> I'm actually the go-between at work between those people think are assholes and some people that are overly sensitive. I quietly hate the role I play and wish

> I'm actually the go-between at work between those people think are assholes and some people that are overly sensitive. I quietly hate the role I play and wish I didn't have to waste time trying to protect people from their emotions. It's exhausting. Why do you do it, then? Stop. You're clearly ill-suited for the job and it's probably not what you're being paid to do. > It's mentally taxing and expensive to deal with overly sensitive people who lose focus on the task at hand because they feel offended or hurt. That's how a lot of people who work against sexism feel when they see posts like yours. Their task is to reduce sexism, but you get offended or hurt by the course of their work, so they're forced to deal with you. Can you imagine how mentally taxing and exhausting that is? It's not different from how you feel. You're playing the victim card here. You're creating a massive waste of everyone else's time because you don't value the contributions that others make that aren't in open source. > I wish you the best of luck, but what you shouldn't do is come into anyone else's house that they built and call them out on how they behave in their house. Why not? If someone puts a sign on the door of their house that says, "Free candy!" and then enslaves and sells every person who comes through their door, is it wrong to stop them from continuing such a practice? Is such an act condoned merely through the act of their having built the house? Now, of course, perhaps the house-builder does not engage in such actions. But then the question is whether or not you agree with the calling out of such actions. This is where you get into the question of whether or not you agree with sexist conduct.