3 ms·

Interpreting this to mean that it's a "fun and diverse work place" is pretty tortured exegesis. The reason this is a problem is that it's alienating to women t

Interpreting this to mean that it's a "fun and diverse work place" is pretty tortured exegesis. The reason this is a problem is that it's alienating to women to describe them as job perks. Like, look. Empathize a little. What if you're a straight lady dev looking for a job? Why would "female" devs be a job perk? Many women take being massive issue with being described as "female." Further, describing them by nationality has an element of exoticizing them. More fundamentally though, the line signals that this environment is a male environment. Its boys club signaling, even if you don't want it to be. Even if it doesn't bother you personally.

sanderjd 13y ago
> What if you're a straight lady dev looking for a job? Why would "female" devs be a job perk? Because many women are sick of always being the only woman on a development team. I think the line can be read to either signal that the environment is female-dominated ("There are lots of women here to work with!") or male-dominated ("There are lots of women here to objectify!"). Whatever their intent, it's a terribly awkward line.
VMG 13y ago
What if you're a straight lady dev looking for a job? Are you suggesting that women don't like with other women? Most tech shops have much less men then women, which is boring. This ad wanted to highlight that this place has more diversity. As with all language, the wording is a little ambiguous. The article (and many commenters) choose to interpret the line in the worst possible way and think the company is a misogynist hellhole and probably think that the four women working there are kept on leashes.
- PebblesRox 13y ago
  I doubt that Richard Green had any malicious intentions in his comments; it was probably an innocent mistake. If you look at the literal meaning of what he wrote, you can see that he probably wanted to highlight the diversity. But I don't think you can deny that the wording he chose has unfortunate connotations and I think it's worth pointing that out because those connotations, while subtle and subjective, are real and they can be harmful. I think at the very least we can agree that they have harmed the image of evvnt, which is the opposite of what he intended. No one is suggesting that women don't like to work together. It's that we don't want to work in a place where the men subconsciously think of us as a temptation, a reward, a decoration, or a commodity. That's the impression that Green's post gives, even though I'm sure that's not what he intended. Does that make sense? I can try to explain better if you have questions.
Dewie 13y ago
> Many women take being massive issue with being described as "female." "Female developers" sounds like a zoologist describing the savannah of the office environment.

sanderjd 13y ago

> What if you're a straight lady dev looking for a job? Why would "female" devs be a job perk? Because many women are sick of always being the only woman on a development team. I think the line can be read to either signal that the environment is female-dominated ("There are lots of women here to work with!") or male-dominated ("There are lots of women here to objectify!"). Whatever their intent, it's a terribly awkward line.

VMG 13y ago

What if you're a straight lady dev looking for a job? Are you suggesting that women don't like with other women? Most tech shops have much less men then women, which is boring. This ad wanted to highlight that this place has more diversity. As with all language, the wording is a little ambiguous. The article (and many commenters) choose to interpret the line in the worst possible way and think the company is a misogynist hellhole and probably think that the four women working there are kept on leashes.

PebblesRox 13y ago
I doubt that Richard Green had any malicious intentions in his comments; it was probably an innocent mistake. If you look at the literal meaning of what he wrote, you can see that he probably wanted to highlight the diversity. But I don't think you can deny that the wording he chose has unfortunate connotations and I think it's worth pointing that out because those connotations, while subtle and subjective, are real and they can be harmful. I think at the very least we can agree that they have harmed the image of evvnt, which is the opposite of what he intended. No one is suggesting that women don't like to work together. It's that we don't want to work in a place where the men subconsciously think of us as a temptation, a reward, a decoration, or a commodity. That's the impression that Green's post gives, even though I'm sure that's not what he intended. Does that make sense? I can try to explain better if you have questions.

Dewie 13y ago

> Many women take being massive issue with being described as "female." "Female developers" sounds like a zoologist describing the savannah of the office environment.