If women really want people to be know them as women then they should make it clear that they are. Hell, the suffragettes persevered through much worse than creepy internet comments.
>Most of the time people use "he" when they don't know the gender of the author. It's not assuming the author is a man.
That's exactly what it's assuming. Why else would you "default" to "he" instead of "she"? Because you assume the author to be a man.
And what the hell is the suffragettes comment supposed to mean? In one sentence you managed to trivialize the way women are treated often in this industry and basically say the equivalent of "They've had it worse, so who cares".
Here's a summary of what I wrote.
1. Sometimes people use "he" to refer to unknown gender.
2. Men outnumber women in tech
3. Men make assumptions because they outnumber women.
4. If women want to make it clear that they are not second-class citizens, they should correct these assumptions.
5. The author of this article feels that if they do (4) they are discriminated against in the form of inappropriate comments etc.
6. I say so what, it's better in the long run.
2. Men outnumber women in tech, making it all the more important not to further alienate the women left.
3. Men make assumptions and then get super-defensive when it is pointed out that their assumptions are wrong.
4. Women attempting to correct those assumptions are told that men's assumptions aren't men's responsibility and women must take responsibility for what random men happen to think.
4.A. Those same men go on to whine about things that are only true in their assumption-filled heads and have no connection to reality. When called on it, they blame women through convoluted logic of refusing to take responsibility for their own actions.
5. The original author reports that sometimes those defensive reactions include harassment, which makes it even less fair to put the entire onus on women who not only are being asked to put in extra effort, but they are also subject to punishment for having done so.
6. Apparently verroq somehow thinks this double standard is fair and "better in the long run", probably because what he means it "it's better for me as a dude, since I don't have to do any work and can keep irrationally blaming women for my failings."
>6. Apparently verroq somehow thinks this double standard is fair and "better in the long run", probably because what he means it "it's better for me as a dude, since I don't have to do any work and can keep irrationally blaming women for my failings."
I said women should speak out against this double standard, even if they get hit with some personal attacks. I like the way you twisted my words to suit your self-righteous indignation.
Sure, you may call me naive to suggest the obvious solution, but do you have any evidence that it won't work?
Do you understand how absurd the position that you've backed yourself into sounds? The people perpetuating the problem shouldn't be part of the solution or discussion? Women should speak up for themselves? Oh really, you mean like the article we're discussing.
Maybe if slaves had just fought harder, right, then we wouldn't have had to help them out?
I never said this. You made it up. Women standing up for themselves is not mutually exclusive to stamping down on asshats.
Funnily enough though, I figured you'd counter with something as vapid and baseless as
>Maybe if slaves had just fought harder, right, then we wouldn't have had to help them out?
You say it like no slave uprisings ever erupted in the course of history. But this is a strawman, unless women are slaves in our society. Some discrimination in tech hardly equates to a life of servitude.
I mean, you don't even understand how offensive it is to sit there and say "I don't care if they're bullied and harassed, they should do it because they should speak up for themselves".
Is that your response to all issues? Gay kids in school should learn to fight their bullies to affect change? Sure, it's a nice idea, I'm sure everyone on HN would love for everyone to feel so empowered, but you must be in one-helluva privileged class to sit in your armchair and hand out recommendations like that without any acknowledge of the personal implications. Again, precisely as the article talks about.
Your posts read, one after another, as someone who is really trying to say "Eh, it's not an issue [for me], if you think it is, you go do something about it".
Then you missed the entire point of the article, or you're more naive than I could have guessed. Again, you act as if "revealing that she is a woman" is without consequence. Or else your "encouragement" is just completely empty and still has no appreciation for the abuse that often results from such a revelation. (For the third time, as the article talks about).
>I also find your "women must be helped" attitude offensive.
If that's what you took away, you haven't been paying a single bit of attention. How many times have I specifically talked about trying to address how men's actions have affected women in tech. Or are you really implying that "We should evaluate how we alienate women" to be "all women are helpless".
I find that gross misrepresentation to be offensive and dishonest.
You can't have your cake and eat it too. There has to be sacrifices for the long run.
>How many times have I specifically talked about trying to address how men's actions have affected women in tech. Or are you really implying that "We should evaluate how we alienate women" to be "all women are helpless".
So buried inside all the cynicism and angst this was you were trying to articulate?
As for your vapid White Knight accusation, I'm not speaking up for women, I'm speaking up for myself against your illogical assertions. Lack of reason offends me. Women are welcome to do whatever they want and they certainly don't need you telling them they are Doing It Wrong.
I believe women should be welcome to highlight their gender or not, because in neither case does their behavior directly hurt me so it's none of my business or yours. I do think men demanding that they do one or the other are way out of line, though, and people taking that as an excuse for why they ignore their existence are just acting scummy.
The obvious solution is for men to stop assuming everyone is male. That, in fact, has nothing to do with women at all and isn't their problem to solve.
Alternatively, instead of requiring every post to be metaphorically coded pink or blue, we could all stop assuming any post not so labeled was written by a man. Your solution requires women to do irrelevant work so that we can continue assuming male-as-default while being wrong less of the time. My solution requires a minor shift in attitude, equally imposed on everyone, that would lead us to be wrong none of the time.
Actually, there is a third option that someone proposed below: we could start assuming every technical blog author was female unless we bothered to find out otherwise and use "she" as the default pronoun.
I can say both from experience and personal perspective that, especially in America, it is a cultural norm to use "he" as a gender-neutral, non-normative pronoun. "They" sounds both awkward and invalid since it is taught as a plural pronoun.
I grew up in the Pacific Northwest, and this is the way I and everyone around me spoke. We never used "he" exclusively as a male pronoun, especially when gender was indeterminate. Some people would correct themselves by saying, "He ... or she..." I myself have spent years training myself to use "they" instead of "he," and I still catch myself using "he" when I clearly mean to use a gender-neutral pronoun.
Please do not put words in people's mouths and assume that when we use "he" it means we think it's a man. Our subculture is different from your own. Our upbringing is different from yours. It is a fallacy to assume otherwise.
Not everyone is a backward sexist.
It has been shown in German and Russian that the gender of inanimate nouns changes how people respond to them. Why do you think that wouldn't be true of referring to everyone as male?