4 ms·

I think the problem is that, under sexism (and this generalizes to other -isms), males generally don't know they're being jerks. They're not being jerks by the

I think the problem is that, under sexism (and this generalizes to other -isms), males generally don't know they're being jerks. They're not being jerks by the standards of their culture, but the culture is sexist. For example, I know brogrammers, the kind who use pornographic female imagery in their workplaces and talk slides. The guy who identifies most with brogrammer culture (and makes such slides) is otherwise an incredibly nice guy, everytime I've observed. Take an extreme, like slaveowners. Does anyone think they were all stereotypical jerks (aside from their institutional role), or grew black mustaches to twirl? Anyway, I'm in technology, and that's where I can make the most direct impact. So naturally, sexism in tech concerns me. (And BTW, one insititutional problem on HN is that males outnumber females greatly. I keep that in mind when I see which female voices tend to get upvoted — and which don't. The ones which blame females' attitudes, rather than analyze sexist culture?)

claudius 14y ago
> I keep that in mind when I see which female voices tend to get upvoted — and which don't. The ones which blame females' attitudes, rather than analyze sexist culture? With 95% of the usernames here I have a hard time telling whether the writer is male or female, so how could this be the basis of an up-/downvote bias that is greater than the usual noise?
- calibraxis 14y ago
  We can search hnsearch.com for "poll gender". Males consistently outnumber females more than 10X. We can predict some likely outcomes of such a voting/commenting system, which I think are borne out by evidence. (https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=poll+gender&sortby=create_ts+desc https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=po...) (Edit: and this linked article is clearly written by a self-identified female. Hope I understood your question correctly.)
  - Davertron 14y ago
    I think what he's saying is when you're upvoting/downvoting someone, you don't actually know whether they're male or female based solely on the username.
    - claudius 14y ago
      Exactly (though my username might be the one exception to that…) – the post I replied to specifically said that apparently only female voices were getting up-/downvoted or that this was only a concern for female voices, so I am a little confused about it.
      - mtrimpe 14y ago
        I interpreted it as which kind of female voices got up-/downvoted: the ones that go along with general consensus or those that are critical of male privilege.
        belorn 14y ago
        People who try to accuse a society with generalized claims like "male privilege" get down voted because they are non-specific, non-discussable "facts", negative, and non-constructive in nature. Comments with those attributes are in direct contrast to a discussion board or for that matter, a scientific mind. Comments that are specific, who's facts is discussable, are constructive in both identifying with facts what is wrong, and suggest solution in a scientific manner will be up voted. It doesn't matter if its male or female voice doing this.
        mtrimpe 14y ago
        I used the general term as just that, a general term to describe a class of voices. I wasn't referring to posts that used that exact generalized claim. As for scientific manner; there's a lot being discussed on HN that isn't scientific. Although related, hacking is broader than science.
        wonderzombie 14y ago
- dcalacci 14y ago
  I think he's talking about articles by women (such as this one) that blame individual women (such as this one).
theorique 14y ago
They're not being jerks by the standards of their culture, but the culture is sexist. Is it that the culture is sexist, or that the culture is aggressive, elitist, loud, obnoxious, and expects people to "suck it up" and not get offended? Or both?
- illuminate 14y ago
  "Is it that the culture is sexist, or that the culture is aggressive, elitist, loud, obnoxious, and expects people to "suck it up" and not get offended?" Strong elements in "the culture" encourage both of these. There isn't quite a monoculture, so using just "the culture" seems a bit off.
  - theorique 14y ago
    There isn't quite a monoculture, so using just "the culture" seems a bit off That's true. That being said, I'm wondering if a boisterous workplace culture that may be grounded in stereotypically male "ways of being" (e.g. rude jokes, elitism, competitiveness, aggression, "in your face"-ness) can be considered sexist insofar as it discourages more stereotypically female "ways of being" (assuming no overt sexism in the form of legitimate discrimination, etc). Or if some women like that culture and thrive in it, is that considered inoculation against charges of sexism? I don't really have an answer. I'm just trying to understand what is considered sexist and what is considered a natural consequences of differences between the sexes.
    - illuminate 14y ago
      The problem is the delineation between "rude" funny and "nasty". I like the former, but I don't think many people are capable of sorting out the dark consciousness of what makes it so funny from the more South Park joke being at someone's expense. Since I'd rather avoid having to deal with the latter, I'm fine with sidestepping the former or setting up clear lines, even though it makes me "no fun" to plenty of techies of any gender. "what is considered sexist" Can probably be debated easier and somewhat more objectively* than "what is considered a natural consequences of differences between the sexes" , which is entirely conjecture and crappy evo-psych. *It's plenty subjective, but what affects and bothers coworkers and friends is absolutely important.
dcalacci 14y ago
It is so refreshing to see something of a sociological perspective on this debate. I think that her premise is sound, but her conclusion is wrong. Many women do feel uncomfortable in many of the situations she outlined. Feeling uncomfortable about your pregnancy _is_ about feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in your field or your office. And it might feel ridiculous, because feeling uncomfortable about your gender in a "post-feminist" workplace doesn't really make sense, does it? Except a lot of women feel this way, and it cannot be directly attributed to them. It's poignant to say that women themselves are partly to blame, because peoples' lack of action can often perpetuate the culture that causes those feelings However, the main culprit IS the society itself, not individual women. It's not a particular persons' fault for feeling a certain way, and it's certainly not an entire group's fault for sharing a feeling of discomfort. When hundreds of thousands of women who work in tech feel the same way, that's not a sign that they all need to realize that their insecurity is 'imagined'. It's a sign that something about their environment is making them feel that way. Feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in technology is a symptom of a male-oriented culture, not a cause. To say otherwise is to perpetuate the culture that makes women uncomfortable in the first place! -- RE: comments about a woman using a sexual favor to get to her position: Comments like this are not harmful because they affect a single employee (although they are disrespectful, disgusting, and rude). They are harmful because they use language and concepts that objectify and derogate women. When someone uses this language (or calls a full-grown woman a 'girl', or comments on a woman's physical attractiveness in a professional setting, etc), and is not reprimanded, it perpetuates a culture that trivializes and invalidates womens' professional accomplishments, praises and characterizes them for physical or sexual qualities rather than professional ones, and makes it that much more OK for someone to make a similar statement in the future. This kind of culture is what makes women have second thoughts about showing their pregnancy. Not an individual delusion or dramatization. -- Yes, feminism is about egalitarianism, but that simply means that it is a movement that works towards that goal. In a society that is already sexist and already uses language like I mentioned above, active forces are needed to change the culture in such a way that will move towards that egalitarianism. Every day, when you don't call someone out on gendered or sexist language, you assist in perpetuating a stand-still culture that believes gender equality has already arrived. It hasn't. There's still a lot of work to do, and most of it has to do with our language and every day behaviors. TL;DR: Feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in technology is a symptom of a male-oriented culture, not a cause, and the language we use every day defines that culture, so jokes about a woman using sexual favors to get a certain position are incredibly harmful to women as a whole. EDIT: just realized this comment is pretty badly placed. However, I think a society-level discussion of these issues is badly needed, and the parent comment serves as an excellent segue.
bmj 14y ago
Take an extreme, like slaveowners. Does anyone think they were all stereotypical jerks (aside from their institutional role), or grew black mustaches to twirl? This is a good point. A friend of mine often talks about the "good slaver problem"--there are certain cultural habits that are so entrenched that we just don't see the problem. Some people do see the problem, and leave it behind and/or fight to fix it.
pbhjpbhj 14y ago
>one insititutional problem on HN is that males outnumber females greatly // How do you know? It certainly seems likely there's a large imbalance, but you know. You even claim to know the sex of specific commenters. Maybe you do, but why does the sex of the commenters matter, surely it's the substance of the comments that are important?

claudius 14y ago

> I keep that in mind when I see which female voices tend to get upvoted — and which don't. The ones which blame females' attitudes, rather than analyze sexist culture? With 95% of the usernames here I have a hard time telling whether the writer is male or female, so how could this be the basis of an up-/downvote bias that is greater than the usual noise?

calibraxis 14y ago
We can search hnsearch.com for "poll gender". Males consistently outnumber females more than 10X. We can predict some likely outcomes of such a voting/commenting system, which I think are borne out by evidence. (https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=poll+gender&sortby=create_ts+desc https://www.hnsearch.com/search#request/submissions&q=po...) (Edit: and this linked article is clearly written by a self-identified female. Hope I understood your question correctly.)
- Davertron 14y ago
  I think what he's saying is when you're upvoting/downvoting someone, you don't actually know whether they're male or female based solely on the username.
  - claudius 14y ago
    Exactly (though my username might be the one exception to that…) – the post I replied to specifically said that apparently only female voices were getting up-/downvoted or that this was only a concern for female voices, so I am a little confused about it.
    - mtrimpe 14y ago
      I interpreted it as which kind of female voices got up-/downvoted: the ones that go along with general consensus or those that are critical of male privilege.
      - belorn 14y ago
        People who try to accuse a society with generalized claims like "male privilege" get down voted because they are non-specific, non-discussable "facts", negative, and non-constructive in nature. Comments with those attributes are in direct contrast to a discussion board or for that matter, a scientific mind. Comments that are specific, who's facts is discussable, are constructive in both identifying with facts what is wrong, and suggest solution in a scientific manner will be up voted. It doesn't matter if its male or female voice doing this.
        mtrimpe 14y ago
        I used the general term as just that, a general term to describe a class of voices. I wasn't referring to posts that used that exact generalized claim. As for scientific manner; there's a lot being discussed on HN that isn't scientific. Although related, hacking is broader than science.
        wonderzombie 14y ago
dcalacci 14y ago
I think he's talking about articles by women (such as this one) that blame individual women (such as this one).

theorique 14y ago

They're not being jerks by the standards of their culture, but the culture is sexist. Is it that the culture is sexist, or that the culture is aggressive, elitist, loud, obnoxious, and expects people to "suck it up" and not get offended? Or both?

illuminate 14y ago
"Is it that the culture is sexist, or that the culture is aggressive, elitist, loud, obnoxious, and expects people to "suck it up" and not get offended?" Strong elements in "the culture" encourage both of these. There isn't quite a monoculture, so using just "the culture" seems a bit off.
- theorique 14y ago
  There isn't quite a monoculture, so using just "the culture" seems a bit off That's true. That being said, I'm wondering if a boisterous workplace culture that may be grounded in stereotypically male "ways of being" (e.g. rude jokes, elitism, competitiveness, aggression, "in your face"-ness) can be considered sexist insofar as it discourages more stereotypically female "ways of being" (assuming no overt sexism in the form of legitimate discrimination, etc). Or if some women like that culture and thrive in it, is that considered inoculation against charges of sexism? I don't really have an answer. I'm just trying to understand what is considered sexist and what is considered a natural consequences of differences between the sexes.
  - illuminate 14y ago
    The problem is the delineation between "rude" funny and "nasty". I like the former, but I don't think many people are capable of sorting out the dark consciousness of what makes it so funny from the more South Park joke being at someone's expense. Since I'd rather avoid having to deal with the latter, I'm fine with sidestepping the former or setting up clear lines, even though it makes me "no fun" to plenty of techies of any gender. "what is considered sexist" Can probably be debated easier and somewhat more objectively* than "what is considered a natural consequences of differences between the sexes" , which is entirely conjecture and crappy evo-psych. *It's plenty subjective, but what affects and bothers coworkers and friends is absolutely important.

dcalacci 14y ago

It is so refreshing to see something of a sociological perspective on this debate. I think that her premise is sound, but her conclusion is wrong. Many women do feel uncomfortable in many of the situations she outlined. Feeling uncomfortable about your pregnancy _is_ about feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in your field or your office. And it might feel ridiculous, because feeling uncomfortable about your gender in a "post-feminist" workplace doesn't really make sense, does it? Except a lot of women feel this way, and it cannot be directly attributed to them. It's poignant to say that women themselves are partly to blame, because peoples' lack of action can often perpetuate the culture that causes those feelings However, the main culprit IS the society itself, not individual women. It's not a particular persons' fault for feeling a certain way, and it's certainly not an entire group's fault for sharing a feeling of discomfort. When hundreds of thousands of women who work in tech feel the same way, that's not a sign that they all need to realize that their insecurity is 'imagined'. It's a sign that something about their environment is making them feel that way. Feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in technology is a symptom of a male-oriented culture, not a cause. To say otherwise is to perpetuate the culture that makes women uncomfortable in the first place! -- RE: comments about a woman using a sexual favor to get to her position: Comments like this are not harmful because they affect a single employee (although they are disrespectful, disgusting, and rude). They are harmful because they use language and concepts that objectify and derogate women. When someone uses this language (or calls a full-grown woman a 'girl', or comments on a woman's physical attractiveness in a professional setting, etc), and is not reprimanded, it perpetuates a culture that trivializes and invalidates womens' professional accomplishments, praises and characterizes them for physical or sexual qualities rather than professional ones, and makes it that much more OK for someone to make a similar statement in the future. This kind of culture is what makes women have second thoughts about showing their pregnancy. Not an individual delusion or dramatization. -- Yes, feminism is about egalitarianism, but that simply means that it is a movement that works towards that goal. In a society that is already sexist and already uses language like I mentioned above, active forces are needed to change the culture in such a way that will move towards that egalitarianism. Every day, when you don't call someone out on gendered or sexist language, you assist in perpetuating a stand-still culture that believes gender equality has already arrived. It hasn't. There's still a lot of work to do, and most of it has to do with our language and every day behaviors. TL;DR: Feeling uncomfortable about being a woman in technology is a symptom of a male-oriented culture, not a cause, and the language we use every day defines that culture, so jokes about a woman using sexual favors to get a certain position are incredibly harmful to women as a whole. EDIT: just realized this comment is pretty badly placed. However, I think a society-level discussion of these issues is badly needed, and the parent comment serves as an excellent segue.

bmj 14y ago

Take an extreme, like slaveowners. Does anyone think they were all stereotypical jerks (aside from their institutional role), or grew black mustaches to twirl? This is a good point. A friend of mine often talks about the "good slaver problem"--there are certain cultural habits that are so entrenched that we just don't see the problem. Some people do see the problem, and leave it behind and/or fight to fix it.

pbhjpbhj 14y ago

>one insititutional problem on HN is that males outnumber females greatly // How do you know? It certainly seems likely there's a large imbalance, but you know. You even claim to know the sex of specific commenters. Maybe you do, but why does the sex of the commenters matter, surely it's the substance of the comments that are important?