> What’s even more troubling than the abuse, however, is that so many people are oblivious to these issues. Even after Kathy was brave enough to post her personal story, people think she’s a statistical abnormality. Since I’ve started talking more openly about my experiences, a staggering number of men that I know and respect have spoken to me privately, apologizing because they didn’t know this was happening. I’ve related those conversations to other women, and they were shocked. They didn’t understand how men could not see these problems, but it’s because so many of us are being so goddamn quiet.
But on re-read, I accept that it was too strong of me to say 'directly'.
Anyway, the "it's only a few bad apples" response is common enough to have been addressed many times by essays on sexism in tech. It's akin to the "not all men" narrative.
Thanks! Still reads as mostly anecdotes to me. I know enough women who are not subject to such abuse to know that it is a tiny minority that is. Or maybe they are not parts of communities where this is more normal? (Obligatory disclaimer: Not victim blaming for being in certain communities.)
I wish oblivious (apparently) responses like mine would actually get valid feedback/criticism instead of being swept under the rug on an instant. I have learned nothing today except to never ever participate in a discussion of these issues. Instead I felt a lot of anger and hatred against the
I really wish people would concentrate on finding out what motivates people to harass and abuse instead of directing their anger at those who question their methodics and tactics.
>I know enough women who are not subject to such abuse to know that it is a tiny minority that is.
Are these women really not subject to abuse? Is it possible that they just haven't felt like they could talk about it? Could it be that they don't realize that some of the things they've experienced constitute as abnormal behavior? It took me a long time to figure that one out. It wouldn't be unreasonable to think that others would have the same problem.
It could very well be but I am very close to some of them and am confident that they are neither oblivious nor feeling like they have to hide anything. They are well respected in their respective communities.
Your anecdotes do not support your stated conclusion that "it is a tiny minority"; at best, even if your data is actually accurate, you've gathered evidence to support the conclusion that there exist people who have not been harassed or abused. Likewise, there is more than enough evidence to support the conclusion that there exist people who have been, and more than enough evidence to infer that those aren't just "isolated incidents" (http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Isolated_incident).
> Still reads as mostly anecdotes to me. I know enough women who are not subject to such abuse to know that it is a tiny minority that is.
That mindset, right there, is part of the problem, and is a large part of why you're getting downvoted.
> I wish oblivious (apparently) responses like mine would actually get valid feedback/criticism
Here you go:
1) You do not know anywhere close to a statistical sample.
2) You are unlikely to directly observe most abuse.
3) If and when you observe such abuse, you are unlikely to recognize all of it as such. (The most blatant of it, sure, that's obvious. The worst of it, though, is often more subtle and pervasive.)
4) People you know are not necessarily inclined to share their experiences with you. That holds doubly true if you are (or are perceived as being) in a position of authority.
> I really wish people would concentrate on finding out what motivates people to harass and abuse
I understand this mindset; it'd be nice to root-cause and fix problems rater than having to work around them. However, sadly, often the motivation is "she's successful" or "people are listening to her". (And if you're looking for the underlying motivation below that, that makes people so broken that they'd harass others: who knows, but that seems unlikely to lead anywhere near a solution. There's no excuse for such harassment.)
> I have learned nothing today except to never ever participate in a discussion of these issues.
That was my initial reaction when I first started hearing about these issues. In any area where you don't have experience, it helps to listen first, and learn more, before jumping in. I spent a long time lurking on LKML before I started hacking on Linux. I spent a long time reading about FOSS licenses before I started dealing with licensing issues.
The reaction you're getting is a lot like the reaction you'd get if, in response to an intricate kernel patch, you asked questions (and made some incorrect assumptions) about basic C programming concepts. In general, the comments or discussion surrounding someone's experiences with harassment are not a good place to ask intro-level questions. There are a few places for such questions, as well as many resources where you can read about these issues. The Geek Feminism wiki is a great place to start.
My mindset is that of a scientist I guess. I don't trust people's own accounts, especially in such a heated debate. I want numbers, research and objectivity.
> However, sadly, often the motivation is "she's successful" or "people are listening to her".
Sources please!
The wikis you linked seems highly loaded and written with agenda. The writing is purely self-serving(?), without criticism of itself. I am sure whoever wrote that feels it is the right way, but I don't see much value in that myself.
The FLOSSPOLS survey linked seems very interesting and objective though, thank you!
You have taken a discussion about her experience and made it about what you want. Why do you think what you want should be so important? (My guess: because as a dude you're used to people acting as if your opinions are important. Privilege stunts growth.)
And you have done it in a way that discourages exactly the sort of detail that you claim to want. Go read some stories from women reporting rape. A lot of them get treated with the same "skepticism". A skepticism that is never applied to, say, theft reports. [1] And you know what they learn? To never, ever, ever report a rape. Because they correctly read the tactical, situation skepticism for what it is. Go spend a few hours reading the #beenrapedneverreported stories if you want to get that.
> My mindset is that of a scientist I guess.
This kills me. An actual social scientist would know something about gathering data safely and effectively. An actual scientist would shut their yawp hole and spend 5-10 years getting a PhD before considering themselves eminently qualified to comment. You are as much a scientist as somebody who stomps through a delicate ecosystem, stepping on plover eggs while shouting SHOW ME THE ECOLOGICAL PROBLEM! I DON'T SEE ONE!
> My mindset is that of a scientist I guess. I don't trust people's own accounts, especially in such a heated debate. I want numbers, research and objectivity.
Your anecdotes do not trump others anecdotes. And when you see enough of them, you start to draw conclusions about a pattern; the plural of "anecdote" sometimes is "evidence".
When you say you don't trust people's own accounts about their own experiences, you are in effect calling them a liar. Think carefully before doing so.
>> However, sadly, often the motivation is "she's successful" or "people are listening to her".
> Sources please!
For the original source, read "Trouble at the Kool-Aid Point".
I'd also suggest reading and considering the other specific points I reiterated in my response to you, rather than ignoring them.
> The wikis you linked seems highly loaded and written with agenda. The writing is purely self-serving(?), without criticism of itself. I am sure whoever wrote that feels it is the right way, but I don't see much value in that myself.
It is entirely unsurprising that the set of people who have done the most research and put the most effort into understanding these issues are those who are affected by them. If you dismiss any such sources, you will find yourself quite lacking in material to read, other than material that confirms your own pre-existing conclusions. All sources are biased; read them all and think for yourself rather than exclusively seeking those that claim lack of bias.
If you're looking exclusively for peer-reviewed scientific papers, there are no shortage of those as well. (You might also consider whether you're applying the same standards to evidence that supports your existing opinions as to evidence that contradicts your existing opinions.) Most of them are far less approachable and newcomer-friendly; you'd be hard-pressed to find a better introduction to this entire family of interrelated issues than geekfeminism.wikia.com . If you need to first confirm for yourself that such incidents exist, go read http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents .
> What’s even more troubling than the abuse, however, is that so many people are oblivious to these issues. Even after Kathy was brave enough to post her personal story, people think she’s a statistical abnormality. Since I’ve started talking more openly about my experiences, a staggering number of men that I know and respect have spoken to me privately, apologizing because they didn’t know this was happening. I’ve related those conversations to other women, and they were shocked. They didn’t understand how men could not see these problems, but it’s because so many of us are being so goddamn quiet.
But on re-read, I accept that it was too strong of me to say 'directly'.
Anyway, the "it's only a few bad apples" response is common enough to have been addressed many times by essays on sexism in tech. It's akin to the "not all men" narrative.