7 ms·

Writing about FOSS sexism

11 points by fogus 17y ago

jacquesm 17y ago
I fully believe it. Lots of the 'men' in open source really are just boys with digital toys. Sure, plenty of us have girlfriends, wives and children. But a large number do not, on /. one of the prevailing memes is that ./ers do not have a life outside of their computing. The attitudes towards women in general, especially potential girlfriends is quite shocking. Even on HN the stuff that comes by every now and then is beyond the pale, and even more scary, it gets voted up, suggesting the majority feels that way.
- ErrantX 17y ago
  I think it's compounded as well by the fact that a lot of "geeks" struggle with being sociable, especially with women. In a lot of cases it really is not sexism; they just don't "get" people full stop and sometimes don't even really think about the concept that someone at the other end of the keyboard is a person too. As a result they come across as highly arrogant or unfeeling (and when talking to or about women as sexist). I've noticed on the various forums I hang out a lot of the younger types have that ingrained mild sexism that young boys usually have - only they cling to it for just a little longer. It soon goes when they head off to college :D EDIT( you know personally I find a large number of feminists as bad or worse than sexist men - they all need throwing into a bag and shaking about a bit :P)
tptacek 17y ago
Actually insightful. The notion that people who do not believe themselves to be sexist cannot detect ambient sexism rings true. I got in a bunch of fights with Erin early in our marriage by professing a similar world view. It was only when I watched her go out for IT jobs after staying home with the kids for a couple years that I saw how bad it was; interviewers would, for instance, ask who was going to take care of the kids if she was working. It's also simply the case that there are fewer women in hard computer disciplines (dev, hardware) than in some of the softer ones (support, SE, QA, etc), which biases some people's expectations.
- benhoyt 17y ago
  I'm wondering why it's sexist (devaluing one sex) to ask who is going to take care of the kids. Isn't it quite possible it's concern for their family situation (because work affects family)? A guy probably wouldn't be asked this simply because it is much more common for the mother to look after kids. I'd be pleasantly surprised if my wife were being interviewed and they asked her this: "Does your husband work from home? We're just wondering if he's the one who's going to look after your kids, because we're happy to be flexible with your work hours if you need that. Even bringing the kids in here sometimes would be fine."
  - wglb 17y ago
    Because they ask the woman that, not the man.
    - benhoyt 17y ago
      Yes, but two things: 1) as I mentioned, the fact that they might ask the woman and not the man is simply due to the fact that more mums stay at home than dads, and 2) why is it devaluing her to ask that? Anyone who's got kids knows that raising them is much more difficult (and rewarding) than most other day jobs.
      - jimbokun 17y ago
        That's pretty much sexism (or racism or ...ism) in a nutshell. Evaluating people by the statistical generalizations of a group they belong to, rather than evaluating them as individuals.
        yummyfajitas 17y ago
        No, sexism would be treating it as a rule ("women miss work to care for their children") rather than a prior ("women have a higher probability of missing work to care for children"). If they are asking the question, they are attempting to evaluate the person based on their individual characteristics (i.e. their answer).
billswift 17y ago
Some asshole that I have never heard of writes "Raymond is not read much any more"! With the general suckiness of the articles, I don't see any reason to bother reading much more of Bruce Byfield. I just wish Raymond would actually write more.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]
Mz 17y ago
Members of the in-group are often blind to subtle things that are very exclusionary of members of the out-group. An example that doesn't bring racism or sexism into this: I joined a forum some years ago where the owner routinely lamented how he desperately wanted more international members. He was probably one of the biggest offenders in terms of creating an exclusionary environment that made foreigners feel unwelcome. One piece of the culture that was very obvious to me as an exclusionary practice was the on-going joke that if you were on the forum at certain times, you were a total loser with no personal life. These were the same times that people in other time zones would be available to be online (ie people in other countries). At the time, I happened to be frequently up all night. I made it my goal to actively root out this piece of forum culture and "set an example" about how I was online all hours. About six months after I joined, membership began to go up quite a lot -- but especially international membership. I'm sure that to this day the forum owner has no clue whatsoever how that happened, even though I have stated that I made it happen. I doubt I am believed.
- srn 17y ago
  Second on unnoticed exclusionary behavior. Making sexist assumptions which are "reasonable" because there are not many women in the field may very well be self perpetuating.
deleted 17y ago
[deleted]

11 points by fogus 17y ago

I fully believe it. Lots of the 'men' in open source really are just boys with digital toys. Sure, plenty of us have girlfriends, wives and children. But a large number do not, on /. one of the prevailing memes is that ./ers do not have a life outside of their computing. The attitudes towards women in general, especially potential girlfriends is quite shocking. Even on HN the stuff that comes by every now and then is beyond the pale, and even more scary, it gets voted up, suggesting the majority feels that way.

ErrantX 17y ago
I think it's compounded as well by the fact that a lot of "geeks" struggle with being sociable, especially with women. In a lot of cases it really is not sexism; they just don't "get" people full stop and sometimes don't even really think about the concept that someone at the other end of the keyboard is a person too. As a result they come across as highly arrogant or unfeeling (and when talking to or about women as sexist). I've noticed on the various forums I hang out a lot of the younger types have that ingrained mild sexism that young boys usually have - only they cling to it for just a little longer. It soon goes when they head off to college :D EDIT( you know personally I find a large number of feminists as bad or worse than sexist men - they all need throwing into a bag and shaking about a bit :P)

tptacek 17y ago

Actually insightful. The notion that people who do not believe themselves to be sexist cannot detect ambient sexism rings true. I got in a bunch of fights with Erin early in our marriage by professing a similar world view. It was only when I watched her go out for IT jobs after staying home with the kids for a couple years that I saw how bad it was; interviewers would, for instance, ask who was going to take care of the kids if she was working. It's also simply the case that there are fewer women in hard computer disciplines (dev, hardware) than in some of the softer ones (support, SE, QA, etc), which biases some people's expectations.

benhoyt 17y ago
I'm wondering why it's sexist (devaluing one sex) to ask who is going to take care of the kids. Isn't it quite possible it's concern for their family situation (because work affects family)? A guy probably wouldn't be asked this simply because it is much more common for the mother to look after kids. I'd be pleasantly surprised if my wife were being interviewed and they asked her this: "Does your husband work from home? We're just wondering if he's the one who's going to look after your kids, because we're happy to be flexible with your work hours if you need that. Even bringing the kids in here sometimes would be fine."
- wglb 17y ago
  Because they ask the woman that, not the man.
  - benhoyt 17y ago
    Yes, but two things: 1) as I mentioned, the fact that they might ask the woman and not the man is simply due to the fact that more mums stay at home than dads, and 2) why is it devaluing her to ask that? Anyone who's got kids knows that raising them is much more difficult (and rewarding) than most other day jobs.
    - jimbokun 17y ago
      That's pretty much sexism (or racism or ...ism) in a nutshell. Evaluating people by the statistical generalizations of a group they belong to, rather than evaluating them as individuals.
      - yummyfajitas 17y ago
        No, sexism would be treating it as a rule ("women miss work to care for their children") rather than a prior ("women have a higher probability of missing work to care for children"). If they are asking the question, they are attempting to evaluate the person based on their individual characteristics (i.e. their answer).

billswift 17y ago

Some asshole that I have never heard of writes "Raymond is not read much any more"! With the general suckiness of the articles, I don't see any reason to bother reading much more of Bruce Byfield. I just wish Raymond would actually write more.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]

Mz 17y ago

Members of the in-group are often blind to subtle things that are very exclusionary of members of the out-group. An example that doesn't bring racism or sexism into this: I joined a forum some years ago where the owner routinely lamented how he desperately wanted more international members. He was probably one of the biggest offenders in terms of creating an exclusionary environment that made foreigners feel unwelcome. One piece of the culture that was very obvious to me as an exclusionary practice was the on-going joke that if you were on the forum at certain times, you were a total loser with no personal life. These were the same times that people in other time zones would be available to be online (ie people in other countries). At the time, I happened to be frequently up all night. I made it my goal to actively root out this piece of forum culture and "set an example" about how I was online all hours. About six months after I joined, membership began to go up quite a lot -- but especially international membership. I'm sure that to this day the forum owner has no clue whatsoever how that happened, even though I have stated that I made it happen. I doubt I am believed.

srn 17y ago
Second on unnoticed exclusionary behavior. Making sexist assumptions which are "reasonable" because there are not many women in the field may very well be self perpetuating.

deleted 17y ago

[deleted]