9 ms·

> It's a funny joke, I love the name. Change it. Women everywhere will appreciate your valiant display of chivalry. They shall chant "Thank you Pxtl, for savin

by smokeyj 13y ago

> It's a funny joke, I love the name. Change it. Women everywhere will appreciate your valiant display of chivalry. They shall chant "Thank you Pxtl, for saving us from male privilege!".

raganwald 13y ago
Your premise is flawed. For example, I don't give a damn what women think of my calling people out on misogyny. I am not pro-women, I am anti-jackass. Comments like yours are jackasstic. I can dislike them without a moment's consideration of what women think of your words.
- smokeyj 13y ago
  > I don't give a damn what women think of my calling people out on misogyny That's what you're doing. You're like MLK for women's rights.
  - raganwald 13y ago
    Dude(?), I'm not MLK, and I'm not into women's rights. I'm a selfish bastard who wants to double or treble the number of productive brains in my environment. Exclusionary behaviour stands between me and my dream, and I will crush it by any means necessary. If you must compare me, think of Malcolm X. Do not make the mistake of thinking I'm nice to women, men, other people of colour, or anybody else.
    - smokeyj 13y ago
      > Exclusionary behaviour stands between me and my dream, and I will crush it by any means necessary. I like your sentiment, but I have a hard time imagining women out there who feel excluded by things like the name of a software package. I would love to see more brains in software, but I don't think word play is a major barrier. I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I would like to hear from first hand sources -- not a bunch of dudes on a software forum who claim to know what women want. Edit: Instead of arguing if the word `bro` is offensive, could you point me to people who are offended?
      - raganwald 13y ago
        I would like to hear from first hand sources -- not a bunch of dudes on a software forum who claim to know what women want. How very odd that despite all of our behaviour being so non-offensive and non-exclusionary, we don't seem to have any women who want to hang around this forum with us, and especially don't want to engage in discussions about exclusion where the immediate response to any questioning to for the questioner to be shouted down in vituperative terms.
        smokeyj 13y ago
        No evidence? Because "we already scared them away"? Okay champ.
        reallyseriously 13y ago
        "How very odd that despite all of our behaviour being so non-offensive and non-exclusionary, we don't seem to have any women who want to hang around this forum with us..." Correlation -> Causation? Is that seriously why you think there aren't more women on HN? Because it's offensive and exclusionary against women?
        aiiane 13y ago
        I can think of a number of my colleagues who specifically avoid HN because of that very reason, so, yes.
        reallyseriously 13y ago
        Is this the part where I should say something about how they need to "toughen up" and they must be "too sensitive"? jk. That's actually a real shame. I'm not going to venture a guess at the % of threads that any woman would find offensive but always thought HN was roughest on people's work when seeking feedback, etc.
        adrienne 13y ago
    - thro2 13y ago
      The behavior here is only exclusionary if people feel excluded by it, so the legitimacy of your concerns is based in how women (in this case) feel. If you can't find a person who thinks he/she is being discriminated against here, you're obviously tilting at windmills.
      - raganwald 13y ago
        the legitimacy of your concerns is based in how women (in this case) feel. If you can't find a person who thinks he/she is being discriminated against here, you're obviously tilting at windmills. Now what you're presenting me with is a proposition that if "X" is false, then I should reconsider my belief that "Y" is true. So before I give this further thought, let me call your bet: Will you in turn agree that if "X" turns out to be true, will you reconsider your belief that "Y" is false? I would hate to go to a lot of work to show you that there are offended women, only to hear you mansplain to me that well, there aren't enough women, or they're the wrong sorts of women, or even if they're offended that they shouldn't be offended, or some other such weaselling out.
        thro2 13y ago
        First of all, I think you're confusing me with the people you're arguing against (who explicitly deny that calling some website "bro" is exclusionary). I'm not arguing for that; I'm objecting to your disingenuous claim (as I read it) that you're NOT trying to act as an advocate on behalf of women. We're talking about a social construct here (exclusionarity), so certainly the more women you find, the stronger your case is. No women is no evidence, one is weak evidence, etc. But even if you find such people, why don't you let them speak for themselves? And why use the word "mansplain"? It's inflammatory language.
        raganwald 13y ago
        I'll take that as a "I want you to burden yourself with justifying your position, but I'm not going to commit to any movement on my own position, and for that matter, I won't even commit to a position, I'm just lobbing a burden at you." I choose not to play along.
- res0nat0r 13y ago
  The word 'bro' has nothing to do with women. There is too much internet dork white knighting going on in this thread. I'd respect peoples opinion more in this thread if they said 'Hey! I know there is a small percentage of us guys who are offended by this rubygem name, and I dont like it! You should change it.' vs. trying to frame the argument that one is trying to save the poor helpless women from themselves.
ilyanep 13y ago
Of course this is his desired outcome, because every man who works for gender equality is doing it for praise or because he wants to get laid.
Pxtl 13y ago
For pity's sake, it's not like I said that his patriarchal name encourages rape-culture and that he needs to check his privilege and properly understand the intersectionality of female geeks. I said it was funny, but that it's probably best for the health of our industry that we try to avoid the whole "gender" subject matter when it comes to jokes. A little professionalism never hurt anyone.
adrienne 13y ago
I get really fucking tired of seeing men who are helping derided as "white knights". Trust me, women can TELL when someone is putting us on a pedestal and deciding that we have to be defended because we're such delicate flowers, and we're quick to call that bullshit when we see it. Most of us actually appreciate when our ALLIES step up to talk about this shit. It's not about "saving us" -- we aren't fucking damsels in distress, and yes, we can speak for ourselves. But assholes like you have made eminently clear that you don't actually LISTEN to women, and so it's nice to know that some men actually have our backs and are willing to do the utterly thankless work of trying to explain shit to you.

by smokeyj 13y ago

> It's a funny joke, I love the name. Change it. Women everywhere will appreciate your valiant display of chivalry. They shall chant "Thank you Pxtl, for saving us from male privilege!".

raganwald 13y ago

Your premise is flawed. For example, I don't give a damn what women think of my calling people out on misogyny. I am not pro-women, I am anti-jackass. Comments like yours are jackasstic. I can dislike them without a moment's consideration of what women think of your words.

smokeyj 13y ago
> I don't give a damn what women think of my calling people out on misogyny That's what you're doing. You're like MLK for women's rights.
- raganwald 13y ago
  Dude(?), I'm not MLK, and I'm not into women's rights. I'm a selfish bastard who wants to double or treble the number of productive brains in my environment. Exclusionary behaviour stands between me and my dream, and I will crush it by any means necessary. If you must compare me, think of Malcolm X. Do not make the mistake of thinking I'm nice to women, men, other people of colour, or anybody else.
  - smokeyj 13y ago
    > Exclusionary behaviour stands between me and my dream, and I will crush it by any means necessary. I like your sentiment, but I have a hard time imagining women out there who feel excluded by things like the name of a software package. I would love to see more brains in software, but I don't think word play is a major barrier. I'm willing to be proven wrong, but I would like to hear from first hand sources -- not a bunch of dudes on a software forum who claim to know what women want. Edit: Instead of arguing if the word `bro` is offensive, could you point me to people who are offended?
    - raganwald 13y ago
      I would like to hear from first hand sources -- not a bunch of dudes on a software forum who claim to know what women want. How very odd that despite all of our behaviour being so non-offensive and non-exclusionary, we don't seem to have any women who want to hang around this forum with us, and especially don't want to engage in discussions about exclusion where the immediate response to any questioning to for the questioner to be shouted down in vituperative terms.
      - smokeyj 13y ago
        No evidence? Because "we already scared them away"? Okay champ.
      - reallyseriously 13y ago
        "How very odd that despite all of our behaviour being so non-offensive and non-exclusionary, we don't seem to have any women who want to hang around this forum with us..." Correlation -> Causation? Is that seriously why you think there aren't more women on HN? Because it's offensive and exclusionary against women?
        aiiane 13y ago
        I can think of a number of my colleagues who specifically avoid HN because of that very reason, so, yes.
        reallyseriously 13y ago
        Is this the part where I should say something about how they need to "toughen up" and they must be "too sensitive"? jk. That's actually a real shame. I'm not going to venture a guess at the % of threads that any woman would find offensive but always thought HN was roughest on people's work when seeking feedback, etc.
        adrienne 13y ago
  - thro2 13y ago
    The behavior here is only exclusionary if people feel excluded by it, so the legitimacy of your concerns is based in how women (in this case) feel. If you can't find a person who thinks he/she is being discriminated against here, you're obviously tilting at windmills.
    - raganwald 13y ago
      the legitimacy of your concerns is based in how women (in this case) feel. If you can't find a person who thinks he/she is being discriminated against here, you're obviously tilting at windmills. Now what you're presenting me with is a proposition that if "X" is false, then I should reconsider my belief that "Y" is true. So before I give this further thought, let me call your bet: Will you in turn agree that if "X" turns out to be true, will you reconsider your belief that "Y" is false? I would hate to go to a lot of work to show you that there are offended women, only to hear you mansplain to me that well, there aren't enough women, or they're the wrong sorts of women, or even if they're offended that they shouldn't be offended, or some other such weaselling out.
      - thro2 13y ago
        First of all, I think you're confusing me with the people you're arguing against (who explicitly deny that calling some website "bro" is exclusionary). I'm not arguing for that; I'm objecting to your disingenuous claim (as I read it) that you're NOT trying to act as an advocate on behalf of women. We're talking about a social construct here (exclusionarity), so certainly the more women you find, the stronger your case is. No women is no evidence, one is weak evidence, etc. But even if you find such people, why don't you let them speak for themselves? And why use the word "mansplain"? It's inflammatory language.
        raganwald 13y ago
        I'll take that as a "I want you to burden yourself with justifying your position, but I'm not going to commit to any movement on my own position, and for that matter, I won't even commit to a position, I'm just lobbing a burden at you." I choose not to play along.
res0nat0r 13y ago
The word 'bro' has nothing to do with women. There is too much internet dork white knighting going on in this thread. I'd respect peoples opinion more in this thread if they said 'Hey! I know there is a small percentage of us guys who are offended by this rubygem name, and I dont like it! You should change it.' vs. trying to frame the argument that one is trying to save the poor helpless women from themselves.

ilyanep 13y ago

Of course this is his desired outcome, because every man who works for gender equality is doing it for praise or because he wants to get laid.

Pxtl 13y ago

For pity's sake, it's not like I said that his patriarchal name encourages rape-culture and that he needs to check his privilege and properly understand the intersectionality of female geeks. I said it was funny, but that it's probably best for the health of our industry that we try to avoid the whole "gender" subject matter when it comes to jokes. A little professionalism never hurt anyone.

adrienne 13y ago

I get really fucking tired of seeing men who are helping derided as "white knights". Trust me, women can TELL when someone is putting us on a pedestal and deciding that we have to be defended because we're such delicate flowers, and we're quick to call that bullshit when we see it. Most of us actually appreciate when our ALLIES step up to talk about this shit. It's not about "saving us" -- we aren't fucking damsels in distress, and yes, we can speak for ourselves. But assholes like you have made eminently clear that you don't actually LISTEN to women, and so it's nice to know that some men actually have our backs and are willing to do the utterly thankless work of trying to explain shit to you.