
A female computer science major at Stanford: “Floored” by the sexism - pierrealexandre
http://fortune.com/2015/02/17/a-female-computer-science-major-at-stanford-floored-by-the-sexism/
======
dneronique
I am a female developer about 6 years older than the author. I absolutely love
the end of this article:

> Slowly but steadily, I am learning to see my dresses and high­-pitched voice
> not as hurdles to my success, but as symbols of the perspective I bring to
> the table.

This conclusion is fantastic and shows a sense of confidence and maturity that
I think all professionals of all genders need to project.

~~~
strathmeyer
It was difficult to have any clue what she was going on about, except that she
expects other people to solve her problems for her and do things for her. I
wonder what gave her that idea.

~~~
cmsj
Perhaps the difficulty is in you and you should reflect on that?

------
bdamm
Well she writes like a junior because she is. But the main points she makes -
subtle sexism regarding capability in the face of equivalent effort - are
certainly observable and do ring true.

When I see articles like this (and the issue of sexism in computing does pop
up quite often) I usually agree. It is there. But what can be done? I myself
have been a disgusting example of a male engineer at times. And as much as I
would love to permanently erase any male/female alteration of my behavior in a
professional context, the reality is I do not become asexual when I go to
work. I'm still a man. What to do?

~~~
leif
You've successfully completed steps 1 and 2:

1\. Acknowledge there is a real problem.

2\. Acknowledge you are part of the problem.

Now, on to steps 3-n!

3\. Don't be discouraged, accept that there are things you can do to help!
This is _good_ , you're about to become a more valuable member of society.

4\. Accept that you need to put in some effort. Not much, don't worry. Most of
it is shutting up.

5\. Read what women write about this problem. They're all experts because
they've been studying it literally their _entire lives_.

6\. Learn (from step 5 and some self-reflection) how to recognize _in real
time_ when you're being a jerk. Then stop.

Now it gets a little harder. But remember, not nearly as hard as _being_ a
woman in tech, so buck up, kid!

7\. Learn (from step 5) how to recognize in real time when _other people_ are
being jerks, and good techniques for how to advocate on behalf of women. This
takes practice and courage, keep at it.

8\. You'll be tempted to brag about how helpful you are to women (hi @wadhwa).
Resist this temptation. Whenever you feel yourself about to tell someone how
great and helpful you are, instead, show them something an actual woman has
said about their problems, and try to point them in the right direction.

Note that you can replace "woman/women" in the above with any
minority/disenfranchised/disadvantaged group you want to help, and the same
formula pretty much works verbatim.

~~~
b6
You seem certain that that you know exactly what the problem is, and exactly
how to solve it, down to a list of steps. You even seem certain that a
stranger on the Internet is part of the problem. Well, give me a break --
that's really presumptuous and condescending. Listening to the aggrieved seems
like a good idea, but there's no guarantee that they have the answers.

~~~
leif
>You even seem certain that a stranger on the Internet is part of the problem

The stranger on the internet said they felt like part of the problem, so I
don't really know what to tell you.

If you read between the lines a bit, I never said I had any of the answers.
All I said was listen to the people that are affected, try to learn about
their problems, and be empathetic, and maybe you'll find the answers.

I'm not trying to be revolutionary here, I just think one of the nice features
of these types of issues is that the people being affected are actual people
that you can listen to and have conversations with, and I think that's a good
place to start.

~~~
pen2l
> All I said was listen to the people that are affected, try to learn about
> their problems, and be empathetic, and maybe you'll find the answers.

Are you aware that one female will have entirely different experiences and
suggestions on how to solve tech's sexism problem than the next? E.g., you
implicate Vivek Wadwa as being a problem (probably due to Amelia Greenhall's
accusations), and yet there are an overwhelming amount of women who take
Vivek's side, not Amelia's. Amelia Greenhall herself, for example, is highly
critical of Sheryl Sandberg. But is highly supportive of females whose blogs
are banned by hacker news (Nitasha Tiku, for example). So, with all due
respect, your suggestions are pretty impractical and will result in a lot of
confusion for the person following the advice, not much good results.

~~~
cmsj
More people accepting the problem, reading up on the experiences of those
facing discrimination, and thinking about what they can do to change
themselves and those around them.

That seems like a pretty good starting point, no?

Whatever you read about, you're going to come up with conflicting opinions and
suggestions, so that is hardly new, and is certainly not an excuse for doing
nothing.

~~~
pen2l
> That seems like a pretty good starting point, no?

Honestly, not at all. I really think the exact opposite is true. The debate in
this arena is hellishly toxic. You read into it a little and you quickly find
out how disturbing ideas flying around really are -- especially from the
prominent voices. Staying away from these debates is probably the best option
for now. I really hope in time something happens and the toxicity goes away.

------
makeset
I do sympathize because people shouldn't have to put up with discrimination
for any reason, especially at work, but her message gets eroded through poorly
chosen arguments.

There's a difference between discrimination and assumption. If I wear scrubs
while visiting a friend at a hospital because I like walking around in scrubs,
people will assume that I'm medical personnel working there. If you're a woman
in a dress at a company where all other women in dresses are recruiters,
people will assume you're probably a recruiter, until they find out otherwise.
They are not discriminating against you, it's just the prior probability. It's
not okay to take this personally and lash out and call them a sausagefest.

An extroverted man wearing more fashion-conscious clothing in an introverted
company-shirt crowd will stand out, and might face less sympathetic reviews in
interview situations. That's discrimination, and it's not okay, but it
happens. Having to look the part or not when it matters is a compromise we all
face. This is not a good argument for her case.

And look here: > And if that wasn’t enough, my achievement was questioned by
male colleagues. I’d occasionally hear, “Oh you’re a woman, you’ll get a job
at Google or Facebook just fine!” Which was the most discouraging
encouragement. If I did get the internship, it was because I was a woman and
if I didn’t, I’d just failed to leverage my upper edge.

They said it because there is truth to it -- she won't get the job _because_
she's a woman, but she _will_ have higher chances _because_ she's a woman. In
the very least, it will muddle the reasons behind the decision. You can't have
your cake and eat it too. If you're in support of gender diversity awareness
in hiring, you've given up the license to complain about it. Saying "Let's
hire more women!" when selecting from a decidedly male-dominated pool fully
implies that women at large are given higher chances solely for being women.
Sad, but true.

At that point I'm starting to doubt the interpretation of other examples like
the older guy who called her dresses "fun." Was it a creepy guy making
underhanded passes, or mere a fatherly figure lending his support for her
unique choices? I personally don't doubt her judgment that it was the former,
but it's hard to be convinced given the way the rest of the article reads.

------
jneen
I have heard most of these things, and it sucks. This is hella real.

~~~
kleer001
Yup, it makes me a teeny bit more angry every time I read an article like
this. Angry and disappointed.

~~~
hackcasual
I'm happy that she decided to share. It's easy to forget how real this issue
can be. The shit show in the comments here when an article like this is new
further demonstrates the fact that there's still more work to be done. I will
say though I do like HN because it seems to pretty quickly approach
reasonableness with the voting system.

------
cubetime
I do sometimes wonder what's added by focusing on sexism in tech, in
particular, and suggesting it's uniquely a problem with tech. I can believe
it's worse here on average than some other comfortable professional jobs, but
seriously, sexism is _everywhere_ and if we want to reduce it, it makes more
sense to me to focus on the problem itself _in full generality_ rather than an
environment it's found in.

Unless you want to invoke an explanation that involves some combination of
classism and good old-fashioned picking on (relatively) low-status nerds
because it's easier and feels more natural. Then there wouldn't be much left
to wonder.

(Edit: NOT saying we shouldn't point out sexism in tech, but expressing
skepticism at the broader cultural narrative around how software people are
uniquely ignorant and sexist relative to other professions. Ask ten women
who've worked somewhere besides tech for a few years for some stories of
sexism, you'll hear plenty.)

~~~
delluminatus
You said yourself that you can believe that sexism is worse in tech than in
other professions. That is already a problem worth discussing. Why is it
worse? What can we do to correct that discrepancy?

I will go so far as to say your suggestion to "focus on the problem _in full
generality_ " \-- which is to say, to completely encompass an impossibly
complicated issue -- is just a way of trying to pass responsibility and to
avoid admitting that there is a problem. Of course, trying to resolve sexism
everywhere is admirable. But to use the existence of sexism in other fields as
a reason to avoid addressing it in our own is little better than rejecting its
existence altogether.

edit for your edit: I think there are specific reasons that sexism is more
prevalent in tech, which are not necessarily related to "software people are
ignorant". In our culture there appears to be a general bias against women in
pretty much all STEM fields, perhaps for historical reasons. I suspect
(although this is just my opinion) that this is largely responsible for any
greater bias that exists in tech as well. There is a mistaken perception that
women are less capable in highly rational pursuits, which affects how women in
tech are viewed by their colleagues. I think this is a big reason that women
have a hard time in tech.

~~~
cubetime
I'd expect it's worse in tech than _some_ other professions _on average_
because tech is mostly male, which I think is mostly due to gendered
expectations originating from parenting and early education.

I think "just don't be sexist please" makes more sense than "don't be sexist
at work if you belong to this profession". Like I desperately clarified in my
edit which you may not have seen, I'm not saying it shouldn't be pointed out
in tech, I'm saying it's suspicious that the cultural narrative focuses so
much on tech in particular.

------
blkhp19
First of all, calling a group of guys a sausage fest is reverse sexism. If I
called a classroom full of girls a barbie play-date, or a tea party, or a
"fashion" class - regardless of the real reason for their gathering, people
would be outraged - and rightfully so. None of those things are true and it's
disrespectful to say something like that.

Second, the guy who said "well I should have applied for that" might have said
it because two people in a row standing right in front of him just said they
had awesome internships at Facebook. Sure, he could have been a total prick
and said it because she was a girl, but the fact that the 2 people he asked
both said they interned at Facebook completely changes the context of the
conversation. If he only asked the girl and responded that way, then that
would be different - and that seems to be how she's thinking about it. She's
not taking into account the actual context of the conversation.

Wearing colorful, comfortable dresses sounds awesome. Yeah, I like tech
T-shirts, and the latter was definitely the more common form of attire at the
startup I interned at this past summer, but if someone wore a dress one day, I
don't think it would be unusual for that person's manager to say "you look
nice today" or "your outfit looks fun."

And regarding the interview, it makes sense that you'll get "better results"
by dressing like a techie. There are _tons_ of girls who dress like techies.
Wearing a T-shirt with a tech logo on it just sends the message that you love
technology. It shouldn't be an important factor in an interview, but of course
the way you dress sends a particular message. Wearing a dress doesn't send a
negative message in any way, but a girl wearing a tech T-shirt comes across as
someone who is super into tech - for the same reason a guy wearing a tech
T-shirt looks more into tech than someone who wears a business suit to an
interview. The T-shirt could be completely misrepresenting that person's
interest in tech, but the point is it sends a particular message during an
interview.

I hate to conclude on such a sour note, but the girl the article is speaking
about seems to think everyone is against her. It is absolutely possible that
this girl experiences discrimination in the tech industry due to her gender,
but the examples she talked about simply don't demonstrate that in a
definitive way.

~~~
dudifordMann
Side note: My relative who works in HR has told me time and again, the
appropriate way to say "you look nice" to a co-worker in a professional
setting is to _not say it_. In that setting, beyond grossly inappropriate work
attire (at which point all comments should go directly to HR and not the
employee), there is no need to make a subjective-comment on someone's
appearance, you're there to work.

(edit) grammar

~~~
blkhp19
I agree with this. Nobody should be judged based on how they look. If you
compliment someone and don't compliment others, it could be interpreted the
wrong way. If you compliment someone and it's misinterpreted, then it could
also cause issues. Just don't judge people based on superficial things.

~~~
tothepixel
Knowing this I am going to start wearing sweatpants and slip-ons to work.
Perhaps I'll stop bathing too. I would certainly hate to have to call my
company out on tumblr for judging me on superficial things.

~~~
blkhp19
I do see the issue with it. Perhaps nobody complimenting anyone is the lesser
of 2 evils? Or maybe the trick is to keep comments about attire left up to HR.
Managers and coworkers should not comment on an outfit, but HR can if a
manager or coworker complains to them. Surely not bathing would get you a
talking to from HR =)

------
jesuislelui
I'm a CS grad at CSUEB in the Bay Area (I was also an undergrad there
previously), and this "women are absent" nonsense is very much the opposite of
what I see in my classes.

Most of my classes are comprised of roughly 25-30 students. Of those, roughly
20+ students are Indian, and of those 20+, 15+ are females, and I assure you
they're really good!

Now, it may not be Stanford or Berkeley or whichever high-horse university
some of you would like to use to dismiss this information, but in my
experience there are women in CS, lots of them. It seems folks are just
looking at the "bigger buzzfeed" schools or where they want for these "ohh..
I'm a girl in CS and I'm not recognized". Take a look outside these
prestigious schools and the gender demographics will change. I'm not saying
these don't exist, I'm just saying look around a little more.

Now, I can't speak for female presence in IT in the professional world, but
with regard to those feeling belittled or taken advantage of, women are
unfortunately targeted by unsolicited/creepy advances all the time,
everywhere. It's not a tech industry thing, it an unfortunate all-over-the-
world problem.

If when asked where one person did an internship the answer is "facebook",
then yeah maybe some surprise, I guess it would be nice to intern at facebook.
If the following 1,2,3 people also answer "facebook", then I too would
probably think to myself "oh, I should have probably applied then". At this
point, I'll just have to take Lea's word that the reaction was truly because
she was a girl?!

------
brandonmenc
A male developer is going to be flagged as an "imposter" if he shows up to cut
code in a suit. That sucks. Unfortunately, it probably also applies to
dresses.

------
jgalt212
> I’ve had middle­-aged coworkers (not at Facebook, another internship)
> literally GChat me pickup lines (that aren’t even clever) to the point I’d
> avoid certain portions of the office altogether;

Not to be trite, but the only thing worse than being a girl who gets Gchated
pick up lines, is one who doesn't.

OK, now. What am I driving at? My view on a primary reason why there doesn't
seem to be more progress is because the Liz Lemon and Jenna Maroney archetypes
have yet to come up with a common strategy.

This bit of dialogue basically sums up their differences:

Jenna: Oh, I’m not worried because I have something the other actors don’t. A
secret weapon.

Liz: Don’t say your sexuality.

Jenna: My sexuality!

~~~
totony
If she feels incomfortable about it, she shouldn't avoid them. Did she tell
them it makes her unconfortable? Nerds aren't all good with asserting if
someone is confortable with something.

------
foxhedgehog
One of the best TA's that I ever had, in any discipline, was a female CS
instructor at Cal who was also likely a PhD candidate. My operating theory was
that she not only had to be smart enough to be admitted into that program, but
that she additionally had to overcome some degree of adversity stemming from
gender-based perceptions (which I definitely observed in our department). The
entire class was disappointed when our regular professor returned from a
conference after she had been instructing for a week because she was so much
better at teaching than he was.

------
VikingCoder
Rush's brain: "Wow, one of my classmates made it to Facebook? Cool." Rush's
brain a moment later, "Wait, TWO of my classmates made it to Facebook?!? Oh...
well then I should have applied for that internship." I'm sympathetic to the
view that Rush was being sexist. But could it possibly be that Rush was just
adding up the numbers and realizing that his odds weren't as bad as he
realized?

"and I’ve been cornered by a stranger at night outside Stanford’s Gates
Building when leaving office hours." This doesn't strike me as an indictment
against Stanford or against Computer Science - just against men in general.

"Worst of all, a 50-­year-­old married, male coworker at one internship would
regularly make it a point in passing to comment on how “fun” my dresses
looked." I wasn't there, and again, I'm sympathetic to the idea that this
could have been sexism - but I again wonder if this wasn't just a compliment.
As a 40-year-old married male, I wonder if I can compliment my female co-
workers on how they look. And at what frequency would it become the "worst of
all" sexism that female had ever encountered?

"I noticed that management listened more to what my male counterparts had to
say even though I was offering insightful feedback." I've seen this first-
hand, and it's disgusting. I saw blatant sexism and racism in my college, as
well.

I am sympathetic, but some of the examples cited seem questionable to me.

------
CHY872
One of my female friends has been through broadly similar experiences, and so
sadly I'm not particularly surprised by this article. I'm glad that it's been
posted, and am somewhat saddened by the defensive nature of a lot of the
replies here.

Yes, a few of her examples are a little weak, but I think it paints an overall
picture that isn't hugely encouraging for the state of SV, and one that I have
no trouble believing.

------
jongraehl
For a typical high-achieving man (in other words, a narcissist) to make it
through a program where he's even slightly outside the social mode _without_ a
persecution complex, he'd have to possess extraordinary emotional poise. And
we've seen that fine analytical minds are at least as prone to biases (system
2 reasoning is the rationalizing one, not the automatic system 1).

So, this woman's reaction is not to her discredit. Almost any person would
have it. What's maybe a little sad is how much play such "dear diary"
reactions get. I guess people really love a good shouting match (see the many
flagkilled comments).

Those capable folks who enter a field out of genuine desire and with no
obstacle other than a (real) feeling of social friction will stick with it and
prevail. Good luck, outsiders. Anyway, ridiculous feelings of persecution
(e.g., they think they're better than me with their college degrees - I'll
show them all!) can be harnessed for productivity, so if you can't zen away
your angst, use it.

------
alialkhatib
As a PhD student here at Stanford, I find this really distressing.

For what little it may be worth to anyone reading this who is(/was) thinking
about coming to Stanford, I _have_ heard professors and grad students talk
about ways to be more inclusive in their actions and language. I've heard my
advisor stumble over "you guys" only to stop and correct himself with "you
all". I can't speak for every lab (there are numerous, each with different
cultures and norms), but hopefully I speak for everyone when I say that we
grad students and the professors are at least open to learning about how we
can make the CS program (and the field as a whole) a safer space for everyone,
if not _actively_ working toward that goal. If nothing else, we can promote an
inclusive culture in how we speak, behave, and in what behavior we (don't)
tolerate.

For Lea (and for countless others), I worry her perception of CS has been
irreparably damaged. Hopefully that won't be the case going forward.

------
trhway
are sexism and sexual harassment the same things? To me it sounded like she
listed examples of both. I mean like the stranger in the night isn't exactly
"sexism in tech", it is more like industry unrelated harassment bordering on
assault. I'd venture to guess that such harassment/assault is even less
probable from a college educated tech workers than from other demographic
groups.

~~~
alxjrvs
Sexism is pervasive. Sexual Harassment is generally goaded on by permissive
environments, especially those that are largely male.

The "Stranger in the Night" comment is definitely harassment, but it is not
hard to see how its occurrence is relevant to the larger issue.

~~~
trhway
>it is not hard to see how its occurrence is relevant to the larger issue.

my point is that it is really hard to see. How thinking that somebody is less
capable as a programmer (or auto mechanic, TV announcer, whatever...) relevant
to actual stalking/harassment/assault.

------
PhoenixWright
These are getting funnier. Now back to actually trying to better myself
instead of blaming "unconscious" biases for all of my problems.

------
buckbova
I've worked many jobs in my life, many . . . people will ask you out
everywhere you work. Go be a waitress and see how many co-workers, bosses, and
customers try and pick you up.

> I’ve had middle­-aged coworkers (not at Facebook, another internship)
> literally GChat me pickup lines (that aren’t even clever) to the point I’d
> avoid certain portions of the office altogether

------
qiqing
Having read a lot of the "are you sure she didn't misinterpret that" or "it's
not like women can't apply to these jobs" comments, I'd like to help people
overcome their knee-jerk reflex and really think about this instead of
throwing their hands up.

For those who are questioning her experience, let's consider a piece of satire
about bias at Hogwarts (and mentally substituting gender or other demographic
of choice for religion here):

"These facts will likely surprise Hogwarts students today, especially those
acquainted with the broader history of Judaism at their school... and though
Spinoza’s invitation to deliver a series of lectures, in 1652, was met with
protests, organizers were careful to note that it was the philosopher’s
virulent anti-wizarding stance that they objected to, not his Jewish
extraction.

A turning point in the story of anti-Semitism at Hogwarts came in 1920, when
Jewish enrollment, buoyed by excellent Wizarding Admissions Test scores,
peaked at thirty per cent. Complaints began to circulate that the “character
of the place” was changing. These were vague comments, but no one mistook
their meaning. The conservative Board of Governors (which, for the record, did
not admit a Jew until Robert Rubin joined, in 1995) exerted enormous pressure
on Headmaster Phineas Nigellus Black to “do something about it,” and the Class
of 1926 was the first to be subject to the notorious Jewish quotas that would
stand for almost fifty years. There were no hard numbers, of course—only a
directive to the admissions committee to begin placing less weight on test
scores and more on certain vaguely defined categories such as “character,”
“fitness,” and “spell diction.” But it was enough.

Of course, the situation at Hogwarts had never been anywhere near as bad as at
the universities in Eastern and Central Europe, where Jewish wizards as
eminent as Freud and Einstein, unable to secure teaching appointments, were
forced to use their magic in the service of formulating bizarre Muggle
theories. Nor was Hogwarts ever the site of anti-Semitic violence, seen at too
many of the Hungarian and Austrian wizarding schools during the tumultuous
years after the First World War. There, student “demonstrations” often
included the use of the so-called Jewish spells, cruel incantations that
caused the peyes (side curls) to become scalding hot, the phylacteries to
tighten around the wearer’s head—and, of course, the notorious ­“kipa
spinner.”

No, Hogwarts was never the setting for any bigotry as brutal as that, and if I
persist in recalling the minor injustices it is for the sake of guarding
against future anti-Semitism in its most subtle forms." [1]

1\. [http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/true-history-
jew...](http://www.newyorker.com/humor/daily-shouts/true-history-jewish-
wizards-hogwarts-harry-potter)

------
xname
I know guys make all kinds of jokes during work, some of them are not PC. If
they do / do not make those jokes with a female coworker, which one is
considered as sexism?

------
kleer001
Yup, sounds like standard fare. I would have been impressed if she'd
documented and reported this shitty behaviour. Then again Confrontation is
difficult, no matter the context.

~~~
jneen
As someone who has tried to document and report shitty behavior, it's
important to keep in mind how risky that is.

Here are a few patterns I've observed:

pattern (a) MAN: _does shitty thing_ ; WOMAN: hey please stop; WOMAN's
performance review: "has conflicts with MAN"

pattern (b) MAN: _does shitty thing_ ; WOMAN: _reports shitty thing_ ;
MANAGER: oh MAN is a nice guy, why don't you try working it out yourself

pattern (c) MAN: _does shitty thing_ ; WOMAN: _does nothing because she
actually reports to MAN_

~~~
bluecalm
This happens in hierarchies regardless of genders. Anyone bullied in school or
a workplace can tell you this. You would need to measure if it in fact happens
more often if it's a woman being a victim which is very difficult as most of
those situations are not reported by neither gender.

~~~
jneen
See, I actually know it has to do with gender because I used to have a beard.
I got treated very differently back then.

~~~
totony
How are you sure that what your experienced was solely based on gender?

------
Jimmy
Perhaps the people who have downvoted every comment so far would like to
contribute to the conversation?

~~~
PhoenixWright
The conversation is they're right and your sexist!

------
helllohi
She doesn't mention other women at her internships. If she had spoken to other
women and they too experienced levels of sexism then yes; but since she
doesn't make the mention we don't know.

------
theVirginian
Most of these incidents just sound like guys who were genuinely trying to be
nice or funny, but because anything can be seen through the lens of sexism,
this woman took the opportunity to consider herself oppressed.

~~~
knowtheory
Hopefully you can understand that intent isn't everything?

Being considerate of others isn't just saying "pshht i didn't mean anything by
it!" it's actually thinking about how other people might react in the
circumstances they've been put in.

You can call sexism a lens, but it might also help to understand the
experiences others have lived (from their POV, not yours) to see why it's a
lens that others are brought to employing.

~~~
theVirginian
Perhaps, but there certainly are some incidents which are ambiguous. I fear
that by taking that mindset we will create an environment where people have
more incentive to not speak to or interact with women because they might get
in trouble for an action that was either careless or consciously intended not
to be sexist but gets twisted around and made to look that way. I certainly
think that saying something like "you are less capable because you are a
woman" is sexist but saying something like "your dress is fun" does not
unambiguously imply that it was a sexual advance. Why can't it just be a nice
unthreatening comment?

~~~
notduncansmith
> people have more incentive to not speak to or interact with women because
> they might get in trouble for an action that was either careless or
> consciously intended not to be sexist but gets twisted around and made to
> look that way

This is how I feel about most tech gatherings now, even online discussions
(I'm actually a bit nervous about this comment). Any interaction I have with a
woman in tech, or any discussion about women in tech that I might participate
in, has the potential for career-threatening blowback. So far I've been
following the War Games strategy: "The only way to win, is not to play." But
that doesn't feel great either, because now I'm consciously avoiding people
who otherwise might have been great to have a conversation with.

The worst part is, I didn't have that problem until the whole women in tech
thing was dragged into the light. I'm not saying that shouldn't have happened:
it's obvious by now that there are problems that need solving. There have been
consequences, however, of which I'm not sure the more vocal members of this
movement are cognizant.

------
dominotw
Wow another privileged woman speaking about her "feels".

I take a bus with Mexican woman whose husband beats her but she is too scared
to go to law enforcement( her being an illegal immigrant and all).

The contrast between two women is insane. Yet we talk everyday endlessly about
the former not the latter. I am disgusted by this whole thing. Seriously WTF.

~~~
intev
Just because the Mexican woman is in a worse situation compared to the
Stanford grad, it doesn't make the Stanford grad's situation any less worse.
If you were not allowed to eat any food once a week, and I told you "there's
starving children in Africa with NO food 3 times a week" does that make you
feel better about your situation? You also happen to be posting on a tech
website, so that would explain why we talk about the former and not the
latter. Outside silicon valley no one cares about the former but there are
many organizations trying their best to help with the latter.

~~~
8_hours_ago
In case you were wondering, that argument is known as the fallacy of relative
privation: "an opponent's arguments should be dismissed or ignored, on the
grounds of there existing more important problems, despite these issues being
often completely unrelated to the subject at hand."

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy_of_relative_privation)

~~~
dominotw
I knew someone would post this. I am talking about two people who work in the
same office but one is treated like a princesses and another like invisible.

This whole gender gap thing is used by profiteers like "diversity
consultants", media outlets like the original post for page views.

------
davidf18
There seems to be something wrong with this commenting system. I tried to
respond to someone who responded to what I wrote and the response did not take
twice.

This is what I wrote: Changing others, changing men, changing culture is very
difficult. Nice to talk about it but it really doesn't happen. What one can do
is to change themselves and part of that is understanding that those people
are ASD are more likely to be insensitive than others and that is partially a
genetic phenomena. There is nothing wrong with women being more competitive
than men in general and learning new technologies by going to meetups and
otherwise. For example, most programmers know Java/Hadoop and far fewer really
work with Scala/Spark. Learn advanced machine learning algorithms. Have a good
understanding of computer architecture and computer chip fabrication.

I have been to a number of meetups and I have never seen any hostility towards
women. These tend to be rather technical where meritocracy is respected.

In sum, those in technology are not wishful thinkers. One cannot change
others, only themselves. Men are not going to change at least in the short
term. I have given examples of a realistic means for dealing with the
situation that I have seen women and others use.

------
rajacombinator
Ahhh Stanford undergrads. Whenever I'm thinking this life is too brutal I can
always count on them to remind me there are people out there whose entire
lives have been shrouded in naiveté and privilege.

I wonder how much the media is to blame for this young woman's mindset? Did
she ever consider that her boss might not be asking her opinion because she
was an intern? Or just jump to I'm not getting 100% attention on a silver
platter, must be sexism? It's not clear from the article.

~~~
_random_
_" I’ve had middle­-aged coworkers ... GChat me pickup lines"_

She is also kind of age-biased. Age doesn't matter, all kind of gender/legal-
age/race relations are accepted by modern society.

~~~
rsfinn
Let's posit "middle-aged" means "in their 40s". She's a junior in college, so
let's say 20 or so.

So you're suggesting that objecting to getting pickup lines from people
_literally old enough to be her father_ is "age-biased", and not, you know,
"creepy"? Hmm.

------
davidf18
Many men who program computers, especially those who are very competent, are
ASD (on the Autistic Spectrum), eg, perhaps some form of Aspergers. In Autism
Researcher Simon Baron-Cohen's terminology they are "hyper" systemic but
"hypo" empathic. Thus, they may be acting socially unaware, especially
compared with women and people should keep that in mind.

Also, women should consider at working and at least understanding and be able
to talk about higher levels of technology that many of their male counterparts
have not worked with. One woman I knew who has never worried about the issues
in this article got an EE degree from a top rated university and did a lot of
C++ contract work at high rates. Part of her education was being mentored by
men who were very competent in programming yet older than she was.

Any guy that thinks he is smarter can be "put in his place" by someone who
knows technology better and can show it.

Also, women should go to Meetups where they can me people in industry and
learn new technologies that they may not have had in school. In the meetups
that I attend in NYC, I see relatively few women and meetups are a great place
to make contacts and learn new technologies.

~~~
listrophy
1\. Being ASD is not a carte blanche.

2\. Suggesting that "simply knowing more" is sufficient ignores the way many
men will discount a woman's knowledge compared to a man's knowledge simply
because she's a woman.

3\. Can we not resort to putting people into their place to establish
dominance hierarchies? What about synergistic differences? Those are
tremendously valuable.

4\. Many meetups can be frustrating or downright hostile to women. Even well
intentioned organizers can have a difficult time attracting women if
attendance is already primarily male. Let's not forget that women make about
70¢ per $1 that men make, so they tend to have less opportunity to spend
leisure time at a meetup.

This is a problem, and we can't ask women to simply try harder. They've been
trying harder their whole lives. Perhaps it's time for us men to try harder
for once.

