5 ms·

>Unless you have some magical way of forcing everyone to suddenly drop their prejudices, then there is a need for social activism. Predicated on what? What's y

>Unless you have some magical way of forcing everyone to suddenly drop their prejudices, then there is a need for social activism. Predicated on what? What's your proof that such prejudices exist, or that they're applied more so to women than men? Furthermore, what's your proof that discrimination is the form of social activism required to fix this unproved prejudice? In any debate around this issue there seems to be a lot of working backwards from the evidence to whatever theory the commenter personally supports. People who want to believe that prejudice and sexism 'keep women down' cite the fact that men are predominant in tech. People who want to believe that men are more predisposed to enter tech than women cite the exact same evidence. This isn't how logic works. Unfortunately for the latter group, it's not possible to prove a negative (i.e. the absence of sexism), so the former group will actually have to present evidence showing that prejudice is the best explanation for the gender gap in tech. >Who are these women being given more than a fair chance? Ignoring the facile pretense that every tech event is somehow exclusive to men simply because more men choose to attend, I'd start off by saying that this event -- this event which is enforced as exclusively women-only -- is evidence of women being given gender-based advantages. It requires Orwellian levels of double-think to look at a female-only event and pretend such a thing isn't sexist, while at the same time decrying the sexism in tech from the mere unexplained fact that tech contains more men than women. But this event is too hot an issue for both sides for either party to concede that it's proof or disproof of a female advantage in tech. Instead, I'd ask what you think constitutes fair, and what constitutes equality? It seems that the answer to this question is what really divides the two sides in this debate. I -- and I assume most who think events like this are destructive -- would answer that fairness and equality relate to negative freedom: the freedom from someone restraining you from pursuing your goals i.e. we would all be more equal if the only thing which stood between us and our goals were our own skill (or lack thereof). If you disagree with this goal, could explain why? And if you do not disagree with this goal, could you explain how you justify discriminatory events? (And if you could do so without sarcasm, that'd be fantastic, thanks.)

rmrfrmrf 13y ago
> Predicated on what? What's your proof that such prejudices exist, or that they're applied more so to women than men? Furthermore, what's your proof that discrimination is the form of social activism required to fix this unproved prejudice? Oh, you want proof? Here you go: http://programmersbeingdicks.tumblr.com/ http://programmersbeingdicks.tumblr.com/.
prayag 13y ago
>What's your proof that such prejudices exist This guys has a point. Yea women where is the proof that you are prejudiced against except centuries of discrimination? The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Almost 50 years ago. The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. Also, feminism is bad. \sarcasm >I assume most who think events like this are destructive -- would answer that fairness and equality relate to negative freedom: the freedom from someone restraining you from pursuing your goals i.e. we would all be more equal if the only thing which stood between us and our goals were our own skill (or lack thereof). Because this argument assumes a level playing field for everybody including no intrinsic factors like lack of role models, lack of representation and lack of societal support. Here's another advice for you, what you are thinking are well-reasoned arguments are all the same arguments that come up time and again in Sociology 101 to being stated in every argument on gender and race related issues on Hacker News. So, go do some research make some new (but probably) misinformed arguments about how we live in a post-gender society instead rehashing the same bigoted crap all the time.
- Dewie 13y ago
  > The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Women got the right to vote at a federal level in Switzerland in 1971. > The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. No. You talk about sociology 101, so how about this nugget; making less money than someone has many more variables associated with it than discrimination (for example; part time vs. full time). This is practically an urban myth at this point. You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones.
  - prayag 13y ago
    > This is practically an urban myth at this point. You are wrong. It's not clear-cut. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap for an introduction. Are you suggesting that women are not prejudiced again in work-place and in technology? > You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones. I did. Here's what I found: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253 https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253
enneff 13y ago
> What's your proof that such prejudices exist Ask any female programmer about it sometime. It'll be enlightening for you.

rmrfrmrf 13y ago

> Predicated on what? What's your proof that such prejudices exist, or that they're applied more so to women than men? Furthermore, what's your proof that discrimination is the form of social activism required to fix this unproved prejudice? Oh, you want proof? Here you go: http://programmersbeingdicks.tumblr.com/ http://programmersbeingdicks.tumblr.com/.

prayag 13y ago

>What's your proof that such prejudices exist This guys has a point. Yea women where is the proof that you are prejudiced against except centuries of discrimination? The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Almost 50 years ago. The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. Also, feminism is bad. \sarcasm >I assume most who think events like this are destructive -- would answer that fairness and equality relate to negative freedom: the freedom from someone restraining you from pursuing your goals i.e. we would all be more equal if the only thing which stood between us and our goals were our own skill (or lack thereof). Because this argument assumes a level playing field for everybody including no intrinsic factors like lack of role models, lack of representation and lack of societal support. Here's another advice for you, what you are thinking are well-reasoned arguments are all the same arguments that come up time and again in Sociology 101 to being stated in every argument on gender and race related issues on Hacker News. So, go do some research make some new (but probably) misinformed arguments about how we live in a post-gender society instead rehashing the same bigoted crap all the time.

Dewie 13y ago
> The last western country to give women right to vote was in 1960s. Women got the right to vote at a federal level in Switzerland in 1971. > The fact that you make 80 cents to every dollar a man makes is not a proof of any prejudice but a proof that women are genetically pre-disposed to making less money than men. No. You talk about sociology 101, so how about this nugget; making less money than someone has many more variables associated with it than discrimination (for example; part time vs. full time). This is practically an urban myth at this point. You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones.
- prayag 13y ago
  > This is practically an urban myth at this point. You are wrong. It's not clear-cut. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_pay_gap for an introduction. Are you suggesting that women are not prejudiced again in work-place and in technology? > You can Google for refutations of it if you want (either 80 cents, or 77 cents) and you should be able to find a dozen decent ones. I did. Here's what I found: http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short http://asq.sagepub.com/content/44/3/453.short https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253 https://archive.nyu.edu/handle/2451/14253

enneff 13y ago

> What's your proof that such prejudices exist Ask any female programmer about it sometime. It'll be enlightening for you.