4 ms·

> I for one think the whole "sexism in technology" is an issue that isn't worth sparing time to think about. A rigorous, peer reviewed study [1] demonstrated t

> I for one think the whole "sexism in technology" is an issue that isn't worth sparing time to think about. A rigorous, peer reviewed study [1] demonstrated the existence of sexism in orchestra auditions: more women were selected with curtains, so that the reviewers could hear but not see the performers. This is sexism by any definition, presumably perpetrated mostly or entirely accidentally, and not by "jerks". Is the existence of this study compatible with your thesis? [1]: http://public.econ.duke.edu/~hf14/teaching/povertydisc/readings/goldin-rouse99.pdf http://public.econ.duke.edu/~hf14/teaching/povertydisc/readi...

swombat 14y ago
That was 15+ years ago. 40 years ago, if we go by shows like Mad Men, the whole world (West included) was definitely extremely sexist by today's standards. We're in 2013 today, things have, thankfully, moved forward a bit. I think if you look at the world today, there are still definitely some issues with institutional sexism, but I do not think they are any more salient in technology than anywhere else. If anything, I'd say tech (at least in the UK) has a pro-female bias, because there are fewer women in the hiring pool, and so if you don't make a deliberate effort to keep your team balanced you'll end up with a sausage fest. In the case of GrantTree, that meant making a deliberate effort to advertise in places which are not predominantly male, and to tweak the wording of our job ads to make it clear that women are very welcome to apply. Last but not least... This is sexism by any definition, presumably perpetrated mostly or entirely accidentally, and not by "jerks". You can be a jerk unconsciously. Surely, most people are - I don't think anyone actively wants to be a jerk. If you look inside your mind and you spot a belief, especially one that you've acted on, that "women can't be as good as men at X", where X is any kind of activity practiced by a large number of men and women, then there's a bit of a jerk in you. There are differences between men and women, and some things men are naturally better at on average (for example, world-class competitive sports where the amount of testosterone in your blood simply makes a big difference in your ultimate performance), but no job I've ever seen advertised touches on anything quite so extreme. Even oil rig workers don't need to be world-class weight-lifting champions. Everyone has some aspects of their mind that are "jerk-like". What makes someone not a jerk in the long term is the constant re-evaluation of otherwise accepted beliefs (usually handed down by their parents) in the face of new evidence. Again, however, that's not at all specific to technology...
- mtrimpe 14y ago
  > if we go by shows like Mad Men Then it's probably good for you to realize that Mad Men purposefully uses the construct of a fictional past to create a neutral stage for the exploration of contemporary issues with sexuality and power dynamics in modern culture.
  - swombat 14y ago
    Are you saying the representation of sexism in the 70s is inaccurate? (I'm asking honestly, I don't know the answer)
    - mtrimpe 14y ago
      You can still find offices today that closely resemble that of Mad Men and in the 60s you could also have found offices that are as respectful of equality as today's average office. Why they chose this stage, and why it became such a success, is because it's capable of touching this nerve in modern culture by having a story line that is just extreme enough to be able to say "thank God we're not like that anymore" but still recognizable enough to think "that's a bit like X from the office."
    - illuminate 14y ago
      The implication is the smug "oh, aren't we better" (as in the blackface routine) but also "I don't think we've really changed enough". Even if people focus more on the former.
- impendia 14y ago
  +1: I wish everyone who spoke up in disagreement with me did so in such a manner! This is why I read HN. I think you're right that things have gotten much better. I'm in academic math, and I hear horror stories from 40 years ago. Women tell me that sexism is still a problem, but a substantially less severe one. And also, as you mention with regards to GrantTree, I know of several efforts in math to deliberately reach out to women, which seem to be paying dividends. 40 years from today, I hope all of us will agree that these discussions are no longer necessary.

swombat 14y ago

That was 15+ years ago. 40 years ago, if we go by shows like Mad Men, the whole world (West included) was definitely extremely sexist by today's standards. We're in 2013 today, things have, thankfully, moved forward a bit. I think if you look at the world today, there are still definitely some issues with institutional sexism, but I do not think they are any more salient in technology than anywhere else. If anything, I'd say tech (at least in the UK) has a pro-female bias, because there are fewer women in the hiring pool, and so if you don't make a deliberate effort to keep your team balanced you'll end up with a sausage fest. In the case of GrantTree, that meant making a deliberate effort to advertise in places which are not predominantly male, and to tweak the wording of our job ads to make it clear that women are very welcome to apply. Last but not least... This is sexism by any definition, presumably perpetrated mostly or entirely accidentally, and not by "jerks". You can be a jerk unconsciously. Surely, most people are - I don't think anyone actively wants to be a jerk. If you look inside your mind and you spot a belief, especially one that you've acted on, that "women can't be as good as men at X", where X is any kind of activity practiced by a large number of men and women, then there's a bit of a jerk in you. There are differences between men and women, and some things men are naturally better at on average (for example, world-class competitive sports where the amount of testosterone in your blood simply makes a big difference in your ultimate performance), but no job I've ever seen advertised touches on anything quite so extreme. Even oil rig workers don't need to be world-class weight-lifting champions. Everyone has some aspects of their mind that are "jerk-like". What makes someone not a jerk in the long term is the constant re-evaluation of otherwise accepted beliefs (usually handed down by their parents) in the face of new evidence. Again, however, that's not at all specific to technology...

mtrimpe 14y ago
> if we go by shows like Mad Men Then it's probably good for you to realize that Mad Men purposefully uses the construct of a fictional past to create a neutral stage for the exploration of contemporary issues with sexuality and power dynamics in modern culture.
- swombat 14y ago
  Are you saying the representation of sexism in the 70s is inaccurate? (I'm asking honestly, I don't know the answer)
  - mtrimpe 14y ago
    You can still find offices today that closely resemble that of Mad Men and in the 60s you could also have found offices that are as respectful of equality as today's average office. Why they chose this stage, and why it became such a success, is because it's capable of touching this nerve in modern culture by having a story line that is just extreme enough to be able to say "thank God we're not like that anymore" but still recognizable enough to think "that's a bit like X from the office."
  - illuminate 14y ago
    The implication is the smug "oh, aren't we better" (as in the blackface routine) but also "I don't think we've really changed enough". Even if people focus more on the former.
impendia 14y ago
+1: I wish everyone who spoke up in disagreement with me did so in such a manner! This is why I read HN. I think you're right that things have gotten much better. I'm in academic math, and I hear horror stories from 40 years ago. Women tell me that sexism is still a problem, but a substantially less severe one. And also, as you mention with regards to GrantTree, I know of several efforts in math to deliberately reach out to women, which seem to be paying dividends. 40 years from today, I hope all of us will agree that these discussions are no longer necessary.