

A woman's take on GitHub: it's structural sexism. - TheHalfelven
http://wizgeneric.blogspot.com/2014/03/overt-sexism-or-structural-sexism.html

======
greenyoda
_" First point of structural sexism: wife of founder has a role in the
company, but it is undefined and she is not formally employed by the company.
This is sexism, pure and simple. Because of her relationship and gender, she
is excluded from a formal role in her husband's company, but is still expected
to 'support him.'"_

This is pure speculation. Maybe the wife doesn't want a real job in the
company (she may have a job somewhere else, or be wealthy enough not to need a
job). Maybe the husband doesn't want his wife hanging around the company but
is uncomfortable telling her to mind her own business.

~~~
MetaCosm
The author is either very clever or very dumb, and I honestly can't tell
which.

She points out that sending a women to deal with another women is sexist. The
(presumed) reasoning is that women are people, and shouldn't have be given
special treatment (positive or negative).

Yet the title of her post SCREAMS "listen to me, because I am a women and for
that reason my perspective deserves special treatment".

If her perspective has value because she is a women, wouldn't the wife the the
founder have the EXACT same additional value of being a women.

Again, either super-clever, self-referential and meta, or dense.

------
gkya
> My husband, who is also a developer, said I should blog about it because he
> didn't see any sexism at all in the story until I pointed it out to him.

I could not see any sexism in this occasion until reading this post either.
The reason is that to me, (and probably to the OP's husband and many others)
sexism is "Shut the f.ck up, this is men's business". Thanks a lot for this
enlightening post.

------
alttab
Looks like there are other addressable issues with the situation that could
avoid saying "because she's a woman" completely. The author almost said it at
the end of the post.

