6 ms·

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

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
        I'm a woman, and I've been in the tech industry for more than a decade. I avoid HN like the fucking plague, precisely because of the fact that it is so exclusionary and hateful toward women and other marginalized groups. (Tonight is absolutely the first time I have EVER commented in a thread.) So there's at least one data point for you.
        aaren 13y ago
        There are threads like this one that become explicitly about gender. They aren't particularly inviting. Sometimes they make the front page, in which case there is a semblance of discussion. They aren't a great advert for hn as an inclusive space though. In general the problem is more with the atmosphere in threads that aren't explicitly about gender. This means things like the language that people use or the assumptions that they make when writing a comment. Sometimes these aren't very welcoming to women (other groups too), or are just offensive. When people get called out for this behaviour, it can spark a big shitstorm of argument in which people often lose all concept of polite discussion and ask for rigorous proof that someone does in fact feel marginalised. This isn't very encouraging. Links to geekfeminism seem to provoke a strong reaction from some people, but here's one for you: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege_Checklist http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege... I encourage you to read this (even if you don't agree) and then spend some time on hn just thinking about the content of discussion knowing that some people might feel this way. Empathy is the key. Not all of the examples on that page are applicable here because this isn't a physical space or a workplace. Yes, a lot of them are anecdotal - it's a wiki and a collection of peoples experiences. I'm not saying that you are necessarily privileged. Treat the page as it is - a collection of experiences. I've bothered to type this out because you seem to be reasonable and to argue in good faith. To understand why people feel marginalised can take a bit more than logical argument though. You need to be open minded and to attempt to empathise with other people.
    - aiiane 13y ago
      You rang? I normally avoid commenting on crap like this because people like you are a pain to talk to, but since you seem to want to take advantage of me not engaging with people like you to argue that I don't exist... hi, I exist. Now please stop it with that terrible argument.
      - kaybe 13y ago
        I would probably not have put it like this, but me too..
        aiiane 13y ago
        Honestly, if I were in a better mood today I'd probably put it differently, but this thread...
      - smokeyj 13y ago
        The correlation between people with attitude problems and those who feel excluded is surprisingly strong. Thanks for your input!
        aaren 13y ago
        The correlation between people with attitude problems and those who make others feel excluded is unsurprisingly strong.
  - 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.

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
        I'm a woman, and I've been in the tech industry for more than a decade. I avoid HN like the fucking plague, precisely because of the fact that it is so exclusionary and hateful toward women and other marginalized groups. (Tonight is absolutely the first time I have EVER commented in a thread.) So there's at least one data point for you.
        aaren 13y ago
        There are threads like this one that become explicitly about gender. They aren't particularly inviting. Sometimes they make the front page, in which case there is a semblance of discussion. They aren't a great advert for hn as an inclusive space though. In general the problem is more with the atmosphere in threads that aren't explicitly about gender. This means things like the language that people use or the assumptions that they make when writing a comment. Sometimes these aren't very welcoming to women (other groups too), or are just offensive. When people get called out for this behaviour, it can spark a big shitstorm of argument in which people often lose all concept of polite discussion and ask for rigorous proof that someone does in fact feel marginalised. This isn't very encouraging. Links to geekfeminism seem to provoke a strong reaction from some people, but here's one for you: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege_Checklist http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Male_Programmer_Privilege... I encourage you to read this (even if you don't agree) and then spend some time on hn just thinking about the content of discussion knowing that some people might feel this way. Empathy is the key. Not all of the examples on that page are applicable here because this isn't a physical space or a workplace. Yes, a lot of them are anecdotal - it's a wiki and a collection of peoples experiences. I'm not saying that you are necessarily privileged. Treat the page as it is - a collection of experiences. I've bothered to type this out because you seem to be reasonable and to argue in good faith. To understand why people feel marginalised can take a bit more than logical argument though. You need to be open minded and to attempt to empathise with other people.
  - aiiane 13y ago
    You rang? I normally avoid commenting on crap like this because people like you are a pain to talk to, but since you seem to want to take advantage of me not engaging with people like you to argue that I don't exist... hi, I exist. Now please stop it with that terrible argument.
    - kaybe 13y ago
      I would probably not have put it like this, but me too..
      - aiiane 13y ago
        Honestly, if I were in a better mood today I'd probably put it differently, but this thread...
    - smokeyj 13y ago
      The correlation between people with attitude problems and those who feel excluded is surprisingly strong. Thanks for your input!
      - aaren 13y ago
        The correlation between people with attitude problems and those who make others feel excluded is unsurprisingly strong.
- 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.