All artificial
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| theBeez Dec 18, 2016 8:10 AM EDT |
Seriously lacking: number of lines written. Stop it and all this will revert automatically. The blatant discrimination on the guys who do the real work is disgusting and FOSS unworthy. |
| dotmatrix Dec 18, 2016 11:18 AM EDT |
>Seriously lacking: number of lines written. I'm not sure what you mean... In any case, after reading the posted article... it appears that 'diversity' means specifically female inclusion. I have precisely zero problem with women in technology, women programmers, women bosses, women who make more money than me, etc. In fact, my wife has a PhD and makes more money than me. I have a BSEE, and make less than her. I have zero problems with women reading, driving cars, and voting. I am not sexist in any way. However, no one should be given an advantage over another simply by virtue of sex, color, or creed. Only talent should count. If an individual lacks the skill, that individual should not get the job. *** As far as non-code open source and FOSS contributions goes... I agree with the article. The open source and FOSS world suffers from lack of non-code talent. This is not to say that the various interfaces and graphical components aren't useable, it's rather that the 'better' graphics always seem to be available only in non-FOSS-ware. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 18, 2016 1:46 PM EDT |
where in the article does it say anything about giving women an advantage? not so. for example: Quoting:Foundations and organizations are increasing outreach efforts [ ... ] The Linux Foundation and OpenStack Foundation provide scholarships, travel assistance, training, mentorships, childcare, affinity groups, and more this is not giving an advantage, but equalizing a disadvantage. on average more women are unable to use opportunities because they have less discretionary funds (they get paid less, need to spend their money for buying food, etc), can't take time off because they need to take care of children... Quoting:Mentorships, scholarship programs, and training are scaling. they mention GSOC which is not specifically targeted at women but open to everyone. outreachy in comparison is much smaller. still think it's unfair? and finally the grace hopper conference for women among other things provides a safe environment for learning. most male dominated events are not a safe environment. what were you complaining about again? Quoting:Conferences are improving diversity among speakers and attendees. again, this happens not by giving women an advantage, but by removing a bias towards (white) males. research has shown that the same resume or the same work is judged differently depending on which gender is associated with it. so by removing this bias, women are getting an advantage how? Quoting:The definition of 'contributions' is expanding, and on-boarding is improving. this too is gender neutral. everyone now has more options to contribute, and everyone can get more help to join a project. there is no advantage for women here either. it's just that, probably more women are attracted by these new opportunities. Quoting:The Ada Initiative and NCWIT skills training are examples of practical approaches to showing male allies how they can support gender equality and build inclusive cultures. that is targeted at men, i suspect it is something come commenters here could benefit from. so please tell me again where are women given an advantage? i just don't see it. greetings, eMBee. |
| jdixon Dec 18, 2016 2:12 PM EDT |
> ...this is not giving an advantage, but equalizing a disadvantage. We'll simply have to disagree on that point. > ...but by removing a bias towards (white) males. Ah, there we have the two magic words. I'll let them speak for themselves. > so please tell me again where are women given an advantage? i just don't see it. Obviously. Others do. Whether I agree that the outreach programs serve a useful purpose or not, I'm not going to pretend that they're not giving an advantage to a particular class, because they are. |
| theBeez Dec 19, 2016 7:10 AM EDT |
@mbaehrlxer
Well, these "outreach programs" have done more harm to FOSS than you can imagine. Note this money was meant to support the development of the software, NOT to support the work of a few feminists who can't really understand what they're supposed to do (http://www.computerworld.com/article/2488233/app-development...). And there is no "white male bias". If any, there is a Asian man bias, because they are proportionally better represented than while males. Do you see me crying for "support to equalize a bias"? No, I'm just doing what I'm supposed to do and that is write the best code I can. ".. Provides a safe environment for learning. most male dominated events are not a safe environment". C'mon it's a few geeks discussing coding, not a rape convention. If so, I'd recommend you stay at home and lock the door very tight, because you WILL meet men on the street. I should be insulted by this, but obviously it's only a problem if women are verbally abused. Your problem is that there IS no bias, it's just that males gravitate to these kind of activities. Just like females gravitate to dating, wedding dresses and childbirth, if I may believe the programming of TLC. And I know they must be pretty stupid there, because their audience is longing for car shows like Fast and Loud. The bias is the result of gender-specific gravitation to certain activities, which of course aren't true for individuals, but very true for groups - which form the input of the statistics channels like the TLC are using to determine their programming (no pun intended). And I don't deny the right of anybody to do anything they want. But don't blame people it things turn out the way they've turned out. It's not a shame - and it's not something that needs "correcting". Certainly not with the money individuals contributed for other purposes. Bottomline: most FOSS projects are single person projects. Within their realm they can do anything they want - even hide that they are a woman at all, since the internet is "an unsafe environment" as well, of course. The vast majority of them are run by males. Change that number first. |
| dotmatrix Dec 19, 2016 11:40 AM EDT |
>And I don't deny the right of anybody to do anything they want. But don't blame people it things turn out the way they've turned out. This. Yes... There's an opportunity cost to decision making in life. And let's just say for arguments' sake that 10% of females would rather raise children than work out of the home.... If so, then the female work force is already starting at 40% rather than 50%... On the flip side, full time parents are almost 100% female. Where is the outrage!? Why should it be perfectly acceptable for a female to raise children and passe for males? And then what about male elementary school teachers? Where is the outrage at the 'missing' male elementary school teachers!? *** Fair does not equal 50%. And equal does not equate to identical. Perhaps society should leave personal decisions about employment options to the individual and not worry about 'percentage of xyz in qwerty job market... Respect the person and the rest will work itself out. |
| mbaehrlxer Dec 21, 2016 1:35 AM EDT |
Quoting:On the flip side, full time parents are almost 100% female. Where is the outrage!? Why should it be perfectly acceptable for a female to raise children and passe for males? it's no longer 100%: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stay-at-home_dad and there would likely be even more stay-at-home dads if society was more supporting. Quoting:And then what about male elementary school teachers? Where is the outrage at the 'missing' male elementary school teachers!? here: https://duckduckgo.com/?q=male+teachers+in+elementary note that the search term is neutral, it doesn't search for articles that support male teachers. it just searches for articles about male teachers. the results could just as well all be articles about how males should not teach elementary. but the majority are asking why, or call for more male teachers. btw, you get a different, but equally telling result when searching for "male nurses". most articles there are about the challenges male nurses face, which mirrors the challenges women face in IT. the problem is not that we need a 50% split, but that going against the norms is looked down upon. THAT is what needs to change. Quoting:society should leave personal decisions about employment options to the individual you are mixing up cause and effect. it's not that women don't want to go into IT, it's that we don't support them when they do. you are saying that the reason why there are so few women in IT is because they are not interested, as if this was the cause. but it's an effect. an effect of being discouraged from playing with computers. discouraged from studying computer-science. and there is another aspect: we NEED more women in engineering. this is why: https://twitter.com/RayOfLaurel/status/808391915397910532 Quoting:The failure of companies to put women consumers at the center of their R&D or business strategy is common. A classic example is that it wasn't until a few years ago that carmakers began regularly testing female crash dummies in drivers' seats. For 30 years, it was just assumed that using male crash test dummies would suffice, even though women are typically smaller than men and the smaller a person is the less force they can tolerate in a crash. That cars were not tested to be safe for female bodies helps to explain why women are killed and injured in car accidents at disproportionately higher rates than men. It's because women were not included in the analysis -- at all. to make matters worse, according to https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2012-08-22/why-carma... they not just forgot women, they deliberately rejected them. i'd like to claim that if there were more women in engineering, this would not have happened. we NEED women in IT because they have a different attitude towards things, which creates better results. if you search online you can find plenty of articles that support the benefits of diversity at work. i was unable to find any that don't. the closest i came up with is: http://archive.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/08/... and even article that only sees problems in a diverse society (problems that can, and should be solved btw), but supports diversity at the workplace. i agree that fairness does not equal 50%. the unfairness comes in when people want to pursue a goal but are stopped from doing it. and it's not about personal decisions for employment options, but about children being influenced in their studying choices. children can't make personal decisions about their future employment. and by the time they are old enough to make a decision it's to late. this is not about giving women an advantage, but about creating a better world for everyone. greetings, eMBee. |
| dotmatrix Dec 21, 2016 9:03 AM EDT |
>you are saying that the reason why there are so few women in IT is because they are not interested, as if this was the cause. but it's an effect. an effect of being discouraged from playing with computers. discouraged from studying computer-science. I am saying that women are not as interested in computing and computers and technology as men. I'm also saying that to proclaim that we need more women in the technology is demeaning to the women who choose other paths in life. Society should not be in the business of telling individuals what one should or should not enjoy. If my daughters enjoy programming, I will be more than happy to hand them my ANSI C manual. If my daughters enjoy engineering, I will be more than happy to lend them my Basic Electronics textbooks. And, of course, my daughters use GNU/Linux as their first and only OS at home. I strongly refute that, in general, there persists a systemic bias for males, and definitely not white males, entering technology studies or employment. Such bias has long been rightfully thrown in the trash bin of history. However, there is a strong anti-male bias which is rising through the educational system. Will the fairness warriors of today seek to right the balance when it's white males who are rejected from programs or employment? Is it ethical to rob Peter to pay Paul? or more appropriately: Rob Peter to pay Mary? Isn't it true that, unbalancing the system in favor of an otherwise perfectly capable human causes strife? If the system has not been artificially unbalanced, then it would be easy to see that those employed in positions of power 'got' there on 'their own'.... An unbalanced system sows the seeds of suspicion and discontent, which robs the attainer of the position the full measure of its worth. |
| jdixon Dec 21, 2016 9:32 AM EDT |
> we NEED women in IT because they have a different attitude towards things, which creates better results. An declaration made no supporting evidence. The actual evidence indicates that it can create better results in the right circumstances. It also indicates that it can backfire spectacularly in the wrong ones. There are plenty of examples of both. Look, no system is perfect because we're not perfect, so you're never going to achieve ideal results. So let people do what they want to do and don't stand in their way. But don't pretend that creating preferential treatment programs isn't giving an advantage to a particular class, because it is. And don't be surprised when those not in that particular class object. |
| theBeez Dec 21, 2016 5:29 PM EDT |
> you are mixing up cause and effect. I'm afraid you are. > it's not that women don't want to go into IT, it's that we don't support them when they do. What kind of support did you have in mind? And why are women so feeble that they do need support when (young) males hacking away on their attic do not? Don't you think that attitude and perseverance is as much a requirement to get the job done? Or do we need to throw skills onto the lap of women, result without effort - isn't that an unfair advantage as well? Is that the "fair" world you had in mind? Where somebody simply by having the right sex gets privileges that others - maybe more qualified - are denied? >This is not about giving women an advantage, but about creating a better world for everyone. A better world for everyone is giving everyone exactly the same chances and privileges. Not picking out a single group. If you apply for the Navy Seals, there are no "corrections" either for being female - because on the battlefield that will help you very little. Just like real life. |
| caitlyn Dec 21, 2016 8:08 PM EDT |
Oh, the poor oppressed white males who run the patriarchy are whining about outreach to other groups, especially women. Y'all have been doing this as long as LXer has been around and then some and guess what: you still rule. Get over yourselves. >I am saying that women are not as interested in computing and computers and technology as men. Repeating a tired old sexist trope does not make it so... AT ALL. Studies have been done. Up through middle school and even into high school girls are just as interested as boys. Societal pressures and, sadly, often their own parents discourage them. Outreach efforts provide role models and people who can encourage girls who are already interested in tech. There is no shortage of such girls. Many of you don't even realize it when you're being sexist. In 2000 women in IT numbered 30%. Today we number 12%. Google, one of the organizations who work hardest at recruiting women is at 16%. Compare that with 40% at Lockheed-Martin when I worked there 15 years ago. The main reason cited for leaving the field: a hostile work environment. Sorry, guys, that's real. None of you, being male, have ever had to overcome the barriers that exist. Ask my cousin's daughter (OK, technically still a first cousin, once removed) who is studying Computer Science and a well known and well respected university. In her class there are 50 CS majors including 2 women. Some professors encourage the women to find another field despite high grades. None of you have ever sat in a meeting where you are supposed to be a senior person and been utterly ignored along with anyone else wearing a skirt. Here is reality: women and minorities have to be twice as good as their (white) male counterparts to even get a seat at the table. OK, maybe Asian males, who are expected to succeed also get a seat. The rest of us? We have to fight for it. Your privilege and your sense of entitlement just drips out of this thread. |
| dotmatrix Dec 21, 2016 8:49 PM EDT |
>None of you, being male, have ever had to overcome the barriers that exist. No... But I've over come being very poor, being violently and sexually abused as a child, and being developmentally delayed until about age 12... and no, I didn't have any help... my parents could barely afford to get me vaccinated, let alone send me to a specialized school for developmentally delayed children. The only reason we didn't go to bed hungry 3 or 4 nights a week was because the local Church Pastor brought us food. I wore pre-worn shoes that came in a bag of other clothing from the Church... and I wore hand-me-down pants that were torn and/or too small. I remember handing in my 4th grade science fair project. It was an 'Adobe House.' I made it out of small stones glued together... while the girls in my class handed in space ships made out of Lego kits. Of course, I received a grade on that project that fully reflected my hours upon hours of searching for just the right stones and carefully gluing them together with the smallest dabs of paste... No... no I didn't... I received a 'D'... the Lego space ship received an 'A'. I don't resent females... I don't hold it against society that I grew up in a household that was well below the poverty level. Why should society make believe that I somehow have led a 'privileged' life? Why should I 'accept' that rewritten, horribly demeaning, and incorrect narrative of my self image? I, being a white male, have had a very hard life, much harder than many of peers... even the female ones... however, also much much better than those of other cultures and other countries. Sure barriers exist for many different groups and for many different reasons. However, we humans are all individuals and have many different levels of experiences. Some of us have suffered cruelly, and some of us have it all handed to us wrapped in Lego box. Class structure is much more applicable than male vs. female or other such arbitrary assignment of 'privilege.' |
| caitlyn Dec 21, 2016 9:02 PM EDT |
Anyone can have a hard life. It's true. The fact that white males have privilege in all sorts of aspects of society, from dealing with law enforcement to dealing with IT, is also true. I'm sorry you can't see that privilege is a thing. That, sadly, despite your very real experience, makes you part of the problem. |
| dotmatrix Dec 21, 2016 9:29 PM EDT |
> The fact that white males have privilege in all sorts of aspects of society, from dealing with law enforcement to dealing with IT, is also true. I'm sorry you can't see that privilege is a thing. I've never been arrested... but then again, I haven't done much illegally except drive 5 MPH over the speed limit. I was always in trouble as a kid and I only avoided Juvy because my parents told the police officer that they wanted the Church to handle my problems. You don't know me. And so, you have nothing at all of meaning to say about my life. I have had a very hard life, and my white skin and my male attributes have not had anything at all to do with my 'success' at life. I worked hard at earning my BSEE. I failed out of school the first time, and I was only accepted to college the first time around because it was a state school and the school was required to accept me as a student. Nothing I have received in life was because I am male or white. In fact, many times I was rejected from employment because I am male and white. When I was working as a computer repair technician at CompUSA for minimum wage, I applied for a job as a mail sorter mechanic. I got an interview and was offered the job. But then the company told me they made a mistake and rescinded the offer and told me the job was to be filled with a minority applicant instead. ...I guess my white male privilege got in the way... Later in life, I managed to secure a job with the Federal government. I routinely worked contracts for small businesses that were labeled as 'Woman or Minority owned'. The status was humorous because many of these companies were run entirely by Asian men who registered the company under their wives names. Why would this be? Because the Federal government is required to give preference to 'Woman or Minority owned' businesses... However, the whole thing is a farce... and I know it, because I worked in the field. There simply is no such thing as 'White Male Privilege'... and I am a living example. Although I am a living example who has managed to push through enormous mountains of hardship to attain my current status... which is... slightly poorly than when I was born, at least on paper. |
| caitlyn Dec 21, 2016 10:06 PM EDT |
Wow. I write in general and you use your own experience to discard decades of well documented discrimination against women and minorities. I'm floored, but not at all surprised. I don't need to know anything about you to know that I live in a white male dominated patriarchy. That says absolutely nothing about your experiences but it says a lot about society in general. Oh, and yeah, I can remember hearing the most insecure and inept developer saying loudly, behind my back but so I could hear, that I must be the "affirmative action hire" even though he had never seen my resume and knew nothing about me. He was just an insecure man who thought I, being a woman, didn't belong in my oh-so-senior position above him. That happened in 1998 during the tech bubble when any qualified person had multiple offers if they put their resume out there. That attitude has only become more prevalent as the field became competitive and it became an employers market. |
| jdixon Dec 21, 2016 10:20 PM EDT |
> The fact that white males have privilege in all sorts of aspects of society, from dealing with law enforcement to dealing with IT, is also true. Not anymore they don't. The institutional barriers that have been raised over the past 50 years against white males have worked. That war has been won. Congratulations. Of course, now those weapons are being turned against white women, but what goes around comes around. > I'm sorry you can't see that privilege is a thing. That, sadly, despite your very real experience, makes you part of the problem. OK, Caitlyn. If I'm going to be called part of the problem no matter what I do, then guess what? I'm actually going to BE part of the problem. Again, congratulations, you got what you wanted. And you know what? A whole bunch of others agree with that assessment. Maybe that's why you're seeing that "hostile work environment" increase. |
| dotmatrix Dec 21, 2016 10:31 PM EDT |
>your own experience to discard decades of well documented discrimination What is a human but an individual set of personal experiences? That's the point. The generalization of people into categories is decidedly wrong and horribly unjust and cruel. BTW: Why did I fail out of college the first time around? Because I was an emotional basket case as the trial of my sexual abuser was going through the courts. I routinely received letters from the Victim of Violent Crimes unit. I was 19 years old. Life is pain... anyone who says differently is selling something. I refuse to acknowledge the validity of 'the white male privilege' movement. My mother would call such a movement as filled with people who have "The Poor Me-s" ... The strange but fascinating twist to my life is: If I didn't grow up so poor that we couldn't afford food, heat, and gasoline for the car... I wouldn't have spent hours upon hours with my father on long cold winter nights fixing the car... the car which was always broken because it was always at least 20 years old... and I wouldn't have learned how mechanical things function... and I wouldn't have learned that my father loved me, even though he beat me mercilessly - because being a good Catholic parent means, "Spare the rod, spoil the child" I tell this personal story here not to gain anything... I don't care about the past... it's all in the past... I tell this personal story, because there are plenty of other young white males out there... and many of them feel that they are worthless.... many of them feel unloved and unwanted by society... many of them see the advantages given to others and wonder why such advantages should exist. And so do I. |
| dotmatrix Dec 21, 2016 11:31 PM EDT |
And... BTW... @caitlyn has proved my point: >behind my back but so I could hear, that I must be the "affirmative action hire" even though he had never seen my resume dotmatrix: If the system has not been artificially unbalanced, then it would be easy to see that those employed in positions of power 'got' there on 'their own'.... An unbalanced system sows the seeds of suspicion and discontent, which robs the attainer of the position the full measure of its worth. ************** If 'affirmative action' did not exist.... there would be no reason for any suspicion. It would be clear that who ever occupied the position, received the position due to merit. Therefore... @caitlyn has been robbed of the full measure of her position's worth... because of the unbalanced system which exists to fulfill a quota and combat the 'patriarchy' ... The presence of the unbalancing force lends credibility to the argument of placement without merit, even -and maybe especially- for those who have merit. The solution to the 'behind your back whispering, oddly, is to remove the "special" programs promoting and elevating certain components of society. One question remains: 1. Who invented peanut butter? 10 to 1 odds says you'll say: George Washington Carver... of course! And you'll even remember that he had significantly more natural melanin in his skin than most Europeans... why? Because there was no such thing as 'Affirmative Action'... ... Condescending to racial or under represented groups does not make for good policy nor good educational decisions. Respect the person and the rest will work itself out. |
| theBeez Dec 22, 2016 12:50 PM EDT |
Well, the point is, if you're a white male (even if you're fat or socially awkward) you don't have any excuses for your failure. However, if you're a woman you can blame anything that happens to you to just that. If you think that white males aren't treated unjust (for whatever reason) from time to time, you're gravely mistaken. But you just swallow it and takes measures. If you have a family that depends on you, you swallow even more. But if you're a women, it's discrimination and you can go to father state (just like you used to go to your own father) and make 'em fix things. It's life. It happens to everybody. |
| theBeez Dec 22, 2016 12:56 PM EDT |
Ok, this is fun.. > The main reason cited for leaving the field: a hostile work environment. Ok, you don't fit in for one reason or another. What reason are you gonna give to a researcher: "Yeah, I ***** up" or a "hostile work environment"? Don't think for a moment that people will state the truth when questioned in that way. If it were, we would have the first female president right now. |
| skelband Dec 23, 2016 2:23 PM EDT |
> I tell this personal story, because there are plenty of other young white males out there... and many of them feel that they are worthless.... many of them feel unloved and unwanted by society... many of them see the advantages given to others and wonder why such advantages should exist. I'm afraid that is part of the self-loathing societal disease that permeates much of the West these days. People and groups have historically seen bias and abuse over the centuries. These days, in the west at any rate, we have the most equitable, fair and even handed society that the world has ever seen. It's just like people's perception of crime. Apparently, society is breaking down and everything is going to hell in a hand basket. However, if you look at the hard figures, crime in virtually all categories is at an all time low and the crime figures are heading in a downward direction. If you listen to the SJWs, everything is going to sh*t and it's primarily down to white males. I assure you, nothing is further from the truth, but nothing will convince them otherwise. Apparently, if you aren't subject to abuse or systemic disadvantage, then you are somehow "privileged". There is something fundamentally sick about that attitude. |
| jdixon Dec 23, 2016 2:56 PM EDT |
> Apparently, if you aren't subject to abuse or systemic disadvantage, then you are somehow "privileged". Even if you're from poverty stricken Appalachia or rural Mississippi, if you're white, you're "privileged", Only whites can be racists, and all whites are racist. Only men can be sexists, and all men are both sexists and rapists. No, I'm not kidding. These are articles of faith amongst the SJW's, as a quick search of the net will verify. Of course, if you're a republican/conservative/small government libertarian, then your sins are compounded even further and you're deplorable and irredeemable. I think enough people have gotten tired of it that a backlash has started, but my crystal ball seems to be on the fritz, so I have no idea how it will play out. |
| skelband Dec 23, 2016 3:24 PM EDT |
Interestingly, and none of the SJWs will admit this, but the entire concept of "white privilege" is explicitly racist. And not even true, as dotmatrix's testimonial above will atest. |
| BernardSwiss Dec 24, 2016 8:09 PM EDT |
Exhibit 'A': this very thread... |
| DrGeoffrey Dec 24, 2016 11:54 PM EDT |
Quoting: Exhibit 'A': Indeed. |
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!