I don't feel like you actually stopped to understand what the author was saying before disagreeing with it. To me, the piece reads more as sort of whimsical, pr

I don't feel like you actually stopped to understand what the author was saying before disagreeing with it. To me, the piece reads more as sort of whimsical, preliminary musing about different ways of viewing interactions and how they can be enshrined in programming paradigms (e.g. OO, functional and logic programming all have different ways of expressing the relationships between program entities and have different ways of deciding what to do with those relationships). It doesn't sound to me like Arielle's hypothesis is "Programming languages are sexist," but rather that it might be interesting to see what a programming language would look like that subscribes to certain philosophies derived from feminist thinking. I don't know enough about feminist philosophy to say what this means in specific terms, but it doesn't strike me as necessarily less reasonable than, say, Clojure's attempt to implement Rich Hickey's philosophies about complexity and identity.