
Why I won’t give talks about being a woman in tech - robin_reala
https://soledadpenades.com/2016/07/20/why-i-wont-talk-about-being-a-woman-in-tech-and-neither-should-you/
======
someone7x
I went to ngconf this year and two of the talks that stood out to me were
given by women.

One was the angular materials talk / demo and it was amazing. The presenter
was exuding tech prowess, I was blown away by how easy she made it look to
make a dog adoption website. One of the best talks.

The other was by the CEO of girl scouts giving a patronizing 5 minute talk
about how we need all help women in tech succeed and change ourselves so the
world can change for the better. One of the worst talks.

I had those in mind when I read the article and for that reason I think I can
see where she's coming from. When a woman just gives a tech talk, it's just a
tech talk incidentally given by a woman. Isn't that the goal? More talks like
the first one I described?

~~~
jonnybgood
Well, I don't think it's the goal of a CEO of a social organization to give a
talk on tech issues. Their focus is on social issues, so I don't see this as a
good example.

~~~
drcoopster
Perhaps then she shouldn't have been giving a talk at a tech conference.

~~~
jonnybgood
That falls under the purview of the organizers.

~~~
ajkjk
But it's well within the public's right to criticize them for doing a bad job
at.. 'purviewing'.

~~~
jonnybgood
I said nothing contrary to that.

The choice of who speaks at a tech conference is at the discretion of the
organizers. So, criticize the organizers, not the speaker.

------
btilly
I personally know several successful professional women who have a policy of
refusing to belong to any women-only groups. Their reason is that in their
experience such groups are populated by people seeking reassurance. The result
is that they offer the "support" of lowered expectations. Which won't help you
succeed.

One also pointed out to me that if a group of men were to form a men's only
business club, that would be seen as sexist. It is no less sexist to form a
women's only club, but nobody sees fit to criticize it.

This is not a bias against women in general. They just refuse to deal with
people whose identify first as women, and only secondarily as professionals.

~~~
AngrySkillzz
If you are a member of a disadvantaged group, you often do not have the
ability to identify as a professional first and a group member second. That is
the effect of being disadvantaged. Other people will make your life seem
primarily about being a group member. Think about dealing with
sexist/sexually-charged comments, racial tension at the office. Even if you
want to just be a professional, other people will get in your way (and not
always intentionally). Maybe imagine what life would be like for one of those
people.

~~~
btilly
Argue for your limitations, and surely they're yours.

To the extent that you can focus on what is under your personal control, you
are likely to be happier and more productive. To the extent that you focus on
things that are not under your control and can't be changed, you will be
unhappy, unproductive, and will have a built-in excuse for your failures. This
is not an either-or choice, it is a spectrum. And the farther you manage to go
towards taking responsibility for your life, generally the better you will do.

This does not diminish the real challenges that various historically
disadvantaged groups have. It is what I believe the best advice is for them
based on everything that I have learned..including from people I respect who
are members of various disadvantaged groups.

~~~
junko
I sortof agree with your "toughen up!" stance; as a member of a minority group
this is actually practical - but only when I've developed sufficiently thick
skin. I've worked in organisations where I was blatantly ignored/sidelined
(I'll spare the details of _how_ I came to conclude that it was due to
discrimination rather than other factors) and that was pretty demoralising. I
share your opinion, but count my blessing that I am able to carry it out.

~~~
orbitur
Fellow minority and I agree with a toughen up stance as well, as I think we do
have to toughen up to actually get ahead.

But that isn't a reason to deny people help, deny people the chance to say
"hey, look I'm feeling really alone right now". I wouldn't be as "tough" as I
am now if it weren't for a few people who gave me a hand when I truly needed
it. I wouldn't be where I am without reading a ton of blogposts by other
marginalized people who feel the same way as I did.

There are, no doubt, people who like to wallow in their insecurities, but they
aren't any worse than the people who say the marginalized should just suck it
up and work harder, or that people who feel marginalized should shut up.

------
thonos
I went to a recent tech conference and a few things came back when I read this
article. In particular that the conf had a lot more female talkers than male
ones (It was curated and invitation based).

Most talks were good but a handful were nuggets where clearly the deciding
factor why that person got the talk was because she was a woman and not her
expertise in the area.

Your typical dose of women who code talks were im there too but one that stood
our from the rest was a woman who thought she kept having to tell people
things like "use your slackbot to tell people to stop using 'guys' and 'team'
instead." or "women need remote work so they can cry silently when their male
colleagues steal their ideas".

I am not denying that there are gender issues in tech (though in my career
path I have yet to encounter them), but I paid good money out of my own pocket
for that conference.

I am not going there to see you speak. I am going there to learn and get value
for my money.

~~~
wccrawford
My wife gave a tech talk locally earlier this year and I didn't even think
anything about her gender in regards to the conference until just now.
Thinking back, there were very few women giving talks that day, and none of
them were about 'women in tech'.

My wife does talk about being a woman in tech, but not in conferences. And in
general she says, "Whatever, use the term 'guys' if you want. It doesn't
matter." She's more worried about people treating her differently (changing
their speech patterns when she's around!) than anything else, I think.

The idea that women should work remotely so they can cry if they get upset
is... Horrifying. For many reasons.

First, that women _should_ cry if unfair things happen. And that guys
shouldn't, or that they don't have a reaction at all. (Hint: They do.)

Would some prefer it? Sure, but so would some guys, for the same reason. And
other reasons.

Anyhow, good on Soledad for insisting on talking about the things that she
wants to, instead of being pigeon-holed. In the end, I suspect her talks about
actual tech are a lot more effective at raising awareness of the women-in-tech
issues than talks on the subject itself would be.

------
renegadesensei
I feel similarly about being a black guy in the tech industry. It is always
the deliberate efforts to "reach out" to minorities that make me feel the most
uncomfortable and unwelcome. I have given talks on AWS, Cassandra, Python, and
other subjects. You could never get me to talk about "being a minority in
tech." Similarly I live in Tokyo and have no interest writing or talking about
"being black in Japan."

Thoughts from my blog:
[https://righteousruminations.blogspot.com/2014/11/another-
si...](https://righteousruminations.blogspot.com/2014/11/another-side-of-
diversity.html)

Recent thoughts on tokenism:
[https://righteousruminations.blogspot.com/2016/07/on-
changin...](https://righteousruminations.blogspot.com/2016/07/on-changing-
characters-race-and-gender.html)

------
droopybuns
I respect this person's rationale. I'm thankful to hear her perspective.

I know lots of incredible women in tech doing great things. I assume they and
everyone else wakes up each day and has to figure out what challenges they'll
be overcoming, and how they will end up spending their one life on this earth.

So this public rejection of gender-specific talks nourishes me, because I am
dropping all packets when someone starts to talk about gender or privilege
issues.

I feel that enthusiasm for these topics is a tell that the speaker is a
narcissist who believes other people exist to either validate their own
opinions or serve as an adversary. It is uncompassionate.

I suspect a group of academics organically instrumented a taxonomy that
directly mirrors established trolling tactics. They have spent the last 10
years providing gender studies philosophies that are being implemented by
graduates- who will now get to discover firsthand whether these ideas are
constructive.

Kids now think that disagreement is evidence of cultural misogyny and racism.
Well, I disagree, but I'm not going to bother trying to engage with this type
of person. Where is your diversity now? How is your behavior going to
cultivate the outcome you desire?

It's left me feeling exhausted and repulsed by the topic. I'm wary of some
women in tech now because of their enthusiasm for these ideas. It is very
frustrating. I'd like to support them, but I also want to lead a happy life. I
want positive, encouraging people around me. The privilege crowd just doesn't
seem healthy.

This person seems pretty thoughtful. She has nothing to gain from posting
something like this. I feel a little less cynical after reading her post.

------
6stringmerc
Very nicely worded sentiments and I think it's a good counter-point, a
rational and thought out one, to the knee-jerk habit of having a trend-
chasing, "WE CARE!" framing around certain issues. This piece is strong in
pointing out that "ISSUE X IN TECH" is not particularly a "tech talk" \- it's
more in the sociology/humanity side of discussion, right? I like how this
tries to make that distinction.

On a personal note, I think I appreciate the article a bit more because I
could substitute "handicapped person with condition X" for the same kind of
framing that she's discussing. I don't want to be known as X, I want to focus
on the subject matter. If I happen to be an inspiration for others in the X
group, super, great, blaze a trail and thank me later if you really feel
compelled, but that's not the purpose of me pursuing success. It's not "in
spite of X" it's just that X is another inconvenience in the way of goals,
much like having to pay taxes or empty my cat's litter box, scope and effort
aside.

------
pselbert
Sandy Metz, of "Practical Object Oriented Design in Ruby" [1] fame made a
comment about this on The Bikeshed[2] recently. She stated that she refuses to
make reference to gender when she is giving her talks, though her gender is
ultimately what got her the opportunity to write a book and talk in the first
place.

Ultimately she is regarded as an amazing teacher and a dynamic speaker, not
because she is a woman in tech.

[1] [http://www.poodr.com/](http://www.poodr.com/) [2]
[http://bikeshed.fm/70](http://bikeshed.fm/70)

~~~
jesterman81
100%. I value her work because its well done. Not because she is a women.

------
cocktailpeanuts
I'm glad there actually is a competent woman who can say this out loud.
Nowadays it's impossible to say anything against "We need more women in tech"
without being called a sexist.

I do realize it is harder for women but the world is not a fair place. Poor
people who were born to poor parents are born into an unfair world. A white
guy or asian guy who really wants to play basketball in NBA finds himself in
an unfair situation. But that's what powers these people. A lot of successful
people came from bad background because they grew up being sick of this
unfairness and they tried hard to get there.

To use the NBA example, you never see Jeremy Lin or Yaoming giving talks about
how "We need more asian basketball players in NBA". They are well aware of how
that's how it is, but still managed to succeed by pushing themselves hard.

Again, I do realize it's unfair, but if I were someone in an unfair situation
I would spend 100% of my time working hard to overcome it, instead of using my
precious time thinking and talking about how my group needs to be more well
represented.

------
StavrosK
Soledad came to my city (Thessaloniki) for a conference a few months ago, and
gave a very interesting talk on the new audio/graphics APIs in browsers. It
was a great talk, and, I agree with her, much more interesting than "I'm a
woman, here's my experience".

I also dislike the mentality this mindset implies that I, as a man, should be
surprised that a woman can code, and should therefore ask her about how she
managed that feat, as if it's not pretty much exactly the same as how I
started.

------
mc32
"It not only is very insulting and distracting, but also pigeonholes you into
“talking about being a woman in tech”, instead of “woman who knows her tech”.
It feels like, once again, we’re delegating on women and other vulnerable
collectives the “caring for others” matters, in addition to their normal job.
That is not OK."

Sometimes, identity, gets in the way of things.

Do what you feel comfortable with. Do it for yourself. Don't do it for or
because of others. Feel that you want to do it for your sake and for its own
sake. Doing something because of agendas, can be good for the group, but, it's
less clear it's always good for the individual.

In a nice world, you'd be valued for many things, not just your economic
productivity and contribution. And our identifiers would be afterthoughts. But
for friends and foes alike, some at least, it's clear identifiers are
important and some would want to find leverage and make use of the
opportunity. Yet, it's not owed, and it's up to you if you feel comfortable
with lending yourself for a cause, as it were.

That said, just do what you like to do, don't explain it as a result of
principles, etc. What I mean, our decisions don't have to be internally
politically explained, or consistent. Just like liking or not liking broccoli
does not have to be internally politicized to like it or not like it (or
bacon).

------
ap0
Showing that women have great technical aptitude by giving a legitimately
interesting tech talk is much better for the cause of promoting diversity than
just talking about being a woman or minority in tech, IMO.

I worked at a large online retailer that catered primarily to women, and
internally there was a large push to hire more women. We hired two women on my
team. One was fantastic, one was horrible. The fantastic one passed the
interview loop without reservation, and would have been hired regardless of
her gender. The other did not do as well and multiple people had reservations,
but she was hired anyway. She was an immediate burden and terminated after
three months.

The first one didn't need any sort of handicap for being a woman -- she was
qualified and competent. The other one just didn't belong in this role. But
management aimed for diversity over competence, and ended up hurting morale.

Treating people like equals is the best way to achieve equality. Don't insult
them, and don't let those who legitimately don't have the skills necessary
through because of their identity. Seems pretty common sense to me.

------
jordigh
> No! The answer to an all male line-up is not a talk on women on tech by a
> women. The answer is diverse people in the line-up, talking about tech.

At the last US Pycon, where 40% of the speakers were female, there were a
broad range of topics. Several female speakers did speak about "soft" issues
like being a woman in tech, but many others also spoke about "hard" purely
tech issues. There were also males on both sides of the soft/hard line. You
can see the topics here:

[https://us.pycon.org/2016/schedule/talks/](https://us.pycon.org/2016/schedule/talks/)

I don't think it's a problem to give soft talks, and I think Pycon is doing a
great job of increasing diversity. It's not perfect and there's work to be
done, but I really don't see soft talks by women as an evil to be avoided. If
people want to give soft talks, let them do it.

------
pritianka
I 100% agree with this article. Whenever I am invited to talk, I always speak
about my work and expertise, as opposed to women in tech stuff, because being
there and being good at what I do, is much more effective than statements
about diversity (IMHO). The only time I've done women in tech type
conversations, it's been in small, intimate settings for an all-female
audience. In that scenario, it makes sense to discuss the challenges and learn
from each other.

------
return0
Something similar happens in science too. Anecdotally i watched it happen with
my supervisor, as the latest "women in science" wave started about a decade
ago. She got a number of administrative positions, which I increasingly felt
she got "because she was a woman". That led to her being visibly left behind
in her scientific field. It's funny, because she s far from what you would
describe as feminist.

------
spoiler
I agree 100% with the author.

Another thing that I feel this "let's talk about women in tech" attitude is
causing is causing a negative effect, rather than a good one. An example of
this is my (female) friend who rolls her eyes at any mention of "women in
tech" and makes jokes about all these online "troll" feminists[1].

We should as a community—like the author herself said—focus more on inspiring
women to join the industry; not talk them into it. I think the author's
suggestion to have confident women talk about their awesome tech is a great
start!

[1]: I am not trying to discredit feminism. We can't deny there are some
people who take it too far when they have online discussions; this happens
regardless of the topic being discussed.

------
qwertyuiop924
Yes. I agree. So much.

These are my metrics for a good tech talk:

1) It is informative

2) It is entertaining

3) It is actually about tech

Well IAWAT (I Am A Woman In Tech) talks can be 1 and 2, they cannot be 3. That
would be okay, if they were informative or entertaining, but they so often
aren't. Many just quote the same statistics we've heard before, and call for
change. There is a reason that I will watch Piotr Szotkowski's "Standard
Library, Uncommon Uses," Or Linus Torvalds' talk on Git, or Hilary Mason's
opening talk at FutureStack, or absolutely every talk Bryan Cantrill does
(even if it IS just to play Bryan Cantrill Bingo), or countless other talks
whose names I forget. Because they are informative, they are entertaining, and
they are about tech. And male or female, if you give a good talk, I'll listen.
If you just want to get on the stage and talk about your gender, then I will
be out of your talk faster than an ICMP packet travelling down an empty fiber
cable.

------
jordigh
This is called the Unicorn Law:

[http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Unicorn_Law](http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Unicorn_Law)

------
lalos
Enjoyed 'but also pigeonholes you into “talking about being a woman in tech”,
instead of “woman who knows her tech”.'

Subtle difference, I believe that's the purpose of this up and coming podcast
show that I've been following [1]. Women having a space to talk about tech
instead of talking about how's it like to be a women in tech.

[1] [https://thewomenintechshow.com](https://thewomenintechshow.com)

------
Frondo
Personal story time...I was at a recent conference, listening to men, women
given talks. One of the women, in her talk, uses an interaction with her
daughter as the framing narrative for the talk (imagine Socrates and Glaucon,
only this woman and her daughter). Almost immediately, three guys to my right
start making fun of the speaker, sotto voce, making all manner of little jokes
to themselves, that are becoming increasingly gender-specific.

When one of them says loudly enough for me and others to hear, "Your daughter
sounds like a real bitch! hur hur", I turned to them and said, "You guys need
to knock this off _now_."

Embarrassed silence. And it stayed that way. Of course, I'm a tall well-built,
well-dressed white guy, i.e. all the things that automatically command
respect.

The thing is, I don't think those guys were bad people, I don't think they sat
there in their minds thinking, "let's tear the _woman_ down". I really don't
think they thought about it at all. I also don't think they'd have sat there,
chattering away, if a man had used the same framing story (father and son,
father and daughter).

I think there's a lot of unconscious, unconsidered, unthoughtful bias that
they (and we) all carry around by default, that makes it easy to pick on
weaker people if you're going to pick on anyone. And there are a lot fewer
women around these tech conferences, and they're used to placating aggressive
people, putting up with shit, etc.

I guess, I wish women didn't have to talk about being a woman in tech. I hope
they keep doing it, though, until people start thinking about this kind of
asinine behavior.

~~~
fdsaaf
Policing speech like that just breeds resentment. You not only guaranteed that
these people later made the same comments to each other in private, but also
inched a bit closer to resenting people like you and your entire cause.

Mind your own business. You have no right to interfere in a conversation among
friends, even one that triggers you. If you want to encourage change in the
world, be the change and set an example. You're not going to change how people
feel by suppressing expressions of those feelings.

Not once in human history has this censorious approach actually worked. But
it's created powder kegs plenty of times.

~~~
bllguo
What? OF COURSE he has a right to interfere, he can say whatever he damn well
pleases. Furthermore, all he said was to knock it off; you seem to imply he
lectured them or something similar.

He set an example by demonstrating their behavior was not socially acceptable.

~~~
eropple
Yup. Where I come from, this is what leadership looks like. Create the
community in which you want to live and work--and if it the community in which
you want to live and work doesn't have sexist dudes ripping on people for the
fun of it, then make sure that they don't.

------
415Kathleem
While I can certainly understand where the woman who wrote this article is
coming from, I really enjoy hearing and seeing women in tech. I work in tech,
albeit peripherally (EA/Admin role at the moment, just getting in the door),
and 99% of the time I feel like I've wandered into a men's club. I am treated
really well by my male colleagues (I'm lucky enough to work with a group of
kind, talented people, though), and generally am treated well by the men I
meet at meetups and the SF tech scene, but they don't see me as a threat. I'm
not on GitHub responding to code reviews and changing things they've worked
on. I'm not competing for their jobs. I have a feeling that the second that
happened, a large percentage of the men who are now cordial to me would be
less than that. I guess my point is that though I see why nobody wants to be a
token female on a panel, and nobody should be coerced into giving talks
they're uncomfortable or unqualified for, as a woman just stepping into the
scene, it would be really great to see more women speaking out visibly in the
field.

~~~
forgottenpass
_I have a feeling that the second that happened, a large percentage of the men
who are now cordial to me would be less than that._

If you expect it, then that's how you'll perceive it. Even if they're just
worried about the project quality. They might even be treating you with kid
gloves compared to their male colleagues. But if you expect to find it, you'll
find it.

------
tomc1985
The secret to diversity is not giving a shit about stupid criteria like race
or gender, and shutting the hell up about it. Quiet acceptance of _anyone_ who
fits and does good work.

People talk about diversity like it's some magical talisman. It isn't.
Diversity is: not being turned off by someone who doesn't possess whatever
stupid criteria you think make for a good human being. That's all.

------
triplesec
The article makes a great point that just being a woman doesn't make you a
good speaker about [the sociological problems] of women in tech. Rather than
have her out of her skillset, hire her to talk about databases, or other parts
of her expertise, and hire academics, HR and others (of both genders,
according to skill relevance) qualified to talk about social-tech challenges.

------
cloudjacker
I agree

Now for the counterpoint, there are a lot of people in the marginalized group
that actually do look up to people that advertise their marginalization.

Everyone that doesn't advertise that they are a "woman in tech" or a "black
executive" flies completely under the radar.

There are literally groups I've been invited to where people make lists of
these inspirational characters, because they want to support their businesses
more than others. And the people that never said "I'm a black female software
engineer that got VC funding" never show up. People assume they don't exist,
when the reality is that isn't what they wanted to be known for!

Any compromises?

~~~
1_2__3
We're not here to make people feel better about themselves, we're here to get
things done. Someone who obsesses over marginalized groups so much that they
can only respect people who play the victim are exactly the sort of people I
don't want to work with.

~~~
cloudjacker
ok, except there are other perspectives you have dismissed

such as all of the competent people on the periphery of the industry that
really are inspired by the women's list in forbes, or the immigrant that
hasn't been exposed to the opportunities available for people like them

yes, a lot of us are annoyed by it. we are annoyed by the pitiful "lead
generation rates" these kind of talks have in changing any demographic in
tech. but there are people that actually are inspired by them and don't have
another adequate way to filter people. People see Elizabeth Holmes and think
that "the man won't let them be successful" reinforced by a history of
disenfranchisement, when there are plenty less dramatic examples of success
that run counter to that theory. But when those examples don't write articles
about it on Linkedin and Medium, people assume they don't really exist.

------
colmvp
I think it depends on the state of knowledge. The tech industry is well aware
of the gender/ethnicity distribution. And quite frankly, at least companies,
community groups, and profound leaders have progressively been doing something
about it for the last number of years. It just takes time to make progress.
Look at other industries which have poor representation of men or ethnicities
and see how many inroads they've made in say, the last five years compared to
tech.

------
throwaway991823
Had to use throwaway here, sorry.

I attend and organise various conferences and its simple. You got to get
Women. 10% minimum, more is better.

One of our own engineer (who is very mediocre but a women) got accepted to a
major conference. She was told her talk is not so good, but they still want
her and she should think of something.

End result? When I see a woman talking in a conference I assume she is there
because of her gender, not skills.

Lose lose to all

------
kkelleey
Does anyone know if there is data somewhere that shows the male/female speaker
proportion across different conferences?

Would be interesting to see how it compares across the different industries. I
didn't see anything after some basic googling.

------
Mz
_If someone approaches me to talk somewhere just because I’m a woman, they
haven’t done their job of finding what my expertise is. Therefore, I am going
to insta-decline._

This is a really good policy. She's 100% right.

------
ktRolster
Because I am fine writing, but feel completely awkward displaying myself in
public! (I'm speaking for myself here).

------
ivanhoe
Huge respect for this lady, both for the attitude and for all the interesting
tech stuff that she does...

------
digitalpacman
I agree with this. I am male though so my opinion might not count.

------
shanemhansen
Reminds me of a response once given by Richard Feynman (I can't find the
source so I apologize if I misremember it). Essentially he was to be included
in a book of successful Jewish people. He declined because he considered his
ethnoreligious background to be irrelevant to his accomplishments as a
physicist.

To stave off the inevitable response that the experience of a white american
man is irrelevant, let me leave this quote from the head of the princeton
physics department: "Is Feynman Jewish? We have no definite rule against Jews
but like to keep their proportion in our department reasonably small". So even
in the face of systematic discrimination Feynman wanted to be known not as a
Jewish scientist, but as a scientist.

------
skylan_q
_If there is no gender parity, there is a problem._

No, there isn't. We don't have a "gender parity problem" in nursing, pre-k
education, garbage collection, nor boilermaking. Just because it isn't 50/50
doesn't mean it's a problem.

~~~
dragonwriter
> We don't have a "gender parity problem" in nursing, pre-k education, garbage
> collection, nor boilermaking

Says who? I'm less familiar with the latter two sectors, but I've certainly
seen considerable gender issues raised with the first two.

~~~
uola
I would definitely say there's a gender problem in many blue collar jobs
leading to a culture that negatively impact safety, productivity and the long-
term well being of workers.

------
cheez0r
That sure sounds like what the tech industry always seems to prefer: walk the
walk, not talk the talk; software, not slideware; etc. Be a strong tech woman
and you don't have to advocate for them; your actions speak louder than words.

Just ask Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson.

~~~
dang
We detached this subthread from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12129860](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12129860)
and marked it off-topic.

~~~
pc86
I have no idea what NDT has to do with anything but this seems like a level-
headed, fair reply that is indeed on-topic. What is off-topic about it?

~~~
dang
It's the subthread that is off topic, and we detached it at the point of
offtopicness ("Just ask Dr. Neil DeGrasse Tyson.").

~~~
cheez0r
I'm not sure what's off topic about drawing parallels between the search for
racial equality and that for sex equality. It's entirely cogent to the topic.

~~~
dang
I disagree. These discussions get less substantive and more uncivil as they
become more generic. Eventually the only conversation left to have is
repeating the same worn and entrenched claims that we've all heard countless
times. What results is tedious for two important reasons: it's predictable,
and people use it to attack each other. That makes such discussions violate
the mandate of this site, which is to be intellectually interesting.

If there's an antidote or at least a retardant to this, it's to focus on the
concrete specifics of the article and inhibit the rush to grand abstractions.

------
jondubois
I don't think women have it particularly hard in tech. Some aspects are harder
but other aspects are easier.

~~~
smt88
Some of the "harder" aspects are being sexually harassed and intimidated in
ways that aren't possible to do to men. I have a friend who was raped by her
boss, and then he raped another coworker. They were afraid of getting fired,
so they didn't tell anyone. Finally her friend spoke up and was fired.

(This was at a VC-backed, Silicon Valley firm, by the way.)

~~~
jondubois
That sounds terrible, but these things are quite rare. They should have gone
straight to the police and pressed criminal charges.

As a woman in the office, your main issue is that some male bosses won't take
you seriously.

On the other hand, if you're a woman, many bosses (female bosses and also some
sympathetic male bosses) might give you extra help/special treatment (which is
fair enough).

~~~
james-watson
Precisely. I am completely flabbergasted by the parent comment.

How can someone allow a rapist to walk free? What job is worth keeping that
interferes with justice being done? Which VC can survive a lawsuit resulting
from firing an employee who was raped by her direct supervisor????

These questions must be answered if the parent's story is to be believed. If
the story is true, it would be international headline news for weeks.

~~~
smt88
People _did not believe her_. That's why she was fired. It was a he-said, she-
said situation. Plenty of people didn't even believe Cosby's accusers until it
was revealed that he himself had admitted to drugging and raping women.

Even if people do believe you, you're heaped with shame. Who wants to make an
"international headline" out of something so painful and personal?

~~~
james-watson
It's not "people's" opinion that matters. It's the police and court's. Victims
of sexual assault have their identities protected throughout the entire legal
process.

Did she, or did she not, report these multiple rapes to the police?

------
sp332
A better title would be "I won't _give talks_ about being a woman in tech".
She's not against talking about it in general.

~~~
trustfundbaby
I think the (and neither should you) kinda negates that last part of your
point though.

~~~
sp332
Her last paragraph makes it clear that she does talk about it, she just wishes
she didn't have to.

------
mhurron
> I don't think those guys were bad people, I don't think they sat there in
> their minds thinking, "let's tear the woman down". I really don't think they
> thought about it at all

Yes, they are bad people, and the fact that they didn't have to think about
going out of there way to tear someone down is part of why they are bad
people.

They didn't have to think about "let's tear the woman down" because they were
already at the position 'she didn't belong there.' And yes, there would most
likely be something similar with a man and his daughter, it just would simply
be along the lines 'she's never going to get married if you teach her to act
like a boy.'

> I think there's a lot of unconscious, unconsidered, unthoughtful bias that
> they (and we) all carry around by default,

Yes there is, and it makes you a bad person. You should be derided for it
every time it shows itself.

~~~
imron
> Yes, they are bad people

Sometimes otherwise good people say stupid things.

Sometimes being called out on that makes them reflect on what they were saying
and realise they were being stupid.

That definitely happened to me when I was younger - people called me out on
saying stupid things and after thinking about what the other person said I
like to think I became a better person as a result.

I wasn't a _bad person_ when I said those stupid things - I was just someone
who hadn't thought some things through.

It's a little harsh to say that unconscious, unconsidered, and unthoughtful
bias makes someone a bad person. It's how a person reacts after being called
out on those biases that is a better indicator of that.

~~~
Grishnakh
I think we're quibbling over semantics here. I disagree about you being a bad
person: if you said stupid, hurtful things to someone, then yes, you _were_ a
bad person, at that moment in time. But that doesn't mean you're always bad,
or that you'll always be bad. But bad behavior is bad behavior, and people who
behave badly are bad people. We've all been bad people at some point in our
lives. We need to be educated and corrected so that we can be better people.
But again, this is semantics I think. It's kinda like how all governments are
bad governments, but some are a lot better than others. Or that all operating
systems suck, but some suck worse than others.

~~~
imron
It was never hurtful things - more just ignorant things.

> But bad behavior is bad behavior

Agreed, but if you'll let me quibble over some more semantics I would argue
that people who _regularly and consistently_ behave badly are bad people and
that a rare bout of bad behaviour does not necessarily make one a bad person -
especially if the person learns and grows from the experience after being
called out on it.

------
not_anit_woman
Your right, women get hired more easily and get paid more, so it is very much
not symmetrical.

~~~
dang
We detached this subthread from
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12130029](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12130029)
and marked it off-topic.

~~~
clifanatic
The original post was about sexism. If any sub-discussion about sexism is off-
topic, why not just delete the entire post?

~~~
dang
In this case the comment appeared trollish, and appearance of trollishness
becomes reality in threads like this.

More generally in case you're interested, the thing we look for in moderating
this sort of thread—i.e the sort that usually turns into a flamewar—is whether
the discussion is staying concrete or whether it is veering into ideological
generalities, which have the gravitational pull of black holes and are about
as interesting to look at. I posted a bit more about this here:
[https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12132109](https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12132109).

------
sakaloda
Diversity in tech will never work. You are going against reality if you think
everyone has the same aptitude to be good at math/engineering. Look at the
data below.

SAT Math by race [1] :

\- Asian/Pacific Islander = 598

\- White = 534

\- Mexican American = 461

\- Black = 429

SAT Math by gender [2] :

\- Men = 537

\- Women = 503

[1]
[https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171](https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=171)

[2] [http://www.fairtest.org/sat-race-gender-gaps-
increase](http://www.fairtest.org/sat-race-gender-gaps-increase)

~~~
dang
This is sleight of hand. Even supposing all that "data" to be accurate, you
assume your conclusion by acting as if you know what the reason for it is.
But, as we all know, nothing is more highly disputed.

This is not the way to an open-minded and open-hearted discussion about the
truth; it's a tangent to yet another generic ideological flamewar. That
violates the HN guidelines.

Since you've done this repeatedly before and don't appear to have any other
purpose in commenting here, we've banned your account. Please stop creating
new accounts to break the HN guidelines with.

~~~
clifanatic
Yikes. All he did was present some data (with references) that you dispute.
You banned him for that? You seem to be the one who isn't interested in an
open-minded and open-hearted discussion about the truth.

~~~
dang
I made it clear why I banned him: repeated creation of accounts to violate the
HN guidelines with, a.k.a. serial trolling.

------
not_anit_woman
Then why are we not allowed to have Tall well-built white men clubs?

~~~
dont_spout_lies
You are.

~~~
dang
If you abuse HN like this again we will ban not only the throwaway account but
your primary account as well.

------
clifanatic
> They need to do their homework, instead of reaching out to the first “tech
> woman speaker” they can think of

... unless that homework points to a man being the most appropriate speaker?

------
onetwotree
It's really bullshit to ask people from disadvantaged groups to take on
additional responsibilities and "educate" their less disadvantaged peers.

To give an example that is, in my opinion, much more disturbing, but
qualitatively similar, my friend, who's a trans guy, was living in a sober
house a while back. The manager demanded that he reveal his gender identity
(he passes like a pro, beard and everything) to his conservative, homophobic
roommates. The manager seemed to be well intentioned and wanted to "teach the
roommates a less about diversity", but hey guess what, that's not my friend's
fucking job. His "job" in sober living, simply put, is to stay sober. He did
so with flying colors, but someone with a more tenuous recovery could easily
have been pushed over the edge by this bs.

Similarly, it's not the job of women in tech to represent other women and try
to force cultural changes. It's their job to be good at tech.

------
grb423
This is very refreshing. Diversity is a key to strength but seeing a woman
present tech stuff is my preference at a tech conference. I was at a
conference recently and I heard a neckbeard, seeing a woman warming up for the
presentation we just sat down for, say something dismissive about another
diversity talk. He actually left without sitting down. His loss. The talk was
pure tech gold.

As the OP says, the diversity presentations should be left to the diversity
professionals.

~~~
searine
>I heard a neckbeard, seeing a woman warming up for the presentation we just
sat down for, say something dismissive about another diversity talk

It's really hard to take your criticism of a sexist dismissal seriously when
you preface it with a sexist dismissal.

~~~
grb423
You are absolutely right. I stand corrected. He just really annoyed me and I
guess it still stings.

