OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering [LWN.net]

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:22 UTC (Thu) by Skud (guest, #59840) [Link]

* Blowjob-related ads in Linux publications
Is this "Do you suck at coding", or something else?

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Linux_Journal_blowjob_ad

* Not having our experiences believed

Maybe it would be better if some of you stuck with LWN instead of being on some girrls-only list. If you want to be believed, being there counts.

I am on one women-only list out of dozens. Do you seriously believe I (we) are active participants in open source without being on mixed mailing lists, websites, twitter/identi.ca, IRC, conferences, LUGs, etc? Strawman.

* Death threats

I get them too. What are these folks objecting to? Just your presence? Are they really project participants? I see some people whose job or obsession is to demotivate us and aren't really project participants.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Debian_and_LinuxChix_h...

* Accusations of reverse sexism when we ask people to avoid the above
But what do I do when someone is? It can happen, you know, and right now I'm damned if I do, and damned if I do not.

http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/06/03/faq-ar...

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:41 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

Well, QSol's out of business, it appears. I won't lament.

Was Mike-whoever-he-is identified as a real member of a Free Software community? The reason I am asking is that I have had people do similar stuff to me, and when I've explored I find that they have no real connection to any project and are more likely someone who is paid to make us look bad.

OK, "reverse-sexism" is bogus, and not the sexism I was concerned with.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 0:02 UTC (Fri) by Skud (guest, #59840) [Link]

I believe MikeeUSA was an open source developer of some kind; some kind of gaming-related stuff? But it's not really relevant: his death threats are no less scary and offputting.

As for the fact that you (and presumably others) receive death threats, I don't think it's cool or OK that *anyone* threatens anyone's life ever, but I do think men are in a better position to brush it off: there is not such a history of men being killed purely out of misandry. The Debian death threats had an eerie similarity to the Montreal Massacre killer's anti-feminism, and more recently to George Sodini. It is absolutely and realistically scary that men kill women just for being in technical fields and/or believe that feminists are ruining everything. Much as we'd love to ignore it and brush it off, we can't.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 0:58 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

I agree with you about threats.

While I would not be a victim of misandry, there is a history of similar nutcases targeting ethnic semites. And lots of folks believe we're running everything too.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 1:42 UTC (Fri) by spender (subscriber, #23067) [Link]

He also seems to be a user of grsecurity. He's annoyingly littered up completely unrelated technical topics with his misogynistic views several times.

-Brad

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 6:18 UTC (Fri) by hypatiadotca (guest, #60478) [Link]

thanks for that pointer, spender. lead me to find his real name, finally. seems he's a law student in maine.

i <3 your exploit videos, incidentally.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:35 UTC (Thu) by maco (guest, #53641) [Link]

>> * Blowjob-related ads in Linux publications

> Is this "Do you suck at coding", or something else?

Linux Journal ran an ad for QSol about how their servers wouldn't "go down on you either" with an image of a woman's heavily-made-up face.

>> * Death threats

> I get them too. What are these folks objecting to? Just your presence?
> Are they really project participants? I see some people whose job or
> obsession is to demotivate us and aren't really project participants.

Some nutjob was going off about how women were destroying Debian and he was going to kill them for it.[0]

>> * Accusations of reverse sexism when we ask people to avoid the
>> above

I've seen a few guys enter the #linuxchix IRC channel recently and tell us that our IRC Etiquette rules[1] are sexist because they're about making men not be men (ie not, as you put it, led around by their gonads). That's just an example of the many times guys say it's unreasonable to expect them to be able to control themselves enough to not hit on every woman they see who can code.

[0] http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Debian_death_threats
[1] http://www.linuxchix.org/irc-etiquette.html

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:54 UTC (Thu) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

I've seen a few guys enter the #linuxchix IRC channel recently and tell us that our IRC Etiquette rules[1] are sexist because they're about making men not be men (ie not, as you put it, led around by their gonads). That's just an example of the many times guys say it's unreasonable to expect them to be able to control themselves enough to not hit on every woman they see who can code.

They're children. Either real children or emotionally handicapped adults.

I counsel companies on their relationship with the Open Source community. One part is preparing them for childish behavior on mailing lists, and helping them find mediators who will never take umbrage and then say something that makes the company look bad.

There are actually worse groups than Free Software in this regard. If you have to work with cypherpunks and the crowd who go to defcon, be prepared.

Attempting to educate them is all we can do, I guess.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 3:52 UTC (Fri) by maco (guest, #53641) [Link]

Mmmm yeah DEFCON...Friends asked if I was going to go this year, but knowing my partner wasn't going to be there...no. Young, female, and at a hacker con [that I can't literally run to my apartment from, if necessary] alone? Bad idea.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 6:44 UTC (Fri) by hypatiadotca (guest, #60478) [Link]

you should come next year. we'll make "maco has a posse" stickers, just like nick's :)

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:41 UTC (Thu) by hypatiadotca (guest, #60478) [Link]

> * Being asked to explain things over and over again and STILL not being believed

> Unless you're telling me there aren't any early-childhood or nature issues in the mix as well, there is not a lack-of-belief issue here.

There are absolutely early-childhood issues at stake. They are covered extensively in the Unlocking the Clubhouse study. It's really a fantastic read.

As for the nature issues, here are three things to consider:

1) Studies which show a lack of difference tend to not get published. This messes up our understanding of gender issues a heck of a lot. This is feminist science studies 101, in a nutshell.
2) Even given that, there is some interesting research and data that shows that a lot of the perceived math/science gender differences are cultural and experiential, rather than in-born. Here's a fascinating one from the school I'm studying at: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/10/071024145626... . There's also interesting data from places like Malaysia where software dev is more like 50/50 men and women.
3) Even if nature does come into play /at all/, its influence is so eclipsed by culture as to be irrelevant. And, well, we can't change nature, so let's focus on the things we can change. Arguing about how much of a role nature plays doesn't really help us get more women involved.

Here's some further reading about the problems with the "nature" argument, which is also called essentialism within the gender studies context: http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Essentialism , which links to http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/05/10/faq-bu...

Leaky pipes and early childhood interventions

Posted Aug 27, 2009 23:53 UTC (Thu) by Skud (guest, #59840) [Link]

I'd also like to suggest a good search term for discussions about this: "leaky pipe". The analogy is that the process of getting women into open source is like a pipe with leaky points all along the way. All of the leaks need to be stopped up, and stopping any particular leak (whether it is early childhood influences or sexism at tech conferences) will help more deliver more women to the end of the pipe.

Nobody's saying that there aren't other leaks. There absolutely are. But the ones that the open source community can best address are the ones that are specific to the open source community.

If you are interested in eg. encouraging girls in STEM (science/tech/eng/math) education at early ages, there are many other organisatinos working on that. Many of them take donations, or would welcome your volunteer time.

Leaky pipes and early childhood interventions

Posted Aug 28, 2009 0:44 UTC (Fri) by BrucePerens (subscriber, #2510) [Link]

The analogy is that the process of getting women into open source is like a pipe with leaky points all along the way.

That frames the issue pretty well.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 3:06 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]

> 1) Studies which show a lack of difference tend to not get published.

Just to expand for the benefit of those without a lot of experience in social science: this has two unfortunate consequences.

First, social scientists constantly have to ask themselves whether some pattern they observe in their data is a result of some underlying principle, or just a coincidence. (If you flip a coin 10 times, and got 8 heads, is that because the coin is unfair? If you had 10 men and 10 women perform some task, and 8 of the women did better than the average man, is that because women in general are better at your task?) That's what statistical testing is for. Unfortunately, statistical tests are never perfect -- they won't tell you that getting 10 heads in a row means your coin is unfair, just that if not then that's one *heck* of a coincidence.

But if you keep trying long enough, then eventually you'll get that coincidence. And "science says women are <...>!" gets press, so lots of the time, when someone's running some random study, they'll do a quick check for gender effects, just in case. If 20 people do this, then 19 of them will get nothing, shrug, and forget about it; 1 of them will flip 10 heads in a row and publish a really excited paper! They don't know they're the 20th person to try, after all. (And that's leaving out the effects of confirmation bias, etc.)

Second, once a claim like that is out there in the literature, it's hard to disprove; if you just repeat the study and don't see a difference, then maybe you just did it wrong or something -- it's hard to get that published. (And even if you do, it's not as exciting, so it won't get press coverage, so a heap of people will go on believing that they Know Something About Men and Women that's just wrong.)

The end result is that the literature on gender differences has heaps of confusing nonsense in it. There are real gender differences too, but they're hard to pin down, and after all that nonsense it's hard to imagine that people would have *missed* anything so dramatic as to cause 98.5%/1.5% differences in participation a specific field invented in the last 30 years. Seriously, that'd be Nobel-worthy.

This isn't my area of specialty, but AFAICT, whether you're right or left handed has more of an effect on your general cognition than what you keep in your pants (and your culture matters a lot more than either).

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 29, 2009 17:05 UTC (Sat) by hypatiadotca (guest, #60478) [Link]

Thanks for expanding on this - it /is/ my area of study (along with my other major in Computer Science) and I kinda glossed over it because of that :)

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 31, 2009 22:21 UTC (Mon) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]

Yeah, anything to procrastinate on writing this stupid methods section :-)

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 2:40 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link]

> I resent them too. Vendors trying to lure me in by my gonads

But you also realize that there's a difference between the resentment due to someone trying to lure you by your gonads, and resentment due to being told that -- roughly speaking -- those companies didn't consider you a real member of their audience, and implicitly "reminded" that your proper aspiration in life is to use your body to lure others by their gonads?

I hope so; it's just that I've heard a lot of men grumble about booth babes, but if they really *hated* the concept of booth babes the way that they might, then one way or another I'm pretty sure booth babes wouldn't still exist.

> The folks I don't believe are the troop of men here telling me what you think.

Speaking as part of that troop, that's why I've tried to provide logic, data, and links. I'm well aware that I may have gotten things wrong despite that, and if I become aware of any then I'll certainly apologize. Is there anything I've claimed that you still particularly disbelieve?

> I get [death threats] too.

For thinking about this issue, I highly recommend this comment by Kathy Sierra, especially the second half about what's happened since she talked about her threats in public: http://geekfeminism.org/2009/08/17/george-sodini-montreal...

On merit, that comment actually deserves front-page treatment. But I don't know what the consequences of that would be :-(

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 12:16 UTC (Fri) by Skud (guest, #59840) [Link]

Re: the front page -- yeah, our thoughts exactly. We talked about it and were uncomfortable putting it in the spotlight, all things considered.

OK, I'll bite. Sides of this issue you might not be considering

Posted Aug 28, 2009 12:35 UTC (Fri) by coriordan (guest, #7544) [Link]

> if [men] really *hated* the concept of booth babes ...
> booth babes wouldn't still exist.

My theory, which I'm pretty confident about, is that this is a general issue of conferences with mostly male attendees, nothing to do with the free software community.

Booth babes continue to exist at conferences because conferences are full of men with no interest in the topic but were sent there by their employer.

When I see booth babes at a free software conference (actually, I've only seen them at "Linux" conferences), then I know that that stall is a reputationless company selling something with no differentiating features. Red flag for "ignore this stall". Most other LWN readers would also ignore that stall at a free software conference, by my theory.

Then there's the separate category of attendees who can't tell the difference between the companies and who aren't interested in the details anyway - that separate category, which has almost nothing to do with us, is the target of booth babes.