Further I don't really see evidence of this having caused more fear among women in tech. In fact one of the more popular blog responses was written by a woman, speaking out against _both_ Adria Richards and the Twitter Idiots. Guess she forgot to retract into her shell for that one. >There was plenty of aggressive examination of what Adria Richards did Which is how it should have been. She handled the situation in a shockingly ridiculous way. _Shockingly_. And it turned out she had a history of doing such shockingly antagonistic things to anyone who wasn't black and/or a woman. People must know that being a member of a "protected class" isn't a license to be a complete asshole, and it isn't a license to abuse your professional standing to further your political cause. We need to foster a culture of civility all-around. This is what the "woman fired for calling out sexism" crew is missing. Maybe those who are still shilling the extremist "OMG SYSTEMIC MISOGYNY" line should head to pyvideo.org. A good number of the talks at the con were given by women. THESE women were the ones "speaking out" -- as part of the community, on merit, rather than as shameless ideologues. Two of the best talks I've seen from this year were given by women: Jessica McKellar's and Julia Grace's. There are plenty of women out there who, for whatever reason, don't feel excluded from tech and who frankly kick ass professionally. I wonder why this is? Less unsubstantiated political BS, more meritocracy. That is the road to solving the gender "problem" in tech. Not hiring "developer evangelists" who don't code/build/do anything and whose jobs are rife with potential for ideological abuse.
- wpietri 14y ago
  > I fail to see what "rising up" against an army of random alt accounts on Twitter would have accomplished. To let women know that they will be supported when speaking out against sexism. To let everybody know we defend our own. > I don't really see evidence of this having caused more fear among women in tech. Keep looking, then. I've seen plenty of it. > And it turned out she had a history of doing such shockingly antagonistic things to anyone who wasn't black and/or a woman. That claim has been debunked: http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-the-surface-that-amanda-blum-article-on-adria-richards-is-not-what-it-seems/ http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-th... > She handled the situation in a shockingly ridiculous way. That's a matter of perspective. I hope that I would have handled it differently. But given the thousand-paper-cuts thing, I can't say that I would have. She didn't fire the one guy who got axed. The guys making the jokes are not being discussed by name. All she did was post a conference pic and a summary of what they said in public. I'm not seeing anything particularly horrible. The one negative outcome for the one guy, firing, could have come just as well if she'd complained to his boss. > A good number of the talks at the con were given by women. And you know why? In good portion because of the hard work of the people you anonymously denigrate here. Because of decades of effort to make tech, and everything else, less of an old boys' club. Because however much you scoff as systemic misogyny currently, you don't have to go back far in time to see something that even you will recognize as systemic misogyny. That you don't see it now could mean you are incredibly perceptive. Or it could mean you are just like the guys back then who couldn't see the systemic misogyny that benefited them. > Less unsubstantiated political BS, more meritocracy. Well when you get around to understanding why a sexually charged environment keeps women of merit out of tech, drop me a line. Then maybe you'll be ready to do something to further the meritocracy you're seeking.
  - obstacle1 14y ago
    >To let women know that they will be supported when speaking out against sexism. To let everybody know we defend our own. Unfortunately in this case it was also imperative not to give the impression that one condoned Richards's actions at the conference. >Keep looking, then. I've seen plenty of it. Your anecdote vs. my anecdote. Nobody wins this round. >That claim has been debunked First off, that blog post doesn't debunk anything. Everything Blum wrote still stands. Second, that wasn't what I was talking about. Try these: https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/statuses/6039856858 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313946261055221760 https://twitter.com/adriarichards/status/313946261055221760 >I'm not seeing anything particularly horrible People shouldn't have to fear political zealots tarring and feathering them publicly without a chance for defence or private resolution. Foster a culture of civility, not trigger-happy ignorant activism. >Because of decades of effort to make tech, and everything else, less of an old boys' club As far as I know the first programming language ever was arguably written by a woman. Women have _always_ been in tech, always will be in tech. The barriers are so much lower than sensationalist ideologues would have us believe. Especially vis-a-vis other industries. Here if you have chops, you're in. The women making things happen at PyCon are evidence of this, are role models for tech-leaning young women to look up to; evil snake oil salespeople whose only real skills are yelling loudly, as we had in this case, have no place in tech and are themselves discouraging women from entering the field. >understanding why a sexually charged environment keeps women of merit out of tech Skilled women aren't running away from tech because men could possibly say "penis" within earshot of them. Someone who takes extreme offense at a dongle joke to the degree that it prevents them from working in their preferred industry probably aren't mature enough to live in the real world, much less hold down an actual job. There's nothing sexually charged about penis jokes. Penises are for urinating too.