
“People like her should kill themselves”: Discussing sexism in tech - leahweitz
http://leahweitz.com/what-happens-when-we-talk-about-sexism-in-tech/
======
striking
It's pretty clear that reacting to trolls only means you'll attract more of
them.

Sexism is an important issue, but posting this article (as opposed to the
previous one you posted) will likely attract more negative comments than the
discussion you intended to start.

[http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2939](http://www.smbc-
comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=2939) may explain the vocalization of
negativity on your blog post.

I'm sorry about what happened. No one deserves that. Pay no attention to the
haters. Just write about your experiences and ignore those who keep you down.

~~~
jackweirdy
The worrying thing is that many people aren't trolls.

They're either oblivious to what it's like to be a target of incessant
cultural bullshit, or are aware that it's bad but say that because "it's
better now than when women couldn't vote" it's pointless complaining about it.
Then after that there's normally some examples of the author being called
whiney/bitchy/SJW/some other personal attack.

Bonus points if it comes from a <3 day old account which still has twitter egg
as its logo.

~~~
striking
Trolling is predicated upon inane opinions being presented as reality. The
most talented trolls can't be distinguished from idiots.

That and people are just angry, so very angry.

This is just what happens when you exist publicly on the Internet. It's sad,
but it's reality. And it's not just men doing it. It's not just trolling.

I can only hope that she takes her audience's outpouring of positivity to
heart.

~~~
richmarr
Agree with the kind tone, disagree with the defeatism.

People being sexist/racist online is reality in the same way that apartheid
was reality, the way the Berlin Wall was reality. Sometimes we get to change
shit.

~~~
striking
I question your comparison of online sexism or racism to apartheid or the
Berlin Wall. I try to stay away from comparing issues, but those were massive
issues in which people died or were separated from their families for years
not knowing if they'd be seen again. I can only be thankful that online sexism
and racism are not as pervasive or life-changing as the aforementioned issues.

It would certainly explain why there hasn't been a change yet. But that
doesn't change the facts: there will always be assholes on the Internet
looking to get a rise out of someone, or people who blindly follow others in
order to feel like they're belonging. If you see someone who's a moron, just
be the bigger person and leave them alone. If you feed them, they multiply.

That's why the literature on the Internet agrees almost unanimously: don't
feed the trolls. Don't even give them the time of day. It's not worth your
time.

(just make sure you're not discounting legitimate opinions in the process)

~~~
richmarr
> I try to stay away from comparing issues...

I'm not comparing issues; I'm criticising your "it's reality" argument that
implies that it can't be changed. Those are examples of sucky things that
_were_ changed. If you're worried about comparing issues, fine, swap those
examples for any in which group behaviour has changed.

> don't feed the trolls

Your responses seem to be based on a few assumptions, (1) that this abuse is
primarily the act of 'trolls', (2) that 'trolls' are an unchangable reality,
and (3) that it's a positive thing to do to tell victims of 'trolling' that it
was their own behaviour that should be adjusted.

------
stegosaurus
I found this article interesting because it seems to indicate a boundary that
some people seem to have while others don't. I don't think it's actually
related to any particular topic of dispute.

Face to face; on the phone; via e-mail and IM; you're interacting with an
actual human being; an individual person you can choose to form a relationship
with, or to simply not bother with any more. I think that most, if not all
people do this. It's how you end up with friends, how you end up drifting away
from other people.

To me, at least, comments on the Internet live in a bubble. They just don't
work in the same way. It's a random snippet of information that doesn't really
link to a personality. To spend time thinking about 'Internet trolls', to
lambast them, it's a waste of time, a complete nonsense (unless perhaps you're
a moderator of a forum or similar).

I think that focusing on that is likely to lead people down the wrong path.

In real life, there are probably places you don't go as a
(white/black/gay/lesbian/male/female/software developer/whatever). At least
perhaps you don't reveal those parts of yourself (obviously, some of those are
harder than the others!) Because there are people out there, that don't want
you. And that's... to me, that's fine. Go to a working man's pub, park your
Ferrari outside and flash the links? It's just not the done thing.

edit 2: (Interestingly enough, I realised after posting this that most of the
comments in the post above seem to be of this sort. They're not really
directed at Leah; they read almost like a group chatting amongst themselves,
like they're looking for someone else to agree...)

But the Internet is that place, everywhere. All walks of life, all people. And
they're going to disagree with you; you're going to disagree with them; and
perhaps you can't reason it out. I think that's perfectly healthy and it's
good that we have that diversity in the human experience.

edit: I wanted to make clear that I do have... sympathy, for lack of a better
term, with the issues here. Not that it matters ever so much, as Random
Internet Commenter #3384492233 ;)

------
manux
As much as everyone is entitled to their opinion, some people really seem to
lack self-awareness, and this post reinforces my opinion on this.

What I mean by that is simply that I often find that people can be incredibly
unaware of the impact of their presence and/or actions; and I don't think this
comes from a lack of empathy, because most people _are_ empathic, just not
towards everyone.

I'm all for anonymous trolls having a bit a pun fun. But these commenters
_aren't_ trolls. They seem to genuinely believe their inane comments and I
think that's partly because they're just not aware of their own impact.

------
briane80
This is the 10th article today about sexism/feminism/rape culture/woman's
issues etc.

What's going on?

~~~
GFK_of_xmaspast
There's a lot of creepos out there in the industry, Brian.

~~~
angersock
There's a lot of creeps everywhere, not just in industry.

However, they are very well outnumbered by the indifferent and the good.

------
jsprogrammer
You are mostly right. Some of the things people are saying to you are awful
and you are rightly calling it out. Please keep doing that.

However, please consider that when something you post starts out by making a
gender distinction (ie. "Things men have actually said..."), you are inviting
everyone that has an investment in binary gender identity politics to either
attack you (bitch) or support you (so brave).

I'd be interested in a post on what is "men" and why it is important to start
out dividing everyone into only two groups (where, according to the premise of
your argument, one will be wrong [and therefore, the other: right]).

What would be wrong with the title, "Things _some_ people have actually
said..."?

Edit: Wow, downmods with no rebuttal or comment. Typical HN.

~~~
demallien
Well, because the comments being made are laced with gender, so the gender of
the comments is surely relevant, no? I mean, I understand where you are coming
from - the title can be interpreted to apply to _all_ men, when it only
applies to _some_ men. So adding "some" to the title might be a good
adjustment. Removing "men" from the title however is not warranted.

~~~
jsprogrammer
Sure, if every person quoted is a male, the title, "What some men have
actually said...", would be accurate. As the title was posted, it did claim to
apply to all men (even if that wasn't the intent).

Having said all of that, I still don't see the real value in calling out the
gender of the people who made those comments. The comments are bad and they
should be exposed for what they are. But, would they really be acceptable if a
woman said them? Of what import is the gender of the people making the
comments?

`define sexism`:

sex·ism

ˈsekˌsizəm

noun: sexism

prejudice, _stereotyping_ , or discrimination, typically against women, _on
the basis of sex_.

~~~
shkkmo
> it did claim to apply to all men No, it was just vague in its scope. It can
> only be interpreted that way, if you deliberately ignore the first sentence
> of the article "In my experience, 99% of men and women in the tech industry
> are decent and genuinely well-meaning people.".

+! for the argument for pushing "people shouldn't treat people that way" over
"men shouldn't treat women that way" style messaging.

~~~
jsprogrammer
That is fair, but most people will only read the title. If people never get to
the qualifying statements, then they will never understand what was actually
meant.

------
Nadya
“People like her should kill themselves” - 7 Results on Google, with this
being a contributor.

“People like him should kill themselves” - 6 Results on Google

Way to kill the gender equality Leah!

~~~
mfoy_
I got 170 vs 7.

Also, what's your point?

~~~
Nadya
There are only 2 pages of results - that 170 is from the above article being
shared and it will increase to well over 500 by later afternoon (PMT). (As of
my finishing of this comment it is up to 192.)

My point was that the statement is not a gendered one, both sides deal with
it, and it's especially rare given the lack of results for the phrase.

People don't bat an eye when they call a guy a neckbeard. An unattractive guy
trying to flirt? He's a creeper (regardless if he crossed any societal
"lines").

But feminism is a hot point and any criticism of it or any defense of man is
labeled as a misogynist woman hater (redundancy needed to emphasis the point)
and all around scum of the Earth. Anyone pointing out that "ignore verbal
harassment and quit letting it control your life; because it isn't going
anywhere" is harassed themselves.

I live in the real world. In the real world harassment, murder, and all other
sorts of nasty unwanted terrible shit happens and has been happening for
centuries. It will continue for centuries until humanity becomes a hive mind
or starts to punish for wrongthink and thoughtcrimes.

What I find especially sad and pathetic is how many females get written off
entirely if they don't buy into the groupthink and worship the theoretical
feminist bible. Somehow those women aren't women or have been brainwashed by
the patriarchy. Maybe, just maybe, but if the _entire world_ is "the problem".
Maybe the world isn't the problem?

~~~
mfoy_
The "kill yourself" comment is the least inherently gendered one, you're
right.

The thing is that it appeared on a blog about sexism, therefore it is sexist.
If it appeared on a blog about homophobia, it would be homophobic. If it
appeared on a a blog about racism, it would be racist.

You just ignored the other comments and the context and tried to say: "This
one comment isn't inherently gendered therefore..."

My question is: Therefore what?

~~~
Nadya
This article is in response to a previous article. In which she openly
complained about a 1% experience.

 _> In my experience, 99% of men and women in the tech industry are decent and
genuinely well-meaning people._

And 1% of people are terrible people. The end.

If I wrote an article about how awful a minority of women are in the tech
community to LGBT I'd be harassed by a number of feminists and an even larger
amount of trolls. But I'm a realist who knows terrible people won't be going
away anytime soon and don't let the few vehement assholes ruin things for me.

She's shown that 1% of a population can cause her enough frustration to write
an article. _Queue the trolls_. Give them attention and they'll come.

