5 ms·

5. Describing software or algorithms as “sexy”, “hot”, etc. By sexualizing something that does not need to be sexualized, you’re creating a college-frat-boy ty

5. Describing software or algorithms as “sexy”, “hot”, etc. By sexualizing something that does not need to be sexualized, you’re creating a college-frat-boy type environment, as well as implicitly conflating quality with sexual attractiveness. If I work with you, I want to know that you’re enough of an adult to be able to appreciate something (or someone) without wanting to fornicate with it. What? Are women not sexually aware now? Or are men the only ones who act immature? I like some of the points, but this one is coated so thickly in irony I can't even tell if there's any substance at the bottom. Honest to God, what's inherently male about calling an algorithm sexy? Why couldn't a woman do just that? Isn't the mere perpetuating of that idea exactly the type of "oh no think of the poor women" thinking that the article tries to dissuade? Or is the irony all on me? Truly I don't understand this one. EDIT: Just to clarify: I'm not trying to advocate "calling algorithms sexy." If you don't like it because you think it's immature or unprofessional; well, it's not my cup of tea, either. But don't put that in a list about sexism. Conflating the two is precisely the latter.

tannk11001 12y ago
You don't think that needlessly sexualizing things might be insensitive to people who are themselves subject to exactly the same kind of needless sexualizing? It's no less insensitive just because women are also capable of sexualizing things, or because men may also find it uncomfortable.
- meric 12y ago
  That argument does not counter his point this isn't a sexism thing.
  - comex 12y ago
    A person can perpetuate sexism without meaning to. It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making women uncomfortable, and to try to be considerate.
    - meric 12y ago
      Using sexual language to describe a non-gendered object in the workplace is a different issue to sexism. "That car is sexy" = Could mean sexy as James Bond. It depends on the car, and the tone of person speaking, and who is saying it. You can't automatically assume it is sexualising women. You can discuss whether saying such things is appropriate in the workplace but what the original comment say is this issue isn't related to discrimination against one particular gender, unless one is prejudicing one particular gender to be more prone to being uncomfortable with sexuality to begin with. "It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making women uncomfortable" should be corrected to: "It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making people uncomfortable". The former is gender discrimination, the second isn't. The former subtly suggests women are more prone to be uncomfortable, and can, for example, worsen the bias a potential employer may have against hiring women, for fear getting into trouble with women being easily uncomfortable in the workplace, because they're women. I am aware of this bias in mind consciously, already.
      - tannk11001 12y ago
        If the important thing is to be pedantic, I guess you win? But if we want to be pragmatic, we can acknowledge that many women, disproportionately, confront sexualization and objectification throughout their regular daily experiences and that this therefore suggests that sexualizing things unnecessarily effects them disproportionately as well. And since we're all very aware of this imbalance, it's completely reasonable to suggest that the behavior is sexist.
        meric 12y ago
        Women are one of the groups who have particular bad experiences in society in their day to day lives. Other such groups include the elderly, children in dysfunctional families, adults with abusive parents, illegal immigrants, the socially inept, the autistic. Each of these groups are disproportionately confront a specific problem aspect of society, every hour of the day. If you want to be pragmatic about it - "have courage, and be kind".
- parennoob 12y ago
  > people who are themselves subject to exactly the same kind of needless sexualizing? Serious question -- who determines if said sexualization is needless? We as a society seem to be generally headed towards hyper-sexualization. Today, men are strongly sexualized in advertising as well [1]. Seen the massive, chiseled male movie stars in movies today compared to, say, 20 years ago? It will take a while for us to acknowledge that sexualization, but it exists today. Now the gender balance in the tech field means that on an average, a woman will be more sexualized than a man. This can be a runaway feedback loop, and to stop it, maybe we should clamp down a little on sexualization. But it would be wise to recognize this and cast it as a logical argument, rather than make blanket, Puritanical statements like "You're a man and you're needlessly sexualizing women! STOP IT!" [1] http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/hunkvertising-objectification-men-advertising-152925 http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/hunkvertisin...
  - tannk11001 12y ago
    > who determines if said sexualization is needless? The people being sexualized. And maybe I just find myself in different circles than you, but I rarely see or hear blanket Puritanical statements like you describe. Instead, I see and here statements that are more like "These are things that make me uncomfortable. Please consider them seriously."
    - parennoob 12y ago
      > The people being sexualized. That would be fair if the sexualization was direct e.g. Bert calling his female co-worker Linda "smoking hot". But if Bert says an algorithm is sexy, I don't know how exactly it sexualizes Linda. Society's sexualization can no longer be an excuse, because both men are women are now heavily sexualized in society. > I rarely see or hear blanket Puritanical statements like you describe. The posted article is chock-full of such statements. I usually don't hear such statements from people I work with either.
      - 4ydx 12y ago
        Yeah I guess this is about casting down damnation on any words or phrases that have in any way bothered the author in the past. It is a totally out of context assertion, I would say. I describe things that I like as being "sexy". It hardly is a term that only applies to women :P
tzakrajs 12y ago
Thank you for highlighting this. Also there is a highly heteronormative bent to this entire article which is incredibly jarring considering the author is supposedly trying to stop normative tropes.
kaitai 12y ago
There is nothing inherently wrong with calling the software or algorithm sexy or hot. It's when the eight guys at the table all sort of turn to look at the one woman when someone says "sexy," or conversely, all sort of titter nervously and carefully don't look at the one woman, or seven of the guys titter nervously and don't look at the one woman but the one creepy guy looks, for a little too long, with a little eyebrow wiggle. It's not the words, it's the people.
- wyager 12y ago
  Perhaps, then, the article should have said anything resembling that. Then we could address how absurd that complaint is. I've never seen anything close to what you're describing. Believe it or not, 99.9% of adults have no problem saying the words "sexy" or "hot" without having whatever weird childish reaction you're describing.
  - kaitai 12y ago
    That's what you think, because they're not looking at you! Guy: "No one stares at my chest at conferences -- I'm sure it doesn't happen! How childish!" Gal: ...
    - cbd1984 12y ago
      We can't have a discussion if you assume that everyone who disagrees is only disagreeing because they don't have your precise life experiences, or the life experiences you assume someone else has had.
mod 12y ago
To take it slightly farther, the whole idea that women (and only women) should take offense to that is sexist in and of itself.
irishcoffee 12y ago
Feminism, among other things, likes to control the idea of 'sexy' and 'sexuality' [0]. Somehow, the idea of being 'sexy' no longer seems to apply to men. Sex is seen as a commodity? ... wat? [0] http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/08/10/anti_feminist_market_theories_of_sexuality_fail_to_explain_the_d.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/08/10/anti_feminis... (last two paragraph kind of sum it up.)
deleted 12y ago
[deleted]
Frondo 12y ago
On the one hand, I agree with you: there are lots of good reasons not to call algorithms sexy, e.g. it sounds stupid and makes the speaker sound stupid, it belies a poverty of language and imagination, it's immature and unprofessional, etc. All these are non-sexism-related reasons not to throw around words like "sexy". On the other hand, rather than simply saying, "this isn't sexist, women can use words like sexy, etc", have you ever talked to women friends of yours in the tech world about this? Have you ever asked a few of them, "what about sexism? What's your experience? What about juvenile words like 'sexy'?" And...when you asked them, did you make sure to fully disengage your defensive circuits, so you could just listen and accept what they said, instead of leaping into the discussion at various points to say "but here's why you're wrong about ..."? (The last part's the hard part.)
- nothrabannosir 12y ago
  That's a good idea, I'll give it a try.
  - Frondo 12y ago
    It's really hard! It takes a lot of attentiveness to how we're thinking/reacting, to undo our tendency to want to be right, not back down, not be humble or show weakness, etc. Good luck!

tannk11001 12y ago

You don't think that needlessly sexualizing things might be insensitive to people who are themselves subject to exactly the same kind of needless sexualizing? It's no less insensitive just because women are also capable of sexualizing things, or because men may also find it uncomfortable.

meric 12y ago
That argument does not counter his point this isn't a sexism thing.
- comex 12y ago
  A person can perpetuate sexism without meaning to. It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making women uncomfortable, and to try to be considerate.
  - meric 12y ago
    Using sexual language to describe a non-gendered object in the workplace is a different issue to sexism. "That car is sexy" = Could mean sexy as James Bond. It depends on the car, and the tone of person speaking, and who is saying it. You can't automatically assume it is sexualising women. You can discuss whether saying such things is appropriate in the workplace but what the original comment say is this issue isn't related to discrimination against one particular gender, unless one is prejudicing one particular gender to be more prone to being uncomfortable with sexuality to begin with. "It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making women uncomfortable" should be corrected to: "It is just a matter of getting people aware and encouraging them to actively think about whether any things they do might be making people uncomfortable". The former is gender discrimination, the second isn't. The former subtly suggests women are more prone to be uncomfortable, and can, for example, worsen the bias a potential employer may have against hiring women, for fear getting into trouble with women being easily uncomfortable in the workplace, because they're women. I am aware of this bias in mind consciously, already.
    - tannk11001 12y ago
      If the important thing is to be pedantic, I guess you win? But if we want to be pragmatic, we can acknowledge that many women, disproportionately, confront sexualization and objectification throughout their regular daily experiences and that this therefore suggests that sexualizing things unnecessarily effects them disproportionately as well. And since we're all very aware of this imbalance, it's completely reasonable to suggest that the behavior is sexist.
      - meric 12y ago
        Women are one of the groups who have particular bad experiences in society in their day to day lives. Other such groups include the elderly, children in dysfunctional families, adults with abusive parents, illegal immigrants, the socially inept, the autistic. Each of these groups are disproportionately confront a specific problem aspect of society, every hour of the day. If you want to be pragmatic about it - "have courage, and be kind".
parennoob 12y ago
> people who are themselves subject to exactly the same kind of needless sexualizing? Serious question -- who determines if said sexualization is needless? We as a society seem to be generally headed towards hyper-sexualization. Today, men are strongly sexualized in advertising as well [1]. Seen the massive, chiseled male movie stars in movies today compared to, say, 20 years ago? It will take a while for us to acknowledge that sexualization, but it exists today. Now the gender balance in the tech field means that on an average, a woman will be more sexualized than a man. This can be a runaway feedback loop, and to stop it, maybe we should clamp down a little on sexualization. But it would be wise to recognize this and cast it as a logical argument, rather than make blanket, Puritanical statements like "You're a man and you're needlessly sexualizing women! STOP IT!" [1] http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/hunkvertising-objectification-men-advertising-152925 http://www.adweek.com/news/advertising-branding/hunkvertisin...
- tannk11001 12y ago
  > who determines if said sexualization is needless? The people being sexualized. And maybe I just find myself in different circles than you, but I rarely see or hear blanket Puritanical statements like you describe. Instead, I see and here statements that are more like "These are things that make me uncomfortable. Please consider them seriously."
  - parennoob 12y ago
    > The people being sexualized. That would be fair if the sexualization was direct e.g. Bert calling his female co-worker Linda "smoking hot". But if Bert says an algorithm is sexy, I don't know how exactly it sexualizes Linda. Society's sexualization can no longer be an excuse, because both men are women are now heavily sexualized in society. > I rarely see or hear blanket Puritanical statements like you describe. The posted article is chock-full of such statements. I usually don't hear such statements from people I work with either.
    - 4ydx 12y ago
      Yeah I guess this is about casting down damnation on any words or phrases that have in any way bothered the author in the past. It is a totally out of context assertion, I would say. I describe things that I like as being "sexy". It hardly is a term that only applies to women :P

tzakrajs 12y ago

Thank you for highlighting this. Also there is a highly heteronormative bent to this entire article which is incredibly jarring considering the author is supposedly trying to stop normative tropes.

kaitai 12y ago

There is nothing inherently wrong with calling the software or algorithm sexy or hot. It's when the eight guys at the table all sort of turn to look at the one woman when someone says "sexy," or conversely, all sort of titter nervously and carefully don't look at the one woman, or seven of the guys titter nervously and don't look at the one woman but the one creepy guy looks, for a little too long, with a little eyebrow wiggle. It's not the words, it's the people.

wyager 12y ago
Perhaps, then, the article should have said anything resembling that. Then we could address how absurd that complaint is. I've never seen anything close to what you're describing. Believe it or not, 99.9% of adults have no problem saying the words "sexy" or "hot" without having whatever weird childish reaction you're describing.
- kaitai 12y ago
  That's what you think, because they're not looking at you! Guy: "No one stares at my chest at conferences -- I'm sure it doesn't happen! How childish!" Gal: ...
  - cbd1984 12y ago
    We can't have a discussion if you assume that everyone who disagrees is only disagreeing because they don't have your precise life experiences, or the life experiences you assume someone else has had.

mod 12y ago

To take it slightly farther, the whole idea that women (and only women) should take offense to that is sexist in and of itself.

irishcoffee 12y ago

Feminism, among other things, likes to control the idea of 'sexy' and 'sexuality' [0]. Somehow, the idea of being 'sexy' no longer seems to apply to men. Sex is seen as a commodity? ... wat? [0] http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/08/10/anti_feminist_market_theories_of_sexuality_fail_to_explain_the_d.html http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_factor/2011/08/10/anti_feminis... (last two paragraph kind of sum it up.)

deleted 12y ago

[deleted]

Frondo 12y ago

On the one hand, I agree with you: there are lots of good reasons not to call algorithms sexy, e.g. it sounds stupid and makes the speaker sound stupid, it belies a poverty of language and imagination, it's immature and unprofessional, etc. All these are non-sexism-related reasons not to throw around words like "sexy". On the other hand, rather than simply saying, "this isn't sexist, women can use words like sexy, etc", have you ever talked to women friends of yours in the tech world about this? Have you ever asked a few of them, "what about sexism? What's your experience? What about juvenile words like 'sexy'?" And...when you asked them, did you make sure to fully disengage your defensive circuits, so you could just listen and accept what they said, instead of leaping into the discussion at various points to say "but here's why you're wrong about ..."? (The last part's the hard part.)

nothrabannosir 12y ago
That's a good idea, I'll give it a try.
- Frondo 12y ago
  It's really hard! It takes a lot of attentiveness to how we're thinking/reacting, to undo our tendency to want to be right, not back down, not be humble or show weakness, etc. Good luck!