There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 21:48 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (guest, #755)
In reply to: There's one final comment I want to make here. by mjg59
Parent article: OSCON keynote: Standing out in the crowd

I do not.

But the undertext is "most male FOSS developers are assholes".

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. I'm not the one making that claim.

Clearly, men and women perceive social interactions differently. I haven't heard any reports for trained social scientists who are accustomed to avoiding gender based perception bias; are there any? I'm not saying that lots of male developers are not understating the case... but everyone seems to be assuming that all the females are being perfectly objective, and not *overstating* the case in their own anecdotal reports, and that doesn't seem reasonable either.

to post comments

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 21:54 UTC (Wed) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link] (6 responses)

That's not the undertext at all. The undertext is "some male FOSS developers are assholes, and this creates a community that is disproportionately hostile to potential female contributors".

As for whether women are being perfectly objective - does it matter? Given the 80% figure, you'd need a huge proportion of women to be overstating their case to get to male-equivalent figures. The question is "Is there a problem", not "How big is this problem to several significant figures". And given that basically all the evidence points at there being a problem, I think the burden of extraordinary proof is on your side of the discussion.

There's one final comment I want to make here.

Posted Jul 29, 2009 22:10 UTC (Wed) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (5 responses)

The point I was trying to make was this:

The percentage of problem perception is clearly gender skewed, markedly.

So that casts into some question the justification, as I see it, for the "disproportionately" in

> The undertext is "some male FOSS developers are assholes, and this creates a community that is disproportionately hostile to potential female contributors".

Some contributors to *all* projects are assholes; I'm male and middle aged (shudder), and I've given up on projects because a major developer was a massive jerk, in environments where there were no females in sight.

So while fixing that problem will probably lift all boats, *that* issue has nothing to do with sexism. My assertion, though, is that many people involevd in this issue are *conflating* developer assholiness with developer sexism, and trying to use the former as evidence of the latter.

Socially, there's evidence that women and men interact differently, and while I think this issue points directly to that, I don't think that's "men behaving badly", I just think it's "men behaving like men".

I'm not here to be an apologist for the death threat or vagina slide crowd; there are *certainly* sexist assholes in (and probably running) FOSS projects. But not all assholes are sexists. And yes, it might turn out to be the case, even if only historically, that a given project is going to have to decide explicitly "we want to be female-friendly", and go out of their way to do it.

And that may, in the final evaluation, impact on how that project does things, and how much it gets done. Could go one way, could go the other. Anyone who makes the blanket assertion that *merely* because that decision is taken and enforced, everything will be mercy and goodness and sweetness and light *for the project* is blowing blue smoke out their ass.

It'll probably be better for *female developers who want to work on that project*, but that is a separately measured quantity.

There's a reason perception is skewed.

Posted Jul 30, 2009 1:10 UTC (Thu) by xoddam (subscriber, #2322) [Link] (4 responses)

> The percentage of problem perception is clearly gender skewed, markedly.

That might just be because the worst-offending death threats, sexual propositions and the like are sent as private messages to the woman in question, not to a public list. I mean, even most arseholes don't want everyone to *know* they're arseholes.

In contrast, the milder comments which do get posted in public are much more likely to register and attract the attention of the people they're directed towards, and from other women who are alert from a lifetime's experience of sexism directed against them, than from the average bloke.

There's a reason perception is skewed.

Posted Jul 30, 2009 2:04 UTC (Thu) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link] (3 responses)

But you know something? Maybe some *guys* got death threats in private emails too. And, for whatever their reasons might be (I'm big enough to take care of my self; he's 3000 miles away; he's blowing off steam; yeah whatever), they just ignored them.

Both reactions would strike me as characteristic (though it's been established in this thread that there are *lots* of people who don't consider me a Reasonable Man :-), but you can see how those reactions would skew the public perception of the issue at hand.

And there's just no real way to tell, is there?

Again: is there *data*?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data

There's a reason perception is skewed.

Posted Jul 30, 2009 2:27 UTC (Thu) by mjg59 (subscriber, #23239) [Link]

What data do you want beyond the previously mentioned FLOSSPOLS study?

There's a reason perception is skewed.

Posted Jul 31, 2009 0:07 UTC (Fri) by njs (subscriber, #40338) [Link] (1 responses)

Again: is there *data*?

I'm glad to see you're getting good use out of that link I gave you.

Seriously, you're arguing: There are a large quantity of anecdotes all pointing the same way, but no formal data (well, there is, but it's not exactly the sort of data I demand). Therefore, ~~nothing can be concluded~~ we can conclude that there is no problem.

Also, you're arguing that women are fragile flowers who of course will whine about little things like death threats, unlike Strong and Reasonable Men who will shrug them off. Rather ignoring the bit where the most recent debian death threat thing only came out when project leadership solicited members for information on their experiences, and the bit where women are both more used to being the target of such behavior and have less reason to believe that publicizing it will help, and the bit where they got these death threats specifically *because they were women*, not because they got into some heated argument and someone needed to blow off steam or whatever. You can't say that those threats are okay because some other guy got threatened for some other reason and so the women deserved it to keep things balanced.

There's a reason perception is skewed.

Posted Aug 2, 2009 22:56 UTC (Sun) by Baylink (guest, #755) [Link]

<sigh>

I've said it a couple of times already, in other places, but I guess I can say it again.

You're drawing statistical inferences from a "survey", about which you cannot speak to the selection bias of... and selection bias -- which I can for myself infer from the report in question -- would make this "survey" worthless for the purpose for which you're depending on it to make your argument.

So, if you agree that anecdotes are not sufficient, then let's nail down how they got their answers, shall we?

And if you don't agree, and think that a self-selecting online survey is enough to make this argument, well, then ...