[Womoz] Womoz Digest, Vol 11, Issue 10

[Leigh Honeywell]

On 10-06-17 01:28 PM, Majken Connor wrote:
> True, but I am familiar with several people in a position to hire in OS
> and they _are_ up on the research, they know plenty of brainy women to
> know that it's not a matter of IQ. So this is getting back to what I
> said about being more scientific and specific. Where are these pitfalls,
> how can we get around them, who can help us get rid of them.

I'm glad to hear that this is the case in some places when it comes to 
hiring.  That doesn't make it the case everywhere though, sadly.

>     The ways of changing attitudes that I've found work so far: be
>     present, be awesome, and call people on problematic actions.  The
>     last one is probably the hardest - so often people freak out more at
>     being called sexist than at the fact that someone experienced their
>     actions as sexist, which is always sad to see in action.
>
>
> I agree. I think if women are the ones who want to change something, we
> have to by definition be the ones to change first.  The problem I have
> here is that women do not agree on "problematic actions." I would not be
> offended as a rule if a coworker asked me out. I would be offended
> however if that coworker had a clear disdain for my work and talked down
> to me all the time, but then those last two are the problematic
> behaviour, IMO.

I tend to go with a rule of thumb that if it would get you fired or 
reprimanded from a workplace, it's probably not appropriate in a free 
software community.

Which covers both of the things you mention, I think - asking someone 
out who's a coworker isn't generally something that gets one in trouble, 
unless there's a supervisory relationship involved, and even then it can 
in some cases be ok, whereas being a patronizing asshat can in some 
cases get one moved / fired.

>     I can't remember where it came from, but there's a parable about
>     pants that's relevant here.  Being called out on
>     sexism/racism/ablism/transphobia etc. should be treated like being
>     told that you're not wearing pants (or a skirt, if that's your
>     thing). Instead of responding "HOW DARE YOU POINT OUT MY
>     PANTSLESSNESS", a productive response is "wow, my butt was totally
>     hanging out there! Thank you for pointing out my pantslessness!  I
>     shall now remedy the situation with pants or possibly my favourite
>     kilt.  Rock on."
>
>     Everyone wins when we spread the gospel of pants :)
>
>
> That's a nice analogy, but I think a little too ideal. I've seen many
> things attributed to sexism that just weren't. We're talking cause and
> effect here. Just because the effect is that a woman felt marginalized
> doesn't mean the action was based on discrimination. Certainly we can
> tell men how their actions inadvertently affected us without having to
> force them to accept the mantle of "sexist." Besides that, someone who
> really is sexist isn't going to care how it made you feel.


Just because an action is sexist doesn't mean the person is sexist. 
Everyone can learn to wear pants - I don't think it's optimistic at all :)

> At the same time, there's a lot coming out that the "rockstars" of
> engineering/CS are usually on the autism spectrum. Now disregarding the
> discussion about whether or not people with autism do have unique
> talents that do make them more gifted with code (which I think is worth
> exploring) we have to remember that a key marker of this disorder is
> lack of empathy. They really can be completely unaware of the effects of
> their choices. They'll also be completely unwilling to accept the label
> of "sexist" when they know gender didn't enter into their minds at all
> (and again for the ones that it did, it's a whole different ballgame
> changing this one's perceptions).

I'm going to quote Matthew Garrett on this one, from a discussion last 
year on LWN (available here http://lwn.net/Articles/348543/ ):

"I used to do voluntary work for people with Asperger's. It doesn't 
automatically make you an asshole. Nor is it an excuse for being one. 
Implying that this kind of behaviour is a direct result of an autistic 
spectrum disorder is a grotesque insult to all the people with 
Asperger's who aren't assholes. This kind of behaviour should not be 
acceptable in the community, and shrugging it off as "Oh, it's not their 
fault" does nothing whatsoever to solve the problem."

We covered this in more depth at GeekFeminism a while back as well:

http://geekfeminism.org/2009/08/26/quick-hit-lwn-discussion-on-sexism-social-skills-and-autism-spectrum-disorders/

-Leigh