Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 64 points65 points66 points 12 years ago (26 children) | Copy Link

A great article.

Basically, "people with technical/rational oriented minds" (or NT-style thinking patterns, to use Myers-Briggs terminology) (which are disproportionately correlated with Autism-spectrum conditions) typically get along well in tech.

Statistically speaking, men are more likely to have NT-style cognition relative to women.

Notice a lot of the women in tech who cry 'misogyny', e.g. Adria Richards, are often in the tech sales or communication or marketing departments rather than actual technology research/development.. in other words they probably skew towards more social/feelings-y personalities.

I'm willing to bet those women with positive experiences in tech are NT-style thinkers and are in the research/development sectors. The woman who wrote this article (Ms. Patterson) is a programmer, after all.

I'm not surprised Ms. Patterson's experiences are considered atypical or difficult to relate to (by many women)... Ms. Patterson thinks more like a "typical tech person" (i.e. has an NT cognitive style (which is statistically more common in men than women)) than like a tech "evangelist" or tech salesperson (jobs which benefit from social skills and charisma and being good with the feelings-y stuff... areas in which women, on average, tend to do better).

According to feminism, she's a gender traitor because she's a gender-atypical woman and "one of the boys" in many respects (I often talk about how nerdy men are treated as a separate gender from "real men"... I'm thinking nerdy women may be treated as a seperate gender from "normal women" in some respects too... like "brainy people" are seen almost as a third sex).

Thus, we have feminists basically gender-policing her.

I often point out when feminists gender-police men, but I haven't seen as many instances of them gender-policing women. That said, when feminists gender-police, they prove how utterly hypocritical they are. If they really oppose the gender system, they have to stop gender-policing.

[–][deleted] 32 points33 points34 points 12 years ago* (19 children) | Copy Link

Thus, we have feminists basically gender-policing her.

You took the words right out of my mouth. She's being chastised and attacked for not acting 'like a woman'. She even links to an article with this unbelievable hypocrisy in it;

Women in tech have, or so they may believe, much to gain in being perceived as “one of the bros.” Much of the critical networking, decision-making and team bonding important to career growth occurs in male-dominated spaces, cemented by heteronormative male bonding. Gaining access to these spaces — or simply achieving the level of comfort and camaraderie that white men in the industry share as the foundation for their work relationships — may, or may seem to, open up career opportunities. Being “one of the bros” is only possible by presenting a non-threatening persona that is aligned with male privilege and emulates the bonding techniques of straight, masculine men… and often its attendant misogyny (such as participating in casual denigration of women in the workplace).

Yep. Feminists attacking women who 'act like men', calling them out gender-traitors, policing them. They even used the term 'heteronormative' - apparently completely oblivious to the fact that that they are themselves promoting the gender binary they claim to be against.

They call acting NT rather than FP 'aligning with male privilege', and proceed to equate being a straight male with being a misogynist (oh, what a surprise!)

Well done to Ms. Patterson for standing up to this bullshit, gender-fascist attempt by feminists at telling her how she should be thinking. It is absolute bullshit that social justice warriors with their gender studies degrees should be telling mathematicians and programmers how they're wrong about the environment in which they work. It demonstrates a total lack of understanding of how the work actually gets done and why people who succeed in that area of work think the way they do. Worst of all, it fucking reeks of anti-intellectualism.

The very first sentence of her article brought something to my attention also;

Growing up with autism is a never-ending series of lessons in how people without autism expect the rest of the world to relate to them.

Autism. A 'condition' that effects more than 4 times as many males than it does females. A 'condition' with a prevalence that has grown in perfect timing with feminism.

Ms. Patterson, it seems, really is being bullied for acting male.

Where I see a mind better attuned to the provable and the calculable than the subjective and intangible, feminists see a damaged, disabled mind unable to socialize. They see someone who needs to be put on drugs to try and make them 'act normal'.

Seeing this, I am lead to view 'Autism' in the same way feminists rightly viewed 'Hysteria'; as a marginalization of a typically gender-specific thought pattern, institutionalized for the purpose of oppressing that gender.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 16 points17 points18 points 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Seeing this, I am lead to view 'Autism' in the same way feminists rightly viewed 'Hysteria'; as a marginalization of a typically gender-specific thought pattern, institutionalized for the purpose of oppressing that gender.

I think you're very much onto something.

Real autism is detectable via brain scans. Many "autistic spectrum" people cannot be detected via a brain scan, which leads me to similar conclusions to yours: many (not all, but many) diagnoses of autistic spectrum disorders are really just pathologizations of a rational temperment.

I'm not sure if its entirely a gender thing though... whilst men are more likely to have a rational temperment than women, the stereotypical man isn't particularly rationally tempered but is rather brutish/jockish. Not only that, but NT-personalities are in fact a minority even amongst males (so I'm not sure it is fair to compare this with diagnoses of "hysteria").

NT's are typically facts-centric and thus tend towards a certain kind of cognitive individualism (i.e. "if my friends say X, but I think Y is true, then I'm sticking to my guns"). A good illustration of this tendency is given by a quote from Ayn Rand (herself an NT female) - "thought does not bow to authority."

Typical normative masculinity is heirarchical and collectivistic (the alpha male/bully mentality), so an NT temperment is just as much a threat to that as it is to traditional femininity (this makes me wonder why so many people classify rational thought as normatively masculine when in fact it is a minority trait, and found in a minority of men (intellectual men) who are typically considered 'lesser men').

Today's Feminism as an ideology isn't particularly fond of any kind of individualism, so obviously NT temperments represent a threat as well.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Real autism is detectable via brain scans. Many "autistic spectrum" people cannot be detected via a brain scan, which leads me to similar conclusions to yours: many (not all, but many) diagnoses of autistic spectrum disorders are really just pathologizations of a rational temperment.

I've posted this further down in the comments, but I feel it's highly relevant to what you've said here;

Wikipedia

Source

The sex ratio averages 4.3:1 and is greatly modified by cognitive impairment: it may be close to 2:1 with intellectual disability and more than 5.5:1 without.

So, in cases of autism among people with legitimate cognitive disability, Autism is roughly twice as common in boys, but in cases where there is no cognitive disability, it skyrockets to being more than five times as common.

If this is not exactly what you would expect to find in the numbers on a condition being exploited to oppress in the style of Hysteria, I don't know what is.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So, in cases of autism among people with legitimate cognitive disability, Autism is roughly twice as common in boys, but in cases where there is no cognitive disability, it skyrockets to being more than five times as common.

That is a fascinating discovery. Thank you.

So objectively-demonstrable-autism is 2:1 male:female skewed, but what we might describe as arguably-socially-constructed-autism is almost 6:1 skewed towards boys. Wow... that really says a lot.

To clarify, why I don't think this is entirely a gender issue is because rational temperments (often classified as autistic-spectrum traits because they're less social and feelings-y) are still a minority in men, and the men who have these temperments are considered gender-nonconforming in certain respects (nerdy/intellectual men are often socially emasculated in various ways). That said, given how a lot of our culture (including our classical and artistic traditions) classifies the rational as masculine and emotional as feminine (whether or not this is in fact empirically true), you are making a compelling point.... conduct which is popularly associated with male-typicality being described as a disease in the absense of any actual objective biological evidence does say quite a bit.

[–]VortexCortex 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

the stereotypical man isn't particularly rationally tempered but is rather brutish/jockish.

Well, for one, prove it. In my experience the typical male is neither a brute nor a jock nor a scientist. Even in your brutes, battling in war or mock war on football and rugby fields you will see the rational logic of strategic suffering to achieve a goal. You will see the needs of the many outweighing the needs of the few. That is nothing if not rational, yet you paint these brutes as irrational...

What I find most common among males in my city is that they are cowed by long term relationships into not doing things they desire to do -- The needs of the family outweigh the needs of the man -- Their Thoughts are bowing to the authority of the family unit, who creates within her life and typically dictates the degree of sexual interaction, even disgustingly using it as rewards for conditioning good behavior.

It's hard not to find a male being appealed to anything but logically: If you do this, you get this. This car is good because it has these benefits. It's hard not to find a female being appealed to in this way, and emotional and societal marketing you see instead: This product makes you more appealing. Emotions and womanhood are to be celebrated, lavish yourself with this product...

IMO, society is too varied for this to be born purely of society -- It can be found in isolated native societies wherein men take multiple wives and no government exists to rule them... Still you will find the emotional and rational appealing to more one sex than the other on average. Thus I expect to see ever more evidence of physiological differentiation leading to differences in any sexually dimorphic race.

Market research is based on evidence of what the targets are receptive to, not the other way around -- They do not market thus because they are influencing the society, but because the society things thus and are thereby best marketed to. The same holds true for many fields of work being attractive to different sexes on average. Jobs require skill sets. It would be daft to think that individuals predisposed to having certain skill sets or attributes will not cluster in the workplace.

Note that noticing and documenting and discussing trends does not limit individuals -- Outliers are accepted as existing in nearly every graph. Feminism as an ideology isn't particularly fond of any kind of individualism because it relies heavily on identity politics. They wish to remain lonely under-appreciated outliers while having an effect on the graph...

One way identity politics is used is to take one or a few portrayals of individuals and then attribute this to a group (without evidence) -- a group one either identifies with as good or repulses as bad depending on the desired outcome of the identity shifting. Eg: These women are abused -> all women are abused -> You as a woman are abused, and Men are abusers. That's identity politics. Any evidence to the contrary is ignored because the ideology is not based on science and observation, and allowed to adapt to the changing environment -- Instead it is a set of unevidenced assumptions which any rational mind will dismiss out of hand. It's no wonder that such an ideology is made to appeal to women -- That feminism targets females is no accident. Look deeper and you will find that there are no feminists, merely useful idiots or Marxist leveraging them with identity politics.

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[+]ihateusernamesalot 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Please don't exploit autistic people to support your conspiracy theory against men.

Right, skyrocketing diagnosis rates are totally not indicative of any problem anywhere, right? I never claimed to have all the answers. I merely noticed a potential connection between Ms. Patterson's autism diagnosis, and the 'stop acting like a guy' comments she reports receiving.

I'm not 'exploiting autistic people'. I'm saying that some of them may be being exploited, largely unintentionally, through series of societal changes that are serving to marginalize an otherwise legitimate and highly useful pattern of thought.

I work in IT. I'm utterly surrounded by people with all kinds of 'weird' social quirks and ticks someone might associate with autism. I wouldn't be surprised if I myself could be diagnosed with it if I saw a doctor over it. We're the kids who got daily beatings all throughout highschool. Outside of a tech environment we get looked on as pasty-faced losers and nerds.

In the current 'autism epidemic', I see a brand of anti-intellectualism with an anti-male slant.

[+]ihateusernamesalot 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I don't think you really know enough about autism to suggest that, and there isn't much evidence to support it. A lot of disorders have gender differences in frequency. Diagnoses aren't perfect and some people are near the arbitrary line, but that doesn't mean autism or anything else is the new hysteria. There aren't abusive "treatments," for one. For adults diagnosed with Asperger's, there aren't really any treatments at all. If there are certain symptoms you are bothered by, you can get help with that, but they don't necessarily have anything to do with autism. In general, you don't even go in to get assessed for anything unless you are distressed or dissatisfied.

And saying it has anything to do with hostile attitudes towards men is really dubious. It might occur more frequently in men, but it happens in such a tiny minority of men that it's pretty hard to argue that the symptoms are masculine qualities. Autism is not being a "nerd," "weird," or "logical." When you reduce it to that and try to work backwards to fit it into a men's issue, you are exploiting autistic people.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]johnmarkley 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I often point out when feminists gender-police men, but I haven't seen as many instances of them gender-policing women. That said, when feminists gender-police, they prove how utterly hypocritical they are.

I've thought for some time that even if I'd never heard of the idea of men's rights, or even of misandry, I'd still have ample reason to consider the feminist movement the enemy of people like me as an autistic. They seem to despise my kind (and men with autistic spectrum-y traits generally) more than stereotypically masculine "patriarchal" men, not less. So I suppose it's not surprising that they're not respectful of women like that, either.

Actually, I think I've seen this before and just failed to recognize it. Some feminists are strikingly hostile to women who prefer the (platonic) company of men over other women, especially if they dislike stereotypically feminine things. They're accused of being misogynists, or of betraying their sex out of a desire for male approval. (The online feminist insult of choice for such women seems to be "chill girl.)

But as you point out, if a woman finds working or hanging out with men more congenial than doing so with women, its likely because men are more likely to have personalities and interests similar to her own. So the actual crime of the reviled "chill girl" is that she's too unfeminine in personality, and too willing to cross gender lines to find people who understand her and like her for who she is. In many cases, since the accusation seems to be especially targeted at women who feel at ease among male geeks/nerds, the "chill girl" may well be autistic, or at least somewhere on the autistic spectrum.

So not only gender policing, but arguably thinly veiled ableism as well. (In the non-ridiculous "contempt for someone because they have a disability" sense of the word, not just the SJW definition.)

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'd still have ample reason to consider the feminist movement the enemy of people like me as an autistic. They seem to despise my kind (and men with autistic spectrum-y traits generally) more than stereotypically masculine "patriarchal" men, not less.

I've noticed this too. It seems pretty obvious in how today's feminists nerd-shame and in their critiques of "nerdy" hobbies like video games and comic books... logically speaking, they should see "nerdy" guys as potential allies since nerdy men are victims of the gender system too, but instead they treat nerd culture as a bastion of male privilege.

There may be an element of ableism in this as well (like you said), although like I've argued I do think a certain amount of the "autistic spectrum" isn't really serving as a classification for a disability but rather a pathologization of a particular temperment (as if simply being facts-oriented, not particularly feelings-y, and having strong interests outside of "aimlessly being with friends" is somehow a disease). But yes, you make a very good point there.

[–]geengaween 3 points4 points5 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]zenmushroom 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]YetAnotherCommenter 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 17 points18 points19 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 53 points54 points55 points 12 years ago* (50 children) | Copy Link

[–]KnowsAboutMath 21 points22 points23 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]intensely_human 14 points15 points16 points 12 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 12 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 9 points10 points11 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]madlordofestnoth 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]SilencingNarrative 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]madlordofestnoth 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]NiceIce1 points 12 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]anonlymouse 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SilencingNarrative 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[–]intensely_human 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]chavelah 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Freyjia 11 points12 points13 points 12 years ago* (24 children) | Copy Link

As a female programmer chiming in, I can tell you gender discrimination does happen, but it's not across the board. I'd say 75% of the guys have no issues (and most of those are the younger crowd).

The other 25% are mostly not intentional about it, they're just clueless as to what is appropriate anymore. I've seen some of our lead programmers casually make comments about other female developers insinuating they don't have the skills to do something (when they clearly do). Or treat them like they're stupid and minimizing their efforts when they're doing the same things their male peers are doing. Or when one of the simple/easy projects come in automatically say things like "well give it to one of the girls." Of course, these are also the same guys who think it's okay to make lewd remarks, or as one guy did - rub my bare lower thigh when I was wearing a skirt (It was not a short skirt, but I was sitting, and he did it in kind of a creepy/fatherly "I'm patting you on the leg" way - totally inappropriate nonetheless). So these aren't the types that are up to speed on gender equality these days.

My point is, many older guys in the industry are still very much in the backwards mindset, and until they retire and leave you can't say that women in tech feel uncomfortable simply because they're getting their "feelings hurt." There are still businesses around that can make you feel very much like you're trespassing in the boys' club.

It is offensive, and sometimes it does feel like even if you prove yourself you are dismissed anyway simple because you're being viewed as a stereotype of your gender. Normally I'd simply dismiss and not care about asses like them, but it's most prevalent among our older programmers who are team leads... meaning I have to answer to these men. I have no problem being "judged objectively" and do not expect to be coddled. I want criticism, because I want to learn and have improved code. I DO take issue with being treated like my skills are automatically sub-par just because I'm a moderately attractive female.

I'm glad Ms. Patterson has had a different experience, but that's just it - her experience alone, and it does not speak for all women in the industry. She, in the article, even admits one of her ideas was dismissed for being female-originated. I'm glad she can laugh such things off and remain focused, which is what I strive to do as well... but there are a lot of women for whom such experiences are still happening quite often.

Tech IS egalitarian amongst the younger crowd, and I'm thankfully for that. I have some really awesome co-workers (near my age), and we all nerd out together all the time. I love these guys.

I just wish a few of the older guys would retire already.

edit: punctuation

[–]themountaingoat 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Mitschu 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SilencingNarrative 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]nigglereddit -7 points-6 points-5 points 12 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]Freyjia 5 points6 points7 points 12 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Grubnar 4 points5 points6 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]JakeWasHere 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]nigglereddit -4 points-3 points-2 points 12 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]fluxBurns 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

[–]NemosHero[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]thro_way 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]fluxBurns 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]NemosHero[S] 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]fluxBurns 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In her example, when a male colleague made a mistake he was berated pretty badly, where as a woman who made a similar mistake would get told what to change quite politely. She claimed to have seen this happen a few times. One poster (non tech) on reddit claimed that despite being more experienced, guys who worked under her were actually paid more. When she confronted her boss, he says "Well you are married and your husband takes care of you so you don't need that much money".

Is this conclusive scientific proof, no. But it does mean something as do the accounts of women or men that observe that discriminating factor in the treatment of a member of staff is their gender.

How can we just say "We can't know so it is all just meaningless speculation". If we seriously can't know anything, what is the point of MRM? We can't know for 100 %certain if men are being discriminated against in family court, or domestic violence cases etc. So lets just ignore it... Sounds like a bad idea to me.

[–]thro_way 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But when the original poster gives an example where her idea (which she later proved to be a good one) is dismissed purely on the grounds of being a woman, that is pretty clear cut sexism.

The fact that she is a woman, and her idea was dismissed, does not mean that her idea was dismissed because she is a woman. Open source project mailing lists are notorious for being utterly ruthless towards anyone, and I think it's far more likely that her ideas were dismissed because of the usual nerd politics.

One of my female friends gave me an example where male colleges where treated worse when they made a mistake, should we just discount that too because we can't know?

We should look into it, because it's a good indicator that there might be sexism, but male employees being treated worse is not in and of itself proof that the reason they're treated worse is because of sexism.

[–]nigglereddit -1 points0 points1 point 12 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

How about instead of accepting discrimination, we work towards changing attitudes and minds? That way we could make things better for men, women, short people, the disabled, black, white, brown etc.

Of course.

But we have to accept that we can never eradicate prejudice and discrimination. There will always be a little and spending exponentially greater amounts of time and money trying to get rid of something that will never go away is a waste.

Women in tech already have it as good as it's going to get, and at least as good as men in tech. We have already achieved equality. There is no difference in male and female treatment; every single complaint she brings is shared by men.

If there's a difference it's that men are aware of the issues women face even though we can't change them. Women, like the OP, blindly believe that men in tech exist in a state of total freedom and happiness, free from all restrictions.

At least the men are dealing with reality.

[–]fluxBurns 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

But we have to accept that we can never eradicate prejudice and discrimination. There will always be a little and spending exponentially greater amounts of time and money trying to get rid of something that will never go away is a waste.

Who said anything about spending exponential amounts of time or money? We are just trying to acknowledge prejudice which you are quite keen to dismiss.

I am sure during the civil rights movement people said the same thing. "Just accept how things are, they will never get better". You must see that the world is less bigoted that it was years ago. That shows we can make progress.

What is the point of the MRM if things can't get better?

Women in tech already have it as good as it's going to get, and at least as good as men in tech.

Can you prove this?

We have already achieved equality. There is no difference in male and female treatment;

Can you also prove this?

I think that is nonsense. In some environments, men get a hard time and in some women do.

every single complaint she brings is shared by men.

Yep men can get a hard time at work but never explicitly over their gender. That is the point of the post. If we can acknowledge gender discrimination in the workplace, we can work at at least reducing it for both genders.

If there's a difference it's that men are aware of the issues women face even though we can't change them.

Speak for yourself. I am not sure how you are an expert in women's issues. It is like a woman who has never heard what a man has to say claiming to understand men's issues.

Women, like the OP, blindly believe that men in tech exist in a state of total freedom and happiness, free from all restrictions.

You are projecting and mind reading dude. No one in here said any of that. She did not say men have no problems, she said I have these problems.

At least the men are dealing with reality.

Again. You just seem dismissive of women's experiences. I bet if this was a guy posting about his experiences in a female dominated field, you would agree.

I don't personally think you get to dictate who's experiences are or are not valid. The woman in the linked blog gave a concrete example of having her work dismissed because of gender. Your advice would be to "not waste any time or money" on it because we have "already achieved equality".

[–]nigglereddit 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

We are just trying to acknowledge prejudice which you are quite keen to dismiss.

I didn't dismiss it at all, in fact I've acknowledged it openly.

What is the point of the MRM if things can't get better?

Because things can get better for men. We have multiple, serious inequalities to rectify.

Women in tech? Not so much. Women in tech have it so good that they're reduced to screaming about men asking them out in elevators or making jokes they might overhear. They're actually manufacturing inequalities because no real ones exist.

Can you also prove this?

Of course, in fact I already have. Everything the OP complains about is equally applicable to men. That is equality.

Yep men can get a hard time at work but never explicitly over their gender.

Clearly this is totally untrue. The very worst complain the OP can come up with is that someone said something she didn't like. Men at work face discrimination in education, pay, paternity leave, sexual harassment cases and many other areas.

As a man, if the worst thing I could think of about my job was that someone was a horrid meanie to me one day, I'd be delighted.

I don't personally think you get to dictate who's experiences are or are not valid.

This is not SRS or r/feminism. We don't believe feelings are more important than facts here. All you're doing is complaining that I won't take the OP's feeings as more important than the hard facts, which show very clearly that women are not discriminated against in tech.

[–]fluxBurns 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

Of course, in fact I already have. Everything the OP complains about is equally applicable to men. That is equality.

No it's not. Have you run any kind of survey that proves it is equally applicable? Either in application or in intensity? How do you know for sure. It seems more like you have already made up your mind and that is that. Is it inconceivable that anyone working in an environment where they are in the vast minority is going to face some kind of discrimination? We have posts on here about men working in education who are treated like perverts. I guess that is equality too huh?

Clearly this is totally untrue. The very worst complain the OP can come up with is that someone said something she didn't like. Men at work face discrimination in education, pay, paternity leave, sexual harassment cases and many other areas.

In one breath we are equal and in another breath men have it worse?

As a man, if the worst thing I could think of about my job was that someone was a horrid meanie to me one day, I'd be delighted.

Again the original article provided a clear cut case where her work was dismissed purely based on gender. This is not someone getting upset over a dongle joke. She just soldiered on and proved those guys wrong by implementing the ideas successfully... and it did well.

This is not SRS or r/feminism. We don't believe feelings are more important than facts here. All you're doing is complaining that I won't take the OP's feeings as more important than the hard facts, which show very clearly that women are not discriminated against in tech.

I did not say take a feeling as conclusive proof of discrimination (nice strawman btw). If the experience offered is concrete such as someone saying "Her opinion does not matter she is a woman", then I am just as inclined to take it as seriously as I would a man that was accused of being pervert for working at a school. This is not a man's version of radfem, everyone gets a fair hearing here. I will listen to you or ignore you based on the merit of your argument not your genitalia.

I think when there is a clear difference between how members of staff are treated and the only dividing line gender/race/height/etc that is pretty good evidence of something going on.

And for the record you have not provided a single 'hard fact' that is at all useful in determining how men and women are treated. You have strawmanned, false equivocated and 'opinioned' your way to your conclusion. And I like how you acknowledge that /u/Freyjia faces discrimination... by accusing her of 'bitching and whining', you and Big Red would go great together.

[–]mantrasong 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. Tech comes across as anti-woman because it is egalitarian. They don't care if you sit to pee, if your code is good it's good, if it's shit it's shit

Well, for the most part. Gender discrimination does happen, but it isn't nearly as common as it's made out to be, and the sort of person who fits in well is also the sort of person to not notice it. She mentioned it herself in the article, with the idea which was ignored because she was a woman, not on the quality of the idea.

I'm in a similar position, a woman in technology who is very much "one of the (nerdy) boys. While I have a "be a girl" switch, my default way of interacting with the world is like a guy. Of course, I'm also conventionally unattractive, which means that I can't speak to the experiences of women who are. (It should be noted that there very much is a difference: unattractive women (ed: people?) fade in to the background - the main "discrimination" we face is invisibility.) More attractive women tend to report more discrimination - go figure.

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]mantrasong 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]noprotein 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Anonaux 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]lafielle 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Vtwinman 10 points11 points12 points 12 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 12 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[–]Vtwinman 1 point2 points3 points 12 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]zenmushroom 2 points3 points4 points 12 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]Vtwinman 0 points1 point2 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]PeterArching 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]SilencingNarrative 6 points7 points8 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]giegerwasright -28 points-27 points-26 points 12 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy
Author	NemosHero
Upvotes	154
Comments	76
Date	October 15, 2013 8:42 AM UTC (12 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/1oho32/okay_feminism_its_time_we_had_a_talk_about_empathy/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/okay-feminism-its-time-we-had-a-talk-about-empathy.1161276 https://theredarchive.com/post/1161276

Comments