Maybe a silly question, but...
How do they even know who's a woman? That I can tell, users on SO are represented by a color kaleidoscope and a randomly-generated number...?
Code Q&A site Stack Overflow has admitted its community can be hostile to women, people of color, and marginalized groups, and has promised to do better. It's an acknowledgement of charges leveled against the programming community repeatedly over the years. Enumerating various barriers to participation, a 2016 research paper …
With the title of the research paper being "Paradise Unplugged: Identifying Barriers for Female Participation on Stack Overflow" I think it would be safe to assume that the researchers went looking for females with a story to tell.
"In summary, the three research questions we want to answer through this study are:
• RQ1 : What barriers do females face on Stack Overflow?
• RQ2 : How do barriers vary by gender?
• RQ3 : How do the rating of barriers vary by other factors,such as site usage and experience?"
Next week: Why do so few men contribute to Mumsnet?
Next week: Why do so few men contribute to Mumsnet?
Because they don't have anxiety, a toxic (probably narc) mother-in-law and a morbid fear of penises in the Top Shop changing rooms.
Seriously, though, Mumsnet is a great place to while away an hour or two. It's like a continuous stream of Jeremy Kyle - stupid people making bad choices with car-crash entertaining results.
Seriously, though, Mumsnet is a great place to while away an hour or two. It's like a continuous stream of Jeremy Kyle - stupid people making bad choices with car-crash entertaining results.
Mumsnet is without doubt one of the more batshitcrazy corners of the internet, and while it may be entertaining to laugh your ass off at them, collectively, they're probably responsible for more divorces than anywhere else on the web.
A nest of vipers yelling LTB (Leave The Bastard, I think) at each other, in some competetive game to see who can get the most new posters to leave their relationship and join them wallowing in misery. Unfortunately, nobody seems to give a crap about the inevitable impact it has on the kids. And no, I'm not divorced, and my Mrs took one look at Mumsnet and asked "Are they mad?"
Mumsnet: Just say no.
Occasionally when googling some question about how to look after the baby* it'll come up with a mumsnet result.
If newbies have an issue with StackOverflow, I have an issue with mumsnet with all the abbreviations they use, it is like another language entirely.
"DD had a high temp DH asked MIL said take calpol, LTB? AIBU?"
(* I wish there was babyoverflow with logical steps on how to fix a crying baby)
I wish there was babyoverflow with logical steps on how to fix a crying baby
That's what baby oil is for. To stop the squeaks.
Pour it down the little fucker's throat until it asphyxiates from the overflow.
These days I don't particularly like children. Then again, I never did. Not even when I was one myself.
You don't need to know.
The same response that's accepted without question when addressed to a man, may be inappropriate when addressed to a woman. The obvious example is if it makes some jokey mention of bodily functions or sex, but there are more subtle differentiators too. When talking face to face, we unconsciously adjust to our audience. Online, we don't have the information to do that.
(Not that we should, of course.)
The issue is properly more that women want environments which are currently most men to change to be nicer for them... god forbid they change to try to fit in with it in it's currently state. I personally the only people who are insulted are the people who ask someone to complete work for them and people don't ask structured questions.
Same question here.
I also don't know how people might be singled out for race, maybe by their name? But then again, that's why I have an online handle - you don't need to share it.
I personally haven't seen anything on the site that I would take to be racist or sexist - it's a technical site, and that's pretty much all that is there - technical answers.
At the risk of angering some people, I wonder how much of this is people having a persecution complex?
If you actually read the blog post, it starts by mentioning women, races and new visitors. The vast majority (~99%) of the post is tailored to that last group - the need to make it more welcoming for new users etc. Its notable that the post doesn't talk at all about reducing gender beyond that first paragraph, and 'race' is touched on in a comment about imperfect English.
So I'm wondering if their view is similar to mine - that improvements can be done, but some people just want to play the gender/race card even when the real issue is more universal?
Feminism is all about victimhood these days, from claiming all men are rapists, going on about smashing some patriarchy I still haven't seen, complaining about the mythical gender pay gap, complaining they haven't got enough of the top jobs whilst not bothered about the male dominated jobs collecting rubbish bags, jobs in sewers, calling men with a differing opinion 'mysogynists', and it goes on and on.
I have no time for their corrosive ideology, nor do I believe anything they say. Let them keep whinging in their echo chambers of hate.
It's tricky. I wouldn't personally go to Mumsnet and complain it is hostile to men, however the fact there is an inherent gender bias at Mumsnet is patently true, as otherwise it would be called Parentsnet.
Software engineering is a tricky field. In general it's a slightly dorky field with a barrier to entry along the lines of the whole "what do you want to be when your old? Ok maths and computers are boring and hard I won't do that", whereas younger males are immensely competitive on video games and just kinda veer into a comp sci course.
Women are essentially capable and valuable in comp sci roles, it's just that statistically it appears they don't want to pursue that field. My electronics degree was 97% male, probably 99% white or Asian. We would have killed for more women/diversity to join us on the course - not just because we'd like to date them, because too many software nerds find social interaction with women difficult because some just don't talk to women.
Beyond this - what is the actual issue here? Is there a specific harassment issue or accusation of intrinsic bias? Or is it simply that some Gender Studies PhD wanted to structurally analyse a nerdy website because it's fashionable and someone was mean to her while playing CoD?
I keep hearing that us evil men discriminate against women, because women are underrepresented at management level. I'd probably argue the opposite - they are overrepresented compared to the statistical numbers that actually pursue employment in the field.
Mansplaining is a word used when one doesn't want ones loudly announced opinions and feels overridden by someone providing facts and logic. It is used to shut down debate, conversation, expertise, experience and to avoid social embarrassment, which these days is far more important than actual information.
Problem is depending on the complexity of the question, knowing how a wrench works can be useful sometimes. Especially if that wrench is the problem.
Most of the time (carrying on with the wrench analogy)
You're currently using a monkey wrench for this job, and while that might work, you'd have a much easier time using a ratchet instead because reasons. Now that you're using the correct tool for the job, you can simplify all these steps you were taking and do this instead.
Personally I'd rather have people explain to me why I'm doing something wrong.
You also have the problem that everyone is at different levels and it's hard to gauge that online.
Personally I'd rather have people explain to me why I'm doing something wrong.
Feminist response: There isn't anything wrong with the way that women do things. Your failure to recognize the way women do things as being equally valid is just proof that you're propagating negative female stereotypes in order to maintain your position of power within the misogynist patriarchy.
also be its downfall?
The very first piece of help you get is the statement
"This site is all about getting answers. It's not a discussion forum. There's no chit-chat."
As developers are prone to do, they take the instruction very literally and this has lead to a culture of intolerance of even the smallest mistake or contravention. Everyone on stackoverflow has met with overzealous "enforcers" who leave the place with a bad smell, especially if you're used to friendlier interactions with people.
It's difficult to see how to proceed. On one hand, this near-autistic intolerance of anything other than verifiable facts has probably given us of the world's best, most successful programming sites. On the other hand, if you step even a fraction out of line, your experience will be so negative that you probably wouldn't want to go back if you got paid.
Is it PC to say the some people have thicker skins than others?
The thing is, there is right, and there is wrong. In most cases* there is one recommended way and style of doing things - if you aren't giving that way/style, then you are giving wrong advice.
There is nothing wrong with being wrong, but if someone is wrong frequently then perhaps they shouldn't be trying to give out advice. If they continue to give out wrong advice, they reduce the quality of the thing.
To the results: on SO you can identify your gender but most users do not, which means the entire survey has been about people who choose to announce their gender to a population of people who, by and large, do not give a fuck. There is a clear self selection bias
* SO. Not all the other boards.
In most cases* there is one recommended way and style of doing things
That's the typical techno-chauvinist answer that permeates eg. physics.stackexchange and math.stackexchange and makes them particularly unwelcoming to questioners who have their own perfectly self-actualised theories of the universe.
In most cases* there is one recommended way and style of doing things
That's the typical techno-chauvinist answer that permeates eg. physics.stackexchange and math.stackexchange and makes them particularly unwelcoming to questioners who have their own perfectly self-actualised theories of the universe.
That's the typical answer of someone who gets offended when people say that they are wrong. It's not aggressive to be correct, the actual problem is the aggression of the person who takes offence at being corrected.
PS: Well done on dropping the starred footnote where I explicitly state that I am not talking about anything other than stack overflow.
"This site is all about getting answers. It's not a discussion forum. There's no chit-chat."
Well they seem to get round that by putting the chit chat in the form of a question. Down the right hand side there are all kinds of non coding related "questions" like: just to take the first that came up ...
https://worldbuilding.stackexchange.com/questions/110902/how-to-convince-primitive-tribe-that-cities-weren-t-built-by-gods
https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/114003/can-a-15-year-old-travel-alone-to-russia-from-the-usa
https://money.stackexchange.com/questions/94671/why-isnt-everybody-rich
Is this on StackOverflow or across the whole of StackExchange? Because as a person pointed out already, hardly anyone looks at the profile of people asking questions on StackOverflow. Maybe the 'victimised' groups really just can't take harsh feedback. They're in for a shock when they have to face a real code review.
Code Q&A site Stack Overflow has admitted its community can be hostile to women, people of color, and marginalized groups, and has promised to do better.
I think the truth though is very different: the community can be hostile towards dumb people who make the mistake of asking for an easy way out while blatantly showing that they have not taken any kind of effort to solve the problem themselves. Sure, those dumb people can indeed be women, people of color and marginalized groups.
See: tech sites usually don't discriminate, everyone gets the same treatment. If you're being stupid you'll be told as much. And that ladies and gentlemen is how we can progress. Yes, it might not be a pleasant experience, welcome to real life. But the motivation isn't so much to ridicule a person but more so to make them fully aware that they've been stupid, lazy, dumb, etc. and that in order to get better results they really should consider putting more effort into their questions or problems.
But in todays society some people apparently can't handle this. Instead of adapting to the rather direct culture of tech sites they feel entitled to a different treatment because... Yeah, why actually? Because you're a woman, person of color, etc, etc.? Isn't that basically discrimination and/or racism? Treating someone different based on their gender and the color of their skin?
And what happened to all those equality speeches?
The way I see it Stack Overflow is caving into the wishes of a dumb minority. And as a result the quality of the website in general will only plummet.
Because if you can't tell someone that they've been stupid and then carefully explain why that is so (not in a hateful manner obviously, but even that is honestly still enough for someone to take offense to, I've seen that happening a few times),... So if you can't do that then... well, I guess you'd better ignore the post alltogether and move onto something more worthy of your time.
The problem lies in what people perceive SO is. In the beginning, it looked like a site for asking "experts" about not-so-easy issues.
Then many wired it to their F1 keys, and started to ask the dumbest questions of them all - which usually could be answered by entering a couple of words in Google, and pressing "I'm feeling dumb lucky".
Unluckily, this behaviour looks more common among some "minorities" that discovered it lately - more often people from not first-world countries, often newbies - which may be used to behave quite differently (in some countries if you own a PC you're probably in the upper class... where upper means "upper"), and may not master English well enough to not look too aggressive, especially when asking quite dumb question.
It's not new to SO, in many forums in the past you got this kind of people - i.e. "I have to setup a CVS repository, explain now all the detailed steps needed, I must have it running by this afternoon". What could you answer?
But even among first-world programmers you get a lot of lazy people who prefer to pollute every resource to get a free answer with no effort, just they stand out less among the others.
I left SO some years ago, sometimes look at it when it appears in search result, but finding the right, good answer(s) among the many wrong or mostly wrong ones often takes time - and votes often don't help - that depends on the quality of peers voting - the dumber they are, the worse the are.
Facts are not "democratic".
> many wired it to their F1 keys
AKA "help vampires"
http://slash7.com/2006/12/22/vampires/
And ironically enough, it says "Note that I use ‘he’ here in the general sense even though Help Vampires are almost exclusively male. It appears that male Help Vampire, drawn as it is to shiny technology, occupies an evolutionary niche that females of the species simply do not find desirable."
I had to give a lecture ot a bunch of grads recently, and happened to use a bit flag for gender. I wasn't intentionally being a dick about it, it's just that's what we always used when I was their age. I noticed next time I turned around that I seemed to have lost them while explaining the basics of SRP. The snowflakes looked so physically uncomfortable I thought they might be sick.
"Gender isn't binary" says one. "Gender is a social construct" says another.
"I'm pretty sure you're going to find it isn't anything to do with society." says I, "It's a natural biological imperative. Anyway, go to any maximum security prison - you'll find a lot of men wishing some of them were women, and you'll find some men pretending to be women, but that don't make it so."
In the end I made gender an int because hurting their feelings with facts wasn't really what I wanted to accomplish.
For the record, I care not whether a man wants to dress and live as a woman (up to and including having their knackers lopped off), and I care not if a woman wants to dress and live as a man - It's your life and you should absolutely live it your way; it isn't anyone elses business. But, your chromasomes are something you're born with and they define your gender (XX or XY), not your lifestyle.
See the 'Humans' section of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_sex-determination_system for an introduction to the physical complexities that on their own might be enough for you to realise you might need to re-assess your bit field.
Of particular note is XX male syndrome - at 1/20,000 there's thousands of these people in the UK alone with a physically ambiguous gender.