5 ms·

I am a woman, and I work in software development, so I'm assuming I fit in your group called "women in tech". I have no idea what insults, abuse, threats, conte

I am a woman, and I work in software development, so I'm assuming I fit in your group called "women in tech". I have no idea what insults, abuse, threats, contempt, ridicule, disdain, and disregard I apparently have been routinely facing. If "women in tech" did suffer so severely on a daily basis, it would not be relevant to Richards. Her job description seems to be "Developer Evangelist". I'm not sure what that specifically means, but I do know it isn't technical, and thus she isn't a "woman in tech". Even if you do consider her a "woman in tech", the abuse Richards suffered while wrong is not something routinely faced by "women in tech". I understand that genitalia aren't generally supposed to be discussed at professional conferences, but am finding it very hard to see why this is an issue of harassment towards "women in tech" when no women were in the conversation at all. Since Richards felt it was, she was entitled to follow up with the conference leaders, and ask that they handle the situation appropriately, which she did. At this point in time, she could have enjoyed the rest of PyCon and gone home without suffering any abuse at all, happy that she spoke up about the conversation that she took offense to. Instead she publicly posted the photos of the men who dared discuss genitalia amongst themselves in her presence in order to shame them. This is when she opened her self to (and received) abuse. She had already had the situation handled by the conference organizers, and thus had already spoken up about it without any abuse at all. It is unfortunate that Richards received the huge storms of abuse that she did. But she chose to handle the situation in a way that invited that abuse, when there were clear ways to "speak up" that would not have resulted in such abuse. This has everything to do with reacting to situations in a professional manner, and nothing to do with "women in tech" being able to speak up about legitimate sexual harassment.

andrewdupont 14y ago
> "It is unfortunate that Richards received the huge storms of abuse that she did. But she chose to handle the situation in a way that invited that abuse, when there were clear ways to "speak up" that would not have resulted in such abuse." This reasoning bothers me. Let's stipulate that Adria's post to Twitter was a mistake. You seem to say that the abuse is her fault, because if she hadn't made that mistake, she wouldn't have received any abuse. But shouldn't punishments be proportional to crimes? We all seem to agree that it's barbaric to cut off a shoplifter's hand, or to hand out the death penalty for petty crimes (as was once common in England, for instance). People say this sort of thing all the time — "If you didn't want Y, you shouldn't have done X." I feel like it shuts down the conversation. Yes, X was wrong, but Y was also wrong, and it's ridiculous that something as wrong as Y resulted from X. That's a discussion worth having. The point is that nobody deserves death threats. It need not feel like a defense of Adria Richards to say that.
- overgryphon 14y ago
  Nobody deserves death threats. But that issue has nothing to do with PyCon, women in tech, or software development. It is simply current reality that whenever anyone posts things online, other people are able to respond by anonymously sending death threats. The fact that there are people who choose to do so sucks, and is a problem, but this is a well-known fact. You, right now, could click reply on my comment and send me a death threat. I would have no recourse. Richards knew that people who didn't like what she posted publicly may respond in that manner, and she decided to take that risk when she posted a photo of other developers to twitter. If she did not want to deal with anonymous death threats, she could (and did) handle the situation in a less public manner. She chose to make the situation public. The developers she posted a picture of had no way of consenting to that publicity.
  - andrewdupont 14y ago
    > "But that issue has nothing to do with PyCon, women in tech, or software development." I disagree. The shitheads in our community who would stoop to death threats do not threaten everyone equally. The way I know that is that a woman who complained about a joke got a bunch of abuse, yet the company who fired the joke-teller — by all accounts, an overreaction — got nearly none. Also, it's not just death threats; it's harassment, too. Jesse Noller, who ran PyCon, commits the sin of "having a Code of Conduct and enforcing it," and ends up getting hate mail and harassing phone calls (https://twitter.com/jessenoller/status/314417532842950656 https://twitter.com/jessenoller/status/314417532842950656). Internet geeks have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice." That's unfortunate, but even worse is what they decide to point their magnifying glass at.
    - pifflesnort 14y ago
      > The shitheads in our community who would stoop to death threats do not threaten everyone equally. What do you have that demonstrates that they're even in our community? > Internet geeks have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice." That's unfortunate, but even worse is what they decide to point their magnifying glass at. Not "Internet geeks". Anonymous mobs of dubious maturity and intelligence have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice", on and off the internet. This is not unique to technology, it's not unique to women, it's not unique to issues of sexism, and it's not unique to Twitter. As I've noted numerous times in this thread, Olivia Wilde, an actress, received similarly hateful and disgusting Twitter messages for daring to insult Justin Beiber, a pop musician whose primary fanbase seems to be pre-teens and teens. Something tells me that the people that were offended enough to send hate mail and treets were not angry "internet geeks".
granitepail 14y ago
This kind of response terrifies me. I'm a man, so maybe I am not in a place to correct you, but I have gotten the impression that the pressure and discomfort wrought by this kind of behavior (whether or not you have a thick enough skin to deal with it) pushes a lot of women away from tech in the first place. Even if you try and reduce the behavior to "little boys club" material, such joking is still alienating to many women. Not only are you reducing her importance based on her former title/role at SendGrid, but you're saying her behavior warranted ("opened herself to") harassment. No two men or women are the same, but your not sympathizing with her at all confounds me. EDIT: fixed a typo
- overgryphon 14y ago
  Juvenile behavior alienates people, not women. Just because a woman was offended doesn't make it a gender issue. Richards can say what she is offended by, but she doesn't get to speak for women. And if she's going to consider herself qualified to speak for "women in tech", then she'd better at least be a part of that group. There are real legitimate problems with gender disparity in the software development community. People like Richards undermine those wanting to discuss real problems by calling attention to situations that don't deserve it. The question I've most heard from women considering an undergraduate degree in computer science is whether women are treated as horribly as comments like the one I was responding to describe- "the abundant reality of insults, abuse, threats, hatred, contempt, ridicule, disdain, disregard that women in tech routinely face". And that simply isn't true. Yes, there are gender problems in a community that is largely male oriented, but there is no need to exaggerate them to such lengths. I am just so tired of "women in tech" groups telling me how discriminated I am. Let me evaluate that for myself, thank you very much. Not to mention that it is completely unacceptable to post pictures of other people online without their permission. Had those two men been women, would we be having a discussion of the danger of stalking, death threats, and abuse that Richards put them in? And please excuse me, I wasn't trying to say her behavior warranted harassment- simply that by making the situation public, she took that risk. She could have easily handled this situation in a more discrete manner.
  - andrewdupont 14y ago

andrewdupont 14y ago

> "It is unfortunate that Richards received the huge storms of abuse that she did. But she chose to handle the situation in a way that invited that abuse, when there were clear ways to "speak up" that would not have resulted in such abuse." This reasoning bothers me. Let's stipulate that Adria's post to Twitter was a mistake. You seem to say that the abuse is her fault, because if she hadn't made that mistake, she wouldn't have received any abuse. But shouldn't punishments be proportional to crimes? We all seem to agree that it's barbaric to cut off a shoplifter's hand, or to hand out the death penalty for petty crimes (as was once common in England, for instance). People say this sort of thing all the time — "If you didn't want Y, you shouldn't have done X." I feel like it shuts down the conversation. Yes, X was wrong, but Y was also wrong, and it's ridiculous that something as wrong as Y resulted from X. That's a discussion worth having. The point is that nobody deserves death threats. It need not feel like a defense of Adria Richards to say that.

overgryphon 14y ago
Nobody deserves death threats. But that issue has nothing to do with PyCon, women in tech, or software development. It is simply current reality that whenever anyone posts things online, other people are able to respond by anonymously sending death threats. The fact that there are people who choose to do so sucks, and is a problem, but this is a well-known fact. You, right now, could click reply on my comment and send me a death threat. I would have no recourse. Richards knew that people who didn't like what she posted publicly may respond in that manner, and she decided to take that risk when she posted a photo of other developers to twitter. If she did not want to deal with anonymous death threats, she could (and did) handle the situation in a less public manner. She chose to make the situation public. The developers she posted a picture of had no way of consenting to that publicity.
- andrewdupont 14y ago
  > "But that issue has nothing to do with PyCon, women in tech, or software development." I disagree. The shitheads in our community who would stoop to death threats do not threaten everyone equally. The way I know that is that a woman who complained about a joke got a bunch of abuse, yet the company who fired the joke-teller — by all accounts, an overreaction — got nearly none. Also, it's not just death threats; it's harassment, too. Jesse Noller, who ran PyCon, commits the sin of "having a Code of Conduct and enforcing it," and ends up getting hate mail and harassing phone calls (https://twitter.com/jessenoller/status/314417532842950656 https://twitter.com/jessenoller/status/314417532842950656). Internet geeks have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice." That's unfortunate, but even worse is what they decide to point their magnifying glass at.
  - pifflesnort 14y ago
    > The shitheads in our community who would stoop to death threats do not threaten everyone equally. What do you have that demonstrates that they're even in our community? > Internet geeks have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice." That's unfortunate, but even worse is what they decide to point their magnifying glass at. Not "Internet geeks". Anonymous mobs of dubious maturity and intelligence have weird and sadistic ways of dispensing "justice", on and off the internet. This is not unique to technology, it's not unique to women, it's not unique to issues of sexism, and it's not unique to Twitter. As I've noted numerous times in this thread, Olivia Wilde, an actress, received similarly hateful and disgusting Twitter messages for daring to insult Justin Beiber, a pop musician whose primary fanbase seems to be pre-teens and teens. Something tells me that the people that were offended enough to send hate mail and treets were not angry "internet geeks".

granitepail 14y ago

This kind of response terrifies me. I'm a man, so maybe I am not in a place to correct you, but I have gotten the impression that the pressure and discomfort wrought by this kind of behavior (whether or not you have a thick enough skin to deal with it) pushes a lot of women away from tech in the first place. Even if you try and reduce the behavior to "little boys club" material, such joking is still alienating to many women. Not only are you reducing her importance based on her former title/role at SendGrid, but you're saying her behavior warranted ("opened herself to") harassment. No two men or women are the same, but your not sympathizing with her at all confounds me. EDIT: fixed a typo

overgryphon 14y ago
Juvenile behavior alienates people, not women. Just because a woman was offended doesn't make it a gender issue. Richards can say what she is offended by, but she doesn't get to speak for women. And if she's going to consider herself qualified to speak for "women in tech", then she'd better at least be a part of that group. There are real legitimate problems with gender disparity in the software development community. People like Richards undermine those wanting to discuss real problems by calling attention to situations that don't deserve it. The question I've most heard from women considering an undergraduate degree in computer science is whether women are treated as horribly as comments like the one I was responding to describe- "the abundant reality of insults, abuse, threats, hatred, contempt, ridicule, disdain, disregard that women in tech routinely face". And that simply isn't true. Yes, there are gender problems in a community that is largely male oriented, but there is no need to exaggerate them to such lengths. I am just so tired of "women in tech" groups telling me how discriminated I am. Let me evaluate that for myself, thank you very much. Not to mention that it is completely unacceptable to post pictures of other people online without their permission. Had those two men been women, would we be having a discussion of the danger of stalking, death threats, and abuse that Richards put them in? And please excuse me, I wasn't trying to say her behavior warranted harassment- simply that by making the situation public, she took that risk. She could have easily handled this situation in a more discrete manner.
- andrewdupont 14y ago