
My experiences at a woman's programming workshop - Swizec
http://blog.emacsen.net/blog/2012/06/07/observations-from-a-python-workshop/?repost
======
jellicle
That's not a call for single-sex education. That's a call for good teachers
who are willing to crack down on the class clown. There's always a class
clown, and he always needs to be cracked down upon for the good of the class.
This is teaching 101. Sorry you didn't have a good teacher.

>Dave was really excited by the class, and, like me and the other volunteers,
had a lot of experience with Python.

Sounds like Dave was in the wrong class and should have been told so.

>I wondered afterwards why this extremely competent woman in her 20s would
react this way after clearly mastering the material.

That's a learned technique for getting assistance. It worked on you, didn't
it?

~~~
mrleinad
> That's a learned technique for getting assistance. It worked on you, didn't
> it?

I was going to point out the same thing. A women playing dumb to get help from
a man, is not uncommon at all.

~~~
rmc
Yeah! Those sneaky women! All of em will con you and all us men into helping
them. Sneaky deceitful women.</sarcasm>

And people wonder why women don't like male dominated tech events

~~~
sliverstorm
The dynamic is an important consideration, like it or not. Do you think a
woman would play dumb, bat her eyelashes and flip her hair (embellishing)
while asking for help if her instructor was a woman?

~~~
bct
> [...] play dumb, bat her eyelashes and flip her hair [...]

The fact that you frame it in such a stereotypical way speaks volumes about
the attitudes at work here.

~~~
sliverstorm
I am inferring based on past experiences. I don't know for sure what happened,
I freely admit that.

------
ClHans
Dear HNers,

Gender bias is a touchy subject in these tech blogs and the responses to this
(yet another) article are, predictably, dismissive. It was one person's fault,
there's no widespread gender bias, the instructor should have things
differently, someone has seen women be jerks too, etc.

So while there really does seem to be a measurable, observable difference in
gender involvement in computing (e.g. in CS enrollments, in working in the
industry, etc), these anecdotes always get tossed as not significant.

So what I'm wondering, and this is an open question to everyone here: would
anything convince you, personally, that gender bias is real, or has a
significant measurable effect, or is a problem? Would it take a certain kind
of experiment? Some kind of data or analysis? (Or is the answer, "it's not a
problem"?) Like, what sorts of articles would people _not_ jump on the
bandwagon to tear to shreds?

best,

~~~
overgard
Well; it would take more than anecdotal evidence for one thing. It's very easy
for sensitive issues to be dominated by emotional anecdotes, to the point
where only group think is tolerated and any sort of valid challenge is
labeled. I often wish as a community we could use Crocker's rules (
<http://wiki.lesswrong.com/wiki/Crocker%27s_rules> ) for this kind of thing.
It would make for more interesting discussions.

Anyway, I don't think people pick apart these blog posts because they're
unwilling to accept there's a "gender bias" (whatever that actually means).
Rather they pick these posts apart because there are very obvious holes in the
original posts' reasoning. In this case, it's that because some guy was
vaguely an overcompetitive jerk, somehow that means we need to isolate the
sexes. Because apparently women are incapable of being overcompetitive jerks,
and it (obviously) has to be a male/female dynamic.

That's kind of a leap!

Here's the other thing, and this is kind of a tangent, but a theme I see with
a lot of these blog posts isn't that someone was actively hostile, but rather,
that someone did something "offensive". With "offensive" ranging from things
that are obviously very unprofessional to incredibly tame things that someone
just didn't like. And to that I'd just say this: its your choice to be
offended by things. And its your choice how you react to that. I've been
"offended" by many things other programmers have said, but I don't go "well
programming isn't for me!". I just think less of those people. I don't think
female sensibilities are so frail that they aren't by and large the same way.

~~~
whateverer
That was hilarious, man. Thanks for that.

Oh, wait, it was serious?!

Well now, how are you going to map this issue to something which isn't, in the
end, anecdotes, since it pertains to human emotional responses? Are you asking
those ethereal (probably fake, as you said, who even knows what this gender
bias thing means?) other people to come up with a scale where they have to put
it in 1-to-ten how belittled they felt?

Have you stopped to think of why these kinds of posts are held up to such
scrutiny in contrast to, say, posts about other, not-related to gender, and
thus mostly affecting men (this last point shouldn't need explanation),
matters? Like, bad experiences with VCs or age discrimination and some such?

I would hazard a guess that the distinction is not due to something very
rational, unless you get very cynical and paranoid.

Anyway...

> Because apparently women are incapable of being overcompetitive jerks, and
> it (obviously) has to be a male/female dynamic.

It sort of is if its impact is mostly on women, and the behavior is mostly
accused on men. Yes, this last point would require something more akin to
actual statistics to be turned into the reason for some sort of castigation on
men in general, but I haven't seen any of that as of now, really. Unless you
count people feeling personally attacked by the existence of this discussion,
of course.

> Here's the other thing, and this is kind of a tangent, but a theme I see
> with a lot of these blog posts isn't that someone was actively hostile, but
> rather, that someone did something "offensive". [...]

Well, we are quite glad that none of these problems affect you, but this
conversation wasn't about you in particular, was it?

------
vbtemp
Interesting article, overall. Something occurred to me though:

> "Dave expressed his enthusiasm for the material by asking a lot of very
> technical questions to the instructor. Largely, these questions seemed
> designed to show off his own knowledge, or to challenge the instructor. In
> other words, Dave was the jerk at the conference."

This isn't a male-only phenomenon. Whether it's philosophy classes, psychology
classes, or other courses with a significant female composition, this type of
behavior is not entirely absent among females either (I have distinct memories
of this in college). Granted it may be less common or less confrontational,
but it exists, and let's also not forget most women will acknowledge that they
can be quite vicious toward one another in office settings as well.

Think about the amount of women in law and medicine (I believe they are the
majority at this point). Do you think hot-shot male lawyers or med students
behave in significantly different ways than hot-shot male hackers? I doubt it.
Men are men; I'm sure in the courtroom, at university, or at the medical
conferences, or tech workshops, a minority of us men will exhibit this same
"jerk" behavior (i.e., challenging the lecturer, asking questions to show off,
etc...). In summary, jerk behavior does not sufficiently or completely explain
the lack of women in tech. It exists in most if not all professional fields,
even ones in which women are coming to dominate (which, hey, I think is
great).

------
irahul
> I saw Dave’s behavior as a challenge, a call to action. And it was at that
> moment that the gender difference became most apparent to me.

Oh, for fuck's sake, how is some Dave being jerk is making gender difference
apparent? The guy was at the wrong place, and was being a show-off. But no,
you must attribute it to his gender.

<edit> As pointed out by threads below, the author was talking about how the
room tuned out when Dave started derailing conversation, and he saw it as call
to arms. The author sees this as apparent gender difference - FWIW I don't
agree with his assessment. As long as we are talking anecdotes, I couldn't see
a clear patterns(based on gender or any other trait) in the reactions of the
people I know to this scenario.

I am leaving my incorrect comment as there are replies, and the replies will
become meaningless if I remove it. </edit>

> Looking at her screen, she’d made significant progress towards finishing the
> project, but when she asked me a question she giggled and told me she had no
> idea what the project was about, or what to do.

> Studies have shown that especially bright women have this reaction to
> difficult material and that women learning computer science do better in an
> single sex classroom (though those studies have critics).

I think you are better off not basing off your approach on some controversial
study. If you are compartmentalizing, no two students are same. And if you are
generalizing, I find it hard to believe that 3291805000 females of the world
show the same behavioral and learning traits. Unless you have proved it
otherwise, I would stick to a feedback based approach where I see how students
are coping up, and then introduce variations.

~~~
gphilip
>Oh, for fuck's sake, how is some Dave being jerk is making gender difference
apparent? >The guy was at the wrong place, and was being a show-off. >But no,
you must attribute it to his gender.

If you read the article again, you may find that the gender difference which
became apparent to the author has to do with the /response/ to Dave's
behaviour, and not with his behaviour /per se/.

Also, here is a (perhaps interesting) thought experiment: Among the folks you
know well enough, how many would care to respond to an opinion in a discussion
forum which starts off with the words "Oh, for fuck's sake" ? How do the women
fare in this count? Is there a gender difference?

~~~
Udo
Yes, it has to do with the response, but I can't agree with the main point of
it which is due to selection bias I think (not gender differences):

    
    
      To me, and I suspect most men, we’d see Dave’s behavior 
      as a call to arms. Dave was raising the stakes and even 
      though his behavior was clearly rude, it also demonstrated 
      that he had a mastery over the material.
    

If this is the core of the article's point, I don't agree with it. People such
as "Dave" waste everyone's time, it doesn't really matter what gender Dave and
his audience are. When I encounter a Dave, I don't see it as a pointless "call
to arms", I tune out and ultimately leave. I'm not wasting my time fighting
people like Dave. I don't like how the article implies this makes me less of a
man. It's simply good sense in my opinion not to waste your energy on trolls.

If there are groups where everyone feels challenged and is in a fighting mood
after seeing Dave in action, it's probably because everyone else already left
the room or had the sense not to come to the event in the first place.

~~~
lotharbot
I'm wondering if Dave was actually guilty of what he's been accused of, or if
his behavior was misinterpreted.

In college and grad school I was usually the guy asking advanced questions,
not because I was trying to show off or be a jerk, but because I was trying to
gain a particular level of mastery of the material, and the way I gain that
mastery is to ask questions during the process of absorbing the material. I
gain understanding of, say, a particular algorithm by asking if a particular
extension of that algorithm is appropriate.

This makes me wonder if others mistakenly viewed me as a troll, or felt like I
was dragging the classroom down, due to my learning style being something of
an outlier. (Being on the autism spectrum, if anyone tried to signal me about
this without being explicit, I would have missed it.)

~~~
1platypus
From what I understood, it seems like Dave wasn't asking questions to better
understand the material. His intent was to stump the instructor of the class,
validating his mastery of the material.

~~~
lotharbot
Are you making an independent observation (ie, you were at the workshop and
observed Dave) or repeating what was in the writeup?

Also, I'm genuinely curious: how do you tell the difference? What's the
difference between Dave's (presumed) "stump the instructor to validate ego"
questions and my "push the edges of my understanding, which may happen to
stump the instructor if they haven't thought about it, and which may confirm
to me that I've understood things correctly" questions?

~~~
droithomme
It sounds to me (someone with a fair amount of teaching experience) like Dave
was an enthusiastic student. Without seeing a transcript or video, it seems
more likely Dave had a lot of things he wasn't clear on regarding Python and
was excited to have a chance to ask an expert (the teacher) a lot of questions
to clarify his understanding.

In a basic intro class, this can be a problem because other students will
start to think they are in the wrong class and don't understand the material
and drop out! A common example is language classes. You have a college German
101 class and a bunch of people show up that are native German speakers
looking to get an easy A. Or they had 3 years in high school, or lived there a
while with their military parents on base, and are looking for a refresher and
thought 101 was a good place.

If the teacher lets these students (who are not jerks, bullies or douches any
more than I think this Dave was) proceed at their own pace, then the rest of
the students will leave in frustration. That happens a lot and the teachers
often like it because then they can teach at a more fun higher level with
students who already know the material. But it's not fair to the actual intro
students.

This also happens a lot in engineering classes where schools pretty much have
to assume students have learned basic programming, soldering, and electricity
on their own before enrolling in engineering school. In this case it is
probably best to let the students who were never interested enough in the
topic to study it previously, just drop out.

In this particular case I agree with the suggestion made here by another that
students be put into basic/advanced tracks or Dave be encouraged to take
another class. Another route to take, which is what I do, is to say "Dave,
these are really excellent and interesting questions, but they are way above
the introductory level of this class. I'd like to keep things for now on a
more basic level since many people here are just getting into programming for
the first time, but I'd definitely be more than happy to talk with you in
detail about these issues during office hours. Is that OK?"

The solution of labeling him a "bully" and calls for "kicking him out" of the
class are irresponsible, immature and signs of an unskilled unprofessional
teacher. But it's what goes on at many American primary schools. If you have
an excited, intellectually interested first grader who asks a lot of
questions, most American teachers will personally diagnose the child with
"ADHD" and demand the parents put him on amphetamines to zone him out so he
won't keep asking questions and will sit and listen because that's what you do
in school nowadays. Sit down, shut up, be quiet, and do as you are told. An
approach that most of the posters in this thread seem to approve of given
their hatred for poor curious Dave.

~~~
nars
_Without seeing a transcript or video..._

Or actually paying attention the article, apparently. "Poor Curious Dave" was
a VOLUNTEER at the workshop. Just like the author of the article, Dave's
purpose being there was to assist the students of the workshop with the
projects (presumably, or to assist in some other capacity).

Maybe Dave thought his questions and comments would help clarify or improve
the instructor's content...but on the other hand I really don't find the
article author's evaluation of Dave as just a showoff/bully much of a stretch.
I assumed that we've all seen this behavior tons of times and that it is
pretty obvious when someone is being "That Guy" versus trying to clarify or
expand on the material for themselves or others.

The fact that quite a few here are eager to challenge the author's evaluation
of Dave and jump to Dave's defense is...funny, I guess.

------
bitboxer
That bully is a reason why on railsgirls events you have tables for differen
skill levels. You could easily send that guy to another table with more
advanced people without throwing him out.

~~~
derleth
This. This is a wonderful idea.

(In fact, in my evil little mind, I might be tempted to send a Dave to a table
just a bit above him, to show him that he's only hot shit in his own mind.)

~~~
relix
That's not evil. That's exactly how I would want to be treated in a class. I
don't want to learn from people who know less than me, I want to learn from
people who know more than me!

~~~
stfu
I think this is key to make progress in any learning environment, i.e. to find
a group that one presumes as being slightly better than oneself. It seems to
push at least myself to try harder and become better. But of cause the gap
shouldn't be too large, otherwise it is annoying for the group and
demotivational for the oneself.

------
NotMyMorals
_these questions seemed designed to show off his own knowledge, or to
challenge the instructor._

Yes, Dave was showing off to an audience of women.

 _she asked me a question she giggled and told me she had no idea what the
project was about, or what to do._

Yes, the woman was acting like a bimbo to elicit male help.

Congrats, you now have the grasp of female/male dynamics usually figured out
by middle school.

 _I’d never really believed in single sex education_

Wow, a thousand years of human culture tossed away in one generation by
ideological fanatics pretending that women and men are "equal" and one guy
finally figures out maybe tradition exists for a reason. Ask any woman who
went to an all-girls school if she missed having to be in the same classroom
as boys.

 _I saw that women only groups are not creating a more insular community of
women, but rather offering these women a more comfortable entrance into our
general community._

Amazing! How was this brilliant guy to know he could have asked his
grandmother and saved himself all that trouble?

 _The jerk factor also reminded me of why we in the Free Software community
need to be taking issues of civility seriously, and not letting the idea of
“free speech” get in the way of maintaining a safe place for discussion._

You get your group to be 50/50 male/female and you are going to drive away
lots of competent men because showing off their skills, bragging, and one-
upping other men is one of the primary motivations to excel at your chosen
field. A "safe space" for women is often a "boring space" for men.

But sure, go ahead, I'm sure this problem will be easy to solve with just the
right technical fix. In fact, I can think of one technical fix the ancient
Chinese used to make "safe men" for keeping their harems.

"There are no statutes capable of controlling the relations between men and
women." -- Secretary

~~~
Confusion
Competent men do not 'show of their skills, brag and one-up other men'. Yes,
they may be technically competent, but they are socially incompetent, because
they never progressed beyond that juvenile behavior. I'd gladly drive them
away.

~~~
NotMyMorals
_Competent men do not 'show of their skills, brag and one-up other men'._

Yes they most certainly do.

 _Yes, they may be technically competent, but they are socially incompetent,
because they never progressed beyond that juvenile behavior._

Ok, now you have admitted that technically competent men may in fact exhibit
those behaviors, so now you're saying they are "socially incompetent." You are
wrong in both cases, highly competent men who show off their skills, brag, and
dominate other men tend to be very socially competent. In fact, this sort of
display is very much a demonstration of social competence.

Obviously, juveniles do this is a different way than adults, but the pattern
of behavior is the same. It is also often the case that men who are being
shown up will try to "tear down" the dominant male by labelling his behavior
"juvenile" or trying to change the nature of the competition to something he's
better at.

One might paraphrase: "sure, he's highly competent, adept at showing his
skills, and is clearly superior to me at this particular activity. But he's
such a show-off!"

~~~
Confusion
Wow, sorry, I didn't realize you were a _brogrammer_

~~~
NotMyMorals
I looked up "brogrammer."

"A popular, cool, or otherwise normal person who has become intrigued by the
fun of programming. Usually unliked by the nerdy programmers for getting all
of the friends and the girls, while creating cool and useful applications."

Was that meant to be an insult?

One has to wonder if "male feminists" and "nice guys" share the same delusion
that "white knighting" females will increase their sexual success, and
advocating "more women in tech" is an excuse to have potential mates in closer
proximity, and has nothing to do with any moral crusade or actual benefit for
the tech industry itself?

One wonders if "male feminists" are simply trying to compensate for their
personal deficiencies?

~~~
lotharbot
The pejorative usage of "brogrammer" is more like "a programmer who displays
all the worst characteristics normally associated with high school jocks" --
things like arrogance, misogyny, bullying, and unwarranted aggression.

(Not rendering any judgment on whether you do or don't fit this definition,
just making sure everyone is clear on what was being implied above.)

~~~
NotMyMorals
_The pejorative usage of "brogrammer" is more like "a programmer who displays
all the worst characteristics normally associated with high school jocks" --
things like arrogance, misogyny, bullying, and unwarranted aggression_

Who associates these characteristics with "high school jocks" and who assumes
these are negative characteristics?

Arrogance (i.e., a superior male) misogyny (i.e., a man who the woman I lust
after has sex with) bullying (i.e., a man who is socially superior than me)
and unwarranted aggression (i.e., a male who out-competes me).

Sound like "brogrammer" means "I really envy this superior man."

~~~
lotharbot
You're trying too hard.

------
antithesis
Was it me or was that article written in a rather simplistic and childish way?
'All was good and well, something a bit odd but funny happened, but then this
jerk came along and he started to ruin everything!'

Near the end he suddenly jumped really fast to his conclusion, namely that he
supports women-only groups (or, as he likes to spell it, 'women only groups'),
but he really doesn't explain why other than saying that it offers a more
comfortable entrance to them. He doesn't link his conclusion to the rest of
the article, and I don't see how this specific occurrence adds to the
conclusion. Because the jerk happened to be male? I'd like to address him for
overgeneralizing males, but he just straight out avoids being clear about it.

But even if it was safe to say that only males act like jerks, that still does
not mean that every male is like that, and it certainly doesn't mean women
should be kept separated from males in education. If a male is being a jerk,
the problem is that he's being a jerk, not the fact that he's a male. I fail
to see why to differ between male and female and the article does not make it
clear in the slightest.

------
danso
I'm going to be the one who says, "Hey, Ive had classes where the 'Dave' jerk
was a woman"...but that isn't necessarily a rebuttal to the OP's point about
single sex classrooms. It's possible that the dynamic of the gender mix causes
certain jerks to show off more, male or female.

But as soon as I say that, I can definitely think of plenty of oxygen-hogs in
my all male engineering classes

------
fleitz
Using the Montessori method would have solved many of the issues presented by
the OP.

Dave would have been in a group where he'd be able to show others directly, if
Dave wasn't in a group, he'd be quickly identified by the teacher as someone
who didn't need help and could possibly benefit the group.

    
    
      Dave: <obscure question about array semantics>
      Teacher: Dave, it looks like you know a lot about arrays, Laura is struggling a bit, can you help her out?
    

Dave was seeking attention and to be recognized as having advanced skill, the
Montessori method would have allowed Dave to put his talents to good use while
not being a disruption to the class.

Dave isn't a jerk, it's just that the instructor is using antiquated teaching
methods from the 19th century, and under utilizing his teaching resources.
Clearly this person is someone who's authority should indeed be challenged.

~~~
keithpeter
Just make sure that Dave knows _how to explain_ the concept before you sit him
next to Laura!

I do stuff about peer feedback and explaining in words in my Maths classes,
then the peer tutoring works a lot better.

------
natasham25
I've been to the railsbridge woman's workshop, and while I was able to follow
the instructions and build a blog in a day, I didn't understand Ruby on Rails
and had no idea how I would do the same thing without following the
instructions. Knowing how to follow instructions != understanding the
material. Too bad the author saw the girl who was confused as a bimbo instead
of taking the time to explain the high level stuff to her.

------
lnanek2
We just have the author's word that the other volunteer was trying to show off
and challenge the instructor. He was a volunteer expert, maybe he just thought
he and the teacher were partners, and it was their job to discuss high level
material for the class.

E.g. instructor illustrates no need for semi-colons, meaningful white space ->
excited volunteer explains how much cleaner it looks than other programming
languages and how great he finds it, maybe with a real world anecdote, or he
compares how it is like working with other languages without that, hell maybe
even says it isn't a feature he likes, etc..

I'd rather he be open and egregious about his knowledge like this, than just
sitting there like a robot for whenever a classmate asks him to help with step
5 or something. It would be a much richer, varied, and more interesting class
than some textbook recitation of a tutorial anyone can follow at home anyway.

------
pauljburke
Unless I'm misreading this (and I have the mother of all migraines at present
so it's possible) weren't both the author of the post and Dave volunteers
helping out rather than students? In which case shouldn't whoever was running
the session just shut them down since the whole point is to help the people
attending to learn rather than intellectual willy waving?

I used to be Dave when I was younger (still am if I don't keep a lid on it;
I'm sure empathy is a wonderful thing but I've just had to learn to fake it
over the years). So my preferred solution would have been to ask "does anyone
else have any questions or are the rest of you secure enough in your own
ability to not feel the need to advertise?". But then I guess there'd have
been two jerks in the room and only one of them being helpful.

~~~
SoftwareMaven
Even in the context of "helping", some people have to show they _could_ teach
the class. They do this by asking leading questions, pointing out any mistake,
no matter how pedantic, and other obnoxious, interruptive actions.

Students quickly recognize the adversarial relationship and, depending on how
the teacher responds, either lose confidence in the teacher or tube out the
cock fight.

As the teacher, in a short-term environment (like a substitute or a half-day
seminar), you have to shut that person down unequivocally. In a longer lasting
environment, give that person a chance to teach.

------
DannyB201298
The part of the post that intrigued me was when she...

"[Looked] at her screen, she’d made significant progress towards finishing the
project, but when she asked me a question she giggled and told me she had no
idea what the project was about, or what to do.

Why?

I still don’t know the reason. Studies have shown that especially bright women
have this reaction to difficult material and that women learning computer
science do better in an single sex classroom (though those studies have
critics)."

On a similar Hacker News post, "In Math You Have to Remember, In Other
Subjects You Can Think About It" the author paraphrases from a book "What's
Math Got To Do With It?", in which he states that a student

"... called Rebecca, was conscientious, motivated, and smart, and regularly
attained A+ grades in mathematics. She was able to follow the methods her
teacher demonstrated in class, and could reproduce them perfectly. But she did
not understand what she was doing, and as a result she regarded herself as not
good at math. When Boaler asked her why she thought that, she replied,
"Because I can't remember things well and there is so much to remember."
[p.164.]"

Coincidentally both subjects are female but I think it's part of an underlying
theme on learning and developing critical thinking skills that is playing out
across this country. And the consequences of this lack/challenge differs on
how one is taught.

~~~
MisterBastahrd
Do they do better because of a lack or male interaction, or because they
aren't going to be challenged as much? Because sooner or later, they have to
leave academia and wake up to the realities of the real world, where Dave
isn't only being a dick in meetings but is trying to take your next promotion
to become your manager.

------
pi18n
I had a language class once with a student that was clearly not at our level
constantly asking questions that the other students all already knew. As a
mature adult, I attributed this lack of consideration for others to the
individual, not the entire gender.

~~~
prawn
You're missing the point. It's not that it was a male troublemaker, but that
the largely female group reacted in a particular way to that person acting as
he did.

------
peterwwillis
When I went to a Java programming class at a local hackerspace, it was
something like 70/30 women/men. I didn't really see anything in the way they
learned or progressed through the session that was in any way different than
the men. What struck me was that _holy crap, there's a lot of women here while
everybody keeps saying there's no women in tech_.

I think the author is dead right about the single-sex classes being a
comfortable way to introduce women to technical topics. But having men there
did not stop them from asking questions and following the material at the
hackerspace. I think getting involvement from female-oriented communities will
provide that comfort level to start with. Also, female teachers (my scientist
female friends said they'd love to teach little girls to become science and
math geeks if they had the time)

~~~
SoftwareMaven
There is a very strong selection bias here (both in your comment and the
original article). The woman who signed up for something like your class may
be very different (in personality, outgoing ness, comfort with men, etc) from
the women who signed up for the original author's class.

The end result is that you both may be right: maybe women (and men, for that
matter) should be fully integrated in learning environments _and_ have
segregated environments. No two people learn the same, why would we expect the
same level of comfort in every classroom setting.

And if I look back to TFA, I think that is what the author meant by "more
PyLadies". Listen to _everybody_ and give them all comfortable places to
learn.

------
whalesalad
I think we simply need to start calling people out in person regardless of
their gender. If I saw "Dave" acting like this I'd pull him aside and set him
straight. And if he couldn't pull his shit together i'd ask him to leave. And
if he couldn't manage to do that, I'd help him leave.

Not that your post is passive-aggressive, but we need to start being proactive
about this. In all realms of life. Call people out on their shit or they're
not going to change. Humans are weak to the pressures and influences of
society. If we continue to stand there and allow certain behavior, they'll
continue to do it. If you man up and call people on their crap, it might not
work the first time but if enough people do, that person will eventually
realize what they are doing is wrong.

~~~
lotharbot
I think we also need to be willing to set people straight without ascribing
bad motivations to them.

Maybe Dave isn't a jerk or a showoff. Maybe he is like me. I learn by asking
questions during the learning process. I feel like I'm not really learning
very well unless I can say "does this material imply this other conclusion?"
or "if we extended this to more dimensions, would we just have to change these
things, or am I missing something?" I learn by stretching the edges of what I
think I'm learning.

I'm also on the autism spectrum, which means I'm unlikely to pick up on
whatever social signals the rest of the class might be sending. I've tried to
learn those things, but they're still pretty opaque to me.

So I would appreciate, if I'm in a circumstance where my question-asking is
causing problems, if someone would pull me aside and say "can you save your
questions for later? They're a bit distracting for the rest of us." I'm not
doing it either to be a jerk or to show off, so I'll gladly stop _if the
problem is clearly communicated to me_.

~~~
cema
I have learned (hopefully learned!) to only use this style of learning when I
am one-on-one with an instructor, and never in a classroom full of peer
students.

Even then, not every instructor (or a person who effectively serves as an
instructor) can stand this. Here I have to trust my people's judgement and
sometimes I do misjudge. I recall one of my colleagues and coworkers with whom
I could not maintain a meaningful oral conversation because we would
misunderstand each other's verbal styles, however we were able to efficiently
converse over email. This is certainly impossible in a classroom.

~~~
prodigal_erik
I see probing questions as the sole justification of the classroom format. If
I'm to merely sit and listen, I'd much rather have either a good text or a
recording of a professionally produced lecture to watch at my own pace.

~~~
cema
Yes, I was originally coming from the same place. However, not all instructors
can handle this, and many peer students could not stand it either.

When I say "student", I mean anyone in the audience, and "instructor" is
anyone at the podium, talking.

------
simula67
At the risk of sounding petty let me say that, I am male and I can only speak
about my part of the problem.

1\. Do I feel bad about women achieving stuff in life ? Yes.

2\. Am I ashamed of the above fact? Yes.

Lets face it, from what I have been able to figure out, this is the case with
a lot of men in this world. Question we must be asking is : how do we go about
solving this problem? This is not as simple as just developing empathy for the
other sex, because according to current customs and expectations: men are
expected to be taking care of women, women should be trading up etc.

Whenever the question of equality of sexes come in tech, the arguments are
always split into two factions. One side argues that there is no such thing as
discrimination of sex in tech. It is a meritocracy and that is the only way it
can be, and women are not in tech because they do not want to be / are
naturally less talented in programming. The other side argues this is not the
case and that you feel so only because you have no daughter/are a virgin/you
are a basement dwelling looser.This line of thinking is not productive.
Painting men as super villains in some grand 'Dan Brown'ian plot of conspiracy
against women will NOT work.Especially with nerds. I am not saying anything
excuses sexist behaviour just that villifying them may satisfy your ego, but
will not accomplish anything.

~~~
s_baby
>Painting men as super villains in some grand 'Dan Brown'ian plot of
conspiracy against women will NOT work.

It works because it plays into traditional gender roles. You don't have to be
a bleeding heart liberal to believe women are the "gentler" sex that needs the
protection of society. Just good ol' fashioned chivalry.

~~~
simula67
You are missing the point. Is this a solution? Does this not reinforce the
gender stereotype? Are we not trained to compete or cooperate with our equals
and take care of the weak an helpless?

~~~
s_baby
I mean it works rhetorically. I don't agree with the level of victimhood
Women's Studies imparts. It's dis-empowering and leads to bitterness.

------
Mz
A couple of random thoughts about Dave:

A) Having participated in plenty of female majority online groups, my
experiance has been that, yes, a single guy can have inordinate power. He is
often deferred to and supported by a bevel of cooing ladies who seem oblivious
to the power dynamic underlying the whole thing.

B) It is possible that Dave was not trying to be a jerk at all. Maybe he was
just nervous around the ladies and subconsciously going into braggart mode in
hopes of impressing someone and getting a date.

------
yummyfajitas
This article begs the question: why do women respond disproportionately badly
to the "helpful jerk"?

~~~
FuzzyDunlop
The real question should be: why does a class respond proportionately badly to
the 'helpful jerk'?

We can't reasonably say this is a female specific phenomenon when our only
point of reference is a female-only class. Send the guy to a bunch of
different classes (of mixed and single gender, and of mixed skill-level) and
see how they all respond.

If one guy is monopolising the time and help available in the class, it stands
to reason that everyone else will lose interest, because there is no longer
time and attention available to them.

And if this guy is asking questions that far exceed the average skill level of
the class, it also stands to reason that the class will lose interest because
they can't understand any of it.

I'd like to know why the volunteers were accepting of this guy when at least
one of them (the OP) was well aware of how detrimental his presence was to the
class as a whole. And I'd like to know this guy's motivations for joining a
class to wave his intellectual dick about.

~~~
bluekeybox
> We can't reasonably say this is a female specific phenomenon when our only
> point of reference is a female-only class.

Then why is the article about gender at all?

~~~
FuzzyDunlop
I agree; why is gender even relevant to this?

The author volunteers for female-only class (which he makes sure to
highlight), and thus assumes his whole experience is down to the fact the
class is all female.

Remove all references to gender and there is no significant change to the
story. I think that reveals the complete irrelevance of gender.

My original point, which I guess wasn't worded very well, was that we're told
about one experience in one classroom, and that has been blown up to account
for the entirety of female-kind.

------
mnicole
Here in Portland we have a group called Code'n'Splode that takes women who are
already working as engineers and gives them an opportunity to sound off on
[gender] issues they've had in the workplace as well as coach other women
interested in learning programming every week. If and when I ever delve into
that world, I would feel a lot more comfortable going to them than even my
close male colleagues if only because I know I can go to them about issues men
might not have or - as a lot of HN articles have shown me - just don't think
exist.

I'm not trying to generalize, but in my years of working with male developers,
they tend to have a much more hands-off and "just look at it and learn"
approach. Whether this is because I am female (and therefore a 'lost cause')
or because they are just not the teaching type, I'm not sure, but when I'm
trying to learn something, I don't want to take the chance of dealing with
Daves or people that think women giggling equates to their being a bimbo.

------
KaoruAoiShiho
I used to be like Dave. Then I turned 13. Empathy is a great thing.

------
Tichy
What part of the experience showed that single sex workshops might be better?
Because there wouldn't be female knowledgeable jerks (either because women are
never jerks, or because they are never knowledgeable, or why?)? Or smart women
would not be self-deprecating among other women?

~~~
NotMyMorals
Or maybe women would respond to knowledgeable female jerks differently and
perhaps more effectively than to knowledgeable male jerks?

~~~
Tichy
The possibilities are endless.

------
zitterbewegung
I have no idea to solve the helpful jerk problem but I can think of possible
solutions. \- If a "Helpful jerk" was at a class at a school they would be
asked to leave by the teacher. This would be the final response. If they are
being that disruptive then the time it takes for you to ask them to leave
would salvage the course.

\- Assign skill levels to tables. Possibly make a leader with the highest
skills. (Bitboxer had this solution). If your skill level is too high then
whats the point of going?

\- Ask the "Helpful jerk" to lead the class. Allow them to aid you in the
course.

We can't actually solve the jerk problem but there are contingency strategies
to minimize this problem. Free software should mean we have standards of
conduct.

[Edited due to comment below]

~~~
ht_th
Just ask the jerk to stop asking questions and making remarks. You're trying
to teach a class and that involves input and interaction of all students, not
just the one. As a teacher you are responsible for the learning climate in the
room and you can act accordingly.

If the jerk doesn't like that, (s)he can leave.

~~~
lutorm
Bingo. This kind of thing should be addressed with a "ground rules" kind of
discussions that we need to hear from everyone and people should self-monitor
to not take all airtime. And if that doesn't work, it's fine to say "Thanks
Dave, but I'd like to hear from someone else this time" or something similar.

------
Goladus
_In one of the classic programming texts (I forget which one), the author says
that very few people who learn to program should be programmers, but that he’d
like to see more programming done by those of other professions. The workshop
would have made him proud, as every student I talked to shared the sentiment
with me that they hoped to learn Python in order to do their job more
effectively, by learning to collect, sort or process data in new and more
efficient ways._

To be fair, that's very nearly Python's optimal niche at the moment. Users can
start seeing returns after a very modest investment of time and energy.

------
Alex3917
As another anecdote I was at PyGotham yesterday. When I stopped by at the
beginners track in the afternoon I counted 35 men and 4 women.

------
cheez
I don't like this conclusion. Anyone can be a jerk, including a woman.

------
jongraehl
I've been around similar buzzkills in person (been one, perhaps?), and I
wonder what precisely is going on.

What is the mechanism behind smarty-pants-Dave's suppression of others'
enthusiasm?

Was it that he was raising issues that weren't relevant to others' learning?

Or did something in his mannerism suggest contempt for those who knew less
Python than him?

Or, did people become suddenly skeptical of the authority or competence of the
instructor Dave questioned?

I second the observation that in the right environment, attention and interest
would increase, as people look for ways to give annoying-Dave his comeuppance.

------
SagelyGuru
I think I met Dave online, posing as 'Diana'. He gave himself away obsessing
about technicalities of Python :)

------
hk_kh
That's why we do not see more women involved with software, and I am not
talking about Dave.

I am talking about both, the writer and Dave.

Why do you think most women stick to managing projects instead of being
involved in Free Software?

Too much drama. Too much shit to cope with, that involves dicks and egos.

In the article we assume that Dave was a jerk (and it probably was). But, see,
the author was in a comfortable position, when suddenly another man entered
the room, and started to go alpha and everything turned into an ego battle.

~~~
WayneDB
So, are you saying that women can't or aren't willing to deal with drama or
cope with shit that involves dicks and egos?

Where there's muck, there's brass. Are you saying that women have no brass?

~~~
hk_kh
I am saying that women are willing to deal with drama, ego and dicks when
there's a motivation to cope with it.

As I see the current status of gender equality in tech, women working on a
tech job are protected by their social status.

A female "junior" programmer could easily be harmed by "women do not know how
to code", but with time and patience, they can go forward into the company
hierarchy, and end in a position where their status protects such opinions.

In the free software world, it's more difficult to move forward in the
hierarchy of a project, hence, time and patience gets consumed.

Now, take this with a grain of salt, because there's a big possibility I am
wrong and just resorting to topics here.

------
derleth
Very interesting story. I wonder if it would have been as effective without
the male villain. The trope reinforces the moral, but it kind of beats us over
the head with it.

~~~
NotMyMorals
_I wonder if it would have been as effective without the male villain. The
trope reinforces the moral, but it kind of beats us over the head with it._

The author clearly stated he felt challenged by the display of dominance by
another male, and wrote this blog to heal his wounded ego and display his
superior abilities at leading women.

So, no, it probably wouldn't have been effective without the male villain. The
competing male was a "jerk" and the damsel in distress just needed to be
protected from the "jerk" by the knight in shining armour.

All-female classes taught by a single male teacher have proven to be quite
effective.

------
ktizo
Stuff like this is required, not because there are problems with programmers,
or even with education, or men, or women, stuff like this is required because
of wider problems in our society as a whole.

When most people have some level of general respect beyond clannishness, is
when things like this will no longer be required. Personally, I'm not holding
my breath.

------
gcb
Yeah, because shielding someone with relationship problems his/her entire life
is the way to go!

random anecdote. in my college days, there was a woman who was doing a second
run at undergrad, after having a phd in marketing, and she was pretty much the
know it all jerk.

------
pwpwp
Given that IME most women's eyes immediately glaze over when the word
"computer" is mentioned, I doubt that "our community isn’t great at
encouraging women contributors" is the reason why few women are in computing.

~~~
Symmetry
Given that all the women there had explicitly signed up to do programming, I
doubt that any of them have eyes that glaze over at the mention of computers.
Surprisingly for some people, there are variations among women just as there
are variations among men. I'm pretty sure that most men also have no interest
in computer programming. Finally: <http://xkcd.com/385/>

~~~
NotMyMorals
Which is probably why pwpwp didn't specifically refer to the self-selected
women in the class, but made a general point about the industry and the
ridiculous attempts to impose a completely artificial 50/50 gender ratio.

The comic could have just as easily said "one girl is good at math therefore
exactly as many girls as boys are good at math."

~~~
KaoruAoiShiho
While I agree a 50-50 gender ratio seems artificial at the moment, fact of the
matter is the tech industry is becoming one of the great sources of power in
society (think skynet). I think for the sake of civilization, we should try to
involve women as much as we can and aim for the 50-50.

~~~
smsm42
Currently, there are substantially more females than males (60/40) among
people receiving college degrees: [http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/06/women-
dominate-higher-ed...](http://mjperry.blogspot.com/2009/06/women-dominate-
higher-education-at.html)

Education is the widely recognized source of power. Should we strive for 50/50
and if so, how should we achieve it?

~~~
keithpeter
Perhaps the kind of activities involved with programming will change as the
devices we seek to program evolve?

Perhaps building applications and managing data will involve more visual tools
that allow domain specific knowledge to be applied directly?

