4 ms·

If I'm understanding correctly, the author would prefer it if non-technical female expo floor workers were scantily-clad so she would be less likely to be assum

by jblz 14y ago

If I'm understanding correctly, the author would prefer it if non-technical female expo floor workers were scantily-clad so she would be less likely to be assumed by other conference-goers to be non-technical herself..? I'm sorry, but I find that pretty offensive. I don't claim to know what it's like to be a woman in a heavily male-dominated field (or just your de facto patriarchy, for that matter), but I also don't assume anyone I'm talking to at a conference has any reason to believe I possess any sort of prowess or authority without my convincing them of such even while donning my geekiest T-shirts. More importantly, I assume anyone representing a product or service at a show is knowledgeable about its inner-workings until they give me some reason to believe otherwise regardless of their gender or attire. While I appreciate that it is often difficult dealing with misogyny at conferences, I think it's unfair to lump a proper PR employee in with a model in a Princess Leia slave bikini who knows nothing about the product.

DucktourDreams 14y ago
From the article's author's words "if I could have substituted all the plain-clothes promoters for traditional booth babes, I would have done it in a heartbeat," I would say your understanding is correct. What the author experienced is status-checking. Status-checking is a human activity. Here is a key component in this conversation. The author writes: "When trying to join lots of interesting conversations, I either had to be that asshole who casually drops her credentials, or deal with a few rounds of being told things were “complicated engineering stuff.”" That is a problem ALL male developers face repeatedly. It's the problem of getting respect and status. It's the same as when two dogs meet in a park. You always have to fight to convince other people you're intelligent. I have three degrees and 20 years of working experience, yet I still have to compete with others to convince them I deserve the status and respect I do. Probably many of you who are reading this now will not be convinced. I am tested daily at my job. And it's got nothing to do with my gender. It's how living beings maintain order. We test each other. We sniff each other's butts. We keep track of who knows what they're doing and who is a pretender or out of date. The author suggested that if all the non-skilled ladies were pigeon-holed as sexual objects, the male geeks would be prejudiced into adorning her with the status she deserves. This assumption is false. She would still have to compete. In tech circles and every other field from welding to law to nuclear physics to snowmobiling to kitesurfing, one faces significant social obstacles when meeting strangers to communicate one's experience and status levels. There is no shortcut (until you're famous). This is quite simply how human interaction works in competitive environments: people jockey for position. It's in our DNA throughout all of the mammalian kingdom. All of the blogs and tweets in the world won't change this. One notable exception is the "nice guys" who afford woman status before they deserve it. Many women are quite familiar with this behavior (and many of them are frustrated with it, because once they realize they are afforded status they haven't earned, they realize the person is unskilled at determining people's social status or just trying to appeal to their ego). I hope every woman who thinks that the tech world will suddenly somehow deviate from 195 million years of evolution - who thinks that the tech world could possibly ever deviate from 195 million years of evolution - in order to accommodate her unfounded expectations takes this seriously and deeply to heart. No matter what, you're going to have to fight to convince other people that you know what you're talking about and that's got nothing to do with your gender, it's got to do with the fact that you're in a competitive social situation. That's they way nature created mammals, and eventually, the human being. I hope they all recognize this behavior in all of the other situations they take part in: going to the bank, playing on a team, fitting in with a church - all humans of all genders experience this. The "world of tech" is especially rife with it b/c it is especially competitive.
danilocampos 14y ago
> If I'm understanding correctly You most certainly are not. The author is simply pointing out that ending the booth babe situation isn't a panacea. The real issue is the shortage of actual technical contributors who are also women: > Goodness knows, if I had the power to bring tons of other technical women at the conference that would be an optimal solution
- bluehat 14y ago
  (I added that after he posted, because s/he brought up a good point.)
  - mmcnickle 14y ago
    Could you mark your edits in the article as such? It's making the discussion here difficult to follow as people are referring to outdated versions.
    - bluehat 14y ago
      Done, edits are italics, thanks
- jblz 14y ago
  You're discounting the second half of the sentence you quoted: > but barring that, selfish as it may sound, if I could have substituted all the plain-clothes promoters for traditional booth babes, I would have done it in a heartbeat. Of course, progress isn't a panacea, but I'd take progress over the "old days," myself. I've personally seen the number of confidently technical women at conferences increase year over year for the past decade (please note, I'm not saying that the status quo is optimal, just that, in my experience, there _has_ been progress). Moreover, the _title_ of the piece concludes with "Thanks But You sort of Made It Worse" which contradicts what you said.
lmm 14y ago
>More importantly, I assume anyone representing a product or service at a show is knowledgeable about its inner-workings until they give me some reason to believe otherwise regardless of their gender or attire. That must get pretty tiring at a conference like this (assuming the description in the post is accurate). People don't stereotype for fun, they do it because it's effective.
- jblz 14y ago
  In general, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt that they're knowledgeable about things they purport to be knowledgeable about. I don't think that's so different from the instant situation here. Walking a crowded expo floor is a chore in and of itself (maybe more-so for introverts like myself :) ), but the '10 GDC I attended wasn't particularly challenging in this regard.
  - icambron 14y ago
    I find this challenging. I want to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but when you get let down over and over, you start taking mental shortcuts, even unfair ones. Humans are good at that. I was at PAX East, and there were a lot of hired-gun women doing hired-gun women stuff, mixed in with a small number of women who actually worked at those companies. It was really hard not to start assuming things.

by jblz 14y ago

DucktourDreams 14y ago

From the article's author's words "if I could have substituted all the plain-clothes promoters for traditional booth babes, I would have done it in a heartbeat," I would say your understanding is correct. What the author experienced is status-checking. Status-checking is a human activity. Here is a key component in this conversation. The author writes: "When trying to join lots of interesting conversations, I either had to be that asshole who casually drops her credentials, or deal with a few rounds of being told things were “complicated engineering stuff.”" That is a problem ALL male developers face repeatedly. It's the problem of getting respect and status. It's the same as when two dogs meet in a park. You always have to fight to convince other people you're intelligent. I have three degrees and 20 years of working experience, yet I still have to compete with others to convince them I deserve the status and respect I do. Probably many of you who are reading this now will not be convinced. I am tested daily at my job. And it's got nothing to do with my gender. It's how living beings maintain order. We test each other. We sniff each other's butts. We keep track of who knows what they're doing and who is a pretender or out of date. The author suggested that if all the non-skilled ladies were pigeon-holed as sexual objects, the male geeks would be prejudiced into adorning her with the status she deserves. This assumption is false. She would still have to compete. In tech circles and every other field from welding to law to nuclear physics to snowmobiling to kitesurfing, one faces significant social obstacles when meeting strangers to communicate one's experience and status levels. There is no shortcut (until you're famous). This is quite simply how human interaction works in competitive environments: people jockey for position. It's in our DNA throughout all of the mammalian kingdom. All of the blogs and tweets in the world won't change this. One notable exception is the "nice guys" who afford woman status before they deserve it. Many women are quite familiar with this behavior (and many of them are frustrated with it, because once they realize they are afforded status they haven't earned, they realize the person is unskilled at determining people's social status or just trying to appeal to their ego). I hope every woman who thinks that the tech world will suddenly somehow deviate from 195 million years of evolution - who thinks that the tech world could possibly ever deviate from 195 million years of evolution - in order to accommodate her unfounded expectations takes this seriously and deeply to heart. No matter what, you're going to have to fight to convince other people that you know what you're talking about and that's got nothing to do with your gender, it's got to do with the fact that you're in a competitive social situation. That's they way nature created mammals, and eventually, the human being. I hope they all recognize this behavior in all of the other situations they take part in: going to the bank, playing on a team, fitting in with a church - all humans of all genders experience this. The "world of tech" is especially rife with it b/c it is especially competitive.

danilocampos 14y ago

> If I'm understanding correctly You most certainly are not. The author is simply pointing out that ending the booth babe situation isn't a panacea. The real issue is the shortage of actual technical contributors who are also women: > Goodness knows, if I had the power to bring tons of other technical women at the conference that would be an optimal solution

bluehat 14y ago
(I added that after he posted, because s/he brought up a good point.)
- mmcnickle 14y ago
  Could you mark your edits in the article as such? It's making the discussion here difficult to follow as people are referring to outdated versions.
  - bluehat 14y ago
    Done, edits are italics, thanks
jblz 14y ago
You're discounting the second half of the sentence you quoted: > but barring that, selfish as it may sound, if I could have substituted all the plain-clothes promoters for traditional booth babes, I would have done it in a heartbeat. Of course, progress isn't a panacea, but I'd take progress over the "old days," myself. I've personally seen the number of confidently technical women at conferences increase year over year for the past decade (please note, I'm not saying that the status quo is optimal, just that, in my experience, there _has_ been progress). Moreover, the _title_ of the piece concludes with "Thanks But You sort of Made It Worse" which contradicts what you said.

lmm 14y ago

>More importantly, I assume anyone representing a product or service at a show is knowledgeable about its inner-workings until they give me some reason to believe otherwise regardless of their gender or attire. That must get pretty tiring at a conference like this (assuming the description in the post is accurate). People don't stereotype for fun, they do it because it's effective.

jblz 14y ago
In general, I try to give people the benefit of the doubt that they're knowledgeable about things they purport to be knowledgeable about. I don't think that's so different from the instant situation here. Walking a crowded expo floor is a chore in and of itself (maybe more-so for introverts like myself :) ), but the '10 GDC I attended wasn't particularly challenging in this regard.
- icambron 14y ago
  I find this challenging. I want to give everyone the benefit of the doubt, but when you get let down over and over, you start taking mental shortcuts, even unfair ones. Humans are good at that. I was at PAX East, and there were a lot of hired-gun women doing hired-gun women stuff, mixed in with a small number of women who actually worked at those companies. It was really hard not to start assuming things.