I'm so tired of this
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| RichardLinx Dec 22, 2015 9:11 AM EDT |
I want to read articles related to Linux, open source, and technology. Not political issues. I'm not sexist and I have no problems with women working in technology related fields (or any fields). What exactly changed? Lately it feels like every technology site I visit is pushing this agenda. I think I might go back to reading print media, because this is starting to wear me out. All I read was the title and blurb of the article and it puts me in a sour mood. I'm so over this **it. Yeah, yeah, I get it. My lack of interest must be one of the big reasons for this problem of lack of women in IT! Sorry for not doing enough. Give me a ****ing break already. |
| albinard Dec 22, 2015 11:40 AM EDT |
Yes, Richard, your egotistical sexism is indeed one of the reasons for this problem. There are two sexes of humans in this world, and each can work. Get used to it. |
| nmset Dec 22, 2015 1:21 PM EDT |
I'm with RichardLinx on this one. This kind of attitude looking for women everywhere creates sexism and this has no place in technology. We want capable persons doing good job, with balls or nips, we don't care. No one should hold a technological job because of balls or nips. This kind of stupidity has become so normal that even parliaments have reserved seats for women here in France. I don't come to LXer for this either. |
| skelband Dec 22, 2015 1:44 PM EDT |
There was a discussion some time back on The Register related to this issue. IIRC it was primarily about harrasment in the workplace, mainly aimed at women but as often happens, the commentary widens outer into a general issue.
I think the general conclusion of a lot commentators was that this was a much more overt and obvious problem in the US.
One the one side, some respondents say that they haven't seen overt sexism in the workplace and it must be fairly isolated in this day and age. On the other hand, other respondents claim that it is rife throughout the industry and those claiming that they haven't seen it must be just blind or lacking awareness. Some of my closest work friends are women and, where I worked with them in the UK, I can confidently say there was no sexism. At all. However, one of my female friends did relate some indicative stories from her past where she experienced this kind of thing, so it certainly does exist. Then we hear about conferences in the US where female speakers are rudely interrupted by snickering "teenagers", having to suffer personal smears in public and privately via forums and e-mail. Sexism in Europe almost certainly does happen but it seems an awful lot rarer than over the pond, but even in Europe I expect that cultural differences play a part in the frequency of it. So it seems that some women suffer this kind of thing disproportionately in certain environments. I think it is a good sign that we are outraged when we hear about this kind of thing online whereas at one time it was pretty much par for the course in many places. I take heart from that. I know that this subject is only tangentially related to the story but such attitudes are entrenched in whole generations. In many places we have made good progress and long may progress continue. I have to say that I don't agree with RichardLinx above. If we stop talking about this issue, it will never be fixed. I do not agree with "positive discrimination" in any area. Discrimination is discrimination wherever you find it. But we must keep airing this issue from time to time to keep it alive. Slavery wasn't abolished because it was talked about a bit then everyone forgot about it. We still speak about it because we never want it to return. |
| jdixon Dec 22, 2015 1:56 PM EDT |
> Slavery wasn't abolished because it was talked about a bit then everyone forgot about it. We still speak about it because we never want it to return. Slavery has only been abolished in a percentage of the world. We still need to be talking about it. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contemporary_slavery |
| albinard Dec 22, 2015 2:56 PM EDT |
@nmset: You couldn't be more wrong about what creates sexism. Inflexible brains with outdated, simple-minded, counter-productive attitudes are what create sexism and a whole lot of other problems in technology and everywhere else. Think about it. |
| nmset Dec 22, 2015 3:15 PM EDT |
@albinard : Think about that : Someone jumps in your office and shouts : I'm a female and hence this job is mine ! No, once you put forward your kind for some advantage, you're creating sexism and discrimination. As far as is visible, females want reserved places as politicians, lawyers or technologists, but they never fight to work in sewrage, constructing roads and buildings, or to go to war in the front line. Because they don't have physical strength ? OK, then they don't have superior intellectual capabilities to claim that they *must* occupy the same number of jobs in the other fields. They can, but without any pre-determined posts. Let the best ones win. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 22, 2015 3:55 PM EDT |
did you even read the article? it is not claiming that women should get more techjobs regardless of their capacity, but rather that women are better at tech then men, yet are actively discouraged from pursuing tech careers. it is also not about women demanding affirmative action as you seem to suggest, nor is it looking for women everywhere, but rather gives us examples of capable women that deserve to work in IT because they excel at working with technology. it is about the best ones being denied an opportunity to prove themselves. how can the best ones win, when they are not allowed to enter the race? greetings, eMBee. |
| nmset Dec 22, 2015 4:07 PM EDT |
But the fact of coining "linux women technology" is itself a sexist request in my view, an affirmative action as you say. Quoting the OP : "I want to read articles related to Linux, open source, and technology. Not political issues." |
| albinard Dec 22, 2015 4:48 PM EDT |
@mbaehrixer: I doubt he did. It is probably the sort of thing he has to avoid to prevent information from altering his cherished opinion. |
| cybertao Dec 22, 2015 5:00 PM EDT |
Open-source and free-software isn't a political issue? |
| BernardSwiss Dec 23, 2015 4:23 AM EDT |
Quoting: I want to read articles related to Linux, open source, and technology. Not political issues. I'm not sexist and I have no problems with women working in technology related fields (or any fields). What exactly changed? Lately it feels like every technology site I visit is pushing this agenda. I think I might go back to reading print media, because this is starting to wear me out. All I read was the title and blurb of the article and it puts me in a sour mood. I'm so over this **it.Translation: "I'm fine. I haven't had to deal with this; and I don't want to. It's too much trouble -- and it doesn't affect me personally, anyway. I'm comfortable with the way things are, and I resent anyone else trying to make me recognize a problem that I otherwise don't even notice and doesn't bother me in my own personal circumstances." |
| nmset Dec 23, 2015 4:35 AM EDT |
"trying to make me recognize a problem that I otherwise don't even notice and doesn't bother me in my own personal circumstances." That's a forged problem, not a real one. We would not have such false problems if we were under-developed countries. |
| RichardLinx Dec 23, 2015 5:28 AM EDT |
@albinard: "Yes, Richard, your egotistical sexism is indeed one of the reasons for this problem." This is the part where I stop talking to you entirely. It's just not worth it. @mbaehrlxer: "how can the best ones win, when they are not allowed to enter the race?" The information technology field has to be one of the most egalitarian fields that have ever existed. It's one of the only merit based industries I can think of, where even a dropout can rise to the top through merit - by demonstrating his/her ability through their work (Like commits on their github page, or an online portfolio showing websites they've developed -just to name two basic examples). What's preventing them from entering the race here, exactly? @BernardSwiss: "Yeah, yeah, I get it. My lack of interest must be one of the big reasons for this problem of lack of women in IT!" I haven't been participating in the Linux "community" much in recent years, but the level of hostility and general "I'm better than you because you're an egotistical sexist" vibe I'm getting here is really off-putting. I could go into a long rant demonstrating just how "not sexist" I am, but well, that would be kind of sexist too, wouldn't it - well, at least if a woman had to do it. I suspect the initial response and much of the wording used here would have been different if I'd made this thread under the name "Natalie" or "Joanna". You people disgust me. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 23, 2015 12:21 PM EDT |
Quoting:What's preventing them from entering the race here, exactly? the article spells it out very clearly: people outside of the IT industry (and also people in the industry) are telling women that they are not fit for the job. can't really get more preventative than that. greetings, eMBee. |
| skelband Dec 23, 2015 12:51 PM EDT |
There's a lot of testosterone being flung around here at the moment. The issue is simple. *Some* women/girls are being demonstrably discouraged from entering IT. It shouldn't happen. That's basically it folks. Nothing more to see. Please move along. End of story. |
| thenixedreport Dec 23, 2015 3:13 PM EDT |
To be fair, it isn't just women/girls being discouraged from becoming interested in tech related fields. Depending on a given neighborhood/environment, a parent/guardian/caregiver may see such things as a waste of time. This is an issue that affects quite a few people, even today. With that said, it's not about, "It doesn't affect me, so I don't want to deal with it." Too many things have become politicized to the point where a given field that was once fun is no longer such. Sometimes it gets to the level where friendships end and family members no longer speak to one another. It sort of reminds me of one of the Mighty Ducks movies where the kid in the middle of the controversy regarding which team he gets to play on put it best. He simply said, "I just want to play hockey." Those who do software simply want to code. Others simply want to build systems, test software, put together networks, and more. They don't care about anything else. They just want to work in tech. In other words, I can understand where some of the irritation is coming from. |
| AwesomeTux Dec 24, 2015 4:18 AM EDT |
I don't want to get into this discussion too much, because I get into these kinds of discussions far too often elsewhere. But I will just say this...Ken Starks wrote:Where is the failure? It resides in the adults in a girl’s life who tell her she shouldn’t be wasting her time with computers My parents said the same thing. I'm a boy. It's a very common thing to say, getting a stable job in tech is very hard, it's better to seek a job in retail. To a sexist, that might look like "channeling" someone into a role "more suited to their gender", but it's just common sense. Parents want their children to be successful, especially their daughters. So when their daughter is choosing a path that doesn't look stable, they will of course discourage it more strongly. For them not to do the same for their sons is sexist. Ken Starks wrote:and that she should start wearing skirts and dresses instead of jeans and that damned three button pullover shirt. What does gender roles have anything to do with the previous point? Ken Starks wrote:Some will go so far as to point out the lack of female presence in the technology workplace as proof. Well yeah…there is a smaller female representation. That’s because mommy and school career counselors are channeling her into roles “more suited to her gender” and their preconceived ideas of her abilities. You're saying a girl's own mother, another woman, is telling her not to pursue a tech job, and yet blaming men for the problem, or rather, blaming the problem on there being too many men in the field. What are you even trying to say? That she can't work in a job if there aren't other people of her sex working that job? That's sexist. You might think it's not, but it is. Could it possibly be that the mother is discouraging a tech job because it didn't work out for herself, and that she assumes it will be same same for her daughter? That is perfectly reasonable, "like mother, like daughter", as they say. In the end this issue comes down to peer pressure, and what people *say to you*. "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me", as they say. In the '80s almost everyone disliked gamers, it was nerdy, and a waste of time. Did that stop them from making and playing games? No. And now it's a million/billion dollar industry. In the '60s through the '90s, again, almost everyone disliked computer programmers, and otherwise general tech enthusiasts, it too was nerdy, and a waste of time. Did that stop them from programming, did that stop them from literally building the modern era? No. And now everyone uses a computer. It's like that quote "If we don't believe in freedom of expression for people we despise, we don't believe in it at all." In this case "If you don't pursue your passion when you're met with resistance, than you were never passionate about it at all." In other words, if you don't pursue a job in tech just because mommy told you not too, than you aren't fit to work in this field anyway. In the article he goes on to say that some girls solved some stupid World of Goo level or something faster than the boys, and that somehow makes them better at tech in general. "I finished that World of Goo level faster than you, therefore I am better at algorithmic pattern matching and multi-networked machine learning artificial intelligence." Yeah, no. Those too things aren't the same. Personally, I don't like these kinds of articles either. And I also think this whole thread, and indeed every article like this one, are in violation of the TOS. I want tech articles, not political agenda (unless it's software related, ie. patents, copyright law, ethics, etc.) This post is longer than I wanted, so I'm done. |
| thenixedreport Dec 24, 2015 10:34 AM EDT |
I believe this discussion is healthy, because it allows all of us to see where the real problem lies. It's a generational issue more than a gender related issue. Gender is a factor, but not the root of the problem. Women would do well in tech related fields due to attention to detail that the are known for. The deciding factors are interest and motivation. Future generations can help solve the motivation problem, but it's no substitute for the other factor. If we are to accept that women are discouraged from participating in specific fields, we also need to accept the fact that sometimes, the interest is also just not there to begin with. |
| BernardSwiss Dec 24, 2015 8:33 PM EDT |
I'm reminded of my highschool's automotive shop classes. Those automotive shop classes were segregated by gender, and that caused quite a fuss. The explanations about how difficult it was for the girls to fully participate in a mixed class environment didn't help much, and maybe even fed the outrage. But the fuss and outrage died down rather quickly when the administration pointed out that, in addition to the group dynamics type of issues, the girls classes were actually about three weeks ahead of the boy's classes... because the boys figured they already knew it all (or at least, plenty enough) about cars, so it took at least three weeks for the boys to begin to realize they didn't actually know as much as they thought they did, and buckle down to the actual work. |
| Ridcully Dec 24, 2015 9:05 PM EDT |
I have deliberately kept out of this until now. There are some comments on this thread that I agree with, others I do not. First of all, anything Ken Starks puts in print is worth a very, very careful read. I have never seen one of his articles that I could disagree with and he writes from considerable long term experience. I have just read his article out to my wife and both of us agree with what he had to say 100 %. Try reading it aloud, slowly - you miss nothing of the points he tries to make quite explicitly. Those posts making negative comments about Ken's article might change their minds after such an experience. I'm a retired high school science and maths teacher and quite candidly, my experience is that when given the chance and encouragement, girls consistently shine above boys in achievement. My only offering to the actual thread discussion is that in all of this, it should be the wishes of the girl or young woman that should be encouraged, and only that. These are her decisions about her future and no-one has the right to make them for her. Advice can be given of course, but that advice must always be presented as an option, not a firm path to take. And for the rest......Merry Christmas Everybody.......I'm enjoying Christmas Day right now in sunny Australia. |
| jdixon Dec 25, 2015 5:42 AM EDT |
> And for the rest......Merry Christmas Everybody.. Merry Christmas to all LXer's and their families. |
| theBeez Dec 26, 2015 2:53 PM EDT |
@RichardLinx - Yes, I agree with you. I've stopped making a fuss of this a long time ago, because people start getting "ad hominem" - like I personally raped any female IT worker I came across - and simply can't be argued with, because their activism blinds them completely. Ok, let's get this show on the road and start what FOSS is. FOSS is producing software under a free license. That's it. Moslims, White power, feminists, satan worshippers, male chauvinist pigs, communists, liberals, racists and what ever group may rise your blood pressure can make free software. They can also take the others software and improve on it. That's FOSS. It's not needed to hug trees, do a prayer, save the whales, sing the Internationale or whatever. There are no additional requirements. People who claim that is required to be part of FOSS are simply LIERS. There is no such things as a "faux community" as some might have claimed in the past. In short, there are FOSS-ers and non-FOSS-ers. But that's it. Sure, there is a FOSS canon, like the Bazaar and the Cathedral, but even that is open for discussion, fortunately. Second, I've worked professionally in the field of IT for thirty years. You simply can't do that if you piss off every single female you meet in this field. There are several females I'd pick every single time for a certain job (yes, even if males are available, thank you) and there are some I'd never want to meet in my entire life again. Strangely enough, the same applies to the males I've encountered.. Which is not too much of a surprise when you come to think of it. That is, because the arguments the "anti-sexist" are using are violently sexist in themselves. Which is unavoidable, because "anti-sexism" is profoundly aware of the existence of two sexes. It must be, otherwise it has no ground to take action. Recently I read that "females design more user friendly software", which is sexist in itself, once you invert the message into "males write software with a better usability" or even "males write better software". Another often heard argument is: "we need more women, because we can't fulfill the demand". I suggest you look at the other side of the pond, because Asians are statistically overrepresented in IT. In other words: they seem to be very good at it. Ok, you got the opportunity - call me a racist too. And yes, my dad didn't think "computers" was a good occupation. I did it anyway. Are females so feeble, so insecure and emotionally unstable that they need special protection? C'mon, the women I worked with would spit on that kind of imagery! Bottomline: it's not my problem. And whatever idiocy you're gonna throw at me: I didn't cause it. If women want to change the ratio they should stop having brown paper sessions on "why are there so few women in IT" and fire up their compilers. Because software is not gonna write it on its own. It requires focus and dedication. And if you think there more important things in the world - fine. Do something else. It's your life. But don't try to make it my problem because it isn't and it won't be. I have something else to do with my time than to suppress women all the time. I have rent to pay and a family to support. Just like the next guy. If you fail, blame it on yourself - not on your genitals. |
| sombragris Dec 28, 2015 10:56 AM EDT |
I love women on the IT workplace and I appreciate their contribution and I agree with the OP. This stuff is getting long in the tooth. However, some place are run by people who is so socially challenged that they REALLY do awful things to ladies. I don't know what to do. |
| jdixon Dec 28, 2015 12:16 PM EDT |
> However, some place are run by people who is so socially challenged that they REALLY do awful things to ladies. Some places are run by people who do awful things to people, both men and women. Others feel more secure if they limit their misdeeds to only women, as history indicates that they're less likely to fight back (yes, I have known of one or two managers who were assaulted for behavior an employee considered unacceptable, and I've heard of others). The worst thing about this discussion is that I'm certain Ken intended no political commentary at all when he wrote the article. He was merely describing what he views as a problem, why it exists, and how it perpetuates. |
| nmset Dec 28, 2015 1:25 PM EDT |
Ken was saying : "Hey ! Some women can do things better than men in IT." Ken was thus saying nothing new, that's true in any field, and recognized for ages. Some commentators are saying : "Hey ! Women are bound to perform better than men !" That one warrants no comment. I am saying : "Women request natural special attention in IT (or elsewhere) because of their gender." No ! |
| theBeez Dec 29, 2015 6:32 AM EDT |
The problem with this whole issue is "generalization of properties based on one single property". That's always dangerous, since individuals NEVER fall within these generalizations. In short, men are bound to be taller than women, but you'll always find a woman that is taller than most, average men. However, based on the "law of large numbers" you'll see these numbers back in the population as a whole. And there is where the discussion starts. Why this distribution? Is it because there is a mechanism within the population that makes up these numbers or is there an alternate explanation? Is it nurture or nature? The latter will show that in a complex world as ours, it's very hard to get this solved - as both are manifest. The behaviorists were wrong - not everything is nurture. The geneticists were wrong - not everything is nature. Being a biologist I know mother nature is a b***h. She doesn't care about "wrong" or "right". Nature is amoral (which is different from immoral, BTW). She cares about "what works and what doesn't" and applies a million degrees of variety (shades of grey) in the meanwhile. Noting that humans are acknowledged to be sexual dimorphic (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_dimorphism#Humans) I simply cannot discard the hypothesis that there are differences between the sexes that become apparent in the aforementioned "large numbers within the population". Blaming it all on the males within that population is a hypothesis that seems more given in by ideology than hard, cold science - and consequently: unfair. I guess most people are running "clean projects" - that is, have standards considering their forums. And throwing in incidents like a immature presentation "perform like a p**nstar" or sexual harassments during conventions is not only unfair to those who never had to do anything with it, but also cloud the discussion as a whole. IMHO the very best women could do is START THEIR OWN PROJECTS. Note that the vast majority of FOSS projects are single person efforts. And as administrator, you are god. Throw out anyone that does not apply to your own personal standards. I don't see where the problem is there. I had my share of trolls and threw them out as well. Sure, it's annoying, but it doesn't spoil my day. You can't tell me that women are so fragile they can't handle the real world - because that's what it is, the real world. We all want it to be nice, but it isn't. A wise man once said "let me accept what I cannot change and change what I can change". |
| theBeez Dec 29, 2015 7:04 AM EDT |
@jdixon
"The worst thing about this discussion is that I'm certain Ken intended no political commentary at all when he wrote the article." Well, let me help you: he is. By classifying it as a problem, he disregards the possibility that is may be a phenomena. Prove: the blame is put where it is always put without ANY significant statistics "For now, one thing we know for sure is that there are tech environments where woman are either subtly or overtly harassed, and that harassment needs to be yanked out and killed with fire." First, as a follower of comp.lang.forth I can tell you: men are harassed as well. They keep coming back. There is a highly respected woman there are well with decades of experience - she isn't going anywhere. I know this is exemplary evidence, which doesn't carry any weight. But the above statement does neither. "He was merely describing what he views as a problem, why it exists, and how it perpetuates". No, he wasn't. It was an ideology based article - not a science based article. Here you got the fallout. People are sick and tired to be judged as "problem cases", based on THEIR GENDER while all they basically want to do is to perform their hobby or work. If women perceive it as a problem, step up the plate and simply do your thing instead of coming up with excuses why not to do it. In other words: what's keeping you? Open up a github account and start coding, for Pete's sake! You're a grown woman! |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 29, 2015 4:07 PM EDT |
the question is not, whether women can or can't handle the real world. the question is: do we want to make the world better, or do we want to keep it as it is? do you disagree that a world where women are not discouraged to pursue the career of their choice would be a better world? does it matter how many women experience this in order for it to change? i don't think so. you may argue that for you the problem is not big enough to warrant your attention. fine, then please go and focus your attention on problems you care about and leave the rest of us to solve this problem. i want my daughter to grow up in a world where no-one ever discourages her to pursue whatever goals she sets for herself. and i will continue to fight for the equality of men and women in our society, until that goal is achieved. greetings, eMBee. |
| Ridcully Dec 29, 2015 4:13 PM EDT |
Well put mbaehrixer.....your last paragraph agrees very nicely with my "contribution to the thread". And really, that is the whole thing in a nutshell in my humble opinion. Let every girl or woman pursue the career course she wishes and encourage her to do so. That course of action applies equally to boys and young men (or even old ones), but the key is that each of us should encourage the person to take the career paths they want, and help each other in them. |
| theBeez Dec 29, 2015 5:38 PM EDT |
"do you disagree that a world where men are not discouraged to pursue the career of their choice would be a better world? does it matter how many men experience this in order for it to change? i don't think so. you may argue that for you the problem is not big enough to warrant your attention. fine, then please go and focus your attention on problems you care about and leave the rest of us to solve this problem. i want my son to grow up in a world where no-one ever discourages him to pursue whatever goals he sets for himself. and i will continue to fight for the equality of men and women in our society, until that goal is achieved." Agreed, I transposed this. For that very reason. Now read it again. Is that the kind of son you'd want to raise? No? So why your daughter. I want to raise someone who takes responsibility for his (or her) life, knows that life comes with challenges and is able to cope with them - because he (or her) has been given the tools to handle those challenges. |
| BernardSwiss Dec 29, 2015 8:46 PM EDT |
[quote] And yes, my dad didn't think "computers" was a good occupation. I did it anyway. Are females so feeble, so insecure and emotionally unstable that they need special protection? C'mon, the women I worked with would spit on that kind of imagery! [/i] You have a point. But nonetheless, there's (still) a rather significant difference between parents saying: "That's not a good career to get into (because it doesn't pay well, or whatever)." and society saying "That's not a career for you to get into (because you're female -- girls aren't good at that stuff)." |
| theBeez Dec 30, 2015 5:47 AM EDT |
@BernardSwiss Wow, do you have to get to subtle wordplay now to win this discussion? And what girl is paying attention when the vast majority of hackers depicted in movies an TV shows are either female or African American? But the most sexist part of all this is the implicit assumption that women need special care and attention to survive in modern corporate life - as if they're more feeble than their male counterparts. That is a far cry from the female colleagues I have met in my thirty year career. |
| Ridcully Dec 30, 2015 6:17 AM EDT |
And at least some of the girls STILL do need that care and attention, theBeez. Although this is nothing to do with computers, we have a classic example within the last month of just how execrably men treat women who want to pursue a particular career here in Australia. A woman was brave enough to take a particular union and its members to court over very crude sexual harassment.......and she won. Admittedly it was unusual in that she wanted to participate in the construction industry, but the principle remains the same. Like it or not, men can be very, very intimidating and unpleasant to the up and coming female, especially when she threatens their cosy little empires. Again, my emphasis is that we should be even handed to anyone who wants to enter the software programming industry and assist them to every degree.....male or female. Unfortunately (or fortunately depending on your perspective), I tend to fall into the camp that says a lot of women need that little bit of extra protection from the robust activities of the men who tend to resent any gender intrusion into their little empires. Oh, sure, there are always very, very aggressive women who are quite capable of taking on the best of us males and winning (your female colleagues ?) - but a lot of ladies aren't like that, bless them. And honestly, does it ever hurt to be a little protective ? I'm rather old fashioned, and I confess that I rather like taking a lady under my wing and ensuring she is able to do what she wants......provided of course that my action is desired.......Otherwise, it's hands off and she deals with things herself. But, that's what she wants...and that's the aim of this thread, isn't it ? |
| theBeez Dec 30, 2015 6:57 AM EDT |
@Ridicully - sorry man: if I say that my exemplary evidence doesn't count, so does yours. Like it or not, men can be very, very intimidating and unpleasant to the up and coming female, especially when she threatens their cosy little empires. >> Unsubstantiated statement. Next. Again, my emphasis is that we should be even handed to anyone who wants to enter the software programming industry and assist them to every degree.....male or female. <snip> a lot of women need that little bit of extra protection from the robust activities of the men who tend to resent any gender intrusion into their little empires. >> Contradictory and unsubstantiated. Next. I'm rather old fashioned, and I confess that I rather like taking a lady under my wing and ensuring she is able to do what she wants. >> "I'm rather modern and have my lady take me under her wing and ensure that I am able to do what I want". This is so twisted in reasoning (if any) that it really doesn't warrant a response. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 30, 2015 7:28 AM EDT |
Quoting:Now read it again. Is that the kind of son you'd want to raise? why, yes, absolutely! do you think i'll sit idly by when my son comes home, and tells me that his teacher said that he'll never be good enough to be an astronaut? or that he shouldn't want to be a nurse, or do ballet because that's for girls? no way. the same principle applies here. no-one is allowed to discourage my children to pursue whatever they want. of course life comes with challenges, and those challenges need to be overcome. but this exactly requires encouragement to work hard and not give up even when things seem difficult, and that does not happen if children are discouraged the along the way and led to believe that they'll never achieve their goal. greetings, eMBee. |
| alc Dec 30, 2015 8:05 AM EDT |
On the lighter side of things. http://dilbert.com/strip/2015-12-30 |
| Ridcully Dec 30, 2015 8:30 AM EDT |
That's a classic alc.......possibly more accurate than we'd like to see. @theBeez......To put in examples of all of those things when you are now retired and it's too long ago to remember is simply not going to happen. I just put things down as I felt them, and if you don't like what I wrote,....well, that's your privilege and I'm not going to get upset one way or another. But, as regards your first item: Quoting:Like it or not, men can be very, very intimidating and unpleasant to the up and coming female, especially when she threatens their cosy little empires. I would have thought my first paragraph was all the substantiation you could possibly require. That particular item hit our newspapers and is a classic case of a woman threatening a "men only empire". Not in software programming I'll admit, but as I said, the principle is there and I'd be willing to bet anything that similar situations occur in the programming world. I certainly saw similar situations in teaching while I was a high school teacher. Anyhow, enough already. Let others wave the flag.....I've had enough of this negativity. |
| theBeez Dec 30, 2015 9:16 AM EDT |
@Ridcully
>> I've had enough of this negativity.
That's exactly the point here. Note I didn't start this thread. It somebody who had the very same feeling as I've had. But I've fought my battle at the time and frankly, I've had enough as well. But instead of addressing these concerns (which not only I have, but obviously several others) you persist in repeating the same old arguments in the same old way as before. Since they obviously failed to convince some people, they won't convince them now. Repeating it doesn't make them any more true or valid. So instead of repeating them, try to address those concerns. Instead of yelling, try listening once. |
| theBeez Dec 30, 2015 9:17 AM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer We've reduced the world to a single teacher now. Nice argumentation, keep going. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 30, 2015 3:30 PM EDT |
i wish you the best of luck for your future. please keep on going the way you are because i do not wish that you should suffer from the problems other people have. you need not feel responsible for them. we are all working towards the advancement of society, because that is the purpose of humanity. but everyone of us focuses on a different problem, and so everyone makes their own contribution, whether or not it is recognized by others. i am sure you are making your own contribution too. given that you are reading lxer it is most likely something with Free Software. that's great. please keep going. every contribution is worthwhile, and it's not my aim to convince you to make a different contribution. i was merely seeking to explain my motivation for my own choices. i am off with ridcully, because we've got work to do too. greetings, eMBee. |
| jdixon Dec 30, 2015 3:59 PM EDT |
> ...we are all working towards the advancement of society, because that is the purpose of humanity Speak for yourself in that regard. I'm doing nothing of the kind, nor do I consider it to be a valid "purpose of humanity". In fact, I'm dubious that there can be any defined "purpose of humanity" outside of religion, which is off topic here. |
| theBeez Dec 31, 2015 6:44 AM EDT |
@jdixon - Correct: since all purposes are by definition arbitrary, there can be no such thing as a universal purpose. |
| dotmatrix Dec 31, 2015 10:42 AM EDT |
There were almost no women in my engineering classes.
There are almost no women in my engineering work environments. There are more than 50% women in my son's technical high school. I think the problem with women in technical fields is actually much more related to child bearing and child rearing than skill or opportunity or female teenagers' proclivities. Many college age females graduate early with an MRS. degree. That's just the way it is. The 'missing' women in engineering, science, and other fields that require massive amounts of 'solid time*' will re-appear when female human wombs are no longer necessary for child bearing. The hardest thing ever is attempting to work in a field that requires long periods of concentration while also changing diapers, breastfeeding, and putting kids down for naps... and then attempting to get re-hired into the tech field after seven or eight years of child rearing. The world is not fair. And sexism is simply a part of life... *solid time ==> http://elmerehbi.com/2014/04/21/rpfeynman-doing-physics/ |
| jdixon Dec 31, 2015 10:59 AM EDT |
> Many college age females graduate early with an MRS. degree. That's just the way it is. Since the continuation of the human species is dependent on their doing so, it's hard to argue that it's a bad choice for them to make. |
| dotmatrix Dec 31, 2015 11:42 AM EDT |
>> Many college age females graduate early with an MRS. degree. That's just the way it is. >Since the continuation of the human species is dependent on their doing so, it's hard to argue that it's a bad choice for them to make. I'm not arguing good or bad here. It's just simply the way it is. And will continue to be so until the human species is no longer dependent on their doing so... Since this is a GNU/Linux forum, it's probably appropriate to place an apropos RMS thought: https://stallman.org/articles/children.html It may be politically incorrect, but child rearing is women's work. Men who try to raise children end up being dismissed and mocked by peers and -- unfortunately -- by the 'mommy and me' groups. So, until child are born mostly in artificial wombs and raised by the state --- AKA daycare --- then women will continue to be missing from the 'hard' sciences... not because of lack of skill or thoughts or 'bad at math', but because child bearing and rearing is a sexist activity. |
| theBeez Dec 31, 2015 2:23 PM EDT |
@dotmatrix - my point exactly. You don't get to be a programmer because 'you're entitled to', you get to be a programmer because you spend an extraordinary amount of time studying and trying to be one. If for one reason or another think there other important things in life - be my guest, but all bets are off. It takes a LOT of passion. Some of the women I speak think there should be more women in tech - but not them, oh no. That's for someone else (other women I suppose). But IMHO if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem. Apart from a sex change, there is little I can do in that respect. |
| cybertao Jan 01, 2016 6:49 PM EDT |
I notice a lack of responses from the female perspective, and how welcome or unwelcome they feel. Isn't this institutionalised discussion about the institution like the insane running the asylum? |
| jdixon Jan 01, 2016 7:45 PM EDT |
> I notice a lack of responses from the female perspective, and how welcome or unwelcome they feel. I don't see anyone keeping them from posting, do you? I know of three prominent female posters to LXer over the years. Two of them seem to have moved on and third only posts intermittently now. |
| cybertao Jan 02, 2016 3:21 PM EDT |
I don't see them posting, even though you claim there's no reason not to, do you? Perhaps there are reasons and lxer just isn't worth the hassle, as attempting to address them in an online environment can get all #gamergate very quickly. |
| jdixon Jan 03, 2016 3:40 AM EDT |
> I don't see them posting, even though you claim there's no reason not to, do you? No one keeping them from does not equate to no reason. |
| theBeez Jan 03, 2016 7:48 AM EDT |
@cybertao >> Perhaps there are reasons and lxer just isn't worth the hassle. Conjecture. Perhaps it's something else. Without any supporting evidence any hypothesis is as valid as another. Even WITH supporting evidence - as long as there is another hypothesis possible that explains the phenomena as well as the supported one. |
| cybertao Jan 03, 2016 3:00 PM EDT |
Conjecture? Yes, a more generalised one than posting on lxer not being worth the hassle because they are busy having babies or pushing a feminist agenda without doing hard graft. |
| jdixon Jan 03, 2016 9:57 PM EDT |
> ...because they are busy having babies You say that as if you think it's derogatory. Having and raising children is one of our highest callings, and far more important in the long run than posting on LXer. |
| cybertao Jan 03, 2016 10:24 PM EDT |
I sometimes forget that sarcasm doesn't always translate well in written dialogue. The act of birth and child-rearing wasn't derogatory, the notion women are to preoccupied with it as suggested earlier was - some of the responses in this thread demonstrate there are issues to be addressed within this institution. The fact I had to explain that leads me to think the problem is more endemic than I first thought. It's an issue to discuss, not explain away. |
| jdixon Jan 04, 2016 6:11 AM EDT |
> ... the notion women are to preoccupied with it as suggested earlier was ... I'm not sure why you think it would be. Most married couples I've known tend to pretty much disappear from any non-essential activities for a year or two after a newborn arrives. It's a very time consuming and rather exhausting endeavor. > It's an issue to discuss, not explain away. Seems like that's what folks have been doing. |
| theBeez Jan 04, 2016 6:19 AM EDT |
@cybertao - "A more generalised one than posting on lxer not being worth the hassle they are busy having babies or pushing a feminist agenda without doing hard graft". (a) Me missing a beat doesn't mean you're free to make the same error. (b) You're talking with a biologist over here. I know of no mammals where care for the offspring is predominantly done by the male. Right of my head, I know of fishes and birds (seahorses and pinguins). So, it's not an indefensible generalized proposition a priori. |
| cybertao Jan 05, 2016 5:41 AM EDT |
There is a higher percentage of men raising their children than there are women participating here. 'Because biology' is totally unreasonable, and the excuse used in societies that subjugate women. Male penguins care for and hatch their partner's eggs. :P |
| theBeez Jan 05, 2016 6:18 AM EDT |
@cybertao - "'Because biology' is totally unreasonable". Opinion, unproven. |
| jdixon Jan 05, 2016 6:33 AM EDT |
> There is a higher percentage of men raising their children than there are women participating here. Properly raising children takes both parents, not just one. It's far to much work for just one person to handle. Yes, their are individuals who do. That's almost never by choice. > 'Because biology' is totally unreasonable, and the excuse used in societies that subjugate women. The last I checked, the Angloshphere wasn't such a society. > Male penguins care for and hatch their partner's eggs. :P As the Beez already noted, penguins are not mammals. Yes, there are families where, for one reason or another, the one who stays home with the child(ren) is the male, but that's not the usual case. The historical reason for that is rather obvious: The female is the one who produces milk. |
| cybertao Jan 05, 2016 6:50 AM EDT |
The goddess of technology was Aphena, because it was used for women's work. Not that long ago, typing was women's work. Pasty males sitting inside typing demonstrate that working in tech is not exactly a masculine activity by traditional social perceptions - they are just inferior women who can't menstrate and produce milk. See what I did there? |
| jdixon Jan 05, 2016 9:31 AM EDT |
> See what I did there? Yes. It's called a strawman. You know, just because someone points out obvious facts which contradict your arguments, it doesn't mean they're opposed to the position you claim to support. It means your arguments aren't convincing. In your case, they're actually counterproductive. |
| dotmatrix Jan 05, 2016 2:57 PM EDT |
@cybertao: > Not that long ago, typing was women's work. Typing is not programming. Programming requires a long concentration effort. The typing is the most minor aspect of programming. There are times when it may take two days to write 50 lines of code... if that code needs to perform a complex task. The basic problem with any task that requires significant time is that that task is incompatible with taking care of children. I know this because I take of children. And, the old tired response, if you don't have children - or if you do but are not the primary full time caregiver - you have no idea what you are talking about... Most women take care of the kids. Society rewards that... yes... true... and society can change those rewards or change the rewarded behavior. However, the OP position was: "Young women are 'trained' away from careers in technology." Personally, I don't believe the OP hypothesis holds up... the reason why women are not represented in large numbers in tech careers is probably more related to child bearing and rearing than early life 'training' or indoctrination, if you will... Further, it's important to note this is not necessarily a 'problem'. It is a problem if a given woman wishes to have a career in tech and is willing to give up raising kids to have the career with the result that the particular woman is then denied that career... or is discriminated against in a career simply because she is a woman. However, if the woman wishes to leave the work place at 3:30 PM each day to pick up kids from daycare --- why should a given employer pay for that lost time? I can see a solution if both parents are employed by the same employer --- then maybe there can be a 'slush' time-fund which is passed between male and female workers. However, at the end of the day, the work needs to be done or the company doesn't perform. The essential issue is the employer and how can a employee's uneven work schedule be accommodated given a continuous work flow. Furthermore, there is an issue of thought time needed... if someone, male or female, needs to think about a difficult problem, that problem is less likely to be solved under a barrage of continuous family related interruption. There is another problem with regard to years spent away from the workplace if a given woman decides to quit work altogether and raise the kids [probably 2 of them on average] until the kids start 1st grade. Given two kids spaced 2.5 years apart... that's at least seven [7] years. These women are very unlikely to get rehired in the tech industry after seven years absence. And quite frankly, there's nothing wrong with that if skills have become rusty, as is most likely. There is a 'problem' if, given the example, a female applicant is denied employment even if the skills are still sharp. However... That said... I know, from my own experience, that the skills become rusty very fast -- and not even in the Mozilla sense. Days upon days and weeks upon weeks spent with infants and toddlers quickly drains an individual of all possible time and deep thought becomes nearly impossible between the sleepless nights and the strained days. As I said, if you haven't experienced it all first hand -- you have no idea. |
| cybertao Jan 05, 2016 3:53 PM EDT |
When the zombie apocalypse comes, Grace Hopper is coming after you guys. |
| dotmatrix Jan 05, 2016 4:04 PM EDT |
@cybertao: You've proved the point: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grace_Hopper "She was married to New York University professor Vincent Foster Hopper (1906–76) from 1930 until their divorce in 1945.[14][18] She never remarried, and she kept his surname." and... http://www.answers.com/Q/Did_Grace_Hopper_have_any_children "no grace never had any children she got divorced in 1945 Isn't that sad? She is so cool, I think she should of had a child. " Children are the reason why women stay out of time intensive careers. If the children never happen along, the career can be great. This is also the view of RMS. And this view has many many examples throughout history and the modern tech era. It's not that women have no brains, no skils, and wear skirts. Rather, it's that women bear and rear children. *** As an aside, women at the park with the kids are just as dismissive and sexist as is possible to be... It's very difficult to work within an environment as an outsider and 'the group' is always suspicious of outsiders whether those outsiders are male, female, black, or white, or purple, or Methodist. Last - it's nearly impossible to do significant deep thought type work while simultaneously caring for infants and toddlers. |
| cybertao Jan 06, 2016 2:42 AM EDT |
Grace Hopper doesn't prove a women has to be childless to have a successful career (which would have been more to do with the dedication to her military career than academic abilities), or that women who have children are addle brained. She does demonstrate that not all women have a preoccupation with being addle brained baby factories though. I hope those presenting the 'addle brained breeder' perspective haven't limited the expectations of their daughters to that, and have more respect for their partners than just being breeding stock. |
| BernardSwiss Jan 06, 2016 3:51 AM EDT |
I don't suppose that anyone's noticed, but... ... none of the women who used to take part in the LXer forum seem to be around any more -- or at least, if they are still around, they're no longer bothering to take part in the discussions. Perhaps, just maybe, there's a connection? |
| dotmatrix Jan 06, 2016 9:51 AM EDT |
@cybertao: I did not and do not think or believe that women are addle brained with or without children. However, I do know -- from personal experience -- that caring for infants and toddlers is thoroughly incompaitable with work that requires significant continuous and uninterrupted time. And, yes, Grace Hopper demonstrates clearly both that:
I don't think most women care about Lxer. The number of women in the tech field overall is quite tiny as a percentage of the total, and I highly doubt the small number are lurking in the corners of a low traffic GNU/Linux news aggregation website. Last - *all* of the women I know who are in the tech field are childless and/or young. I know a few older women in other science fields... and those few are also childless. Please note that it is not impossible to have child and be in the tech/science fields. However, it is nearly impossible to be the primary care giver for children and be in the tech/science fields. This is true for males and females... it just so happens that females are statistically about 98% of the primary care givers. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!