This woman saw an opportunity to pick up some Twitter followers, knowing that at least one or two people would be upset by her embellished explanation of what happened. In the process she took away someone's livelihood, which is despicable in my opinion. She would have simply asked them to be quiet if she were truly offended. Instead she smiled, photographed them, and let them continue their private conversation. It's pretty clear that she wanted publicity - nothing more.
#FameWhore
You are speculating about someone else's motives and conduct. Unless you have evidence to back up the assertions you are making, you are behaving in exactly the same manner for which you are criticizing others.
Also, private conversations held in public are no longer private.
All things being equal, working together with women puts you at risk (they might get accidentally offended, go ballistic and ruin your life), working with men much less so (harrassment claims much less likely). Conclusion: it is prerferrable to not work with women. Just saying how it is, rationally. To be honest, it sometimes felt weird to work at places with 100% guys as developers. But at the end of the day, I just want to get my job done then get home to wife+ kids. Exactly why should I care about getting more women into IT?
Honest question - I see the appeal of lower wages for employers (more devs- they get cheaper). That would lower my wages, too. As for nicer atmosphere at work - flirting and being nice is too dangerous, so having women around would actually make things worse.
Note: I don't really have a problem with women in IT, just wondering about the future.
I know someone who thought exactly like you. He and the rest of his colleagues evaluated a woman and they wondered if she could really integrate into the group (because of dirty jokes), so in the end they decided not to hire her.
In the future engineering will be just like most other workplaces: men and women working together mostly respectfully without incident. This will happen whether you care about it or not. Your side (the side that concludes that "it is prerferrable to not work with women") will lose. Your "logic" and your "rationality" will surrender to justice, fair play and equality.
Now, please stop fighting for your side so men who recognize the benefits of having women colleagues can enjoy those benefits sooner.
So, making a joke about a "dongle" with your friend is a firable offense, but taking a photo of someone without their permission and publicly calling them an "ass clown" is okay?
Because she was offended at crudeness directed at no one and merely overheard, that means crude insults directed at people are appropriate? And in a way that's meant to harm them publicly?
For those keeping score, this is also OK: @adriarichards Black people CANNOT be racist against White people. Racism is a position of the oppressor who has the power
- http://i.imgur.com/ou8JZVu.jpg
So, making a joke about a "dongle" with your friend is a firable offense, but taking a photo of someone without their permission and publicly calling them an "ass clown" is okay?
It's not about what was done, it's about who did it. Because the latter offense was done by a member of an oppressed class, it's automatically OK. Because the former offense was done by a member of the oppressor class, it's punishable.
Is this about sexism again? The culture has lost when political correctness is taken too far. Perhaps the guy behaved like an a*e for disturbing other people, but this is not how you handle it. You turn around, and tell them to STFU. But perhaps she was offended by the nature of the jokes.
Possibly off topic, because I didn't follow the incident at all. But I just thought of Derek Sivers' summary [1] of PG's "Hackers and Painters" (which I haven't read yet) and there he writes:
"What exactly is "hate speech?" This sounds like a phrase out of 1984. Labels like that are probably the biggest external clue. If a statement is false, that's the worst thing you can say about it. You don't need to say that it's heretical. And if it isn't false, it shouldn't be suppressed. So when you see statements being attacked as x-ist or y-ic (substitute your current values of x and y), whether in 1630 or 2030, that's a sure sign that something is wrong."
This isn't about culture in general. This is about PyCon. They are trying to be extra-specially welcoming to women, in particular. They don't pretend this isn't artificial! You don't have to guess what's allowed; PyCon has a code of conduct https://us.pycon.org/2013/about/code-of-conduct/ that spells it out for you.
I agree, it is in peoples nature to make fun of those who are different, be it by gender, etnicity, height, intelligence or whatever. But in most cases, this is harmless fun between two people that don't share that trait.
Only when you are actively, openly insulting said people and treating them different then anyone else you are doing something very wrong.
Some racist jokes are just really funny, but that doesn't mean I'm racist.
Also, I feel like this is more of an issue in the US then in Europe. I really couldn't imagine someone being fire for a picture posted on twitter by someone else accusing you of something nasty in The Netherlands.
"If a statement is false, that's the worst thing you can say about it. "
I have to disagree with that. There are many possible things worse than being false. People are not computers and speech does not happen in an ahistorical vacuum. It would be nice if we could debate everything dispassionately, but it's simply not the case.
Let me give an extreme example. A few years ago in an English football (soccer) game, one player had his leg horribly broken in a bad tackle. He was out for about a year and a half. As he was being taken from the field, a few of the opposing fans were chanting, "You've only got one leg!" Now this was not literally true, of course, but it was to most intents and purposes. I don't think many people would think this behavior was all right.
Just to be very clear, I'm citing this example to explain why I disagree with the statement I quoted at the top, not to draw a comparison with today's story.
But not all examples are so obvious and concepts like 'hate speech' are introduced in an attempt to point out the sometimes subtle problems with particular examples. Of course, such concepts are like any other tool or shortcut: they can be abused as easily as used for their intended purposes.
I think many people - even smart ones - still don't realize how big the possible consequences are when publicly bullying someone.
My thoughts on this: don't do it. You might feel like venting right now, and you might have good reason to do so, but do it in your immediate vicinity, not on the Internet. You might find out later that you overreacted, and you won't be able to take it back.
Also, I find it ugly to put someone in the pillory who has a lot less clout than you do, no matter how justified it seems to you. It seems like applying mob law to me, which I have an aversion to.
I mean, imagine going to a conference, joking around with a friend and the next day you get fired for it!
I wouldn't even go so far to call this (yet another) discussion about women in tech. I mean there are many topics not gender-related that could potentially offend people.
The thing that I don't get is: Why did she decide to take a picture of them an put it on Twitter?
If she really didn't want to talk to them in person, which I wouldn't blame her for if she was offended by ther attitude, why didn't she just report them to the staff and get them escorted out?
Does anyone know if the people involved here ever talked to each other?
According to the post they didn't. She just made a picture and posted it to twitter.
If she just had said: "Guys that's not appropriate"
Then they would probably pardon themselves!
Sorry but they way she acted is not appropriate in my eyes. Just make a picture of somebody and put it online! C'mon that's against normal privacy etiquette.
There's a couple of things that really suck about this. One, the misogynistic reaction from the masked avengers of the internet is shameful, and has actually made the situation much worse now. The second being, how did we end up here at all? I get that someone might feel uncomfortable about dick jokes, but given dick and fart jokes have been staples of low brow humour for a pretty long time it's pretty petty to name and shame over it.
We all should be concerned about sexism in the industry, in this case it seems like it's been taken too far and Playhaven should be ashamed to have not had some faith in their member of staff. The last time a discussion on sexism came out I made a comment about how we need to have responsible disclosure about these issues, for this exact reason. It's turned into a witchhunt, and it's turned nasty and vicious.
1. A said something to B (doesn't matter what he said)
2. C overheard and found it offensive.
3. Honestly, why should A & B care? (that wasn't intended for C!)
I shudder to think of a society where I must consider every word I say, just to avoid offending someone. Doing this will lead us to the kind of world described in Fahrenheit 451, where nobody can really write about anything or anyone because their opinions might offend someone.
Also, I guess someone doesn't understand the difference between `sexual` and `sexist`.
I can understand her reaction at the conference. PyCon has a specific policy about this. Since they were in earshot of at least a dozen people around them, it was not a "private" conversation. The PyCon workers took her complaint seriously and didn't seem to have any problem helping her out. The only thing she was out of line about was shaming the guys publicly on twitter.
> 3. Honestly, why should A & B care? (that wasn't intended for C!)
it was a public event with a code of conduct in a crowded room with children in attendance.
So C was free to report it to the conf. Sadly that's not what C did (when the conf staff got aware of it, they took everybody, discussed it and as far as I understood basically told A and B to be a bit more careful, then let everybody go and have a good time).
Well if i was the little girl on the photo in the slides..
I guess I would rather work in an industry with occasional sexual jokes
then in an industry where the reaction to hearing something you don't want to hear, even though it is not directed at you,
is snapping a picture of someone without their permission, posting it online without their permission and proceeding to insult them,
instead of just asking them to stop or minding your own business..
Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with that woman? She could've turned around and told them to stop making these kind of jokes. That she made a similar joke before is even weirder.
We are policed far, far more often, and more thoroughly, than the Victorians could have dreamed. In that sense, Victorian England was a far freer society than ours.
We, male developers, actually benefit from her actions. One guy may have lost his job, not a big deal, gonna get another, after all this publicity he got quite famous, but the main thing is that less woman will want to take the job of software development, less employers will want to hire woman because of the possible problems like this and so less concurrency for us and bigger salary.
With which right did she anyway take picture of the guys and posted them on the internet without permit? Hypothetically she could just have built up the entire story. What scares me the most is how having a wide (social) audience can give you a position of power: the followers become your minions and you can easily start your personal battles.
Managers at Playheaven rushed too much, IMO.
[+] [-] downandout|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] knowtheory|13 years ago|reply
Also, private conversations held in public are no longer private.
[+] [-] Tichy|13 years ago|reply
Honest question - I see the appeal of lower wages for employers (more devs- they get cheaper). That would lower my wages, too. As for nicer atmosphere at work - flirting and being nice is too dangerous, so having women around would actually make things worse.
Note: I don't really have a problem with women in IT, just wondering about the future.
[+] [-] ciupicri|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] svlasits|13 years ago|reply
Now, please stop fighting for your side so men who recognize the benefits of having women colleagues can enjoy those benefits sooner.
[+] [-] lionhearted|13 years ago|reply
Because she was offended at crudeness directed at no one and merely overheard, that means crude insults directed at people are appropriate? And in a way that's meant to harm them publicly?
What a damn strange time we live in.
[+] [-] jcc80|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] theorique|13 years ago|reply
It's not about what was done, it's about who did it. Because the latter offense was done by a member of an oppressed class, it's automatically OK. Because the former offense was done by a member of the oppressor class, it's punishable.
(Some people actually think this way.)
[+] [-] scrrr|13 years ago|reply
Possibly off topic, because I didn't follow the incident at all. But I just thought of Derek Sivers' summary [1] of PG's "Hackers and Painters" (which I haven't read yet) and there he writes:
"What exactly is "hate speech?" This sounds like a phrase out of 1984. Labels like that are probably the biggest external clue. If a statement is false, that's the worst thing you can say about it. You don't need to say that it's heretical. And if it isn't false, it shouldn't be suppressed. So when you see statements being attacked as x-ist or y-ic (substitute your current values of x and y), whether in 1630 or 2030, that's a sure sign that something is wrong."
[1] http://sivers.org/book/HackersPainters
For what it's worth, he shouldn't be too upset for not working there anymore.
[+] [-] sp332|13 years ago|reply
Edit: they guy who got fired agrees: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5398681
[+] [-] gnur|13 years ago|reply
Only when you are actively, openly insulting said people and treating them different then anyone else you are doing something very wrong.
Some racist jokes are just really funny, but that doesn't mean I'm racist.
Also, I feel like this is more of an issue in the US then in Europe. I really couldn't imagine someone being fire for a picture posted on twitter by someone else accusing you of something nasty in The Netherlands.
[+] [-] aptwebapps|13 years ago|reply
I have to disagree with that. There are many possible things worse than being false. People are not computers and speech does not happen in an ahistorical vacuum. It would be nice if we could debate everything dispassionately, but it's simply not the case.
Let me give an extreme example. A few years ago in an English football (soccer) game, one player had his leg horribly broken in a bad tackle. He was out for about a year and a half. As he was being taken from the field, a few of the opposing fans were chanting, "You've only got one leg!" Now this was not literally true, of course, but it was to most intents and purposes. I don't think many people would think this behavior was all right.
Just to be very clear, I'm citing this example to explain why I disagree with the statement I quoted at the top, not to draw a comparison with today's story.
But not all examples are so obvious and concepts like 'hate speech' are introduced in an attempt to point out the sometimes subtle problems with particular examples. Of course, such concepts are like any other tool or shortcut: they can be abused as easily as used for their intended purposes.
[+] [-] michaelgrafl|13 years ago|reply
My thoughts on this: don't do it. You might feel like venting right now, and you might have good reason to do so, but do it in your immediate vicinity, not on the Internet. You might find out later that you overreacted, and you won't be able to take it back.
Also, I find it ugly to put someone in the pillory who has a lot less clout than you do, no matter how justified it seems to you. It seems like applying mob law to me, which I have an aversion to.
[+] [-] Joe-Z|13 years ago|reply
I mean, imagine going to a conference, joking around with a friend and the next day you get fired for it!
I wouldn't even go so far to call this (yet another) discussion about women in tech. I mean there are many topics not gender-related that could potentially offend people. The thing that I don't get is: Why did she decide to take a picture of them an put it on Twitter?
If she really didn't want to talk to them in person, which I wouldn't blame her for if she was offended by ther attitude, why didn't she just report them to the staff and get them escorted out?
Does anyone know if the people involved here ever talked to each other?
[+] [-] TeeWEE|13 years ago|reply
If she just had said: "Guys that's not appropriate" Then they would probably pardon themselves!
Sorry but they way she acted is not appropriate in my eyes. Just make a picture of somebody and put it online! C'mon that's against normal privacy etiquette.
[+] [-] nicholassmith|13 years ago|reply
We all should be concerned about sexism in the industry, in this case it seems like it's been taken too far and Playhaven should be ashamed to have not had some faith in their member of staff. The last time a discussion on sexism came out I made a comment about how we need to have responsible disclosure about these issues, for this exact reason. It's turned into a witchhunt, and it's turned nasty and vicious.
[+] [-] rurounijones|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jrajav|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] TeeWEE|13 years ago|reply
I actually miss the github message "hardcore forking action" when i fork a repo. That was humor!
[+] [-] aviraldg|13 years ago|reply
1. A said something to B (doesn't matter what he said)
2. C overheard and found it offensive.
3. Honestly, why should A & B care? (that wasn't intended for C!)
I shudder to think of a society where I must consider every word I say, just to avoid offending someone. Doing this will lead us to the kind of world described in Fahrenheit 451, where nobody can really write about anything or anyone because their opinions might offend someone.
Also, I guess someone doesn't understand the difference between `sexual` and `sexist`.
[+] [-] sp332|13 years ago|reply
Edit: just found this on the other thread, where someone claiming to be the guy who got fired makes pretty much the same point. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5398681
[+] [-] masklinn|13 years ago|reply
it was a public event with a code of conduct in a crowded room with children in attendance.
So C was free to report it to the conf. Sadly that's not what C did (when the conf staff got aware of it, they took everybody, discussed it and as far as I understood basically told A and B to be a bit more careful, then let everybody go and have a good time).
[+] [-] adnam|13 years ago|reply
Unrelated, but I would definitely fork this guys repo: https://github.com/snsn/dongle
[+] [-] AdrianRossouw|13 years ago|reply
I've lost count how many conferences I attended, or read about, that had some form of sexism scandal.
My initial response to pycon-gate 2013 was just 'every.fucking.time!'
[+] [-] pc86|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tapan_pandita|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Steph0r|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] girvo|13 years ago|reply
That doesn't advance the fight against sexism. In fact, it makes it more adversarial.
Besides, offended != sexism. I hope she's happy.
[+] [-] scotty79|13 years ago|reply
Let's keep Real professional!
[+] [-] illuminate|13 years ago|reply
So it's not okay for you to feel uncomfortable, only for the woman to.
[+] [-] js-coder|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] brador|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jfmercer|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] p6v53as|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Tichy|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tirant|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|13 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] prajjwal|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] illuminate|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rdavl|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] davidland|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] jahewson|13 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ciupicri|13 years ago|reply