Hacker News Reader

Comment by officemonkey | Hacker News Reader

That would be effective if programming was a solo activity. I suppose there are niches where that is so (eg: the majority of solo web-designers I know are female.)

But most programming jobs happen in companies (even if that "company" is virtual, like an open source project.) Look around your office. What's the prevalent culture? How accepting are you of people of other races, nationalities, sexes, sexual orientation? Which colleges and universities are represented?

Now, it's okay if you're successful and have a limited culture, but at least own up to your lack of diversity.

(and by "you" I mean the generic you, not "you" specifically altero.)

View on HN

I was in a dev shop for the last 6 years -- we had everything from no degree to PhD's. Eurpoeans, Eurasians, Indians, Caribbean and Americans. 20-30% women, and from 23 to 45 years old.

I know a lot of places that look like this.

I have no doubt the "bro culture" exists, but I think its prevalence is

1. In older (employee age wise) shops where, in those age groups, women simply hadn't been studying CS. 2. in very young startup environments where a team is likely to be a group of friends, vs. an externally sourced, interviewed workforce.

I don't think that the demographics of SV / SF are necessarily demonstrative of the industry as a whole.

My cofounder is women, no employees yet. My last team had 40% woman, some developers, one manager, two sysops. Team was distributed so most people in Europe, some in Southern America, about 30% in India. Questions about sexual orientation are not appropriated at my workplace.

Any more questions?

What post are you replying to?

I am arguing that places like "I do not hire woman because they would not go rock climbing with me" are just tiny fragment of huge industry.

"Questions about sexual orientation are not appropriated at my workplace."

Really? Do you fire me if I say 'my wife really likes that show, but I haven't gotten in to it"?

If someone wants to keep their sexual orientation private, that is absolutely their right, but people do talk about their lives. If you say "don't talk about sexual orientation" you're effectively saying "straight people get to be out, but gay folks stay in the closet."

I hope and kinda suspect that what you really mean is that if someone doesn't say something that indicates their orientation, it's no one else's business. That's certainly a necessary attitude.

But you also need to understand that most straight people are "out" by default, without ever thinking about it. And it needs to be understand that gay and lesbian employees are equally free to be open about their significant others (not sex itself--that's a different topic).

> my wife really likes that show, but I haven't gotten in to it

It is not a question.

In many countries it is illegal to ask question about sexual orientation, religion, marital status, age or even race. Assumption is that such information could be only used for discrimination. If someone would be compiling list of gays at my old workplace, I would probably call the police.

Disclosing sexual orientation to close colleagues after couple of weeks is fine. Scarfs and other sings are also fine. Proactive disclosure at inappropriate moment (job interview) would be probably interpreted as harassment (hitting on someone), same way as saying to woman "I am straight". People who organize gay parades etc.. are perceived as extremists who milk public budget.

I hope I explained it well without sounding homophobic.

I'm not talking about asking questions. Surely you shouldn't ask questions that could be perceived as discriminatory.

My point is that since ordinary human conduct in a professional environment lets straight people reveal their orientation, the same treatment should be expected for gay and lesbian folks, and the expected reaction should be complete understanding and professionalism.

You're right that it will normally not come up in a job interview.

"People who organize gay parades etc.. are perceived as extremists who milk public budget." Not quite sure what this means, but it sounds suspect.

> I hope and kinda suspect that what you really mean is that if someone doesn't say something that indicates their orientation, it's no one else's business. That's certainly a necessary attitude.

Yes, I think we can leave at here.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com