The most important problem was omitted entirely - from article and you reasoning too
Posted Oct 4, 2007 11:16 UTC (Thu) by
ekj (subscriber, #1524)
In reply to:
The most important problem was omitted entirely - from article and you reasoning too by khim
Parent article:
Yet another male perspective on women in free software
You mean well. Yet you shoot yourself in the foot squarely.
The article is about avoiding driving away participants by being flat-out rude, or whatever.
Then you go on grossly stereotyping a whole lot of people in a way that I personally find offensive. Mind you, I have *got* thick skin, so I'm not driven away by it. But I am annoyed.
You stereotype male OSS-participators as being "ostracized and rejected for years", a stereotype that never applied to all of us, indeed I strongly suspect it doesn't even apply for the majority.
You go on to compound that by claiming this is because we "lack tact" and "ignore manners". I don't recognize myself in either of these characterisations either, and suspect it's the kind of thing you -wouldn't- say to anyones face.
You then claim, indirectly, that FOSS communities generally "reject all normal people who are insisting on using manners and tact", another gross insult. I don't feel this fits even aproximately to most FOSS-communities I've been and are involved in, including Lwn.net. The debate here is a schoolbook example of tact and tone compared to, say, the debate on dagbladet.no one of the biggest online newspapers in norway...
As if that wasn't enough, you then go on to claim that in general, women are "more social". Did you ever consider that if it's sexist to make general statements *negative* towards women, then it's equally sexist to do the reverse ? If it's unacceptable and insulting to generally state that, for example, women are less technically competent, why is it then OK to state, like you just did, that men are less socially competent ?
I'm in favor of normal politeness in general (though not in favor of putting politeness above truth in general), but please, if that's what you're preaching: atleast consider following your own advice.
(
Log in to post comments)