3 ms·

I didn't say there was not a lot to say about it. I said there was not a lot to say beyond 'It's wrong' The more debatable issue is getting more traffic, which

I didn't say there was not a lot to say about it. I said there was not a lot to say beyond 'It's wrong' The more debatable issue is getting more traffic, which is only understandable. You seem to feel that the amount of discussion relates to how acceptable something is. I feel it relates to how debatable it is.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago
But the "discussion" about whether Richards did the right thing hasn't been a debate - it's been a general piling-on with a generous helping of condescension and chauvinism. There has been only a smattering of disagreement and it has been summarily dismissed with a combination of the most perfunctory hand-waving and sheer shouting down. The tech community immediately and decisively latched onto a convenient portrait of Richards as an underhanded, incompetent, cowardly, race-baiting, gender-baiting fraud with a manipulative agenda to aggrandize herself at the expense of everyone around her. No amount of counter-evidence could make a dent in this depiction, a depiction that is immediately slapped onto every woman who dares to speak up about gender issues in the tech industry [1]. Everyone read and referred to the Amanda Blum post [2], but totally ignored a detailed review [3] of the instances Blum cited that cast them in a far more detailed and less sinister light. No matter how you try to parse it, it's unambiguously clear that our community whipped itself into an apoplectic firestorm of outrage when a woman complained about behaviour in a conference that violated the conference's code of conduct, but at best shrugged and at worst said she deserved it when that very firestorm of outrage turned into an outpouring of the most vile, vitriolic and disgusting abuse, insults, threats and mockery against her. That says something most disturbing about our community, and the collective unwillingness even to acknowledge it, let alone come to terms with it, should be all the evidence we need that our blind spot on gender issues is as pervasive as ever. References [1] http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a-tech-conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a... [2] http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/ http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/ [3] 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...
- summerdown2 14y ago
  Well here I think we will have to agree to disagree. I've certainly seen a lot of debate. I would also add that I find it hard to work through your comments as they are laden with the same extremely emotional language you disapprove of. Paragraph 1: piling on, condescension, chauvinism, summarily dismissed, perfunctory hand waving, shouting down. Paragraph 2: underhanded, incompetent, cowardly, race baiting, gender baiting, fraud, manipulative, aggrandise. Paragraph 3: immediately slapped onto, totally ignored. Pargraph 4: unambiguously clear, whipped itself into an apoplectic firestorm of outrage, at best shrugged, firestorm of outrage, outpouring of the most vile, vitriolic and disgusting abuse, insults, threats and mockery Paragraph 5: disturbing, unwillingness to even acknowledge it, blind spot on gender issues. Look, I will simply point out, again, that I disagree with the abuse that Adria has had to suffer. However, I think that there are also interesting things that can be said about what is or is not acceptable at a conference, and that that debate is ongoing.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago

But the "discussion" about whether Richards did the right thing hasn't been a debate - it's been a general piling-on with a generous helping of condescension and chauvinism. There has been only a smattering of disagreement and it has been summarily dismissed with a combination of the most perfunctory hand-waving and sheer shouting down. The tech community immediately and decisively latched onto a convenient portrait of Richards as an underhanded, incompetent, cowardly, race-baiting, gender-baiting fraud with a manipulative agenda to aggrandize herself at the expense of everyone around her. No amount of counter-evidence could make a dent in this depiction, a depiction that is immediately slapped onto every woman who dares to speak up about gender issues in the tech industry [1]. Everyone read and referred to the Amanda Blum post [2], but totally ignored a detailed review [3] of the instances Blum cited that cast them in a far more detailed and less sinister light. No matter how you try to parse it, it's unambiguously clear that our community whipped itself into an apoplectic firestorm of outrage when a woman complained about behaviour in a conference that violated the conference's code of conduct, but at best shrugged and at worst said she deserved it when that very firestorm of outrage turned into an outpouring of the most vile, vitriolic and disgusting abuse, insults, threats and mockery against her. That says something most disturbing about our community, and the collective unwillingness even to acknowledge it, let alone come to terms with it, should be all the evidence we need that our blind spot on gender issues is as pervasive as ever. References [1] http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a-tech-conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a... [2] http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/ http://amandablumwords.wordpress.com/2013/03/21/3/ [3] 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...

summerdown2 14y ago
Well here I think we will have to agree to disagree. I've certainly seen a lot of debate. I would also add that I find it hard to work through your comments as they are laden with the same extremely emotional language you disapprove of. Paragraph 1: piling on, condescension, chauvinism, summarily dismissed, perfunctory hand waving, shouting down. Paragraph 2: underhanded, incompetent, cowardly, race baiting, gender baiting, fraud, manipulative, aggrandise. Paragraph 3: immediately slapped onto, totally ignored. Pargraph 4: unambiguously clear, whipped itself into an apoplectic firestorm of outrage, at best shrugged, firestorm of outrage, outpouring of the most vile, vitriolic and disgusting abuse, insults, threats and mockery Paragraph 5: disturbing, unwillingness to even acknowledge it, blind spot on gender issues. Look, I will simply point out, again, that I disagree with the abuse that Adria has had to suffer. However, I think that there are also interesting things that can be said about what is or is not acceptable at a conference, and that that debate is ongoing.