
Demoted and Placed on Probation - mancerayder
https://quillette.com/2020/01/11/demoted-and-placed-on-probation/
======
geofft
When I write code at work, I write so according to guidelines that my employer
and my teammates have produced, not all of which I agree with. We mostly write
in Java, which I don't really like as a language (I'm lucky enough to be on a
team that writes Python, but if I need to work with another team's code or a
common library, I need to write Java). We run Python tests with unittest
instead of pytest. We format our code with the `black` autoformatter, even
though I disagree with several of its approaches. And so forth. I still follow
the recommendations, because I'm working as part of a team, and none of the
recommendations are egregiously unreasonable - they're just not what I would
have preferred.

The recommendations of the university working group seem similar. Well-
intentioned people can reach different conclusions on these things, but none
of them are egregiously unreasonable. You don't _have_ to use the BMI
exercise; there are enough other exercises that solve the goal of inputting
some numbers and calculating a simple formula based on them. None of them are
even at the level of saying, you must teach a thing you don't believe. (He's
not even, say, a biology professor asked to teach/not teach evolution. He's a
computer science lecturer, and none of these recommendations are about the
facts of computer science itself.)

As a professional software engineer, if I picked a fight about the coding
guidelines, I would in fact be spending a significant amount of my political
capital. If I find something very important, it's possible I can slowly try to
convince people of one thing, and have it reflect positively on me. But if I
picked a pointless fight - like saying that we should standardize on double
quotes in Python instead of single quotes - my management would be right to
question whether I was more interested in doing my job or in getting my way.

And if I were to say that I wanted to work on "heterodox engineering," I would
be surprised if my management _did not_ question whether I was in the right
role. By his own admission, this man's "best teaching" is in areas entirely
unrelated to computer science - why is he confused about having trouble
getting tenure in a school of computer science?

For all that _Quillette_ seems to dislike professional victims, they appear to
have published one.

~~~
kragen
> _When I write code at work, I write so according to guidelines that my
> employer and my teammates have produced, not all of which I agree with._

This is the core of the opposition between being an employee and being a
professional, such as a professor, a priest, a judge, or a doctor. The
professions answer to a higher authority than those who pay them, and this is
essential to their role. In the case of professors, part of this is codified
in the norm of “freedom of inquiry”, which has been central to the modern
conception of the University for centuries.

It is unsurprising that the dominant paradigm of wage labor attempt to erase
and co-opt the pre-capitalist institution of the professions, obliterating it
as an outdated or worthless obstacle and even attempting to appropriate its
terminology. But I think the existence of professional institutions like the
academy and the judiciary has done a fair bit of good, and replacing them with
wage labor is a perilous enterprise.

To be clear, you are not a professional software engineer. You are an
employee, directed by management. That is the opposite. That is why you do not
enjoy the autonomy that professors are struggling to retain. Your plight is
regrettable, and condemning others to it would be not only regrettable but
potentially catastrophic.

~~~
geofft
He's not a professor in the classical definition, he's a lecturer. (Both from
his title on paper - Principal Lecturer - and from his actual work - teaching
intro CS classes for the purpose of training students to work in wage labor,
not guiding researchers.) He's an employee just as much as I am. It's true
that professors should have independence from those who oversee them, and
there's a mechanism for that: it's called tenure, and he doesn't have it.

It's certainly reasonable for him to want to be a "professional," and from his
teaching statement and his desire to teach honors classes about Haidt instead
of intro classes about programming, that seems like exactly what he wants. I,
too, would like to be a "professional." But he doesn't get to just _be_ one
merely because he _wants_ to be one, any more than I can.

~~~
kragen
I understand that you are not aware of this, but freedom of inquiry protects
non-tenured lecturers and even, thanks to Humboldt, students. I suggest that
you read at least the introductory section of
[https://www.britannica.com/topic/academic-
freedom](https://www.britannica.com/topic/academic-freedom) so that your
opinions are no longer based on complete ignorance of the issues at hand.

It is true that tenure is a much more effective protection, and this is
perhaps a major reason that managerialists have shifted more and more of the
teaching load to adjunct faculty over the last four decades. Unquestionably
someone designing a new introductory course, as the author claims to have
done, would have been tenured or tenure-track faculty at any US University in
the 1950s, 60s, or 70s. That is, as defined by his teaching responsibilities,
he is very much a professor or assistant professor according to the
traditional definition.

It does seem to be correct that he is in fact vulnerable to political
interference with his freedom to teach. But what we are debating is whether it
would be better if he were more vulnerable to it or less so. Your position
seems to be that it would be better if he were more vulnerable to it because
that would make him more like you. My position is that it would be better if
he were less vulnerable to it because historically that kind of thing has led
to disasters like Lysenkoism and the failure of the Nazi atomic bomb program.

~~~
geofft
And someone who was teaching at any US university in those eras would have
been generally preparing people for what you call a "professional" role, not
to become an ignorant peon like me working a wage labor job. Teaching people
how to program (honestly, even calling it introductory "computer science" is a
polite fiction) _does not require inquiry at all_ , freedom or otherwise. It's
a well-established course, much like high school algebra is well-established,
and the concept of "freedom of inquiry" for the high school algebra teacher
doesn't make much sense. If a university wishes to have senior faculty design
such a class, that's certainly reasonable, but it doesn't fundamentally
require innovation.

Which gets to the heart of the problem: there isn't a meaningful sense in
which any of the decisions he objected to were related to a "freedom of
inquiry" _about computer science_ or even about programming. It would be one
thing if he said, I don't think we should be teaching students this
programming language or this material or this approach to concepts, I think we
should be teaching another way. (For instance, he could have written something
like [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/12/29/the-perils-of-
java...](https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2005/12/29/the-perils-of-
javaschools-2/) .) I would agree with you that such decisions should be the
purview of a tenure-track professor and not school administrators, and I would
even agree with you that the growth of adjunct roles is an attempt to take
such decisions out of the hands of professors. His objections were of a
different category entirely. He objected to how he perceived universities to
be coddling students, to how he doesn't recognize certain words as part of the
English language, etc. It's a pretty motte-and-bailey argument to say that
_academic_ freedom also protects a professor's right to ignore any direction
about teaching from university administration.

Suppose a tenured professor says, I don't think students learn well in the
mornings in a classroom setting, I wish to teach at 10 PM at the pub, and I
don't care what time and room these managerialists have assigned me to.
Students will meet me where I say they'll meet me, or they'll fail the class.
Would you say that the professor (who may genuinely believe this is a better
teaching environment) is protected in this decision by "freedom of inquiry"?

------
Ballas
> A relaxation of grading on coding style.

> Allowing students to work together in a group for part of their grade
> instead of requiring them to complete all graded work individually.

> A reduction in the amount of effort expended pursuing cheating cases by 50
> percent even though there has been no reduction in cheating cases.

Can somebody explain to me how these recommendations will make the course more
inclusive/diverse, I fail to see the connection?

~~~
nickpp
It’s more inclusive towards the stupid.

It’s only natural for various minority groups to ultimately attack what they
perceive to be the primary instrument of discrimination against them: judging
them on their ability.

~~~
downerending
Rather than "stupid", I'd say individuals that aren't cut out to be
programmers. But yes, I've known people who have sort of bumped along the
bottom through a CS program and even sometimes gotten their degrees.

However well-intentioned this might seem, the results can be pretty awful. In
some cases, the person was hired for their first job, flamed out completely,
and had to find a job in an unrelated industry. It's a terrible thing to go
through.

I tried several majors in college and had the good luck to wash out almost
immediately in the early coursework. If I hadn't, I might have ended up in a
career I hated, dragging down those around me. It's hard to love your work if
you don't have the skills for it.

------
brenden2
Going against the zeitgeist, whether you like it or not, is rarely going to
win you favours in any social circles.

~~~
quotemstr
George Bernard Shaw put it aptly: "the reasonable man adapts himself to the
world; the unreasonable man adapts the world to himself. All progress,
therefore, depends on the unreasonable man."

In other words, if the zeitgeist is ever to change, _someone_ has to go
against it, often at personal cost. We should be grateful some people have a
compulsion to speak up even when it costs them personally.

------
forgottenpass
>The university agreed to several of their demands, including that, “A group
of (mostly senior) faculty will review the introductory programming courses to
ensure that they are inclusive of students from all backgrounds.” A working
group was formed and it produced a set of recommendations. These included:
[...] A reduction in the amount of effort expended pursuing cheating cases by
50 percent

That's a huge insult directed at exactly the student they claim to be
supporting.

~~~
downerending
Worse yet, it devalues the degree they're working so hard for (and paying so
much for).

As many here can attest, we already have a significant problem with people
passing through CS/etc programs and coming out the other end without being
able to write a fizz-buzz off the top of their heads. Looking at current
curricula, it strikes me as noticeably dumbed down, compared to the no-name
program I went through several decades ago.

------
muglug
Whatever your beliefs, it's very stupid to try to have a debate in public on a
politcally heated topic with someone you don't know, without some sort of
moderator or an agreed-upon set of rules.

~~~
awinder
You also earn extra-stupid points when your employers and peers across decades
gently tell you to knock it off and you refuse.

~~~
ThrowawayR2
> " _You also earn extra-stupid points when your employers and peers across
> decades gently tell you to knock it off and you refuse._ "

One wonders how history would've turned out if Galileo had followed your
advice?
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair)

------
jasoneckert
As part of an industry that was started by Ada Lovelace, I don't think I could
write an article entitled "Why Women Don't Code."

~~~
lopmotr
What if you discovered the reason? Wouldn't you want to share it?

------
dcole2929
> Most of these suggestions seem to rely on the notion that undergraduates are
> delicate. While I agree that we must be careful to ensure that all students
> feel welcome and respected, we should be helping our students to become
> antifragile. So I will continue to use the BMI example, I will maintain high
> standards for grading, and I will continue to pursue cheating cases
> vigorously. I will continue to say “you guys” and to make occasional
> cultural references. In the case of pronouns, I have always made an effort
> to accommodate requests from transgender students, but I refuse to use words
> that are not part of the English language.

What really stands out to me is how he addressed the honestly pretty tame
feedback he got on his class. A whole committee was put together and came back
with recommendations on some pretty minor things he could do to better foster
a sense of inclusivity and his response was nah I'd rather not. I'm not at all
surprised at the result. Regardless of what his article said, the reaction to
it, or his actual credentials as an instructor he showed the administration
very clearly with his actions that he has literally no interest in trying to
make the department an inclusive environment. And that's ultimately the entire
point. They are trying to make CS as accessible as possible and this guy is
fighting them tooth and nail at every step because what...?

I mean the last sentence is just a ridiculous take as a teacher. A) Yeet is
now a word in the english dictionary. New words are created all the time and
the definitions of existing ones change to match the context in which they are
used in modern times. B) Making the pretty minimal effort, of referring to
someone in the way in which they'd like to be addressed is literally such a
low bar, that refusing to do so quite frankly makes you an asshole. C) He uses
the word antifragile, which is not a universally recognized english word. It's
a term coined by a professor in a book in 2012.

~~~
thomaskcr
I think he had the wrong reaction, I think he could have implemented some of
the more reasonable suggestions easily, but some of that stuff is really nuts.
"The addition of an indigenous land acknowledgement to the syllabus." I would
have wtf'ed at too -- it's a CS class. If you mix in that stuff with
reasonable suggestions like avoiding references that require cultural
knowledge or just using different names in examples I can see how someone
would just throw the whole thing out after getting exasperated with the whole
process and some of the "best practices".

The suggestions included some that just seemed like "make your class easier",
I can see how a diversity panel telling him how to grade his class would be
annoying.

> A relaxation of grading on coding style.

> Allowing students to work together in a group for part of their grade
> instead of requiring them to complete all graded work individually.

> A reduction in the amount of effort expended pursuing cheating cases by 50
> percent even though there has been no reduction in cheating cases.

There were some that he easily could have done, like just buying some seminar
for his TAs and using a different problem:

> Training for TAs in inclusion and implicit bias.

> Review of all course materials for inclusiveness. For instance, of a lecture
> that involves calculating body mass index (BMI) using guidelines from the
> National Institutes of Health, the report noted that it “seems insensitive
> to present students with a program that would print out that some of them
> are ‘obese’ while others are ‘normal.’”

There's no reason not to make an effort to use more names in examples and even
just a quick "I've always said you guys, I'm making an effort to say folks but
old habits die hard" probably would have at least shown he cared enough to
make people happy.

~~~
zozbot234
> "The addition of an indigenous land acknowledgement to the syllabus."

That's _one_ nutty request amid a bunch of more-or-less-reasonable ones. (The
requested reduction in pursuing cheating cases was just as nutty, TBH.) It
tells you a lot about how politicized this whole thing is, but it's not like
we didn't know that already. Overall, the article author seems a bit too
emotionally involved himself, in a way that's pretty hard to make sense of as
just caring about good CS 101 teaching.

~~~
hug
In Australia, indigenous land acknowledgements are commonplace, and I cannot
think of a single instance where they have caused any inconvenience.

I see absolutely no reason why the addition of a sentence to the header of the
syllabus would be onerous.

~~~
zozbot234
It's not about having them on the header of a syllabus, it's why have them on
a CS 101 syllabus, of all things - and just about every other syllabus in the
curriculum, apparently. Do people care _that_ much about reading: "This course
is taking place on traditional X!tribe land." or whatever? How does this make
any sense?

~~~
hug
> Do people care that much about reading: "This course is taking place on
> traditional X!tribe land." or whatever?

Demonstrably: Yes, or they wouldn't be asking for it.

> How does this make any sense?

It costs you nothing, or so close to nothing that there's no effective
difference, and a whole heap of people appreciate it. And, in this instance,
it also allows you to keep your job. It's a net positive for all involved.

Do you have a particularly good argument for anyone _not_ doing it? (Slippery
slopes need not apply.)

~~~
DuskStar
> Demonstrably: Yes, or they wouldn't be asking for it.

Obviously, people never ask for things they don't actually care about.

IMO this is intended as something that is both unreasonable to include AND
hard to object to on any grounds but reasonableness and practicality. "Don't
you care about indigenous peoples, or are you some kind of racist?" And so it
provides the ability to continue objecting to someone's behavior even if they
make all the other requested changes.

~~~
zozbot234
The best response to that is malicious compliance: make the changes, but in a
way that's as reasonable as possible, _and_ as obnoxious as possible to the
people who have actually requested the change. Like, have the acknowledgment
line on the syllabus be: "ᴅɪsᴄʟᴀɪᴍᴇʀ: ᴛʜɪs ᴄᴏᴜʀsᴇ ɪs ᴛᴀᴋɪɴɢ ᴘʟᴀᴄᴇ ᴏɴ
ᴛʀᴀᴅɪᴛɪᴏɴᴀʟ x-ᴛʀɪʙᴇ ʟᴀɴᴅ." or something like that. If the other side objects,
you can stand your ground and point out that _they_ are being unreasonable.

~~~
hug
That's the _worst_ possible response! The way you want think this man should
cleverly manoeuvre out of people thinking he's behaving badly is by being
deliberately _malicious_?

You think the solution is being obnoxious and doing that in such a way that is
literally exact same amount of effort as just _being nice_?

Then, your imaginative response when someone points out that everything you
are suggesting is shitty behaviour, the answer is to point back at them and
say "no you"?!

~~~
zozbot234
> ...being deliberately _malicious_?

Of course. After all, 'malicious compliance' is a relative term; the
alternative is to ignore the request altogether and do nothing at all!

~~~
hug
You could just comply with the request in good faith, of course, which you
still have yet to come up with any argument against.

~~~
josteink
I'm feeling a little sensitive right now about your use of "you". It feels
very direct, hostile and threatening to me.

I would appreciate it if you could rewrite all your HN posts to exclude the
use of "you" and rather use alternate grammatical forms.

It's not a big job really, so you shouldn't have any possible reason not to
comply.

------
Kiro
> A relaxation of grading on coding style

I don't understand how this relates to inclusivity.

~~~
plorkyeran
I've worked with developers that get angry at a single trailing space on a
line, and developers who seemingly can't comprehend the concept of
indentation, and definitely can't spot code formatting problems.

With the help of a code formatting tool both are perfectly capable of working
in industry and I haven't seen any particular correlation with actual ability
to write software, but one of them is going to get much better grades than the
other in a class that grades on code style.

~~~
Kiro
Still not sure how that is related to inclusivity. Who is getting
discriminated?

------
DanBC
Has there ever been a useful thread from a quillette submission?

~~~
dang
It is downweighted on HN like most ideologically driven publications, but
we've found there's occasionally a worthwhile article for discussion, as with
other such publications. One test is whether there's enough new information in
a piece to provide support for conversation, as opposed to angry opposing
recitals. Since this is a well-known case with new developments, it seems to
qualify. Also, first-person accounts tend to allow for additional aspects
because human lives are complicated. His story about being gay seems to me an
example of that.

Whatever point one occupies in these spaces, in whatever region sectioned off
by the major divides, it's uncomfortable to have an article in one's face that
comes from an opposing sector. Every one of us has this experience. Even users
who identify with occupying _no_ such region have this experience—maybe most
of all, since they don't want to see any of these, whereas most of us quite
like the ones from the spaces we identify with. I don't think there's any way
out of this conundrum. We all have to tolerate that discomfort if we're to
survive as a whole community. Indeed it seems to me that tolerating such
discomfort is the essence of tolerance. Fortunately it's a skill that can
slowly be learned, so the hopeful view is that we're slowly learning it
together.

~~~
blueboo
No. Tolerating intolerance isn’t the same as tolerance.

~~~
zeta0134
This is an interesting, if contradictory stance to take. I should probably
downvote it, but I see an opportunity for a philosophical discussion, so here
we go anyway.

I am a gay man. I grew up Christian, but ended up rejecting the Christian
faith initially due to incompatibilities with my church and my sexuality. Over
time it became more ideological (I dislike binary moral systems) but that's
irrelevant.

In my experience, my original church (certainly not all of Christianity) chose
to reject people of my orientation. They express intolerance to the highest
degree. So, as a gay man, should I respond in turn and completely cut all
Christians out of my life, declaring them all intolerant?

Of course not.

You see, Christianity actually preaches tolerance. Not all Christians follow
this to the same degree, but Christians are taught to love their neighbors,
even the gentiles, and especially the tax collectors, prostitutes, and folks
that the rest of society would choose to reject on principal. Even if I
disagree with the teaching as a whole, there's a _ton_ of good moral lessons
to be had within that book. It is generally useful as a means of teaching a
system of right and wrong, through parables and stories, even if some of its
teachings disagree with my personal world view.

I think it's dangerous to reject other _people_ entirely just because you
choose to reject one of their beliefs. We may find it easy to label people and
sort them into boxes, but it's easy to lose track of the humanity underneath
those labels. So, _yes,_ I will choose to tolerate people whose beliefs I
strongly disagree with, because that one belief does not solely define them as
a person. Even if we fundamentally disagree on something as core to my being
as who I choose to love, we can still have an interesting discussion and gain
perspective through that discourse. I value that discourse far too much to
reject any person on the misguided notion that they are somehow "wrong" or
"flawed." They are simply _different._ And if I want them to tolerate _me_ ,
the very least I can do is agree to tolerate _them_ in return, whether we like
each other or not.

~~~
joshuamorton
> hould I respond in turn and completely cut all Christians out of my life,
> declaring them all intolerant?

You've set up a straw man. Identifying as Christian does not make someone
intolerant. Many people who identify as Christian are intolerant of people who
identify as gay.

Discrimination against the first group due to the actions of the second is
unfair. But refusing to engage with the second group is completely reasonable.

Otherwise you allow intolerance toward gay people to be legitimized. That can
lead to an erosion of rights. It's literally dangerous in the long term.

~~~
zeta0134
> You've set up a straw man.

Hrm... I suppose I have. The parent appears to be using a quote (from Karl
Popper) that I've not heard before, so clearly I misread the intended nuance.
Now that I'm reading through the philosophical context of that quote, I can
see that I overreacted.

Thanks for the clarification; I now have much food for thought to chew on.

------
porlune
The "hey guys" issue bothers me. "Guys" is gender inclusive already. Defined
as "people of either sex." [1]

I don't mind saying "ya'll", but policing the vernacular of an individual
based on their sexual organs is fairly concerning.

[1]
[https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/guy](https://www.lexico.com/en/definition/guy)

~~~
seanmcdirmid
“Guys” is gender neutral in most of the English speaking world except for some
parts of the USA, where it is considered exclusively masculine. Edit: here is
a photo that describes where it is used or not:
[https://cdn.mapmania.org/original/how_americans_address_a_gr...](https://cdn.mapmania.org/original/how_americans_address_a_group_of_two_or_more_people_65280.jpg)

~~~
nilkn
What region are you referring to? I’ve lived in the US my whole life and have
never encountered an area where “you guys” could not be used in a gender
neutral manner.

~~~
DoreenMichele
FWIW, I'm an American woman who thinks "guys" is masculine.

I don't generally hassle people about such things, but I'm pretty darn sure
there are people who are not me who think it is masculine and would hassle
people about it.

~~~
nilkn
“You guys”, not “guys”. If you still think that can only refer to men, that’s
certainly the first time I’ve heard an American say that. Indeed, I hear this
phrase from women as much as I do from men, to address audiences of any gender
makeup. And I’m in the southern US.

~~~
DoreenMichele
Where I come from, the correct term would be "y'all" or "all y'all" which I
have also seen arguments online about the correct usage and meaning.

I used to routinely use _y 'all_ online in a forum where I was intentionally
emphasizing my Southern identity to more clearly distinguish between singular
"you" and plural "you."

I've had a class in linguistics. I grew up in a bilingual home. I'm not
uninformed about the fact that local colloquialisms exist, language is alive
and evolving.

I think of "guys" and "you guys" as both masculine. I don't generally hassle
people about such things.

Evidence that I don't generally hassle people about such things:

[https://witnesstodestruction.blogspot.com/p/it-seems-my-
sile...](https://witnesstodestruction.blogspot.com/p/it-seems-my-silence-was-
heard.html?m=1)

~~~
nilkn
I’m not making any claims about whether you generally hassle anyone so I don’t
need any evidence about that in either direction. Either way, you are the
first person I’ve talked to who doesn’t think “you guys” can refer to an
audience of multiple genders. That certainly contradicts the overwhelming
majority of usages of the phrase I’ve seen in my life.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I'm aware there are people that use it that way. I've seen this discussion on
the internet before.

I am unlikely to do so, in part because of negative experiences from a very
toxic forum where I was treated like absolute shit.

Please note that I'm backing up someone else's claim about this being a
phenomenon. I'm telling you they aren't making that up. There are Americans
who view that as a masculine term. I'm actual living proof this is not a
bullshit claim.

Sorry you are having such a big problem accepting that.

~~~
nilkn
It’s not that there are some people who use it “that way.” It’s the standard
usage:
[https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_guys](https://en.m.wiktionary.org/wiki/you_guys)

No need to make this personal with your last sentence.

~~~
DoreenMichele
I don't think that's "making this personal." It's not intended as some kind of
personal attack.

Someone other than me noted that this is a phenomenon in some parts of the US.
I posted to support that assertion. You have made multiple comments telling me
I'm wrong about this when my claim is "I, personally, fit the profile" and you
keep citing general usage.

I may be "wrong" by some metric or other to see it as masculine, but I'm
living proof some Americans do, in fact, view it that way. You do appear to be
having some trouble accepting that assertion, given that you basically are
trying to tell me I'm wrong about my testimony about my opinion about the
phrase, which really is quite baffling to me that anyone would try to tell me
that.

~~~
nilkn
I don’t believe I ever used the term “wrong.” I said you’re the only American
I’ve encountered, offline or online, to maintain that “you guys” can only
refer to groups of men. That’s all I’ve said, and that’s probably the end of
this conversation.

The women I work with use this phrase probably more than anyone else I work
with, so there’s not much practical for me to take away from this exchange.

~~~
DoreenMichele
None of this was intended to be "practical" in your life out in meat space.

I only mentioned my gender due to the larger context of the discussion. The
implication is there are women who, like me, view "guys/you guys" as masculine
and (unlike me) would make a big deal out of it. This seems pertinent to the
piece being discussed and wasn't intended to suggest anything about women
generally, much less women you personally know in meat space.

~~~
nilkn
For what it’s worth, the topic has never been whether “you guys” is
“masculine” but whether it can refer to groups of mixed or not-all-male
gender. I do find it odd you have consistently avoided ever making a statement
about the gender makeup of groups to which the phrase can refer. I believe it
is possible for the phrase to be masculine in a sense and for it to still
refer to mixed- or arbitrary-gender groups.

Can you confirm without ambiguity whether you are indeed talking about the
same topic as me?

------
Kapura
On the one hand, I don't think that people should be punished solely for their
political beliefs. On the other hand, a person's beliefs inform their biases
and their actions.

A person who believes that the gender gap in computer science is solely
because Men and Women are different is not the sort of person I want teaching
introductory computer science classes. It excuses the status quo, and does not
demand that the people making the claim try to improve one iota.

\---

I went back and read the "Why Women Don't Code" article by the same author. It
is not about why women don't code; it is a piece about the 'culture wars.'
There are some charts, but then they're 'backed up' with unsubstantiated
claims like,

>"Men disproportionately respond to economic incentives, so they are more
likely to respond favorably to reports of high salaries for tech workers.
Women tend, on average, to be more risk averse, and are more likely to respond
strongly to negative stories about dwindling job prospects in tech."

These sort of UNSUBSTANTIATED sexist generalisations are exactly why he needs
a different job.

~~~
himinlomax
> A person who believes that the gender gap in computer science is solely
> because Men and Women are different is not the sort of person I want
> teaching introductory computer science classes.

What if it's true?

~~~
wayoutthere
It's absolutely not; women get fed up from hearing this crap all the time and
just go do something else where people don't insult them all the time.

~~~
himinlomax
That's not a very powerful argument. In fact it's not an argument at all. And
it doesn't even answer the question: WHAT IF it's true?

Not is it true, not how morally bad is this, not how do you or "women" feel
about it (using quotes because implying women as a group share such a feeling
and that you know what it is sounds just bizarre on the face of it.)

------
microtherion
> my exchange with the young woman, during which we debated whether group
> identity is more important than judging people as individuals

And I'm sure that in that debate, the author of an article titled "Why Women
Don't Code" was outspoken in his defense of judging people as individuals
rather than by some group identity…

~~~
oh_sigh
Saying "women code less than men" does not have an implied "therefore you can
just ignore any individual woman that codes" after it.

Do you think it would be impossible for the perfect uber-individualist to ever
make the statement "men play more basketball than women"?

~~~
microtherion
> Saying "women code less than men" does not have an implied "therefore you
> can just ignore any individual woman that codes" after it.

When uttered by a _teacher_ , it can easily be taken to have an implied
"therefore I'll make less of an effort teaching them, or to encourage their
career".

If somebody had said 40 years ago that "men play more soccer than women", this
would have been correct as an empirical statement. However, it was also
invariably taken as a _normative_ statement, and subsequently less resources
and encouragement were expended on women. And when the genders were later put
on more equitable footing, the empirical fact turned out to be quite
malleable.

> Do you think it would be impossible for the perfect uber-individualist to
> ever make the statement "men play more basketball than women"?

As an individualist, one should always examine whether one extends the
benefits of individualism to _everyone_ , or whether one sees just one's own
peers as individuals, while judging others as groups.

~~~
googlryas
This doesn't really follow. The original post seems to be about how the author
is a hypocrite - now it is simply about him not having the right sensitivity
levels for his statements.

~~~
microtherion
I was not so much trying to point out hypocrisy, as an apparent lack of self
awareness. The author does not realize that he resorts to "group identities"
as well, nor does he consider what kind of effect his statements as a teacher
can have on his students.

As another example of doubtful self awareness, the author mentions the
enthusiastic reception of his "heterodox thinking" seminar — has he considered
that receiving a perfect evaluation score (5 of 5) is NOT exactly evidence
that the seminar has succeeded in instilling heterodox thinking in his
students?

And, given said lack of self awareness, I would not surprised if the author's
attitudes about gender had more of an influence on his treatment of students
than he realizes.

------
OldFatCactus
Can't trust anyone who cites JBP

~~~
dang
Would you please stop posting flamebait to HN? We've asked you before, and
you've done a lot of it. Eventually that gets you banned here, regardless of
which ideology you favor or disfavor. The idea here is: if you have a
substantive point to make, make it thoughtfully; if you don't, please don't
comment until you do.

[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

~~~
OldFatCactus
I don't think I've posted a lot of flamebait. Maybe a couple of times when the
topic drifts close to something regarding women or minority rights. I agree
that my comment was not substantive and I'm sorry

------
cortesoft
I am always a little frustrated by people who make arguments like "Women just
prefer to do other things besides code"; there is always an implicit
assumption that preferences are completely genetic and not affected by the
same culture that shapes all the other reasons why women might not be as
represented in tech.

Preferences are strongly influenced by our culture. Just think about other
areas; kids in Brazil are WAY more likely to be into soccer than a kid in the
United States. Do people think this is because Brazilians have a genetic
disposal to liking soccer? Of course not, if a kid born to American parents
grew up in Brazil, he or she would be just as likely to 'prefer' soccer over
other sports as any other kid in Brazil.

Preferences are shaped by our culture (and of course there is a genetic
component), and there is no easy way to tease out what factors go into setting
our preferences.

The only clear answer is that preferences are not set in stone at birth, and
we shouldn't assume that differences in preferences between men and women will
always remain static and shouldn't be talked about as being influenced by
culture.

tl;dr you can't end the conversation by appealing to preference.

~~~
leereeves
If different preferences are related to culture, why are they seen most
strongly in the societies that try hardest to eliminate differences between
the sexes?

> They observed that the more that women have equal opportunities, the more
> they differ from men in their preferences.

[https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6412/eaas9899](https://science.sciencemag.org/content/362/6412/eaas9899)

~~~
cortesoft
I am not sure how that is related... how culture affects preferences is not
just about how much a society pushes for equality. Culture is complicated, and
isn't as simple as a culture supporting women or not.

I am not even arguing that sexes having different preferences is necessarily
bad... I am simply arguing that preferences are heavily influenced by culture.

~~~
leereeves
It's related because Western cultures have made a conscious effort to
eliminate such influences, and yet those preferences stubbornly remain, or
even grow stronger.

And psychologists have reported these preferences across very different
cultures throughout the world.

It seems like you are stating what you'd like to think is true rather than
drawing conclusions from the available evidence.

~~~
cortesoft
I think you underestimate how much of our culture still perpetuates gender
stereotypes.

~~~
leereeves
No, I really don't. But there's a biological reason for that: women have a
choice that men do not. Many women who want to become stay-at-home (and,
increasingly, single) mothers choose careers that prepare them for that (which
do not include software development).

Men don't really have that choice, so naturally men are overrepresented in
other life choices.

How many men do you know who planned to have a child and raise it on their
own, without a mother, and therefore studied education and medicine to prepare
to be a better primary caregiver? How could that even be made a viable option
for men without forcing women to have children against their will?

~~~
cortesoft
I know zero men who have done that... I also know zero women who have done
that

------
fersho311
I think people who are sensitive are basically human censorship. Freedom of
speech does not truly exist when people are sensitive.

To achieve true freedom of speech, we must be empathetic to those who are
angry and listen to their stories and help wherever we can so they can accept
their situation.

Which is something the professor didn’t do. Why did he post that article? He
grouped a together people who may be marginalized by society and gave them a
label. That’s not how you help people.

I hope the professor learns to be truly empathetic and people takes away the
right lesson from this so that one day we may have true freedom of speech.

------
crankylinuxuser
Whereas here at Indiana Univerity Bloomington , we had Prof Rasmussen say a
whole bunch of terrible things.

Quote: “The whole idea of affirmative action is that too few black students
wouldn [sic] get in without racial preferences, so we need to lower the
standard for them and accept that they will do worse academically,”

Quote: “geniuses are overwhelmingly male because they combine outlier high IQ
with moderately low Agreeableness and moderately low Conscientiousness.”

Quote: “Are Women Destroying Academia? Probably,”

And since this teacher is tenured, he pretty much has to kill someone to get
him out of that job. But keeping people like this one out of classrooms where
they have dictatorial powers over grades is essential for all students to
function. After all, he has said distinctly disparaging remarks against women,
gays, and black people. Has he discriminated in his classrooms against them?

(0) [https://www.idsnews.com/article/2019/11/professor-
criticizes...](https://www.idsnews.com/article/2019/11/professor-criticizes-
ius-reponses-to-tweet) (1)
[https://www.indystar.com/story/news/education/2019/11/24/eri...](https://www.indystar.com/story/news/education/2019/11/24/eric-
rasmusen-says-iu-cant-fire-him-hes-right-heres-why/4272679002/) (2)
[https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-iu-professor-
eric-...](https://www.chicagotribune.com/midwest/ct-iu-professor-eric-
rasmusen-20191122-idgr3m4unrb6fiv3wokqukmddy-story.html)

------
tomohawk
> By the time I got to Stanford as a graduate student in 1979, I was openly
> gay. Not many people were at the time. When I started teaching at the
> university, I found that many gay people wanted to talk to me but almost
> always in private. They would tell me that they couldn’t afford to be as
> open as I was.

> I’m once again having private conversations behind closed doors in my office
> with closeted individuals […] They are deeply concerned about the
> university’s direction, but they are also afraid of jeopardizing their
> current or future job prospects. They also worry about losing friendships
> and professional relationships.

It's not enough to successfully design and run a CS curriculum. You also have
to be a card carrying member of the pitchfork club.

