

Re: Women in Tech, Don’t Apologize, Just Recognize - tswicegood
http://www.michellesblog.net/meet-people-in-austin/re-women-in-tech-dont-apologize-just-recognize#

======
51Cards
I think the HN title of this post is misleading to the actual article content.
The HN title here implies that the women in tech are apologizing, when she is
actually saying to men "Please stop apologizing for other offensive males in
tech, just recognize the situation in general, recognize your female co-
workers, and strive for improvements".

------
wccrawford
The title is confusing, indeed. She's trying to say, 'Men: Don't apologize for
the situation'.

And I totally disagree. As a man, I know what happens when we don't: We get
lambasted for not caring.

We do care. We care enough to apologize and defend.

While I haven't worked with a female programmer, the ones I met socially were
very competent. The female QA Testers I've worked with have been amazing. Even
the female phone tech support reps I've worked with have been great. (For the
record, most of the males filling those positions were better than average.
I'm not disparaging them.)

The negative stereotype of women and science/tech/etc is undeserved and wrong.

But ignoring the situation is not the answer. Not-apologizing is a form of
ignoring it. It doesn't help the situation at all.

Apologizing, however, shows support and that the vocal minority are just that:
A minority.

~~~
bellaire
You can other things to show that you give a damn besides apologizing, which
is kind of her point.

Would a woman apologize to another woman about the behavior of a crude man?
No, because she hasn't done anything wrong. Apologizing explicitly
externalizes women as being outside your group. You're saying "gee, I'm sorry
one of us did that to one of you." That just reinforces the idea that "Women
in Tech" are a separate entity from "People in Tech". She's asking you to stay
at the "People in Tech" level.

Not-apologizing isn't a form if ignoring. There are many other things you can
do than pretend to be part of the offending group so that you can apologize.
If a caucasian American said to an African-American, "Gee, I'm sorry about
slavery, that was really wrong of us", that would be horribly offensive,
wouldn't it?

Are we all in this together or not?

~~~
michellegreer1
You hit the nail on the head, bellaire. The best thing you can do is support
competent people and call out people who bring others down. It doesn't matter
if someone is a woman, African American, or has a crazy lisp or something. If
someone brings value into the workplace, which according to research, women
do, we should protect them for the sake of us all. I don't want apologies. I
want you to have my back, because I'll always have yours if you are good
people.

------
Skroob
"Ask Michael Arrington what Heather Harde has brought to TechCrunch, or Larry
Page what Marissa Mayer means to Google. Ask Mark Zuckerberg what Sheryl
Sandberg brings to Facebook."

Maybe it's not that they're women. Maybe it's alliterative names that makes
the difference.

~~~
Unseelie
Does it really count as alliteration with only two words?

~~~
cshesse
Yes

------
ianterrell
I find it ironic that the gist of her argument is a little sexist itself:
_Don't call us victims, call us your valuable assistants!_

~~~
KaeseEs
I find it ironic that the tone gets so bellicose at times, and also kind of
wonder what the purpose of the implied threat at the end was in an article
that started out so reasonably.

------
Unseelie
In all fairness, even if someone is your boss, they are a piece of meat. Cause
we're made of meat. Unless there's something you want to be telling us..

------
recoiledsnake
>Almost a year ago, a flurry of TechCrunch commenters repeatedly called me the
“C word”, insisted that my brain somehow was incapable of quantitative tasks,
and one even told me if I didn’t like my female body, I could euthanize myself
legally in the state of Oregon. Awesome.

There's one big problem right there, taking a bunch of online comments
seriously. Anonymity seems to be bring out the worst in people(both men and
women), there's no point whatsoever mulling over it.

~~~
michaelchisari
_Anonymity seems to be bring out the worst in people_

It can be argued that anonymity presents people in their most honest,
unfiltered form.

So, the same anonymous commenters calling her the c-word may "intellectually"
argue that women are merely incapable of succeeding in tech when in polite
company.

~~~
sliverstorm
If the online presences of anonymous people are the truest representations of
humans as individuals, I think we my have bigger problems than misogyny.

~~~
kstenerud
An anonymous poster's behavior is indicative of what that person is really
like. With nothing to fear, there is nothing to inhibit you. Absolute power
has a similar effect, with demonstrable results throughout history. Very few
people have the moral character and discipline to comport themselves in a
civilized manner without an external counterbalance to their impulses.

~~~
sliverstorm
I find myself hearkening back to the old musing, "If a tree falls in a forest,
and no one is around to hear, does it make a sound?"

Humans are social creatures. Is what a person behaves like when traditional
social structures are removed necessarily what they are "really like"? What
makes that any more "true" than how they behave elsewhere?

You could remove a wolf from it's pack and examine it's behavior. Do you know
the wolf on some deeper level now? I'd argue no- the wolf is part of the pack,
and without the pack you do not know the wolf.

~~~
pnathan
Humans are not social creatures like dogs. Dogs are pack animals. We are not.
That is a bad analogy.

If you want to know a human to the uttermost, put him under tremendous stress
and listen to the thoughts he thinks in his head. That is who he is.

~~~
sliverstorm
I beg to differ. I think it is actually a pretty good analogy. Humans
originated in tribes, no? Besides being a bit more complex socially, how is a
tribe so different from a pack?

Have you ever noticed just how well dogs integrate into the human family? It's
weird sometimes- I find dogs in general behave almost exactly like a
particularly stupid but happy human.

------
dolvlo
>And the next time you say something crude to a woman at a happy hour,
remember that one day, someone could wise up and hire that woman in a senior
management position. She won’t be a piece of meat then–she’ll be your boss.

With respect to this quote: 1\. Crudeness is, at times, appreciated and
welcome, depending on context and consent. 2\. This is a horrible reason to
treat women with respect. This is literally the same argument religious people
use to demand believers to not sin (i.e. "If you sin, you might go to hell").
3\. A good reason to treat women with dignity and respect is that they're
conscious animals, just like you, the reader of this comment.

