Hacker News Reader

Comment by cromwellian | Hacker News Reader

It's really quite ridiculous, because if you watch some of her videos where she's doing a build, it's obvious she's doing all the cutting, soldering, drilling, etc

But more then that, if you watch videos where she is being interviewed talking about being a Maker (e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcnChnrHwXg) she talks just like a real hacker. She uses the exact terminology and process you'd expect, knowing you're not an expert in something, but just scraping a whole bunch of different other projects that other people contributed and made tutorials on, and tweaking them and combining them to make it your own.

It's like this CEO didn't spend even 10 minutes watching her videos and just decided to believe a conspiracy theory.

View on HN

The problem I have with this woman is that she actually demeans women. There is no way I would have my little girl watch her videos as a role model. The entire thing is plain stupid.

I would have exactly the same reaction if we were talking about a guy going around town in tight fitting speedo's doing technology projects and interviews. Ridiculous. Stupid. Demeaning.

I suspect that because she is a woman I am not allowed to object to her walking around nearly naked, nipples showing through nearly see-through clothing, nearly all of her ass out there to behold, etc. I, personally, find it disgusting and as far from role model behavior as one can get. I am not a prude by any measure.

She does nothing for women other than to propose that to be accepted in technology you have to walk around showing your tits and ass in a ridiculous outfit that paints you as a sex toy and, yes, know your shit too. I find that repugnant. Just as I would for a man who might behave behaving similarly.

Raise your hand if this is what you want to teach your little girls. Exactly.

You're completely missing the point.

Not everyone has to be a role model for your little kid.

I don't want my kid to hear people swearing, but I'm not going to slander Linus Torvalds for doing so. I'm not stupid enough to believe that just because someone is crass they can't possibly be a good maker/developer/engineer/etc.

The part you guys are missing in my comment is that I said this is the problem "I" have with this woman.

I am not trying to pass judgement for all of humanity here. If you are OK watching videos of a nearly naked woman playing with tech and think that's great for women and humanity, so be it. I happen to thing it's disgusting.

All I can speak for is myself. I see this person as a clown who demeans every single female engineer I have every worked with or hired. She might as well be doing soft porn videos and make more money, she ain't too far from that.

Because of that I can't respect what she is doing.

Do we really want to portray women in tech this way? Really?

At one end of the spectrum people are up in arms about politicians objectifying women (and worst) and meanwhile, on the tech side of things we are OK with a woman walking around with tits and ass hanging out there?

Is the tech community OK with women being portrayed this way? I am not. Definitely not. If you defend her you are defending the objectification of women. Which is shameful.

Sorry, this is disgusting to me.

I look at it this way. I wouldn't recommend it, because society still discriminates against you based on how you look and dress. I mean, if you show up at a job interview with 98% of your body tattooed you're also going to face bias.

Conformity in a way increases opportunity. On the other hand, she's a transhumanist, so she probably believes all of these rules and customs are pretty primitive and totally changeable. I mean, who says you ever have to wear clothes if you're in a warm climate? Who says our genitals shouldn't be seen? These are all developed customs and specific to each society. She's deliberately breaking the mold and refusing to be shamed.

I'm ok with people portraying themselves however they want to portray themselves. I can make a rational argument for "playing it safe" and being conservative, then again, when you're 70 years old and lived a life of conformity, maybe you'll regret you didn't live life openly and flamboyantly like she does.

She's not supposed to be a role model for you to show to your little girl, or took aesthetically comfortable for you, or to be an example of how women should or not be accepted in technology.

She is not yours - nor even other women's - servant.

Why would anyone question that she is a real person? If you like her content, watch it. If you don't, leave. What's wrong with being an anonymous creator?

Because she doesn't fit your stereotype of what a maker looks like, and that challenge to your preconceptions can either be accepted or rejected. Some percentage of people will reject the challenge, and come to the conclusion that this person is not who they claim to be.

In short: sexism.

For further reading, see criticism of the "fake geek girl" meme.

I remember reading a study that posited low status men tended toward misogyny when they felt threatened by the skill of women they were competing against, and this was the first thing that came to mind as I was reading over this whole saga.

That may be true, but:

> the negative impact of my tweets was amplified by the fact that I, a white, Western, male CEO of a key company in the Maker community

This guy was not low status by any definition.

Just 'cause he's a CEO, doesn't mean he's not insecure and misogynistic...

Most of the comments here reference the fact that her skill is self evident. He could easily have felt threatened by her technical skill, and the fact he couldn’t plainly see it as other commenters did adds credence to his own deficit of technical ability.

The fact that he maintained a sustained slander campaign when he ostensibly had other priorities implies he felt that ‘exposing’ her became important to him, again a trait of insecure, low status individuals.

Replace "low status" with "insecure" as many high-status men have proven otherwise

Or so you would think, but as I recall her biggest detractors were SJWs complaining about how much skin she was showing. The whole idea of her being just a facade for some male engineer was driven by the feminist notion of "male gaze". By contrast, the "misogynistic nerd" crowd (Gamergaters and the like) were quite supportive of her.

Examples?

I'm skeptical. All the high level summaries imply that most of the pre-Dougherty "fake" theories came from anonymous redditors. How do you know that was the "SJW" set?

A conspiracy theory from _reddit_, no less. Quite apart from anything else, this makes him come across as astonishingly gullible.

> didn't spend even 10 minutes ... just decided to believe a conspiracy theory.

Isn't this what the Internet is all about?

what is a Maker?

someone who makes things

It's a made up term. Titles are suppose to be specific. I made a nice dinner yesterday myself. Guess I'm a maker too(no recipe used,original as well!)

Since they are using "maker" to describe persons that are engineering electronics related work,why not just call themselves "electronics engineer"?

Edit: seems I stepped on toes with my comment,I don't know how else to react to a term like "maker". Could have been less sarcastic but I'll eat up the downvotes and maintain what small amount of common sense I have.

Every term is made up. That’s how language works.

When you describe what you do with a term (made up or not),that term should at the very least give your audience some idea of what you do.

Everyone is a maker. The point of a language is to communicate information,not to obscure it. Would it be a proper use of language if a programmer called himself a "writer"? After all he is writing. "programmer" or "software developer" is used to distinguish what type of writing he/she works with for a living.

Sorry if that offended you,but from my perspective,it just does not communicate the nature of their work efficiently.

I’m not offended, I just thought that was a really silly criticism.

Lack of specificity is a much better one.

Fair enough. This is why I would not ever be able to keep a silicon valley job.

Sure language is made up,but isn't an obstacle to clear communication bad language?

I find it hard to accept unreasonable logic(even the popular and trendy kind).

"Maker" refers to an entire tinkering movement. The projects are often electronics-related, but not always. And in any case, a "maker" generally isn't performing "engineering" in anything but the loosest sense (kind of like the criticism of most "software engineers" not performing "engineering").

> Would it be a proper use of language if a programmer called himself a "writer"?

No, because that would be confusing; no one uses "writer" in that way without extra explanation. In contrast, "maker" is used to describe a tinkerer who builds designs and/or builds projects, often reusing ideas from other makers. It's "proper use of language" not because it makes sense, but because that's how people use it.

I'm not sure that "writer," or even "fiction writer," the job title shared by James Joyce and Stan Lee and William S. Burroughs and J.K. Rowling and Dr. Seuss and Toni Morrison and The Coen Brothers, is especially descriptive.

One of the things about "maker" is that in many ways it's a social descriptor - it almost means "someone who might read Make magazine". After all, it covers a huge variety of things. Someone who's into amateur electronics but is not a radio ham. Someone who dabbles in programming, does a bit of soldering, stitching, 3D printing, carpentry etc. Not someone who specialises in a particular craft. Also not an "artist" as traditionally construed (artist is itself a social descriptor), even though many of the pieces made could be considered art.

I think "maker"/DIY go hand in hand - and are probably most useful as umbrella terms for people who genuinely enjoy tinkering and enjoy experiencing learning and experimenting with new physical skills.

So, yeah, "DIY dinner" does sound a bit silly. But, as someone who has done amateur shoe modification - I would never call myself a cobbler. A maker? Sure.

I sympathize a bit with your criticism of the term, because I've thought long and hard about whether or not some new terminology is coined or supported by men when they get into a hobby which is traditionally practiced by women.

eg, "crafting" is a well established word, but seems avoided by men, and DIY is an easy substitute, eg "DIY foam halloween costume"

I first noticed this when I got a sewing machine, and started to frequent DIY camping gear/hammock forums. There's an obnoxious habit around those parts to not even call a sewing machine a sewing machine - it's a "thread injector." It drives me up the wall, it seems so blatantly sexist.

It doesn’t matter that it’s made up. What matters is that the word refers to a category of entities in the real world that it’s useful for us to be able to distinguish and refer to.

Think "hacker" except with the physical world.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maker_culture

Reply on news.ycombinator.com