Inside the Feminist Hackerspace
secret.is
secret.is
“Our geek cred is constantly challenged or
belittled,” Liz Henry, founder of feminist
hackerspace DoubleUnion writes. “You might be
there coding, and you want to stop for a while and
draw in your notebook and think, but if you’re not
staring at a black and green screen or, like,
melding your brain with an Arduino every second,
some dude is going to come up to you and act like
you need his expert lessons in how to hack.”
Probably it would be best to have some formal procedure to identify and deal with newbies, such as having designated people who look for them and offer help, and asking others to let those designated people handle the new people.
There are obviously still gender-centric issues at play: men who are subconsciously trying to impress women with their knowledge, and/or "bro cultures" that are intellectually hostile and competitive by default. (And of course, no shortage of just plain ignorant sexism.) As with Smokey's forest fire advice, we all bear responsibility to improve our own behavior, make work/learning environments welcoming, and to assume that everyone has knowledge and skills to offer, regardless of their genetic details or background.
As a male front-end web developer (who uses 5 operating systems daily, runs his own web server, scripts his own shell functions for linux, and outputs hundreds of lines of code and markup each week) I get talked down to by most infosec and IT people at my shared office. Even when you explain that you're more comfortable on a Linux CLI than the desktop, they still feel the need to patronize you and use metaphors for everything to avoid using any technical terms in conversation at all.
I realize some people are just like that; it's a self-importance issue on their end, not a self-esteem issue on mine. I just let it roll off, but if I had the nagging suspicion it was because of my gender/age/race/height/etc I could be sitting here feeling victimized over nothing.
I suppose you can flip this around, too: a few guys commenting seem rather angry that their helpful well-meaning attention to women staring into the distance at hackerspaces is not appreciated, and they might consider that the women in question have their own issues and it's not necessarily the guy's problem. So, you see a woman who you assume needs help and it turns out you're wrong -- she's just thinking, or she's happy being stuck because that is part of the fun -- then you say, "Ok, see you around!", stop talking, and leave her to it. It's not your problem that she doesn't want your help. Don't take it personally.
That's why I can't imagine the labyrinth of doubt that you would walk being a minority hired in an organization that practiced Affirmative Action. No matter the reason you got hired, you and your peers would always wonder…
If you think someone is stuck and you offer to help, you're being condescending or mansplaining but if you think that someone is just in their process and working something out so you leave them alone, you're being cliquish and not welcoming to the newcomer.
Is the subculture supposed to change to fit the needs of the newbie or should the newbies be expected to learn to fit in to the subculture?
This... is perhaps not the wisest answer, as it is the kind of thing that tends to provoke a backlash. Certainly, telling people that their culture has no value whatsoever does not generally incline them to welcome you.
The only viable solution I can see to the basic failure to communicate that you can describe is for either mind-reading machines to be deployed or for highly formalized channels to be adopted. The former are still being worked on and the latter just makes life harder for newbies, assuming they work at all.
"Hello, may I speak further words to you?"
"Hello, would you be comfortable if I help with your project? Also, I do not want my help to be construed as condescending or demeaning or belittling you, but I have been doing this for 20 years and you seem to be stuck on an introductory problem."
Then you have both parties sign an official collaboration and non-harrassment document, get it notarized, then 6 to 12 days later you may begin working together.
Being sensitive and aware of others needs is great, but being punished because Joe cries when he hears the word Soufflé, and you didn't know that fact, is weird. On the other hand, once you know Joe is sensitive to the S word, and you continue harassing Joe with a daily Soufflé, then you are an asshat.
Our future is on a trajectory to just be like the minions movie. The only word allowed will be banana, in deference to maintaining the internal psychological purity of all sentient humans.
On the other-other hand if Joe is sensitive to the word Soufflé, maybe he shouldn't be hanging out in a French Restaurant.
What do other subcultures do? What is a culture of it has no strong identity? Why would anyone want to join it?
1. Ask them if they have a second to chat (if no, leave them alone for a while).
2. Ask them what they're working on, and what they enjoy about it, and what is hard (if they don't want to talk about it, leave them alone for a while).
3. Ask them if they'd mind a suggestion about what they're trying (if they don't want a suggestion, leave them alone for a while). This may also be in the form of a leading question.
EDIT:
Also, some of my sibling commenters and even my parent comment have language that suggests some grumpiness over gender or feminism or whatever.
If you're there to help with tech, none of that matters, so don't bring it up. Just ignore it and focus on the tech--doing anything else is, by definition, being distracting.
Furthermore, complaining about it just makes you look silly.
Take at your statement, and pretend a frustrated/easily embarrassed/grumpy person is hearing it:
"You look like you could use some help" --> "You look like you don't know what you're doing/you look frustrated"
"I may be able to offer relevant expertise" --> "I assume that I both have something to offer and that you are having a problem of this particular way/shape/form"
"in the interests of addressing your apparent problem" --> "whatever you're working on is clearly broken, and needs fixing"
My formulation is intentionally very gentle and indirect, precisely to avoid any of the above misinterpretations. Working with people experienced in the field or who are known to be open to communication, obviously, we want to be more direct; for a novice, or for somebody who is looking for any excuse to take offense at what you're saying (perhaps because they're frustrated at their work and want to vent at something), it is useful to take a lighter touch.
"Hey, do you have a second to chat?" --> "I want to waste your time with spurious bullshit when you're clearly eyeball-deep in something."
Might I suggest a different formulation that presumes less about the subject? Or perhaps giving up entirely? Personally, I've accepted that there is not and cannot be any uniformly acceptable way to approach a stranger and offer assistance that does not risk backlash or misinterpretation.
spurious bullshit avoided, algorithm deployed successfully.
Communications failures combined with the human capacity for reinterpretation are a bottomless pit of potential badness.
Maybe I'm just more cynical about people than you.
"If I ask a woman in a hackerspace ``want to chat?'' then .... Jezebel will print horrible articles about men."
"If I don't talk to the woman in a hackerspace then..... .. .. I am a horrible misogynist (?) because I am not encouraging her."
From Wikipedia, "Splitting creates instability in relationships because one person can be viewed as either personified virtue or personified vice at different times, depending on whether they gratify the subject's needs or frustrate them. This, along with similar oscillations in the experience and appraisal of the self, leads to chaotic and unstable relationship patterns, identity diffusion, and mood swings." I think sometimes folks get too invested in how to talk to women in tech. Do your best and move on. No one is going to fix this problem individually, and heightening every interaction into a chance for a Jezebel article is counterproductive. Not unless you are Iggy Azalea are you going to get Jezebel hate every time you move, so relax a little!
Have you considered the possibility that there's a real state of fear surrounding these topics? It renders everything toxic and every interaction becomes a minefield. It's not a healthy state of affairs, and it's not one in which telling people to do their best and move on offer is a sufficient response. It comes across as utterly lacking in empathy.
Now, I come from a European country, where things like wolf-whistling at a pretty woman on the street is an unthinkable act for a sane, sober man. And I sincerely believe that increasing, not reducing, the interactions between girls and boys, men and women, is the key to reducing gender inequality.
Historical analogy: do you want to go the Booker T. Washington route, and hope that there will be a Martin Luther King later on? Or do you go the MLK route straight away?
can you think of a way to have a free-for-all hackerspace where women are in the majority? because the dynamics are very different if you are not.
1. The dude in question would quietly work on his own project, and occasionally ask if anybody needed help, and otherwise be unobtrusive. This was generally the most helpful behavior.
2. The dude would (as an older techie, and an abrasive one at that!) hold court and fast-talk and denounce other languages and help-but-butt-in and be loud and act like he was some ancient wizened wizard handing down carefully guarded pearls of wisdom. This behavior was disruptive and annoyed everyone regardless of the practitioner.
3. The dude would kibbutz and babble with the women trying to work, and many of them would socialize instead of writing code. The dude was passionate and friendly and outspoken and not very knowledgeable about code or software engineering. But, they went to a lot of meetups, continually proclaimed their novice status, and thus they were able to perpetually distract attendees.
Of the three types, 2 & 3 were actually tied for obnoxiousness and toxicity.
~
If people want to learn a new thing, especially a somewhat introverted activity like development, I find it most helpful not to be super excited and energetic and scare them off. Shy new people will be turned off, unshy new people will feedback off of them and continue the group disruption. Calm, friendly, and helpful is the way to approach this, and without badgering to give assistance.
Further, talking about things not related to coding and development serves to undermine the learning and practice process for everyone. Things that fall into this category are: talking about your ex-spouse, talking about how hard it is to find a job, talking about how cool it is to be a minority in tech, talking about how hard it is to be a woman in tech, talking about how tech isn't something you grew up with, talking about how tech was something you grew up with, talking about the weather, trying to pick up men, trying to pick up women, talking about your children, talking about how great the last meetup was, talking about how great the next meetup will be, etc.
None of those are bad per se, but they distract and prevent people from getting maximum utility from the gathering. If they want to talk about non-tech things, they should do so elsewhere--if they want to reaffirm the industry biases against, say, women and technical ability, they should certainly be elsewhere.
I stopped attending these meetings after it was clear that there wasn't really anything of technical substance occurring there.
> Women and people of color join hackerspaces all the time ... “Our geek cred is constantly challenged or belittled ... some dude is going to come up to you and act like you need his expert lessons in how to hack.”
If "white dudes" are becoming more aware that women and minorities are getting into tech and wanting to get into tech, many of them will want to help in any way they can, including asking if you need help. Saying that this is belittling is saying that there is malicious intent, which is alienating to anyone who wants to help spread their knowledge to new people.
I have the ability to tell the difference when someone is treating me a certain way because I am a newbie or because I am a woman.
It's incredibly insulting that every time this is brought up it's written off as women not understanding basic human interaction.
But that's the whole point: it's hard to tell! Of course the classification is easy at the end points (super helpful guy vs total arrogant jerk) but towards the mean the probability of false alarm is much larger. Geeks are a diverse bunch, it may just be that the guy is from another country where interactions are different or it may be just that he's a bit awkward initially because he does not interact with women daily (it happens).
I think the correct approach is to give them the benefit of doubt for a while before labeling them as dudes or whatever. Isn't that the golden rule?
I am an awkward person with social anxiety. The idea that women like myself aren't already doing that is part of the absurdity.
I don't think it stems from ignorance so much as forced, willful ignorance to reinforce your own cognitive biases.
It borders on delusion if you get offended by a friendly, non-threatening gesture in a cooperative environment.
If I was looking for something to get offended about I wouldn't hide behind male usernames on Stackoverflow, my local user groups, Hackernews (obviously not this account) and Github to avoid conflict. I just want to be a normal part of tech communities, on and offline.
It's absurd that you can write off the large portion of women who say there's a problem because you don't want to examine you're own internal biases.
Clearly, not all women are looking for something to be outraged about. However, there is a vocal minority that loudly takes offense at friendly gestures, like in this particular instance. That's what I take issue with.
> If I was looking for something to get offended about I wouldn't hide behind male usernames on Stackoverflow, my local user groups, Hackernews (obviously not this account) and Github to avoid conflict. I just want to be a normal part of tech communities, on and offline.
That's more of a consequence of the erosion of anonymity in the Internet, than you being a woman.
> It's absurd that you can write off the large portion of women who say there's a problem because you don't want to examine you're own internal biases.
Large portion of women according to whom? I'm not writing off anybody either, I'm asking people to critically examine a concept and judge for themselves. I think you ought to think for yourself a little bit more, onee-sama.
No it's a consequence of men seeking out my social profiles on other sites and offering to give me "extra help". Also dick pics.
>I'm asking people to critically examine a concept and judge for themselves
That's exactly what you're being asked to do. Women in the spaces, including myself, aren't looking for things to be angry about, we are looking for acceptance and the ability to enjoy our hobbies/passions and professions in peace. Insisting that everything is just a misunderstood friendly gesture is ridiculous and part of the larger culture that make certain groups of people feel unwelcome in tech.
And once again, why do you think that women haven't already examined this and realized that the interactions they have in certain environments are something beyond needing a little understanding? It's not like women walking into hackerspaces haven't been around nerdy, awkward men before- half of them are nerdy, awkward women.
Implying there's a simple solution that is summed up as "women don't understand!" is ridiculous.
Are you really suggesting that because these women have a hard time integrating in communal environments, that it means all women have problems integrating?
Constantly being irritated with how everyone interacts with you is personality trait, found in any race, gender, orientation, or identity. It's not genetic. I'm not sure why you're saying these people speak for all women.
On the other side, I am maybe a bit too conscious about these things. Sometimes it is very hard to judge someones skill level. There are a lot of people who somehow manage as programmers without knowing even the most basic things. I find it often hard to explain these basic things to them without seeming like an arrogant showoff.
When these things are brought up it's not to say only women have to deal with these things- we get to deal with all the regular bullshit and a little extra.
Like a an extra layer on a bullshit cake.
What does it mean to bring it up in the context of this article, other than merge all people with skin spectral signature falling in a cluster. But then there's this idea: http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/06/16/how-fluid-is.... You can't have it both ways.
I'm not "white", I'm not a "dude" and I hate to be labeled as such, probably as much as these people hate to be treated as clueless just because they are women. Unfortunately, it's a sad fact that people who are on the receiving end of abuse usually practice it themselves when they get a chance.
So... the author claims she doesn't like any special treatment that women sometimes get... but also doesn't want to be like a common, boring, ordinary "white dude"?
For instance, if a man tells his barber "just a regular cut", he may be described as a "dude". On the other hand, if he shaves his hair into a mohawk and dyes it hot-pink, he loses his dudehood and becomes an individual.
Whenever you hear somebody use the word "dude" in a tone that makes it sound disparaging, what they are basically telling you is "I am bothered by my perception that this man conforms."
But why keep the discussion philosophical, after all a word's meaning is its use, right? As a simplistic experiment google "geek dude" and "geek" and look at the image results to try to figure out what the extra dude adds.
Stereotypes, basically. Visuals/fashion play a very large role, as you can see in those google queries.
How they interact with others also is a factor. In my experience, shy people are less likely to be considered "dudes", while extroverts are much more likely to get the label.
Here's one such example I've personally witnessed:
"Maybe you should consider that your life choices have consequences."
"Is that a threat? Because I can go get the police right now."
Then maybe we should defer to the people directly involved. I mean, look. If these women say they feel uncomfortable at male-dominated hackerspaces, is it really such a stretch to believe that it's becuase they actually feel uncomfortable at male-dominated hackerspaces?
There's no harm here. Let them hack where they want to. Our job as the dominant members of the subculture is just to shut up about it and not be thin-skinned nutjobs.
No matter how its implemented or who implements it, its always ugly, and frankly not very polite.
I think everyone agrees no matter how uncouth and uncivilized a tourist acts, its not acceptable for the local thugs to intimidate the tourists, two wrongs never make a right. That has to be tempered with endless propaganda of "I visited Mexico, drank the water and got the runs, now everyone must feel sorry for me and join me in the two minutes hate for Mexico" isn't frankly an interesting story. No, I don't have to care.
Another excellent example is how do people respond when they go to the zoo and the elephant exhibit is overflowing with stinky poo? Whats most likely to result in the long run in non-smelly elephant exhibit? Compare and contrast with what feels better on the internet, whats a trendy and popular behavior to lash back?
Also gay guys usually don't just hit on everyone because at least they usually have the grace to know when it's appropriate and when it's not and also when it might be reciprocal (wanted) and when not.
Well, then I imagine hack spaces a bit differently. For me, anything I do in my free time isn't work, it's fun. Socializing. And a natural part of socializing is forming relationships. Friendships, romantic relationships, ... In any case, I'd consider it much preferable to try and meet a soulmate at a common hobby, rather than at a bar. Applies to everyone, not just women, of course.
> Also gay guys usually don't just hit on everyone because at least they usually have the grace to know when it's appropriate and when it's not and also when it might be reciprocal (wanted) and when not.
That's quite a generalization, a pretty offensive at that. Obviously, straight guys are all scary and creepy, while gay guys are nice and tender and soft!
Small correction: person involved. You rarely get to hear the others' opinion or viewpoint on the matter.
Which brings us back to "they're possibly interpreting a friendly tone as a condescending tone". Of course they'll feel unsafe when they see danger everywhere because they've conditioned themselves to be victims and everyone else a possible aggressor. Or maybe the other person is an asshole and they are 100% verified. Without seeing it happen or having an unbiased viewpoint there is no way to know for sure.
Deferring to a possibly biased viewpoint is not the answer. Here's why:
I keep the door open for absolutely everyone if they're within 8-10ft of the door without discrimination of age, sex, gender, religion, sexual orientation, height, weight, body shape, deformities, mental ability, physical ability, which direction they are walking, whether they are wearing socks with sandals or slippers, if they are accompanied by someone else or alone, or any other reason you could possibly think of to discriminate against holding the door open for someone.
All it takes is a single woman thinking I'm being chivalrous (which is now "benevolent sexism") to hate me for all of eternity because I'm a sexist misogynist because I happened to hold the door open for her and her cognitive bias and victim mentality instantly believes I only held the door open for her because she's a woman!
Would you accept her biased and negative viewpoint at face value? Rhetorical question: you've already stated your belief that we should defer to the person involved. Which turns her into a victim and me into a sexist. For no reason
Now, I could stop holding doors open for everyone, but I know I would eventually get flak for not holding a door open for a woman and she'll assume I didn't hold the door open for her because of her gender.
I'll await an article in coming years with the following complaint:
"This hackerspace is unfriendly, nobody is willing to help me or share information. People keep to themselves and don't socialize at all. Can't they see I'm having troubles soldering these wires together? Its no wonder women don't want to be here. Everyone's a coldhearted asshole."
On the internet sometimes it feels pretty even though...
Point being, a person telling a story several times removed probably shouldn't be treated as The Source Of Revealed Truth. There's too much opportunity for reinterpretation and slanting, accidental or otherwise.
TechShop itself has many women members and employees. But that's in decline. TechShop used to let their employees take any class they wanted for free, and women were getting jobs there and learning all the machines. Their main welding instructor was a woman, and a cynical punker with colored hair overhauled the milling machines. Now TechShop charges their employees for classes and they have to take them on their own time. The result is receptionists at tool checkout who don't even know what the tools look like.
Remember that Wozniak tinkered with hardware for fun and his day job at HP. Such things were possible then, but before that there was always clubs for engineers and creatives of all kinds. We often ignore history when we create these kinds of articles, because writing things in the context of history is hard and doesn't get as many clicks if you don't put more effort into it. I find this phenomenon deeply interesting, as we'd do much better as a species if we learned historical contexts for a lot of things we think are new and powerful ideas.
tl;dr: No, startup culture is a niche extension of hackerspaces. Not the other way around.
"Startup culture" is purely an invention of "How do I build a business with no resources"? Hackerspaces are the continuation of HAM radio clubs and electronics clubs and engineers bullshitting at bars and people letting folks goof around with their broken television sets and kids goofing around on BBS.
None of that has anything to do with startups--to say otherwise is pretty much just astroturfing.
Formal hackerspaces (e.g. have a building, have staff, have policies) are [potentially non-profit] startups themselves.
Yet the extension of startup culture is true in a sense of massive participant demographic overlap. Mostly white, highly educated, male, generally hands-off technical background, very young and inexperienced, generally far above median income, overachiever in academic or vocational or artistic or perhaps all three, anti-individualist because its a socializing space, overwhelmingly urban extroverts... A bunch of socializing young java programmers aspiring to learn how to solder could be a startup staff or could be a hackerspace, depending on where they're sitting and who's paying the rent at that instant.
Seriously? "The bad white cis-hetero male offers us his help", patriarchy right?
This is ridiculous, really stop it...
BubbleSort: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/sailorhg/bubblesort-com...
Or check out Natalie Freed's work in electronics, bookbinding, and art: http://www.nataliefreed.com/projects/
Or Jayne Vidheecharoen's awesome projects and her Appaloosa kit for kids learning mobile app programming, http://seejayne.com/
That is just off the top of my head! So much skill, idealism, and energy, combined with hard work! We have many members who are also part of TechShop, Noisebridge, work in tech, in startups, teach coding to wide audiences, and so on. DU and the other hackerspaces centered on women are worthy of celebrating! Our motivation is also very much that we want to support each other so that we feel able to stay in our various fields, and continue exploring our hacking and making arts.
So many talented women have gathered at the space and want to support each others' work. That's what should be highlighted.
I'll stop now :) Really, it's nice, though.
I sat behind a desk and waited for the students to come to me to ask questions or ask for help. I wasn't allowed to go up to the students and ask them if they needed help.
I handed out floppy disks, and one of them logged into the Novell Network on a PC or PS/2 DOS machine. We had software on the Novell server and on floppy disks.
I debugged programs too, we had a debugger for that but when she couldn't figure something out or it was in a language she didn't know they sent the students to me to figure it out. Lady who was a debugger eventually took over the department. She taught me logical methods when I was a student there. I was let go in 1992 because I graduated (I went half-time and worked half-time there, had to be a student to keep the job).
We had women and minorities as well in the computer lab, I helped everyone equally. We didn't seem to have the issues that exists today in hacker spaces with feminists. I don't know what has changed since 1992.
What I do know is that not knowing feminism or gender studies terms can make one look like a jerk or people can take things the wrong way. For example transgender people, if you don't know to call a transgender woman as a she or her and respect that she has an identity as a woman you could get into a lot of trouble. The slightest thing you say can be taken out of context and found as offensive. For example we had a professor who told a woman that her method for solving a problem was 'bush league' and that his method was a much better one. He was talking about baseball but the woman complained he was talking about female parts and so he got into trouble for sexual harassment.
Summed it up pretty well.