
How to teach your girlfriend programming - darthdeus
http://blog.jakubarnold.cz/how-to-teach-your-girlfriend-programming
======
jacalata
This is kind of like the ways I have helped my boyfriend learn programming
except for how it is hopelessly mired in the idea that programmers are guys
who have cutely technologically impaired girlfriends.

~~~
reginaldjcooper
Where exactly is that idea expressed?

EDIT: Fine, if you read into the preface where he talks about his programmer
friends I guess they are all male. That's hardly hopelessly mired, it's more
like an unfortunate choice of description. I bet the author would assume women
programmers feel the exact same way about their partners as well.

~~~
chlostick
It's heavily implied in the language of the article. Chances are you're right,
and if we asked the author of the article, he might say that: yeah, it works
both ways, and this is just his experience.

The problem is that this is an instructional article, and his language
excludes the idea of female programmers completely. It doesn't mean he's a
horrible person because of it. It's just that this kind of language is still
the norm, and it would be great if we could be recognised as equals, and not
for us to be expected to assume it in the face of exclusion.

Language is important, because it affects how we perceive one another. So
jacalata's comment serves as a polite critisism. Women are people too, and you
all know that, but sometimes some folks need to be reminded to reflect that in
their language.

~~~
reginaldjcooper
Outside of that paragraph there is basically no insinuation that women cannot
program. The line about rubber-ducking problems with your partner? Not gender-
specific unless you've already decided he's sexist.

It's about a specific woman who happens to be a political science student and
_learns quite a bit about programming in six months_. I don't see how that
implies women are incapable of it, on the contrary it claims the woman in
question was quite capable even though she was not in the field. He explicitly
mentions that she's a political science student; that's the only reason he had
for thinking she'd be unable to do it.

"Teach your girlfriend to program" is obviously meant to be interpreted as
"teach your non-programming partner to program" where he uses himself and his
girlfriend as the "everyprogrammer" and every(wo)man. If you are going to
decide he is sexist and then interpret his use of himself as the programmer to
implicitly or explicitly mean only men know how to program, well, that seems
to unfairly make assumptions about the intent of the author.

God forbid we claim a political science student might not be able to learn
programming if she happens to be a woman.

~~~
chlostick
"Teach your girlfriend to program" is obviously meant to be interpreted as
"teach your non-programming partner to program"

^ That is exactly what I'm talking about. It may be obvious to you, but from
my perspective it's exclusionary. It says this article is not meant for me.
Which would be fine if not for the fact that it could absolutely be meant for
me, if not for the fact that I'm a woman. Do you see what I mean? It's so hard
to hard to convey this shit...

Okay, imagine there's an article called "How to teach your boyfriend to use
proper hygiene". And it's written in the same way as this article, with a girl
describing her own experience with her non-hygienic boyfriend, and it's
written in the same instructional manner, using language that implies (however
indirectly) that boyfriends in general are un-hygienic.

Wouldn't you be at least a little annoyed by the assumption? Now, what if you
saw shit like that in the vast majority of content you read, online and out in
the world? That's what it's like for us; especially those of us women in
typically male-dominated professions. It's harder for men to see, because it
doesn't affect men, and it's still very socially normative. And when we point
it out, men often see it as an attack on all men. And it's not personal. Most
folks have the best intentions. But I feel I need to call this shit out when I
see it, because awareness invokes change. I try my best not to offend people,
but I'm sick of being excluded because of my gender, when my gender make up
half the damn population.

Ugh.

~~~
reginaldjcooper
Other than a poor choice of title I literally cannot understand what is
objectionable. But somehow it is as objectionable as claiming all men have
poor hygiene?

I also hate that women are excluded from what they want to do because of
sexist bullshit. Please if this is actually sexist, point me to the exact
parts or wordings that indirectly imply girlfriends in general are incapable
of programming, so that I can never write a similar thing.

~~~
chlostick
Okay, sure.

It starts with the title. "How to teach your girlfriend programming"
immediately tells women that this article isn't for her; it's for her
boyfriend, so _he_ can teach her.

The rest of the article regularly enforces this exclusion. He's talking to
men.

Almost every time he refers to his girlfriend, he says "my girl", which, in
the context of a professional article, is belittling. He says "my girlfriend"
twice. Never does he say "my partner", which would have made the article much
more inclusive.

"Every one of them told me they don’t want a programmer girl, they said they
would go crazy. But I call that bullshit. It was just their fear talking."

There is so much wrong with these sentences. Why say "programmer girl"? They
are women who don't want to be programmers. Saying it was their fear talking,
and calling it bullshit, invalidates these women's legitimate concern for how
the people in their lives will view them if they go into this field. Their
fear isn't bullshit, the expectations of our society are bullshit (for the
record, a lot of expectations made of men are bullshit too).

"What’s really everyone thinking is that it is impossible to find a girl who
would be good looking, intelligent, interested in programming, and above all
else, interested in you, the socially awkward geek. What are the odds of
getting all of that?"

This whole paragraph reinforces the fact that the author is speaking only to
men. Which would be fine, if not for the fact that this is totally relevant to
women as well, with partners of any sex. It's not difficult to tell your own
experience, a perspective of your own gender, and relate it to everyone.

"But let me tell you a secret brother, she doesn’t need to know all of this
stuff. Everything in life can be learned."

Here again. How can you not see this?

"You can explain pointers, manual memory management, stack & heap allocation,
garbage collection and much more in just a couple of hours if you chose the
right metaphors."

So women can't understand these concepts without metaphors? Come on, man. And
yes, he is talking about women, because it is expressed over and over that
this article is for men, and it's about their girlfriends.

"But what if you had knives and wanted to teach your girl how to sort them
(obviously by size)? You might have to do it two or three times for her to
really believe you that it works, but the algorithm itself is stupidly
simple."

What the fuck, dude. Sorting knives? The kitchen is aREALLY bad choice of
setting for your first example of what a girl might want to program. Oh and
don't forget that it might take two or three times for her to believe that
you've done it. Sexist.

"It will be easy for her to understand once you find the right metaphor."

Sexist.

"The biggest obstacle here I would say is breaking the I would never
understand that fear."

Invalidating, demeaning.

"to make some animations on her personal website that I made."

There is no reason to tell us that he made the website for her. It's a small
thing, but it reinforces everything else. Mentioning it in this article is
just unprofessional, and makes his girlfriend seem like a bimbo who couldn't
do it herself if she tried.

"Basically I’m able to take what I know, extract the important things, throw
away the 99.5% of wasted time on figuring out what is important and just teach
her what she needs to know."

Her, she. More reinforcement. At this point in the article the author seems
like he's trying to impress, and he's doing it at the expense of his
girlfriend. He could easily have changed his language to reflect a more
sincere and inclusive article. I will illustrate this by editing that
paragraph.

"Basically, you want to convey the important information, and avoid the time
that would be wasted for someone figuring this out on their own. Teach only
what needs to be learned."

Personally, I disagree with his teaching method, but at least now the language
is constructive and inclusive.

Look, I could cover the rest, but I have to go to work, and I'm sure you get
the point. Remember too that all of this is caked deep in the historical and
current context of the exclusion of women. I'm not saying the author is a
terrible person for writing this, I'm just pointing out that his language
excludes women and implies their technical inferiority.

And so it's sexist.

~~~
reginaldjcooper
I see now what you are objecting to. Thank you so much for taking the time to
write it all out.

------
bazzargh
Reading this I'm reminded of Alisdair Gray's "Poor Things"
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Things](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_Things)

...wherein the narrator believes he has brought a woman to life, Frankenstein-
style, and is teaching her about the world, but at the end it turns out that
he was a fantasist and Bella is only odd to him because she is a modern
independent woman (a suffragette, etc), and he is mired in the past.

------
deletes
If the only thing you can talk about is programming, then it is not the
girlfriend who has to learn new things.

~~~
xerophtye
It's not that all he wants to talk about is programming, but he's passionate
about it, and isn't it entirely common for people to want mates who share
their passions?

------
Wintamute
To those saying this post is partly sexist, I think it says more about the
prism through which you choose to view the world than anything about the
author. This is just a guy and girl that have found themselves in a
relationship where one is interested to learn the skills of the other. He's
happy and excited to teach her, which is totally understandable. I see no
evidence to suggest he feels like he's paternalistically teaching her about
the world, rather he's glad he's found a partner he can share his enthusiasm
with.

~~~
jtheory
It does say something that he doesn't realize his ideas could also apply to
relationships where the tech/non-tech roles are reversed; the possibility just
didn't occur to him.

Imagine an article about teaching other people how to, I don't know, paint
with watercolors, and the author kept assuming his audience was women,
teaching their hopefully attractive, fit boyfriends how to do it, even though
it might seem like an impossible task.

~~~
xerophtye
Hey I am a programmer and dating a med student. And the information flow is
usually from her to me. I am intensely inept at Medical Science and so I am
always eager to learn from from her. I find it fascinating :) and your case
with your bf is pretty cool! (And I am sorry but i AM a programmer with a cute
technologically-impaired girlfriend :P cant help it)

------
jonahx
Reminds me of: [http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-mans-intelligence-
prob...](http://www.theonion.com/articles/area-mans-intelligence-probably-
just-too-intimidat,33916/)

------
acqq
Don't even try to _teach_ anybody anything unless he/she actually wants you to
do that. _Teaching_ is completely different from giving somebody idea what
you're doing.

Especially try to be aware how many things you "know" as a "professional" are
fully irrelevant details about the technologies or methods that are going to
be obsolete in very, very short time. Most of the "knowledge" that make you
money today is irrelevant even in just a few years. Or I have a lot of
lectures about Clipper 5 and CP/M to teach you.

------
bromagosa
A bit too much of a patronizing tone in this article... it even felt quite
sexist at some points.

~~~
novalis
Having read the article, I think it would be good for you to quote something
out of it that is blatantly sexist. So that your comment doesn't equal a mixed
insult to the writer based on a general feeling you had at times.

~~~
johnplaxton
Why is it "teach your girlfriend"? Why does he presume that his audience has a
girlfriend who needs to be taught, rather than a boyfriend? You can't say
"well he has a girlfriend so he wrote it like that" because he's not talking
about him in the title, he's talking about you - he's presuming you have a
girlfriend who needs to be taught, and that's sexist. I don't think it's the
crime of the century, but I do think less of the guy.

~~~
novalis
Mostly because some other person who happens to be a man and is in a relation
with a person that happens to be a woman may feel like teaching her some basic
programming and a title that ports this situation to a possible reader elicits
a stronger connection. That and "How a humam should teach another human
partner how to program" would be very daft. I don't see anywhere in there,
where it is stated that a girlfriend needs to be taught. Would it be ok if it
was "teach your boyfriend" ? Where are you going with this ? You think that
title is sexist because he says he has a girfriend that he will be teaching ?

~~~
johnplaxton
It wouldn't be sexist if he wrote "how I taught my girlfriend to program".

Imagine if it said "how to teach your black friend to program". Why only black
friends? Why only girlfriends?

~~~
reginaldjcooper
There's a difference between girlfriends and black friends. (Hint: are you
having a close, _sexual_ relationship with all your black friends?) Therefore
it's appropriate to distinguish between your girlfriend versus regular
friends. It is not appropriate to distinguish between black friends and your
regular friends. If he had written about teaching your female friends to
program I would see that as full-on sexist. As it stands you are seeking to be
offended and you found something offensive which is unsurprising.

------
xerophtye
Hahahah! You're one lucky guy! I have always known teaching someone
programming is pretty simple (I managed to teach simple C++ to my 9-yr-old
sister and also to my 74-yr-old Granny). But it was easier to teach them
because my sister was too young to have the "I'll never understand that"
barrier and my granny just loved the attention i was giving her so she put all
her effort into learning what i was teaching her.

So can I teach it to my girlfriend? Probably not. Partially because she's
technologically challenged (she's cute that way) and as a medical student she
already has tons on her plate.

But I must say I share your dreams of having a girl with whom I could discuss
tech stuff the same way i discuss it with my friends

~~~
Felix21
I have taught many "technologically challenged" people how to code. They say
cute things like

... okay so how do I "compress" this file

... i used that "tag thingie" but its not working

but they still learn it and are able to build websites sometimes even faster
then the "technologically exposed".

In general technologically challenged doesn't mean stupid. Its just a lack of
exposure to the technologies and in time they get the hang of it.

~~~
xerophtye
I apologize if that came of as rude. By no way do i think of her as Dumb.
(heck she's becoming a doctor! She studies like 5 times as hard as me!) I just
meant she isn't that tech-savy (she's too cute to use the words "tag" and
"compress" :P) But that doesn't mean she CAN'T learn. Heck she's a VERY fast
learner when she WANTS to learn something. And i was just stating my own case
not a general rule :) I have taughts tons of people programming too on an
academic basis and they turned out to be great developers later on

------
itsjustluck
If you don't love someone, change them.

Great lesson of love here.

