No - it's saying don't extrapolate your personal experiences to an entire industry. That's not that crazy.
Hey wait. It IS those things. Gosh maybe we should listen then?
This urge to tell people anecdotes are not data is very very stale, when it comes to this topic. We have data and it's consistent with this anecdote. A woman being harassed in the workplace appears to be plausible and backed by data.
So why does anyone feel like immediately posting a not-all-tech-orgs helps anyone buy the tech org you're representing?
The story wasn't "I almost quit my job" - the story was "I almost quit tech." If you want to keep generalizing - we can keep going to "I almost quit modern cities and went off to live as a hermit."
I think it's important to share her story. However, it's more powerful when people don't overreach, and talk about their specific situation and how it had specific instances & issues because it allows people to understand, empathize & change things that are within their circle of influence.
Saying "tech" has a problem is easy to say, but it doesn't actually provide any actionable insight on what to do about it.
I'm just confused, because this seems like such an obvious statement. Of course not every workplace is this bad. Why does that have to be said here?
The author seems to convey a frustration with what she feels is an industy-level problem. Given the events of the last 5 years and the general statistics for women in tech, maybe that's not unreasonable.
Both your point and hers can coexist in the same narrative. It's just that your point seems a bit like you're mad the article wasn't copy-edited to avoid pedantic objections about implicit quantification.
I'm all about holding people accountable - but in order to do that you have to be specific about who is causing the issue & what they're doing.
Have a good day.
I don't think the author is extrapolating her personal experience to the industry. Her experience is a personal example of a trend she had previously studied.