3 ms·

Interesting. I didn't see that much negative attitudes after the story was cleared out, actually most were sympathetic. The main disagreements were how the stor

Interesting. I didn't see that much negative attitudes after the story was cleared out, actually most were sympathetic. The main disagreements were how the story was massively pinned everywhere as one of sexism, when the main conflict involved another woman, and then the man who reversed Horvath's commits appeared to hold a grudge, not necessarily sexist attitudes. Sorry about the incident you describe, but I'm having a hard time extrapolating it to systemic racism. It appeared that it was an uneducated punk trying to impress a love interest through the only brutish way he knows: violence. He also needs to intimidate you somehow, and your race stands out. So what do you think he's going to do, in that case? Comment on your race, of course. People of lower caliber tend to focus on these superficialities. Oh, and they also tend to be highly effective insults. There's that, too. If your goal is to offend, racial slurs are an invaluable tool. But even if we were to assume that this arbitrary incident from over 25 years ago is evidence of current events, I still cannot take your claim that the tech industry is "as welcoming to women as medicine and law were a century ago" at face value. Secret WASP classes, indeed. Most higher education today is the polar opposite of that ideologically, but there you go.

pron 13y ago
> the story was massively pinned everywhere as one of sexism, when the main conflict involved another woman, and then the man who reversed Horvath's commits appeared to hold a grudge, not necessarily sexist attitudes. That is not true, that's just what the nitpickers here focused on. To quote the TechCrunch story: Horvath claims: “I had a really hard time getting used to the culture, the aggressive communication on pull requests and how little the men I worked with respected and valued my opinion,” she wrote in an email to TechCrunch. Why did Horvath work for GitHub? She “loved the idea of GitHub because it was the place people went to make things for people who make things.” In light of that, Horvath told us that she “participated in the boys’ club upon joining,” but when her “character started being discussed in inappropriate places like on pull requests and issues,” the situation changed. In short, Horvath said that she felt she was being treated differently internally simply due to her gender and not the quality of her work. She calls her colleagues’ response to her own work and the work of other female GitHub employees a “serious problem.” Despite GitHub hiring more female developers, Horvath said she struggled to feel welcome.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  Ah, I guess one could have an argument for that, in that case. It still sounds like it was just a very informal and competitive environment, much like Bungie, where there are no idols and people are free-for-all, but I can definitely see how some can be put off by it.
  - pron 13y ago
    Exactly: just like Horvath said – a sexist environment, and a sexist comment. Read here[1] on the definition of sexism. Notice especially how sexism explains itself away in naturalistic and/or neutral terms, like "free-for-all" and "competitive", while not so subtly shifting the blame to those who can't cope with such an "informal" environment. Usually, "informal" actually means that those who have power feel comfortable, while those who don't feel bullied. [1]: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/ http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-de...
    - reallyseriously 13y ago
      Informal at the places I've worked meant wearing silly shirts on Friday and harsh language was used if you screwed up. If a woman quit does that mean it was a sexist workplace? If a guy quit after being berated is that different? I don't think so. Also, you linked to a feminist site to provide the definition of a word. Is that normally how people cite the standard/objective meaning of a word or is this story a chance to talk about something you feel very strongly about whether it fits or not? Edit: just read the definition. Women can't be sexist? Hilarious. Let me guess, African Americans & Asians can't be racist either? Warped view of the world.
      - pron 13y ago
        > If a woman quit does that mean it was a sexist workplace? No. But if she quits because she felt the environment was sexist, then yes. > If a guy quit after being berated is that different? I don't think so. Well, male-on-male bullying is also an interesting topic and subject to research, but the topic du jour is sexism, so let's stick to that. > Also, you linked to a feminist site to provide the definition of a word. Is that normally how people cite the standard/objective meaning of a word...? Well, I don't know if "sexism" has an "objective" definition, but yes, words are usually best defined by experts on the subjects. Just as gravity is best defined by physicists, sexism is best defined by feminists, who have studied sexism for the past few decades. I'm a newbie to feminism, so I defer to the experts. > or is this story a chance to talk about something you feel very strongly about whether it fits or not? It is something I feel strongly about because of this story and others like it. Because so far all evidence suggests that "it fits", I think those trying to make it look irrelevant are suspect.
zorpner 13y ago
Ah, HN. "I have a different interpretation of a situation which I was not involved in": check "You can't extrapolate from analogous situations over to tech": check "This wasn't sexism, it involved another woman!": check "Racial slurs are an invaluable tool": This is a new one to me, actually.
- vezzy-fnord 13y ago
  I'm sorry, but if a person posts their article online up for debate, then yes, I will comment on how I interpret what they've given of their story. That's how public discourse works, I'm afraid. You can, but you need to have convincing argumentation. The statement that "tech treats women like medicine and law did a century ago" is a blatant provocation. Most of Horvath's story detailed a power struggle. If your goal is to offend. Context matters, people. Stop deliberately trying to get offended by everything, please. It's not that I agree with offending people, but it's what the person in the OP's story seemed to be going for, and since racial slurs are highly offensive, they are very useful in that.
  - zorpner 13y ago
    > since racial slurs are highly offensive, they are very useful in that. I agree! And the context of this is important, as you note -- as verbal constructions, racial slurs are more effectively offensive than pretty much any other available words, and one can often easily use them after just having looking at someone. And, after having these verbal weapons leveled at him, and being in a subsequent fistfight, he was essentially told that "boys will be boys". This should tell you something about how the power structures in play deal with minorities.
    - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
      Or perhaps it was simply them trying to brush off an inconvenient situation? That's something many institutions do, it's not just done exclusively when it concerns racial issues. Hell, the fact that it was a racial issue gives them more incentive to keep silence. As for his friends, they might have simply decided it wasn't worth expending energy on a lowlife punk.

pron 13y ago

> the story was massively pinned everywhere as one of sexism, when the main conflict involved another woman, and then the man who reversed Horvath's commits appeared to hold a grudge, not necessarily sexist attitudes. That is not true, that's just what the nitpickers here focused on. To quote the TechCrunch story: Horvath claims: “I had a really hard time getting used to the culture, the aggressive communication on pull requests and how little the men I worked with respected and valued my opinion,” she wrote in an email to TechCrunch. Why did Horvath work for GitHub? She “loved the idea of GitHub because it was the place people went to make things for people who make things.” In light of that, Horvath told us that she “participated in the boys’ club upon joining,” but when her “character started being discussed in inappropriate places like on pull requests and issues,” the situation changed. In short, Horvath said that she felt she was being treated differently internally simply due to her gender and not the quality of her work. She calls her colleagues’ response to her own work and the work of other female GitHub employees a “serious problem.” Despite GitHub hiring more female developers, Horvath said she struggled to feel welcome.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
Ah, I guess one could have an argument for that, in that case. It still sounds like it was just a very informal and competitive environment, much like Bungie, where there are no idols and people are free-for-all, but I can definitely see how some can be put off by it.
- pron 13y ago
  Exactly: just like Horvath said – a sexist environment, and a sexist comment. Read here[1] on the definition of sexism. Notice especially how sexism explains itself away in naturalistic and/or neutral terms, like "free-for-all" and "competitive", while not so subtly shifting the blame to those who can't cope with such an "informal" environment. Usually, "informal" actually means that those who have power feel comfortable, while those who don't feel bullied. [1]: http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-definition/ http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/10/19/sexism-de...
  - reallyseriously 13y ago
    Informal at the places I've worked meant wearing silly shirts on Friday and harsh language was used if you screwed up. If a woman quit does that mean it was a sexist workplace? If a guy quit after being berated is that different? I don't think so. Also, you linked to a feminist site to provide the definition of a word. Is that normally how people cite the standard/objective meaning of a word or is this story a chance to talk about something you feel very strongly about whether it fits or not? Edit: just read the definition. Women can't be sexist? Hilarious. Let me guess, African Americans & Asians can't be racist either? Warped view of the world.
    - pron 13y ago
      > If a woman quit does that mean it was a sexist workplace? No. But if she quits because she felt the environment was sexist, then yes. > If a guy quit after being berated is that different? I don't think so. Well, male-on-male bullying is also an interesting topic and subject to research, but the topic du jour is sexism, so let's stick to that. > Also, you linked to a feminist site to provide the definition of a word. Is that normally how people cite the standard/objective meaning of a word...? Well, I don't know if "sexism" has an "objective" definition, but yes, words are usually best defined by experts on the subjects. Just as gravity is best defined by physicists, sexism is best defined by feminists, who have studied sexism for the past few decades. I'm a newbie to feminism, so I defer to the experts. > or is this story a chance to talk about something you feel very strongly about whether it fits or not? It is something I feel strongly about because of this story and others like it. Because so far all evidence suggests that "it fits", I think those trying to make it look irrelevant are suspect.

zorpner 13y ago

Ah, HN. "I have a different interpretation of a situation which I was not involved in": check "You can't extrapolate from analogous situations over to tech": check "This wasn't sexism, it involved another woman!": check "Racial slurs are an invaluable tool": This is a new one to me, actually.

vezzy-fnord 13y ago
I'm sorry, but if a person posts their article online up for debate, then yes, I will comment on how I interpret what they've given of their story. That's how public discourse works, I'm afraid. You can, but you need to have convincing argumentation. The statement that "tech treats women like medicine and law did a century ago" is a blatant provocation. Most of Horvath's story detailed a power struggle. If your goal is to offend. Context matters, people. Stop deliberately trying to get offended by everything, please. It's not that I agree with offending people, but it's what the person in the OP's story seemed to be going for, and since racial slurs are highly offensive, they are very useful in that.
- zorpner 13y ago
  > since racial slurs are highly offensive, they are very useful in that. I agree! And the context of this is important, as you note -- as verbal constructions, racial slurs are more effectively offensive than pretty much any other available words, and one can often easily use them after just having looking at someone. And, after having these verbal weapons leveled at him, and being in a subsequent fistfight, he was essentially told that "boys will be boys". This should tell you something about how the power structures in play deal with minorities.
  - vezzy-fnord 13y ago
    Or perhaps it was simply them trying to brush off an inconvenient situation? That's something many institutions do, it's not just done exclusively when it concerns racial issues. Hell, the fact that it was a racial issue gives them more incentive to keep silence. As for his friends, they might have simply decided it wasn't worth expending energy on a lowlife punk.