5 ms·

You can educate yourself and others! There are lots of resources for learning how to do more, including speaking up to other men and putting some money toward s

by britta 12y ago

You can educate yourself and others! There are lots of resources for learning how to do more, including speaking up to other men and putting some money toward supporting people who are making a difference. Here's an article with a bunch of options ("What Can Men Do? Men working with other men against patriarchy in technology"): https://medium.com/tech-culture-briefs/a1e93d985af0 https://medium.com/tech-culture-briefs/a1e93d985af0 - and here's an allies training workshop that you can encourage your company (or your friends' companies) to do: http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/workshops-and-training/ http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/workshops-and-training/

deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
thenmar 12y ago
I'm curious about how controversial this post seems. It has been bouncing back and forth from light gray to black. Is it that people disagree with educating others? That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair?
- ForHackernews 12y ago
  I generally agree with the parent and I upvoted it, but I did so in spite of having a visceral negative reaction to buzzwords like "allies" (implies that I'm somehow taking a risk/taking sides in a war) and "patriarchy" (vague and ill-defined to the point of meaninglessness).
- thenmar 12y ago
  I'm replying to this because I can't reply to ForHackernews's comment, but this really needs to be said: "patriarchy" is most certainly NOT "vague and ill-defined to the point of meaninglessness". To say that is to dismiss decades of feminist work. If you are genuinely curious about this, the book Feminism is for Everybody (by bell hooks) is a great, accessible introduction to feminism and the (admittedly esoteric and ivory-towery) language you need to talk about it.
  - jdp23 12y ago
    Well said. Just like "dynamic typing" and "object-oriented" these are terms of art. And great suggestion on Feminism is for Everybody.
  - ForHackernews 12y ago
    I apologize if I wasn't clear, I think the issue is that "patriarchy" means many things to many people. Maybe you have some clear definition in mind, but that may or may not be what anyone else is talking about when they say "patriarchy" I've read bell hooks, and I consider myself a feminist. But the problem is that there's no universally agreed-upon definition. How will we know when patriarchy is dead? What metrics are we judging this by?
- zem 12y ago
  mostly that shanley (the blogger linked in the first post) tends to be a polarising figure
- mcantelon 12y ago
  >That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair? When ideological lingo is used to communicate, it's going to, right or wrong, cause some folks to stop reading.
  - ben0x539 12y ago
    What ideologically neutral lingo do you propose?
  - wpietri 12y ago
    What name would you suggest for the system that oppressed women for millennia?
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
gfodor 12y ago
Sorry, but I find Shanley's approach to framing this issue completely the opposite of the OP here. The OP sees the good in good men and lifts them up. The closing point about the joke she shared with her colleagues underlines it: there are people who are unable to laugh off a "dick in your hand" joke regardless of context and who it comes from. Not because of a lack of sense of humor, but because any such joke will be framed as oppressive and sexist due to the gender of the person it comes from. Shanley sees all men as de facto oppressors (of varying degrees) due to their gender and the existence of the patriarchy. (Don't believe me? Look at her point: "Men need to work with each other on sexism. It is not okay to lean on the class of people you oppress to solve your system or your discomfort with it.".) This is not a productive avenue for making progress IMHO.
- zorpner 12y ago
  This is not a productive avenue for making progress IMHO. As Roizen points out in her article, while she believes that things have improved, she's still often the only woman in the room. Other women, like Shanley Kane, believe that working within the system and ignoring or brushing off sexist behavior when it's experienced merely propagates the (unacceptable) status quo. They're different ways of looking at the problem from people who actually experiencing it, and they're both valid perspectives. Listening to the perspectives of women and trying to understand where they're coming from, even if it makes you uncomfortable, is literally the first step towards making progress.
- jdp23 12y ago
  I've shown Shanley's post to quite a few women in technology (including some diversity experts) and they all think her concrete suggestions are excellent. [As do I.] So I strongly suggest any guys who really want to help read it and act on the suggestions even if they would prefer a different framing. And specifically, which of her points do you disagree with? Are you saying that men don't need to work with each other on their sexism? Or, are you saying that instead of men taking a responsibility to address sexism or overcome their discomfort with this issue they should instead lean on women?
  - 12y ago
jdp23 12y ago
britt's post is a substantive answer to 'news_to_me's question, with links off to useful resources. What does it say about the HN community that it was downvoted? [And by the way, this is an example of the 'speaking up' that britta mentioned. Guys, when you see this kind of hostile-to-women behavior on HN, call it out.]
- abracar 12y ago
  That some of us don't find these resources that useful or relevant?
  - jdp23 12y ago
    Thanks for the response. If you don't find the resources useful or relevant, it seems to me that it would be better to reply with your reasoning and links to other resources. Or are you using "downvote" to mean "I disagree"?
    - abracar 12y ago
      I can't downvote yet so I'm not one of those who did - I was trying to give an explanation. I don't know the exact rules for downvoting but I assume some use it to say " not helpful".
  - huu 12y ago
    Then perhaps it would be helpful to point out why you don't find the resources useful or relevant. Downvoting should be reserved for low-substance comments, not for hiding (it literally has the effect of hiding things from other people) information which you think is useless to you.

by britta 12y ago

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

thenmar 12y ago

I'm curious about how controversial this post seems. It has been bouncing back and forth from light gray to black. Is it that people disagree with educating others? That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair?

ForHackernews 12y ago
I generally agree with the parent and I upvoted it, but I did so in spite of having a visceral negative reaction to buzzwords like "allies" (implies that I'm somehow taking a risk/taking sides in a war) and "patriarchy" (vague and ill-defined to the point of meaninglessness).
thenmar 12y ago
I'm replying to this because I can't reply to ForHackernews's comment, but this really needs to be said: "patriarchy" is most certainly NOT "vague and ill-defined to the point of meaninglessness". To say that is to dismiss decades of feminist work. If you are genuinely curious about this, the book Feminism is for Everybody (by bell hooks) is a great, accessible introduction to feminism and the (admittedly esoteric and ivory-towery) language you need to talk about it.
- jdp23 12y ago
  Well said. Just like "dynamic typing" and "object-oriented" these are terms of art. And great suggestion on Feminism is for Everybody.
- ForHackernews 12y ago
  I apologize if I wasn't clear, I think the issue is that "patriarchy" means many things to many people. Maybe you have some clear definition in mind, but that may or may not be what anyone else is talking about when they say "patriarchy" I've read bell hooks, and I consider myself a feminist. But the problem is that there's no universally agreed-upon definition. How will we know when patriarchy is dead? What metrics are we judging this by?
zem 12y ago
mostly that shanley (the blogger linked in the first post) tends to be a polarising figure
mcantelon 12y ago
>That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair? When ideological lingo is used to communicate, it's going to, right or wrong, cause some folks to stop reading.
- ben0x539 12y ago
  What ideologically neutral lingo do you propose?
- wpietri 12y ago
  What name would you suggest for the system that oppressed women for millennia?
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]

gfodor 12y ago

Sorry, but I find Shanley's approach to framing this issue completely the opposite of the OP here. The OP sees the good in good men and lifts them up. The closing point about the joke she shared with her colleagues underlines it: there are people who are unable to laugh off a "dick in your hand" joke regardless of context and who it comes from. Not because of a lack of sense of humor, but because any such joke will be framed as oppressive and sexist due to the gender of the person it comes from. Shanley sees all men as de facto oppressors (of varying degrees) due to their gender and the existence of the patriarchy. (Don't believe me? Look at her point: "Men need to work with each other on sexism. It is not okay to lean on the class of people you oppress to solve your system or your discomfort with it.".) This is not a productive avenue for making progress IMHO.

zorpner 12y ago
This is not a productive avenue for making progress IMHO. As Roizen points out in her article, while she believes that things have improved, she's still often the only woman in the room. Other women, like Shanley Kane, believe that working within the system and ignoring or brushing off sexist behavior when it's experienced merely propagates the (unacceptable) status quo. They're different ways of looking at the problem from people who actually experiencing it, and they're both valid perspectives. Listening to the perspectives of women and trying to understand where they're coming from, even if it makes you uncomfortable, is literally the first step towards making progress.
jdp23 12y ago
I've shown Shanley's post to quite a few women in technology (including some diversity experts) and they all think her concrete suggestions are excellent. [As do I.] So I strongly suggest any guys who really want to help read it and act on the suggestions even if they would prefer a different framing. And specifically, which of her points do you disagree with? Are you saying that men don't need to work with each other on their sexism? Or, are you saying that instead of men taking a responsibility to address sexism or overcome their discomfort with this issue they should instead lean on women?
- 12y ago

jdp23 12y ago

britt's post is a substantive answer to 'news_to_me's question, with links off to useful resources. What does it say about the HN community that it was downvoted? [And by the way, this is an example of the 'speaking up' that britta mentioned. Guys, when you see this kind of hostile-to-women behavior on HN, call it out.]

abracar 12y ago
That some of us don't find these resources that useful or relevant?
- jdp23 12y ago
  Thanks for the response. If you don't find the resources useful or relevant, it seems to me that it would be better to reply with your reasoning and links to other resources. Or are you using "downvote" to mean "I disagree"?
  - abracar 12y ago
    I can't downvote yet so I'm not one of those who did - I was trying to give an explanation. I don't know the exact rules for downvoting but I assume some use it to say " not helpful".
- huu 12y ago
  Then perhaps it would be helpful to point out why you don't find the resources useful or relevant. Downvoting should be reserved for low-substance comments, not for hiding (it literally has the effect of hiding things from other people) information which you think is useless to you.