Furore over sexism being called out at PyCon
March 20, 2013 3:17 PM Subscribe
Developer evangelist Adria Richards snaps a photo of two men at the recent PyCon whom she overheard making quips about "big dongles". PyCon responds, following which one of the men is fired. Adria justifies the callout as a step towards securing the future of programming for women. Full discussion at Hacker News.
What the fuck does joking about male genitalia have to do with feminism?
I could see being upset if someone was being hostile or exclusionary to her, but they were "being hostile" to themselves. Everyone has that fundamental right.
Adria's in the wrong here; she's the one who got upset about 'big dongles' when it didn't have anything to do with her specifically, or women in general, at all.
Should they have joked about female genitalia instead? Or wouldn't that be sexist? And if they can't joke about genitalia, period, isn't she really being anti-sex, not pro-woman?
posted by Malor at 3:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [54 favorites]
I could see being upset if someone was being hostile or exclusionary to her, but they were "being hostile" to themselves. Everyone has that fundamental right.
Adria's in the wrong here; she's the one who got upset about 'big dongles' when it didn't have anything to do with her specifically, or women in general, at all.
Should they have joked about female genitalia instead? Or wouldn't that be sexist? And if they can't joke about genitalia, period, isn't she really being anti-sex, not pro-woman?
posted by Malor at 3:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [54 favorites]
What does 'forking a repo' mean, anyway?
posted by kuujjuarapik at 3:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by kuujjuarapik at 3:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Something about this feels really off and weird.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
What does 'forking a repo' mean, anyway?
From the BÖC classic. Don't Fork the Repo.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
From the BÖC classic. Don't Fork the Repo.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
From the Code of Conduct:
Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention.
Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.
Exhibitors in the expo hall, sponsor or vendor booths, or similar activities are also subject to the anti-harassment policy. In particular, exhibitors should not use sexualized images, activities, or other material. Booth staff (including volunteers) should not use sexualized clothing/uniforms/costumes, or otherwise create a sexualized environment.
Be careful in the words that you choose. Remember that sexist, racist, and other exclusionary jokes can be offensive to those around you. Excessive swearing and offensive jokes are not appropriate for PyCon.
If a participant engages in behavior that violates this code of conduct, the conference organizers may take any action they deem appropriate, including warning the offender or expulsion from the conference with no refund.
If it's a professional conference and you are there as a representative of your employer, it might be in your best interest to act like it.
posted by rtha at 3:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [45 favorites]
Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention.
Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.
Exhibitors in the expo hall, sponsor or vendor booths, or similar activities are also subject to the anti-harassment policy. In particular, exhibitors should not use sexualized images, activities, or other material. Booth staff (including volunteers) should not use sexualized clothing/uniforms/costumes, or otherwise create a sexualized environment.
Be careful in the words that you choose. Remember that sexist, racist, and other exclusionary jokes can be offensive to those around you. Excessive swearing and offensive jokes are not appropriate for PyCon.
If a participant engages in behavior that violates this code of conduct, the conference organizers may take any action they deem appropriate, including warning the offender or expulsion from the conference with no refund.
If it's a professional conference and you are there as a representative of your employer, it might be in your best interest to act like it.
posted by rtha at 3:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [45 favorites]
What does 'forking a repo' mean, anyway?
I assume they were referring to software project repositories -- repo for short. As it's being created, software is kept in a type of storage that tracks revisions to the source files that make up the software. You can 'fork' a particular revision of the software into an alternate branch separate from the main 'trunk' -- later merging your changes with the main trunk, or maybe not (e.g., software library X rolls forward to version 3 but you want to modify the software as it was starting in 2.5, rather than use the major revisions in 3).
posted by axiom at 3:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I assume they were referring to software project repositories -- repo for short. As it's being created, software is kept in a type of storage that tracks revisions to the source files that make up the software. You can 'fork' a particular revision of the software into an alternate branch separate from the main 'trunk' -- later merging your changes with the main trunk, or maybe not (e.g., software library X rolls forward to version 3 but you want to modify the software as it was starting in 2.5, rather than use the major revisions in 3).
posted by axiom at 3:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
What the fuck does joking about male genitalia have to do with feminism?
The woman who complained isn't a feminist. Why would you bring up feminism?
posted by Jairus at 3:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
The woman who complained isn't a feminist. Why would you bring up feminism?
posted by Jairus at 3:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
What does 'forking a repo' mean, anyway?
repo is short for repository (in this case a git repository). Forking means that you create another branch of someone else's work and build upon it. There will always be a connection to the source and you can submit contributions back to the original project with that developers permission.
posted by special-k at 3:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
repo is short for repository (in this case a git repository). Forking means that you create another branch of someone else's work and build upon it. There will always be a connection to the source and you can submit contributions back to the original project with that developers permission.
posted by special-k at 3:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
There was also this: How To Get Banned From PyCon.
posted by octothorpe at 3:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by octothorpe at 3:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I could see being upset if someone was being hostile or exclusionary to her, but they were "being hostile" to themselves. Everyone has that fundamental right.
It's not quite that simple, I think. I mean, there's an argument to be made that blokey hur-hur-hur penis hur-hur-hur humor creates an environment that's intrinsically hostile to women even if the jokes themselves are not specifically aimed at women.
That said, this feels like a waaaaaay over the top reaction to these two particular jokes (I mean, the above argument would apply far more plausibly in a situation where you worked with these two guys and they continually made these sorts of jokes in your presence--not to a couple of jokes overheard from two random people behind you at a conference).
And the "won't somebody think of the children" stuff in her self-justification is pretty stomach-turning:
It's not quite that simple, I think. I mean, there's an argument to be made that blokey hur-hur-hur penis hur-hur-hur humor creates an environment that's intrinsically hostile to women even if the jokes themselves are not specifically aimed at women.
That said, this feels like a waaaaaay over the top reaction to these two particular jokes (I mean, the above argument would apply far more plausibly in a situation where you worked with these two guys and they continually made these sorts of jokes in your presence--not to a couple of jokes overheard from two random people behind you at a conference).
And the "won't somebody think of the children" stuff in her self-justification is pretty stomach-turning:
There is something about crushing a little kid’s dream that gets me really angry.posted by yoink at 3:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
I don't know what any of this means but no one likes a tattletale.
posted by 2bucksplus at 3:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
posted by 2bucksplus at 3:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
I don't want to live in a world where geeks at a geek conference can't joke about big dongles.
posted by schoolgirl report at 3:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [87 favorites]
posted by schoolgirl report at 3:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [87 favorites]
And the forking joke is common enough among developers that GitHub sells such a shirt.
posted by special-k at 3:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by special-k at 3:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I dunno. I am very sympathetic that conferences need to do explicit work to make them into better places for women. That said, this wasn't a comment by an exhibitor or a presenter but by an audience member. And it was made privately to his friend presumably. I mean, I'm assuming the dude didn't stand up and make some sort of impromptu speech here. So to me it sort of pushes the boundaries. I'm all for being respectful towards other people, but this was a private conversation that she wasn't directly party to, so it seems a bit harsh for her to publicly shame the guy.
The he got fired is a whole other level of over-reaction.
posted by GuyZero at 3:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
The he got fired is a whole other level of over-reaction.
posted by GuyZero at 3:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
the callout was ok. pycon's handling was ok. employer firing the guy was not ok.
posted by Foci for Analysis at 3:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
posted by Foci for Analysis at 3:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
I wonder if she said anything to the two before taking the picture. I'm sympathetic to the idea of acting like a professional at a professional conference, but it seems like part of that might be addressing the behavior directly with the participants. I wonder if they got their presentations pulled as well as being fired.
posted by boo_radley at 3:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by boo_radley at 3:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
If it's a professional conference and you are there as a representative of your employer, it might be in your best interest to act like it.
I have had co-workers say things that other people might find far more offensive at conferences. But these were private conversations between ourselves and not in any official capacity. I'm very much for being professional while "on the clock" but in private I think people should be free to say whatever dumb stuff they want.
posted by GuyZero at 3:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I have had co-workers say things that other people might find far more offensive at conferences. But these were private conversations between ourselves and not in any official capacity. I'm very much for being professional while "on the clock" but in private I think people should be free to say whatever dumb stuff they want.
posted by GuyZero at 3:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Finally a dev flame war not in the Rails community...
posted by PenDevil at 3:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 3:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Randomly, I had a brief conversation about tech stuff with Adria Richards a few weeks back. She came across as a pretty cool individual, but I don't really know anything about her.
There have been some claims that the dude on hacker news is not actually the guy in question. Assuming that he is, and did in fact get fired, this comes across as a fairly shitty way for her to have handled things. Of course, I'm sure she's now experiencing insane levels of misogynist rage as a result, which is completely horrible and makes me hate most of the internet all over again.
I think I'll shut up now. Probably no one needs my opinion all that badly, and this smells like the kind of thing where I'd wind up somehow arguing with a bunch of people whose opinions I often, broadly speaking, share.
posted by brennen at 3:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
There have been some claims that the dude on hacker news is not actually the guy in question. Assuming that he is, and did in fact get fired, this comes across as a fairly shitty way for her to have handled things. Of course, I'm sure she's now experiencing insane levels of misogynist rage as a result, which is completely horrible and makes me hate most of the internet all over again.
I think I'll shut up now. Probably no one needs my opinion all that badly, and this smells like the kind of thing where I'd wind up somehow arguing with a bunch of people whose opinions I often, broadly speaking, share.
posted by brennen at 3:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I wonder if she said anything to the two before taking the picture.
Both she and the fired guy say not.
posted by yoink at 3:36 PM on March 20, 2013
Both she and the fired guy say not.
posted by yoink at 3:36 PM on March 20, 2013
I'm all for being respectful towards other people, but this was a private conversation that she wasn't directly party to, so it seems a bit harsh for her to publicly shame the guy.
From the picture, it doesn't seem private, they were sitting in the audience right behind her.
posted by octothorpe at 3:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
From the picture, it doesn't seem private, they were sitting in the audience right behind her.
posted by octothorpe at 3:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
In Geek world, repo forks you.
posted by No Robots at 3:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by No Robots at 3:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I don't know what any of this means but no one likes a tattletale.
I don't know what that means. When is it tattling to tell someone that someone else did something bad/rule-breaking, and when is it not?
posted by rtha at 3:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I don't know what that means. When is it tattling to tell someone that someone else did something bad/rule-breaking, and when is it not?
posted by rtha at 3:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Wait, these were just two guys in an audience? Jeez. I'm out. Call a professional ethicist, because this is uncomfortable on all sides for me.
posted by boo_radley at 3:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
posted by boo_radley at 3:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
Why does this take me back to growing up in the Christian Midwest where we "weren't supposed to say penis in the presence of ladies."
Also, wtf is a developer evangelist.
posted by Lutoslawski at 3:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Also, wtf is a developer evangelist.
posted by Lutoslawski at 3:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Jairus: The woman who complained isn't a feminist. Why would you bring up feminism?
Well, from the FPP: Adria justifies the callout as a step towards securing the future of programming for women.
Is there some term I should be using instead? That certainly looks like feminism to me, and I absolutely do not see that a vague joke about male genitalia has anything to do with that. In what possible way does a vague dick joke threaten the future of programming for women?
She really fucked that guy's life up, for no benefit to herself.
posted by Malor at 3:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
Well, from the FPP: Adria justifies the callout as a step towards securing the future of programming for women.
Is there some term I should be using instead? That certainly looks like feminism to me, and I absolutely do not see that a vague joke about male genitalia has anything to do with that. In what possible way does a vague dick joke threaten the future of programming for women?
She really fucked that guy's life up, for no benefit to herself.
posted by Malor at 3:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
My main problem is it seems like a bit much to have these guys' faces plastered all over the internet for saying "forking" and "big dongle" in what sounds like a more-or-less private computer-dude conversation as if they are somehow the self-elected posterboys for misogyny. Did she have their permission to take their picture and use it publicly?
I would have thought a mature, self-assured adult woman would have addressed them directly and on top of that where does a conversation like this fall on the freedom of speech spectrum? It's not hate speech. Argh, I just think this whole situation is really odd and poorly-scaled and post-modern or something.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
I would have thought a mature, self-assured adult woman would have addressed them directly and on top of that where does a conversation like this fall on the freedom of speech spectrum? It's not hate speech. Argh, I just think this whole situation is really odd and poorly-scaled and post-modern or something.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
wtf is a developer evangelist
Someone who is really, really excited about iron oxalate, iron sulfate or iron lactate.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
Someone who is really, really excited about iron oxalate, iron sulfate or iron lactate.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 3:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
When is it tattling to tell someone that someone else did something bad/rule-breaking, and when is it not?
I think we'd generally say that "tattling" is when you call in a higher authority to resolve something that would be better handled by the relevant actors themselves. If your neighbor's kid smashes your Halloween Jack'o'lantern, you probably could call the cops and ask them to arrest him for vandalism, but you'd probably be wiser not to.
posted by yoink at 3:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
I think we'd generally say that "tattling" is when you call in a higher authority to resolve something that would be better handled by the relevant actors themselves. If your neighbor's kid smashes your Halloween Jack'o'lantern, you probably could call the cops and ask them to arrest him for vandalism, but you'd probably be wiser not to.
posted by yoink at 3:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
When is it tattling to tell someone that someone else did something bad/rule-breaking, and when is it not?
I know you quoted some rules, but there is some legitimate discussion as to whether those rules apply in this situation, and assuming they do, whether the reaction on the part of all involved — including Adria — was appropriate or reactionary/excessive.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013
I know you quoted some rules, but there is some legitimate discussion as to whether those rules apply in this situation, and assuming they do, whether the reaction on the part of all involved — including Adria — was appropriate or reactionary/excessive.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013
Dongle and forking are both funny words. Can we at least agree on that?
posted by found missing at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
posted by found missing at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
Adria posted a penis joke to twitter not long before this incident (re: the TSA feeling-up an attendee). Also, taking harassing photos is against Pycon rules. It seems she holds others' behaviour to a vastly different standard than for her own.
posted by five fresh fish at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [91 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 3:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [91 favorites]
From the picture, it doesn't seem private, they were sitting in the audience right behind her.
She wasn't a participant in the conversation though. Are audience members at PyCon not supposed to say anything that might offend someone who overhears what they're saying? Neither of the people involved in the exchange seemed to want her to know what they were talking about. In an actual workplace this one incident would be unlikely to result in any action (especially firing). If there was a pattern of action that might be different, but she heard something like a few dozen words these guys exchanged privately between themselves.
posted by GuyZero at 3:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
She wasn't a participant in the conversation though. Are audience members at PyCon not supposed to say anything that might offend someone who overhears what they're saying? Neither of the people involved in the exchange seemed to want her to know what they were talking about. In an actual workplace this one incident would be unlikely to result in any action (especially firing). If there was a pattern of action that might be different, but she heard something like a few dozen words these guys exchanged privately between themselves.
posted by GuyZero at 3:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
It's unfortunate that he got sacked, but I think that a zero-tolerance policy on sexualised innuendo at conferences is a good idea, at least at this point in history. If there isn't a clear boundary, you will get the minority of touchy-feely improperly socialised males who attend such conferences pushing the boundaries, intimidating any women who attend. So making jokes like the “it was bare, just the way I like it” should not be tolerated, and should result in disciplinary action.
Perhaps, once things like the CouchDB talk are ancient history, we can attend technical conferences like mature adults. That time, however, is not yet. We still live in a world where women avoid computer science, and most of the female coders who exist shun open-source and go to work with Microsoft and Oracle and such because their environments have professional codes of conduct so they won't be considered fair game for the socially challenged mouth-breathing whiz-kids.
posted by acb at 3:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
Perhaps, once things like the CouchDB talk are ancient history, we can attend technical conferences like mature adults. That time, however, is not yet. We still live in a world where women avoid computer science, and most of the female coders who exist shun open-source and go to work with Microsoft and Oracle and such because their environments have professional codes of conduct so they won't be considered fair game for the socially challenged mouth-breathing whiz-kids.
posted by acb at 3:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
Sex jokes in a public place that make other people feel uncomfortable are grounds for being asked to leave the room.
She really fucked that guy's life up
No, the guy's boss is to blame here. An isolated incident of unprofessional behavior is not a hanging offence. Unless there's an ongoing pattern of bad behavior we don't know about his firing is an unjustifiable corporate CYA exercise.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 3:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [45 favorites]
She really fucked that guy's life up
No, the guy's boss is to blame here. An isolated incident of unprofessional behavior is not a hanging offence. Unless there's an ongoing pattern of bad behavior we don't know about his firing is an unjustifiable corporate CYA exercise.
posted by justsomebodythatyouusedtoknow at 3:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [45 favorites]
From the Code of Conduct:I guess I would have to hear the actual jokes made, but I wouldn't be surprised if they didn't seem "offensive" to me. Obviously they offended her, of course, but lots of people get offended about lots of things. I don't really see how sexual jokes are necessarily misogyny, and I certainly don't see how a non-misogynistic sexual joke keeps young girls from becoming programmers.
Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention.
Meanwhile, "harassing photography" is pretty much exactly what she did, no?
posted by Flunkie at 3:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
While I think being more thoughtful of others is a good idea in general, I am not totally comfortable with the idea that when in public, people should avoid ever saying anything that anyone eavesdropping could be offended by, on pain of their livelihood.
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [74 favorites]
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [74 favorites]
If you read her blog entry, she comes off sounding like a sociopath, ala yoink's quote upthread, ditto the self-invented title.
It's seemingly a clear cut case of "prudish asshat invents justification to inflicts their prudishness upon others". There is a slim chance the guys were being stupidly loud, thus making their conversation not really between themselves, and bringing PyCon's rules clearly into the picture, but that doesn't sound like the case.
It's not a feminism thing, just a freaky prudish power trip thing. Men do this too. Very unfeminist men even.
As much as I hate British libel law, it's amusing to point out that her action are civilly actionable in the U.K., if not actually criminal.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
It's seemingly a clear cut case of "prudish asshat invents justification to inflicts their prudishness upon others". There is a slim chance the guys were being stupidly loud, thus making their conversation not really between themselves, and bringing PyCon's rules clearly into the picture, but that doesn't sound like the case.
It's not a feminism thing, just a freaky prudish power trip thing. Men do this too. Very unfeminist men even.
As much as I hate British libel law, it's amusing to point out that her action are civilly actionable in the U.K., if not actually criminal.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
I am not totally comfortable with the idea that when in public, people should avoid ever saying anything that anyone eavesdropping could be offended by, on pain of their livelihood.welcome to the future, have a pair of Google Glasses
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 3:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [44 favorites]
So making jokes like the “it was bare, just the way I like it” should not be tolerated, and should result in disciplinary action.
That seems like a very different kind of joke than the ones that were actually made, though. I wouldn't think twice about making a "big dongle" or a "forking" joke here on the blue. It wouldn't occur to me in any circumstance that I can think of to make your joke.
posted by yoink at 3:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
That seems like a very different kind of joke than the ones that were actually made, though. I wouldn't think twice about making a "big dongle" or a "forking" joke here on the blue. It wouldn't occur to me in any circumstance that I can think of to make your joke.
posted by yoink at 3:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
This is apparently what it takes to get people to realize that these sorts of comments are insulting to some. Anything shy of making an example of an asshole is virtually ineffective.
posted by blue t-shirt at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by blue t-shirt at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
It is really unfortunate that words like forking and dongle are so pervasive in the community. It is almost impossible to not make jokes about them, After all, they satisfy Krusty's rule of comedy, they are words that sound dirty but aren't, just like mukluk. I propose the words forking and and dongle be replaced with words that sound less dirty.
posted by Ad hominem at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by Ad hominem at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
Overheard conversations can contribute to a hostile environment. It generally wouldn't pass a workplace sexual harassment policy, so it shouldn't fly at a professional conference. That said, everything that happened seems to have been overreaction. Posting the guys' picture on Twitter; the organizers kicking the guys out of the conference rather than warning them to knock it off; the one guy being fired.
posted by eruonna at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by eruonna at 3:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Y'know, one of the things that makes it difficult for women in spaces that have been largely unexaminedly male-normative is the expectation that they be endlessly perfect and patient if they encounter something that's not cool. She describes having already that day had that conversation with someone else.
So here, in a panel audience where she couldn't get into a conversation about it without distracting and irritating everyone around her, she didn't try, but snapped a picture and kvetched on Twitter. How many of you have seen "Christ what an asshole" complaints with photos on the internet? Were you outraged every time?
Pycon saw it and talked to the people and said not cool (and whatever you think of how appropriate their comments were, they seem clearly in violation of PyCon's code of conduct) and they apologized and all of this is everything working in a reasonable manner.
If someone was fired (we seem to have only an unverified Hacker News commenter saying it) I think that's disproportionate and overkill. But it was overkill on the employer's part.
A few years ago, someone broke into our garage and stole my and my wife's bikes. If I could have done anything to effect it, I'd have loved to see the thieves arrested and tried and wouldn't have shed any tears if they'd done jail time. If they'd then been killed in jail, that would be a horrible thing and absolutely disproportionate to bike theft... but I wouldn't be wracked with guilt that I'd had something to do with their arrest.
Blaming Richards for something the employer did is nuts.
posted by Zed at 3:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [75 favorites]
So here, in a panel audience where she couldn't get into a conversation about it without distracting and irritating everyone around her, she didn't try, but snapped a picture and kvetched on Twitter. How many of you have seen "Christ what an asshole" complaints with photos on the internet? Were you outraged every time?
Pycon saw it and talked to the people and said not cool (and whatever you think of how appropriate their comments were, they seem clearly in violation of PyCon's code of conduct) and they apologized and all of this is everything working in a reasonable manner.
If someone was fired (we seem to have only an unverified Hacker News commenter saying it) I think that's disproportionate and overkill. But it was overkill on the employer's part.
A few years ago, someone broke into our garage and stole my and my wife's bikes. If I could have done anything to effect it, I'd have loved to see the thieves arrested and tried and wouldn't have shed any tears if they'd done jail time. If they'd then been killed in jail, that would be a horrible thing and absolutely disproportionate to bike theft... but I wouldn't be wracked with guilt that I'd had something to do with their arrest.
Blaming Richards for something the employer did is nuts.
posted by Zed at 3:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [75 favorites]
welcome to the future, have a pair of Google Glasses
- Search: "conversation I will personally be offended by"
- 821,371,000,000 results. Would you like to find the nearest "conversation I will personally be offended by"?
- Yes.
- The nearest "conversation I will personally be offended by" is 7' from your location. Would you like to know the quickest route to get there? Note: You will need to climb through a window.
- Yes.
- You are arriving at "conversation I will personally be offended by". Would you like to RECORD?
- Yes.
- You have recorded "conversation I will personally be offended by". Would you like to upload this to Google+ to share with your friends?
- Yes.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [58 favorites]
- Search: "conversation I will personally be offended by"
- 821,371,000,000 results. Would you like to find the nearest "conversation I will personally be offended by"?
- Yes.
- The nearest "conversation I will personally be offended by" is 7' from your location. Would you like to know the quickest route to get there? Note: You will need to climb through a window.
- Yes.
- You are arriving at "conversation I will personally be offended by". Would you like to RECORD?
- Yes.
- You have recorded "conversation I will personally be offended by". Would you like to upload this to Google+ to share with your friends?
- Yes.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 3:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [58 favorites]
Job Interviewer: "So tell me, why did you leave your job with PlayHaven?"
Interviewee: "I made an off-colour joke in a private conversation outside the workplace."
Job Interviewer: "Ah."
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
Interviewee: "I made an off-colour joke in a private conversation outside the workplace."
Job Interviewer: "Ah."
posted by ricochet biscuit at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
Stick a fork in it, I'm dongle.
posted by mazola at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by mazola at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
This is an odd situation, to say the least. Reading through the comments, it's clear that the story is not this story but a much larger story.
First of all, the firing is rather strange. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes there. Maybe the company was ready to downsize and needed an excuse. Or the guy was not performing to standard. Or the decision was made by someone who has absolutely zero tolerance for anything smelling vaguely of sexual harassment. Who knows? But it's obvious there was a reaction there that was made in a context we'll probably never know. It's easy to slag off as "psychotic corporation afraid of bad PR" but then again, great people are hard to find, and companies are loathe to let great talent go for any reason.
Secondly, the larger story. Tech has been dominated by men, since I started in tech back in 1994 at least. I've worked in a variety of tech-related roles, and by and large the staff have been predominantly white men. I realise that's changing – and rapidly – but that has been the zeitgeist for at least a generation, maybe two.
The jokes that go around in teams overwhelmingly populated by men can be rough, and that's regardless of industry. Tech, media, hospitality, etc. It's the mark of a male-dominated society – define "the other" and reinforce group identity. No magic there, basic human behaviour.
What the change represents is that Tech is no longer an old boys club, as it once was. What comes across from reading the links is that the misogyny is deeply engrained, there are heaps of people defending it without even realising that they are defending it.
Power is not an infinite quantity, it is a finite quantity. Before you tell me who has been empowered, first you must tell me who has been disempowered.
In this case, it's men who are being disempowered by the presence of women, and the requirement that their behaviour become more inclusionary, rather than exclusionary. If one has ever had to watch a woman endure jokes from these male groups – or even worse, make jokes at their own expense to fit in – it's obvious that jokes are not simple jokes. Seemingly innocuous comments are loaded with subtle statements of power.
It's difficult, because in these situations, the men are guilty of repressing women without even being aware of it. The misogyny is so embedded, that to call it misogyny is easily characterisable as 'dramatic'. That is the degree to which it is rooted within common everyday interactions.
Thus, this poor fellow has been made an example of it. And it sucks to be the example, but societies are composed of individuals, and sometimes shit happens. I feel for the guy – I really do – but at the same time, women cannot be empowered without men being disempowered. Women cannot be treated as equal as long as it is acceptable to not treat them like equals. Some men will go as far as to say they are open with the jokes, and therefore it is okay. That the content is irrelevant. It was just a joke. But that's the point where in a larger context, the joke itself is an expression of power.
And men's safe zones are increasingly under attack. For a long time, men – especially white men – had architected a society that self-perpetuated the benefits of white maleness. That comes first in socialisation and basic language, and is extended through formal education, and into the domain of the career. This was physical control – restricting access to be present in places like educational institutions and companies – as well as psychological controls, in the media, for example.
But that's changing and now women are performing very well in the workforce and educational institutions, often surpassing men. Software development is a growing industry with very high salaries, so a natural attractor for young talent. Previously, women were taught that they did not have a place in engineering and software. But those battles have been – and are increasingly – fought and won. Women are taking their rightful place as equals to men.
That is great for women, for it is empowering them, and shit for men, for they are being disempowered. But there's no other way around it. If the situation has been unbalanced, then it must be rebalanced, and that means winners and losers. Women are winning, therefore men have to lose. But then the case point, that men have had a disproportionate share of the winnings anyway, therefore, they have power to lose... or rather to be balanced.
So overall, there's not much of a story here. The story is much larger, about the shift of society toward being more inclusive of women. Men are going to have to learn to watch what they say, and there's two ways to do that. The easy way, and the hard way. This fellow happened upon the hard way. And he's not going to be the last fellow to learn the hard way either.
posted by nickrussell at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [53 favorites]
First of all, the firing is rather strange. Who knows what's going on behind the scenes there. Maybe the company was ready to downsize and needed an excuse. Or the guy was not performing to standard. Or the decision was made by someone who has absolutely zero tolerance for anything smelling vaguely of sexual harassment. Who knows? But it's obvious there was a reaction there that was made in a context we'll probably never know. It's easy to slag off as "psychotic corporation afraid of bad PR" but then again, great people are hard to find, and companies are loathe to let great talent go for any reason.
Secondly, the larger story. Tech has been dominated by men, since I started in tech back in 1994 at least. I've worked in a variety of tech-related roles, and by and large the staff have been predominantly white men. I realise that's changing – and rapidly – but that has been the zeitgeist for at least a generation, maybe two.
The jokes that go around in teams overwhelmingly populated by men can be rough, and that's regardless of industry. Tech, media, hospitality, etc. It's the mark of a male-dominated society – define "the other" and reinforce group identity. No magic there, basic human behaviour.
What the change represents is that Tech is no longer an old boys club, as it once was. What comes across from reading the links is that the misogyny is deeply engrained, there are heaps of people defending it without even realising that they are defending it.
Power is not an infinite quantity, it is a finite quantity. Before you tell me who has been empowered, first you must tell me who has been disempowered.
In this case, it's men who are being disempowered by the presence of women, and the requirement that their behaviour become more inclusionary, rather than exclusionary. If one has ever had to watch a woman endure jokes from these male groups – or even worse, make jokes at their own expense to fit in – it's obvious that jokes are not simple jokes. Seemingly innocuous comments are loaded with subtle statements of power.
It's difficult, because in these situations, the men are guilty of repressing women without even being aware of it. The misogyny is so embedded, that to call it misogyny is easily characterisable as 'dramatic'. That is the degree to which it is rooted within common everyday interactions.
Thus, this poor fellow has been made an example of it. And it sucks to be the example, but societies are composed of individuals, and sometimes shit happens. I feel for the guy – I really do – but at the same time, women cannot be empowered without men being disempowered. Women cannot be treated as equal as long as it is acceptable to not treat them like equals. Some men will go as far as to say they are open with the jokes, and therefore it is okay. That the content is irrelevant. It was just a joke. But that's the point where in a larger context, the joke itself is an expression of power.
And men's safe zones are increasingly under attack. For a long time, men – especially white men – had architected a society that self-perpetuated the benefits of white maleness. That comes first in socialisation and basic language, and is extended through formal education, and into the domain of the career. This was physical control – restricting access to be present in places like educational institutions and companies – as well as psychological controls, in the media, for example.
But that's changing and now women are performing very well in the workforce and educational institutions, often surpassing men. Software development is a growing industry with very high salaries, so a natural attractor for young talent. Previously, women were taught that they did not have a place in engineering and software. But those battles have been – and are increasingly – fought and won. Women are taking their rightful place as equals to men.
That is great for women, for it is empowering them, and shit for men, for they are being disempowered. But there's no other way around it. If the situation has been unbalanced, then it must be rebalanced, and that means winners and losers. Women are winning, therefore men have to lose. But then the case point, that men have had a disproportionate share of the winnings anyway, therefore, they have power to lose... or rather to be balanced.
So overall, there's not much of a story here. The story is much larger, about the shift of society toward being more inclusive of women. Men are going to have to learn to watch what they say, and there's two ways to do that. The easy way, and the hard way. This fellow happened upon the hard way. And he's not going to be the last fellow to learn the hard way either.
posted by nickrussell at 3:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [53 favorites]
Prudish bullshit from top to tail.
posted by Artw at 3:57 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
posted by Artw at 3:57 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
Interviewee: "I made an off-colour joke in a private conversation outside the workplace."
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
You missed that part.
posted by blue t-shirt at 3:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
You missed that part.
posted by blue t-shirt at 3:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
It's not a feminism thing, just a freaky prudish power trip thing. Men do this too. Very unfeminist men even.
Even if it is so, in this case the result could be an awareness that, at conferences, you save your dick jokes for the bar.
posted by acb at 4:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Even if it is so, in this case the result could be an awareness that, at conferences, you save your dick jokes for the bar.
posted by acb at 4:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Blaming Richards for something the employer did is nuts.
Disagree, especially if she had a similar situation earlier and resolved it by talking to the people. It's odd that she didn't do it in this situation.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Disagree, especially if she had a similar situation earlier and resolved it by talking to the people. It's odd that she didn't do it in this situation.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
So there are degrees of public. These guys were no on a stage and where in no way attempting to make this women part of their conversation at all. I understand the issues with creating a hostile environment, but two guys talking between themselves don't quite get there.
women cannot be empowered without men being disempowered
Hm, not sure I agree that this is some sort of zero-sum dominance game.
posted by GuyZero at 4:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
So there are degrees of public. These guys were no on a stage and where in no way attempting to make this women part of their conversation at all. I understand the issues with creating a hostile environment, but two guys talking between themselves don't quite get there.
women cannot be empowered without men being disempowered
Hm, not sure I agree that this is some sort of zero-sum dominance game.
posted by GuyZero at 4:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
Well technically, at a private conference.
And this whole "representing the company" aspect is such a load of shit. It's evoked selectively
when things are blown out of proportion, such as this whole debacle. Every word you utter is
supposed to represent the company? Prudish at best, completely unrealistic at worst.
posted by gcbv at 4:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
Well technically, at a private conference.
And this whole "representing the company" aspect is such a load of shit. It's evoked selectively
when things are blown out of proportion, such as this whole debacle. Every word you utter is
supposed to represent the company? Prudish at best, completely unrealistic at worst.
posted by gcbv at 4:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
blue t-shirt:
I don't mean to single you out, but I don't understand. Can you please explain how that comment is offensive? What makes it offensive? Please be specific.
I guess I'm old now, because I don't understand the reference in the slightest, except in the way that Ad hominem has pointed out. The word sounds dirty, but it's not. So how is it offensive?
I am saying this as an honestly, really trying hard to understand, want to be a better person feminist white male. nickrussell has posted this power dynamic thing that I don't agree with, but will have to think about and address later.
Do juvenile jokes really cause a hostile work environment?
posted by daq at 4:02 PM on March 20, 2013
I don't mean to single you out, but I don't understand. Can you please explain how that comment is offensive? What makes it offensive? Please be specific.
I guess I'm old now, because I don't understand the reference in the slightest, except in the way that Ad hominem has pointed out. The word sounds dirty, but it's not. So how is it offensive?
I am saying this as an honestly, really trying hard to understand, want to be a better person feminist white male. nickrussell has posted this power dynamic thing that I don't agree with, but will have to think about and address later.
Do juvenile jokes really cause a hostile work environment?
posted by daq at 4:02 PM on March 20, 2013
I do so wish she'd done this in the U.K. so that we could all enjoy bemoaning both her prudishness and the resulting libel suit.
posted by jeffburdges at 4:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by jeffburdges at 4:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
If I'm having a conversation with my neighbor in a normal speaking volume, is that 'in public'? What's a reasonable way to make sure nobody else but my intended is listening to me?
posted by ftm at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
If I'm having a conversation with my neighbor in a normal speaking volume, is that 'in public'? What's a reasonable way to make sure nobody else but my intended is listening to me?
posted by ftm at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The linked Hacker News discussion is kind of mind-boggling. There are thoughtful and constructive discussions that people can have about intensely complicated issues like this, but Hacker News rarely makes it there. I sometimes read those comments in order to remind myself that a large number of people in my industry are quietly thinking something along the lines of "nothing too bad about how women are treated around here, no need for special efforts at empathy; it doesn't make sense that they complain; works for me".
posted by dreamyshade at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by dreamyshade at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
kuujjuarapik: "What does 'forking a repo' mean, anyway?"
Simple. kuujjuarapik makes Kuujjuarapik's awesome MetaFilter SuperClient & GoogleReaderReplacement. And, to make life easier you put the source code in an online repository like GitHub for easy management. I see it and I think "Gawd, those colors and fonts suck." But I can't change your code.
So, I fork your repo. I basically clone your code and such into my own repository. And I make a better version. So there.
(Of course, like so many explanations, it is all fantasy as I completely suck at coding.)
Also, some people use repos to track things like documents and other files they want to have change tracking and management on.
posted by Samizdata at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013
Simple. kuujjuarapik makes Kuujjuarapik's awesome MetaFilter SuperClient & GoogleReaderReplacement. And, to make life easier you put the source code in an online repository like GitHub for easy management. I see it and I think "Gawd, those colors and fonts suck." But I can't change your code.
So, I fork your repo. I basically clone your code and such into my own repository. And I make a better version. So there.
(Of course, like so many explanations, it is all fantasy as I completely suck at coding.)
Also, some people use repos to track things like documents and other files they want to have change tracking and management on.
posted by Samizdata at 4:04 PM on March 20, 2013
Interviewee: "I made an off-color joke in a private conversation outside the workplace."
More like, "I acted grossly unprofessionally at a professional conference while representing my company".
posted by octothorpe at 4:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
More like, "I acted grossly unprofessionally at a professional conference while representing my company".
posted by octothorpe at 4:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
In the future we'll all just have to glare at each other with fake smiles and a smoldering rage behind the eyes.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [21 favorites]
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [21 favorites]
Is there a difference between sexist comments and sexual innuendo? I'm still not sure what the sexist comments were. Is "heh-heh... he said dongle" sexist? Unprofessional, yes. Sexist? Not sure.
posted by yoz420 at 4:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by yoz420 at 4:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Do men really need to wave the idea of penises and fucking around in blokey banter to mark their territory and feel “empowered”? I am a man, and work as an IT contractor, and have worked in blokey environments where such banter was commonplace (i.e., joking about one's porn viewing habits, hot women one wants to screw, mail-order brides, that sort of thing), and didn't enjoy it. Personally, I'd feel more comfortable in a work environment if such verbal dick-waving was not acceptable.
posted by acb at 4:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
posted by acb at 4:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
More like, "I acted grossly unprofessionally at a professional conference while representing my company".
If you think this is grossly unprofessional you have been living in a box.
Now, perhaps it's still creating an unpleasant or oppressive environment for women, but believe me, this bad joke made in semi-private is nothing.
posted by GuyZero at 4:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
If you think this is grossly unprofessional you have been living in a box.
Now, perhaps it's still creating an unpleasant or oppressive environment for women, but believe me, this bad joke made in semi-private is nothing.
posted by GuyZero at 4:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
In the future we'll all just have to glare at each other with fake smiles and a smoldering rage behind the eyes.
Isn't that what we do now?
posted by jessamyn at 4:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [77 favorites]
Isn't that what we do now?
posted by jessamyn at 4:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [77 favorites]
Adria posted a penis joke to twitter not long before this incident (re: the TSA feeling-up an attendee).
I was curious about this and went through her twitter feed. I don't know how to link to an individual tweet, so here's the exchange (this is on her way to the Pycon conference):
posted by yoink at 4:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [50 favorites]
I was curious about this and went through her twitter feed. I don't know how to link to an individual tweet, so here's the exchange (this is on her way to the Pycon conference):
Dave Hall @skwashd 14 MarI dunno. I have to say that this makes the "OMG, someone made a 'large dongle' joke in my presence!!" thing seem a little forced. I notice that she retweets, later, a tweet by Dave Hall saying that their exchange is "different" because of it occurring in the context of an exchange between friends. Um....hello? You might not have thought that one through the whole way.
I made it to US and A. I've received my traditional TSA welcoming - having my nuts fondled.
10:56 AM - 14 Mar 13 · Details
Adria Richards @adriarichards 14 Mar
@skwashd you should put something in your pants next time...like a bunch of socks inside one...large...sock. TSA agent faint
posted by yoink at 4:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [50 favorites]
In the future we'll all just have to glare at each other with fake smiles and a smoldering rage behind the eyes.i have always known that i am from the future
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 4:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
I agree with the "hey, dudes, making jokey penis innuendos is uncool here."
I disagree with the "hey, this is too much trouble to say this, either to the perpetrators or the conference organizers, so I think I'll post their faces to my ten thousand Twitter followers instead, and let the internet have that discussion for me."
posted by zippy at 4:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
I disagree with the "hey, this is too much trouble to say this, either to the perpetrators or the conference organizers, so I think I'll post their faces to my ten thousand Twitter followers instead, and let the internet have that discussion for me."
posted by zippy at 4:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Adria Richards @adriarichards 14 Mar
@skwashd you should put something in your pants next time...like a bunch of socks inside one...large...sock. TSA agent faint
It should be noted that if she tweeted this while on the way to the conference, she was technically representing her employer.
posted by gcbv at 4:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
@skwashd you should put something in your pants next time...like a bunch of socks inside one...large...sock. TSA agent faint
It should be noted that if she tweeted this while on the way to the conference, she was technically representing her employer.
posted by gcbv at 4:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
She says they "kept going and kept going" so apparently it wasn't just one or two off-color jokes. I would be really uncomfortable too if I were at a professional conference and the men behind me kept cracking sex jokes for several minutes.
posted by Danila at 4:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
posted by Danila at 4:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
Do men really need to wave the idea of penises and fucking around in blokey banter to mark their territory and feel “empowered”?
Yeah. Coming from the field of academia/science, the fact that this sort of thing goes on, and that women are still considered unwelcome, sort of blows my mind. Shit needs to change in the computing world, it seems. However, this pycon thing feels like very much the wrong battle to fight.
posted by Jimbob at 4:12 PM on March 20, 2013
Yeah. Coming from the field of academia/science, the fact that this sort of thing goes on, and that women are still considered unwelcome, sort of blows my mind. Shit needs to change in the computing world, it seems. However, this pycon thing feels like very much the wrong battle to fight.
posted by Jimbob at 4:12 PM on March 20, 2013
joking about one's porn viewing habits, hot women one wants to screw, mail-order brides, that sort of thing
But if the jokes these guys had made at Pycon had been anything remotely like that there'd be a great deal more sympathy for Adria's response. Those would be obviously hostile and offensive. "Big dongle" seems, well, not. "Guy at conference starts talking about hot women he wants to screw, woman snaps his photo and posts it to twitter" would lead to a very different thread on Metafilter than this one, wouldn't it?
posted by yoink at 4:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
But if the jokes these guys had made at Pycon had been anything remotely like that there'd be a great deal more sympathy for Adria's response. Those would be obviously hostile and offensive. "Big dongle" seems, well, not. "Guy at conference starts talking about hot women he wants to screw, woman snaps his photo and posts it to twitter" would lead to a very different thread on Metafilter than this one, wouldn't it?
posted by yoink at 4:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
"big dongles" isn't funny, in and of itself. it's funny because it evokes big penises. No one would say it if they weren't trying to make their audience think of wang.
Why do we need to make jokes about big penises at a software developer conference? We don't. If it pisses someone off, you know that, and you persist, then you're an asshole. If it pisses someone off, and you don't know that, well, you've learned something.
I'm not condoning the actual firing on PlayHaven's part. That's a clear overreaction, but it sends a message, and it's a message that probably needs sending.
posted by blue t-shirt at 4:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
Why do we need to make jokes about big penises at a software developer conference? We don't. If it pisses someone off, you know that, and you persist, then you're an asshole. If it pisses someone off, and you don't know that, well, you've learned something.
I'm not condoning the actual firing on PlayHaven's part. That's a clear overreaction, but it sends a message, and it's a message that probably needs sending.
posted by blue t-shirt at 4:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
I would be really uncomfortable too if I were at a professional conference and the men behind me kept cracking sex jokes for several minutes.
I would be uncomfortable if after several minutes the best they could come up with was dongle jokes. They should be fired for being lame at a professional conference. Gotta have standards!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I would be uncomfortable if after several minutes the best they could come up with was dongle jokes. They should be fired for being lame at a professional conference. Gotta have standards!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Brandon Blatcher: "Earlier joke by Richards."
Cheers, sir.
I was starting to lean towards the "overreaction" camp, but that witty little bon mot pushed me right over.
So, let me get this right. Dick jokes by women on their own Twitter = okay.
Cheesy jokes based on suggestive programming terms at a geek conference your boss sent you too = You're banned from the conference AND fired.
I join with the group that said she needs to just turn around and call them out, somewhat loudly if she felt the need.
And just to finish off my opinion -
look
find
gawk
talk
touch
grep
unzip
finger
mount
fsck
gasp
more
eject
umount
makeclean
zip
done
exit
posted by Samizdata at 4:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
Cheers, sir.
I was starting to lean towards the "overreaction" camp, but that witty little bon mot pushed me right over.
So, let me get this right. Dick jokes by women on their own Twitter = okay.
Cheesy jokes based on suggestive programming terms at a geek conference your boss sent you too = You're banned from the conference AND fired.
I join with the group that said she needs to just turn around and call them out, somewhat loudly if she felt the need.
And just to finish off my opinion -
look
find
gawk
talk
touch
grep
unzip
finger
mount
fsck
gasp
more
eject
umount
makeclean
zip
done
exit
posted by Samizdata at 4:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
This is why I still code in Perl.
posted by mcstayinskool at 4:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 4:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Even if she's a hypocrite, it doesn't mean she's wrong for calling these guys out. Pursuing that line of reasoning is fallacious.
posted by blue t-shirt at 4:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by blue t-shirt at 4:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
From Richards:
I was telling myself if they made one more sexual joke, I’d say something.
The it happened….The trigger...
...I saw a photo on main stage of a little girl who had been in the Young Coders workshop.
I realized I had to do something or she would never have the chance to learn and love programming because the ass clowns behind me would make it impossible for her to do so.
This seriously made me fucking cringe. We're all the hero of our own story, I guess.
posted by Broseph at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [55 favorites]
I was telling myself if they made one more sexual joke, I’d say something.
The it happened….The trigger...
...I saw a photo on main stage of a little girl who had been in the Young Coders workshop.
I realized I had to do something or she would never have the chance to learn and love programming because the ass clowns behind me would make it impossible for her to do so.
This seriously made me fucking cringe. We're all the hero of our own story, I guess.
posted by Broseph at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [55 favorites]
Fsck is the worst one. It is one letter away from a word I can't type as I am representing my employer. This shit has got to change guys.
posted by Ad hominem at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Ad hominem at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
The hypotethical issue that is raised is probably an important one to be having. The actual situation smacks to me of an opportunity to make a power move over something that could have been handled one human being to another. I'm sure being an evangelist for something requires an ongoing platform of public recognition, and this really seems to be more about that. I would like to talk about the issues raised between gender perceptions at conferences like this, but it does not, at any point of the process, feel like it's been initiated in good faith.
posted by SpacemanStix at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by SpacemanStix at 4:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
1) This is not a zero sum deal.
2) The fact that two men said something sexist does not erase the fact that someone with more power than them in a professional field bullied them, or vice versa.
3) If Adria Richards had the influence of a typical attendee, institutional sexism would have ensured nobody would care, which would be bad.
4) Adria Richards has more influence than that, however, to the point where her actions not only derailed a career, but she must have known that the method she used would cause particular injury to the men she called out.
posted by mobunited at 4:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
2) The fact that two men said something sexist does not erase the fact that someone with more power than them in a professional field bullied them, or vice versa.
3) If Adria Richards had the influence of a typical attendee, institutional sexism would have ensured nobody would care, which would be bad.
4) Adria Richards has more influence than that, however, to the point where her actions not only derailed a career, but she must have known that the method she used would cause particular injury to the men she called out.
posted by mobunited at 4:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
She says they "kept going and kept going" so apparently it wasn't just one or two off-color jokes. I would be really uncomfortable too if I were at a professional conference and the men behind me kept cracking sex jokes for several minutes.
She also described there being sexual forking jokes, which the guy involved says were legitimate technical non-sexual references to the forking procedure. Some of the "kept going and kept going" could easily be her misunderstanding of nonoffensive material that got bundled in with the juvenile dongle joke(s). She also says that these two dudes making this dongle joke would make it literally impossible for a young girl to ever learn programming and concludes that the future of programming was on the line over this dongle joke, so her writing style seems to involve hyperbole to some degree.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
She also described there being sexual forking jokes, which the guy involved says were legitimate technical non-sexual references to the forking procedure. Some of the "kept going and kept going" could easily be her misunderstanding of nonoffensive material that got bundled in with the juvenile dongle joke(s). She also says that these two dudes making this dongle joke would make it literally impossible for a young girl to ever learn programming and concludes that the future of programming was on the line over this dongle joke, so her writing style seems to involve hyperbole to some degree.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [25 favorites]
If you think this is grossly unprofessional you have been living in a box.
You really think that making dick jokes in public is professional behavior? I probably wouldn't get fired but if I'd done that I'd definitely be talked to by my manager and the VP of HR about professional decorum when I'm attending a conference.
posted by octothorpe at 4:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
You really think that making dick jokes in public is professional behavior? I probably wouldn't get fired but if I'd done that I'd definitely be talked to by my manager and the VP of HR about professional decorum when I'm attending a conference.
posted by octothorpe at 4:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
ditto the self-invented title.
It's not self-invented, it's a pretty common thing these days.
posted by asterix at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's not self-invented, it's a pretty common thing these days.
posted by asterix at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
The fact that two men said something sexistIs this actually a fact?
posted by Flunkie at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
She says they "kept going and kept going" so apparently it wasn't just one or two off-color jokes. I would be really uncomfortable too if I were at a professional conference and the men behind me kept cracking sex jokes for several minutes.
I guess I can see why, but here are some solutions that are not photographing them and placing that photograph into a stream that will be seen by all of their colleagues, along with a vague description of their behavior that they are given no opportunity to rebut:
* Ask them to stop making the jokes. That's the most obvious solution, but no one should feel obligated to initiate a confrontation; I don't think many people would do this, at least if they were alone. But it's a possible solution.
* Leave. No one should have to do this -- you shouldn't have to walk away from a panel you wanted to attend -- but again, it is a solution.
* Tell someone in authority that the men are creating a disruption.
Their behavior may have been boorish (it sounds fairly harmless to me, but I don't have a full accounting of what was said; largely we are left to imagine what might have been said for several minutes, but we really have no idea; if it were all jokes along the lines of "big dongle," that really sounds more obnoxious than alarming, but YMMV), but to be frank, photographing them and attributing bad behavior to them sounds a whole lot worse to me. I mean, I doubt that Richards thought anyone would get fired, but she had to realize there could be repercussions in the world of the internet, where torches and pitchforks are often torched and pitchforked first, and questions asked later, provided that the attention span of the questioner lasts enough tOH SQUIRREL
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I guess I can see why, but here are some solutions that are not photographing them and placing that photograph into a stream that will be seen by all of their colleagues, along with a vague description of their behavior that they are given no opportunity to rebut:
* Ask them to stop making the jokes. That's the most obvious solution, but no one should feel obligated to initiate a confrontation; I don't think many people would do this, at least if they were alone. But it's a possible solution.
* Leave. No one should have to do this -- you shouldn't have to walk away from a panel you wanted to attend -- but again, it is a solution.
* Tell someone in authority that the men are creating a disruption.
Their behavior may have been boorish (it sounds fairly harmless to me, but I don't have a full accounting of what was said; largely we are left to imagine what might have been said for several minutes, but we really have no idea; if it were all jokes along the lines of "big dongle," that really sounds more obnoxious than alarming, but YMMV), but to be frank, photographing them and attributing bad behavior to them sounds a whole lot worse to me. I mean, I doubt that Richards thought anyone would get fired, but she had to realize there could be repercussions in the world of the internet, where torches and pitchforks are often torched and pitchforked first, and questions asked later, provided that the attention span of the questioner lasts enough tOH SQUIRREL
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference.
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
posted by 2bucksplus at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
It's the photograph which really lays bare her attitude - needless bullying and humiliation.
posted by mani at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
posted by mani at 4:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
Well, we still have fart jokes.
posted by jperkins at 4:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by jperkins at 4:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Even if she's a hypocrite, it doesn't mean she's wrong for calling these guys out.
Even if she wasn't a hypocrite, I think she's in the wrong for posting their photograph to Twitter and denouncing them publicly for such a profoundly trivial offense. The appropriate response would have been, at most, "dudes! That's not cool!" The fact that she's a flaming hypocrite is just the icing on the cake.
Also, given that her dick joke--which is more explicit, more elaborate and far more offensive than theirs--would have been 'overheard' by far, far more people at the conference than theirs could possibly be unless they were talking to each other with loudhailers, she was definitely not the person to be administering even the verbal slap down.
posted by yoink at 4:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
Even if she wasn't a hypocrite, I think she's in the wrong for posting their photograph to Twitter and denouncing them publicly for such a profoundly trivial offense. The appropriate response would have been, at most, "dudes! That's not cool!" The fact that she's a flaming hypocrite is just the icing on the cake.
Also, given that her dick joke--which is more explicit, more elaborate and far more offensive than theirs--would have been 'overheard' by far, far more people at the conference than theirs could possibly be unless they were talking to each other with loudhailers, she was definitely not the person to be administering even the verbal slap down.
posted by yoink at 4:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
This is apparently what it takes to get people to realize that these sorts of comments are insulting to some. Anything shy of making an example of an asshole is virtually ineffective.
If your idea of an asshole is someone who makes a PG-rated penis joke privately to a friend, I honestly wonder how much of your life is spent taking offense. Please don't take that as an attack or criticism. I really have trouble processing it. It must be fatiguing.
posted by echocollate at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
If your idea of an asshole is someone who makes a PG-rated penis joke privately to a friend, I honestly wonder how much of your life is spent taking offense. Please don't take that as an attack or criticism. I really have trouble processing it. It must be fatiguing.
posted by echocollate at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference.
Even if wearing a badge, listing your name and employer?
posted by acb at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Even if wearing a badge, listing your name and employer?
posted by acb at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I mean, my first instinct was like, "Well look I'm a lady and speaking with my Lady Authority you're overreacting to the big dongle joke," but all we know is that it was a "big dongle" joke.
So it could have been "Heh heh that's one big dongle" (this would not really offend me, especially since as noted above it essentially amounts to just saying "BIG PENIS!"). But it also could have been, "Mmm, I have such a big dongle. There are so many places I want to put it. I like to touch it a lot so I know I haven't lost it, you know? Like, I want to keep my hands on it so when there's a nice dock for it, I can just shove it right in wherever I am. I think most people like big dongles, I mean, bigger's better, right? It can be kind of a tight fit but there are workarounds for that."
And if that went on for a couple minutes? Ugh. And nobody's released a transcript, so.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
So it could have been "Heh heh that's one big dongle" (this would not really offend me, especially since as noted above it essentially amounts to just saying "BIG PENIS!"). But it also could have been, "Mmm, I have such a big dongle. There are so many places I want to put it. I like to touch it a lot so I know I haven't lost it, you know? Like, I want to keep my hands on it so when there's a nice dock for it, I can just shove it right in wherever I am. I think most people like big dongles, I mean, bigger's better, right? It can be kind of a tight fit but there are workarounds for that."
And if that went on for a couple minutes? Ugh. And nobody's released a transcript, so.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
I think this is a totally fine callout, and I don't really have a problem with their photos being made public. However, the firing seems, to me, out of line on the employer's part. Employers should be held to a higher standard for taking punitive action based on hearsay than should random internet spectators.
posted by threeants at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by threeants at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Even if she's a hypocrite, it doesn't mean she's wrong for calling these guys out. Pursuing that line of reasoning is fallacious.
Well, was she angry about what these guys were thinking? Or was she angry that they were voicing it while she was eavesdropping? If she's going to claim that making these kind of comments is harmful, she needs to either admit that her twitter comment did similar harm, or do a better job explaining why it's somehow different.
posted by ftm at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, was she angry about what these guys were thinking? Or was she angry that they were voicing it while she was eavesdropping? If she's going to claim that making these kind of comments is harmful, she needs to either admit that her twitter comment did similar harm, or do a better job explaining why it's somehow different.
posted by ftm at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Maybe I don't get this because I don't use Twitter, but she took the photograph and added the pycon tag so the conference organizers would see it. At least, that's how she presents it in her blog post, that she was letting them know what was happening and who was doing it. I guess she could have left the presentation, gone to find someone and pointed them out but why in this age of much faster technology?
posted by Danila at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Danila at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Oh my lord, I just read Adria's blog entry about this event, and I've never heard such over-dramatic self-righteousness. This is pure garbage. Did she even try to tell the guys to stop before immortalizing them on Twitter? According to her account, no. And, I'm sorry, but nothing they said seemed to be terribly offensive. Ms. Richards seems to thrive on drama. Up until I read her blog, I was a bit more on the fence, but holy crap she sounds insufferable.
posted by Edgewise at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
posted by Edgewise at 4:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [32 favorites]
Much to my chagrin, one of the involved individuals was a former student and intern of mine. I found out when I saw him in the picture attached to the tweet. As I write this, I am unsure of what if any discipline he has received.
While I'm waiting to hear his side of the story and while mostly I worry about his well being as an individual human (he said the last several days have been very rough when we spoke this afternoon) I agree 100% with her assessment that what he said was highly inappropriate and absolutely imperatively must be called out in these conferences.
For anyone saying she's overreacting: here I sit wishing I'd made a stronger impression when inappropriate remarks came up, and likewise, I wish my other coworkers had been more supportive when I did call out remarks as inappropriate.
2bucksplus: "The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference."
I agree in general, however they were at an industry conference on behalf of their employer, wearing shirts advertising their employer. Almost certainly their travel, tickets and lodging were paid for by their company. This seems like an "at work" context and not an "at an outside of work, work related event" to me.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
While I'm waiting to hear his side of the story and while mostly I worry about his well being as an individual human (he said the last several days have been very rough when we spoke this afternoon) I agree 100% with her assessment that what he said was highly inappropriate and absolutely imperatively must be called out in these conferences.
For anyone saying she's overreacting: here I sit wishing I'd made a stronger impression when inappropriate remarks came up, and likewise, I wish my other coworkers had been more supportive when I did call out remarks as inappropriate.
2bucksplus: "The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference."
I agree in general, however they were at an industry conference on behalf of their employer, wearing shirts advertising their employer. Almost certainly their travel, tickets and lodging were paid for by their company. This seems like an "at work" context and not an "at an outside of work, work related event" to me.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
2bucksplus: "The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference."
I assume that they paid his way there, that's how my co-workers end up at conferences.
posted by octothorpe at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I assume that they paid his way there, that's how my co-workers end up at conferences.
posted by octothorpe at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
When I got to the actual remarks being objected to I was pretty surprised, because hey, dongle jokes are funny! Genitalia are indeed funny and dongles sound like they should refer to them, look like genitalia, and even function kind of like genitalia - comedy gold. dongle jokes are also so very much a normal part of learning about tech hardware, talking about tech hardware, and hell designing tech hardware to be further punny in some way.
But then I got to thinking about how this would translate to my own non-tech science field that now has a significant number of women through hard fought battles. If I sat in the audience of one of our conferences making penis jokes about someones slides or the topic being discussed at a panel, this whole 'overreaction' (excepting the whole tweeting business because we're really not that tech savvy) would be a totally normal and expected way to deal with that bullshit all the way up to severe professional consequences. If I really had a burningly funny penis joke to make I'd wait until I was in a bar around exclusively colleagues who would find it hilarious and even then I'd do it carefully because you don't fucking play around with that shit in the workplace.
That conference is a fucking workplace, not a playdate for awkward dudes. Indeed, how normal it seems that Big Dongle jokes apparently are at conferences like this is not an indication of how much she overreacted but how really warped tech shit is away from totally standard business practices that normalize not sexualizing everything and keep workplaces accessible.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
But then I got to thinking about how this would translate to my own non-tech science field that now has a significant number of women through hard fought battles. If I sat in the audience of one of our conferences making penis jokes about someones slides or the topic being discussed at a panel, this whole 'overreaction' (excepting the whole tweeting business because we're really not that tech savvy) would be a totally normal and expected way to deal with that bullshit all the way up to severe professional consequences. If I really had a burningly funny penis joke to make I'd wait until I was in a bar around exclusively colleagues who would find it hilarious and even then I'd do it carefully because you don't fucking play around with that shit in the workplace.
That conference is a fucking workplace, not a playdate for awkward dudes. Indeed, how normal it seems that Big Dongle jokes apparently are at conferences like this is not an indication of how much she overreacted but how really warped tech shit is away from totally standard business practices that normalize not sexualizing everything and keep workplaces accessible.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
Is this actually a fact?
The assertion that there's no sexual innuendo involved in forking jokes is like the assertion that BSG's "frack" does not in the least resemble the same common expletive. There seems to be no dispute that there was a succession of stupid sexualized puns that are inappropriate in professional environments. Pretending that these words do not exist in the context of a sexist culture is approaching this situation in bad faith.
Using your power as a tech media professional in ways that, as a tech media professional you almost certainly know will cause disproportionate harm isn't cool either.
posted by mobunited at 4:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
The assertion that there's no sexual innuendo involved in forking jokes is like the assertion that BSG's "frack" does not in the least resemble the same common expletive. There seems to be no dispute that there was a succession of stupid sexualized puns that are inappropriate in professional environments. Pretending that these words do not exist in the context of a sexist culture is approaching this situation in bad faith.
Using your power as a tech media professional in ways that, as a tech media professional you almost certainly know will cause disproportionate harm isn't cool either.
posted by mobunited at 4:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I realized I had to do something or she would never have the chance to learn and love programming because the ass clowns behind me would make it impossible for her to do so.
This seriously made me fucking cringe.
I somehow executed the elusive cringe-eyeroll-snort triplet on exactly that line too. Also... she's calling them 'assclowns'? By her own rational, does this make her a homophobe or something ridiculous as well? Count me among those that think she's a self-important fool.
posted by amorphatist at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
This seriously made me fucking cringe.
I somehow executed the elusive cringe-eyeroll-snort triplet on exactly that line too. Also... she's calling them 'assclowns'? By her own rational, does this make her a homophobe or something ridiculous as well? Count me among those that think she's a self-important fool.
posted by amorphatist at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
And, in semi-reversal of my "position" no one of any gender wants Beavis and Butthead sitting behind them if you're actually trying to pay attention to the presentation. But we just have a lot of hearsay so it's pretty much impossible for us to judge whether it was was 2 jokes and an entire episode of "huh uh huhuhuhuh".
posted by GuyZero at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
In public, while representing the company at a conference.
I'm sorry, in the photo I see when I click the link I see two guys sitting in chairs in the audience. I cannot see the company booth they were sitting in while making the admittedly juvenile-seeming jokes, nor have I found the part where they went up on stage before the audience and horrified them with dongle jokes. My initial reading was that someone eavesdropping on a private conversation decided to snap a photo and subject these guys to whatever punishment the twitterverse could lay on them. Can you elucidate the part I missed where they sought to offend their captive audience? Or is this just someone seeking out something to be offended by?
posted by ricochet biscuit at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
I'm sorry, in the photo I see when I click the link I see two guys sitting in chairs in the audience. I cannot see the company booth they were sitting in while making the admittedly juvenile-seeming jokes, nor have I found the part where they went up on stage before the audience and horrified them with dongle jokes. My initial reading was that someone eavesdropping on a private conversation decided to snap a photo and subject these guys to whatever punishment the twitterverse could lay on them. Can you elucidate the part I missed where they sought to offend their captive audience? Or is this just someone seeking out something to be offended by?
posted by ricochet biscuit at 4:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
Maybe I don't get this because I don't use Twitter, but she took the photograph and added the socon tag so the conference organizers would see it. At least, that's how she presents it in her blog post, that she was letting them know what was happening and who was doing it.
All of her followers would have seen the tweet, as would anyone who was checking for tweets using the hashtag. She certainly knew she was making the photo generally available.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
All of her followers would have seen the tweet, as would anyone who was checking for tweets using the hashtag. She certainly knew she was making the photo generally available.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 4:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I have to wonder, if they "kept going and kept going", why does she only ever mention the fork and dongle lines?
Also, the next time I overhear anyone talking about Emacs, I'm gonna snap a photo of them and put it online. The shame!
posted by ymgve at 4:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Also, the next time I overhear anyone talking about Emacs, I'm gonna snap a photo of them and put it online. The shame!
posted by ymgve at 4:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'm assuming none of these would be tolerated at this convention?
posted by Chuffy at 4:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Chuffy at 4:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The idea that we are "representing our employer" at all times when out in public is extremely troublesome to me. Yes, even at a professional conference.
You're being paid to be there. If you made a dirty joke in the hallway at the office and a visiting VIP took offense when he overheard, yeah, your job might be in jeopardy. So it is with a conference - employer's dime, employer's time, employer's rules. Save it for the ride back to the hotel, don't embarrass your outfit with unprofessional behavior.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
You're being paid to be there. If you made a dirty joke in the hallway at the office and a visiting VIP took offense when he overheard, yeah, your job might be in jeopardy. So it is with a conference - employer's dime, employer's time, employer's rules. Save it for the ride back to the hotel, don't embarrass your outfit with unprofessional behavior.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I realized I had to do something or she would never have the chance to learn and love programming because the ass clowns behind me would make it impossible for her to do so.
Oh fucking puke.
I'm sorry if your reaction to some people being irritating had unintended side effects and it's all gotten a bit big, but seriously, you do the exact same shit and have not made the future better for anyone here.
posted by Artw at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
Oh fucking puke.
I'm sorry if your reaction to some people being irritating had unintended side effects and it's all gotten a bit big, but seriously, you do the exact same shit and have not made the future better for anyone here.
posted by Artw at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
There seems to be no dispute that there was a succession of stupid sexualized puns that are inappropriate in professional environments.
They guy who got fired is disputing that the forking references were sexualized, while admitting that there was a (using the singular) dongle joke made:
They guy who got fired is disputing that the forking references were sexualized, while admitting that there was a (using the singular) dongle joke made:
While I did make a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male, no sexual jokes were made about forking. My friends and I had decided forking someone's repo is a new form of flattery (the highest form being implementation) and we were excited about one of the presenters projects; a friend said "I would fork that guys repo" The sexual context was applied by Adria, and not us.posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
Shades of this thread, especially the whole "instead of talking to the person in question, grandstand to a web audience".
posted by zabuni at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by zabuni at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm not asserting anything, and more importantly I'm not denying that a forking joke has sexual innuendo. I was asking about your claim that it is a fact that the jokes were sexist. Not sexual, but sexist. I was asking, is it actually a fact that they made sexist jokes? I don't even know what the jokes were, and the mere fact that they were sexual doesn't imply to me that they were necessarily sexist.Is this actually a fact?The assertion that there's no sexual innuendo involved in forking jokes is like the assertion that BSG's "frack" does not in the least resemble the same common expletive.
Unless I'm seriously misunderstanding you, or if you think anything with any sexual innuendo whatsoever is necessarily sexist, then I don't really see what your response has to do with anything.
posted by Flunkie at 4:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
"I'm assuming none of these would be tolerated at this convention?"
I should fucking hope not, Jesus.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:34 PM on March 20, 2013
I should fucking hope not, Jesus.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:34 PM on March 20, 2013
When I used to work for a (UK) software company, we were told to not use the word dongle when talking to American clients because they considered it too rude and/or amusing.
It was 2005 and I was not yet an unemployed husk of a man.
posted by dng at 4:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
It was 2005 and I was not yet an unemployed husk of a man.
posted by dng at 4:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
When I used to work for a (UK) software company, we were told to not use the word dongle when talking to American clients because they considered it too rude and/or amusing.
Hey, I like your pants.
posted by GuyZero at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Hey, I like your pants.
posted by GuyZero at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Really, because we were told not to mention shag carpets to you guys.
posted by found missing at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
posted by found missing at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
While I did make a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male, no sexual jokes were made about forking. My friends and I had decided forking someone's repo is a new form of flattery (the highest form being implementation) and we were excited about one of the presenters projects; a friend said "I would fork that guys repo" The sexual context was applied by Adria, and not us.
I don't think that's a fair reading of what Richards said, though. This is how she recounts the interaction:
He said he would be interested in forking the repo and continuing development.
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
She didn't object to the phrase, but to the jokes that followed after the first gentleman used the term as a compliment.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't think that's a fair reading of what Richards said, though. This is how she recounts the interaction:
He said he would be interested in forking the repo and continuing development.
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
She didn't object to the phrase, but to the jokes that followed after the first gentleman used the term as a compliment.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Save it for the ride back to the hotel
No - the employer probably paid the cab fare, so if the cab driver might be offended, no jokes there, either. At the hotel, which your employer is paying for, please be aware that the cleaning staff might overhear you while walking past your door, so please refrain there, too. And don't even think about cracking wise at the airport!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [27 favorites]
No - the employer probably paid the cab fare, so if the cab driver might be offended, no jokes there, either. At the hotel, which your employer is paying for, please be aware that the cleaning staff might overhear you while walking past your door, so please refrain there, too. And don't even think about cracking wise at the airport!
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [27 favorites]
So it is with a conference - employer's dime, employer's time, employer's rules. Save it for the ride back to the hotel, don't embarrass your outfit with unprofessional behavior.
But isn't the company paying for the hotel and some gas mileage or transportation fares? So why save it for then?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:37 PM on March 20, 2013
But isn't the company paying for the hotel and some gas mileage or transportation fares? So why save it for then?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:37 PM on March 20, 2013
When I used to work for a (UK) software company, we were told to not use the word dongle when talking to American clients because they considered it too rude and/or amusing.
Yeah, I know. One should never amuse Americans.
posted by Jimbob at 4:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I know. One should never amuse Americans.
posted by Jimbob at 4:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
"So, let me get this right. Dick jokes by women on their own Twitter = okay."
Yeah, I think that one is pretty solid. If that is her personal twitter account then yes indeed women make dick jokes on their own time too and that is totally ok. Making dick jokes in a professional environment around colleagues who are there because its how they make a living on the other hand is not ok.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Yeah, I think that one is pretty solid. If that is her personal twitter account then yes indeed women make dick jokes on their own time too and that is totally ok. Making dick jokes in a professional environment around colleagues who are there because its how they make a living on the other hand is not ok.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
@Chuffy
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 4:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
How many punks does it take to change a lightbulb?lol
None. Everybody knows that punk can't change anything.
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 4:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah, I think that one is pretty solid. If that is her personal twitter account then yes indeed women make dick jokes on their own time too and that is totally ok. Making dick jokes in a professional environment around colleagues who are there because its how they make a living on the other hand is not ok.
Agree. I don't even get the hypocrisy, unless you assume she is a prude and is anti-sex. Apparently she's not so maybe there's some other reason she had a problem with a litany of dick jokes right in the middle of a presentation.
posted by Danila at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Agree. I don't even get the hypocrisy, unless you assume she is a prude and is anti-sex. Apparently she's not so maybe there's some other reason she had a problem with a litany of dick jokes right in the middle of a presentation.
posted by Danila at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
But isn't the company paying for the hotel and some gas mileage or transportation fares? So why save it for then?
Because then you are around colleagues that you know and whose sense of humor you presumably understand, so you know that you all think dongle jokes are funny but take it easy on pope jokes because Ron is weirdly devout and also nothing to do with zebras, Jen had an unfortunate birthday party at a zoo as a child and she's still traumatized.
But when you're in public, you don't know where where people's sensitivities lie and you do know that a non-zero percentage of people are touchy about sex jokes.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Because then you are around colleagues that you know and whose sense of humor you presumably understand, so you know that you all think dongle jokes are funny but take it easy on pope jokes because Ron is weirdly devout and also nothing to do with zebras, Jen had an unfortunate birthday party at a zoo as a child and she's still traumatized.
But when you're in public, you don't know where where people's sensitivities lie and you do know that a non-zero percentage of people are touchy about sex jokes.
posted by Snarl Furillo at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
But isn't the company paying for the hotel and some gas mileage or transportation fares? So why save it for then?
Good point. I know of a sales goon who got into a ton of trouble for cracking racist jokes at a cab driver's expense while he was in the cab.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Good point. I know of a sales goon who got into a ton of trouble for cracking racist jokes at a cab driver's expense while he was in the cab.
posted by Slap*Happy at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
somewhere, a software engineer named peter dongle has had a hard life.
posted by echocollate at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
posted by echocollate at 4:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
So is this just the thing where the person on stage happens to say something that sounds rude, in this case "big dongles" and you just repeat it to your friend and giggle?
It's silly, but it's not something to get all crazy about. This would be a pretty horrible world without the silly people, believe me.
posted by w0mbat at 4:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's silly, but it's not something to get all crazy about. This would be a pretty horrible world without the silly people, believe me.
posted by w0mbat at 4:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm not asserting anything, and more importantly I'm not denying that a forking joke has sexual innuendo. I was asking about your claim that it is a fact that the jokes were sexist. Not sexual, but sexist. I was asking, is it actually a fact that they made sexist jokes? I don't even know what the jokes were, and the mere fact that they were sexual doesn't imply to me that they were necessarily sexist.
If I were to walk into my office and talk about my dick and how much I enjoy its capacity to bring orgasm without referring to the gender or even existence of a partner, it would still be sexist, because we live in a culture where a man talking about these things in from of women in a professional environment exists in the context of creepy power relations, instead of a blank-slate 24th century holodeck amidst utopia.
It occurs to me, as a sidebar to this conversation, that this means that in allegedly post sexist Star Tre: TNG, people would freely talk about dicks, vulvas, alien genetalia and getting it on all the time, because there would be no creepy power relations.
Riker especially.
posted by mobunited at 4:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
If I were to walk into my office and talk about my dick and how much I enjoy its capacity to bring orgasm without referring to the gender or even existence of a partner, it would still be sexist, because we live in a culture where a man talking about these things in from of women in a professional environment exists in the context of creepy power relations, instead of a blank-slate 24th century holodeck amidst utopia.
It occurs to me, as a sidebar to this conversation, that this means that in allegedly post sexist Star Tre: TNG, people would freely talk about dicks, vulvas, alien genetalia and getting it on all the time, because there would be no creepy power relations.
Riker especially.
posted by mobunited at 4:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
Can we stop treating this like an offense against borders, with stupid hypotheticals about whether or not the cabbie is offended while your employer is paying? That's not the point. The point is that if you're going to gamble on humour that could offend someone, even unreasonably, in a context where offending someone has consequences, then you're gambling and have to eat the loss if you lose. Don't want to risk it? Don't gamble. Know your audience. Don't whine about hitting snake eyes.
I've been through a few arguments about incidents like these on HN, and between the high minded idiocy there (and some of it here), and the reaction Adria's getting for calling out behaviour that she shouldn't have to tolerate, it all just demonstrates that people like Adria need to do shit like this to move our collective window of acceptable behaviour. Call me when we have gender parity in tech, and I'll agree that women should put up with Beavis and Butthead sitting behind them.
posted by fatbird at 4:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
I've been through a few arguments about incidents like these on HN, and between the high minded idiocy there (and some of it here), and the reaction Adria's getting for calling out behaviour that she shouldn't have to tolerate, it all just demonstrates that people like Adria need to do shit like this to move our collective window of acceptable behaviour. Call me when we have gender parity in tech, and I'll agree that women should put up with Beavis and Butthead sitting behind them.
posted by fatbird at 4:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
I was in a farmers' market this weekend and this one 20-something kid points to a huge daikon and says to another 20-something kid, "Dude, that's what mine looks like." I think part of being a good and responsible feminist, and having some success dealing with a still male-dominated world and the whole rape culture thing, is recognizing what is actually a threat and what is just ignorance and stupidity and an opportunity for re-education. These guys are ignorant and stupid and deserved a glare and maybe a small-scale public calling out by nearby audience members. That would have made them think twice the next time, in my opinion. They didn't deserve internet infamy or unemployment.
As for the daikon kid, I rolled my eyes and laughed inwardly at him and then moved on to the mangoes, which were three for $2.00.
posted by mudpuppie at 4:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
As for the daikon kid, I rolled my eyes and laughed inwardly at him and then moved on to the mangoes, which were three for $2.00.
posted by mudpuppie at 4:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
I think the problem is not the "representing your employer" issue-- it's pretty clear, in my opinion, that they are. It's more the "unsubstantiated claim from an entirely third party" issue. If they had made this statement at the mic during a session, I would support the employer firing them. Or, if a woman within the company had reported this private comment to HR, and they did an investigation, I would support the employer firing them. This is just a random third party; I have very little doubt that her account is false, but the implications of the employer accepting it at face value concern me nonetheless, for workers' rights in general. I suspect that if the company did an investigation and talked to their own female employees, similar anecdotes might arise, on the basis of which I would support a firing.
posted by threeants at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by threeants at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013
Know your audience.
She was not the audience of the discussion at hand.
I'll be the first to say that if a presenter had cracked these jokes then that would be right out.
posted by GuyZero at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013
She was not the audience of the discussion at hand.
I'll be the first to say that if a presenter had cracked these jokes then that would be right out.
posted by GuyZero at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013
If I were to walk into my office and talk about my dick and how much I enjoy its capacity to bring orgasm without referring to the gender or even existence of a partner, it would still be sexist
Well since these men didn't walk into Adria's office and start talking to her about their dicks, then I agree with you that this was not sexist.
posted by amorphatist at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well since these men didn't walk into Adria's office and start talking to her about their dicks, then I agree with you that this was not sexist.
posted by amorphatist at 4:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
is recognizing what is actually a threat and what is just ignorance and stupidity and an opportunity for re-education.
This X1000.
If I posted every time a human said something dumb/sexist/offensive at my bartending job...
posted by gcbv at 4:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
This X1000.
If I posted every time a human said something dumb/sexist/offensive at my bartending job...
posted by gcbv at 4:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
The backlash against Political Correctness did, and does, more damage to liberal and political interests than most people want to admit.
posted by effugas at 4:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by effugas at 4:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Well since these men didn't walk into Adria's office and start talking to her about their dicks, then I agree with you that this was not sexist.
Certainly, just in the same way anti-voter fraud laws are in no way racist, ever.
posted by mobunited at 4:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Certainly, just in the same way anti-voter fraud laws are in no way racist, ever.
posted by mobunited at 4:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I hope nobody offered to buy her a drink.
posted by Chuffy at 4:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Chuffy at 4:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
She was not the audience of the discussion at hand.
If she can hear you, she's your audience. I don't get a pass for telling racist jokes in a line-up because the black guy in front of me isn't part of my party.
posted by fatbird at 4:48 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
If she can hear you, she's your audience. I don't get a pass for telling racist jokes in a line-up because the black guy in front of me isn't part of my party.
posted by fatbird at 4:48 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
So by that policy mentioned above, all the women should be wearing head coverings, and be segregated from the men, lest some Islamic men attending the conference are offended.
You're offended? I don't care.
Giving people the right to shut other people up who offend them is worse than letting those people be offended, I think.
posted by smcameron at 4:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
You're offended? I don't care.
Giving people the right to shut other people up who offend them is worse than letting those people be offended, I think.
posted by smcameron at 4:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
is recognizing what is actually a threat and what is just ignorance and stupidity and an opportunity for re-education.
Is everybody automatically ignorant and stupid for making silly banter with a friend without first checking for the presence of ReEdukators in the vicinity? Jeebus.
posted by amorphatist at 4:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
Is everybody automatically ignorant and stupid for making silly banter with a friend without first checking for the presence of ReEdukators in the vicinity? Jeebus.
posted by amorphatist at 4:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [17 favorites]
If she called out speech because it was made at a conference, that's one thing. The line between private conversation and public speech is ambiguous these days, and it's a fair point that these men may have indirectly been representing their employers, even when having a private conversation.
But if she was calling them out because she didn't like other people who happened to be men making dick jokes in private, then it is also fair to call her a hypocrite when she makes her own demeaning dick jokes, especially when made by a public relations staffer (I assume that's what technology evangelist means these days) on a public forum.
People have been fired over much less by employers for what they post to their personal Facebook page, so in the interest of fairness, perhaps her own public speech should also not be under any less scrutiny given the strict standards she applies — and what we seem to apply — to others.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
But if she was calling them out because she didn't like other people who happened to be men making dick jokes in private, then it is also fair to call her a hypocrite when she makes her own demeaning dick jokes, especially when made by a public relations staffer (I assume that's what technology evangelist means these days) on a public forum.
People have been fired over much less by employers for what they post to their personal Facebook page, so in the interest of fairness, perhaps her own public speech should also not be under any less scrutiny given the strict standards she applies — and what we seem to apply — to others.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
Pardon me if I'm missing something here. Two people were, essentially, giggling over the silly words "fork" and "dongle," and this is worth firing someone over? What the hell?! Are we supposed to police all personal conversations to meet the standards of an interview or first date? This is just bullying masked as prudery.
posted by pleurodirous at 4:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
posted by pleurodirous at 4:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
Atheism Plus approves of this righteous purging of the wrongspeaking undesirables.
posted by Decani at 4:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Decani at 4:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
But things like "stand back or the foul ball will ruin your pretty smile" are sexist. Is "Huh huh huh, he said 'Big dongle'" sexist? I grant it's obviously sexual.
posted by Flunkie at 4:57 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Flunkie at 4:57 PM on March 20, 2013
Here's what I had to say on a different forum; Here is the guy's perspective, i.e., the guy who's picture she took and published on the internet.
For the record, he was a dad, with three kids, who is now unemployed in a state with high unemployment, all because she overheard something, and didn't realize it was an inside joke and felt justified by the word "dongle" to publicly humiliate him and subsequently put his children at risk.
For the record; I am a woman. I've been in tech since the 80s, when I was a semiconductor broker. I've subsequently been on the forefront of a lot of tech waves, led many tech teams, and launched a couple of well known IPOs during the dot.com boom. I've published numerous things about women in tech, and have been a member of Systers for almost 25 years. Just putting that out there to establish that I know a little something about the tech field and being a woman in it. I also grew up in a racing family, and was the founder of a comic book publishing company, so I know a little bit about how sexism works in the world outside of tech.
I believe that what Adria did was both an overreaction, and in the long term, a damaging thing for other women who attend conferences. I'm not suggesting that women should tolerate sexism, but it's also ridiculous to publicly humiliate and destroy the career of someone who wasn't even speaking TO her. She didn't know if she misheard it, she didn't know it was an inside joke, she didn't bother to follow the rules she so happily waves about, by asking them to stop. And this nonsense of "having her experience invalidated" is just poppycock. It's a public conference. If she heard it, other people heard it. If nobody else heard it, she didn't hear what she thought she heard, and there's nothing to invalidate.
And she didn't do a damn thing about the guy who actually said sexist stuff TO HER.
Again; I don't have a problem with her going to the conference people, if that's what she feels like she needs to do because she's too delicate a flower to ask some goofy geek to shut the hell up. What I have a problem with is that she broadcast his picture to the internet with full malice aforethought. She destroyed a man's life and is crowing about what a good thing she's done, because how dare he make a joke about dongles in a room where she might overhear it.
This wasn't a "win" for women in tech. No woman feels safer because of this. Nobody feels more empowered because of this, except maybe her. Nobody has had their lives or the conference experiences enhanced by this. This wasn't a win for anyone but Adria and her cheerleaders.
Sexism is real. Sexism is a problem in tech. This wasn't sexism. This was a pearl-clutching excuse to grab attention.
posted by dejah420 at 4:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [208 favorites]
For the record, he was a dad, with three kids, who is now unemployed in a state with high unemployment, all because she overheard something, and didn't realize it was an inside joke and felt justified by the word "dongle" to publicly humiliate him and subsequently put his children at risk.
For the record; I am a woman. I've been in tech since the 80s, when I was a semiconductor broker. I've subsequently been on the forefront of a lot of tech waves, led many tech teams, and launched a couple of well known IPOs during the dot.com boom. I've published numerous things about women in tech, and have been a member of Systers for almost 25 years. Just putting that out there to establish that I know a little something about the tech field and being a woman in it. I also grew up in a racing family, and was the founder of a comic book publishing company, so I know a little bit about how sexism works in the world outside of tech.
I believe that what Adria did was both an overreaction, and in the long term, a damaging thing for other women who attend conferences. I'm not suggesting that women should tolerate sexism, but it's also ridiculous to publicly humiliate and destroy the career of someone who wasn't even speaking TO her. She didn't know if she misheard it, she didn't know it was an inside joke, she didn't bother to follow the rules she so happily waves about, by asking them to stop. And this nonsense of "having her experience invalidated" is just poppycock. It's a public conference. If she heard it, other people heard it. If nobody else heard it, she didn't hear what she thought she heard, and there's nothing to invalidate.
And she didn't do a damn thing about the guy who actually said sexist stuff TO HER.
Again; I don't have a problem with her going to the conference people, if that's what she feels like she needs to do because she's too delicate a flower to ask some goofy geek to shut the hell up. What I have a problem with is that she broadcast his picture to the internet with full malice aforethought. She destroyed a man's life and is crowing about what a good thing she's done, because how dare he make a joke about dongles in a room where she might overhear it.
This wasn't a "win" for women in tech. No woman feels safer because of this. Nobody feels more empowered because of this, except maybe her. Nobody has had their lives or the conference experiences enhanced by this. This wasn't a win for anyone but Adria and her cheerleaders.
Sexism is real. Sexism is a problem in tech. This wasn't sexism. This was a pearl-clutching excuse to grab attention.
posted by dejah420 at 4:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [208 favorites]
Are we supposed to police all personal conversations to meet the standards of an interview or first date?
Oh come off it, who doesn't talk about their genitals on a first date? I mean, would it at least be ok to ask if the other person has brought theirs?
posted by amorphatist at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Oh come off it, who doesn't talk about their genitals on a first date? I mean, would it at least be ok to ask if the other person has brought theirs?
posted by amorphatist at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm sorry mudpuppie but I really disagree that she was in the wrong because she didn't make a scene in the middle of the presentation to "re-educate" entitled jerks. 9 times out of 10 they never listen and now you've made a scene. And in this situation you cannot at all, AT ALL, be assured that you'll have the support of other people in the vicinity or the conference organizers. Here, look at the response to what you said, and you're criticizing her:
Is everybody automatically ignorant and stupid for making silly banter with a friend without first checking for the presence of ReEdukators in the vicinity?
See what I'm saying? A lot of people will consider the person who is making the scene to be the one out of line. Political correctness gone mad! A prude! Radical feminist taking away all our fun!
I get that the real sin is supposedly embarrassing them in public. By publicly tweeting all the relevant information, including the code of conduct reminder, to the conference organizers, she accomplished a number of things. First, she let them know what was going on and who was doing it so they could act on it. But a lot of conferences have not been acting on their own codes of conduct, it's been a big deal. So she was publicly putting the ball in their court and if they did nothing and let the hostile environment continue then others would know about it. It wouldn't just be her suffering in silence and why should it be?
And these weren't teenagers, they were grown men who I think should know better than to crack a bunch of sex jokes in the middle of a presentation at a professional conference. But apparently many many many men do not know better, just look at this thread and the comments at other sites.
Now, if anyone got fired I don't really have an opinion on that other than she didn't contact their employers and that's really not her responsibility. If firing someone was overboard then the employer went overboard, not her.
posted by Danila at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Is everybody automatically ignorant and stupid for making silly banter with a friend without first checking for the presence of ReEdukators in the vicinity?
See what I'm saying? A lot of people will consider the person who is making the scene to be the one out of line. Political correctness gone mad! A prude! Radical feminist taking away all our fun!
I get that the real sin is supposedly embarrassing them in public. By publicly tweeting all the relevant information, including the code of conduct reminder, to the conference organizers, she accomplished a number of things. First, she let them know what was going on and who was doing it so they could act on it. But a lot of conferences have not been acting on their own codes of conduct, it's been a big deal. So she was publicly putting the ball in their court and if they did nothing and let the hostile environment continue then others would know about it. It wouldn't just be her suffering in silence and why should it be?
And these weren't teenagers, they were grown men who I think should know better than to crack a bunch of sex jokes in the middle of a presentation at a professional conference. But apparently many many many men do not know better, just look at this thread and the comments at other sites.
Now, if anyone got fired I don't really have an opinion on that other than she didn't contact their employers and that's really not her responsibility. If firing someone was overboard then the employer went overboard, not her.
posted by Danila at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Why do we need to make jokes about big penises at a software developer conference? We don't.
Exactly. Nor do we need them anywhere else for that matter.
The way I see this is, at one point or another we've all been forced by whatever frustration we're experiencing to embark upon a stupidly righteous quest to draw a line in the sand, kick over a few tables, and Right All the Wrongs. Usually, these things are shielded in enough obscurity so that we can easily walk away from them to later reflect upon our actions and choose our battles more carefully in the future, but this one was unfortunate enough to have been documented on the Internet. I don't blame her for doing what she did, but I think it could have been handled better.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Exactly. Nor do we need them anywhere else for that matter.
The way I see this is, at one point or another we've all been forced by whatever frustration we're experiencing to embark upon a stupidly righteous quest to draw a line in the sand, kick over a few tables, and Right All the Wrongs. Usually, these things are shielded in enough obscurity so that we can easily walk away from them to later reflect upon our actions and choose our battles more carefully in the future, but this one was unfortunate enough to have been documented on the Internet. I don't blame her for doing what she did, but I think it could have been handled better.
posted by RonButNotStupid at 4:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Know your audience.
It seems as though Richards did, when she took the photo, posted it to Twitter and asked for the PyCon staff to come to where she was sitting and talk to the guys. When the staff arrived, they talked to Richards privately, outside in a hall, and then indicated to her that they wanted to pull the guys out of the talk. She pointed them out, they were asked to leave the main hall. Richards returned to her seat.
It doesn't seem as though anyone talked to the guys about what happened, they were just asked to leave the main hall and one was later fired. A better solution would have been for Richards to ask the guys to knock it off and if they persisted, then asked PyConn staff to deal with them. She should not have taken their photo and publicly posted it. That puts a particular mark on those men, one that is hard to professionally shake and seems undeserved.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
It seems as though Richards did, when she took the photo, posted it to Twitter and asked for the PyCon staff to come to where she was sitting and talk to the guys. When the staff arrived, they talked to Richards privately, outside in a hall, and then indicated to her that they wanted to pull the guys out of the talk. She pointed them out, they were asked to leave the main hall. Richards returned to her seat.
It doesn't seem as though anyone talked to the guys about what happened, they were just asked to leave the main hall and one was later fired. A better solution would have been for Richards to ask the guys to knock it off and if they persisted, then asked PyConn staff to deal with them. She should not have taken their photo and publicly posted it. That puts a particular mark on those men, one that is hard to professionally shake and seems undeserved.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
She didn't object to the phrase, but to the jokes that followed after the first gentleman used the term as a compliment.
I think you're misinterpreting what the guy is saying. He's saying there weren't any sexual jokes made, that the only jokes made were in reference to this little "forking = flattery" silliness the group was coining. He's saying that Richards misinterpreted those jokes as being sexual. And from the example he cites ("I would fork that guys repo"), that seems plausible.
In other words, he's saying that Richards totally misinterpreted a series of jokes—which can happen, when you're listening to parts of other people's conversations. He admits making "a comment about big dongles," and he apologizes for that comment. But he also notes:
posted by cribcage at 5:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
I think you're misinterpreting what the guy is saying. He's saying there weren't any sexual jokes made, that the only jokes made were in reference to this little "forking = flattery" silliness the group was coining. He's saying that Richards misinterpreted those jokes as being sexual. And from the example he cites ("I would fork that guys repo"), that seems plausible.
In other words, he's saying that Richards totally misinterpreted a series of jokes—which can happen, when you're listening to parts of other people's conversations. He admits making "a comment about big dongles," and he apologizes for that comment. But he also notes:
My second comment is this, Adria has an audience and is a successful person of the media. Just check out her web page linked in her twitter account, her hard work and social activism speaks for itself. With that great power and reach comes responsibility. As a result of the picture she took I was let go from my job today. Which sucks because I have 3 kids and I really liked that job.That seems like part of the story worth hearing.
She gave me no warning, she smiled while she snapped the pic and sealed my fate. Let this serve as a message to everyone, our actions and words, big or small, can have a serious impact.
posted by cribcage at 5:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
Danila, they DIDN'T crack sex jokes in the middle of the conference; that's what is so infuriating about this.
posted by dejah420 at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by dejah420 at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Exactly. Nor do we need them anywhere else for that matter.
Yeah! Shakespeare out of schools now.
posted by logicpunk at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
Yeah! Shakespeare out of schools now.
posted by logicpunk at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
Is everybody automatically ignorant and stupid for making silly banter with a friend without first checking for the presence of ReEdukators in the vicinity?
See what I'm saying? A lot of people will consider the person who is making the scene to be the one out of line. Political correctness gone mad! A prude! Radical feminist taking away all our fun!
FYI, that comment was specifically in reference to the kid at the farmers market sanctimony, not the conference incident.
posted by amorphatist at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013
See what I'm saying? A lot of people will consider the person who is making the scene to be the one out of line. Political correctness gone mad! A prude! Radical feminist taking away all our fun!
FYI, that comment was specifically in reference to the kid at the farmers market sanctimony, not the conference incident.
posted by amorphatist at 5:05 PM on March 20, 2013
I looked at the picture and I couldn't see any women in it. I know there are women there, but I was at a developer conference recently and the ratio was like 10:1, generously. Probably wider than that, in some specialties. And that's not a matter of intelligence; that's a culture problem of women being systematically excluded, deliberately and inadvertently, for generations. Plus looking at photos of her, it appears she is a woman of color. At the con I attended, virtually every attendee was white or Asian. So in one way she's among her group, but in most other ways, very alone. I think most women would be reluctant to confront a couple of dick-joking bros in a roomful of bros - that sounds like a situation that could turn hostile very quickly. I don't think it's her job to enforce the con's standards of behavior, especially if they were established specifically for the purpose of making such events less hostile and more inclusive.
posted by toodleydoodley at 5:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by toodleydoodley at 5:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
i generally don't feel it's appropriate to even acknowledge the existence of sex in a workplace environment but that doesn't have anything to do with my gender or that of my co-workers
posted by rap and country at 5:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rap and country at 5:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The idea that this would be considered harassment makes me want to throw up. People who really harass women know exactly how to get away with it. Making a dick joke might be in bad taste, but it saddens my heart to even think that it might be put in the same category as some of the legitimate harassment that I and other women have experienced, harassment intended to sexually manipulate and destroy.
Misogyny should be unacceptable, but bawdy jokes and a matter of taste. I am alarmed that the hacker environment is becoming increasingly repressed and corporate.
posted by melissam at 5:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
Misogyny should be unacceptable, but bawdy jokes and a matter of taste. I am alarmed that the hacker environment is becoming increasingly repressed and corporate.
posted by melissam at 5:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
Danila, they DIDN'T crack sex jokes in the middle of the conference; that's what is so infuriating about this.
Okay. That's what the guy who was cracking sex jokes and is now really mad at the consequences had to say. Why do you take his word for it? And why do you use so much sexist language in the process. Pearl-clutching delicate flower, really??
posted by Danila at 5:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Okay. That's what the guy who was cracking sex jokes and is now really mad at the consequences had to say. Why do you take his word for it? And why do you use so much sexist language in the process. Pearl-clutching delicate flower, really??
posted by Danila at 5:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
This seems like that rare "Three wrongs also don't make a right" sort of story.
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
I tend to agree that these guys shouldn't have made jokes about dongles in public, whether or not they were representing anyone. In public means within earshot of strangers, and those strangers can overhear you without making any special effort.
About 10 years back I was out at a restaurant with my then girlfriend and another couple. My girlfriend at the time was a much more obnoxious drunk than I was. We got into a discussion about a specific part of the female anatomy. I don't think there was anything sexist about it, I believe she was giving out tips and tricks or something, just kinda loud. The other couple seemed mortified.
Later they told us that our banter had upset a family behind us. Parents and two little kids. Never mind that the kids were out at like 11pm. Never mind that we didn't even know the kids were there. Never mind we weren't speaking to them. We were in a public place, anyone could have been around, as is their right.
Should she have creepshotted them? no absolutely not.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:10 PM on March 20, 2013
About 10 years back I was out at a restaurant with my then girlfriend and another couple. My girlfriend at the time was a much more obnoxious drunk than I was. We got into a discussion about a specific part of the female anatomy. I don't think there was anything sexist about it, I believe she was giving out tips and tricks or something, just kinda loud. The other couple seemed mortified.
Later they told us that our banter had upset a family behind us. Parents and two little kids. Never mind that the kids were out at like 11pm. Never mind that we didn't even know the kids were there. Never mind we weren't speaking to them. We were in a public place, anyone could have been around, as is their right.
Should she have creepshotted them? no absolutely not.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:10 PM on March 20, 2013
"I'm assuming none of these would be tolerated at this convention?"
I should fucking hope not, Jesus.
(emphasis mine)
From the link:
posted by ricochet biscuit at 5:11 PM on March 20, 2013
I should fucking hope not, Jesus.
(emphasis mine)
From the link:
A piece of string walks into a bar. The bartender says, "We don't serve string here." The string walks out, ties himself into a clove hitch, rubs himself against the sidewalk a few times, then goes back into the bar. Bartender says, "Aren't you the piece of string that was just in here?" The string says, "No, I'm afraid not."Can I ask why this joke would cause this sort of reaction in you?
posted by ricochet biscuit at 5:11 PM on March 20, 2013
God damn it ya'll. THERE WERE NO DICK JOKES. She made the dick joke thing up out of whole cloth when she heard the word dongle. And I don't know a single person in tech who hasn't made a dongle joke. It's a funny word. She was mostly upset about the "fork" joke; which is to say, she as a "developer evangelist" whatever the fuck that is, doesn't know the first thing about code jokes.
posted by dejah420 at 5:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [21 favorites]
posted by dejah420 at 5:11 PM on March 20, 2013 [21 favorites]
IMO, the guys' real offense was that they were talking during a presentation instead of paying attention and not distracting others. STFU, the people around you want to hear what the speaker is saying.
posted by five fresh fish at 5:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 5:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
Mod note: This is not an appropriate place to drag tasteless jokes over from other websites.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
i generally don't feel it's appropriate to even acknowledge the existence of sex in a workplace environment
Holy moly. I can't tell if that's meant to be a satirical exaggeration of "Political Correctness run maaaad!" or if you really mean that. If you do really mean it then, no, that's just nuts. If we were to take "acknowledging the existence of sex" as a meaningful standard for what counts as creating a hostile work environment we would be treating women as if they were the childish innocents of Victorian children's fiction.
posted by yoink at 5:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Holy moly. I can't tell if that's meant to be a satirical exaggeration of "Political Correctness run maaaad!" or if you really mean that. If you do really mean it then, no, that's just nuts. If we were to take "acknowledging the existence of sex" as a meaningful standard for what counts as creating a hostile work environment we would be treating women as if they were the childish innocents of Victorian children's fiction.
posted by yoink at 5:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Ultimately, this is about political correctness, and PC has to be used correctly. When PC is used to keep people from being slyly racist or sexist or using dogwhistles, that's a good thing. When PC is used to make everyone into a humorless, sexless android, that's a bad thing. Everyone hates that, and the resulting backlash hurts the more worthwhile uses of PC and causes more racism and sexism in the world. This is clearly the second kind, and all it's going to do is make enemies of people who would otherwise be against sexism.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
And Danila, I'm upset because I've spent almost 30 years of my life fighting REAL sexism in tech. Like being asked to go get coffee for the team, when I'm the team leader, like being asked to promote a man over a woman because "he's a provider and she's going to get married", like seeing contemporaries make less money because they have boobs.
I'm furious when people take the fight I've been fighting for all these years, and turn it in to "I"m gonna have someone thrown out of a conference, and publicly shame them for the rest of their lives because I don't like what they said, even though I didn't hear the whole conversation, I don't understand the inside joke". She's the one who said "Oh, I didn't want my experience invalidated, so I couldn't say anything to them, I have to get a protector to do it for me." Which is, from my perspective, and the perspective of a lot of tech women near the 50 year mark, is what she did.
Seriously, if you can't turn around in a tech conference and shush someone, if you smile at them while you take their picture so you can publicly humiliate them; you're not fighting sexism, you're an attention seeker and a bully who uses other people to do your dirty work.
posted by dejah420 at 5:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [100 favorites]
I'm furious when people take the fight I've been fighting for all these years, and turn it in to "I"m gonna have someone thrown out of a conference, and publicly shame them for the rest of their lives because I don't like what they said, even though I didn't hear the whole conversation, I don't understand the inside joke". She's the one who said "Oh, I didn't want my experience invalidated, so I couldn't say anything to them, I have to get a protector to do it for me." Which is, from my perspective, and the perspective of a lot of tech women near the 50 year mark, is what she did.
Seriously, if you can't turn around in a tech conference and shush someone, if you smile at them while you take their picture so you can publicly humiliate them; you're not fighting sexism, you're an attention seeker and a bully who uses other people to do your dirty work.
posted by dejah420 at 5:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [100 favorites]
Pardon me if I'm missing something here. Two people were, essentially, giggling over the silly words "fork" and "dongle," and this is worth firing someone over? What the hell?! Are we supposed to police all personal conversations to meet the standards of an interview or first date? This is just bullying masked as prudery.
"Bullying masked as prudery" encapsulates my queasy feelings about this and a bunch of quasi-similar PC teacup storms (dickwolves, desborough).
posted by Sebmojo at 5:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
"Bullying masked as prudery" encapsulates my queasy feelings about this and a bunch of quasi-similar PC teacup storms (dickwolves, desborough).
posted by Sebmojo at 5:18 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
But things like "stand back or the foul ball will ruin your pretty smile" are sexist. Is "Huh huh huh, he said 'Big dongle'" sexist? I grant it's obviously sexual.Did the comment I was responding to here disappear?
posted by Flunkie at 5:18 PM on March 20, 2013
I had something long and poorly-written, but dejah420 said it much better. There was no reason to publish that picture - she took it and could've shown it to PyCon staff when they responded to her. Instead, she used to it enable her own self-righteous actions, and now creating a safe tech environment for women is more difficult because someone tomorrow will invariably ask me, "Did you hear about that feminist who got that guy fired for saying the word 'dongle'?" and I have to sort-of defend her actions and sort-of criticize them, but the end result is that another dude will think that all feminists are out to get him.
posted by antonymous at 5:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by antonymous at 5:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
Did the comment I was responding to here disappear?
Yes, the commenter asked us to remove it.
posted by jessamyn at 5:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes, the commenter asked us to remove it.
posted by jessamyn at 5:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
ok, so the guy got fired over a dongle joke - but h r people will be googling his name and this probably won't come up
now adria will eventually want to move on to another job - and h r people will be googling her name and this WILL come up
gee, i wonder how that's going to work out
she overreacted in the most public grandstanding way possible
would you want to take a chance on someone like that?
posted by pyramid termite at 5:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
now adria will eventually want to move on to another job - and h r people will be googling her name and this WILL come up
gee, i wonder how that's going to work out
she overreacted in the most public grandstanding way possible
would you want to take a chance on someone like that?
posted by pyramid termite at 5:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think one potential backlash from this is that people might take real complaints about real sexism at conferences (e.g. the infamous "Perform like a Pron star" debacle) and the real ways in which women are maginalized in the tech industry less seriously.
Admittedly, I'm a dude, so I have a different perspective, but "dongle" is a funny word and anyone who has heard the phrase "forking the repo" in context has thought "Heh. Forking the repo" at least once. This seems like pretty small beer in the offense scale. This isn't sexism so much as "acting like a five year old". I try to be very sensitive to this (as a straight, white male, I pretty much don't fall into the minority classification from any direction), but this seems to be something that could be resolved with a glare or a "Keep it down, kids".
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 5:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Admittedly, I'm a dude, so I have a different perspective, but "dongle" is a funny word and anyone who has heard the phrase "forking the repo" in context has thought "Heh. Forking the repo" at least once. This seems like pretty small beer in the offense scale. This isn't sexism so much as "acting like a five year old". I try to be very sensitive to this (as a straight, white male, I pretty much don't fall into the minority classification from any direction), but this seems to be something that could be resolved with a glare or a "Keep it down, kids".
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 5:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Keep in mind the word "dongle" is itself not a neutral, serious word, but was intentionally coined as a penis joke:
"The word is most likely a blend of dong and dangle, as it can resemble a penis that hangs off a computer."
posted by dgaicun at 5:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
"The word is most likely a blend of dong and dangle, as it can resemble a penis that hangs off a computer."
posted by dgaicun at 5:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
The man who was fired responds in one of the HN threads:
posted by boo_radley at 5:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Unfortunately in this case there were more downsides than could have been predicted. I personally helped recruit 2 young women over the course of the weekend who were looking for junior/intern positions. They both seemed very passionate about development and well qualified. Before I lost access to my corporate account I was able to get one of their resumes to my manager but I'm afraid the other might have gone down with my inbox. I've been imploring my boss to forward my address or look into my closed account to see if he can find her response. I know how hard it was for me when I was first starting out, how scary it can be, you're putting yourself out there hoping someone will see just how awesome you are. I can only imagine it's more difficult coming in as a minority to the field.So, still feeling pretty conflicted about each accounting of the story.
posted by boo_radley at 5:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
IMO, the guys' real offense was that they were talking during a presentation instead of paying attention and not distracting others. STFU, the people around you want to hear what the speaker is saying.
If she got some rude jerks to shut up instead of this mess then I'd be all for giving her a medal.
posted by Artw at 5:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
If she got some rude jerks to shut up instead of this mess then I'd be all for giving her a medal.
posted by Artw at 5:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
"I would fork that guys repo"
If it is a sexual joke, and it sure looks like one to me no matter what he says, it's interesting that a joke about desiring sex with another man is at the heart of this.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
If it is a sexual joke, and it sure looks like one to me no matter what he says, it's interesting that a joke about desiring sex with another man is at the heart of this.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Oh holy shit! She is employed by the spamming outfit SendGrid! Just gets better and better!
SendGrid Raises $5 Million, Sends A Bajillion E-mails
Email is still hot: Why SendGrid got $21M in VC funds
Worse, a spammer based on Microsoft products.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
SendGrid Raises $5 Million, Sends A Bajillion E-mails
Email is still hot: Why SendGrid got $21M in VC funds
Worse, a spammer based on Microsoft products.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Obviously, their first mistake was attending a python conference!
posted by blue_beetle at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by blue_beetle at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
"And she didn't do a damn thing about the guy who actually said sexist stuff TO HER.
Again; I don't have a problem with her going to the conference people, if that's what she feels like she needs to do because she's too delicate a flower to ask some goofy geek to shut the hell up. What I have a problem with is that she broadcast his picture to the internet with full malice aforethought. She destroyed a man's life and is crowing about what a good thing she's done, because how dare he make a joke about dongles in a room where she might overhear it."
I think part of that is that she seems to have underreacted in the moment, and then responded by overreacting the next time.
"Why do you take his word for it?"
Why are you taking her word for it? (The rational thing seems to be saying that we can't really know what happened there, at least without further information, so basing speculations upon particular interpretations isn't going to lead us anywhere but increasingly fantastic Rashamons.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Again; I don't have a problem with her going to the conference people, if that's what she feels like she needs to do because she's too delicate a flower to ask some goofy geek to shut the hell up. What I have a problem with is that she broadcast his picture to the internet with full malice aforethought. She destroyed a man's life and is crowing about what a good thing she's done, because how dare he make a joke about dongles in a room where she might overhear it."
I think part of that is that she seems to have underreacted in the moment, and then responded by overreacting the next time.
"Why do you take his word for it?"
Why are you taking her word for it? (The rational thing seems to be saying that we can't really know what happened there, at least without further information, so basing speculations upon particular interpretations isn't going to lead us anywhere but increasingly fantastic Rashamons.)
posted by klangklangston at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
i generally don't feel it's appropriate to even acknowledge the existence of sex in a workplace environment
And that's exactly what some of us fear that you hope to achieve.
posted by amorphatist at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
And that's exactly what some of us fear that you hope to achieve.
posted by amorphatist at 5:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
"I would fork that guys repo"
If it is a sexual joke, and it sure looks like one to me no matter what he says,
I'm totally ignorant about the technical side of this, but doesn't the term also have a real, literal meaning? I mean, how are we to know which level of meaning is in play here? Like, if I said to you "would you grab my dongle for me" I'm obviously handing you the mother of all straight lines, but I could simply be saying "my hands are full, will you pick up that USB drive that's sitting on the desk for me, please."
posted by yoink at 5:28 PM on March 20, 2013
If it is a sexual joke, and it sure looks like one to me no matter what he says,
I'm totally ignorant about the technical side of this, but doesn't the term also have a real, literal meaning? I mean, how are we to know which level of meaning is in play here? Like, if I said to you "would you grab my dongle for me" I'm obviously handing you the mother of all straight lines, but I could simply be saying "my hands are full, will you pick up that USB drive that's sitting on the desk for me, please."
posted by yoink at 5:28 PM on March 20, 2013
Mod note: Folks. Seriously chill out, quit being nasty to each other, and talk about the topic of the thread.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:28 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 5:28 PM on March 20, 2013
schoolgirl report: "I don't want to live in a world where geeks at a geek conference can't joke about big dongles."
And show slides of half naked women, right?
Here's the thing - geek asshole male bullshit is damaging as a whole - it DOES make women feel unwelcome in general. Maybe this instance is a bit silly, I honestly can't judge. I saw the photo - the look in the guys eyes, come on tell me he's not purposefully trying to troll?
So my link above - that's about Ruby on Rails. I don't know the current situation in Rubyland, but for quite a while there was a sharp dichotomy with what happened there and how Python decided to proceed. As pointed out above, they have an explicit stance on this issue. One of the reasons (I believe, though I could be wrong) is due to the specific RoR conference episode. Regardless, Python was supposed to be different and tolerant, it was supposed to make people feel welcome.
So maybe, maybe this one little joke isn't a "big deal", just like a bunch of dudes sitting in an office making jokes around a woman about sex (not about her, even, just sex in general, acting like fucking 12 year old children) isn't an environment that makes for a healthy workplace and makes the woman generally feel uncomfortable (and especially if the power dynamics are such that she feels less empowered than the rest of the people in that office)... This it the point. I won't make exact parallels to "rape culture" but there's a time and place to act like fucking children. Grow the fuck up. Wanna hang out in some place that's not a PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCE and be a childish dick? Then fine, whatevs. I mean, depending on who's around, probably something you should think about, too, as well. I mean, you don't go fucking swearing around little 2 year old kids if you can help it, do you?
Point being, just because it's not specifically targeted AT you doesn't mean that you, as a member of a certain class, aren't feeling violated.
In the end, these dicks broke the rules, and there should be no problem for them paying the consequences.
However...
I also believe that perhaps an automatic firing *might* be overboard if the individual in question was talked to, and clearly understood why what they did could be upsetting to someone of the opposite gender and hopefully get at least a little glimpse of how the power dynamics of social gender structures happen.
Fuck, why do I expect more of Metafilter than I sometimes get.
posted by symbioid at 5:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
And show slides of half naked women, right?
Here's the thing - geek asshole male bullshit is damaging as a whole - it DOES make women feel unwelcome in general. Maybe this instance is a bit silly, I honestly can't judge. I saw the photo - the look in the guys eyes, come on tell me he's not purposefully trying to troll?
So my link above - that's about Ruby on Rails. I don't know the current situation in Rubyland, but for quite a while there was a sharp dichotomy with what happened there and how Python decided to proceed. As pointed out above, they have an explicit stance on this issue. One of the reasons (I believe, though I could be wrong) is due to the specific RoR conference episode. Regardless, Python was supposed to be different and tolerant, it was supposed to make people feel welcome.
So maybe, maybe this one little joke isn't a "big deal", just like a bunch of dudes sitting in an office making jokes around a woman about sex (not about her, even, just sex in general, acting like fucking 12 year old children) isn't an environment that makes for a healthy workplace and makes the woman generally feel uncomfortable (and especially if the power dynamics are such that she feels less empowered than the rest of the people in that office)... This it the point. I won't make exact parallels to "rape culture" but there's a time and place to act like fucking children. Grow the fuck up. Wanna hang out in some place that's not a PROFESSIONAL CONFERENCE and be a childish dick? Then fine, whatevs. I mean, depending on who's around, probably something you should think about, too, as well. I mean, you don't go fucking swearing around little 2 year old kids if you can help it, do you?
Point being, just because it's not specifically targeted AT you doesn't mean that you, as a member of a certain class, aren't feeling violated.
In the end, these dicks broke the rules, and there should be no problem for them paying the consequences.
However...
I also believe that perhaps an automatic firing *might* be overboard if the individual in question was talked to, and clearly understood why what they did could be upsetting to someone of the opposite gender and hopefully get at least a little glimpse of how the power dynamics of social gender structures happen.
Fuck, why do I expect more of Metafilter than I sometimes get.
posted by symbioid at 5:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
"Folks"? Sounds dirty to me...
posted by Jimbob at 5:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Jimbob at 5:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
this reminds me of the creepshot thread. you have a person doing or being a certain way in public, and it can be observed by someone else within a certain distance. the doing or being is not directed at another particular person, but they take a picture anyway, post it on the internet and add cometary, all without consulting the subject of the picture.
posted by cupcake1337 at 5:31 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by cupcake1337 at 5:31 PM on March 20, 2013
What would have made this situation even "better" would be if the fired person was here on a H1 visa, thus resulting in him being de-facto deported upon being fired from his job. It could have happened.
posted by GuyZero at 5:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 5:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
"I was going to let it go. It had been a long week. A long month. I’d been on the road since mid February attending and speaking at conferences. PyCon was my 5th and final conference before heading home."Ah, the 'extremely tired' defense for the way I reacted. Paging Mr. Holden Karnofsky. Please pick up a white courtesy phone. Mr. Holden Karnofsky.
posted by ericb at 5:32 PM on March 20, 2013
"Can I ask why this joke would cause this sort of reaction in you?"
Apparently not, though it might help to read the rest of the jokes.
posted by Blasdelb at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013
Apparently not, though it might help to read the rest of the jokes.
posted by Blasdelb at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013
yoink, I don't particularly buy that they used it as a form of flattery in the manner described without a wink to the double meaning. It just doesn't seem likely to me. Could be wrong.
posted by Drinky Die at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Drinky Die at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013
Here's the thing - geek asshole male bullshit is damaging as a whole - it DOES make women feel unwelcome in general.
Yes. Absolutely.
Maybe this instance is a bit silly, I honestly can't judge.
Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. Indeed, it is difficult to judge.
I saw the photo - the look in the guys eyes, come on tell me he's not purposefully trying to troll?
Ok, seriously, now you're projecting.
posted by GuyZero at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
Yes. Absolutely.
Maybe this instance is a bit silly, I honestly can't judge.
Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. Indeed, it is difficult to judge.
I saw the photo - the look in the guys eyes, come on tell me he's not purposefully trying to troll?
Ok, seriously, now you're projecting.
posted by GuyZero at 5:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
God damn it ya'll. THERE WERE NO DICK JOKES.
The guy appears to admit that he made one:
posted by cribcage at 5:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
The guy appears to admit that he made one:
Hi, I'm the guy who made a comment about big dongles. First of all I'd like to say I'm sorry. I really did not mean to offend anyone and I really do regret the comment and how it made Adria feel. She had every right to report me to staff, and I defend her position. However, there is another side to this story. While I did make a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male, no sexual jokes were made about forking.Now, he's admitting to making one inappropriate joke, and he then goes on to explain that Richards misinterpreted another series of jokes as sexual when they actually weren't. Still, if we're being accurate we can't really claim there were "no" dick jokes. Both sides admit there was at least one.
posted by cribcage at 5:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
I'm at PyCon right now. Out of respect for a whole bunch of stuff, I'm just going to say this.
My first PyCon was 7 years ago. It was in Dallas. There were perhaps a handful of women there.
In the ensuing seven years, a lot of dedicated people who I feel privileged to know have put in unbelievable amounts of work. It started with a diversity effort that produced a positive statement. It evolved into a code of conduct, officially adopted by the conference, and the sponsoring foundation adopting a requirement for any conference it sponsors to do the same. It evolved into people trained to respond to and handle incidents. It evolved into a pledge by a ton of high-profile people in the community, to refuse to attend or sponsor any conference that doesn't have a code of conduct and incident-handling procedures in place. It evolved into outreach and diversity efforts and financial aid and grants to organizations that try to improve the diversity of not just the conference but of the broader community.
At PyCon this year, 20% of the attendees, at a conference dedicated to an open-source programming language, were women. At PyCon this year there were around $100k in financial-aid grants to help people attend. At PyCon this year there was a charity auction, organized on the spur of the moment, that raised $10,000 for PyLadies, an organization dedicated to getting women more involved in programming and in Python.
At PyCon this year there was a two-day workshop full of kids -- boys and girls -- who got to learn some basics of programming for free. At PyCon this year there were 2500+ Raspberry Pi kits on hand, given free to every attendee and the remainder donated to schools and outreach programs.
I'm not really going to comment on this incident, and I think all that can usefully be said about it has been said about it.
I am going to say that if you find you have some energy and would like to help make things better, you could do a lot worse than to look into those things I just mentioned and maybe help them out or promote them. We are far from what the ideal would be, but so far these things actually seem to be working, at least a little bit.
posted by ubernostrum at 5:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [36 favorites]
My first PyCon was 7 years ago. It was in Dallas. There were perhaps a handful of women there.
In the ensuing seven years, a lot of dedicated people who I feel privileged to know have put in unbelievable amounts of work. It started with a diversity effort that produced a positive statement. It evolved into a code of conduct, officially adopted by the conference, and the sponsoring foundation adopting a requirement for any conference it sponsors to do the same. It evolved into people trained to respond to and handle incidents. It evolved into a pledge by a ton of high-profile people in the community, to refuse to attend or sponsor any conference that doesn't have a code of conduct and incident-handling procedures in place. It evolved into outreach and diversity efforts and financial aid and grants to organizations that try to improve the diversity of not just the conference but of the broader community.
At PyCon this year, 20% of the attendees, at a conference dedicated to an open-source programming language, were women. At PyCon this year there were around $100k in financial-aid grants to help people attend. At PyCon this year there was a charity auction, organized on the spur of the moment, that raised $10,000 for PyLadies, an organization dedicated to getting women more involved in programming and in Python.
At PyCon this year there was a two-day workshop full of kids -- boys and girls -- who got to learn some basics of programming for free. At PyCon this year there were 2500+ Raspberry Pi kits on hand, given free to every attendee and the remainder donated to schools and outreach programs.
I'm not really going to comment on this incident, and I think all that can usefully be said about it has been said about it.
I am going to say that if you find you have some energy and would like to help make things better, you could do a lot worse than to look into those things I just mentioned and maybe help them out or promote them. We are far from what the ideal would be, but so far these things actually seem to be working, at least a little bit.
posted by ubernostrum at 5:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [36 favorites]
I should also point out that as my roommate and I were discussing this, we don't think that intergender discussions about sex in the office are strictly verboten. It's all about circumstances. It's about knowing who it is you're talking to. The two secretaries that are younger like me and I could talk about sex generally - I try to make sure not to get too offensive, but in general, it's ok. My boss making his stupid ass Archie Bunker comments is bad enough in front of me as a dude, and it's most certainly not ok when women are around.
So there's a lot of factors here. I don't want to say nobody should ever make a dick joke (fuck I'm the guy who makes genocide jokes and abortion jokes, so...) But context is important. That's all. It's quite possible this wasn't handled in the most appropriate way, but to say she had no right at all to feel uncomfortable or upset by the behavior of the individuals involved strikes me like a lot of right-wing attitudes towards liberals in general "OH come on, we're just jooooooooking. Lighten up!" etc..
posted by symbioid at 5:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
So there's a lot of factors here. I don't want to say nobody should ever make a dick joke (fuck I'm the guy who makes genocide jokes and abortion jokes, so...) But context is important. That's all. It's quite possible this wasn't handled in the most appropriate way, but to say she had no right at all to feel uncomfortable or upset by the behavior of the individuals involved strikes me like a lot of right-wing attitudes towards liberals in general "OH come on, we're just jooooooooking. Lighten up!" etc..
posted by symbioid at 5:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
symbioid: "schoolgirl report: "I don't want to live in a world where geeks at a geek conference can't joke about big dongles."
And show slides of half naked women, right?"
Hey, maybe don't put words in people's mouths.
posted by boo_radley at 5:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
And show slides of half naked women, right?"
Hey, maybe don't put words in people's mouths.
posted by boo_radley at 5:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
If we believe what the guy says.
While I did make a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male, no sexual jokes were made about forking
So yeah, one possible way to interpret the joke is the dongle is the fictional piece of hardware's dick. That is really the only way the joke is funny at all I think. The guys are not entirely blameless.I don't think it is unreasonable to characterize it as a dick joke.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
While I did make a big dongle joke about a fictional piece hardware that identified as male, no sexual jokes were made about forking
So yeah, one possible way to interpret the joke is the dongle is the fictional piece of hardware's dick. That is really the only way the joke is funny at all I think. The guys are not entirely blameless.I don't think it is unreasonable to characterize it as a dick joke.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
If I may play armchair shrink briefly, I'd suspect that working for a spammy outfit like SendGrid^ really helps explain the sociopathic quality in her blog post and behavior. Just imagine cognitive dissonance working there.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by jeffburdges at 5:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
This is weird to me: I was happy to see this posted here because it popped up on reddit first and the response there is so unrelentingly SOUND THE HORN FOR THE DEFENSE OF WHITE MALE PRIVILEGE that I was hoping for a bit more nuance here.
If I may play armchair shrink briefly, I'd suspect that working for a spammy outfit like SendGrid really helps explain the sociopathic quality in her blog post
You're fucking fired. No offense.
posted by yerfatma at 5:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
If I may play armchair shrink briefly, I'd suspect that working for a spammy outfit like SendGrid really helps explain the sociopathic quality in her blog post
You're fucking fired. No offense.
posted by yerfatma at 5:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
These guys could at least have been joking about having big pythons or pypys or something. Also, no play on Richards from anyone? Come on! "Hard" is even in the etymology.
posted by michaelh at 5:39 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by michaelh at 5:39 PM on March 20, 2013
There has been plenty of nuance here. What there hasn't necessarily been is universal agreement with any position.
posted by Justinian at 5:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by Justinian at 5:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
Just to follow up: the SendGrid comments are the really insidious kind of shit that happens in male tech crowds: it's not that I'm judging her because she's a dumb emotional girl, I'm judging her because she works at a company I don't like because they use a technology I don't like (for no good reason because technologies are just tools) but really I just like to look down my nose at everyone because of my own insecurities and I can't be arsed to realize that bothers people and leads to making them feel unwanted. And if they happen to be part of a marginalized group, well, fuck them, they need to get a helmet because I'm not judge-mental.
Now THAT'S armchair psychology!
posted by yerfatma at 5:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Now THAT'S armchair psychology!
posted by yerfatma at 5:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
So what exactly is an evangelist? Is it a coder, or is it some kind of marketing droid?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by PeterMcDermott at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013
Are we allowed a middle ground where we'd like tech dudes to conduct themselves in a manner that doesn't alienate and make female colleagues uneasy, but we're still opposed to Trial By Twitter, when a person could, you know, turn around and tell them to knock it off?
posted by DirtyOldTown at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [66 favorites]
posted by DirtyOldTown at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [66 favorites]
There has been plenty of nuance here
Sorry, poorly put on my part (especially given my total lack of nuance). I was looking for less "Bitch be cray".
posted by yerfatma at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Sorry, poorly put on my part (especially given my total lack of nuance). I was looking for less "Bitch be cray".
posted by yerfatma at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Marketing droid.
posted by Jimbob at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Jimbob at 5:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Why are you taking her word for it? (The rational thing seems to be saying that we can't really know what happened there, at least without further information, so basing speculations upon particular interpretations isn't going to lead us anywhere but increasingly fantastic Rashamons.)
Well I take her word that she thought she heard these guys telling a bunch of sex jokes in the middle of the conference presentation. And...they were telling sex jokes, the only dispute is on how many they told (and how many were just "regular" jokes, no dispute that they were telling a bunch of jokes).
I don't see this as being like a creepshot. She took the picture right in front of their faces. He smiled for the camera. That's the opposite of the creepshot. Not a creepshot, not a sociopath bullying with malicious intent, goodness. She'd been friendly with the guys just moments before things started going downhill.
I see sexist language being thrown at her (here at Metafilter, and much worse elsewhere). I see the standard diatribes against political correctness and oversensitive women ruining it for all women because of how men will react. These appear in every single thread, every single thread, on sexism especially with regard to these conferences.
posted by Danila at 5:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
Well I take her word that she thought she heard these guys telling a bunch of sex jokes in the middle of the conference presentation. And...they were telling sex jokes, the only dispute is on how many they told (and how many were just "regular" jokes, no dispute that they were telling a bunch of jokes).
I don't see this as being like a creepshot. She took the picture right in front of their faces. He smiled for the camera. That's the opposite of the creepshot. Not a creepshot, not a sociopath bullying with malicious intent, goodness. She'd been friendly with the guys just moments before things started going downhill.
I see sexist language being thrown at her (here at Metafilter, and much worse elsewhere). I see the standard diatribes against political correctness and oversensitive women ruining it for all women because of how men will react. These appear in every single thread, every single thread, on sexism especially with regard to these conferences.
posted by Danila at 5:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
Marketing droid.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
People who really harass women know exactly how to get away with it. Making a dick joke might be in bad taste, but it saddens my heart to even think that it might be put in the same category as some of the legitimate harassment that I and other women have experienced, harassment intended to sexually manipulate and destroy.
I'm concerned that the huge reaction to this event will subtly discourage other women from reporting things that make them uncomfortable at future tech conferences, maybe even from reporting the kind of direct/intentional harassment that has ambiguity thrown in to confuse the target. I can imagine some people reading this event as "making a mistake in reporting can have massively heavy costs for your reputation, so it's probably best to avoid reporting".
posted by dreamyshade at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
I'm concerned that the huge reaction to this event will subtly discourage other women from reporting things that make them uncomfortable at future tech conferences, maybe even from reporting the kind of direct/intentional harassment that has ambiguity thrown in to confuse the target. I can imagine some people reading this event as "making a mistake in reporting can have massively heavy costs for your reputation, so it's probably best to avoid reporting".
posted by dreamyshade at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
So what exactly is an evangelist? Is it a coder, or is it some kind of marketing droid?
it varies. around here they're developer specifically designed to work with external developers and help them understand APIs, etc. It's developer outreach. But people use it to mean all sorts of things.
posted by GuyZero at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
it varies. around here they're developer specifically designed to work with external developers and help them understand APIs, etc. It's developer outreach. But people use it to mean all sorts of things.
posted by GuyZero at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
So, umm
Metafilter: the kind of thing where I'd wind up somehow arguing with a bunch of people whose opinions I often, broadly speaking, share.
posted by titus-g at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Metafilter: the kind of thing where I'd wind up somehow arguing with a bunch of people whose opinions I often, broadly speaking, share.
posted by titus-g at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
So what exactly is an evangelist? Is it a coder, or is it some kind of marketing droid?
I'd say it is closer to marketing, but with a technology slant. She would make technical arguments why her company is a better choice, be able to discuss technical capabilities, use cases and the API. I don't think she would code day to day, but would probably be able to gather or knock together some sample code.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013
I'd say it is closer to marketing, but with a technology slant. She would make technical arguments why her company is a better choice, be able to discuss technical capabilities, use cases and the API. I don't think she would code day to day, but would probably be able to gather or knock together some sample code.
posted by Ad hominem at 5:43 PM on March 20, 2013
Ah yes, marketing, the one group which it's still ok to hate. Like gypsies I guess.
posted by GuyZero at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't want to live in a world where geeks at a geek conference can't joke about big dongles."
And show slides of half naked women, right?
But how are these things even remotely the same? This seems to me a tactic that has been resorted to again and again in this thread by those who want to side with Adria Richards--to jump from what actually happened to all kinds of horrible things that would obviously be utterly wrong and inappropriate and say "well, what if this had happened, should she have just stood by and said nothing then?" Well no, obviously not. But it's as if we're arguing about, to take an example I offered above, the neighbor's bratty kid smashing your Jack'o'lantern and what the appropriate response would be and you said "well, what if he'd smashed your dog's head in with a rock? Would you just turn a blind eye then? Or what if he invaded the Sudatenland and started executing millions of Jews? I guess you'd say all he needed was a good talking to, huh?"
What these guys are actually accused of by Adria Richards in her original tweet is making a "dongle" joke and a "forking a repo" joke. That's it. To each other. At a conference. Not "bragging about sexual conquests," not "joking about mail order brides," not "talking about their penises," not "showing slides of half naked women," not any of the various obviously bad and profoundly offensive things that people have felt they had to resort to in order to find some objective correlative for the OUTRAGE! OUTRAGE! they wish to convey. At some point, surely, the fact that you can't actually point at what they did in fact and expect anybody to do more than roll their eyes suggests that Adria Richards's response was overblown.
(Especially when you add in the fact that she is obviously not, in fact, particularly shocked by penis-jokes nor thinks them something that should be kept for purely private entertainment, given that she happily tweeted one--a far more graphic and explicit one--to all her thousands of followers as she was arriving at this conference, a conference which she knows that some of her twitter followers were also attending).
posted by yoink at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [59 favorites]
And show slides of half naked women, right?
But how are these things even remotely the same? This seems to me a tactic that has been resorted to again and again in this thread by those who want to side with Adria Richards--to jump from what actually happened to all kinds of horrible things that would obviously be utterly wrong and inappropriate and say "well, what if this had happened, should she have just stood by and said nothing then?" Well no, obviously not. But it's as if we're arguing about, to take an example I offered above, the neighbor's bratty kid smashing your Jack'o'lantern and what the appropriate response would be and you said "well, what if he'd smashed your dog's head in with a rock? Would you just turn a blind eye then? Or what if he invaded the Sudatenland and started executing millions of Jews? I guess you'd say all he needed was a good talking to, huh?"
What these guys are actually accused of by Adria Richards in her original tweet is making a "dongle" joke and a "forking a repo" joke. That's it. To each other. At a conference. Not "bragging about sexual conquests," not "joking about mail order brides," not "talking about their penises," not "showing slides of half naked women," not any of the various obviously bad and profoundly offensive things that people have felt they had to resort to in order to find some objective correlative for the OUTRAGE! OUTRAGE! they wish to convey. At some point, surely, the fact that you can't actually point at what they did in fact and expect anybody to do more than roll their eyes suggests that Adria Richards's response was overblown.
(Especially when you add in the fact that she is obviously not, in fact, particularly shocked by penis-jokes nor thinks them something that should be kept for purely private entertainment, given that she happily tweeted one--a far more graphic and explicit one--to all her thousands of followers as she was arriving at this conference, a conference which she knows that some of her twitter followers were also attending).
posted by yoink at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [59 favorites]
Are we allowed a middle ground...
That's pretty much where I'm at on the whole thing. Not enough information on this particular situation for me personally.
posted by jessamyn at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
That's pretty much where I'm at on the whole thing. Not enough information on this particular situation for me personally.
posted by jessamyn at 5:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Well, if it makes anyone feel better, I'm reading mailing list threads between folks in the Ada Initiative community about this and Adria is getting significant harassment, as is her employer, over this issue. She's hardly coming out of this unscathed.
It's hard to say what level these jokes were at given what we've seen. Maybe there were trivial bits of nothing, maybe they were tediously lewd. I don't think anyone intended for anyone to get fired. The uncharitable reading of Adria here is pretty disheartening though. I expected a more nuanced discussion from metafilter, instead of "what a horrible overreacting prude".
posted by ch1x0r at 5:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's hard to say what level these jokes were at given what we've seen. Maybe there were trivial bits of nothing, maybe they were tediously lewd. I don't think anyone intended for anyone to get fired. The uncharitable reading of Adria here is pretty disheartening though. I expected a more nuanced discussion from metafilter, instead of "what a horrible overreacting prude".
posted by ch1x0r at 5:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Are we allowed a middle ground where we'd like tech dudes to conduct themselves in a manner that doesn't alienate and make their females colleagues uneasy, but we're still opposed to Trial By Twitter, when you could, you know, turn around and tell them to knock it off? - by DirtyOldTown
Yes. I'd like very much to stake out a territory there, please.
posted by dejah420 at 5:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Yes. I'd like very much to stake out a territory there, please.
posted by dejah420 at 5:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Adria is getting significant harassment, as is her employer, over this issue
As are the conference organizers*, including phone calls to their homes. Because, y'know, reddit/ HN thinks you should know how they feel and it's not like calls to your house are intimidating or worrisome.
* I'll cop to having a dog in this fight as I used to work with one of the people tangentially affected and it's unreal how this has blown up for them.
posted by yerfatma at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
As are the conference organizers*, including phone calls to their homes. Because, y'know, reddit/ HN thinks you should know how they feel and it's not like calls to your house are intimidating or worrisome.
* I'll cop to having a dog in this fight as I used to work with one of the people tangentially affected and it's unreal how this has blown up for them.
posted by yerfatma at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I expected a more nuanced discussion from metafilter, instead of "what a horrible overreacting prude".
Ok, how about just "overreacting"?
posted by GuyZero at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Ok, how about just "overreacting"?
posted by GuyZero at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
So does SendGrid actually do real spamming or are they just the go-to people when for example Gamefly sends me their monthly newsletter because I forgot to remove a checkmark?
posted by ymgve at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by ymgve at 5:50 PM on March 20, 2013
The uncharitable reading of Adria here is pretty disheartening though. I expected a more nuanced discussion from metafilter, instead of "what a horrible overreacting prude".
What sort of nuanced discussion would you like to see?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
What sort of nuanced discussion would you like to see?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
are they just the go-to people when Gamefly sends me their monthly newsletter because I forgot to remove a checkmark?
Basically. Also, forgotten password emails, receipts, etc.
I don't actually know anything about SendGrid in specific, I've just worked with ESP's before. It's a perfectly legitimate business and most companies in the space work very hard to ensure compliance to both laws and technical standards.
posted by GuyZero at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Basically. Also, forgotten password emails, receipts, etc.
I don't actually know anything about SendGrid in specific, I've just worked with ESP's before. It's a perfectly legitimate business and most companies in the space work very hard to ensure compliance to both laws and technical standards.
posted by GuyZero at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
So maybe, maybe this one little joke isn't a "big deal", just like a bunch of dudes sitting in an office making jokes around a woman about sex (not about her, even, just sex in general, acting like fucking 12 year old children) isn't an environment that makes for a healthy workplace and makes the woman generally feel uncomfortable (and especially if the power dynamics are such that she feels less empowered than the rest of the people in that office)...
There are sexist jokes and there are jokes about sex. Jokes about sex do not make me uncomfortable. Jokes about women being fat, fearful, mail order brides, how the new tech isn't as attractive as the old one, etc. lead to an uncomfortable and detrimental work environment.
posted by melissam at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
There are sexist jokes and there are jokes about sex. Jokes about sex do not make me uncomfortable. Jokes about women being fat, fearful, mail order brides, how the new tech isn't as attractive as the old one, etc. lead to an uncomfortable and detrimental work environment.
posted by melissam at 5:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
"Well I take her word that she thought she heard these guys telling a bunch of sex jokes in the middle of the conference presentation. And...they were telling sex jokes, the only dispute is on how many they told (and how many were just "regular" jokes, no dispute that they were telling a bunch of jokes). "
But you weren't there, right? And trying to parse whether that joke was OK or not would kind of require you to be there, unless you're going to hold to a zero tolerance policy. Which is fine if you want to, but I think that's a pretty dumb position to hold.
I don't see this as being like a creepshot. She took the picture right in front of their faces. He smiled for the camera. That's the opposite of the creepshot. Not a creepshot, not a sociopath bullying with malicious intent, goodness. She'd been friendly with the guys just moments before things started going downhill. "
When I'm friendly with people, I let them know when they're bugging me. Not doing so is kind of a dick move.
I see sexist language being thrown at her (here at Metafilter, and much worse elsewhere). I see the standard diatribes against political correctness and oversensitive women ruining it for all women because of how men will react. These appear in every single thread, every single thread, on sexism especially with regard to these conferences.
And that's OK to call out on its own, but it's not fair to characterize this conversation as being part of that, nor to reduce it all down to that attitude.
posted by klangklangston at 5:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
But you weren't there, right? And trying to parse whether that joke was OK or not would kind of require you to be there, unless you're going to hold to a zero tolerance policy. Which is fine if you want to, but I think that's a pretty dumb position to hold.
I don't see this as being like a creepshot. She took the picture right in front of their faces. He smiled for the camera. That's the opposite of the creepshot. Not a creepshot, not a sociopath bullying with malicious intent, goodness. She'd been friendly with the guys just moments before things started going downhill. "
When I'm friendly with people, I let them know when they're bugging me. Not doing so is kind of a dick move.
I see sexist language being thrown at her (here at Metafilter, and much worse elsewhere). I see the standard diatribes against political correctness and oversensitive women ruining it for all women because of how men will react. These appear in every single thread, every single thread, on sexism especially with regard to these conferences.
And that's OK to call out on its own, but it's not fair to characterize this conversation as being part of that, nor to reduce it all down to that attitude.
posted by klangklangston at 5:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I don't see this as being like a creepshot. She took the picture right in front of their faces. He smiled for the camera. That's the opposite of the creepshot. Not a creepshot, not a sociopath bullying with malicious intent, goodness. She'd been friendly with the guys just moments before things started going downhill.
A creepshot is a photo taken of someone without their knowledge, with the intent of damaging use. The opposite of this would be a photo of someone taken with their knowledge, with the intent of positive or benign use. This is like 90 degrees from a creepshot, a photo taken of someone with their knowledge, but also with the intent of damaging use against the subject.
And given that she'd been friendly with them moments before taking the photo, isn't the most reasonable assumption that he smiled because he thought she had friendly intent?
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 5:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
A creepshot is a photo taken of someone without their knowledge, with the intent of damaging use. The opposite of this would be a photo of someone taken with their knowledge, with the intent of positive or benign use. This is like 90 degrees from a creepshot, a photo taken of someone with their knowledge, but also with the intent of damaging use against the subject.
And given that she'd been friendly with them moments before taking the photo, isn't the most reasonable assumption that he smiled because he thought she had friendly intent?
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 5:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Oh wait, "new tech" as in "the new person we hired". That's sexist.
I was thinking in the "web 2.0 isn't as attractive as I was lead to believe" sense.
posted by ymgve at 5:55 PM on March 20, 2013
I was thinking in the "web 2.0 isn't as attractive as I was lead to believe" sense.
posted by ymgve at 5:55 PM on March 20, 2013
Not doing so is kind of a dick move.
Watch yourself!
posted by Jimbob at 5:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Watch yourself!
posted by Jimbob at 5:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Nothing I say here represents my employer's views on anything ever.
posted by klangklangston at 5:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 5:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I sat through a presentation at a big tech company once about a product that was being designed specifically to sell to a female 18-30 demographic. Every slide was of a scantily clad woman "enjoying" this technology luridly (it was a PC speaker; I know, so sexy). I sat there in this room full of people, jaw agape, wondering when someone was going to pull the plug Michelle Shocked-style on the guy. Nobody did. No repercussions. In hindsight, I was guilty of inaction on the matter, but I was probably the most junior employee in the room. I've never seen anything so overtly sexist in a corporate setting than in that meeting that day.
But this? This thing is bullshit. This is somebody who thinks for hours about what the next awesome thing they are going to Tweet will be to underline to themselves how smart and cool and great they are. This is not sexism on display. This is Twitter, misused again.
Just like many others have said in this thread, if this was an example of men creating an unhealthy professional environment for women, which I doubt but I wasn't there, then figure out a different way of fixing this that doesn't involve destroying their life via your bullshit viral social networking technologies.
God we've lost our way.
posted by mcstayinskool at 5:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
But this? This thing is bullshit. This is somebody who thinks for hours about what the next awesome thing they are going to Tweet will be to underline to themselves how smart and cool and great they are. This is not sexism on display. This is Twitter, misused again.
Just like many others have said in this thread, if this was an example of men creating an unhealthy professional environment for women, which I doubt but I wasn't there, then figure out a different way of fixing this that doesn't involve destroying their life via your bullshit viral social networking technologies.
God we've lost our way.
posted by mcstayinskool at 5:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
So does SendGrid actually do real spamming or are they just the go-to people when for example Gamefly sends me their monthly newsletter because I forgot to remove a checkmark?
Their client list appears to contain some reasonably legit companies. One persons targeted marketing campaign is another persons spam, I guess.
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on March 20, 2013
Their client list appears to contain some reasonably legit companies. One persons targeted marketing campaign is another persons spam, I guess.
posted by Artw at 6:00 PM on March 20, 2013
I was hoping this story would show up here, because every other website has treated it like shit. Lots of guys saying, "what's the big deal??" and complaining about how she handled it instead of, you know, the fact it happened. I wanted to hear some opinions that weren't, "How dare she utilize the exact thing she was supposed to in order to report Code of Conduct infractions!"
I was saddened to see it's being treated the exact same way here. Yeah, her blog post was somewhat dramatic. Can you blame her, after having to deal with the same shit earlier in the day? This wasn't a high school class. It was supposed to be a convention for professionals. If you can't stop making jokes about your dick for nine days while you're at the con, there's something wrong with you, not the person who reports you.
Their comments weren't explicitly sexist, but they contributed to an atmosphere that is hostile to women, so they ended up becoming sexist. That's what a lot of you, and reddit, and HN seem to be missing. Just because they didn't call her a bitch doesn't mean their comments weren't hostile.
posted by ceol at 6:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
I was saddened to see it's being treated the exact same way here. Yeah, her blog post was somewhat dramatic. Can you blame her, after having to deal with the same shit earlier in the day? This wasn't a high school class. It was supposed to be a convention for professionals. If you can't stop making jokes about your dick for nine days while you're at the con, there's something wrong with you, not the person who reports you.
Their comments weren't explicitly sexist, but they contributed to an atmosphere that is hostile to women, so they ended up becoming sexist. That's what a lot of you, and reddit, and HN seem to be missing. Just because they didn't call her a bitch doesn't mean their comments weren't hostile.
posted by ceol at 6:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [24 favorites]
Danila said: I see sexist language being thrown at her (here at Metafilter, and much worse elsewhere). I see the standard diatribes against political correctness and oversensitive women ruining it for all women because of how men will react. These appear in every single thread, every single thread, on sexism especially with regard to these conferences.
But see, here's the thing; events like this one DO make it harder to report real cases of not only sexism, but harassment and assault. Not because of "how men will react", but because it is crying wolf, when there is no wolf at the door. Do it enough, and the wolves get ignored.
posted by dejah420 at 6:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
But see, here's the thing; events like this one DO make it harder to report real cases of not only sexism, but harassment and assault. Not because of "how men will react", but because it is crying wolf, when there is no wolf at the door. Do it enough, and the wolves get ignored.
posted by dejah420 at 6:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
I'd be very interested to read a statement from the employer who fired the attendee, were such a statement forthcoming. I suspect that it would be necessarily short on detail, but might still provide an element of context beyond pure heresay. I'm not big on public shaming, but I'm also uneasy about putting the obligation on her to tell them to show a little class in public. But I'm also uneasy about what a low bar we seem to be setting for what acceptable public behavior is (where "unacceptable" results in real punishments). But I'm also uneasy about what a low bar for adult behavior we seem ready to accept.
So, obviously, this whole thing makes me uneasy.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 6:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
So, obviously, this whole thing makes me uneasy.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 6:03 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
If you can't stop making jokes about your dick for nine days while you're at the con, there's something wrong with you, not the person who reports you.
And if the person who reports you for making a dick joke to your friend is happy to broadcast dick jokes on her twitter account, what then?
posted by leopard at 6:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
And if the person who reports you for making a dick joke to your friend is happy to broadcast dick jokes on her twitter account, what then?
posted by leopard at 6:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
"I wanted to hear some opinions that weren't, "How dare she utilize the exact thing she was supposed to in order to report Code of Conduct infractions!""
I have pretty much zero problem with her reporting the guys. I do think that banning them from the conference is a mistake, and I also think that tweeting their picture is a mistake. I also think that tweeting the conference in public, instead of D@ was a mistake. I don't know what the guys said — and neither do you — so it makes more sense for me to comment on the parts that I do know.
posted by klangklangston at 6:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I have pretty much zero problem with her reporting the guys. I do think that banning them from the conference is a mistake, and I also think that tweeting their picture is a mistake. I also think that tweeting the conference in public, instead of D@ was a mistake. I don't know what the guys said — and neither do you — so it makes more sense for me to comment on the parts that I do know.
posted by klangklangston at 6:06 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
And if the person who reports you for making a dick joke to your friend is happy to broadcast dick jokes on her twitter account
If you think those are comparable and it's hypocritical, my answer is you should attend the talk on lexical scoping, because you seem to lack any concept of context.
posted by yerfatma at 6:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
If you think those are comparable and it's hypocritical, my answer is you should attend the talk on lexical scoping, because you seem to lack any concept of context.
posted by yerfatma at 6:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
But you weren't there, right? And trying to parse whether that joke was OK or not would kind of require you to be there, unless you're going to hold to a zero tolerance policy. Which is fine if you want to, but I think that's a pretty dumb position to hold.
No, I wasn't there. I just...believe her. I'm actually allowed to do that, to believe a woman when she gives an account of sexism if the account seems highly plausible which it does, to me. The people who don't believe her are also using sexist and trite language in their dismissals, which just makes me believe her more. And yeah, I actually don't think prolonged joking is appropriate in that context, and jokes about sex that go "on and on" (again, I believe her when she says it was continuous rather than a one-off) in the middle of a conference presentation are way over the line. Over the line enough that she had a right to complain publicly about it, which is what she did.
This is somebody who thinks for hours about what the next awesome thing they are going to Tweet will be to underline to themselves how smart and cool and great they are. This is not sexism on display.
The evidence is clear, it is abundantly clear, that accusing men of doing something sexist does not make you appear smart or cool or great. This is not the road to success. No woman would think it is because it always ends up this exact same way. It sets you up for a lot of harassment and a black mark for not being a good girl who goes along to get along.
because it is crying wolf
Dejah, I think that would mean no one would believe Adria again. But that's not what you said, and a lot of other people echoed what you said, which is that men won't listen to women when they legitimately complain because of what some other woman did. If people find this particular woman dishonest or..sociopathic (I can't really believe this has been said multiple times), that's one thing. But I absolutely hate the threat that we could have been treated like human beings, but that one chick messed it up for all of us. No, she is not responsible if men in the future behave badly.
What makes it harder for women to report is being harassed and silenced and the terrible consequences they incur by speaking out. I mean, like what is happening to Adria now if a specific example is needed.
posted by Danila at 6:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
No, I wasn't there. I just...believe her. I'm actually allowed to do that, to believe a woman when she gives an account of sexism if the account seems highly plausible which it does, to me. The people who don't believe her are also using sexist and trite language in their dismissals, which just makes me believe her more. And yeah, I actually don't think prolonged joking is appropriate in that context, and jokes about sex that go "on and on" (again, I believe her when she says it was continuous rather than a one-off) in the middle of a conference presentation are way over the line. Over the line enough that she had a right to complain publicly about it, which is what she did.
This is somebody who thinks for hours about what the next awesome thing they are going to Tweet will be to underline to themselves how smart and cool and great they are. This is not sexism on display.
The evidence is clear, it is abundantly clear, that accusing men of doing something sexist does not make you appear smart or cool or great. This is not the road to success. No woman would think it is because it always ends up this exact same way. It sets you up for a lot of harassment and a black mark for not being a good girl who goes along to get along.
because it is crying wolf
Dejah, I think that would mean no one would believe Adria again. But that's not what you said, and a lot of other people echoed what you said, which is that men won't listen to women when they legitimately complain because of what some other woman did. If people find this particular woman dishonest or..sociopathic (I can't really believe this has been said multiple times), that's one thing. But I absolutely hate the threat that we could have been treated like human beings, but that one chick messed it up for all of us. No, she is not responsible if men in the future behave badly.
What makes it harder for women to report is being harassed and silenced and the terrible consequences they incur by speaking out. I mean, like what is happening to Adria now if a specific example is needed.
posted by Danila at 6:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [29 favorites]
Ceol, perhaps I'm just inured, but how is one guy saying to a second guy, about a third guy, "I'd fork his repo." Creating a hostile environment to women? That's the part of this I really don't get.
posted by dejah420 at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by dejah420 at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
And if the person who reports you for making a dick joke to your friend is happy to broadcast dick jokes on her twitter account, what then?
Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
posted by fatbird at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
posted by fatbird at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
yoink - what? i said (in the very same post, even) that my stance on that has nothing to do with gender
posted by rap and country at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rap and country at 6:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The people who don't believe her are also using sexist and trite language in their dismissals, which just makes me believe her more.
That is not a valid method to assess the veracity of a claim.
posted by amorphatist at 6:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
That is not a valid method to assess the veracity of a claim.
posted by amorphatist at 6:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I was saddened to see it's being treated the exact same way here.
PShe did a semi-shitty thing with super shitty repercussions. Some of the repercussions have fallen upon her, in the form of a bug disgusting ball of Internet idiots, on the other hand her bullshit got some guy fired. I don't think she's going to be getting unanimous applause anywhere. TBH I think whatever applause she does get is undeserved. She doesn't deserve a hate campaign, but she's a legitimately shitty person.
posted by Artw at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
PShe did a semi-shitty thing with super shitty repercussions. Some of the repercussions have fallen upon her, in the form of a bug disgusting ball of Internet idiots, on the other hand her bullshit got some guy fired. I don't think she's going to be getting unanimous applause anywhere. TBH I think whatever applause she does get is undeserved. She doesn't deserve a hate campaign, but she's a legitimately shitty person.
posted by Artw at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
mcstayinskool: "God we've lost our way."
You seem to have the impression that we have had our way to begin with.
posted by symbioid at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013
You seem to have the impression that we have had our way to begin with.
posted by symbioid at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013
She compares herself to Joan of Arc. That's kinda weird.
posted by homunculus at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
posted by homunculus at 6:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [18 favorites]
We use SendGrid for things like password resets, messages from other users, etc. It is just a highly reliable way to send email. It's a neutral tool.
posted by michaelh at 6:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by michaelh at 6:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
If you can't stop making jokes about your dick for nine days while you're at the con, there's something wrong with you, not the person who reports you.
What if the person who reports you also punches you in the face?
Just wondering where you draw the line at an unjust response (and if think her tweeting response was unjust), and whether it then determines where the post-game analysis ought to be meandering to.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:14 PM on March 20, 2013
What if the person who reports you also punches you in the face?
Just wondering where you draw the line at an unjust response (and if think her tweeting response was unjust), and whether it then determines where the post-game analysis ought to be meandering to.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:14 PM on March 20, 2013
Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
It isn't quite as black and white as that. Both contexts involve public speech, for instance, so discussion of what is acceptable in that shared context should be fair.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:15 PM on March 20, 2013
It isn't quite as black and white as that. Both contexts involve public speech, for instance, so discussion of what is acceptable in that shared context should be fair.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:15 PM on March 20, 2013
So, this is going to go exactly like it always goes, right? The woman is going to be accused of ruining a good man's life, and her past history is going to be combed through looking for examples of publicly flirtatious behavior, iffy career choices and possible hypocrisies. Same thing happened with Rebecca Watson, same thing happend with Noirin Shirley. All this has happened before, all this will happen again.
Whether this particular callout was justified is proportionate is kind of irrelevant: for all the helpful advice being offered about what she should have done, there is nothing she could have done, except for hunkering down and keeping quiet, that wouldn't have ended with people feeling justified in calling her a bitch and a liar, and declaring open season on her. Rebecca Watson didn't name names. Noirin Shirley was sexually assaulted. The immune response was pretty much the same...
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [36 favorites]
Whether this particular callout was justified is proportionate is kind of irrelevant: for all the helpful advice being offered about what she should have done, there is nothing she could have done, except for hunkering down and keeping quiet, that wouldn't have ended with people feeling justified in calling her a bitch and a liar, and declaring open season on her. Rebecca Watson didn't name names. Noirin Shirley was sexually assaulted. The immune response was pretty much the same...
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [36 favorites]
Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
Well what was the reason she complained about the joke? Because she found it offensive? This appears unlikely on the face of it, given that she has previously demonstrated she is not actually offended by dick jokes. Because it created a hostile environment? How was she not creating a hostile environment on Twitter? Is there some reason she feels Twitter is allowed to be a hostile environment?
posted by Jimbob at 6:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Well what was the reason she complained about the joke? Because she found it offensive? This appears unlikely on the face of it, given that she has previously demonstrated she is not actually offended by dick jokes. Because it created a hostile environment? How was she not creating a hostile environment on Twitter? Is there some reason she feels Twitter is allowed to be a hostile environment?
posted by Jimbob at 6:19 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Danila, if she had reported them, I'd be behind her. If she had tweeted that some jerks were being jerks, I'd be behind her.
Where she lost me was publicly publishing this guy's photograph and when she had to make a media splash about it, even though she got what she wanted; which was having the guy removed from a conference even though he said NOTHING to her, and she didn't have the common courtesy to tell him that she didn't understand forking repo jokes and didn't think they were appropriate.
She overreacted. She publicly shamed someone she had no right to shame, even though she did NOTHING about the guy who made vagina jokes TO HER, so she took out her anger on some random geek. She was directly responsible for putting that man and his family at risk so that she could garner more attention, and that's why this is infuriating to women who really do fight sexism every single day of their careers. Bullshit media call outs like this are a knife in the back of real feminists.
posted by dejah420 at 6:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [42 favorites]
Where she lost me was publicly publishing this guy's photograph and when she had to make a media splash about it, even though she got what she wanted; which was having the guy removed from a conference even though he said NOTHING to her, and she didn't have the common courtesy to tell him that she didn't understand forking repo jokes and didn't think they were appropriate.
She overreacted. She publicly shamed someone she had no right to shame, even though she did NOTHING about the guy who made vagina jokes TO HER, so she took out her anger on some random geek. She was directly responsible for putting that man and his family at risk so that she could garner more attention, and that's why this is infuriating to women who really do fight sexism every single day of their careers. Bullshit media call outs like this are a knife in the back of real feminists.
posted by dejah420 at 6:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [42 favorites]
klangklangston: I have pretty much zero problem with her reporting the guys. I do think that banning them from the conference is a mistake, and I also think that tweeting their picture is a mistake. I also think that tweeting the conference in public, instead of D@ was a mistake. I don't know what the guys said — and neither do you — so it makes more sense for me to comment on the parts that I do know.
For starters, they weren't banned. They were reprimanded. I'm also not about to dismiss her just because she did it in a way you happen to not condone.
dejah420: Ceol, perhaps I'm just inured, but how is one guy saying to a second guy, about a third guy, "I'd fork his repo." Creating a hostile environment to women? That's the part of this I really don't get.
They were speaking to her moments before they started those jokes, and it wasn't just "I'd fork his repo." It was multiple jokes equating dongles to penises. Couple this with the environment of constant objectification and belittlement in the tech industry women already have to face, and you get some very casual sexism.
posted by ceol at 6:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
For starters, they weren't banned. They were reprimanded. I'm also not about to dismiss her just because she did it in a way you happen to not condone.
dejah420: Ceol, perhaps I'm just inured, but how is one guy saying to a second guy, about a third guy, "I'd fork his repo." Creating a hostile environment to women? That's the part of this I really don't get.
They were speaking to her moments before they started those jokes, and it wasn't just "I'd fork his repo." It was multiple jokes equating dongles to penises. Couple this with the environment of constant objectification and belittlement in the tech industry women already have to face, and you get some very casual sexism.
posted by ceol at 6:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Casual sexism still doesn't justify plastering their photos online.
posted by ymgve at 6:25 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by ymgve at 6:25 PM on March 20, 2013
There is a deeper narrative here that few have touched upon, not just here on Metafilter, that beyond the accusations of sexism, there is the technological issue of policing your behavior or having it policed for you, often in ways beyond any legal recourse, given the increasing impotence of government now ceding its traditional role to employers, private entities that now have more control over your public and private life than ever before. The walls have ears, but it isn't the government that is the only one listening in. Beyond the grey areas outlined by this seeming overreaction, the multiplier effects are pretty terrifying, when anyone can eavesdrop and record you or your actions in or out of context, to be rebroadcast without your consent. We are in an Age of Google Goggles, indeed.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
Would you like to compare the two contexts and explain why one is perfectly acceptable while the other is a firing offense?
On her blog she reports a developer telling her how he made a joke about "looking under a [table] skirt" and how it was "bare just the way he liked it" (this part said after a woman gave him a look). Now that is stupid, offensive, fostering a hostile environment, ridiculously clingy to male privilege.
But the "forking the repo" and dongle jokes? You can tell this doesn't stand up on its own because we have to drag in fifty million analogies to make it some sort of crime. A little girl will never code because of the dongle joke. It was like Lord of the Flies. She's Rebecca Watson now. Guess whose side I was on during that debacle? But oh no, "there's nothing she could have done."
posted by leopard at 6:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Would you like to compare the two contexts and explain why one is perfectly acceptable while the other is a firing offense?
On her blog she reports a developer telling her how he made a joke about "looking under a [table] skirt" and how it was "bare just the way he liked it" (this part said after a woman gave him a look). Now that is stupid, offensive, fostering a hostile environment, ridiculously clingy to male privilege.
But the "forking the repo" and dongle jokes? You can tell this doesn't stand up on its own because we have to drag in fifty million analogies to make it some sort of crime. A little girl will never code because of the dongle joke. It was like Lord of the Flies. She's Rebecca Watson now. Guess whose side I was on during that debacle? But oh no, "there's nothing she could have done."
posted by leopard at 6:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
But the "forking the repo" and dongle jokes? You can tell this doesn't stand up on its own
Lol.
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Lol.
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I, like others, have been waiting for a post about this on mefi in order to read some less knee-jerk discussion. It does seem like a fairly shitty situation all around, given any actual reality from all of the possible combinations of:
People were being egregiously out of line / people were being annoying / otherwise nice people were naively rude / people were misunderstood.
+
Someone called them out on it in the most effective way available / someone accidentally produced an overreaction / someone knowingly called in the personal army / unusually powerful person deliberately bullied people.
The thing is, I can't see any combination there which is actually okay, it's all just massively regrettable. However this particular instance played out, I feel like that's the real problem.
posted by lucidium at 6:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
People were being egregiously out of line / people were being annoying / otherwise nice people were naively rude / people were misunderstood.
+
Someone called them out on it in the most effective way available / someone accidentally produced an overreaction / someone knowingly called in the personal army / unusually powerful person deliberately bullied people.
The thing is, I can't see any combination there which is actually okay, it's all just massively regrettable. However this particular instance played out, I feel like that's the real problem.
posted by lucidium at 6:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
A little girl will never code because of the dongle joke. It was like Lord of the Flies. She's Rebecca Watson now.
Ahem, that was tweets ago. It's Joan of Arc now.
posted by amorphatist at 6:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
Ahem, that was tweets ago. It's Joan of Arc now.
posted by amorphatist at 6:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
"Whether this particular callout was justified is proportionate is kind of irrelevant: for all the helpful advice being offered about what she should have done, there is nothing she could have done, except for hunkering down and keeping quiet, that wouldn't have ended with people feeling justified in calling her a bitch and a liar, and declaring open season on her. Rebecca Watson didn't name names. Noirin Shirley was sexually assaulted. The immune response was pretty much the same..."
Some people may have felt justified in that, sure. But surely fewer, right? And I haven't seen a single comment here calling her a bitch.
I realize this is heated, but not every instance of someone responding to feeling offended is justified, and we can talk about this specific incident in a rational matter.
"For starters, they weren't banned. They were reprimanded. I'm also not about to dismiss her just because she did it in a way you happen to not condone."
Cool, thanks. I misunderstood. And I'm not dismissing her — I'm pointing out that this is currently something that we don't have a lot of information on, and simply overlaying existing biases onto the situation instead of thinking critically about it is only going to lead to a clash of biases.
"They were speaking to her moments before they started those jokes, and it wasn't just "I'd fork his repo." It was multiple jokes equating dongles to penises. Couple this with the environment of constant objectification and belittlement in the tech industry women already have to face, and you get some very casual sexism."
You don't know that. When you argue from premises of dubious truth value, especially in the service of a broader narrative, you get away from what actually happened and proceed into what you think happened and how that just lines up with everything you've already thought.
posted by klangklangston at 6:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
Some people may have felt justified in that, sure. But surely fewer, right? And I haven't seen a single comment here calling her a bitch.
I realize this is heated, but not every instance of someone responding to feeling offended is justified, and we can talk about this specific incident in a rational matter.
"For starters, they weren't banned. They were reprimanded. I'm also not about to dismiss her just because she did it in a way you happen to not condone."
Cool, thanks. I misunderstood. And I'm not dismissing her — I'm pointing out that this is currently something that we don't have a lot of information on, and simply overlaying existing biases onto the situation instead of thinking critically about it is only going to lead to a clash of biases.
"They were speaking to her moments before they started those jokes, and it wasn't just "I'd fork his repo." It was multiple jokes equating dongles to penises. Couple this with the environment of constant objectification and belittlement in the tech industry women already have to face, and you get some very casual sexism."
You don't know that. When you argue from premises of dubious truth value, especially in the service of a broader narrative, you get away from what actually happened and proceed into what you think happened and how that just lines up with everything you've already thought.
posted by klangklangston at 6:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
There was also this: How To Get Banned From PyCon.
"Double underscore names as a language element suck!"
"Rails rocks!"
"Why can't a scripting language use more than one core?"
posted by JHarris at 6:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
"Double underscore names as a language element suck!"
"Rails rocks!"
"Why can't a scripting language use more than one core?"
posted by JHarris at 6:35 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
. . . a step towards securing the future of programming for women.
she has, in one story, embodied (and in her defense of it, perpetuated) a myriad of unfair stereotypical impressions of women in the workplace--that they are overly sensitive, humorless, gossipy, whiny, and can't mind their own business. i'm guessing many women would appreciate it if she didn't do them any more favors.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 6:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
she has, in one story, embodied (and in her defense of it, perpetuated) a myriad of unfair stereotypical impressions of women in the workplace--that they are overly sensitive, humorless, gossipy, whiny, and can't mind their own business. i'm guessing many women would appreciate it if she didn't do them any more favors.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 6:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I think sex jokes in a professional environment do create a hostile environment. Legally, it's sexual harassment to make pervasive "sexual or sex-based jokes" in the workplace. Not saying this was a legal issue at all. Just bringing that up because I don't agree with the assumption that of course it was overreacting because it was just jokes.
I don't find it hard to imagine sitting at a conference while several men are cracking sex joke after sex joke and I'm one of few women. It would really suck. This is not a social situation with friends, it's something they were all attending for their jobs. She could have got up and walked away or changed seats. She could have confronted them and risked making a scene. I understand why she didn't do either of those things. What she did do was actually effective and it's what the conference organizers encouraged people to do precisely because they don't want women to feel like a tech conference is a hostile environment.
she has, in one story, embodied (and in her defense of it, perpetuated) a myriad of unfair stereotypical impressions of women in the workplace--that they are overly sensitive, humorless, gossipy, whiny, and can't mind their own business. i'm guessing many women would appreciate it if she didn't do them any more favors.
The problem of stereotyping is in the people who use them to justify injustice and inequality. It is not in the people who "embody" stereotypes by being their individual human selves. She doesn't represent all women. She doesn't make women look bad. If women look worse to you (general you) now because of what this one woman did, you are the problem. But I'm repeating myself so I'll bow out of this.
posted by Danila at 6:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
I don't find it hard to imagine sitting at a conference while several men are cracking sex joke after sex joke and I'm one of few women. It would really suck. This is not a social situation with friends, it's something they were all attending for their jobs. She could have got up and walked away or changed seats. She could have confronted them and risked making a scene. I understand why she didn't do either of those things. What she did do was actually effective and it's what the conference organizers encouraged people to do precisely because they don't want women to feel like a tech conference is a hostile environment.
she has, in one story, embodied (and in her defense of it, perpetuated) a myriad of unfair stereotypical impressions of women in the workplace--that they are overly sensitive, humorless, gossipy, whiny, and can't mind their own business. i'm guessing many women would appreciate it if she didn't do them any more favors.
The problem of stereotyping is in the people who use them to justify injustice and inequality. It is not in the people who "embody" stereotypes by being their individual human selves. She doesn't represent all women. She doesn't make women look bad. If women look worse to you (general you) now because of what this one woman did, you are the problem. But I'm repeating myself so I'll bow out of this.
posted by Danila at 6:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
At the end of the day, the moral for me on both sides is, "Don't be 22". Both sides are too pleased with themselves and too self-righteous, but it sucks if the end result of this discussion is not that we all think before assuming how we like to act is how we should.
/The More You Know self-righteous bastard
posted by yerfatma at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
/The More You Know self-righteous bastard
posted by yerfatma at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I would totally trade dongle jokes with a coworker at a conference. Sorry everyone, I guess I am a bad feminist and unemployable. I don't even consider shitty pubs on fork and dongle inherently sexist, I really am a bad person.
I'd try and keep it down if people were listening to a speaker though, Jesus.
posted by Artw at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'd try and keep it down if people were listening to a speaker though, Jesus.
posted by Artw at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
klangklangston: You don't know that. When you argue from premises of dubious truth value, especially in the service of a broader narrative, you get away from what actually happened and proceed into what you think happened and how that just lines up with everything you've already thought.
This entire situation involves taking someone's word for it, so I think that's a poor argument to make. If you want to argue from what is certain, then here is what happened:
- A woman reported two men for breaking PyCon's Code of Conduct by sending a tweet to PyCon with their photograph.
- The two men were reprimanded by PyCon organizers.
Seems like a non-story, right? It's actually pretty great. PyCon successfully enforced their Code of Conduct by listening to a con-goer, no one was banned or removed from the con, and two guys learn a lesson about saying something offensive in public. And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything. It happens all the time.
So then, what's the problem?
posted by ceol at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
This entire situation involves taking someone's word for it, so I think that's a poor argument to make. If you want to argue from what is certain, then here is what happened:
- A woman reported two men for breaking PyCon's Code of Conduct by sending a tweet to PyCon with their photograph.
- The two men were reprimanded by PyCon organizers.
Seems like a non-story, right? It's actually pretty great. PyCon successfully enforced their Code of Conduct by listening to a con-goer, no one was banned or removed from the con, and two guys learn a lesson about saying something offensive in public. And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything. It happens all the time.
So then, what's the problem?
posted by ceol at 6:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
At the end of the day, the moral for me on both sides is, "Don't be 22".
At last, an explanation for Forever 21
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
At last, an explanation for Forever 21
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything. It happens all the time.
You're wrong. It's absolutely out of line.
posted by ymgve at 6:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
You're wrong. It's absolutely out of line.
posted by ymgve at 6:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything. It happens all the time.
So then, what's the problem?
That is a problem, and many would argue yes, that was out of line.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:43 PM on March 20, 2013
So then, what's the problem?
That is a problem, and many would argue yes, that was out of line.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:43 PM on March 20, 2013
Apparently someone's making death threats over this. The original comment was deleted, but here's the response.
posted by desjardins at 6:44 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by desjardins at 6:44 PM on March 20, 2013
They were speaking to her moments before they started those jokes, and it wasn't just "I'd fork his repo." It was multiple jokes equating dongles to penises. Couple this with the environment of constant objectification and belittlement in the tech industry women already have to face, and you get some very casual sexism.
But... those jokes sounded like they were objectifying other men, not women.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:44 PM on March 20, 2013
But... those jokes sounded like they were objectifying other men, not women.
posted by Apocryphon at 6:44 PM on March 20, 2013
And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything.
The only reason for her to publically tweet their photo was to attempt to bring down the Hammer Of Internet Justice upon them.
posted by Jimbob at 6:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
The only reason for her to publically tweet their photo was to attempt to bring down the Hammer Of Internet Justice upon them.
posted by Jimbob at 6:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
The problem, ceol, is that the picture wasn't sent to the py people, it was sent to the web. In her blog, she states that, and says she stood up and pointed them out to the conference people. She wasn't worried about making a scene, or interrupting the speaker, she wanted an audience to do it.
posted by dejah420 at 6:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by dejah420 at 6:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Would you like to compare the two contexts and explain why one is perfectly acceptable while the other is a firing offense?
One was done on twitter, where readers have to seek her out and who's nature permits her to be occasionally racy. The other was done in a crowded convention hall in earshot of a tech pundit heavyweight who was having a Bad Day.
It was not her fault she was having a Bad Day. It was not her fault she over-reacted. She does not have the slightest bit of responsibility to shut up and take it, even if it was largely inoffensive to most listeners. She had every right to gripe, and every right to document what had ticked her off with a camera - this was a public venue, and they were acting inappropriately in public.
The dude who got fired? He had a responsibility to use civil language in public, in a professional venue, when his company's name is on that plastic card hanging from the lanyard around his neck. He didn't. He made dirty jokes when he wasn't sure of who was listening in - this is a public venue where she was obligated to be for her job.
One guy where I worked, in a cubicle environment, cracked a loud joke about "feminazis" - the director of customer service was walking by. Guess who wasn't there monday? Another guy at another gig had a naked lady wallpaper on his PDA, and one of the customer's project managers saw it. Guess who wasn't allowed back on site the next day?
This guy made a dirty joke when someone with clout heard it. She didn't make him tell a dirty joke. He did that all by himself. He should be grown-up enough to know that it's generally not OK to do that in crowded convention halls with a mixed and unknown audience around him.
A twitter feed is not the same thing as a crowded room full of professionals on assignment.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
One was done on twitter, where readers have to seek her out and who's nature permits her to be occasionally racy. The other was done in a crowded convention hall in earshot of a tech pundit heavyweight who was having a Bad Day.
It was not her fault she was having a Bad Day. It was not her fault she over-reacted. She does not have the slightest bit of responsibility to shut up and take it, even if it was largely inoffensive to most listeners. She had every right to gripe, and every right to document what had ticked her off with a camera - this was a public venue, and they were acting inappropriately in public.
The dude who got fired? He had a responsibility to use civil language in public, in a professional venue, when his company's name is on that plastic card hanging from the lanyard around his neck. He didn't. He made dirty jokes when he wasn't sure of who was listening in - this is a public venue where she was obligated to be for her job.
One guy where I worked, in a cubicle environment, cracked a loud joke about "feminazis" - the director of customer service was walking by. Guess who wasn't there monday? Another guy at another gig had a naked lady wallpaper on his PDA, and one of the customer's project managers saw it. Guess who wasn't allowed back on site the next day?
This guy made a dirty joke when someone with clout heard it. She didn't make him tell a dirty joke. He did that all by himself. He should be grown-up enough to know that it's generally not OK to do that in crowded convention halls with a mixed and unknown audience around him.
A twitter feed is not the same thing as a crowded room full of professionals on assignment.
posted by Slap*Happy at 6:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
A quick search shows three or four instances of the phrase "not cool" on this thread. Interestingly, Adria Richards' post includes this:
What has to change is that everyone must take personal accountability and speak up when they hear something that isn’t ok. It takes three words to make a difference:
“That’s not cool.”
I can't help feeling that the whole thing would have gone better if she'd tried that on the people making sexual innuendos rather than going straight to the conference officials. It's quite possible they would have just shut up or at least resorted to the whispers they should have been using in the first place.
She says:
I decided to do things differently this time and didn’t say anything to them directly. I was a guest in the Python community and as such, I wanted to give PyCon the opportunity to address this.
I'm not sure that worked out so well. I'm an American citizen, but I might ring my upstairs neighbor's doorbell and ask them to turn down the stereo before calling the cops. You can make that one small effort before calling in the heavies.
I certainly don't blame her for the firing, which seems like the worst part of this fiasco -- it reminds me of elementary school kids being suspended for carrying subscription medication or a transparent dayglo watergun because of some "no-tolerance" policy probably motivated by fear of lawsuits. But saying "that's not cool" might have headed off the whole situation.
I also wonder if we'll get better at discussing this sort of thing as time goes by, without so much misunderstanding and talking past each other, or if it takes more than a text-only format for that to happen.
posted by uosuaq at 6:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
What has to change is that everyone must take personal accountability and speak up when they hear something that isn’t ok. It takes three words to make a difference:
“That’s not cool.”
I can't help feeling that the whole thing would have gone better if she'd tried that on the people making sexual innuendos rather than going straight to the conference officials. It's quite possible they would have just shut up or at least resorted to the whispers they should have been using in the first place.
She says:
I decided to do things differently this time and didn’t say anything to them directly. I was a guest in the Python community and as such, I wanted to give PyCon the opportunity to address this.
I'm not sure that worked out so well. I'm an American citizen, but I might ring my upstairs neighbor's doorbell and ask them to turn down the stereo before calling the cops. You can make that one small effort before calling in the heavies.
I certainly don't blame her for the firing, which seems like the worst part of this fiasco -- it reminds me of elementary school kids being suspended for carrying subscription medication or a transparent dayglo watergun because of some "no-tolerance" policy probably motivated by fear of lawsuits. But saying "that's not cool" might have headed off the whole situation.
I also wonder if we'll get better at discussing this sort of thing as time goes by, without so much misunderstanding and talking past each other, or if it takes more than a text-only format for that to happen.
posted by uosuaq at 6:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
To the extent that expressions in both forums are public speech, people should be allowed to be offended by her speech, if they find it demeaning, or even if they find it inappropriate. We (we as a society, that is) apply the same standards to others elsewhere — why do we give her a free pass?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:51 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 6:51 PM on March 20, 2013
The dude who got fired? He had a responsibility to use civil language in public, in a professional venue, when his company's name is on that plastic card hanging from the lanyard around his neck.
I couldn't help but notice from the picture that the company's name wasn't just hanging on a lanyard, his tshirt is clear the tshirt for that company. So yeah, he was pretty clearly representing his company at this conference, probably actively recruiting for them at the conference. It's not super surprising that his employer is pissed at him getting called out for saying stupid shit.
posted by ch1x0r at 6:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I couldn't help but notice from the picture that the company's name wasn't just hanging on a lanyard, his tshirt is clear the tshirt for that company. So yeah, he was pretty clearly representing his company at this conference, probably actively recruiting for them at the conference. It's not super surprising that his employer is pissed at him getting called out for saying stupid shit.
posted by ch1x0r at 6:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Guess who wasn't there monday? Guess who wasn't allowed back on site the next day?
And you think that's okay? This is the culture you should be more worried about than dongle jokes. One wrong move and you're on the fucking street. But that's okay, because someone got offended.
posted by Jimbob at 6:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
And you think that's okay? This is the culture you should be more worried about than dongle jokes. One wrong move and you're on the fucking street. But that's okay, because someone got offended.
posted by Jimbob at 6:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
One guy where I worked, in a cubicle environment, cracked a loud joke about "feminazis" - the director of customer service was walking by. Guess who wasn't there monday? Another guy at another gig had a naked lady wallpaper on his PDA, and one of the customer's project managers saw it. Guess who wasn't allowed back on site the next day?
So the moral is, don't piss off people with clout. What an inspiring message of social justice for the unempowered and downtrodden.
He had a responsibility to use civil language in public, in a professional venue, when his company's name is on that plastic card hanging from the lanyard around his neck.
Adria Richards' Twitter account mentions her company name. She uses it to promote her employer. Oh, but I guess no one with clout who was having a bad day complained. That's the real moral offense here, right? Because we've established that dongle jokes aren't intrinsically awful or anything.
posted by leopard at 6:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
So the moral is, don't piss off people with clout. What an inspiring message of social justice for the unempowered and downtrodden.
He had a responsibility to use civil language in public, in a professional venue, when his company's name is on that plastic card hanging from the lanyard around his neck.
Adria Richards' Twitter account mentions her company name. She uses it to promote her employer. Oh, but I guess no one with clout who was having a bad day complained. That's the real moral offense here, right? Because we've established that dongle jokes aren't intrinsically awful or anything.
posted by leopard at 6:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
Would you like to compare the two contexts and explain why one is perfectly acceptable while the other is a firing offense?
No, because Richards didn't fire the guy, nor did she intend the guy to get fired, nor did she cheer when he was... assuming he was, because so far all we have is an anonymous HN account claiming to be him.
But, to separate the contexts: One is a broadcast channel to which people deliberately subscribe, in a medium with extremely broad standards for public behaviour; the other is a conference where you represent your employer (who is sponsoring the event), and present yourself as a professional within the ambit of the conference.
Like peas in a pod, they are.
posted by fatbird at 6:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
No, because Richards didn't fire the guy, nor did she intend the guy to get fired, nor did she cheer when he was... assuming he was, because so far all we have is an anonymous HN account claiming to be him.
But, to separate the contexts: One is a broadcast channel to which people deliberately subscribe, in a medium with extremely broad standards for public behaviour; the other is a conference where you represent your employer (who is sponsoring the event), and present yourself as a professional within the ambit of the conference.
Like peas in a pod, they are.
posted by fatbird at 6:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
I wonder if she has kill decals below the nameplate on her office door, and what the design for them is.
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:58 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by George_Spiggott at 6:58 PM on March 20, 2013
dejah420: The problem, ceol, is that the picture wasn't sent to the py people, it was sent to the web. In her blog, she states that, and says she stood up and pointed them out to the conference people. She wasn't worried about making a scene, or interrupting the speaker, she wanted an audience to do it.
It was sent to her twitter feed, and then she immediately asked PyCon to do something about it. If she really wanted the audience to do something, she would have stood up and called them out to the rest of the audience. It doesn't make sense to post it on twitter if that was her true goal.
It seems you're reading your own motive into her actions. Nothing about what she did implied she wanted vigilante justice. Just the opposite, in fact: She asked PyCon, the organizers and enforcers, to do something about it.
I really don't like Twitter and Tumblr's witch-hunting culture, but this certainly doesn't qualify as such. They were in public, they were wearing their company's logo, they were very much subject to being photographed.
posted by ceol at 7:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
It was sent to her twitter feed, and then she immediately asked PyCon to do something about it. If she really wanted the audience to do something, she would have stood up and called them out to the rest of the audience. It doesn't make sense to post it on twitter if that was her true goal.
It seems you're reading your own motive into her actions. Nothing about what she did implied she wanted vigilante justice. Just the opposite, in fact: She asked PyCon, the organizers and enforcers, to do something about it.
I really don't like Twitter and Tumblr's witch-hunting culture, but this certainly doesn't qualify as such. They were in public, they were wearing their company's logo, they were very much subject to being photographed.
posted by ceol at 7:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
One is a broadcast channel to which people deliberately subscribe
How is this a defense? If I subscribe to someone because they are important in their field, and they make sexual jokes on their Twitter feed, how does that not create a certain sort of environment? How does that not set standards for what is and is not acceptable behavior? "Oh if you don't like it then you don't have to subscribe." Really?
the other is a conference where you represent your employer (who is sponsoring the event), and present yourself as a professional within the ambit of the conference.
Adria Richards' Twitter account description begins as follows: "Developer Evangelist for @SendGrid."
posted by leopard at 7:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
How is this a defense? If I subscribe to someone because they are important in their field, and they make sexual jokes on their Twitter feed, how does that not create a certain sort of environment? How does that not set standards for what is and is not acceptable behavior? "Oh if you don't like it then you don't have to subscribe." Really?
the other is a conference where you represent your employer (who is sponsoring the event), and present yourself as a professional within the ambit of the conference.
Adria Richards' Twitter account description begins as follows: "Developer Evangelist for @SendGrid."
posted by leopard at 7:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
From the PyCon code of conduct:
You will see she drew attention to the matter by tweeting all relevant tweets, including the picture, using the #pycon hashtag -- as hashtag is a way of grouping a large topic and it makes it easy for even organizers to see hundreds of concurrent streams of conversation relevant to their work. This certainly qualifies as "contacting a member of the staff" and really I don't see the public exposure as being much different than if she'd gotten up, gone and got a staff member, then had the fellows escorted out. The session was surely videotaped, it would doubtless be posted, furore would still be had.
And I have a feeling, seeing as not both participants got fired, that the one who was least contrite when confronted about the incident was the one who was fired. I'll find out if that's the case soon enough.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 7:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
All communication should be appropriate for a professional audience including people of many different backgrounds. Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue, including talks.[ . . . ]
Be careful in the words that you choose. Remember that sexist, racist, and other exclusionary jokes can be offensive to those around you. Excessive swearing and offensive jokes are not appropriate for PyCon.There's no sense in discussing whether or not you think the conversation was appropriate, it was inappropriate within the guidelines all conference participants consented to when they decided to attend. The thread of thought trying to invalidate her complaint because of a joke she made on her twitter account outside the context of the conference is entirely irrelevant -- it's a separate context wherein she was not bound in an agreement with the convention organizers.
You will see she drew attention to the matter by tweeting all relevant tweets, including the picture, using the #pycon hashtag -- as hashtag is a way of grouping a large topic and it makes it easy for even organizers to see hundreds of concurrent streams of conversation relevant to their work. This certainly qualifies as "contacting a member of the staff" and really I don't see the public exposure as being much different than if she'd gotten up, gone and got a staff member, then had the fellows escorted out. The session was surely videotaped, it would doubtless be posted, furore would still be had.
And I have a feeling, seeing as not both participants got fired, that the one who was least contrite when confronted about the incident was the one who was fired. I'll find out if that's the case soon enough.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 7:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [12 favorites]
This all reminds me of the NYT piece on the "Human Flesh Search Engine" that was linked on the Blue a few years ago.
posted by Admiral Haddock at 7:08 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Admiral Haddock at 7:08 PM on March 20, 2013
How is this a defense?
It's not a defense. She doesn't need a defense to make dick jokes on her twitter feed. If her employer dislikes being listed at the top of the page, they can fire her for it.
As for subscribers, yes, they can unsubscribe. The environment of being a subscriber to a twitter feed is obviously different from a conference where you're sitting there, trying to enjoy the speaker but some fellow participants are intruding on your space.
Again: Richards didn't fire the guy, didn't ask for the firing, didn't foresee the firing, and didn't cheer it when it happened. She said, in the HN thread where the guy said he was fired "I'm sorry to hear your employer deciding to not to work with you on this and I hope they reconsider, bring you back on and dealing with it constructively."
posted by fatbird at 7:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
It's not a defense. She doesn't need a defense to make dick jokes on her twitter feed. If her employer dislikes being listed at the top of the page, they can fire her for it.
As for subscribers, yes, they can unsubscribe. The environment of being a subscriber to a twitter feed is obviously different from a conference where you're sitting there, trying to enjoy the speaker but some fellow participants are intruding on your space.
Again: Richards didn't fire the guy, didn't ask for the firing, didn't foresee the firing, and didn't cheer it when it happened. She said, in the HN thread where the guy said he was fired "I'm sorry to hear your employer deciding to not to work with you on this and I hope they reconsider, bring you back on and dealing with it constructively."
posted by fatbird at 7:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'm sorry, but for a "professional" conference, none of this, the comments, the tweeting, the blogging, the firing, sounds at all professional to me.
Sounds, rather, like a pathetic clusterfuck.
posted by sutt at 7:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
Sounds, rather, like a pathetic clusterfuck.
posted by sutt at 7:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
This is such a shitty situation. I guess as a woman in a male dominated field I've just become desensitized to sexual jokes and don't get offended by them. The outcome I see as being a lasting testament to this is that men will be even more dismissive of women joining their spaces. There have been multiple questions on AskMeFi that I've seen where women in a male dominated field are upset that men don't seem to want them around... well, this is part of it. Even if it's not fair or right or moral or whatever for men to want to have spaces where they can make dick jokes, but this is still going to be on a man's mind when a woman wants to join their hackerspace or whatever: "Oh great, I can't make dick jokes ever again or I might get villified on the internet." And that's going to be friction to having women join, and it's going to create an air that they don't want us around - men won't want us around in their voluntary activities if we're going to be 'killjoys.'
posted by permiechickie at 7:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by permiechickie at 7:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
And you think that's okay? This is the culture you should be more worried about than dongle jokes. One wrong move and you're on the fucking street. But that's okay, because someone got offended.
This wasn't the first time the bozo yukked it up about feminazis. Want me to describe to you how the women in the office hunkered down and wouldn't make eye contact with anyone when he was parroting Rush Lindbaugh's views on women verbatim?
There is a very low threshold for this behavior because of the intense social pressure (see the few hundred posts above) to just shut up and take it. So, when it does require attention, odds are it's already too late - things have run right off the rails and you're about to get a call from someone's lawyer.
You get second chances for screwing up your work. You generally don't for screwing up your workplace.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
This wasn't the first time the bozo yukked it up about feminazis. Want me to describe to you how the women in the office hunkered down and wouldn't make eye contact with anyone when he was parroting Rush Lindbaugh's views on women verbatim?
There is a very low threshold for this behavior because of the intense social pressure (see the few hundred posts above) to just shut up and take it. So, when it does require attention, odds are it's already too late - things have run right off the rails and you're about to get a call from someone's lawyer.
You get second chances for screwing up your work. You generally don't for screwing up your workplace.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
This is apparently what it takes to get people to realize that these sorts of comments are insulting to some. Anything shy of making an example of an asshole is virtually ineffective
George Carlin does a 360 in his grave.
Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.
posted by ericb at 7:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
George Carlin does a 360 in his grave.
Shit, piss, fuck, cunt, cocksucker, motherfucker, and tits.
posted by ericb at 7:17 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
This wasn't the first time the bozo yukked it up about feminazis.
Ah, okay. I was wondering what ever happened to warnings. Your previous description didn't make that clear, and I think there's a lot of difference between being thoughtless once versus being consistently offensive in the face of warnings. (And I have no idea which is the case in the original post.)
posted by benito.strauss at 7:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ah, okay. I was wondering what ever happened to warnings. Your previous description didn't make that clear, and I think there's a lot of difference between being thoughtless once versus being consistently offensive in the face of warnings. (And I have no idea which is the case in the original post.)
posted by benito.strauss at 7:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm a pretty vocal proponent of keeping your goddamned mouth shut and being professional in the workplace and making a positive, proactive effort to create a welcoming space for everyone. The IT industry is a sewer of frat-house bullshit and the sooner people tone it down the better. At my workplace gendered insults are forbidden but cursing is allowed (possibly encouraged). That strikes me as a good balance between excluding the aforementioned frathouse bullshit without turning the place into a sterile, humorless wasteland.
I think it's a thorny issue in general, cons are more public so there's both a greater responsibility to be neutral and open (you can't give everyone the "welcome to the company, fuck is ok but bitch is not" speech at the door at PyCon) and at the same time a greater chance of people fucking up and getting it wrong. It seems that PyCon has a strict line on sexual content which is good and fine and makes this a straight black-and-white decision instead of a "well I wasn't offended" judgment call.
Like others here I'd be quite satisfied if the tweet had been private and the guys had been asked to leave. I'd also be quite satisfied if this was blogged about as a "guys being dicks, pycon did good by removing them" or ideally "don't make dongle jokes at pycon, you'll be asked to leave" (effective and educational!). The guys were flat out wrong for testosteroning up a professional environment and sanctioning and removing them was the right call.
I also think that it's flat out wrong to use a position of power to single out people in public like this as a first step. We are all absolutely, always and one hundred percent responsible for the proportionality of our reactions, bad day or not. Pycon is in charge of policing its content guidelines, the hammer of the internet rage machine is not.
posted by Skorgu at 7:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
I think it's a thorny issue in general, cons are more public so there's both a greater responsibility to be neutral and open (you can't give everyone the "welcome to the company, fuck is ok but bitch is not" speech at the door at PyCon) and at the same time a greater chance of people fucking up and getting it wrong. It seems that PyCon has a strict line on sexual content which is good and fine and makes this a straight black-and-white decision instead of a "well I wasn't offended" judgment call.
Like others here I'd be quite satisfied if the tweet had been private and the guys had been asked to leave. I'd also be quite satisfied if this was blogged about as a "guys being dicks, pycon did good by removing them" or ideally "don't make dongle jokes at pycon, you'll be asked to leave" (effective and educational!). The guys were flat out wrong for testosteroning up a professional environment and sanctioning and removing them was the right call.
I also think that it's flat out wrong to use a position of power to single out people in public like this as a first step. We are all absolutely, always and one hundred percent responsible for the proportionality of our reactions, bad day or not. Pycon is in charge of policing its content guidelines, the hammer of the internet rage machine is not.
posted by Skorgu at 7:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
This wasn't the first time the bozo yukked it up about feminazis. Want me to describe to you how the women in the office hunkered down and wouldn't make eye contact with anyone when he was parroting Rush Lindbaugh's views on women verbatim?
You don't think that was maybe a relevant part of the story? I would imagine practically everyone on the "anti-firing" side would say if the person had a long, documented history of offensive speech in the workplace that the situation would be different. Maybe that is the case here as well--I doubt it, but maybe--but that is a very different situation than a one-off event.
In fact, reading your story at face value, you are seem to be saying the person had misbehaved to the degree that women were "hunkering down" around him, but nothing apparently was done until the director of customer service happened to be walking by during one of his episodes? I guess complaints from the peons don't count, or the environment was such that no one dared talk to HR?
Your former employer sucked.
posted by dsfan at 7:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
You don't think that was maybe a relevant part of the story? I would imagine practically everyone on the "anti-firing" side would say if the person had a long, documented history of offensive speech in the workplace that the situation would be different. Maybe that is the case here as well--I doubt it, but maybe--but that is a very different situation than a one-off event.
In fact, reading your story at face value, you are seem to be saying the person had misbehaved to the degree that women were "hunkering down" around him, but nothing apparently was done until the director of customer service happened to be walking by during one of his episodes? I guess complaints from the peons don't count, or the environment was such that no one dared talk to HR?
Your former employer sucked.
posted by dsfan at 7:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
This wasn't the first time the bozo yukked it up about feminazis
Okay then - your comment made it seem he was overheard using the word "feminazi" and was promptly sent backing. If context was examined, if warnings, training were offered first and he didn't alter his behaviour, then fine.
posted by Jimbob at 7:25 PM on March 20, 2013
Okay then - your comment made it seem he was overheard using the word "feminazi" and was promptly sent backing. If context was examined, if warnings, training were offered first and he didn't alter his behaviour, then fine.
posted by Jimbob at 7:25 PM on March 20, 2013
leopard:She's Rebecca Watson now.
It's OK to skim things, but it's also OK to read them. Here's what I wrote again:
Funnily enough, this ties neatly in to something we were talking about (somewhat belatedly) a few days ago - the "Doritogate" brouhaha. In which the discussion of the actions of a particular PR agency, promoting a game by a particular publisher, were dropped almost completely in favor of cross-referencing the blog posts and LinkedIn profile of a young female journalist looking for conflicts of interest.
klangklangston:Some people may have felt justified in that, sure. But surely fewer, right? And I haven't seen a single comment here calling her a bitch.
I realize this is heated, but not every instance of someone responding to feeling offended is justified, and we can talk about this specific incident in a rational matter.
Well, we have had "put his children at risk" and "putting that man and his family at risk", which a) makes her sound like she has them at gunpoint and b) neatly exonerates the company which allegedly fired him in order to focus on someone who, to the best of my knowledge, has no power over his employers' actions. That does not seem to me wholly rational. There's a slide into dramatisation and overstatement: you yourself, klang, were led to believe that the guys had been banned from PyCon, when no such thing apparently happened.
We actually don't seem to have confirmation that the guy has been fired, or who he is: the anonymous new HN account claiming to be him, and to have been fired, specifically says he is not the guy in the middle of the picture, who is still employed. So, something slightly odd is happening there, possibly. Is there an actual, official confirmation that someone has been let go, and that it was because of this?
The "putting that man and his family at risk" rhetoric is pretty common over on HN, although over there she is actually killing people:
Apparently someone's making death threats over this.
Right on schedule.
So, there's a discussion about who said what and with what intent in this case, and the ethics of posting photos to Twitter. That is... not going to be resolved conclusively one way or another, although I guess it might be kallisthenic to argue about it.
However, there's a larger discussion, I think, which is that if you stick your head up at a tech/geek conference (or, more broadly, in tech/geek circles) and happen to be a woman, you are going to be called an attention whore and possibly a homewrecker. You're going to get Human Flesh Search Engined. You're going to get death threats, and/or rape threats. And a lot of people who don't directly participate in that process will either shrug and say that this is just the culture, and women need to toughen up, or that obviously this is out of order, but you did kind of bring it on yourself, and really, why would someone listen to/ employ an overly emotional troublemaker like you in future?
That feels like a broader systemic question than a fundamentally unresolvable argument about the uses of Twitter. Posting the photo was clearly unwise, because it's a signal flare for the "ruining a good man's life" brigade, but, really, there's no way she could have responded to this (except with silence) that would have avoided that.
For context, incidentally, C. Titus Brown's blogpost about PyCon's Code of Conduct is useful. Sample quote:
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
It's OK to skim things, but it's also OK to read them. Here's what I wrote again:
Whether this particular callout was justified is proportionate is kind of irrelevant: for all the helpful advice being offered about what she should have done, there is nothing she could have done, except for hunkering down and keeping quiet, that wouldn't have ended with people feeling justified in calling her a bitch and a liar, and declaring open season on her. Rebecca Watson didn't name names. Noirin Shirley was sexually assaulted. The immune response was pretty much the same...The point is, it doesn't really matter what specifically happened in this case. The same thing always happens right after one of these incidents.
Funnily enough, this ties neatly in to something we were talking about (somewhat belatedly) a few days ago - the "Doritogate" brouhaha. In which the discussion of the actions of a particular PR agency, promoting a game by a particular publisher, were dropped almost completely in favor of cross-referencing the blog posts and LinkedIn profile of a young female journalist looking for conflicts of interest.
klangklangston:Some people may have felt justified in that, sure. But surely fewer, right? And I haven't seen a single comment here calling her a bitch.
I realize this is heated, but not every instance of someone responding to feeling offended is justified, and we can talk about this specific incident in a rational matter.
Well, we have had "put his children at risk" and "putting that man and his family at risk", which a) makes her sound like she has them at gunpoint and b) neatly exonerates the company which allegedly fired him in order to focus on someone who, to the best of my knowledge, has no power over his employers' actions. That does not seem to me wholly rational. There's a slide into dramatisation and overstatement: you yourself, klang, were led to believe that the guys had been banned from PyCon, when no such thing apparently happened.
We actually don't seem to have confirmation that the guy has been fired, or who he is: the anonymous new HN account claiming to be him, and to have been fired, specifically says he is not the guy in the middle of the picture, who is still employed. So, something slightly odd is happening there, possibly. Is there an actual, official confirmation that someone has been let go, and that it was because of this?
The "putting that man and his family at risk" rhetoric is pretty common over on HN, although over there she is actually killing people:
The problem I see here is that you snapped a picture and posted it in public - being prosecutor, judge, jury and executor in one person. That's not how things should work out. There's two sides of the story and I think it would have been better if a neutral party heard both sides instead of public summary execution.and
You are - by definition - a terrorist, applying unlawful use of force or violence against people with the intention of intimidating or coercing groups of people and societies for ideological or political reasons.Again, this is all pretty familiar. In fact:
Apparently someone's making death threats over this.
Right on schedule.
So, there's a discussion about who said what and with what intent in this case, and the ethics of posting photos to Twitter. That is... not going to be resolved conclusively one way or another, although I guess it might be kallisthenic to argue about it.
However, there's a larger discussion, I think, which is that if you stick your head up at a tech/geek conference (or, more broadly, in tech/geek circles) and happen to be a woman, you are going to be called an attention whore and possibly a homewrecker. You're going to get Human Flesh Search Engined. You're going to get death threats, and/or rape threats. And a lot of people who don't directly participate in that process will either shrug and say that this is just the culture, and women need to toughen up, or that obviously this is out of order, but you did kind of bring it on yourself, and really, why would someone listen to/ employ an overly emotional troublemaker like you in future?
That feels like a broader systemic question than a fundamentally unresolvable argument about the uses of Twitter. Posting the photo was clearly unwise, because it's a signal flare for the "ruining a good man's life" brigade, but, really, there's no way she could have responded to this (except with silence) that would have avoided that.
For context, incidentally, C. Titus Brown's blogpost about PyCon's Code of Conduct is useful. Sample quote:
If you want to know, until last week, I was fairly publicly on the fence about the proposed Python Software Foundation code of conduct (which is not yet public, but is based on the Ubuntu CoC, I think) because I was worried about CoCs being used to whack people inappropriately, due to nonspecificity and other things.(The second and third were someone appearing at a panel under the influence of illegal drugs, both of which he thought were handled well and appropriately by PyCon.)
Three things happened at PyCon 2013 that made me decide to (a) change my mind and (b) post this short note saying so.
First, I came to PyCon with two women colleagues, one of whom was harassed nearly constantly by men, albeit on a low level. Both of them are friendly people who are willing to engage at both a personal and a technical level with others, and apparently that signals to some that they can now feel free to comment on "hotness", proposition them, and otherwise act like 14 year old guys. As one friend said, (paraphrased) "I'd be more flattered that they seem to want to sleep with me, if they'd indicated any interest in me as a human being -- you know, asked me why I was at PyCon, what I did, what I worked on, what I thought about things. But they didn't."
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
Ha! Titus coincidence is coincidental.
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:28 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:28 PM on March 20, 2013
This certainly qualifies as "contacting a member of the staff" and really I don't see the public exposure as being much different than if she'd gotten up, gone and got a staff member, then had the fellows escorted out.
Had she gone and got a staff member, the gentlemen would have been spoken to, they would have apologized and then returned to their seat.
The route Richards choose managed to get one fired and the excuse that she didn't try for that direction result is incredibly odd to me. If you want to deal with the situation, then do so, must you publicly post a photo and then blog about it? It's hard to think that someone so heavily involved in the tech industry would not realize what a spectacle it could turn into.
I get that she was tired and probably a fed up with general sexism and this one incident was enough to really set her off. But part if being professional keeping your emotions in check and acting like a professional. This could have been handled quietly, with a similar result that would have everyone still keeping their job. It wasn't and that reflects poorly on Richards, the guy and the company, PlayHaven, that fired him.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:29 PM on March 20, 2013
Had she gone and got a staff member, the gentlemen would have been spoken to, they would have apologized and then returned to their seat.
The route Richards choose managed to get one fired and the excuse that she didn't try for that direction result is incredibly odd to me. If you want to deal with the situation, then do so, must you publicly post a photo and then blog about it? It's hard to think that someone so heavily involved in the tech industry would not realize what a spectacle it could turn into.
I get that she was tired and probably a fed up with general sexism and this one incident was enough to really set her off. But part if being professional keeping your emotions in check and acting like a professional. This could have been handled quietly, with a similar result that would have everyone still keeping their job. It wasn't and that reflects poorly on Richards, the guy and the company, PlayHaven, that fired him.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 7:29 PM on March 20, 2013
Sorry this one time shit ran down hill on someone who looked like you.
Maybe you should try reading the comment I was responding to before jumping to conclusions about what I look like.
posted by leopard at 7:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Maybe you should try reading the comment I was responding to before jumping to conclusions about what I look like.
posted by leopard at 7:31 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
"the gentlemen would have been spoken to, they would have apologized"
Yes, as I read it, that happened.
"The route Richards choose managed to get one fired and the excuse that she didn't try for that direction result is incredibly odd to me."
So Richards has an obligation to keep Playhaven's employees misadventures secret from Playhaven so as to prevent their bosses from exercising whatever they feel to be the appropriate disciplinary action?
posted by Matt Oneiros at 7:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yes, as I read it, that happened.
"The route Richards choose managed to get one fired and the excuse that she didn't try for that direction result is incredibly odd to me."
So Richards has an obligation to keep Playhaven's employees misadventures secret from Playhaven so as to prevent their bosses from exercising whatever they feel to be the appropriate disciplinary action?
posted by Matt Oneiros at 7:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
This entire situation involves taking someone's word for it, so I think that's a poor argument to make. If you want to argue from what is certain, then here is what happened:
- A woman reported two men for breaking PyCon's Code of Conduct by sending a tweet to PyCon with their photograph.
- The two men were reprimanded by PyCon organizers.
Seems like a non-story, right? It's actually pretty great. PyCon successfully enforced their Code of Conduct by listening to a con-goer, no one was banned or removed from the con, and two guys learn a lesson about saying something offensive in public. And it's not like tweeting photographs of people is out of line or anything. It happens all the time.
So then, what's the problem?
The photograph *is* the problem. The whole conversation about the jokes misses the point.
If you are a social media personality (or whatever it's called) with a readership in the thousands, it is extremely irresponsible to take a picture of someone and post it next to an unsubstantiated accusation. There was no reason to post a photo other than to publicly shame these people. A tweet without the photo would have achieved the same thing, the jokers being reprimanded by the organizers, without this whole uproar.
I'm willing to give Adria the benefit of the doubt and accept that maybe she was having a bad day. But she made an extremely poor choice when she tweeted that photo.
Her subsequent blog post and response to the incident haven't really covered her in glory. My gut feeling is that she was having a bad day, found an opportunity to take umbrage to something and lashed out in an irresponsible way. And now, maybe, she feels that she can't de-escalate.
(That having been said, I hope the hate storm subsides because no one deserves to subjected to that sort of thing.)
posted by Maugrim at 7:36 PM on March 20, 2013 [11 favorites]
But part if being professional keeping your emotions in check and acting like a professional.
And that's the argument that gets trotted out consistently to women who have a difficult time dealing with sexism, harassment and general hurf durfery in the workplace: you're not being professional if you make a thing about it. Because professional has been outlined as putting up with this sort of thing. And somehow that needs to change.
I generally agree with you, if this had been me, even on a bad day, I would have handled it differently. But I think it's difficult precisely because outlining what is and is not professional has often been used as a silencing tactic historically for exactly the same situations.
posted by jessamyn at 7:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [51 favorites]
And that's the argument that gets trotted out consistently to women who have a difficult time dealing with sexism, harassment and general hurf durfery in the workplace: you're not being professional if you make a thing about it. Because professional has been outlined as putting up with this sort of thing. And somehow that needs to change.
I generally agree with you, if this had been me, even on a bad day, I would have handled it differently. But I think it's difficult precisely because outlining what is and is not professional has often been used as a silencing tactic historically for exactly the same situations.
posted by jessamyn at 7:38 PM on March 20, 2013 [51 favorites]
You don't think that was maybe a relevant part of the story?
No. No-one wanted to rock the boat, especially as he had a lot of conservative friends in the office, so no one reported it, and the managers just let it slide. This was the first time someone in a position to do something caught him in the act.
Which is kind of the point. Some places will give graduated warnings and levels of write-ups and PIPs - other places will look at it in the same light as threatening violence in the workplace or theft: grounds for immediate dismissal. Also, backlash against whistleblowers is a real concern - dragging it out with second chances and talking-to's may make things worse instead of better.
Don't start none, won't be none, all I'm saying.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
No. No-one wanted to rock the boat, especially as he had a lot of conservative friends in the office, so no one reported it, and the managers just let it slide. This was the first time someone in a position to do something caught him in the act.
Which is kind of the point. Some places will give graduated warnings and levels of write-ups and PIPs - other places will look at it in the same light as threatening violence in the workplace or theft: grounds for immediate dismissal. Also, backlash against whistleblowers is a real concern - dragging it out with second chances and talking-to's may make things worse instead of better.
Don't start none, won't be none, all I'm saying.
posted by Slap*Happy at 7:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I read the links and started off being pissed off at Adria for her over-reaction. But I'v been thinking about the situation. And reading the comments. And while she hasn't exactly covered herself in glory I no longer think she did anything wrong.
Whether the joker got fired or not is on the joker's company, not on Adria. At this point we don't even know if he was, but again, not on Adria.
I can see where a lot of people are coming from when they say that she shouldn't have posted their pictures on twitter because as far as her need to inform the PyCon people was concerned it was unnecessary (PyCon staff came to her and she pointed the two jokers out). But these people are in public (or at least in a quasi-public setting) and if someone wants to take a picture of them then there shouldn't be anything stopping that from happening. If you are in public someone can take your picture. They can post your picture on the internet and talk about things you did. This is part of what being in public means.
If we accept the jokes were sexual then they boil down to guys talking about their penis size and how much they want to fuck another guy. As a bystander I don't really want to hear about these things but how do such comments make things difficult for women as opposed to men? I don't see it but I fully accept this could be because I am male and can't see past my privilege.
I think of sexual comments the way I think of racial or classist comments. It is more acceptable for the people on the lower end of the power equation to make such comments about those on the upper end. Not saying either is acceptable but one way is definitely worse than the other. To my mind anyway. Where seemingly male homosexual comments heard by a woman fall into the power equation is a tough one.
This lame sexual comment/objectification bullshit seems to happen way too often at tech/comic/male-nerd conventions. A few high profile examples like this may be needed to get it to stop.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 7:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Whether the joker got fired or not is on the joker's company, not on Adria. At this point we don't even know if he was, but again, not on Adria.
I can see where a lot of people are coming from when they say that she shouldn't have posted their pictures on twitter because as far as her need to inform the PyCon people was concerned it was unnecessary (PyCon staff came to her and she pointed the two jokers out). But these people are in public (or at least in a quasi-public setting) and if someone wants to take a picture of them then there shouldn't be anything stopping that from happening. If you are in public someone can take your picture. They can post your picture on the internet and talk about things you did. This is part of what being in public means.
If we accept the jokes were sexual then they boil down to guys talking about their penis size and how much they want to fuck another guy. As a bystander I don't really want to hear about these things but how do such comments make things difficult for women as opposed to men? I don't see it but I fully accept this could be because I am male and can't see past my privilege.
I think of sexual comments the way I think of racial or classist comments. It is more acceptable for the people on the lower end of the power equation to make such comments about those on the upper end. Not saying either is acceptable but one way is definitely worse than the other. To my mind anyway. Where seemingly male homosexual comments heard by a woman fall into the power equation is a tough one.
This lame sexual comment/objectification bullshit seems to happen way too often at tech/comic/male-nerd conventions. A few high profile examples like this may be needed to get it to stop.
posted by any portmanteau in a storm at 7:44 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Dejah420, I mostly agree with you, except for the mentions of how the guy has a family. That makes no difference.
posted by HopperFan at 7:45 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by HopperFan at 7:45 PM on March 20, 2013
So Richards has an obligation to keep Playhaven's employees misadventures secret from Playhaven so as to prevent their bosses from exercising whatever they feel to be the appropriate disciplinary action?
It's a tough question because when you make something into a public issue the appropriate action may shift because it becomes a PR issue for the company. In that case he could be a liability that may have to be let go rather than reformed. If she had contacted them directly rather than going to Twitter they may have decided sensitivity training would be more appropriate.
Not sure on where I fall on if taking it public is appropriate or not in this case, but I think you should increase the consequences for the person you are reporting with some caution and make sure it's what you really want.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's a tough question because when you make something into a public issue the appropriate action may shift because it becomes a PR issue for the company. In that case he could be a liability that may have to be let go rather than reformed. If she had contacted them directly rather than going to Twitter they may have decided sensitivity training would be more appropriate.
Not sure on where I fall on if taking it public is appropriate or not in this case, but I think you should increase the consequences for the person you are reporting with some caution and make sure it's what you really want.
posted by Drinky Die at 7:45 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Would it make a difference if they were both gay?
posted by blue_beetle at 7:49 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by blue_beetle at 7:49 PM on March 20, 2013
If you are a social media personality (or whatever it's called) with a readership in the thousands, it is extremely irresponsible to take a picture of someone and post it next to an unsubstantiated accusation.
(As an aside, Adria Richards has 9,000 or so Twitter followers. That's not chopped liver by any means, but it's a long way from being Felicia Day or Veronica Belmont. She doesn't even have a verified account, which is the sort of low bar for being Twitter notable...)
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Both parties were met with, in private. The comments that were made were in poor taste, and individuals involved agreed, apologized and no further actions were taken by the staff of PyCon 2013. No individuals were removed from the conference, no sanctions were levied.I think that probably counts as substantiation.
(As an aside, Adria Richards has 9,000 or so Twitter followers. That's not chopped liver by any means, but it's a long way from being Felicia Day or Veronica Belmont. She doesn't even have a verified account, which is the sort of low bar for being Twitter notable...)
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
In my experience professionalism as typically defined is mainly reserved for proles and public displays (like having a huge Twitter following and effectively representing an employer with a high public profile); as you move up the ladder in an organization, people are increasingly less concerned with professionalism in management circles except when making dog and pony shows to the staff (who are not too stupid to realize you're completely full of shit) or when sussing out what style of discourse is favored by a potential client, and once you've established that, "being professional" often involves the exact opposite of what the term evokes in the working class (hyperbolic example -- Dinner for Schmucks).
The word is thrown around all of the time and ultimately it comes down to knowing your audience, knowing your boundaries, knowing what may be taken as hurtful to someone even though you and your buddy have no problem with it, and it applies in most walks of life, beyond the workplace. Sometimes outright unprofessionalism is akin to throwing down a gauntlet and daring someone to pick it up and this is more like bullying. It only gets a special term in the workplace because not knowing the game can cost you dearly; every interaction with everyone but your closest confidantes is a fucking minefield of figuring out what is and is not acceptable.
My gut reaction is that she completely overreacted, she is representing her company on Twitter and has no problem making dick jokes, and is basically that type of passive-aggressive person that creates enormous displays of [often unintended but seemingly inevitable in hindsight] clusterfuckery rather than dealing with things on a direct human level. And they often save up their "bad day energy" and dump it all over somebody as if it's a valid excuse. The bad ones turn a blind eye and never apologize or acknowledge their disproportionate response, and perhaps martyr themselves.
And I know what it feels like to be put out and to not want to directly confront someone and make a scene, what an imposition it can be to have someone push assholery on you and to be expected to push back.
It's messy all around but I think she's the biggest "bad actor" in the mix.
posted by lordaych at 7:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
The word is thrown around all of the time and ultimately it comes down to knowing your audience, knowing your boundaries, knowing what may be taken as hurtful to someone even though you and your buddy have no problem with it, and it applies in most walks of life, beyond the workplace. Sometimes outright unprofessionalism is akin to throwing down a gauntlet and daring someone to pick it up and this is more like bullying. It only gets a special term in the workplace because not knowing the game can cost you dearly; every interaction with everyone but your closest confidantes is a fucking minefield of figuring out what is and is not acceptable.
My gut reaction is that she completely overreacted, she is representing her company on Twitter and has no problem making dick jokes, and is basically that type of passive-aggressive person that creates enormous displays of [often unintended but seemingly inevitable in hindsight] clusterfuckery rather than dealing with things on a direct human level. And they often save up their "bad day energy" and dump it all over somebody as if it's a valid excuse. The bad ones turn a blind eye and never apologize or acknowledge their disproportionate response, and perhaps martyr themselves.
And I know what it feels like to be put out and to not want to directly confront someone and make a scene, what an imposition it can be to have someone push assholery on you and to be expected to push back.
It's messy all around but I think she's the biggest "bad actor" in the mix.
posted by lordaych at 7:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
This is such a shitty situation. I guess as a woman in a male dominated field I've just become desensitized to sexual jokes and don't get offended by them. The outcome I see as being a lasting testament to this is that men will be even more dismissive of women joining their spaces. There have been multiple questions on AskMeFi that I've seen where women in a male dominated field are upset that men don't seem to want them around... well, this is part of it. Even if it's not fair or right or moral or whatever for men to want to have spaces where they can make dick jokes, but this is still going to be on a man's mind when a woman wants to join their hackerspace or whatever: "Oh great, I can't make dick jokes ever again or I might get villified on the internet." And that's going to be friction to having women join, and it's going to create an air that they don't want us around - men won't want us around in their voluntary activities if we're going to be 'killjoys.'
In my experience in male-dominated fields this actually weirdly leads to potty-mouthed women because they use it as a signal that they are "cool." I also grew up in a household where "low-class" language was used, so this was how I learned how to talk anyway.
Which makes a bit worried about politically correct speech codes at tech conferences, because at this point it's the language I use and I might slip up myself. To clarify I make jokes that might seem immature to judgmental people who are outside my culture, not sexist jokes, but jokes about sex and talking about sex, as well as generally naughty language. It's a benefit of working in the very very very backend of IT where I hardly ever interact with clients.
To some women this actually attracts them to tech. I for example was a tomboy and I didn't fit in with other females, which is why I stayed at home playing with computers and bugs. If I wanted to wear a business suit and be all proper, I would have stuck with accounting. But in many tech environments I've been able to be myself. I work with women who have worked as cooks, mechanics, bartenders, and other professions where this is common language, especially since I'm now in the more blue-collar end of IT.
This might also might explain the number of tech women who are not siding with Adria, which might be mystifying to people outside the industry. To us, Adria represents how the hacker community has gone from a place that embraced misfits to a stifling corporate environment. All the exhortions of people here about "professionalism" scare people like me and are why I increasingly skip programming conferences.
posted by melissam at 7:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [52 favorites]
In my experience in male-dominated fields this actually weirdly leads to potty-mouthed women because they use it as a signal that they are "cool." I also grew up in a household where "low-class" language was used, so this was how I learned how to talk anyway.
Which makes a bit worried about politically correct speech codes at tech conferences, because at this point it's the language I use and I might slip up myself. To clarify I make jokes that might seem immature to judgmental people who are outside my culture, not sexist jokes, but jokes about sex and talking about sex, as well as generally naughty language. It's a benefit of working in the very very very backend of IT where I hardly ever interact with clients.
To some women this actually attracts them to tech. I for example was a tomboy and I didn't fit in with other females, which is why I stayed at home playing with computers and bugs. If I wanted to wear a business suit and be all proper, I would have stuck with accounting. But in many tech environments I've been able to be myself. I work with women who have worked as cooks, mechanics, bartenders, and other professions where this is common language, especially since I'm now in the more blue-collar end of IT.
This might also might explain the number of tech women who are not siding with Adria, which might be mystifying to people outside the industry. To us, Adria represents how the hacker community has gone from a place that embraced misfits to a stifling corporate environment. All the exhortions of people here about "professionalism" scare people like me and are why I increasingly skip programming conferences.
posted by melissam at 7:54 PM on March 20, 2013 [52 favorites]
I think that probably counts as substantiation.
A substantiation after the fact.
(And a rather weak one at that, judging by all the guess work that's going on.)
posted by Maugrim at 8:02 PM on March 20, 2013
A substantiation after the fact.
(And a rather weak one at that, judging by all the guess work that's going on.)
posted by Maugrim at 8:02 PM on March 20, 2013
"Would it make a difference if they were both gay?
posted by blue_beetle"
I'm not sure if you were responding to my comment, but just in case - that wasn't the situation, was it? Let's not stroll down the hypothetical tulip path. I just meant that whether someone did or did not have dependents at home is not a valid reason to NOT call them out on sexism, if necessary. Though I personally am not sure that it was warranted in this specific instance.
posted by HopperFan at 8:03 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by blue_beetle"
I'm not sure if you were responding to my comment, but just in case - that wasn't the situation, was it? Let's not stroll down the hypothetical tulip path. I just meant that whether someone did or did not have dependents at home is not a valid reason to NOT call them out on sexism, if necessary. Though I personally am not sure that it was warranted in this specific instance.
posted by HopperFan at 8:03 PM on March 20, 2013
Whether the joker got fired or not is on the joker's company, not on Adria. At this point we don't even know if he was, but again, not on Adria.
Personally, I don't let her entirely off the hook for this. Perhaps she wasn't thinking about it (*), but impugning a specific person's character online, it can have serious consequences for that person. Especially if the impugner has a strong online presence. Especially within a very online community. That stuff is always searchable, and it never goes away. It's not enough to throw up one's hands and claim to have no influence; we've all heard enough to know better. Especially, one would hope, a developer evangelist.
* Actually, from reading her blog, it's apparent that she never thought about it for a second, and perhaps still does not, but that is a fault of another kind.
posted by Edgewise at 8:09 PM on March 20, 2013
Personally, I don't let her entirely off the hook for this. Perhaps she wasn't thinking about it (*), but impugning a specific person's character online, it can have serious consequences for that person. Especially if the impugner has a strong online presence. Especially within a very online community. That stuff is always searchable, and it never goes away. It's not enough to throw up one's hands and claim to have no influence; we've all heard enough to know better. Especially, one would hope, a developer evangelist.
* Actually, from reading her blog, it's apparent that she never thought about it for a second, and perhaps still does not, but that is a fault of another kind.
posted by Edgewise at 8:09 PM on March 20, 2013
I wasn't there, I don't know what she said or what they said or how they said it. From my limited vantage, it sounds like those guys were boorish and sophomoric -- and I'm with artw in finding their talking about anything during the presentation pretty offensive. On the great axis of offenses, dongle jokes seem sort of on a par with fart and poop jokes. But I wasn't there and I'm not her. I've had people use totally nonsexual words that have totally creeped me out and offended me. Tone and inflection matter. I can't and won't judge the level of offense she felt. Despite the evidence of her tweeting a dick joke, that doesn't invalidate her ability to take offense. I'm a lot more freewheeling with comfort-zone friends than with strangers in a professional setting.
But I do think she should have tried to deal with it on a human-to-human basis first - either by giving them the fish-eye or telling them to cut out the sophomoric sex jokes. Someone up-thread noted she might have felt uncomfortable confronting a couple of dick-joking guys - well, I could see that, but turning and taking their picture was pretty ballsy. That would intimidate me to do. And her actions throughout don't seem the actions of someone who fears confrontation.
Reporting it to the conference? That seemed fine to me.
Putting their photos on Twitter? That struck me like using a shotgun to shoot a flea. You may kill the flea, but there can be a lot of collateral damage.
That's just me - I don't like to escalate things to max level right out of the shoot. I like to leave people room to save face. If they react badly well, OK, all bets are off, get the elephant gun.
I think it was very crappy for the employer to fire the guy. But many employers are terrified of harassment litigation. And I have no way of knowing if that was the straw that broke the proverbial back - the only thing I know about him is that he jokes about dongles - a crime of which I am also guilty, mea culpa.
We all bring our own experiences. I related to quite a bit of what dejah said. I'm older and although I never worked in tech, manufacturing was no picnic. Nor was bartending or waiting tables. Or working in corporations. Hell, a lot of it was a tough slog, and I learned to pick my battles.
Thank you, men of mefi - this has been a very balanced discussion. I'm appreciative of all the great guys we have here who speak up about sexism. This is a thread I might have skipped 5 years ago.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
But I do think she should have tried to deal with it on a human-to-human basis first - either by giving them the fish-eye or telling them to cut out the sophomoric sex jokes. Someone up-thread noted she might have felt uncomfortable confronting a couple of dick-joking guys - well, I could see that, but turning and taking their picture was pretty ballsy. That would intimidate me to do. And her actions throughout don't seem the actions of someone who fears confrontation.
Reporting it to the conference? That seemed fine to me.
Putting their photos on Twitter? That struck me like using a shotgun to shoot a flea. You may kill the flea, but there can be a lot of collateral damage.
That's just me - I don't like to escalate things to max level right out of the shoot. I like to leave people room to save face. If they react badly well, OK, all bets are off, get the elephant gun.
I think it was very crappy for the employer to fire the guy. But many employers are terrified of harassment litigation. And I have no way of knowing if that was the straw that broke the proverbial back - the only thing I know about him is that he jokes about dongles - a crime of which I am also guilty, mea culpa.
We all bring our own experiences. I related to quite a bit of what dejah said. I'm older and although I never worked in tech, manufacturing was no picnic. Nor was bartending or waiting tables. Or working in corporations. Hell, a lot of it was a tough slog, and I learned to pick my battles.
Thank you, men of mefi - this has been a very balanced discussion. I'm appreciative of all the great guys we have here who speak up about sexism. This is a thread I might have skipped 5 years ago.
posted by madamjujujive at 8:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [13 favorites]
I'm a female and have been a programmer for 20 years. I have withstood a lot of abuse in my industry and have also tried to fight against it. The bad boy behavior isn't going to stop until we stand up against it.
I work with a woman who is constantly stroking the men's egos, flirting with them, and laughing along with their bad behavior. Behind their backs she talks badly about them. I don't want to be that woman, and if I am a killjoy, then so be it. So tech is supposed to be the last bastion for men to behave like little boys. I say screw that.
Suppose this had been a story about Adria joining in with their sexual banter because she had a need to feel accepted by the men and prove her worth to them. Would you like her more then?
posted by jenh526 at 8:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I work with a woman who is constantly stroking the men's egos, flirting with them, and laughing along with their bad behavior. Behind their backs she talks badly about them. I don't want to be that woman, and if I am a killjoy, then so be it. So tech is supposed to be the last bastion for men to behave like little boys. I say screw that.
Suppose this had been a story about Adria joining in with their sexual banter because she had a need to feel accepted by the men and prove her worth to them. Would you like her more then?
posted by jenh526 at 8:13 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
I don't really get the claim from the fired guy that the "I'd fork his repo" stuff wasn't sexual. I understand that they were using it to mean something nonsexual, but it seems pretty obvious that they're using the phrase because of its sauciness, even if it's not used to mean something sexual. If he genuinely thinks that he and his colleagues were using a nonsexual phrase to mean their nonsexual meaning, then it seems like he just didn't get it, which seems a bit hard to believe.
posted by Flunkie at 8:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Flunkie at 8:16 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
The keynote talk at the 2012 YAPC ("Yet Another Perl Conference") was about diversity issues in the Perl Community: "Perl: The Next Generation" (40 min.). I believe YAPC is a pretty major conference.
I don't know how much pick-up it's had since it was delivered, but I was surprised / impressed to see the issue dealt with at all. I can't find a transcript, but I found it worth watching.
posted by benito.strauss at 8:19 PM on March 20, 2013
I don't know how much pick-up it's had since it was delivered, but I was surprised / impressed to see the issue dealt with at all. I can't find a transcript, but I found it worth watching.
posted by benito.strauss at 8:19 PM on March 20, 2013
I'm a female and have been a programmer for 20 years. I have withstood a lot of abuse in my industry and have also tried to fight against it. The bad boy behavior isn't going to stop until we stand up against it.
I work with a woman who is constantly stroking the men's egos, flirting with them, and laughing along with their bad behavior. Behind their backs she talks badly about them. I don't want to be that woman, and if I am a killjoy, then so be it. So tech is supposed to be the last bastion for men to behave like little boys. I say screw that.
Commendable. Do you think Adria's actions in this case work toward that?
She's put herself in a situation where it seems like she's making a mountain out of a molehill.
posted by Maugrim at 8:19 PM on March 20, 2013
I work with a woman who is constantly stroking the men's egos, flirting with them, and laughing along with their bad behavior. Behind their backs she talks badly about them. I don't want to be that woman, and if I am a killjoy, then so be it. So tech is supposed to be the last bastion for men to behave like little boys. I say screw that.
Commendable. Do you think Adria's actions in this case work toward that?
She's put herself in a situation where it seems like she's making a mountain out of a molehill.
posted by Maugrim at 8:19 PM on March 20, 2013
This is what I think: Some nerds were acting like nerds, making jokes to pass the time at what I imagine is a pretty boring ordeal. They weren't being sexist, they were being silly, as nerds are often wont to do.
Some corporate busybody with no sympathy for nerd humor, but a large Twitter fanbase, misinterpreted and grandstanded some poor hapless nerd into unemployment.
Her over-reaction snowballed, and it just keeps right on snowballing.
I look at all the wet blankets and killjoys in this thread, quoting rules of conduct like goddamn hall monitors. Jesus, people, does everything have to be deadly serious all the goddamn time? Do you really want to live in a world where we all have to be stiff and silent and obedient at all times, lest we lose everything over a moment where we dared to inject a little levity? You sure as hell sound like you do.
posted by KHAAAN! at 8:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Some corporate busybody with no sympathy for nerd humor, but a large Twitter fanbase, misinterpreted and grandstanded some poor hapless nerd into unemployment.
Her over-reaction snowballed, and it just keeps right on snowballing.
I look at all the wet blankets and killjoys in this thread, quoting rules of conduct like goddamn hall monitors. Jesus, people, does everything have to be deadly serious all the goddamn time? Do you really want to live in a world where we all have to be stiff and silent and obedient at all times, lest we lose everything over a moment where we dared to inject a little levity? You sure as hell sound like you do.
posted by KHAAAN! at 8:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Is this to show what she thinks correct male roles should be? Implying that the responsible Dad in the photo would never make a risqué joke? ( maybe Adria is kinda socially conservative...?)
Never mind the adults, she's in trouble if she ever hangs around kids that age if dongle jokes were kryptonite to her.
posted by Artw at 8:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Never mind the adults, she's in trouble if she ever hangs around kids that age if dongle jokes were kryptonite to her.
posted by Artw at 8:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm suprised that either of the guys involved admitted anything. A picture of two people smiling and sitting in chairs and a tweet alleging they said something isn't evidence. I'm also pretty stunned that an otherwise performing employee would be fired over the evidence provided. The and he was fired claim does not seem genuine. It sounds more like the made up omg then the PC police fired the white guy bullshit. Look at that poor white man who lost his job to PC. Right that never happens. If you think that happened to you or someone you know it is because they were crappy in a thousand other ways in the eyes of mgmt and they took this as an opportunity to dump em.
posted by humanfont at 8:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 8:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Fuck Adria Richards and her insensitive use of the social media and her weight in that media to bring something like this down on another human being that she could have and should have encountered on a personal level. It's like calling the cops on a next door neighbor who is playing music too loud at 11pm, on Tuesday evening. All she really had to do was walk over and say "I was offended by what you said, and maybe the guy and her would have learned something about each other, and improved human relationships, just a little bit. Instead, this. What a fucking moron, and coward Adria Richards is!
posted by Vibrissae at 8:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Vibrissae at 8:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I work with a woman who is constantly stroking the men's egos, flirting with them, and laughing along with their bad behavior. Behind their backs she talks badly about them. I don't want to be that woman, and if I am a killjoy, then so be it. So tech is supposed to be the last bastion for men to behave like little boys. I say screw that.
Suppose this had been a story about Adria joining in with their sexual banter because she had a need to feel accepted by the men and prove her worth to them. Would you like her more then?
What if I told you there is a third type of woman, the woman who hates misogyny, but sometimes enjoys and even initiates bawdy banter?
I've encountered interesting attitudes among the more seasoned women in IT. It seems like half are completely dismissive of everything and tell you to toughen up to open sexual harassment and sexism. I remember one really respected experienced women telling me I'd never make it in the real world when I complained about the leader of our open-source group making jokes about women being weak. She said I was proving him right.
And the other half pretend women like me, who would prefer that talking about sex not be banned in codes of conduct because it is an aspect of our personality, are just posers or don't really exist. Also it bothers me that you would conflate talking about sex with flirting. Reminds me of the kerfluffle over Violet Blue being at the b-sides conference.
posted by melissam at 8:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [31 favorites]
the PC police fired the white guy bullshit
Pray tell, what does race have to do with this?
posted by amorphatist at 8:28 PM on March 20, 2013
Pray tell, what does race have to do with this?
posted by amorphatist at 8:28 PM on March 20, 2013
Everything, if you are using privelege as a D&D alignment chart.
posted by Artw at 8:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
posted by Artw at 8:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Just fyi, there were apparently non-sexual comments that Adria Richards misstook as sexual, but that when you reread carefully you might conclue must be homosexual, as they make no sense read as straight sexual comments. As I understand it, only one comment has any sexual references and no comments had an homosexual references. So you've missread something if you think you're reading about two males making homosexual cracks about another male's repository. It's confusing as Adria herself never acknowledged that the homosexual sounding comments were merely her miss-understanding.
posted by jeffburdges at 8:36 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 8:36 PM on March 20, 2013
Reminds me of the kerfluffle over Violet Blue being at the b-sides conference.
I hadn't heard that story. Thanks for that link, melissam.
posted by homunculus at 8:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I hadn't heard that story. Thanks for that link, melissam.
posted by homunculus at 8:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think there are many failures that contributed to this shitstorm, and laying the blame at any one of: Adria Richards, PyCon, Mr. Hank, or his employer is a mistake.
Posting the photo on Twitter did turn out to be a bad idea, but I don't think it's appropriate to attribute that to malice. It is certainly an incautious use of social networking, and that reflects badly on her as a professional in the field, but that doesn't make it bullying behavior per se.
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.
posted by LogicalDash at 9:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Posting the photo on Twitter did turn out to be a bad idea, but I don't think it's appropriate to attribute that to malice. It is certainly an incautious use of social networking, and that reflects badly on her as a professional in the field, but that doesn't make it bullying behavior per se.
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by incompetence.
posted by LogicalDash at 9:01 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Pray tell, what does race have to do with this?
I was observing that this claim fits a template. In other versions the antagonist might be black man instead of a woman and the protagonist would have made a racially insensitive remark.
posted by humanfont at 9:05 PM on March 20, 2013
I was observing that this claim fits a template. In other versions the antagonist might be black man instead of a woman and the protagonist would have made a racially insensitive remark.
posted by humanfont at 9:05 PM on March 20, 2013
If it were my company I would make damned sure that I never risked the potential of bad publicity of sending anyone to PyCon ever again.
posted by tyllwin at 9:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by tyllwin at 9:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I was observing that this claim fits a template. In other versions the antagonist might be black man instead of a woman and the protagonist would have made a racially insensitive remark.
I'm not really sure dongle puns really translate into that.
posted by Artw at 9:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm not really sure dongle puns really translate into that.
posted by Artw at 9:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah, I'm not sure I believe anybody was fired over this. I don't really trust anonymous commenters on Hacker News.
posted by koeselitz at 9:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 9:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Thank you, men of mefi - this has been a very balanced discussion. I'm appreciative of all the great guys we have here who speak up about sexism. This is a thread I might have skipped 5 years ago.
Really? God, if that had come from anyone but you I wouldn't even try to believe it. This thread has been horrible from the get-go, frankly, with hateful comments getting piles of favourites too. It's not as awful as reddit or HN are, and it's a damn site better than the violent and evil mess of her twitter mentions right now, but it really hasn't seemed balanced to me at all. More a slew of guys who work in tech howling about their unseen privilege, and the odd lone voice of caution.
Tech is so deeply, horribly sexist, I would in fact be happy with a zero tolerance-style "prudish reaction" until these chuckleheads learn that this shit has to stop. I *want* men to go "uh uh can't say that here someone might tweet me ho ho!" because that's the first step on the road to understanding, just like it was when my father's generation said things like "uh uh can't call it a Paki shop anymore can I? Might be in the paper ho ho" until eventually they just started calling it a corner shop and the world got fractionally better.
If you don't think the guy should have been fired, barrack his employers. If you think she over-reacted and did the cause of feminism an injustice and pushback should be reserved for "real" sexism, get on twitter and start taking on the morons who are assaulting her right now. There is more than enough hate speech there for you to fill your boots.
posted by bonaldi at 9:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [35 favorites]
Really? God, if that had come from anyone but you I wouldn't even try to believe it. This thread has been horrible from the get-go, frankly, with hateful comments getting piles of favourites too. It's not as awful as reddit or HN are, and it's a damn site better than the violent and evil mess of her twitter mentions right now, but it really hasn't seemed balanced to me at all. More a slew of guys who work in tech howling about their unseen privilege, and the odd lone voice of caution.
Tech is so deeply, horribly sexist, I would in fact be happy with a zero tolerance-style "prudish reaction" until these chuckleheads learn that this shit has to stop. I *want* men to go "uh uh can't say that here someone might tweet me ho ho!" because that's the first step on the road to understanding, just like it was when my father's generation said things like "uh uh can't call it a Paki shop anymore can I? Might be in the paper ho ho" until eventually they just started calling it a corner shop and the world got fractionally better.
If you don't think the guy should have been fired, barrack his employers. If you think she over-reacted and did the cause of feminism an injustice and pushback should be reserved for "real" sexism, get on twitter and start taking on the morons who are assaulting her right now. There is more than enough hate speech there for you to fill your boots.
posted by bonaldi at 9:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [35 favorites]
So two people were in the sort of liminal space where you're observable but have a reasonable expectation of some privacy. And someone else took their picture, without asking permission, sent it to thousands of people on the internet, and added a caption urging everyone to Two-Minutes-Hate on the people in the picture.
So basically this is Creepshots for people who like being offended more than masturbating. Christ, what an asshole.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
So basically this is Creepshots for people who like being offended more than masturbating. Christ, what an asshole.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:20 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
What if I told you there is a third type of woman, the woman who hates misogyny, but sometimes enjoys and even initiates bawdy banter?
Yeah, that can't be repeated enough. This was NOT a misogynist joke. No women were demeaned in the making of this comment. This was a joke that acknowledged the existence of penises.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
Yeah, that can't be repeated enough. This was NOT a misogynist joke. No women were demeaned in the making of this comment. This was a joke that acknowledged the existence of penises.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:21 PM on March 20, 2013 [22 favorites]
Also, on race, some of the abuse she is getting is specifically racist in form, which is possibly where race comes into this particular story. She's getting n-bombed, pretty much inevitably.
I think humanfont's point, however, is clearly not exactly that - but rather that narratives where a white man is oppressed by the forces of political correctness by dint of his whiteness and/or maleness tend to have a polemic rather than purely documentary intent.
So, the narrative here - that a previously model employee has lost his job purely as a result of a harmless comment blown out of proportion by a vengeful woman - feels like it may be incomplete in various ways.
To be honest, I share koeselitz' uncertainty that we can even say with confidence that anyone has lost their job. The available evidence seems to be an anonymous post on Hacker News. But, when someone thought they had identified the person sacked (probably by cross-referencing the photo with the headshots on the website), they were told that it was not him.
Also, of course, in the face of a story like this some communities, for purposes of ideology or recreation (or a mix of the two), look for ways to heighten the emotional temperature. When Jennifer Hepler of Bioware was targeted, a number of fake screencaps of posts she did not make to the Bioware Social Network were disseminated, along with falsified quotes.
So, it's entirely possible that someone has lost their job, but right now I think it still needs to be substantiated.
Speaking of - Maugrinn, I get what you mean, I think - that there is no primary evidence of the guys making those comments. So, all we have is a confirmation after the fact that they agreed that they had made inappropriate comments and apologized. That might be inaccurate - they might for their own reasons have given an inaccurate account to PyCon's officers, or expressed false contrition (possibly in the interests of smoothing things over), or it might have been misrecorded. However, it is the only account of the event from an independent, official and verifiable source. That's generally how things are substantiated - they happen first, and then the fact that they happened and how they happened is supported with evidence.
The lack of primary documentation raises an interesting side-point, though. Earlier, there was talk of "the age of Google goggles" - an age where everything is recorded, and we have to be careful of what we say and do at all times. However, there is no lifecast here, no Project Glass video clip to share.
Even if there were, however, I'm not sure it would make much difference. The argument over the wisdom of sharing it over social media would be about the same, although with a few different elements, and according to the official record nobody actually denied that the comments were made or that they were in poor taste, so the evidence value might be relatively limited. This is just one of those things people are going to disagree about, and probably still would if there were a video and audio record, since all sorts of elements of tone, context and motive could still be raised and questioned.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I think humanfont's point, however, is clearly not exactly that - but rather that narratives where a white man is oppressed by the forces of political correctness by dint of his whiteness and/or maleness tend to have a polemic rather than purely documentary intent.
So, the narrative here - that a previously model employee has lost his job purely as a result of a harmless comment blown out of proportion by a vengeful woman - feels like it may be incomplete in various ways.
To be honest, I share koeselitz' uncertainty that we can even say with confidence that anyone has lost their job. The available evidence seems to be an anonymous post on Hacker News. But, when someone thought they had identified the person sacked (probably by cross-referencing the photo with the headshots on the website), they were told that it was not him.
Also, of course, in the face of a story like this some communities, for purposes of ideology or recreation (or a mix of the two), look for ways to heighten the emotional temperature. When Jennifer Hepler of Bioware was targeted, a number of fake screencaps of posts she did not make to the Bioware Social Network were disseminated, along with falsified quotes.
So, it's entirely possible that someone has lost their job, but right now I think it still needs to be substantiated.
Speaking of - Maugrinn, I get what you mean, I think - that there is no primary evidence of the guys making those comments. So, all we have is a confirmation after the fact that they agreed that they had made inappropriate comments and apologized. That might be inaccurate - they might for their own reasons have given an inaccurate account to PyCon's officers, or expressed false contrition (possibly in the interests of smoothing things over), or it might have been misrecorded. However, it is the only account of the event from an independent, official and verifiable source. That's generally how things are substantiated - they happen first, and then the fact that they happened and how they happened is supported with evidence.
The lack of primary documentation raises an interesting side-point, though. Earlier, there was talk of "the age of Google goggles" - an age where everything is recorded, and we have to be careful of what we say and do at all times. However, there is no lifecast here, no Project Glass video clip to share.
Even if there were, however, I'm not sure it would make much difference. The argument over the wisdom of sharing it over social media would be about the same, although with a few different elements, and according to the official record nobody actually denied that the comments were made or that they were in poor taste, so the evidence value might be relatively limited. This is just one of those things people are going to disagree about, and probably still would if there were a video and audio record, since all sorts of elements of tone, context and motive could still be raised and questioned.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
And the forking joke is common enough among developers that GitHub sells such a shirt.
If you need an introduction to geek-bro culture, just attend a GitHub Drinkup. I wouldn't base my social standards on what they deem proper.
posted by jsavimbi at 9:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
If you need an introduction to geek-bro culture, just attend a GitHub Drinkup. I wouldn't base my social standards on what they deem proper.
posted by jsavimbi at 9:23 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
I'd wager that Metafilter ranks somewhere in the 99th percentile when it comes to mainstream, general-topic discussion sites.
If the prevailing wind here suggests that this was an harmful overreaction to a non-example of sexism (in an area well known to be rife with it; namely coding) then it might not be a bad idea to step back and reexamine the situation objectively.
One would not have to tweak the details in this story very much to produce a 500-reply thread full of "Good for her!", but as it is, there are a lot of problems with it, not the least of which is that it further alienates borderline feminists or aspiring progressive thinkers who look at it and ask "is this what it's come to? We can't make christing 'dongle' jokes at a nerd convention? I'm off the bandwagon."
posted by ShutterBun at 9:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
If the prevailing wind here suggests that this was an harmful overreaction to a non-example of sexism (in an area well known to be rife with it; namely coding) then it might not be a bad idea to step back and reexamine the situation objectively.
One would not have to tweak the details in this story very much to produce a 500-reply thread full of "Good for her!", but as it is, there are a lot of problems with it, not the least of which is that it further alienates borderline feminists or aspiring progressive thinkers who look at it and ask "is this what it's come to? We can't make christing 'dongle' jokes at a nerd convention? I'm off the bandwagon."
posted by ShutterBun at 9:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
If you think she over-reacted and did the cause of feminism an injustice and pushback should be reserved for "real" sexism, get on twitter and start taking on the morons who are assaulting her right now.
Where do you go if you think that both Richards and the Joker pretty much got (and are getting) unnecessarily dumped on and the only people who stand the gain are Internet faux activists on both sides (asshole MRAs and over-sensitive busybody PC types) who make it a business to generate controversy by stirring stuff like this up until it's a nice steamy, creamy froth?
posted by FJT at 9:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Where do you go if you think that both Richards and the Joker pretty much got (and are getting) unnecessarily dumped on and the only people who stand the gain are Internet faux activists on both sides (asshole MRAs and over-sensitive busybody PC types) who make it a business to generate controversy by stirring stuff like this up until it's a nice steamy, creamy froth?
posted by FJT at 9:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Also, on race, some of the abuse she is getting is specifically racist in form, which is possibly where race comes into this particular story.
Oh come off it. There is no indication whatsoever that the two guys took the race of some woman seated in front of them into account when they choose to banter amongst themselves about dongles and forking, nor did this charming offendee declare that they directed any racial nonsense towards her afterwards either (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong).
If the young lady had bad acne, these internet idiots would attack her for that. If she was larger or smaller, they would attacker her for being skinny or fat. Oh shit, look what just happened. Is this possibly where sizeism comes into this particular story?!
posted by amorphatist at 9:36 PM on March 20, 2013
Oh come off it. There is no indication whatsoever that the two guys took the race of some woman seated in front of them into account when they choose to banter amongst themselves about dongles and forking, nor did this charming offendee declare that they directed any racial nonsense towards her afterwards either (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong).
If the young lady had bad acne, these internet idiots would attack her for that. If she was larger or smaller, they would attacker her for being skinny or fat. Oh shit, look what just happened. Is this possibly where sizeism comes into this particular story?!
posted by amorphatist at 9:36 PM on March 20, 2013
If the prevailing wind here suggests that this was an harmful overreaction to a non-example of sexism
Yeah, a viewpoint I tend to agree with. It's unfortunate that the wind is carrying along with it a powerful amount of sexist tropes and same-old-awful arguments. I guess it's a small mercy we haven't had a huge men's rights derail, like that choking both reddit and HN
posted by bonaldi at 9:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yeah, a viewpoint I tend to agree with. It's unfortunate that the wind is carrying along with it a powerful amount of sexist tropes and same-old-awful arguments. I guess it's a small mercy we haven't had a huge men's rights derail, like that choking both reddit and HN
posted by bonaldi at 9:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
I think that we can all agree that the swarm of internet idiots are, indeed, idiots, and despicable for it, whatever you think of unmoderated dongle-chat.
posted by Artw at 9:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Reddit already is a huge mens rights derail - anything that isn't MRA is basically a shocking derail from that.
posted by Artw at 9:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
amorphatist: "Oh come off it. There is no indication whatsoever that the two guys took the race of some woman seated in front of them into account when they choose to banter amongst themselves"
Not the two guys at the conference, but post-facto racial harassment on HN, twitter, etc.
posted by boo_radley at 9:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Not the two guys at the conference, but post-facto racial harassment on HN, twitter, etc.
posted by boo_radley at 9:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
In Australia we have laws that would probably protect an employee from being sacked under these circumstances. I think the lack of employee protection in the USA is reprehensible: taking someone's livelihood away is a very serious act, and employees ought to have some recourse against it happening for trivial or unfair reasons.
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 9:46 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Reminds me of the kerfluffle over Violet Blue being at the b-sides conference.
Reading about that, it sounds more like the same "help, help, I'm beingoppressedcensored" act that Blue trotted out during the Boing Boing mess. I'd question who thought it was a good idea to invite her in the first place. Not really relevant to the main topic of this thread.
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Reading about that, it sounds more like the same "help, help, I'm being
posted by Halloween Jack at 9:47 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
The way she's been treated since by some people is totally reprehensible and symptomatic of how the internet is full of morons and racists and misogynists, but the existence of real sexism does not mean that any given call-out is actually calling out sexism. Even people doing something wrong should not be subjected to the sort of things she's been called. On the other hand, even people saying mildly rude things in public should not be subject to public shaming for such.
These things can both be true simultaneously without each lessening the import of the other.
posted by Ex-Wastrel at 9:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
These things can both be true simultaneously without each lessening the import of the other.
posted by Ex-Wastrel at 9:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
Not the two guys at the conference, but post-facto racial harassment on HN, twitter, etc.
Yes, I understand, and as I said, now that she's incurred the wrath of the internet idiots, they will use any and every form of abuse available to attack her. It is despicable, but this is the sad condition of the internet. This is not news. And it doesn't make the story about race, any more than if somebody called her fat that this story would then be about sizeism.
posted by amorphatist at 9:51 PM on March 20, 2013
Yes, I understand, and as I said, now that she's incurred the wrath of the internet idiots, they will use any and every form of abuse available to attack her. It is despicable, but this is the sad condition of the internet. This is not news. And it doesn't make the story about race, any more than if somebody called her fat that this story would then be about sizeism.
posted by amorphatist at 9:51 PM on March 20, 2013
SendGrid's a good company. I've used them, and they seem to make the right noises about spam. Plus, if you think it's a good model to pay sendgrid prices for the sending of spam, then you probably don't know what you're talking about.
posted by zoo at 9:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by zoo at 9:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [9 favorites]
amorphatist: " And it doesn't make the story about race"
Oh, I don't know. It seems like the internet idiots response to her becomes part of the story. Maybe that's just my take on it, though.
posted by boo_radley at 9:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Oh, I don't know. It seems like the internet idiots response to her becomes part of the story. Maybe that's just my take on it, though.
posted by boo_radley at 9:55 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Sorry, running order, I think my initial response was poorly worded.
I don't really doubt that "lewd" jokes were made, but it does seem that there may have been some things that were misinterpreted.
I see two problems with her actions.
1) Shaming: Throwing up pictures of someone on twitter and accusing them of something is public shaming. I feel that's wrong in most contexts and obviously so. I don't think that public shaming is going to bring about the desired change in behaviour. Plus, what if she misheard or misunderstood (which seems to be part of the case)? Are internet mobs ever a good way to go about something? She could have made the tweet without the picture and it would have had the exact same effect (of attracting attention from the organizers).
2) Making things better for women: From a "making life better for females in the tech. industry" standpoint, it's a really weak play. There's no real corroborating evidence. From the beginning it was a my word against theirs story. And the comments she accused them of making aren't exactly inspiring revulsion amongst most people. If they said something sexist and demeaning, it would certainly help her cause if she could repeat it verbatim or an approximation thereof. I don't make my living using social media, but I'd like to think I would have recognized the potential for a blow up before tweeting.
I'm very happy to give her the benefit of the doubt and say that it was a mistake made by someone having a bad day. But her blog post did nothing to improve my opinion of her.
(Disclaimer: If you can use the word "dongle" in a sentence and not immediately think of dick jokes, you are a far more serious person than I.)
posted by Maugrim at 9:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
I don't really doubt that "lewd" jokes were made, but it does seem that there may have been some things that were misinterpreted.
I see two problems with her actions.
1) Shaming: Throwing up pictures of someone on twitter and accusing them of something is public shaming. I feel that's wrong in most contexts and obviously so. I don't think that public shaming is going to bring about the desired change in behaviour. Plus, what if she misheard or misunderstood (which seems to be part of the case)? Are internet mobs ever a good way to go about something? She could have made the tweet without the picture and it would have had the exact same effect (of attracting attention from the organizers).
2) Making things better for women: From a "making life better for females in the tech. industry" standpoint, it's a really weak play. There's no real corroborating evidence. From the beginning it was a my word against theirs story. And the comments she accused them of making aren't exactly inspiring revulsion amongst most people. If they said something sexist and demeaning, it would certainly help her cause if she could repeat it verbatim or an approximation thereof. I don't make my living using social media, but I'd like to think I would have recognized the potential for a blow up before tweeting.
I'm very happy to give her the benefit of the doubt and say that it was a mistake made by someone having a bad day. But her blog post did nothing to improve my opinion of her.
(Disclaimer: If you can use the word "dongle" in a sentence and not immediately think of dick jokes, you are a far more serious person than I.)
posted by Maugrim at 9:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
ThatFuzzyBastard: "So two people were in the sort of liminal space where you're observable but have a reasonable expectation of some privacy."
This and other comments make it sound like Ms. Richards was eavesdropping or intruding on the two men's conversation. That's wrong, at least if her side of the story is correct:
posted by jiawen at 9:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
This and other comments make it sound like Ms. Richards was eavesdropping or intruding on the two men's conversation. That's wrong, at least if her side of the story is correct:
The guy behind me to the far left was saying he didn’t find much value from the logging session that day. I agreed with him so I turned around and said so. He then went onto say that an earlier session he’d been to where the speaker was talking about images and visualization with Python was really good, even if it seemed to him the speaker wasn’t really an expert on images. He said he would be interested in forking the repo and continuing development.So she'd been in conversation with the first guy when the second joined in. She was not invading their private conversation; she was already engaged in it, until it took a turn for the worse. (Not to mention that the two guys were talking right behind her, in the middle of a public event.)
posted by jiawen at 9:59 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
The "fired" guy claims to have 3 kids. Look at the picture. What was he twelve when he got married. She caught some guys engaged in jerky and unprofessional behavior. She had every right to complain and shame them. They appogized and the world went on. All this stuff about how these morons were wronged because they were outed for behaving like asses is ridiculous
She's a smart, educated professional. If she was offended and they apologized; you should presume she heard some shit that was way over the line; and what you've read was probably sanitized. The idea that she's it some hysterical black woman is garbage. If that's your reaction, you need to take a minute and do some serious introspection. She obviously goes to many events and interacts with clients on a regular basis. People prone to hysterics and hyper-dramatic outbursts don't end up in those jobs at the level she's at. So give her the presumption of correctly calling the situation and accept that the conference handled this in a way that resulted in an appropriate appology.
posted by humanfont at 10:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
She's a smart, educated professional. If she was offended and they apologized; you should presume she heard some shit that was way over the line; and what you've read was probably sanitized. The idea that she's it some hysterical black woman is garbage. If that's your reaction, you need to take a minute and do some serious introspection. She obviously goes to many events and interacts with clients on a regular basis. People prone to hysterics and hyper-dramatic outbursts don't end up in those jobs at the level she's at. So give her the presumption of correctly calling the situation and accept that the conference handled this in a way that resulted in an appropriate appology.
posted by humanfont at 10:00 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
People prone to hysterics and hyper-dramatic outbursts don't end up in those jobs at the level she's at.
LOL.
posted by amorphatist at 10:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
LOL.
posted by amorphatist at 10:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
humanfont: People prone to hysterics and hyper-dramatic outbursts don't end up in those jobs at the level she's at.
I'm really not sure about that. People who are prone to drama and demonstrate a willingness to run to the teacher/boss/lawyer at the first offense can do surprisingly well. I think it's because everyone is too terrified of them to get rid of them downward, so they get rid of them upwards or sideways.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm really not sure about that. People who are prone to drama and demonstrate a willingness to run to the teacher/boss/lawyer at the first offense can do surprisingly well. I think it's because everyone is too terrified of them to get rid of them downward, so they get rid of them upwards or sideways.
posted by Mitrovarr at 10:09 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
Oh come off it. There is no indication whatsoever that the two guys took the race of some woman seated in front of them into account when they choose to banter amongst themselves about dongles and forking, nor did this charming offendee declare that they directed any racial nonsense towards her afterwards either (to the best of my knowledge, correct me if I'm wrong).
You're not wrong - but what you are asserting has nothing to do with what you quoted, so I am not sure what you think we are disagreeing about - it is as boo_radley says.
Regarding acne/weight - well, I don't think it's profitable to derail this thread with whether being racially abused is materially identical to being called "spotty" or "fatty". If that's what you believe, then that is a thing that you believe. It might be better discussed as an Ask MetaFilter question, though.
Her website says she has nearly 2 million views and 10,000 subscribers for her YouTube channel, so I think she is fairly notable as a social media personality
To be honest, I'm suspicious of the idea of a "social media personality" in general. Gotye, whom I would say actually is a social media personality - that is somebody recognizable from social media to mainstream audiences - got 380 million views for a single video. That's about the same as Totalbiscuit's lifetime views.
Charlie McDonnell - who you may well never have heard of, but who probably counts as a YouTube celebrity - gets more than 2 million views to a single video with reasonable regularity.
10,000 subscribers is 10,000 more than 0, and size certainly isn't everything - smaller followerships can be highly influential, and technology discussion on this level of granularity is unlikely to get the same number of views as cute cat videos.
I'm not trying to do her down or minimize her achievements or influence. I just don't think this is necessarily a case of a huge assymmetry in power or media profile. There's some good discussion about _why_ PyCon put a Code of Conduct in place on the webs - C. Titus Brown linked to his, above. I doubt that a company would change its corporate strategy, or fire someone, or a con would change its policies, purely out of fear of this kind of social reach.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
You're not wrong - but what you are asserting has nothing to do with what you quoted, so I am not sure what you think we are disagreeing about - it is as boo_radley says.
Regarding acne/weight - well, I don't think it's profitable to derail this thread with whether being racially abused is materially identical to being called "spotty" or "fatty". If that's what you believe, then that is a thing that you believe. It might be better discussed as an Ask MetaFilter question, though.
Her website says she has nearly 2 million views and 10,000 subscribers for her YouTube channel, so I think she is fairly notable as a social media personality
To be honest, I'm suspicious of the idea of a "social media personality" in general. Gotye, whom I would say actually is a social media personality - that is somebody recognizable from social media to mainstream audiences - got 380 million views for a single video. That's about the same as Totalbiscuit's lifetime views.
Charlie McDonnell - who you may well never have heard of, but who probably counts as a YouTube celebrity - gets more than 2 million views to a single video with reasonable regularity.
10,000 subscribers is 10,000 more than 0, and size certainly isn't everything - smaller followerships can be highly influential, and technology discussion on this level of granularity is unlikely to get the same number of views as cute cat videos.
I'm not trying to do her down or minimize her achievements or influence. I just don't think this is necessarily a case of a huge assymmetry in power or media profile. There's some good discussion about _why_ PyCon put a Code of Conduct in place on the webs - C. Titus Brown linked to his, above. I doubt that a company would change its corporate strategy, or fire someone, or a con would change its policies, purely out of fear of this kind of social reach.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Blasdelb: " That conference is a fucking workplace, not a playdate for awkward dudes. Indeed, how normal it seems that Big Dongle jokes apparently are at conferences like this is not an indication of how much she overreacted but how really warped tech shit is away from totally standard business practices that normalize not sexualizing everything and keep workplaces accessible."
Yeah, in most industries, the way this was handled is the norm. If your employer sends you to a conference, you represent your employer at the conference professionally, which means the workplace rules apply, plus you are now a public face of the company. If you do something to embarrass the company or anything that could be construed as a serious violation of workplace harassment policies (including telling off-color jokes), you can easily be fired for it. The tech industry is still behind the times, honestly, by a couple decades. I worked in tech for a long time until a couple years ago, and the atmosphere anywhere I worked always seemed like it sprung right out of the 1950s or a high school boys' locker room as far as attitudes towards women. It's long past due for a change, although the kicking and screaming will probably persist for a while...
posted by krinklyfig at 10:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yeah, in most industries, the way this was handled is the norm. If your employer sends you to a conference, you represent your employer at the conference professionally, which means the workplace rules apply, plus you are now a public face of the company. If you do something to embarrass the company or anything that could be construed as a serious violation of workplace harassment policies (including telling off-color jokes), you can easily be fired for it. The tech industry is still behind the times, honestly, by a couple decades. I worked in tech for a long time until a couple years ago, and the atmosphere anywhere I worked always seemed like it sprung right out of the 1950s or a high school boys' locker room as far as attitudes towards women. It's long past due for a change, although the kicking and screaming will probably persist for a while...
posted by krinklyfig at 10:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
It's unfortunate that the wind is carrying along with it a powerful amount of sexist tropes and same-old-awful arguments
I'm not seeing so much of that, though admittedly I'm far from a keen identifier of such things, and may simply to take them for granted.
I'm not seeing "bitch be cray," or "fuck em if they can't take a joke," just a lot of "this was an example of being sensitive to the point of 'reaching', as well as an extreme overreaction to said offense."
Given the context of the jokes, it strikes me as being nearly in the same ballpark as the various people who have been fired over the use of the word "niggardly" over the years. Or maybe a (hypethitical) UPS driver who was fired for telling a female client he had a big "package" for her, while smiling just a little too much.
This could have been a great opportunity to teach a couple of guys what "not cool" means, but the takeaway for them (and others who sympathize) now is "sheesh, they (feminists) really *can't* take a joke, can they?"
It's a real shame things went this way, given how the convention and Python community seemed to be really going out of their way to promote diversity, but dramatic situations like this seem more likely to promote mistrust and division. Guys might become fearful of including women in conversations, lest they be placed under extra scrutiny. Obviously the goal is to teach everyone to treat everyone respectfully, but this was no way to do it (speaking as one who considers himself a student of such lessons.)
posted by ShutterBun at 10:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm not seeing so much of that, though admittedly I'm far from a keen identifier of such things, and may simply to take them for granted.
I'm not seeing "bitch be cray," or "fuck em if they can't take a joke," just a lot of "this was an example of being sensitive to the point of 'reaching', as well as an extreme overreaction to said offense."
Given the context of the jokes, it strikes me as being nearly in the same ballpark as the various people who have been fired over the use of the word "niggardly" over the years. Or maybe a (hypethitical) UPS driver who was fired for telling a female client he had a big "package" for her, while smiling just a little too much.
This could have been a great opportunity to teach a couple of guys what "not cool" means, but the takeaway for them (and others who sympathize) now is "sheesh, they (feminists) really *can't* take a joke, can they?"
It's a real shame things went this way, given how the convention and Python community seemed to be really going out of their way to promote diversity, but dramatic situations like this seem more likely to promote mistrust and division. Guys might become fearful of including women in conversations, lest they be placed under extra scrutiny. Obviously the goal is to teach everyone to treat everyone respectfully, but this was no way to do it (speaking as one who considers himself a student of such lessons.)
posted by ShutterBun at 10:12 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The court of public opinion is never a fair trial. Reporting bad behavior to the conference and having the men escorted out, perfectly acceptable, laudatory even. The rest? Not so much.
posted by Freen at 10:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Freen at 10:14 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
He could be 24 for all I know. It doesn't take that long to make 3 kids.
posted by ShutterBun at 10:22 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by ShutterBun at 10:22 PM on March 20, 2013
Absent of any hate comments by the so-called shamed ones, this looks like a frontal assault on free speech.
posted by Brian B. at 10:25 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Brian B. at 10:25 PM on March 20, 2013
Reporting bad behavior to the conference and having the men escorted out, perfectly acceptable, laudatory even.
We're still not in agreement over the word "bad" here, by the way.
If everyone who ever made a "floppy drive / hard drive" innuendo in the 80's got fired...sheesh.
posted by ShutterBun at 10:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
We're still not in agreement over the word "bad" here, by the way.
If everyone who ever made a "floppy drive / hard drive" innuendo in the 80's got fired...sheesh.
posted by ShutterBun at 10:26 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Given the context of the jokes, it strikes me as being nearly in the same ballpark as the various people who have been fired over the use of the word "niggardly" over the years.
As an aside, this has happened once, to my knowledge, to a drugs councillor in Broward County in 2011, and even then it was a little more complicated than that. The most famous "fired for saying niggardly" example, David Howard, actually resigned, was invited to take his position back up and instead chose a different role in the Mayor's office.
Possibly you have better info, but this might be a good example of how ideas which fit a narrative get propagated - just as we still don't really have any solid evidence that anyone has been fired on this occasion, or, if they have been, for what.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
As an aside, this has happened once, to my knowledge, to a drugs councillor in Broward County in 2011, and even then it was a little more complicated than that. The most famous "fired for saying niggardly" example, David Howard, actually resigned, was invited to take his position back up and instead chose a different role in the Mayor's office.
Possibly you have better info, but this might be a good example of how ideas which fit a narrative get propagated - just as we still don't really have any solid evidence that anyone has been fired on this occasion, or, if they have been, for what.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:27 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I feel bad for the guy who got fired. I make lots of questionable jokes in public during private conversations (I mean, am I supposed to take all my bad jokes and my friends to a closet and whisper to each other?) and I certainly wouldn't want anyone snapping a picture of me (did she even get permission?) and telling the world about it without first confronting me.
It seems cowardly and vindictive. I'm sure if she had told the two that she was personally offended by their jokes, they would have probably apologized and stopped. No one would have been fired. She wouldn't look like a crazy person and people wouldn't be waving their internet fists at her.
posted by cyml at 10:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
It seems cowardly and vindictive. I'm sure if she had told the two that she was personally offended by their jokes, they would have probably apologized and stopped. No one would have been fired. She wouldn't look like a crazy person and people wouldn't be waving their internet fists at her.
posted by cyml at 10:32 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The court of public opinion is never a fair trial. Reporting bad behavior to the conference and having the men escorted out, perfectly acceptable, laudatory even. The rest? Not so much.
It is a scary thing to see many (including self-described liberals on Metafilter) endorse: Namely the destruction of a person's livelihood in the blink of an eye, over the whims of capricious Internet mob that saw a photograph, a false quote and filled in the blanks, right or wrong. It's like #amazonfail, but progressed to having actual human beings affected in a way that seems difficult to fix or undo. That is the power of a surveillance culture joined hand in hand with technology and a vindictive, fear-based mindset.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
It is a scary thing to see many (including self-described liberals on Metafilter) endorse: Namely the destruction of a person's livelihood in the blink of an eye, over the whims of capricious Internet mob that saw a photograph, a false quote and filled in the blanks, right or wrong. It's like #amazonfail, but progressed to having actual human beings affected in a way that seems difficult to fix or undo. That is the power of a surveillance culture joined hand in hand with technology and a vindictive, fear-based mindset.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [10 favorites]
I see outrage above about someone possibly getting fired, even though we have no actual evidence that this occurred. Also outrage about guys being kicked out of the conference , when the truth is they were just pulled aside and decided to give an appology after talking about it. They were not kicked out.
I am tired of this ongoing grar in this thread over things that DID NOT HAPPEN. These myths are being used to position the woman as a bad person and ignore what happened to her. Focus on the facts.
posted by humanfont at 10:48 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
I am tired of this ongoing grar in this thread over things that DID NOT HAPPEN. These myths are being used to position the woman as a bad person and ignore what happened to her. Focus on the facts.
posted by humanfont at 10:48 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
ignore what happened to her
What happened to her? She was in the proximity of dick jokes not of her own making and ???
posted by Artw at 10:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
What happened to her? She was in the proximity of dick jokes not of her own making and ???
posted by Artw at 10:51 PM on March 20, 2013 [8 favorites]
I'm female, loud, non-neurotypical, have a filthy sense of humour and often say things out loud before I realise quite what I've said. It's not the blokes with their dongle jokes in this situation who scare me, but that someone used shaming by photograph and tweet to deal with a daft double entendre from a conversation they dipped into. One day someone like Adria Richards will probably pick on me and do me serious damage and maybe even get me fired since I don't do a terribly good job of keeping my mouth shut and acting 'professional'.
I also really didn't like the pompous 'Won't somebody think of the children?' justification, especially when no children were present except as photos. It's a great excuse to bully and police people.
posted by Flitcraft at 10:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
I also really didn't like the pompous 'Won't somebody think of the children?' justification, especially when no children were present except as photos. It's a great excuse to bully and police people.
posted by Flitcraft at 10:52 PM on March 20, 2013 [37 favorites]
Mod note: Comment deleted. Do not come into this thread with your gallon of gasoline and pack of matches, or you will get a time out.
posted by taz (staff) at 11:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 11:02 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
oh, look at all the poor nerds who have memories of saying things that they realise actually kind of are inappropriate, and feel bad for someone getting punished for doing the same thing. It's kind of like the conversations the Steubenville football coaches probably had among themselves, 'oh man I totally did the same thing when I was 16, lucky there wasn't twitter and phones then huh Bob!? Feels terrible to know that these days it can just ruin a nice kids life, his whole football career!'.
posted by jacalata at 11:03 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by jacalata at 11:03 PM on March 20, 2013
It's kind of like the conversations the Steubenville football coaches probably had among themselves
Um, no, it's really not.
posted by Artw at 11:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [38 favorites]
Um, no, it's really not.
posted by Artw at 11:07 PM on March 20, 2013 [38 favorites]
Oh FFS, jacalata, she overheard a conversation among strangers.
Comparing that to rape plus massive coverup is A) insane, and B) far more objectionable than anything these guys are accused of.
posted by Malor at 11:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Comparing that to rape plus massive coverup is A) insane, and B) far more objectionable than anything these guys are accused of.
posted by Malor at 11:08 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Mod note: Yes, please do not do this. Please just have a conversation without setting up hyperbolic overblown premises. It really, really doesn't help.
posted by taz (staff) at 11:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by taz (staff) at 11:10 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
She otter have deleted the tweet with the photo after the situation had been dealt with. It does no good after.
posted by wemayfreeze at 11:13 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by wemayfreeze at 11:13 PM on March 20, 2013
What happened to her? She was in the proximity of dick jokes not of her own making and ???
Did you read her account. She was at a conference talking with another attendee about a previous session they had both attended. Forking the code was suggested. She turned around and they started making jokes about forking her code and other women, and about the size of their dongles. She notified conference orgs, they got an appology.
If there was some misunderstanding of intent then I'd be more sympathetic of the guys. I was working a large corporate party. In an attempt to get the dancing going the DJ said, "come on up here, show me your moves." A person at the back heard it as , "come on up here, show me your boobs." They tweeted upset about it. I had to grab some staff and lead a search party to make sure we cleared it up. It all got worked out.
posted by humanfont at 11:15 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
As an aside, this has happened once, to my knowledge, to a drugs councillor in Broward County in 2011, and even then it was a little more complicated than that. The most famous "fired for saying niggardly" example, David Howard, actually resigned, was invited to take his position back up and instead chose a different role in the Mayor's office.
When it comes to political appointments, I tend to read "accepted his resignation" as being more or less equal to "fired." (The mayor himself profusely apologized for his "haste", which tends to point toward pressure against the accused.) Nevertheless, your account is accurate. There have been numerous other public controversies over the word, though. (Wikipedia has a whole section on it)
/derail
posted by ShutterBun at 11:16 PM on March 20, 2013
When it comes to political appointments, I tend to read "accepted his resignation" as being more or less equal to "fired." (The mayor himself profusely apologized for his "haste", which tends to point toward pressure against the accused.) Nevertheless, your account is accurate. There have been numerous other public controversies over the word, though. (Wikipedia has a whole section on it)
/derail
posted by ShutterBun at 11:16 PM on March 20, 2013
If there was some misunderstanding of intent then I'd be more sympathetic of the guys.
There was.
posted by ShutterBun at 11:22 PM on March 20, 2013
There was.
posted by ShutterBun at 11:22 PM on March 20, 2013
Did you read her account. She was at a conference talking with another attendee about a previous session they had both attended. Forking the code was suggested. She turned around and they started making jokes about forking her code and other women, and about the size of their dongles. She notified conference orgs, they got an appology.
Yeah, that's not what happened according to her account. The jokes didn't involve her or, apparently, other women. Her description of what was said is very vague.
It also seems, if you believe the account of the person making the joke, that Adria misunderstood the context in which forking was being used.
posted by Maugrim at 11:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Yeah, that's not what happened according to her account. The jokes didn't involve her or, apparently, other women. Her description of what was said is very vague.
It also seems, if you believe the account of the person making the joke, that Adria misunderstood the context in which forking was being used.
posted by Maugrim at 11:24 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Did you read her account. She was at a conference talking with another attendee about a previous session they had both attended. Forking the code was suggested. She turned around and they started making jokes about forking her code and other women, and about the size of their dongles.Are you referring to her account here? If so, I did read that. Obviously I might have missed something, but I didn't notice her claim that they joked about forking her code. Nor did I notice her claim that they joked about forking other women. Nor did I notice her claim that they were talking about their big dongles. Did she claim these things there? Or elsewhere?
posted by Flunkie at 11:25 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I see outrage above about someone possibly getting fired, even though we have no actual evidence that this occurred.
"I'm only reacting to what I was told." - Martin Brody, Chief of Police, Amity Island
posted by ShutterBun at 11:25 PM on March 20, 2013
"I'm only reacting to what I was told." - Martin Brody, Chief of Police, Amity Island
posted by ShutterBun at 11:25 PM on March 20, 2013
"oh, look at all the poor nerds who have memories of saying things that they realise actually kind of are inappropriate, and feel bad for someone getting punished for doing the same thing. It's kind of like the conversations the Steubenville football coaches probably had among themselves, 'oh man I totally did the same thing when I was 16, lucky there wasn't twitter and phones then huh Bob!? Feels terrible to know that these days it can just ruin a nice kids life, his whole football career!'."
Whoa, that's a massive fucking overstatement. If you can't describe what they did without playing a Steubenville Godwin, you don't have a very good argument and you should examine that before saying that being reserved in judgment here based on personal experience is the same as excusing gang rape. That's incredibly inflammatory and offensive, not least to actual victims of rape. Papercut Holocaust.
posted by klangklangston at 11:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Whoa, that's a massive fucking overstatement. If you can't describe what they did without playing a Steubenville Godwin, you don't have a very good argument and you should examine that before saying that being reserved in judgment here based on personal experience is the same as excusing gang rape. That's incredibly inflammatory and offensive, not least to actual victims of rape. Papercut Holocaust.
posted by klangklangston at 11:28 PM on March 20, 2013 [6 favorites]
Yeah, I just took another look at her account. This is what she describes:
The forking joke set the stage for the dongle joke. Neither were funny.
-
He said he would be interested in forking the repo and continuing development.
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
That's pretty much all the detail she gives and the account from the guy suggests it was joking about forking a guy. It isn't really specific enough to judge exactly how offended or not she "should" be, but she obviously felt it was serious.
posted by Drinky Die at 11:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
The forking joke set the stage for the dongle joke. Neither were funny.
-
He said he would be interested in forking the repo and continuing development.
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
That's pretty much all the detail she gives and the account from the guy suggests it was joking about forking a guy. It isn't really specific enough to judge exactly how offended or not she "should" be, but she obviously felt it was serious.
posted by Drinky Die at 11:29 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Flunkie: " Did she claim these things there? "
That doesn't make any difference in terms of whether or not telling those jokes is a violation of the conference policies or is considered sexual harassment in a workplace. Telling sexual jokes or making sexual comments in the workplace is considered harassment, whether or not they could be considered to be sexist or directed at any gender or person in particular. It's contributing to a hostile work environment. It's also a violation of the conference rules.
posted by krinklyfig at 11:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
That doesn't make any difference in terms of whether or not telling those jokes is a violation of the conference policies or is considered sexual harassment in a workplace. Telling sexual jokes or making sexual comments in the workplace is considered harassment, whether or not they could be considered to be sexist or directed at any gender or person in particular. It's contributing to a hostile work environment. It's also a violation of the conference rules.
posted by krinklyfig at 11:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
"She turned around and they started making jokes about forking her code and other women, and about the size of their dongles."
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
posted by klangklangston at 11:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
posted by klangklangston at 11:30 PM on March 20, 2013 [34 favorites]
Is it a coincidence that just a few hours ago, for a reason that I no longer remember, I was thinking of the time that Amanda Marcotte called the people who thought the Duke non-rapists might be innocent "rape-loving scum"? Good times.
I have so many questions. Can someone explain to me how what Adria did empowers women? What exactly is "progressive" about this? Why are even the most far-left Americans (well, some of them anyway) still puritanical prudes? Are our fucked-up attitudes towards sex so pervasive and oppressive that even the most enlightened minds among us cannot shake them? And yes, these are all serious questions.
Look, as much as I abhor the whole "slippery slope" fallacy, the commenter who said that the logical conclusion of this thinking is to have all the women wear hijabs lest a Muslim male be in the audience is correct. I know that to serial conclusion-jumpers this sounds like "women need to just shut up and deal with men being sexist pigs", but it is not. Middle ground, people. This could've been solved (assuming there even was a situation to begin with) in a few seconds by her turning around and explaining how what they were saying made her feel. Hell, she even could have tweeted that she got a couple guys to become slightly more enlightened about inadvertent sexism, at a developer's conference, no less! Could've had all that sweet, sweet internet twitter glory without destroying a guy's life.
posted by MattMangels at 11:31 PM on March 20, 2013
I have so many questions. Can someone explain to me how what Adria did empowers women? What exactly is "progressive" about this? Why are even the most far-left Americans (well, some of them anyway) still puritanical prudes? Are our fucked-up attitudes towards sex so pervasive and oppressive that even the most enlightened minds among us cannot shake them? And yes, these are all serious questions.
Look, as much as I abhor the whole "slippery slope" fallacy, the commenter who said that the logical conclusion of this thinking is to have all the women wear hijabs lest a Muslim male be in the audience is correct. I know that to serial conclusion-jumpers this sounds like "women need to just shut up and deal with men being sexist pigs", but it is not. Middle ground, people. This could've been solved (assuming there even was a situation to begin with) in a few seconds by her turning around and explaining how what they were saying made her feel. Hell, she even could have tweeted that she got a couple guys to become slightly more enlightened about inadvertent sexism, at a developer's conference, no less! Could've had all that sweet, sweet internet twitter glory without destroying a guy's life.
posted by MattMangels at 11:31 PM on March 20, 2013
I didn't say it did make a difference with respect to that, krinklyfig. I asked if she said the things that humanfont said she said.
posted by Flunkie at 11:32 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by Flunkie at 11:32 PM on March 20, 2013
Malor: "Oh FFS, jacalata, she overheard a conversation among strangers."
No, from the looks of it, she was in a conversation with strangers.
posted by jiawen at 11:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
No, from the looks of it, she was in a conversation with strangers.
posted by jiawen at 11:33 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
And yes, these are all serious questions.
No they're not. They're a singleminded opinion masquerading as open-mindedness by slapping question marks on leading statements.
posted by fatbird at 11:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
No they're not. They're a singleminded opinion masquerading as open-mindedness by slapping question marks on leading statements.
posted by fatbird at 11:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
I feel like there is so much I don't know about what happened, I'm not comfortable coming to a conclusion. I don't know what was said, I don't know how long it was sustained, I don't know if there was anything resembling an opportunity to address these guys directly.
I do know that the response to this has been a relentless attack on her character, her psychology, and very literal DOS attacks on her website. I know a lot of the responses have been to specifically mock her gender. I know people are trying to wedge this into some "PC gone amok" narrative when they know just as little as I do. I know there is an exceptional amount of ad hominem.
And, from past events like this, I know that this is what she would have had to endure even if they had make unambiguously sexist jokes or engaged in unambiguously inappropriate behavior. Because that's what women have to deal with. And I would rather we not participate in attacking her personally or in inventing scenarios or in any of the other endemic misbehavior toward women that this sort of thing produces.
All I know is the event has rules of conduct, she felt they were violated, she reported it, she tweeted it, they were chastised, one apologized, and apparently one was fired. Without more detail, I don't know that she was overreacting, I don't know that they were in the wrong, I don't know anything but the barest bones and some conflicting accounts. One thing I know is that rushing to judgement on either side here is likely to make people look foolish at best.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
I do know that the response to this has been a relentless attack on her character, her psychology, and very literal DOS attacks on her website. I know a lot of the responses have been to specifically mock her gender. I know people are trying to wedge this into some "PC gone amok" narrative when they know just as little as I do. I know there is an exceptional amount of ad hominem.
And, from past events like this, I know that this is what she would have had to endure even if they had make unambiguously sexist jokes or engaged in unambiguously inappropriate behavior. Because that's what women have to deal with. And I would rather we not participate in attacking her personally or in inventing scenarios or in any of the other endemic misbehavior toward women that this sort of thing produces.
All I know is the event has rules of conduct, she felt they were violated, she reported it, she tweeted it, they were chastised, one apologized, and apparently one was fired. Without more detail, I don't know that she was overreacting, I don't know that they were in the wrong, I don't know anything but the barest bones and some conflicting accounts. One thing I know is that rushing to judgement on either side here is likely to make people look foolish at best.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:34 PM on March 20, 2013 [16 favorites]
All I know is the event has rules of conduct, she felt they were violated, she reported it, she tweeted it, they were chastised, one apologized, and apparently one was fired.
She tweeted and included a photograph.
There's a world of difference.
posted by Maugrim at 11:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
She tweeted and included a photograph.
There's a world of difference.
posted by Maugrim at 11:37 PM on March 20, 2013 [5 favorites]
Feel free to be critical of that. But this digging into her private life, scouring her tweets to show her up as a hypocrite, armchair psychoanalyzing, etc.? It's not forwarding the conversation, it's just making it look like people think that she misbehaved and this justifies any attack against her.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:39 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
I acted grossly unprofessionally at a professional conference while representing my company
Professionalism is a ruse invented by companies to make you feel guilty about having a life outside of work. It's always a one way street, with the employee having obligations the employer does not have and it's always code for "we will fuck you over if you step out of line".
posted by MartinWisse at 11:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [38 favorites]
Professionalism is a ruse invented by companies to make you feel guilty about having a life outside of work. It's always a one way street, with the employee having obligations the employer does not have and it's always code for "we will fuck you over if you step out of line".
posted by MartinWisse at 11:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [38 favorites]
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
Worse than that, it gets amplified in an echo chamber to the point until people can no longer distinguish it from anything that reasonably approaches objective truth.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
Worse than that, it gets amplified in an echo chamber to the point until people can no longer distinguish it from anything that reasonably approaches objective truth.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:40 PM on March 20, 2013 [7 favorites]
What if I told you there is a third type of woman, the woman who hates misogyny, but sometimes enjoys and even initiates bawdy banter?
It's almost ironic the way self-proclaimed feminists find women to be such delicate fragile flowers that we must ban vast swaths of normal sorts of communication and interaction generally enjoyed by majorities of men and women.
It's like the way the left and right bleed into each other at the extremes; "liberal" ideas about sex and gender looping back around into repressive, unnatural rules foisted by a small, vocal, self-righteous minority, vainly trying to proscribe common human experiences from our shared society.
posted by crayz at 11:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
It's almost ironic the way self-proclaimed feminists find women to be such delicate fragile flowers that we must ban vast swaths of normal sorts of communication and interaction generally enjoyed by majorities of men and women.
It's like the way the left and right bleed into each other at the extremes; "liberal" ideas about sex and gender looping back around into repressive, unnatural rules foisted by a small, vocal, self-righteous minority, vainly trying to proscribe common human experiences from our shared society.
posted by crayz at 11:41 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Hell, she even could have tweeted that she got a couple guys to become slightly more enlightened about inadvertent sexism, at a developer's conference, no less!
She could, indeed, have tweeted that. It would not, however, make it true. In that context, at least from what we've been told, it seems very unlikely that there was any sexism. The comments were not directed at her, and there's no way to construe what she's told us about as anti-woman or pro-man in any particular way.
It might upset the prudish, but sexual humor is not at all the same as sexist humor.
It seems to me that what these guys are really guilty of is being un-funny in earshot of the wrong person.
posted by Malor at 11:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
She could, indeed, have tweeted that. It would not, however, make it true. In that context, at least from what we've been told, it seems very unlikely that there was any sexism. The comments were not directed at her, and there's no way to construe what she's told us about as anti-woman or pro-man in any particular way.
It might upset the prudish, but sexual humor is not at all the same as sexist humor.
It seems to me that what these guys are really guilty of is being un-funny in earshot of the wrong person.
posted by Malor at 11:42 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
So, I attended PyCon this year, and I read and agreed to the Code of Conduct and I think that the key paragraphs are these ones:
That said? I think the PSF handled it with aplomb; they called the jokers outside and spoke to them about the fact that their behaviour was causing another person discomfort, and everything went better than expected. If the picture had been never been made public, then I think I'd still be squicked about the humourlessness that is being asked for, but I'd still be onboard with the whole process.
posted by ChrisR at 11:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
Harassment includes offensive verbal comments related to gender, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention.From the attendee procedure for reporting harassment document, a specific note:
Participants asked to stop any harassing behavior are expected to comply immediately.
Public shaming can be counter-productive to building a strong community. PyCon does not condone nor participate in such actions out of respect.These are nice, clear statements about how to behave at a con. It is possible to argue that the joker in question was immature, but I have a hard time seeing how his comments to his friend constituted any of the offenses called out above. I do see a possible violation on the photographer's part, though; harassing photography is a decent name for what she did, and so is public shaming.
That said? I think the PSF handled it with aplomb; they called the jokers outside and spoke to them about the fact that their behaviour was causing another person discomfort, and everything went better than expected. If the picture had been never been made public, then I think I'd still be squicked about the humourlessness that is being asked for, but I'd still be onboard with the whole process.
posted by ChrisR at 11:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [15 favorites]
It's almost ironic the way self-proclaimed feminists find women to be such delicate fragile flowers that we must ban vast swaths of normal sorts of communication and interaction generally enjoyed by majorities of men and women.
And it's intensely distressing that people feel free to invent straw feminists and mock them using gendered language in public forums. Is it really impossible that we not do that here?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
And it's intensely distressing that people feel free to invent straw feminists and mock them using gendered language in public forums. Is it really impossible that we not do that here?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:43 PM on March 20, 2013 [14 favorites]
Feel free to be critical of that. But this digging into her private life, scouring her tweets to show her up as a hypocrite, armchair psychoanalyzing, etc.? It's not forwarding the conversation, it's just making it look like people think that she misbehaved and this justifies any attack against her.
Honestly, I don't see much of that in this thread.
What I'm getting is that a lot of people who would, provided just cause, happily rally to her side if they weren't skeptical of Adria's actions.
posted by Maugrim at 11:44 PM on March 20, 2013
Honestly, I don't see much of that in this thread.
What I'm getting is that a lot of people who would, provided just cause, happily rally to her side if they weren't skeptical of Adria's actions.
posted by Maugrim at 11:44 PM on March 20, 2013
Honestly, I don't see much of that in this thread.
I guess I see enough of it that I felt it should be commented on.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:47 PM on March 20, 2013
I guess I see enough of it that I felt it should be commented on.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:47 PM on March 20, 2013
crayz: " It's almost ironic the way self-proclaimed feminists find women to be such delicate fragile flowers that we must ban vast swaths of normal sorts of communication and interaction generally enjoyed by majorities of men and women."
I enjoy that kind of thing, too, but I'm an adult, so I can discern when such banter is appropriate or not and act accordingly. Especially when the rules are posted publicly, and my job is at stake.
posted by krinklyfig at 11:47 PM on March 20, 2013
I enjoy that kind of thing, too, but I'm an adult, so I can discern when such banter is appropriate or not and act accordingly. Especially when the rules are posted publicly, and my job is at stake.
posted by krinklyfig at 11:47 PM on March 20, 2013
Maugrim: What I'm getting is that a lot of people who would, provided just cause, happily rally to her side being skeptical of Adria's actions.
Yeah, if the events matched humanfont's very misleading rendition, I suspect MeFi would be apoplectic. The described behavior would be absolutely unacceptable, humiliating and demeaning her precisely because she was female.
But that's not, at least by the evidence that's on display at present, even remotely what actually happened.
posted by Malor at 11:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, if the events matched humanfont's very misleading rendition, I suspect MeFi would be apoplectic. The described behavior would be absolutely unacceptable, humiliating and demeaning her precisely because she was female.
But that's not, at least by the evidence that's on display at present, even remotely what actually happened.
posted by Malor at 11:49 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Man, what a mess all around. As anyone who follows me on Twitter can attest to, I'm pretty strident when it comes to issues of sexism and oppression and creating hostile environments for people with comparative little social power, but I have a hard time standing fully behind Richards on this one.
Some dudes behaved not optimally, she overreacted, the internet flipped the fuck out and is raining abuse and threats down on her and the PyCon organisers, and the employer (if HN is to be believed, which is a pretty big if) got freaked out and pulled the trigger on the guy too hastily. Seems like the only people who come off not looking like assholes are the Con staff, whose positions I do not envy one bit.
There's been some notable trends in the reactions to Richards, though. For one, I absolutely do not believe or agree that she would have been treated with much more kindness if the incident she called out was more egregious. It's an unfortunate reality that women who call attention to themselves in any way invite abuse, even if they have all the justification in the world. It's therefore doubly frustrating that this incident muddies the water on much worse instances of boundary-crossing and misogyny. She may not identify as a feminist (although she needs to do a hell of a lot more reading if she thinks feminism isn't about power and structural issues) but as this thread demonstrates, this incident will be attributed to feminism by both sides.
Secondly, there's been a little bit of discussion of how it sucks that the tech world is becoming more rigid and corporate, and that people like Richards represent the vanguard of that trend. Which I think is a little bit simplistic. The tech world may be more structured now, but it's also so much more accessible to a wider audience. I used Wordpress casually for years before deciding to check out a WordCamp, and loved it so much I switched careers. I could have taught myself the same things I learned in those 3-4 workshops by reading the Codex or something, but the diverse and engaging atmosphere at the convention made Wordpress development feel like something that was attainable to me, even if I'm not good at sitting through hours of documentation.
But when you run conferences (and organizations) that are open to a wider audience, you necessarily need codes of conduct. Not because bureaucracy is the unavoidable end state of things, but because you can't negotiate informal social norms when you have a diverse group with different backgrounds and expertise and engagement. The CoCs are there to protect the newcomers as well as the health of the community, even if this formalization of norms feels stuffy.
I'm personally incredibly grateful for the recent move in nerdy conventions to try and adopt anti-harassment CoCs. Not every convention is great at implementing or enforcing these, but their presence is an indicator to me that my experience matters, even if I'm not the expert speaker that everyone reveres. That means a lot.
The issue of inclusiveness is, IMO, separate from the issue of corporatization. A CoC looks like an HR document and thus feels like bureaucracy, but it doesn't have to reflect a lack of human input and contextual analysis in reflexive decision making. A bad implementation of a CoC can be that, yes, but bad implementations are not grounds for dismissing good ideas.
But given the tech world's aversion to anything that has a whiff of being corporate (something I don't disagree with), it's then interesting that there's been a lot of (attempted) character analysis of Richards in this thread that paint her in this light. She has a silly title, she is dramatic in her blog post, she works for a company in the most hated of all industries, etc. which is justification for accusing her of attention seeking, trying to get agead, being sociopathic, whatever. Even the employer's alleged pigheadedness, a perfect example of knee-jerk corporatism, is being attributed to her as something she intended or wanted to happen.
I'm not a fan of her behaviour at all, but it really of sucks that we still can't discuss the behaviour without inferring malicious motives or maligning her character. Not surprising, but still sucky.
posted by Phire at 11:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
Some dudes behaved not optimally, she overreacted, the internet flipped the fuck out and is raining abuse and threats down on her and the PyCon organisers, and the employer (if HN is to be believed, which is a pretty big if) got freaked out and pulled the trigger on the guy too hastily. Seems like the only people who come off not looking like assholes are the Con staff, whose positions I do not envy one bit.
There's been some notable trends in the reactions to Richards, though. For one, I absolutely do not believe or agree that she would have been treated with much more kindness if the incident she called out was more egregious. It's an unfortunate reality that women who call attention to themselves in any way invite abuse, even if they have all the justification in the world. It's therefore doubly frustrating that this incident muddies the water on much worse instances of boundary-crossing and misogyny. She may not identify as a feminist (although she needs to do a hell of a lot more reading if she thinks feminism isn't about power and structural issues) but as this thread demonstrates, this incident will be attributed to feminism by both sides.
Secondly, there's been a little bit of discussion of how it sucks that the tech world is becoming more rigid and corporate, and that people like Richards represent the vanguard of that trend. Which I think is a little bit simplistic. The tech world may be more structured now, but it's also so much more accessible to a wider audience. I used Wordpress casually for years before deciding to check out a WordCamp, and loved it so much I switched careers. I could have taught myself the same things I learned in those 3-4 workshops by reading the Codex or something, but the diverse and engaging atmosphere at the convention made Wordpress development feel like something that was attainable to me, even if I'm not good at sitting through hours of documentation.
But when you run conferences (and organizations) that are open to a wider audience, you necessarily need codes of conduct. Not because bureaucracy is the unavoidable end state of things, but because you can't negotiate informal social norms when you have a diverse group with different backgrounds and expertise and engagement. The CoCs are there to protect the newcomers as well as the health of the community, even if this formalization of norms feels stuffy.
I'm personally incredibly grateful for the recent move in nerdy conventions to try and adopt anti-harassment CoCs. Not every convention is great at implementing or enforcing these, but their presence is an indicator to me that my experience matters, even if I'm not the expert speaker that everyone reveres. That means a lot.
The issue of inclusiveness is, IMO, separate from the issue of corporatization. A CoC looks like an HR document and thus feels like bureaucracy, but it doesn't have to reflect a lack of human input and contextual analysis in reflexive decision making. A bad implementation of a CoC can be that, yes, but bad implementations are not grounds for dismissing good ideas.
But given the tech world's aversion to anything that has a whiff of being corporate (something I don't disagree with), it's then interesting that there's been a lot of (attempted) character analysis of Richards in this thread that paint her in this light. She has a silly title, she is dramatic in her blog post, she works for a company in the most hated of all industries, etc. which is justification for accusing her of attention seeking, trying to get agead, being sociopathic, whatever. Even the employer's alleged pigheadedness, a perfect example of knee-jerk corporatism, is being attributed to her as something she intended or wanted to happen.
I'm not a fan of her behaviour at all, but it really of sucks that we still can't discuss the behaviour without inferring malicious motives or maligning her character. Not surprising, but still sucky.
posted by Phire at 11:50 PM on March 20, 2013 [20 favorites]
Humanfont wrote: I see outrage above about someone possibly getting fired, even though we have no actual evidence that this occurred.
We have a statement from someone who claims to be the guy that got fired. And we have a statement from someone who claims to have overheard inappropriate remarks. It's the same sort of evidence, and in neither case is it especially clear or especially good.
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
We have a statement from someone who claims to be the guy that got fired. And we have a statement from someone who claims to have overheard inappropriate remarks. It's the same sort of evidence, and in neither case is it especially clear or especially good.
posted by Joe in Australia at 11:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [2 favorites]
I guess I see enough of it that I felt it should be commented on.
Fair enough. Please point it out when you see it.
My issue is primarily with the photo attached to the tweet.
Does anything merit the treatment she's received? No. Did Adria bring an avoidable situation on herself because she chose to tweet a photo alongside her text rather than just tweeting text? Yes.
posted by Maugrim at 11:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Fair enough. Please point it out when you see it.
My issue is primarily with the photo attached to the tweet.
Does anything merit the treatment she's received? No. Did Adria bring an avoidable situation on herself because she chose to tweet a photo alongside her text rather than just tweeting text? Yes.
posted by Maugrim at 11:53 PM on March 20, 2013 [1 favorite]
Blazecock Pileon:
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
Worse than that, it gets amplified in an echo chamber to the point until people can no longer distinguish it from anything that reasonably approaches objective truth.
................................................................................................................
Oh how I wish I could favor that a thousand times.
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
Worse than that, it gets amplified in an echo chamber to the point until people can no longer distinguish it from anything that reasonably approaches objective truth.
................................................................................................................
Oh how I wish I could favor that a thousand times.
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013
Phire: For one, I absolutely do not believe or agree that she would have been treated with much more kindness if the incident she called out was more egregious.
Well, the internet troll brigade would probably be out in force no matter what, but in places like MeFi, she'd have a lot of support. Imagine that humanfont's rendition up there was true, and I suspect the anger and derision here would be almost unanimous. (in her favor, not opposing her.)
So she'd absolutely get a lot more kindness if her case were better; the haters would hate no matter what, but she'd have a huge number of people backing her, instead of offering anything from very tepid support to outright eye-rolling at her claim.
posted by Malor at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Well, the internet troll brigade would probably be out in force no matter what, but in places like MeFi, she'd have a lot of support. Imagine that humanfont's rendition up there was true, and I suspect the anger and derision here would be almost unanimous. (in her favor, not opposing her.)
So she'd absolutely get a lot more kindness if her case were better; the haters would hate no matter what, but she'd have a huge number of people backing her, instead of offering anything from very tepid support to outright eye-rolling at her claim.
posted by Malor at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [4 favorites]
Has the guy claiming to have been fired and to therefore be telling one side of this story over on HN been verified in any way? Every article about it links back to those posts, and I can't find any verification of the poster there. Like, you know, wouldn't it be easy just to post a picture of yourself?
posted by lantius at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013
posted by lantius at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013
TBH the thing that's most depressing about if is the Internet flip out. Its so seemingly inevitable these days, and dumb, and heaping dumb on top of dumb helps no-one at all.
posted by Artw at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Artw at 11:56 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
It's like the way the left and right bleed into each other at the extremes; "liberal" ideas about sex and gender looping back around into repressive, unnatural rules foisted by a small, vocal, self-righteous minority, vainly trying to proscribe common human experiences from our shared society.
Yes! MetaFilter, myself certainly included, will (more often that not) rightfully jump on anyone espousing the tired old "left and right are just the same, extreme views = bad, why don't you join me over here in the magical middle where unicorns bake cherry pie all day long and cocaine isn't bad for you" line. It's one of the most cliched, unoriginal, hackneyed things one can say in these sorts of discussions.
Yet, I'll be darned if there isn't some truth to it; not being a writer the only way I can think to express it is "extremists gonna extreme". These kinds of threads used to make me angry, now I just try to find whatever truth I can in them, even if it's an uncomfortable one.
posted by MattMangels at 11:57 PM on March 20, 2013
Yes! MetaFilter, myself certainly included, will (more often that not) rightfully jump on anyone espousing the tired old "left and right are just the same, extreme views = bad, why don't you join me over here in the magical middle where unicorns bake cherry pie all day long and cocaine isn't bad for you" line. It's one of the most cliched, unoriginal, hackneyed things one can say in these sorts of discussions.
Yet, I'll be darned if there isn't some truth to it; not being a writer the only way I can think to express it is "extremists gonna extreme". These kinds of threads used to make me angry, now I just try to find whatever truth I can in them, even if it's an uncomfortable one.
posted by MattMangels at 11:57 PM on March 20, 2013
But that's not, at least by the evidence that's on display at present, even remotely what actually happened.
Well, the trouble is that codes of conduct have eliminated much overtly sexual behavior, and so we wind up with a lot of these edge cases, where the inappropriateness is uncertain and a matter of opinion. And I think what bothers me is that in these edge cases, there isn't so much of a discussion as an instant, angry dismissal. With more information, this is an instance where I might feel the behavior of the two men was not inappropriate -- but, then, it's not my call. I do think people should never be discouraged from reporting, and the organizers can address it. And I think the fact of reporting it shouldn't invite a torrent of abuse, or outright dismissal, or refusal to engage the discussion, or a presumption that one side must necessarily be wrong because no way is that sexist, because then there are no mechanisms for addressing the stuff that might be a problem but hasn't come up yet, or stuff that's a problem that people aren't aware of, or stuff that is just barely to one side of being a problem, but actually, yes, still is a problem. This might not be an example of it, and she may have been overreacting, but a lot of the response in general, and some of it here, seems to be an attempt to just tell her that she should have shut up.
Should she have tweeted the photo? I think not, but that's again something the conference has rules about and can address. The fact that she did something wrong does not mean anything else in this is right.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
Well, the trouble is that codes of conduct have eliminated much overtly sexual behavior, and so we wind up with a lot of these edge cases, where the inappropriateness is uncertain and a matter of opinion. And I think what bothers me is that in these edge cases, there isn't so much of a discussion as an instant, angry dismissal. With more information, this is an instance where I might feel the behavior of the two men was not inappropriate -- but, then, it's not my call. I do think people should never be discouraged from reporting, and the organizers can address it. And I think the fact of reporting it shouldn't invite a torrent of abuse, or outright dismissal, or refusal to engage the discussion, or a presumption that one side must necessarily be wrong because no way is that sexist, because then there are no mechanisms for addressing the stuff that might be a problem but hasn't come up yet, or stuff that's a problem that people aren't aware of, or stuff that is just barely to one side of being a problem, but actually, yes, still is a problem. This might not be an example of it, and she may have been overreacting, but a lot of the response in general, and some of it here, seems to be an attempt to just tell her that she should have shut up.
Should she have tweeted the photo? I think not, but that's again something the conference has rules about and can address. The fact that she did something wrong does not mean anything else in this is right.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:58 PM on March 20, 2013 [3 favorites]
A few things, reading the guy's apology:
a) I think he needs to get some credit for an *actual* apology here; he actually says he regrets making the joke and that he defends Adria's right to complain. What he said wasn't some wishy-washy "I'm sorry you feel this way" shit.
b) He seems to be hinting that he was at PyCon on a personal capacity, or at least that he doesn't mind being at PyCon on his own; he did say he'd be back next year, despite apparently being without a job. It's possible that his employer hadn't funded his participation.
c) I think his point about social media makes me think; I'd wonder if there'd be this much response or discussion had Adria not had a "personal brand", so to say. I wonder how the discussion would have been different had the guy had an online presence himself.
Finally, I think it's pointless arguing whether the joke was appropriate or not, given that all the parties involved have more or less agreed that while it happened, it shouldn't have. Personal views apart, that's where it stands.
Also, the guy seems to already have gotten leads, so his job situation might not be as dire as it might seem initially.
Death/rape threats, DDoS attacks and personal attacks on Richards are beyond the pale, of course. That's the danger of social-media-izing normal face-to-face communication isn't it; brings out all the neanderthals out of the woodwork.
posted by the cydonian at 12:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [15 favorites]
a) I think he needs to get some credit for an *actual* apology here; he actually says he regrets making the joke and that he defends Adria's right to complain. What he said wasn't some wishy-washy "I'm sorry you feel this way" shit.
b) He seems to be hinting that he was at PyCon on a personal capacity, or at least that he doesn't mind being at PyCon on his own; he did say he'd be back next year, despite apparently being without a job. It's possible that his employer hadn't funded his participation.
c) I think his point about social media makes me think; I'd wonder if there'd be this much response or discussion had Adria not had a "personal brand", so to say. I wonder how the discussion would have been different had the guy had an online presence himself.
Finally, I think it's pointless arguing whether the joke was appropriate or not, given that all the parties involved have more or less agreed that while it happened, it shouldn't have. Personal views apart, that's where it stands.
Also, the guy seems to already have gotten leads, so his job situation might not be as dire as it might seem initially.
Death/rape threats, DDoS attacks and personal attacks on Richards are beyond the pale, of course. That's the danger of social-media-izing normal face-to-face communication isn't it; brings out all the neanderthals out of the woodwork.
posted by the cydonian at 12:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [15 favorites]
ShutterBun: " This could have been a great opportunity to teach a couple of guys what "not cool" means, but the takeaway for them (and others who sympathize) now is "sheesh, they (feminists) really *can't* take a joke, can they?" "
I don't see why anyone should be inclined to stereotype women or feminists, nor that this incident is any excuse they should. Adria does not represent all women, and she explicitly says she's not a feminist (although I think she's perhaps not clear on what feminism means, but that doesn't really matter).
Would you confront someone over something offensive, if you were in a minority among a non-friendly crowd? I mean, look at the reaction here and elsewhere, for example ... all the vitriol thrown at Adria, because she didn't cater to the needs of the people who violated the conference policy or think of them first.
What if it had been a racist comment? Would you say that someone who had been offended by a racist joke directly confront the jokers before taking other action?
posted by krinklyfig at 12:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I don't see why anyone should be inclined to stereotype women or feminists, nor that this incident is any excuse they should. Adria does not represent all women, and she explicitly says she's not a feminist (although I think she's perhaps not clear on what feminism means, but that doesn't really matter).
Would you confront someone over something offensive, if you were in a minority among a non-friendly crowd? I mean, look at the reaction here and elsewhere, for example ... all the vitriol thrown at Adria, because she didn't cater to the needs of the people who violated the conference policy or think of them first.
What if it had been a racist comment? Would you say that someone who had been offended by a racist joke directly confront the jokers before taking other action?
posted by krinklyfig at 12:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
On the plus side, we can hope that the sexists will be so tired out from this kerfuffle that the next time a major incident of sexual harrassment or assault is publicized they won't have the energy to go to town on the victim.
Ah who am I kidding-Reddit breeds sexists with infinite reserves of hatred. It's nice to dream though.
posted by happyroach at 12:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ah who am I kidding-Reddit breeds sexists with infinite reserves of hatred. It's nice to dream though.
posted by happyroach at 12:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The guy that was fired for saying "niggardly" was only re-instated because he was a respected gay activist and had a well-organized power base behind him that demanded he get his job back. His reinstatement was nothing to do with "niggardly" being a perfectly non-racist word with no semantic link to the N word.
Anyway, getting back to the subject,
Adria didn't just say something that sounded suggestive on Twitter. She implied that the man she was replying to had such a small dick he should stuff items in his pants, but it would be funny if he overdid it and made such a huge bulge that it shocked the TSA.
That's a public sexual insult.
By contrast, one of the guys in the audience said "big dongles" to his friend with no stated context
There is no body part called the dongle.
Now "dong" has been used (quite rarely) as a slang term for penis, but "dong" has many many meanings, e.g. the sound of a bell, it's the currency of Vietnam, it's a common last name in China, and it's the name of a North Korean weapons system, just to give a few from memory. I actually used to work with a guy whose name was "Tiger Dong".
Furthermore, "dong" and "dongle" are not the same word. A bang is not a bangle, a wig is not a member of The Wiggles, 'sing" is not the same word as "single", a "tang" is not a "tangle", etc.
If vague and meaningless statements are to be banned from conferences, they are going to have a hard time writing the speeches, I can tell you.
posted by w0mbat at 12:05 AM on March 21, 2013
Anyway, getting back to the subject,
Adria didn't just say something that sounded suggestive on Twitter. She implied that the man she was replying to had such a small dick he should stuff items in his pants, but it would be funny if he overdid it and made such a huge bulge that it shocked the TSA.
That's a public sexual insult.
By contrast, one of the guys in the audience said "big dongles" to his friend with no stated context
There is no body part called the dongle.
Now "dong" has been used (quite rarely) as a slang term for penis, but "dong" has many many meanings, e.g. the sound of a bell, it's the currency of Vietnam, it's a common last name in China, and it's the name of a North Korean weapons system, just to give a few from memory. I actually used to work with a guy whose name was "Tiger Dong".
Furthermore, "dong" and "dongle" are not the same word. A bang is not a bangle, a wig is not a member of The Wiggles, 'sing" is not the same word as "single", a "tang" is not a "tangle", etc.
If vague and meaningless statements are to be banned from conferences, they are going to have a hard time writing the speeches, I can tell you.
posted by w0mbat at 12:05 AM on March 21, 2013
There's been some notable trends in the reactions to Richards, though. For one, I absolutely do not believe or agree that she would have been treated with much more kindness if the incident she called out was more egregious. It's an unfortunate reality that women who call attention to themselves in any way invite abuse, even if they have all the justification in the world.
I agree and the "internet's" reaction is horrible and if I could end the hate on her right now, I would.
But MeFi threads are not usually bigoted hate fests thanks to the moderation and the people who come here. I think, to a certain extent, I can treat MeFi threads as a bit of a bellwether as towards what the actual debate should be about and on which side I should fall. And, in this case, it seems that there's cause to be skeptical about Adria's actions.
(Also, I post infrequently but I'm here quite often and I'd like to give a shout out to the mods and the community for being awesome. Thanks!)
posted by Maugrim at 12:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I agree and the "internet's" reaction is horrible and if I could end the hate on her right now, I would.
But MeFi threads are not usually bigoted hate fests thanks to the moderation and the people who come here. I think, to a certain extent, I can treat MeFi threads as a bit of a bellwether as towards what the actual debate should be about and on which side I should fall. And, in this case, it seems that there's cause to be skeptical about Adria's actions.
(Also, I post infrequently but I'm here quite often and I'd like to give a shout out to the mods and the community for being awesome. Thanks!)
posted by Maugrim at 12:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
That stuff those guys said was inappropriate. It should have been complained about. Stop defending what those fucking guys said, it was stupid, and it makes me vaguely ashamed to be a in the IT field even to the light degree that I am when people say stuff that dumb.
But a technology "evangelist" quasi-journalist rocking around 10K followers on Twitter knows exactly what she's doing by bringing it there and moreover sharing a photograph of those idiots instead of sending a message straight to convention staff, and knows the possible consequences.
So the question becomes whether or not we are cool with Adria Richards knowingly choosing to respond by endangering someone's job when there were other ways to get the behaviour censured. Please do not assume that she is an idiot when you would find it rhetorically convenient, and would have no idea that the guy's company might fire him for attracting bad publicity.
You either think that these guys' shitty behaviour warrants a response that could destroy careers, or you don't.
posted by mobunited at 12:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
But a technology "evangelist" quasi-journalist rocking around 10K followers on Twitter knows exactly what she's doing by bringing it there and moreover sharing a photograph of those idiots instead of sending a message straight to convention staff, and knows the possible consequences.
So the question becomes whether or not we are cool with Adria Richards knowingly choosing to respond by endangering someone's job when there were other ways to get the behaviour censured. Please do not assume that she is an idiot when you would find it rhetorically convenient, and would have no idea that the guy's company might fire him for attracting bad publicity.
You either think that these guys' shitty behaviour warrants a response that could destroy careers, or you don't.
posted by mobunited at 12:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Adria didn't just say something that sounded suggestive on Twitter. She implied that the man she was replying to had such a small dick he should stuff items in his pants, but it would be funny if he overdid it and made such a huge bulge that it shocked the TSA.I didn't get any such implication when I read that tweet.
That's a public sexual insult.
posted by Flunkie at 12:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
w0mbat: " If vague and meaningless statements are to be banned from conferences, they are going to have a hard time writing the speeches, I can tell you."
I think it matters that the people involved apologized and agreed that their words were inappropriate, and said publicly that she was right to report them.
It's really not that difficult to act in a professional manner at work and when in a professional environment, if nothing more than out of respect for others. It's pretty disrespectful, IMO, to disregard people's complaints about incidents which discourage the participation of women in tech. Even if you think it's silly that people are offended at certain ideas and words that don't offend you personally, isn't it better to be able to encourage women to voice their concerns rather than shut them down?
posted by krinklyfig at 12:20 AM on March 21, 2013
I think it matters that the people involved apologized and agreed that their words were inappropriate, and said publicly that she was right to report them.
It's really not that difficult to act in a professional manner at work and when in a professional environment, if nothing more than out of respect for others. It's pretty disrespectful, IMO, to disregard people's complaints about incidents which discourage the participation of women in tech. Even if you think it's silly that people are offended at certain ideas and words that don't offend you personally, isn't it better to be able to encourage women to voice their concerns rather than shut them down?
posted by krinklyfig at 12:20 AM on March 21, 2013
Stuff like this is so controversial on here because we don't actually know what they said, word-for-word, or how they said it.
We project caricatures of "bad people" onto either party, depending which way they lean. We go through hundreds of comments because we're all imagining a slightly different set of events. So we can't reach any definite conclusions about who was right and wrong.
I saw the same thing with before the Trayvon Martin case went to trial.
That's not to say the discussion isn't edifying, but people should be aware of what we're really doing when we talk about cases like this.
posted by victory_laser at 12:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
We project caricatures of "bad people" onto either party, depending which way they lean. We go through hundreds of comments because we're all imagining a slightly different set of events. So we can't reach any definite conclusions about who was right and wrong.
I saw the same thing with before the Trayvon Martin case went to trial.
That's not to say the discussion isn't edifying, but people should be aware of what we're really doing when we talk about cases like this.
posted by victory_laser at 12:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
krinklyfig: What if it had been a racist comment?
Well, let's turn your question around: what if the accusations here were of racism, not sexism? Same exact events transpired, but now she's accusing them of being racists.
It wouldn't fly. It absolutely wouldn't fly. I feel safe in asserting that nobody here would think this was racism.
So why is it sexism? I don't think the evidence for that is particularly stronger than a racism claim.
Yes, there are obviously circumstances where similar events could be sexism or harassment. Most of us have probably seen things like that. But this case appears to just be a little innuendo and wordplay, which wasn't even directed at her, and doesn't seem likely to qualify.
posted by Malor at 12:24 AM on March 21, 2013
Well, let's turn your question around: what if the accusations here were of racism, not sexism? Same exact events transpired, but now she's accusing them of being racists.
It wouldn't fly. It absolutely wouldn't fly. I feel safe in asserting that nobody here would think this was racism.
So why is it sexism? I don't think the evidence for that is particularly stronger than a racism claim.
Yes, there are obviously circumstances where similar events could be sexism or harassment. Most of us have probably seen things like that. But this case appears to just be a little innuendo and wordplay, which wasn't even directed at her, and doesn't seem likely to qualify.
posted by Malor at 12:24 AM on March 21, 2013
I can agree with drawing a distinction between MeFi and the Internet troll brigade, but on a practical level, she would still be getting rape and death threats, still be harassed and DDOS'd. It's not nothing that she gets support from impartial third parties, but it's dispiriting to know that no airtight case will stop the abuse. (I also remember what a clusterfuck the Rebecca Watson and subsequent Skepticism threads were, and don't always have great faith in even MetaFilter to "do sexism well".)
It's also what makes accusations of attention-seeking a bit eye-rolly for me, because it seems to me to betray a lack of understanding of how risky it is to invite the Internet to pass judgment on you. Like all the MRA twits who think women just make up rape accusations for fun, not realizing how horribly society treats rape victims, you don't just decide to contravene community norms on a whim. She's a social media person, she must've know what kind of assholes would respond.
posted by Phire at 12:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's also what makes accusations of attention-seeking a bit eye-rolly for me, because it seems to me to betray a lack of understanding of how risky it is to invite the Internet to pass judgment on you. Like all the MRA twits who think women just make up rape accusations for fun, not realizing how horribly society treats rape victims, you don't just decide to contravene community norms on a whim. She's a social media person, she must've know what kind of assholes would respond.
posted by Phire at 12:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Malor: " Well, let's turn your question around: what if the accusations here were of racism, not sexism? Same exact events transpired, but now she's accusing them of being racists. "
She did not accuse anyone of 'being' anything. She reported what these people did which was a violation of the conference policy. She was specifically calling out their behavior. People need to get to the point where they understand that calling out bad behavior is not the same as accusing someone of being a bad person. It also doesn't absolve someone of the consequences of their behavior, which is not her fault nor her responsibility.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
She did not accuse anyone of 'being' anything. She reported what these people did which was a violation of the conference policy. She was specifically calling out their behavior. People need to get to the point where they understand that calling out bad behavior is not the same as accusing someone of being a bad person. It also doesn't absolve someone of the consequences of their behavior, which is not her fault nor her responsibility.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
She's a social media person, she must've know what kind of assholes would respond.
Gosh, I wonder. People can be astonishingly naive about such things -- I mean, Anita Sarkeesian is about as savvy as anybody, and I doubt she could have predicted (and obviously she didn't) that she would become the end-level boss in an massive online multiplayer game in which the goal was to silence and abuse her just for having the temerity for wanting to explore gender roles in video games.
I am going to draw a personal line in saying that anything people do invites or deserves the response the web gives them, which is often like a random sustained shock and awe campaign.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Gosh, I wonder. People can be astonishingly naive about such things -- I mean, Anita Sarkeesian is about as savvy as anybody, and I doubt she could have predicted (and obviously she didn't) that she would become the end-level boss in an massive online multiplayer game in which the goal was to silence and abuse her just for having the temerity for wanting to explore gender roles in video games.
I am going to draw a personal line in saying that anything people do invites or deserves the response the web gives them, which is often like a random sustained shock and awe campaign.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
but on a practical level, she would still be getting rape and death threats,
Yeah, but remember that this is coming from guys who are usually (almost always?) under 21. We treat their threats as just as valid as ones coming from mature adults, because we can't see that the people doing it are pimply geeks with zero real ability to follow through. The normal social cues are missing, which is why young men love the Internet for this stuff so very much; largely hapless in their normal lives, due to a lack of social skills, they can terrorize others and feel big online.
It's the older people we have to actually worry about, and it's hard, maybe impossible, to know whether the troll brigade's attitudes are coming from true participants of mainstream society, rather than being bluster from the powerless.
posted by Malor at 12:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, but remember that this is coming from guys who are usually (almost always?) under 21. We treat their threats as just as valid as ones coming from mature adults, because we can't see that the people doing it are pimply geeks with zero real ability to follow through. The normal social cues are missing, which is why young men love the Internet for this stuff so very much; largely hapless in their normal lives, due to a lack of social skills, they can terrorize others and feel big online.
It's the older people we have to actually worry about, and it's hard, maybe impossible, to know whether the troll brigade's attitudes are coming from true participants of mainstream society, rather than being bluster from the powerless.
posted by Malor at 12:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Malor: " So why is it sexism? I don't think the evidence for that is particularly stronger than a racism claim. "
Forget sexism. Sexual jokes and innuendo in a workplace is considered sexual harassment. It's also against the conference policies. Period. The people involved did not argue that they had violated the policy.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Forget sexism. Sexual jokes and innuendo in a workplace is considered sexual harassment. It's also against the conference policies. Period. The people involved did not argue that they had violated the policy.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
People need to get to the point where they understand that calling out bad behavior is not the same as accusing someone of being a bad person.
Except, when you do it on the internet in a social media context, for all intents and purposes, it is.
(I'd like to point out that I've consistently avoided prescribing malicious intent on Adria's part.)
posted by Maugrim at 12:32 AM on March 21, 2013
Except, when you do it on the internet in a social media context, for all intents and purposes, it is.
(I'd like to point out that I've consistently avoided prescribing malicious intent on Adria's part.)
posted by Maugrim at 12:32 AM on March 21, 2013
Yeah, but remember that this is coming from guys who are usually (almost always?) under 21.
I am not clear on the point here. Firstly, how do we know this? And, secondly, obviously rape threats from minors should be treated with the same degree of seriousness as when they come from adults.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I am not clear on the point here. Firstly, how do we know this? And, secondly, obviously rape threats from minors should be treated with the same degree of seriousness as when they come from adults.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Maugrim: " Except, when you do it on the internet in a social media context, for all intents and purposes, it is."
Dragging this into the light is unpleasant, and I have mixed feelings about the way she did it, but the real problem underlying all this is the poor behavior of men towards women at these conferences. I can't really muster a lot of sympathy for people who were called out publicly for doing something that was clearly inappropriate and a specific example of a much larger problem.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:39 AM on March 21, 2013
Dragging this into the light is unpleasant, and I have mixed feelings about the way she did it, but the real problem underlying all this is the poor behavior of men towards women at these conferences. I can't really muster a lot of sympathy for people who were called out publicly for doing something that was clearly inappropriate and a specific example of a much larger problem.
posted by krinklyfig at 12:39 AM on March 21, 2013
She's a hero, and she did it all for the children according to her blog.
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 12:39 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 12:39 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
And, secondly, obviously rape threats from minors should be treated with the same degree of seriousness as when they come from adults.
Um, how many maladjusted geek minors have you actually known? These guys would make your eyes roll if they said that stuff to you in real life; you'd instantly know they were neither emotionally nor physically capable of such an act.
Plus, minors simply do not have the resources to carry these threats out; if someone's not in immediate proximity, there's rarely much they can do, because they can't easily travel, and they certainly can't get weapons once they get there. Once in a great while, you'll see a really unusual one shoot up a public place, but that's exceedingly rare to begin with, and always involves a nearby target. You simply do not see minors cross the country to rape and/or kill some random female they don't like on the Internet.
If you're aware of something I'm not, then feel free to educate me, but from personal experience, that would appear to be inaccurate threat classification.
posted by Malor at 12:46 AM on March 21, 2013
Um, how many maladjusted geek minors have you actually known? These guys would make your eyes roll if they said that stuff to you in real life; you'd instantly know they were neither emotionally nor physically capable of such an act.
Plus, minors simply do not have the resources to carry these threats out; if someone's not in immediate proximity, there's rarely much they can do, because they can't easily travel, and they certainly can't get weapons once they get there. Once in a great while, you'll see a really unusual one shoot up a public place, but that's exceedingly rare to begin with, and always involves a nearby target. You simply do not see minors cross the country to rape and/or kill some random female they don't like on the Internet.
If you're aware of something I'm not, then feel free to educate me, but from personal experience, that would appear to be inaccurate threat classification.
posted by Malor at 12:46 AM on March 21, 2013
Um, how many maladjusted geek minors have you actually known?
I don't know any anonymous person on the web. I don't know that they are minors or that they are faraway. Neither do you. I do know that women are raped quite often, and, barring actually knowing the source of the threat, the safest thing to do is treat it as credible and criminal. I don't care if it is some maladjusted geek whose eyes will roll. That might be habit they would do to get themselves out of.
By the way, maladjusted geeks do rape people.
You know as little about these anonymous threats as I do. I find it strange that you are treating them as inherently unserious based on a series of assumptions about their sources. I would never advise somebody that they should ignore a rape threat because, in my opinion, it's some nerd in a faraway basement. Because I might be wrong.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
I don't know any anonymous person on the web. I don't know that they are minors or that they are faraway. Neither do you. I do know that women are raped quite often, and, barring actually knowing the source of the threat, the safest thing to do is treat it as credible and criminal. I don't care if it is some maladjusted geek whose eyes will roll. That might be habit they would do to get themselves out of.
By the way, maladjusted geeks do rape people.
You know as little about these anonymous threats as I do. I find it strange that you are treating them as inherently unserious based on a series of assumptions about their sources. I would never advise somebody that they should ignore a rape threat because, in my opinion, it's some nerd in a faraway basement. Because I might be wrong.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [14 favorites]
krinklyfig I don't deny that there's a problem. I don't deny that she had the right to be offended.
I do, however, have a problem with her calling people out by posting their images on twitter.
She could have misheard. And, even if she didn't, how does subjecting people to a public shaming help anything? What if someone had attacked them as a result (yes, unlikely, but it's not like there's a shortage of crazies on the internet)?
Adria could have simply messaged the organizers saying, "Jerks behind me. Could you come talk to them?" She intentionally took the message to a public forum.
I'm perfectly willing to believe that she made an angry mistake. That really doesn't excuse what is a horrific lapse in judgement form someone whose business is social media.
posted by Maugrim at 12:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I do, however, have a problem with her calling people out by posting their images on twitter.
She could have misheard. And, even if she didn't, how does subjecting people to a public shaming help anything? What if someone had attacked them as a result (yes, unlikely, but it's not like there's a shortage of crazies on the internet)?
Adria could have simply messaged the organizers saying, "Jerks behind me. Could you come talk to them?" She intentionally took the message to a public forum.
I'm perfectly willing to believe that she made an angry mistake. That really doesn't excuse what is a horrific lapse in judgement form someone whose business is social media.
posted by Maugrim at 12:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Adria didn't just say something that sounded suggestive on Twitter. She implied that the man she was replying to had such a small dick he should stuff items in his pants, but it would be funny if he overdid it and made such a huge bulge that it shocked the TSA.
That's a public sexual insult.
The exchange seems sexually suggestive, perhaps demeaning in a way that suggests her public behavior may not be all that much different from a private exchange which she has called out publicly. It seems to add another shade of grey to a fairly complicated matter.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:52 AM on March 21, 2013
That's a public sexual insult.
The exchange seems sexually suggestive, perhaps demeaning in a way that suggests her public behavior may not be all that much different from a private exchange which she has called out publicly. It seems to add another shade of grey to a fairly complicated matter.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:52 AM on March 21, 2013
. I expected a more nuanced discussion from metafilter, instead of "what a horrible overreacting prude"
Well, she was a horribly overreacting prude, but that's not the interesting part of this kerfuffle. What's interesting is that it was apparantly easier to sent a tweet to alert the con staff than to actually talk to them directly. Which is where the problem starts. Because now this incident is on record, with the consequence being that one of them got fired. This is probably not what Adria Richards intended, but by not thinking through the potential impact of using a public medium to settle a private grievance, she is partially responsible for it.
It's a good object lesson as well that if you make shit public, how people deal with it is out of your hands, something to remember in this glorious new Google Glassed future.
posted by MartinWisse at 1:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Well, she was a horribly overreacting prude, but that's not the interesting part of this kerfuffle. What's interesting is that it was apparantly easier to sent a tweet to alert the con staff than to actually talk to them directly. Which is where the problem starts. Because now this incident is on record, with the consequence being that one of them got fired. This is probably not what Adria Richards intended, but by not thinking through the potential impact of using a public medium to settle a private grievance, she is partially responsible for it.
It's a good object lesson as well that if you make shit public, how people deal with it is out of your hands, something to remember in this glorious new Google Glassed future.
posted by MartinWisse at 1:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Bunny Ultramod, I hope you didn't read my comment to mean that I was implying that Richards deserved what she got. I was saying that the consequences of of doing what she did is so obviously negative given the recent furore over geek sexism--Sarkeesian included--that I would trust that anyone who makes that decision had very good reason to do so.
Malor, I tend find underestimating Internet trolls to be not super productive. We've seen plenty of situations where grown men are more than happy to attack and harass women. There are Facebook pages dedicated to putting "13-year-old sluts" in their places where men post awful comments with their real identities. The developer who made the "Beat up Sarkeesian" game is 26. The most egregious harasser I know in my Twitter circle who is now facing several charges is 40-something. The people who run A Voice For Men who regularly incite internet hate mobs against uppity feminists are all well into adulthood.
If we assume the majority of Internet trolls are teenage basement dwellers, it becomes easy to not take them seriously, and it discounts how threatening and upsetting it can be to receive demeaning and angry messages from anonymous usernames. One teenager trying to act tough may be laughable, but hordes of trolls acting tough drove a 15-year-old girl to take her life. Even if that assumption is correct, I think it's still worth examining and correcting why these many teenage boys have such disdain for women.
Anyway, I'm off to bed. I've rambled enough.
posted by Phire at 1:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Malor, I tend find underestimating Internet trolls to be not super productive. We've seen plenty of situations where grown men are more than happy to attack and harass women. There are Facebook pages dedicated to putting "13-year-old sluts" in their places where men post awful comments with their real identities. The developer who made the "Beat up Sarkeesian" game is 26. The most egregious harasser I know in my Twitter circle who is now facing several charges is 40-something. The people who run A Voice For Men who regularly incite internet hate mobs against uppity feminists are all well into adulthood.
If we assume the majority of Internet trolls are teenage basement dwellers, it becomes easy to not take them seriously, and it discounts how threatening and upsetting it can be to receive demeaning and angry messages from anonymous usernames. One teenager trying to act tough may be laughable, but hordes of trolls acting tough drove a 15-year-old girl to take her life. Even if that assumption is correct, I think it's still worth examining and correcting why these many teenage boys have such disdain for women.
Anyway, I'm off to bed. I've rambled enough.
posted by Phire at 1:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
those fucking regular, ordinary guys said,
If anyone is willing to state that what these guys said is definitively beyond my correction, feel free.
posted by ShutterBun at 1:40 AM on March 21, 2013
If anyone is willing to state that what these guys said is definitively beyond my correction, feel free.
posted by ShutterBun at 1:40 AM on March 21, 2013
It seems to add another shade of grey to a fairly complicated matter.
Eegads, we're up to 51 Shades now?
posted by ShutterBun at 1:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Eegads, we're up to 51 Shades now?
posted by ShutterBun at 1:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
she has, in one story, embodied (and in her defense of it, perpetuated) a myriad of unfair stereotypical impressions of women in the workplace--that they are overly sensitive, humorless, gossipy, whiny, and can't mind their own business. i'm guessing many women would appreciate it if she didn't do them any more favors.
I appreciate what she did and am glad she did me a favor. Standing up and making oneself a target for a principle is never an easy thing to do, especially now that it is clear that pretty much any woman who draws enough attention on the internet with get rape and death threats, among the lesser insults of sexual and racial slurs up to and including prude.
posted by Deoridhe at 2:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
I appreciate what she did and am glad she did me a favor. Standing up and making oneself a target for a principle is never an easy thing to do, especially now that it is clear that pretty much any woman who draws enough attention on the internet with get rape and death threats, among the lesser insults of sexual and racial slurs up to and including prude.
posted by Deoridhe at 2:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Not entirely relevant, but I'd gladly take 5000 Internet death threats over one real-life firing any day (assuming both sides of the story are true.) I don't want to diminish (what I think is) your principle is here, but if you want people to go to the wall over "dongles," god help those who are fighting the real battles. (my words)
posted by ShutterBun at 2:39 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ShutterBun at 2:39 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I can't speak for laws in all states, but when employees out here get briefed on sexual harassment law, it is made clear that the intent of the speaker is irrelevant, only the reaction of the listener. The example we are given is that if two of us are making off color jokes in a room by ourselves but somebody has their ear pressed agains the window, overhears us and complains, we can be fired and sued for creating a hostile work environment. In fact, we are told it doesn't even really matter if we're not making blue jokes at all and the person completely misunderstands what we're saying. We could still be fired and sued.
Now, at the end of the day, we probably wouldn't be fired or sued for it, but the point is sexual harassment, as its defined out here, can be committed by somebody who is having a totally legitimate conversation about dongles if the listener doesn't realize the speaker is actually talking about a piece of equipment.
Granted, I work at a school, but we're very careful about our choices of words. We can still make jokes and be playful, we just try our hardest not to say anything that might be misconstrued. When you work with kids, it's pretty easy to learn which words provoke Beavis like reactions. I'm not advocating nor complaining about this law - it is what it is and we just deal with it.
So in that context, when I read about this event, my first reaction was "oh, those guys shouldn't have said those things." Assuming the laws are the same in their states, they're potentially in violation of hostile workplace rules and could get themselves and their companies sued.
As to the rest of this issue, there has been a ton of assumption and speculation in this discussion. Lots of "yeah, but what if..." statements, lots of information that is proven false but still being trotted out as fact five comments later, lots of misreading and not reading and selective reading, and lots of assigning motives to the two men, to Adria and to other Mefites. There's also been some thoughtful and awesome discussion and insight. I can't help thinking that, in light of the scant information, we're over thinking a plate with only two or three beans on it right now.
The topic of sexism in the tech industry (indeed, in the world) is an important one to soberly and thoughtful confront. It's worth getting angry over and arguing about. The issue of privacy in the age of the Internet and the resultant mob "justice" is an important one that is equally deserving of our attention. This discussion has been at its best when those issues have been addressed. When we get bogged down in the details here of who said what to whom and what we think they intended based on a tweet, a blog entry and an anonymous comment, we tend to create and debate little fictions with increasing levels of vitriol. That seems to just make us all mad in an unproductive way.
Regardless of what actually happened at the tech conference, I think it's shameful that the broader Internet discussion has led to indisputable harrasment and theats directed at Adria. It's also sobering to think that we're moving into a time where anyone can generate a public shame campaign. It's also hopeful that a real effort is being made at conferences to help ensure that the environment is respectful to all attendees.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:04 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Now, at the end of the day, we probably wouldn't be fired or sued for it, but the point is sexual harassment, as its defined out here, can be committed by somebody who is having a totally legitimate conversation about dongles if the listener doesn't realize the speaker is actually talking about a piece of equipment.
Granted, I work at a school, but we're very careful about our choices of words. We can still make jokes and be playful, we just try our hardest not to say anything that might be misconstrued. When you work with kids, it's pretty easy to learn which words provoke Beavis like reactions. I'm not advocating nor complaining about this law - it is what it is and we just deal with it.
So in that context, when I read about this event, my first reaction was "oh, those guys shouldn't have said those things." Assuming the laws are the same in their states, they're potentially in violation of hostile workplace rules and could get themselves and their companies sued.
As to the rest of this issue, there has been a ton of assumption and speculation in this discussion. Lots of "yeah, but what if..." statements, lots of information that is proven false but still being trotted out as fact five comments later, lots of misreading and not reading and selective reading, and lots of assigning motives to the two men, to Adria and to other Mefites. There's also been some thoughtful and awesome discussion and insight. I can't help thinking that, in light of the scant information, we're over thinking a plate with only two or three beans on it right now.
The topic of sexism in the tech industry (indeed, in the world) is an important one to soberly and thoughtful confront. It's worth getting angry over and arguing about. The issue of privacy in the age of the Internet and the resultant mob "justice" is an important one that is equally deserving of our attention. This discussion has been at its best when those issues have been addressed. When we get bogged down in the details here of who said what to whom and what we think they intended based on a tweet, a blog entry and an anonymous comment, we tend to create and debate little fictions with increasing levels of vitriol. That seems to just make us all mad in an unproductive way.
Regardless of what actually happened at the tech conference, I think it's shameful that the broader Internet discussion has led to indisputable harrasment and theats directed at Adria. It's also sobering to think that we're moving into a time where anyone can generate a public shame campaign. It's also hopeful that a real effort is being made at conferences to help ensure that the environment is respectful to all attendees.
posted by Joey Michaels at 3:04 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
One anonymous threat would be quite bad enough. I can't imagine what it would be like to receive hundreds, or thousands. The barrier to harassment is incredibly low nowadays, and we don't seem to have any mechanism for dealing with it.
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 3:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
You should always report threats to the police folks because they might really catch whoever made the threat. I'd explicitly point the police the contact information for the company running the service through which the threats were sent because that'll increase the chance that they actually ask for identifying information like IP addresses.
posted by jeffburdges at 3:48 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 3:48 AM on March 21, 2013
Much ado about nothing.
posted by panaceanot at 3:54 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by panaceanot at 3:54 AM on March 21, 2013
In fact, we are told it doesn't even really matter if we're not making blue jokes at all and the person completely misunderstands what we're saying. We could still be fired and sued.
Yeah, but you understand that that's completely stupid, right? Like, monstrously so.
posted by gadge emeritus at 4:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
Yeah, but you understand that that's completely stupid, right? Like, monstrously so.
posted by gadge emeritus at 4:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
Maugrim: " She could have misheard. And, even if she didn't, how does subjecting people to a public shaming help anything? What if someone had attacked them as a result (yes, unlikely, but it's not like there's a shortage of crazies on the internet)?"
I think it's clear that the public backlash is mostly against her, and it has already reached that level. She puts herself in jeopardy by making this public. It takes courage to make a public stand like this, especially considering the inevitable reaction. I'm not sure there's any way she could have talked about this publicly without bringing down the shitstorm, because the last incident I recall like this involved talking about an incident at an atheist conference where no pictures were taken nor anyone identified, and yet there was the same reaction. I think public humiliation isn't a great way to bring about justice for the most part, but even if that were her motive, I can understand how the constant demeaning and insulting behavior becomes more of an issue than protecting the professional reputations of the people who are responsible.
The fact remains that those guys would never have ended up in that twitter picture if they didn't behave the way they did, in spite of clear and unambiguous rules. I'm sure they'll be fine, as long as they don't try to dig their hole deeper in a public way. From what I understand, the guy who was purportedly fired was getting job offers almost immediately. There are plenty of tech companies who are more than eager to claim some man they think was wronged by a feminist, so don't worry about him.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think it's clear that the public backlash is mostly against her, and it has already reached that level. She puts herself in jeopardy by making this public. It takes courage to make a public stand like this, especially considering the inevitable reaction. I'm not sure there's any way she could have talked about this publicly without bringing down the shitstorm, because the last incident I recall like this involved talking about an incident at an atheist conference where no pictures were taken nor anyone identified, and yet there was the same reaction. I think public humiliation isn't a great way to bring about justice for the most part, but even if that were her motive, I can understand how the constant demeaning and insulting behavior becomes more of an issue than protecting the professional reputations of the people who are responsible.
The fact remains that those guys would never have ended up in that twitter picture if they didn't behave the way they did, in spite of clear and unambiguous rules. I'm sure they'll be fine, as long as they don't try to dig their hole deeper in a public way. From what I understand, the guy who was purportedly fired was getting job offers almost immediately. There are plenty of tech companies who are more than eager to claim some man they think was wronged by a feminist, so don't worry about him.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
What a terribly sad and confusing story.
There's nothing in this whole story where any of the main actors did anything wrong. Two men sharing a joke about sex. (and how many jokes aren't about sex). A woman, upset by this behaviour reported it. A conference followed its code of conduct.
I'm of the opinion that there should be some leeway in how we're treated for our public behaviour. Doesn't matter if you're at a professional event or you're tweeting or you're out with friends. People say and do slightly stupid things all the time, and it shouldn't provoke a reaction where people are being threatened or losing their jobs. This goes for the men involved and for Adria herself.
She photographed a couple of people and made a stink about their behaviour. Big woop-di-doo. It's not passive aggressive or weird or anything. It's what people on Twitter do. They made a couple of jokes between themselves about dongs and forking repos. Big woop-di-doo. It's not dangerous or unprofessional. It's what people do.
I can't understand how you would think one of the two parties behaved badly and the other did not. Either everyone is culpable or nobody is. She could have done better; the boys could have done better. Either you expect it from everyone or you expect that there are occasional slip ups and really, no-one is to blame.
My biggest problem at the moment with situations like this is that we're consistently being expected to behave in a way that we can't behave. You need a degree of this to push morality forward, but all too often, an unreasonable expectation of how we should behave is used to punish those we most disagree with.
Martin Luthor King has a great quote (I can't find it) which says as much. It's the sign of a corrupt society when everyone is guilty, but only certain people are punished for their crimes. Of course, none of this is new to women in the tech world. They know what it's like to be held to a higher standard than the men they work with. Don't think that I'm not aware of this.
The biggest crime in this whole story is the fury, threats and doxing being exhibited by the people on reddit and Hacker News. Find out who they are, round them up and kick the shit out of them.
On a sidenote:
It was kind of frustrating last year when a tweet about the lack of diversity at an upcoming Manchester Ruby Con caused the conference to be cancelled. The Manchester IT scene isn't perfect, but it does try to be inclusive. As a kind of antidote to this sort of shit, here's an awesome talk by one of the speakers at the recent Manchester Rasberry Jamboree.
posted by zoo at 4:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
There's nothing in this whole story where any of the main actors did anything wrong. Two men sharing a joke about sex. (and how many jokes aren't about sex). A woman, upset by this behaviour reported it. A conference followed its code of conduct.
I'm of the opinion that there should be some leeway in how we're treated for our public behaviour. Doesn't matter if you're at a professional event or you're tweeting or you're out with friends. People say and do slightly stupid things all the time, and it shouldn't provoke a reaction where people are being threatened or losing their jobs. This goes for the men involved and for Adria herself.
She photographed a couple of people and made a stink about their behaviour. Big woop-di-doo. It's not passive aggressive or weird or anything. It's what people on Twitter do. They made a couple of jokes between themselves about dongs and forking repos. Big woop-di-doo. It's not dangerous or unprofessional. It's what people do.
I can't understand how you would think one of the two parties behaved badly and the other did not. Either everyone is culpable or nobody is. She could have done better; the boys could have done better. Either you expect it from everyone or you expect that there are occasional slip ups and really, no-one is to blame.
My biggest problem at the moment with situations like this is that we're consistently being expected to behave in a way that we can't behave. You need a degree of this to push morality forward, but all too often, an unreasonable expectation of how we should behave is used to punish those we most disagree with.
Martin Luthor King has a great quote (I can't find it) which says as much. It's the sign of a corrupt society when everyone is guilty, but only certain people are punished for their crimes. Of course, none of this is new to women in the tech world. They know what it's like to be held to a higher standard than the men they work with. Don't think that I'm not aware of this.
The biggest crime in this whole story is the fury, threats and doxing being exhibited by the people on reddit and Hacker News. Find out who they are, round them up and kick the shit out of them.
On a sidenote:
It was kind of frustrating last year when a tweet about the lack of diversity at an upcoming Manchester Ruby Con caused the conference to be cancelled. The Manchester IT scene isn't perfect, but it does try to be inclusive. As a kind of antidote to this sort of shit, here's an awesome talk by one of the speakers at the recent Manchester Rasberry Jamboree.
posted by zoo at 4:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Much ado about nothing.
Definitely much ado, but ado that covers several important and unsettled areas - the boundaries of modern privacy, feminism and male culture, internet as leverage, employment and corporate power. Certainly worth talking about, regardless of whether the individual actors were victims or maroons.
posted by forgetful snow at 4:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Definitely much ado, but ado that covers several important and unsettled areas - the boundaries of modern privacy, feminism and male culture, internet as leverage, employment and corporate power. Certainly worth talking about, regardless of whether the individual actors were victims or maroons.
posted by forgetful snow at 4:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
zoo: " It's not dangerous or unprofessional. It's what people do. "
In most industries, it is considered unprofessional and potentially harassing to tell sexual jokes in a workplace, including while attending conferences. The tech industry is just beginning to wake up to the fact that this kind of behavior really isn't appropriate for the workplace, and has only continued for as long as it has because it's so heavily dominated by men. Not understanding and addressing this issue is preventing women from becoming employed in the industry, because they don't see it as being friendly to them.
Martin Luthor King has a great quote (I can't find it) which says as much. It's the sign of a corrupt society when everyone is guilty, but only certain people are punished for their crimes.
Being called out for inappropriate behavior affecting gender equality in the workplace hardly qualifies as unjustly being labelled a criminal.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:40 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
In most industries, it is considered unprofessional and potentially harassing to tell sexual jokes in a workplace, including while attending conferences. The tech industry is just beginning to wake up to the fact that this kind of behavior really isn't appropriate for the workplace, and has only continued for as long as it has because it's so heavily dominated by men. Not understanding and addressing this issue is preventing women from becoming employed in the industry, because they don't see it as being friendly to them.
Martin Luthor King has a great quote (I can't find it) which says as much. It's the sign of a corrupt society when everyone is guilty, but only certain people are punished for their crimes.
Being called out for inappropriate behavior affecting gender equality in the workplace hardly qualifies as unjustly being labelled a criminal.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:40 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Definitely much ado, but ado that covers several important and unsettled areas
I don't disagree, but my mind wandered while reading all the comments, and I couldn't help think of the Mars Curiosity rover sampling rocks on another planet and how cool that is, and how ridiculous it was that I was reading about this conflated drama involving overheard crappy jokes and public shaming by tweets, and, well, *sigh*.
posted by panaceanot at 4:45 AM on March 21, 2013
I don't disagree, but my mind wandered while reading all the comments, and I couldn't help think of the Mars Curiosity rover sampling rocks on another planet and how cool that is, and how ridiculous it was that I was reading about this conflated drama involving overheard crappy jokes and public shaming by tweets, and, well, *sigh*.
posted by panaceanot at 4:45 AM on March 21, 2013
the last incident I recall like this involved talking about an incident at an atheist conference where no pictures were taken nor anyone identified, and yet there was the same reaction.
Not on Metafilter, though. I mean there are degrees as far as "what constitutes harassment," but in the example you're citing, the prevailing attitude here was much more "good for her!" in that case.
It's quite possible for two people to be on the same side of the same good fight, and one of them totally screws it up, ya know?
posted by ShutterBun at 4:47 AM on March 21, 2013
Not on Metafilter, though. I mean there are degrees as far as "what constitutes harassment," but in the example you're citing, the prevailing attitude here was much more "good for her!" in that case.
It's quite possible for two people to be on the same side of the same good fight, and one of them totally screws it up, ya know?
posted by ShutterBun at 4:47 AM on March 21, 2013
it is considered unprofessional and potentially harassing to tell sexual jokes in a workplace
And that's fine. But if an expectation of behaviour is so high that everyone fails that expectation, you can use that to punish those you don't like. One of the most corrosive factors in stifling diversity in the workspace is exactly this kind of behaviour, and the quicker it's identified and cut out the better.
Obviously, there's a subjective line to be drawn as to what is / is not acceptable and I'm 100% against workplace harassment but we have to accept that people are flawed uncomfortable things that make mistakes. Any policy or reaction to a news story needs to take this into account.
posted by zoo at 4:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
And that's fine. But if an expectation of behaviour is so high that everyone fails that expectation, you can use that to punish those you don't like. One of the most corrosive factors in stifling diversity in the workspace is exactly this kind of behaviour, and the quicker it's identified and cut out the better.
Obviously, there's a subjective line to be drawn as to what is / is not acceptable and I'm 100% against workplace harassment but we have to accept that people are flawed uncomfortable things that make mistakes. Any policy or reaction to a news story needs to take this into account.
posted by zoo at 4:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Martin Luthor King has a great quote (I can't find it) which says as much. It's the sign of a corrupt society when everyone is guilty, but only certain people are punished for their crimes.
By the way, this always seems to be the sticking point with these issues. The appropriate way to react when called out for this kind of behavior is to say something like, "Hey, I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that my behavior was a problem. I don't want you or other people to feel unwelcome because of it, and now I'm aware that this kind of thing is not OK in this situation." I'm not sure why it's so important to fight for the right to be crappy and disrespectful to others, even if you didn't mean it. Nobody is being called a criminal. I also find it hard to fathom Dr MLK was talking about defending the right to be a dudebro around women at work.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
By the way, this always seems to be the sticking point with these issues. The appropriate way to react when called out for this kind of behavior is to say something like, "Hey, I'm sorry, I wasn't aware that my behavior was a problem. I don't want you or other people to feel unwelcome because of it, and now I'm aware that this kind of thing is not OK in this situation." I'm not sure why it's so important to fight for the right to be crappy and disrespectful to others, even if you didn't mean it. Nobody is being called a criminal. I also find it hard to fathom Dr MLK was talking about defending the right to be a dudebro around women at work.
posted by krinklyfig at 4:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm not fighting for the right to be crappy and disrespectful. I'm saying that invariably, each one of us is going to have a day when we're crappy and disrespectful and we don't deserved to be either threatened on the internet or fired when that happens.
The fact that a woman is probably rightfully scared for her life and a man has been fired and is now scared for the welfare of his children does nothing to dissuade me that this is any different to being treated like a criminal. You can pick at the semantics of it if you like, but both these people have been found guilty, and are suffering the consequences of their actions.
posted by zoo at 4:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The fact that a woman is probably rightfully scared for her life and a man has been fired and is now scared for the welfare of his children does nothing to dissuade me that this is any different to being treated like a criminal. You can pick at the semantics of it if you like, but both these people have been found guilty, and are suffering the consequences of their actions.
posted by zoo at 4:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
zoo: " Obviously, there's a subjective line to be drawn as to what is / is not acceptable and I'm 100% against workplace harassment but we have to accept that people are flawed uncomfortable things that make mistakes. Any policy or reaction to a news story needs to take this into account."
Well, the conference people talked to the two men, who apparently apologized and went back to the conference. The public tweet may have resulted in one of the two losing a job, but that's really on the employer and that person's behavior. Some employers have a zero-tolerance policy, and some do not care as long as you don't make them look bad in public. Either way, not really her fault.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:04 AM on March 21, 2013
Well, the conference people talked to the two men, who apparently apologized and went back to the conference. The public tweet may have resulted in one of the two losing a job, but that's really on the employer and that person's behavior. Some employers have a zero-tolerance policy, and some do not care as long as you don't make them look bad in public. Either way, not really her fault.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:04 AM on March 21, 2013
krinklyfig: Is there any part of this where I said it was her fault? I'm saying she could have done better, the boys could have done better but nobody was really at fault here. We shouldn't be *expecting* her to do some weird risk analysis before tweeting, and we shouldn't be *expecting* that a conference is a completely smut-free zone. It'd be nice, and we can all do better but my concern is primarily with how we (all of us) police imperfect people.
She felt the behaviour by the two men behind her was inappropriate, she and the conference acted on it and the boys apologised. Meanwhile the internet explodes in an effort to tell her that she behaved inappropriately, and meanwhile nobody can see the contradiction in any of this.
My preference is that as tricky as it can be, we afford people some leeway, we don't judge people differently according to whether we like them or not, and we don't put into place procedures that allow this behaviour. That is all.
posted by zoo at 5:38 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
She felt the behaviour by the two men behind her was inappropriate, she and the conference acted on it and the boys apologised. Meanwhile the internet explodes in an effort to tell her that she behaved inappropriately, and meanwhile nobody can see the contradiction in any of this.
My preference is that as tricky as it can be, we afford people some leeway, we don't judge people differently according to whether we like them or not, and we don't put into place procedures that allow this behaviour. That is all.
posted by zoo at 5:38 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Calling out programmers for inappropriate behavior seems a little weird... I mean, duh! If we had people skills, we'd be taking the requirements from the customers to the developer.
posted by ph00dz at 6:01 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by ph00dz at 6:01 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Two wrongs were committed in this story. The dude who was fired made off-colour comments in violation of the conference's code of conduct, was asked to leave the event, and has since apologized. All good.
Adria Richards publicly shamed two guys by posting their pics and her account of the conversation on her well-read twitter feed, which was in violation of the conference's recommendations for dealing with harrassment. She has not yet apologized or acknowledged that she did anything wrong.
posted by rocket88 at 6:04 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
Adria Richards publicly shamed two guys by posting their pics and her account of the conversation on her well-read twitter feed, which was in violation of the conference's recommendations for dealing with harrassment. She has not yet apologized or acknowledged that she did anything wrong.
posted by rocket88 at 6:04 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
I am saying this as an honestly, really trying hard to understand, want to be a better person feminist white male. nickrussell has posted this power dynamic thing that I don't agree with, but will have to think about and address later.
I had an amazing professor at Santa Monica College, who taught the racial studies course. His view is paraphrased as follows:
The benefit of whiteness in America is not having to think about race. When a white person is pulled over by the highway patrol on the 405, they never wonder if it is because they are white. When a white person is refused a job opportunity, they do not wonder if it is because they were white. If a white man is rejected by a white woman, he does not consider if it is because he is white. When a white person is refused access or entry, he often sees the true reason. Class. He does not have enough money for a medical treatment, or to attend a certain college. The freedom of being white is not having to think about race.
When a black man is pulled over by the highway patrol, it could be because he is black. When he is refused a job opportunity, he may wonder if it is because he is black. When he is rejected by a white woman, he may wonder if it is because he is black. When he is refused access or entry, he wonders if it is because he is black. He lives in a world where, for everything, there could be two reasons. The real reason, and then because he is black. A black man in America thinks about race constantly. When he watches the news, white criminals are "men" and black criminals are "african american men" or "hispanic men" or "asian men". The art of his community receives the label "urban". His music is "urban music" and his art is "urban art" or "street art". He lives his life constantly aware of race.
That is the construct that has been created and is perpetuated. It is done so in jokes. We all know Carlton from the Fresh Prince. He has that little dance, The Carlton. He is a wealthy black man, who operates in a white world. That requires that he is stripped of his blackness. Therefore he cannot dance. He acts like a preppy. He takes on the behaviour of whiteness, yet he is black. His family is not identified as a "wealthy" family. They are a "wealthy black family".
These are the notes I have recorded, and they are quite old. But the point was that for the dominant individuals in the hierarchy, the dominance is the freedom from having to consider where they are in the hierarchy. I do not think most white people's first thought when they are pulled over is "it's because I'm white" or "I'm driving in the wrong neighbourhood".
Similarly, the benefit of being a man in a male-dominated world is that one does not consider gender when thinking about anything. Think about "ladies night" or "Sadie Hawkins" dances, where the evening is centred around women. That is a male construct. "Tonight it is okay for you to choose a man".
When men receive pay offers, how often do they wonder, "This is below my expectations. That must be because I am a man"? When a man is refused admission to a college engineering programme, how often does he wonder, "It probably is because I am a man"?
If you're wondering if the subtle factors matter, think about the high heel. The high heel is a symbol of physical weakness, for it puts the wearer at an immediate disadvantage in the environment. They are not using the full contact patch of their foot for bodily stability, but rather balancing on a tiny point. Whilst their male counterparts have the entire foot firmly on the ground. Think of that from a physical power standpoint. If one person was to suddenly push the other, who has more physical power? Obviously the one with more square centimetres of contact with the ground. Yet, when you look at high heels, do you seem them as a symbol of male physical power or male primacy? Probably not. Neither do most women, which is the other subtle feature of the power dynamic. Both sides of the equation buy into it.
When a woman is rejected from an engineering programme and considers it is because she is a woman, as often as there is anger at the rejection, there is often acquiescence to the power hierarchy. She is not the only woman rejected, therefore the power hierarchy is valid. Because it's not that the door is closed to her, but that the door is closed to "hers".
There was a point made earlier about the woman at the conference using her position in media to dominate this man. Damn straight, because that is how change happens. When a man uses his position to selectively hire, that is "the way it goes". When a women does it, that is "an abuse of authority". If this was a man who had called out this sexual harassment, he would be revered as "a man who protects women". Since it was a woman, she is being cast as "a woman using her power to crush men". Subtle, but absolutely essential if you are to understand the dominance hierarchy.
This is a hard point to deal with because it involves the individual within a larger context, which was the point I made earlier. If I am a woman who hires other women ahead of men, that is unfair, for I am considering gender. Yet, the deck is stacked against women to begin with, so the only way women will get ahead is if they take advantage of their positions of authority to enable other women.
In hip-hop, there's often the entourage that comes with a celebrity. Part of the reason for that entourage is that the big man in the group is bringing people with him. Putting his friends in a place where their opportunities are changed as well. This isn't my assertion, but the results of research findings from work done quite a while ago. Should the celebrity surround himself with the best people, regardless of race? Perhaps. But the reality is, he's taking his people with him because without the opportunity he is providing, many doors would be closed to them. This took the form in the research as "success is an opportunity to bring my people with me."
So in reporting the sexual harassment at such a high profile, it was unfair to the man who was the target, but simultaneously, he is the beneficiary of the system which she is attempting to change. So whilst it is unfortunate that he became a target, and it's through no fault of his own, that the cost of being a man. For the first time in his life – and many others – they're experiencing unfair treatment for their gender. And it sucks, doesn't it.
posted by nickrussell at 6:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [28 favorites]
I had an amazing professor at Santa Monica College, who taught the racial studies course. His view is paraphrased as follows:
The benefit of whiteness in America is not having to think about race. When a white person is pulled over by the highway patrol on the 405, they never wonder if it is because they are white. When a white person is refused a job opportunity, they do not wonder if it is because they were white. If a white man is rejected by a white woman, he does not consider if it is because he is white. When a white person is refused access or entry, he often sees the true reason. Class. He does not have enough money for a medical treatment, or to attend a certain college. The freedom of being white is not having to think about race.
When a black man is pulled over by the highway patrol, it could be because he is black. When he is refused a job opportunity, he may wonder if it is because he is black. When he is rejected by a white woman, he may wonder if it is because he is black. When he is refused access or entry, he wonders if it is because he is black. He lives in a world where, for everything, there could be two reasons. The real reason, and then because he is black. A black man in America thinks about race constantly. When he watches the news, white criminals are "men" and black criminals are "african american men" or "hispanic men" or "asian men". The art of his community receives the label "urban". His music is "urban music" and his art is "urban art" or "street art". He lives his life constantly aware of race.
That is the construct that has been created and is perpetuated. It is done so in jokes. We all know Carlton from the Fresh Prince. He has that little dance, The Carlton. He is a wealthy black man, who operates in a white world. That requires that he is stripped of his blackness. Therefore he cannot dance. He acts like a preppy. He takes on the behaviour of whiteness, yet he is black. His family is not identified as a "wealthy" family. They are a "wealthy black family".
These are the notes I have recorded, and they are quite old. But the point was that for the dominant individuals in the hierarchy, the dominance is the freedom from having to consider where they are in the hierarchy. I do not think most white people's first thought when they are pulled over is "it's because I'm white" or "I'm driving in the wrong neighbourhood".
Similarly, the benefit of being a man in a male-dominated world is that one does not consider gender when thinking about anything. Think about "ladies night" or "Sadie Hawkins" dances, where the evening is centred around women. That is a male construct. "Tonight it is okay for you to choose a man".
When men receive pay offers, how often do they wonder, "This is below my expectations. That must be because I am a man"? When a man is refused admission to a college engineering programme, how often does he wonder, "It probably is because I am a man"?
If you're wondering if the subtle factors matter, think about the high heel. The high heel is a symbol of physical weakness, for it puts the wearer at an immediate disadvantage in the environment. They are not using the full contact patch of their foot for bodily stability, but rather balancing on a tiny point. Whilst their male counterparts have the entire foot firmly on the ground. Think of that from a physical power standpoint. If one person was to suddenly push the other, who has more physical power? Obviously the one with more square centimetres of contact with the ground. Yet, when you look at high heels, do you seem them as a symbol of male physical power or male primacy? Probably not. Neither do most women, which is the other subtle feature of the power dynamic. Both sides of the equation buy into it.
When a woman is rejected from an engineering programme and considers it is because she is a woman, as often as there is anger at the rejection, there is often acquiescence to the power hierarchy. She is not the only woman rejected, therefore the power hierarchy is valid. Because it's not that the door is closed to her, but that the door is closed to "hers".
There was a point made earlier about the woman at the conference using her position in media to dominate this man. Damn straight, because that is how change happens. When a man uses his position to selectively hire, that is "the way it goes". When a women does it, that is "an abuse of authority". If this was a man who had called out this sexual harassment, he would be revered as "a man who protects women". Since it was a woman, she is being cast as "a woman using her power to crush men". Subtle, but absolutely essential if you are to understand the dominance hierarchy.
This is a hard point to deal with because it involves the individual within a larger context, which was the point I made earlier. If I am a woman who hires other women ahead of men, that is unfair, for I am considering gender. Yet, the deck is stacked against women to begin with, so the only way women will get ahead is if they take advantage of their positions of authority to enable other women.
In hip-hop, there's often the entourage that comes with a celebrity. Part of the reason for that entourage is that the big man in the group is bringing people with him. Putting his friends in a place where their opportunities are changed as well. This isn't my assertion, but the results of research findings from work done quite a while ago. Should the celebrity surround himself with the best people, regardless of race? Perhaps. But the reality is, he's taking his people with him because without the opportunity he is providing, many doors would be closed to them. This took the form in the research as "success is an opportunity to bring my people with me."
So in reporting the sexual harassment at such a high profile, it was unfair to the man who was the target, but simultaneously, he is the beneficiary of the system which she is attempting to change. So whilst it is unfortunate that he became a target, and it's through no fault of his own, that the cost of being a man. For the first time in his life – and many others – they're experiencing unfair treatment for their gender. And it sucks, doesn't it.
posted by nickrussell at 6:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [28 favorites]
The dude who was fired made off-colour comments in violation of the conference's code of conduct, was asked to leave the event...
The guys weren't asked to leave. I emailed Jesse Noller, the PyConn contact person about this incident and asked if the guys were asked to leave. The reply was that the guys were quietly pulled aside and then returned to their seats after things were settled.
This jibs with other reports that they guys were taken out into the hallway, spoken too and they acknowledged the problem, apologized and that was that.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
The guys weren't asked to leave. I emailed Jesse Noller, the PyConn contact person about this incident and asked if the guys were asked to leave. The reply was that the guys were quietly pulled aside and then returned to their seats after things were settled.
This jibs with other reports that they guys were taken out into the hallway, spoken too and they acknowledged the problem, apologized and that was that.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'm not sure there's any way she could have talked about this publicly without bringing down the shitstorm
True. But that's not evidence for anything, either her being in the wrong about how she handled this, or her being in the right. The inevitable death and rape threats by outraged entitled man children is a constant.
There's nothing in this whole story where any of the main actors did anything wrong. Two men sharing a joke about sex. (and how many jokes aren't about sex). A woman, upset by this behaviour reported it. A conference followed its code of conduct.
It was the way she reported it, with the consequences it had, that is the main objection of people, like me, here. Talking to them directly to complain? Not a problem. Sending a private message to the conference organisers? Also not a problem. But publically tweeting their picture? That goes to for in the context.
Even the way she reported it, whatever offence they caused was minor at best, not deserving of public outrage.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
True. But that's not evidence for anything, either her being in the wrong about how she handled this, or her being in the right. The inevitable death and rape threats by outraged entitled man children is a constant.
There's nothing in this whole story where any of the main actors did anything wrong. Two men sharing a joke about sex. (and how many jokes aren't about sex). A woman, upset by this behaviour reported it. A conference followed its code of conduct.
It was the way she reported it, with the consequences it had, that is the main objection of people, like me, here. Talking to them directly to complain? Not a problem. Sending a private message to the conference organisers? Also not a problem. But publically tweeting their picture? That goes to for in the context.
Even the way she reported it, whatever offence they caused was minor at best, not deserving of public outrage.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
This is such blatant, obvious, boorish power tripping on the part of Richards, who is taking advantage of this whole "make ALL THE THINGS safe for teh womenz" environment.
Dear Ms. Richards: please remove the giant chip from your shoulder, and try to remember that the whole world is not designed for your comfort, nor shall it ever be.
posted by gsh at 6:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Dear Ms. Richards: please remove the giant chip from your shoulder, and try to remember that the whole world is not designed for your comfort, nor shall it ever be.
posted by gsh at 6:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm not seeing so much of that, though admittedly I'm far from a keen identifier of such things, and may simply to take them for granted.
Yeah, most of your comment is a sexist trope, too. "She shouldn't have reacted how she did", "she should have used it as a chance to teach then", "she should have confronted the people making her uncomfortable" are all sexist tropes.
Women have no obligation, whatsoever, to "teach" people anything. If I see you pissing on the floor, it's not on me to grab the learning opportunity and teach you about how big boys don't pee in public these days. I just get you thrown out. I might well take your picture too: an amorphous sense of privacy is not an inviolable shield for those acting like morons in public.
MartinWisse: same deal. Tone arguments demean the arguer.
posted by bonaldi at 6:21 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Yeah, most of your comment is a sexist trope, too. "She shouldn't have reacted how she did", "she should have used it as a chance to teach then", "she should have confronted the people making her uncomfortable" are all sexist tropes.
Women have no obligation, whatsoever, to "teach" people anything. If I see you pissing on the floor, it's not on me to grab the learning opportunity and teach you about how big boys don't pee in public these days. I just get you thrown out. I might well take your picture too: an amorphous sense of privacy is not an inviolable shield for those acting like morons in public.
MartinWisse: same deal. Tone arguments demean the arguer.
posted by bonaldi at 6:21 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
What annoys me the most about the discussion here is the idea that "professionalism" trumps everything and that you have to be on best behaviour at all times in case your behaviour reflects back on your company, as justified by the idea that the company paid for them to be at this conference. It's very very easy, especially online, to make this universal, that everything you say or do (online) is subject to review by your employer.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by MartinWisse at 6:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'm starting to feel like this is an ARG created by a group of Philosophy of Language professors to support a class about truth statements... I mean, it's all just really... didactically constructed. Check it out:
"She posted the picture to Twitter/blogged about the situation."
Is a factual statement - at least, within the bounds of reasonable confidence. Nobody has attempted to suggest that her entire online persona has been hijacked, or that this is a mass hallucination.
"It was wrong to post the picture to Twitter/ her blog post shows that she's a bad person."
Is a value statement - it's not actually a truth statement at all, but rather a statement about the interaction of a factual statement with the internal discernment of the person responding to it - which exists in a dialog with consensus and other individual and group responses, of course.
It's possible to disagree with that - to say that your internal calculus comes up with a different number - but it's actually very hard to say "you are wrong to think it is wrong", in truth-value terms. It's that confusing thing where "wrong" meaning factually inaccurate and "wrong" meaning morally deficient are very different concepts covered by the same word.
"If she had just talked to the guys about this, they would certainly have been receptive and respectful."
Is an untestable conditional. It is impossible to say with confidence that Y would have occurred if X had happened, because X did not happen. Our relationship with temporality is such that the moving hand, once writ, moves on.
(We can say that, according to the PyCon report, the men, once invited to discuss it, agreed that their conversation was in poor taste and apologized. But that's a different situation, and one could construct a hypothetical scenario where they felt pressured to do so, for example.)
"A man has been fired as a result of Adria Richards' tweet/ blog post."
Is first a factual assertion, based so far (to my understanding) on a single, pseudonymous anonymous post to Hacker News. If one has access to a datum (whether a man has actually been fired, which has a paper trail, although in the US not one necessarily with a stated cause), one can say whether at least the first half of the statement is true or false. It is second a proposed causal relationship - if we take the two statements ("Adria Richards tweeted/blogged", "a man was fired") as factually correct, there's then a kind of gnoming process required to connect the two.
"A man's life/career/livelihood/family has been destroyed."
Is an extrapolation. It takes the above simple factual assertion and extrapolates a set of consequences which are neither verifiable or unverifiable on the currently available evidence.
Hypotheses, assertions and extrapolations are hugely important, because they are the way we work out how the universe works. In this case, I think we've got a fundamental issue here because the relevant datum - whether someone has actually been fired - is not currently available.
(As an aside, Shutterbun, I think "a man has been fired" and "Adria Richards has received death threats" are statements with different assessable truth values. We've already seen a post which said that the poster was on his way to "slit her", along with her home address, posted to and removed from Hacker News.)
However, while we don't know whether the statement "a man has been fired" (and the extrapolation "a man has had his career/livelihood/family endangered") is truthful, it is definitely truthy: it reflects a particular view of the world and how it works which is a useful tool for particular purposes.
To take a less contentious example, rocket88 just said, and is by no means the first person to do so, that "the dude who was fired ... was asked to leave the event". As Brandon says, that record says that the issue was resolved privately and no further action was taken by PyCon's organizers.
However, the guy being ejected from PyCon is such a useful narrative element, because it creates a satisfying rule-of-three escalation of injustice (Richards tweeting - convention organizers ejecting - employer firing) that it's better than true within that narrative. So, it's going to keep coming up, and at some point a theory will start doing the rounds that PyCon falsified their record when they realised they had screwed up, if it hasn't already.
Truthiness - or confirmation bias, if we're being technical - is kind of fascinating. Back on Jennifer Hepler*, I recall having a conversation with someone who "quoted" a statement she had made (that is, posted a .jpg someone had posted to Reddit or 4chan represented as a quote from her) about how she wanted to move the Dragon Age franchise away from the kind of fantasy written by "old white males".
That sounded immediately fake to me - it's how straw feminists talk. And it seemed particularly fake because I knew she had specifically singled out George R R Martin and a couple of other (middle-aged to deceased) white men as writers she admired. And, indeed, no record of her actually having said it could be found. Even when this was pointed out, however, the guy who posted it maintained that, even if she hadn't said it, it was worth sharing because it was the kind of thing she would say. It wasn't truthful, but it was truthy.
(It's possibly anecdotally interesting that this conversation happened about a month ago, even though the Hepler hate fest peaked a year ago. Richards has basically signed up to get this kind of treatment from a long tail for for a very, very long time - which is tricky for someone whose job is tied up with their ability to communicate on social media.)
*Looking only at the process, not the extent to which a particular person deserved a particular level of opprobrium.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [22 favorites]
"She posted the picture to Twitter/blogged about the situation."
Is a factual statement - at least, within the bounds of reasonable confidence. Nobody has attempted to suggest that her entire online persona has been hijacked, or that this is a mass hallucination.
"It was wrong to post the picture to Twitter/ her blog post shows that she's a bad person."
Is a value statement - it's not actually a truth statement at all, but rather a statement about the interaction of a factual statement with the internal discernment of the person responding to it - which exists in a dialog with consensus and other individual and group responses, of course.
It's possible to disagree with that - to say that your internal calculus comes up with a different number - but it's actually very hard to say "you are wrong to think it is wrong", in truth-value terms. It's that confusing thing where "wrong" meaning factually inaccurate and "wrong" meaning morally deficient are very different concepts covered by the same word.
"If she had just talked to the guys about this, they would certainly have been receptive and respectful."
Is an untestable conditional. It is impossible to say with confidence that Y would have occurred if X had happened, because X did not happen. Our relationship with temporality is such that the moving hand, once writ, moves on.
(We can say that, according to the PyCon report, the men, once invited to discuss it, agreed that their conversation was in poor taste and apologized. But that's a different situation, and one could construct a hypothetical scenario where they felt pressured to do so, for example.)
"A man has been fired as a result of Adria Richards' tweet/ blog post."
Is first a factual assertion, based so far (to my understanding) on a single, pseudonymous anonymous post to Hacker News. If one has access to a datum (whether a man has actually been fired, which has a paper trail, although in the US not one necessarily with a stated cause), one can say whether at least the first half of the statement is true or false. It is second a proposed causal relationship - if we take the two statements ("Adria Richards tweeted/blogged", "a man was fired") as factually correct, there's then a kind of gnoming process required to connect the two.
"A man's life/career/livelihood/family has been destroyed."
Is an extrapolation. It takes the above simple factual assertion and extrapolates a set of consequences which are neither verifiable or unverifiable on the currently available evidence.
Hypotheses, assertions and extrapolations are hugely important, because they are the way we work out how the universe works. In this case, I think we've got a fundamental issue here because the relevant datum - whether someone has actually been fired - is not currently available.
(As an aside, Shutterbun, I think "a man has been fired" and "Adria Richards has received death threats" are statements with different assessable truth values. We've already seen a post which said that the poster was on his way to "slit her", along with her home address, posted to and removed from Hacker News.)
However, while we don't know whether the statement "a man has been fired" (and the extrapolation "a man has had his career/livelihood/family endangered") is truthful, it is definitely truthy: it reflects a particular view of the world and how it works which is a useful tool for particular purposes.
To take a less contentious example, rocket88 just said, and is by no means the first person to do so, that "the dude who was fired ... was asked to leave the event". As Brandon says, that record says that the issue was resolved privately and no further action was taken by PyCon's organizers.
However, the guy being ejected from PyCon is such a useful narrative element, because it creates a satisfying rule-of-three escalation of injustice (Richards tweeting - convention organizers ejecting - employer firing) that it's better than true within that narrative. So, it's going to keep coming up, and at some point a theory will start doing the rounds that PyCon falsified their record when they realised they had screwed up, if it hasn't already.
Truthiness - or confirmation bias, if we're being technical - is kind of fascinating. Back on Jennifer Hepler*, I recall having a conversation with someone who "quoted" a statement she had made (that is, posted a .jpg someone had posted to Reddit or 4chan represented as a quote from her) about how she wanted to move the Dragon Age franchise away from the kind of fantasy written by "old white males".
That sounded immediately fake to me - it's how straw feminists talk. And it seemed particularly fake because I knew she had specifically singled out George R R Martin and a couple of other (middle-aged to deceased) white men as writers she admired. And, indeed, no record of her actually having said it could be found. Even when this was pointed out, however, the guy who posted it maintained that, even if she hadn't said it, it was worth sharing because it was the kind of thing she would say. It wasn't truthful, but it was truthy.
(It's possibly anecdotally interesting that this conversation happened about a month ago, even though the Hepler hate fest peaked a year ago. Richards has basically signed up to get this kind of treatment from a long tail for for a very, very long time - which is tricky for someone whose job is tied up with their ability to communicate on social media.)
*Looking only at the process, not the extent to which a particular person deserved a particular level of opprobrium.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [22 favorites]
nickrussell: "There was a point made earlier about the woman at the conference using her position in media to dominate this man. Damn straight, because that is how change happens."
Domination is also the way by which change is prevented and injustice is done. To learn about social justice and come away with the conclusion that domination is the way to go? Jeeez, maybe go back and study your notes more.
Cooperation and education are a far better way to go about things. It sounds like Richards would have had a party amenable to cooperation and education, given their apologies and agreement with the PyCon organisers that they had stepped over the line. Unfortunately, the big problem was that she opted for public shaming and bullying via Twitter images to doubly make her point, even after the PyCon people had helped her solve the problem.
posted by barnacles at 6:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Domination is also the way by which change is prevented and injustice is done. To learn about social justice and come away with the conclusion that domination is the way to go? Jeeez, maybe go back and study your notes more.
Cooperation and education are a far better way to go about things. It sounds like Richards would have had a party amenable to cooperation and education, given their apologies and agreement with the PyCon organisers that they had stepped over the line. Unfortunately, the big problem was that she opted for public shaming and bullying via Twitter images to doubly make her point, even after the PyCon people had helped her solve the problem.
posted by barnacles at 6:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
When a man is refused admission to a college engineering programme, how often does he wonder, "It probably is because I am a man"?
Actually, this DOES happen now, due to affirmative action trying to get women in STEM fields. There are only so many spots, and if a man is competing against a woman of equal ability for admission into a college program, I would argue that the pendulum has swung far in the other direction insofar as one of these people will be passed over for a competitive spot. If you're a woman who wants to get into science and engineering, nobody is standing in your way - in fact just about everyone is encouraging you, because every program wants a good female-to-male ratio in their program. This doesn't necessarily hold for things like jobs/tenure, just because female-to-male ratios become less important to administrators beyond the college level.
posted by permiechickie at 6:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Actually, this DOES happen now, due to affirmative action trying to get women in STEM fields. There are only so many spots, and if a man is competing against a woman of equal ability for admission into a college program, I would argue that the pendulum has swung far in the other direction insofar as one of these people will be passed over for a competitive spot. If you're a woman who wants to get into science and engineering, nobody is standing in your way - in fact just about everyone is encouraging you, because every program wants a good female-to-male ratio in their program. This doesn't necessarily hold for things like jobs/tenure, just because female-to-male ratios become less important to administrators beyond the college level.
posted by permiechickie at 6:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
MartinWisse: same deal. Tone arguments demean the arguer.
That's not a tone argument. She's free to complain however she wants, but she has to own the consequences of her actions. In this case that it caused one of the men she complained about to be fired.
And I'm free to criticise her for that. To repeat: I've got no problem with her complaint, even if I found it over the top, just the place she made it, which judging by her own statements, she didn't think through other than thinking it would be the quickest way to contact the con organisers.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
That's not a tone argument. She's free to complain however she wants, but she has to own the consequences of her actions. In this case that it caused one of the men she complained about to be fired.
And I'm free to criticise her for that. To repeat: I've got no problem with her complaint, even if I found it over the top, just the place she made it, which judging by her own statements, she didn't think through other than thinking it would be the quickest way to contact the con organisers.
posted by MartinWisse at 6:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
What annoys me the most about the discussion here is the idea that "professionalism" trumps everything and that you have to be on best behaviour at all times in case
Sounds more like what annoys you is that the power of tech men to act with impunity might be in question. As as been pointed out, other industries manage to be professional without the joke police sitting in their homes at night.
Tech could desperately do with more people having to be on their best behaviour, yes.
That's not a tone argument. She's free to complain however she wants, but she has to own the consequences of her actions. In this case that it caused one of the men she complained about to be fired.
That hasn't been proven. And even if it were, the consequences of her actions have been death-threats, rape-threats and a slew of hate-speech. Which is to me the real story, here.
But, yes, it is a tone argument. "Her complaint would have been fine if she hadn't been so public about it" fits exactly with the usual "oh, I would have listened to your complaint if only you hadn't been so shrill/uppity about it" formulations.
She had a very small amount of power, in the form of a moderate twitter following, and she used it in the context of a massive historic and entrenched power imbalance. It's illuminating how terrified that has you.
posted by bonaldi at 6:33 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Sounds more like what annoys you is that the power of tech men to act with impunity might be in question. As as been pointed out, other industries manage to be professional without the joke police sitting in their homes at night.
Tech could desperately do with more people having to be on their best behaviour, yes.
That's not a tone argument. She's free to complain however she wants, but she has to own the consequences of her actions. In this case that it caused one of the men she complained about to be fired.
That hasn't been proven. And even if it were, the consequences of her actions have been death-threats, rape-threats and a slew of hate-speech. Which is to me the real story, here.
But, yes, it is a tone argument. "Her complaint would have been fine if she hadn't been so public about it" fits exactly with the usual "oh, I would have listened to your complaint if only you hadn't been so shrill/uppity about it" formulations.
She had a very small amount of power, in the form of a moderate twitter following, and she used it in the context of a massive historic and entrenched power imbalance. It's illuminating how terrified that has you.
posted by bonaldi at 6:33 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
If you're a woman who wants to get into science and engineering, nobody is standing in your way - in fact just about everyone is encouraging you, because every program wants a good female-to-male ratio in their program.
It's only taken a thousand years. ;)
posted by nickrussell at 6:36 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's only taken a thousand years. ;)
posted by nickrussell at 6:36 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The example we are given is that if two of us are making off color jokes in a room by ourselves but somebody has their ear pressed agains the window, overhears us and complains, we can be fired and sued for creating a hostile work environment. In fact, we are told it doesn't even really matter if we're not making blue jokes at all and the person completely misunderstands what we're saying. We could still be fired and sued.
Now, at the end of the day, we probably wouldn't be fired or sued for it
So in short, do not say or do anything that could possibly be misconstrued as sexual or there will be terrible consequences. But anything you say could be misconstrued as sexual, couldn't it? Sure, we all do it!
In shorter: As soon as you speak, you are guilty, and those with power will decide whether to punish you or not.
And this is supposed to be inclusive? This is an improvement? Yech and double-yech.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 6:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Now, at the end of the day, we probably wouldn't be fired or sued for it
So in short, do not say or do anything that could possibly be misconstrued as sexual or there will be terrible consequences. But anything you say could be misconstrued as sexual, couldn't it? Sure, we all do it!
In shorter: As soon as you speak, you are guilty, and those with power will decide whether to punish you or not.
And this is supposed to be inclusive? This is an improvement? Yech and double-yech.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 6:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Blasdelb: ""So, let me get this right. Dick jokes by women on their own Twitter = okay."
Yeah, I think that one is pretty solid. If that is her personal twitter account then yes indeed women make dick jokes on their own time too and that is totally ok. Making dick jokes in a professional environment around colleagues who are there because its how they make a living on the other hand is not ok."
Well, seeing as she doesn't seem to have a business Twitter, I, well, see a case of pot and kettle. Of course, she seems to be self-employed.
Mind you, I am NOT objecting to women and dick jokes by any means. I AM objecting to her apparently making a slip in a semi-public forum, and these guys apparently making a slip in a semi-public forum and how things played out.
posted by Samizdata at 6:49 AM on March 21, 2013
Yeah, I think that one is pretty solid. If that is her personal twitter account then yes indeed women make dick jokes on their own time too and that is totally ok. Making dick jokes in a professional environment around colleagues who are there because its how they make a living on the other hand is not ok."
Well, seeing as she doesn't seem to have a business Twitter, I, well, see a case of pot and kettle. Of course, she seems to be self-employed.
Mind you, I am NOT objecting to women and dick jokes by any means. I AM objecting to her apparently making a slip in a semi-public forum, and these guys apparently making a slip in a semi-public forum and how things played out.
posted by Samizdata at 6:49 AM on March 21, 2013
(We can say that, according to the PyCon report, the men, once invited to discuss it, agreed that their conversation was in poor taste and apologized. But that's a different situation, and one could construct a hypothetical scenario where they felt pressured to do so, for example.)
One could also construct a hypothetical example where they were joking amongst themselves, but upon being told that they had offended someone, were honestly apologetic, because that hadn't been their intent.
But then, in your construction of truth statements and truthiness, you managed to start analysing things from after the establishing incident, even though whether she misconstrued a tech joke or overheard an in-joke or was party to something truly offensive is also one of the unknowns. That seems its own form of confirmation bias.
As for bonaldi saying: She had a very small amount of power, in the form of a moderate twitter following, and she used it in the context of a massive historic and entrenched power imbalance. It's illuminating how terrified that has you.
That's an immensely uncharitable assessment, and entirely unhelpful to reasonable discussion. Try harder.
posted by gadge emeritus at 6:54 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
One could also construct a hypothetical example where they were joking amongst themselves, but upon being told that they had offended someone, were honestly apologetic, because that hadn't been their intent.
But then, in your construction of truth statements and truthiness, you managed to start analysing things from after the establishing incident, even though whether she misconstrued a tech joke or overheard an in-joke or was party to something truly offensive is also one of the unknowns. That seems its own form of confirmation bias.
As for bonaldi saying: She had a very small amount of power, in the form of a moderate twitter following, and she used it in the context of a massive historic and entrenched power imbalance. It's illuminating how terrified that has you.
That's an immensely uncharitable assessment, and entirely unhelpful to reasonable discussion. Try harder.
posted by gadge emeritus at 6:54 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Gadge: this thread reads, for a large part, like the yelp of scared and threatened power. Just two posts above yours is yet another "the sky is falling" post where whenever someone speaks "they are guilty". If anything needs to be worked harder on, it's the examination of privilege.
posted by bonaldi at 7:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by bonaldi at 7:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
In shorter: As soon as you speak, you are guilty, and those with power will decide whether to punish you or not.
I agree, and would add that in the realm of speech monitoring and thought reform, you can be punished for not saying something too. Silence is never a right without the right to speak freely, and this leads to all kinds of posturing. It is also likely that every tyranny or oppression that ever lived always gave a serious reason before punishing someone. It didn't need to make sense to anyone outside the culture, merely that it was taught as a right and true one, and that a consistent social reasoning developed in order to control people automatically.
posted by Brian B. at 7:07 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I agree, and would add that in the realm of speech monitoring and thought reform, you can be punished for not saying something too. Silence is never a right without the right to speak freely, and this leads to all kinds of posturing. It is also likely that every tyranny or oppression that ever lived always gave a serious reason before punishing someone. It didn't need to make sense to anyone outside the culture, merely that it was taught as a right and true one, and that a consistent social reasoning developed in order to control people automatically.
posted by Brian B. at 7:07 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sounds more like what annoys you is that the power of tech men to act with impunity might be in question. As as been pointed out, other industries manage to be professional without the joke police sitting in their homes at night.
This is highly uncharitable. I've seen behavior 100 times worse go on, both inside and outside of tech circles, and it's horrible, and women generally feel that they have to smile and be a good sport and go along with it, because that's the way the game is played. This ranges from women being sent to client meetings explcitly because the client would "appreciate" it, to two young women receiving a barrage of sexual innuendos because they had plans to go shopping together after work, to a man putting his hands on a woman's shoulders during a business meeting, etc etc etc. Horrible.
But someone got punished for talking about dongles and forking repos, so now we have an important step towards cosmic balance in the universe, and because this step is so important we no longer have any problems with arbitrary exercises of power and disproportionate responses and public policing. Nope, none of these things are problematic at all. A world in which you can get fired because someone with power is annoyed, that's only bad because everyone is desperately clinging to their male privilege.
posted by leopard at 7:07 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
This is highly uncharitable. I've seen behavior 100 times worse go on, both inside and outside of tech circles, and it's horrible, and women generally feel that they have to smile and be a good sport and go along with it, because that's the way the game is played. This ranges from women being sent to client meetings explcitly because the client would "appreciate" it, to two young women receiving a barrage of sexual innuendos because they had plans to go shopping together after work, to a man putting his hands on a woman's shoulders during a business meeting, etc etc etc. Horrible.
But someone got punished for talking about dongles and forking repos, so now we have an important step towards cosmic balance in the universe, and because this step is so important we no longer have any problems with arbitrary exercises of power and disproportionate responses and public policing. Nope, none of these things are problematic at all. A world in which you can get fired because someone with power is annoyed, that's only bad because everyone is desperately clinging to their male privilege.
posted by leopard at 7:07 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
Hmm.
I've been sitting here typing out a comment, deleting it, rewording, deleting..
I just can't make the judgement call on this.
1) are sexist remarks bad? yeah they are, they inforce the institutional fault.
2) is outing someone bad? yeah, collateral damage bad.
3) is outing a person in power bad? no, but depends on the subject of "outing".
4) is it wrong to threaten someone for outing something/someone? this is always bad.
it's just too bloody hard to make the call on this, since we don't have anything but anecdotes of what really transpired.
We know frightfully little about what transpired, we know A. felt threatened due to the jokes and prior comments, we know someone got fired. But there's a lot inbetween along with motives we know zilch about.
I find myself agreeing with A, but I also think it's wrong whatever-his-name-was got fired for it.
I just don't ever want to find myself in a position where I have to police myself, my thoughts and my language.
We all operate differently, I come from two cultures where sexual jokes are very .. universal, guys are far less likely to make sexist jokes than women, and I've yet to see someone get fired due to a remark they made at a conference.
Also, the conferences i've been to, mindless banter is a way to handle a boring talk amongst other things.
But like so many others in this thread, we need to think about privilege, power and how sexism effects others on a day to day basis.
I just don't want to judge anyone in this. :/
posted by xcasex at 7:08 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I've been sitting here typing out a comment, deleting it, rewording, deleting..
I just can't make the judgement call on this.
1) are sexist remarks bad? yeah they are, they inforce the institutional fault.
2) is outing someone bad? yeah, collateral damage bad.
3) is outing a person in power bad? no, but depends on the subject of "outing".
4) is it wrong to threaten someone for outing something/someone? this is always bad.
it's just too bloody hard to make the call on this, since we don't have anything but anecdotes of what really transpired.
We know frightfully little about what transpired, we know A. felt threatened due to the jokes and prior comments, we know someone got fired. But there's a lot inbetween along with motives we know zilch about.
I find myself agreeing with A, but I also think it's wrong whatever-his-name-was got fired for it.
I just don't ever want to find myself in a position where I have to police myself, my thoughts and my language.
We all operate differently, I come from two cultures where sexual jokes are very .. universal, guys are far less likely to make sexist jokes than women, and I've yet to see someone get fired due to a remark they made at a conference.
Also, the conferences i've been to, mindless banter is a way to handle a boring talk amongst other things.
But like so many others in this thread, we need to think about privilege, power and how sexism effects others on a day to day basis.
I just don't want to judge anyone in this. :/
posted by xcasex at 7:08 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"Actually, this DOES happen now, due to affirmative action trying to get women in STEM fields. There are only so many spots, and if a man is competing against a woman of equal ability for admission into a college program, I would argue that the pendulum has swung far in the other direction insofar as one of these people will be passed over for a competitive spot. If you're a woman who wants to get into science and engineering, nobody is standing in your way - in fact just about everyone is encouraging you, because every program wants a good female-to-male ratio in their program. This doesn't necessarily hold for things like jobs/tenure, just because female-to-male ratios become less important to administrators beyond the college level."
You have just stated a number of testable hypotheses and every single one of them has either been empirically demonstrated to be patently false or is just irrelevant to your thesis. In the STEM fields there is a now massive body of research showing just how bad it still is, here is a good introduction to it with a solid references section,
You have just stated a number of testable hypotheses and every single one of them has either been empirically demonstrated to be patently false or is just irrelevant to your thesis. In the STEM fields there is a now massive body of research showing just how bad it still is, here is a good introduction to it with a solid references section,
Science Faculty’s Subtle Gender Biases Favor Male Students.posted by Blasdelb at 7:11 AM on March 21, 2013 [31 favorites]
Despite efforts to recruit and retain more women, a stark gender disparity persists within academic science. Abundant research has demonstrated gender bias in many demographic groups, but has yet to experimentally investigate whether science faculty exhibit a bias against female students that could contribute to the gender disparity in academic science. In a randomized double-blind study (n = 127), science faculty from research-intensive universities rated the application materials of a student—who was randomly assigned either a male or female name—for a laboratory manager position. Faculty participants rated the male applicant as significantly more competent and hireable than the (identical) female applicant. These participants also selected a higher starting salary and offered more career mentoring to the male applicant. The gender of the faculty participants did not affect responses, such that female and male faculty were equally likely to exhibit bias against the female student. Mediation analyses indicated that the female student was less likely to be hired because she was viewed as less competent. We also assessed faculty participants’ preexisting subtle bias against women using a standard instrument and found that preexisting subtle bias against women played a moderating role, such that subtle bias against women was associated with less support for the female student, but was unrelated to reactions to the male student. These results suggest that interventions addressing faculty gender bias might advance the goal of increasing the participation of women in science.
This is highly uncharitable. I've seen behavior 100 times worse go on, both inside and outside of tech circles, and it's horrible, and women generally feel that they have to smile and be a good sport and go along with it, because that's the way the game is played. This ranges from women being sent to client meetings explcitly because the client would "appreciate" it, to two young women receiving a barrage of sexual innuendos because they had plans to go shopping together after work, to a man putting his hands on a woman's shoulders during a business meeting, etc etc etc. Horrible.
THIS.
I have a friend, let's call her P, she works as an economic advisor for a company in the construction sector. P is always the one they send to client meetings, negotiations and while she's happy she has that job and that responsibility, she also loathes that they (management) are making her feel like the only good use she has is her looks. We had discussions about this every now and then and this winter she took it up with the CEO, He told her that they'd implement a change policy and that she'd just have to "live with it" until they've managed to ease through the new policy.
One week afterwards, a companywide email went out about how due to various complaints from the female staff they'd have to implement this change in behaviour.
P being the only female on staff, She started receiving threats, physical confrontations and this went as far as one of the management bee's grabbing her ass and saying something reprehensible.
So what happened? She was fired for conduct unbecoming.
That wasn't the IT sector and is just one story out of many :/
posted by xcasex at 7:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
THIS.
I have a friend, let's call her P, she works as an economic advisor for a company in the construction sector. P is always the one they send to client meetings, negotiations and while she's happy she has that job and that responsibility, she also loathes that they (management) are making her feel like the only good use she has is her looks. We had discussions about this every now and then and this winter she took it up with the CEO, He told her that they'd implement a change policy and that she'd just have to "live with it" until they've managed to ease through the new policy.
One week afterwards, a companywide email went out about how due to various complaints from the female staff they'd have to implement this change in behaviour.
P being the only female on staff, She started receiving threats, physical confrontations and this went as far as one of the management bee's grabbing her ass and saying something reprehensible.
So what happened? She was fired for conduct unbecoming.
That wasn't the IT sector and is just one story out of many :/
posted by xcasex at 7:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
bonaldi: "Gadge: this thread reads, for a large part, like the yelp of scared and threatened power"
Just so I can understand this for future reference: Is there any way in which a male human can be critical of what took place (I'm particularly irritated by the reposting of the image on Richards's blog, for instance) without it being a yelp of scared and threatened power?
Let me know and I'll do some further self-examination. As it stands the only party that comes out looking okay in all of this are the PyCon organizers.
posted by vanar sena at 7:15 AM on March 21, 2013
Just so I can understand this for future reference: Is there any way in which a male human can be critical of what took place (I'm particularly irritated by the reposting of the image on Richards's blog, for instance) without it being a yelp of scared and threatened power?
Let me know and I'll do some further self-examination. As it stands the only party that comes out looking okay in all of this are the PyCon organizers.
posted by vanar sena at 7:15 AM on March 21, 2013
"She turned around and they started making jokes about forking her code and other women, and about the size of their dongles."
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
If you read the account and the followup it is obvious that she felt the sexual innuendo was directed at her and other women.
posted by humanfont at 7:17 AM on March 21, 2013
Don't make shit up. It makes the conversation worse.
If you read the account and the followup it is obvious that she felt the sexual innuendo was directed at her and other women.
posted by humanfont at 7:17 AM on March 21, 2013
Mod note: Good morning. We don't really do the "fixed that for you" thing here. Be decent to each other and have a good faith discussion or go to one of the many other places you can be a relentless gleeful snarky jerk about this topic. Our contact form is always open if you'd like to discuss this further.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:17 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 7:17 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
this thread reads, for a large part, like the yelp of scared and threatened power. Just two posts above yours is yet another "the sky is falling" post where whenever someone speaks "they are guilty". If anything needs to be worked harder on, it's the examination of privilege.
Or, you could understand that those who don't agree with you aren't a monolithic block of privilege, and come from their own points of view. Or did you miss that it's not just white men who have questions or disagreements about what happened?
posted by gadge emeritus at 7:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Or, you could understand that those who don't agree with you aren't a monolithic block of privilege, and come from their own points of view. Or did you miss that it's not just white men who have questions or disagreements about what happened?
posted by gadge emeritus at 7:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
What would she have done if the two programmers were women making a sexist joke about men?
posted by Leezie at 7:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Leezie at 7:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Blasdelb, I was specifically referring to college admissions and not any higher (as per my last sentence). I would be very interested to read a study on college admissions to STEM programs and how male and female STEM-specific abilities compare immediately after admission. It was my perception going through a STEM field in college that universities tried very hard to recruit women, and, when spots are competitive, this means that at the same time they are rejecting men of equal ability who might otherwise have attended, admissions being a zero sum game ostensibly based mostly on merit. Retention of female students beyond the first year is a huge problem, and there ARE biases when people are asked to evaluate male/female students on "ability" for things like jobs/tenure where there is not a focus on retaining diversity.
This is perhaps a derail. I just don't agree that men's privilege is an overriding concern in college admissions to STEM fields, because a focus on diversity has overcome it in that specific area.
posted by permiechickie at 7:23 AM on March 21, 2013
This is perhaps a derail. I just don't agree that men's privilege is an overriding concern in college admissions to STEM fields, because a focus on diversity has overcome it in that specific area.
posted by permiechickie at 7:23 AM on March 21, 2013
I didn't formerly agree with the extreme "anti-doxing" sentiment at places like reddit. People who do wrong shouldn't be able to hide behind anonymity. However this situation may have changed my mind. All parties in this situation have been disproportionately harmed because a fairly private matter (not strictly private, but limited in scope) has blown up beyond all rationality due to the matter becoming too public.
I was leaning a bit towards the idea that she may have overreacted to the comments, not so much in posting a picture which I now think was wrong, but given the harrasment she has now received, how can I blame her? If death and rape threats are how some people respond to her complaints, what has she had to deal with in more private contexts over the years?
If so many people are willing to threaten felonies against her in public, how much lesser harassment must be going on unreported all the time!.
posted by jclarkin at 7:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I was leaning a bit towards the idea that she may have overreacted to the comments, not so much in posting a picture which I now think was wrong, but given the harrasment she has now received, how can I blame her? If death and rape threats are how some people respond to her complaints, what has she had to deal with in more private contexts over the years?
If so many people are willing to threaten felonies against her in public, how much lesser harassment must be going on unreported all the time!.
posted by jclarkin at 7:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Sendgrid has been having service issues this morning. DDOS?
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 7:26 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 7:26 AM on March 21, 2013
So does that mean the people upset over someone (maybe) being fired for their actions "on the clock" are now DDOSing a company because of said company's employee's actions?
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 7:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 7:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
this thread reads, for a large part, like the yelp of scared and threatened power.
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private, the one being scared and threatened by power is the one who got fired.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 7:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private, the one being scared and threatened by power is the one who got fired.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 7:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
humanfont: If you read the account and the followup it is obvious that she felt the sexual innuendo was directed at her and other women.
I'm sorry, that's not obvious at all. All we really know about the jokes in question are,
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
and,
They started talking about “big” dongles. I could feel my face getting flustered.
and,
I was telling myself if they made one more sexual joke, I’d say something.
That's it. When it comes to what she found offensive, that's all she says. There is no suggestion that it was directed at other women, unless you presume that since she took offense then there must have been, and that isn't at all clear. We don't even know if they made more than one sexual joke. So no, it's not obvious in the slightest.
posted by gadge emeritus at 7:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'm sorry, that's not obvious at all. All we really know about the jokes in question are,
That would have been fine until the guy next to him…
began making sexual forking jokes
and,
They started talking about “big” dongles. I could feel my face getting flustered.
and,
I was telling myself if they made one more sexual joke, I’d say something.
That's it. When it comes to what she found offensive, that's all she says. There is no suggestion that it was directed at other women, unless you presume that since she took offense then there must have been, and that isn't at all clear. We don't even know if they made more than one sexual joke. So no, it's not obvious in the slightest.
posted by gadge emeritus at 7:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
She had a very small amount of power, in the form of a moderate twitter following, and she used it in the context of a massive historic and entrenched power imbalance. It's illuminating how terrified that has you.
Actually, it mostly has me rolling my eyes and muttering "americans".
posted by MartinWisse at 7:35 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
Actually, it mostly has me rolling my eyes and muttering "americans".
posted by MartinWisse at 7:35 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
But someone got punished for talking about dongles and forking repos
Now who is being uncharitable? She says they were making sexual comments that made her feel uncomfortable. That's not merely "talking about dongles".
Nope, none of these things are problematic at all. A world in which you can get fired because someone with power is annoyed, that's only bad because everyone is desperately clinging to their male privilege.
If we have problems with the disproportionate responses, why aren't we taking it out on the guy's employers? (And why isn't the vaunted MeFi investigative unit finding out if he was actually fired, rather than taking the word of an anon HN comment?)
Is there any way in which a male human can be critical of what took place (I'm particularly irritated by the reposting of the image on Richards's blog, for instance) without it being a yelp of scared and threatened power?
You know what? There's not really a way to do it that's simply not a good look. How much does your irritation at the reposting of the image on the blog matter when this woman is being subjected to a howling maelstrom of abuse, doxxing, rape and death threats? Lots of people here might be OK with shrugging it off as "internet gonna internet", but I'm not.
By analogy, this woman is down on the ground of the parking lot being kicked and punched, and people like you are all "well, wait just a minute, she totally cut that guy up when he was going to park. Who am I going to complain to about that, huh?"
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private, the one being scared and threatened by power is the one who got fired.
Yes. And the reaction to that shifting balance of power is a lot of people who apparently thought their power to do what they like was unquestioned -- so much so that they hate the very idea of even having to be on "their best behaviour" when representing their company -- freaking out.
posted by bonaldi at 7:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Now who is being uncharitable? She says they were making sexual comments that made her feel uncomfortable. That's not merely "talking about dongles".
Nope, none of these things are problematic at all. A world in which you can get fired because someone with power is annoyed, that's only bad because everyone is desperately clinging to their male privilege.
If we have problems with the disproportionate responses, why aren't we taking it out on the guy's employers? (And why isn't the vaunted MeFi investigative unit finding out if he was actually fired, rather than taking the word of an anon HN comment?)
Is there any way in which a male human can be critical of what took place (I'm particularly irritated by the reposting of the image on Richards's blog, for instance) without it being a yelp of scared and threatened power?
You know what? There's not really a way to do it that's simply not a good look. How much does your irritation at the reposting of the image on the blog matter when this woman is being subjected to a howling maelstrom of abuse, doxxing, rape and death threats? Lots of people here might be OK with shrugging it off as "internet gonna internet", but I'm not.
By analogy, this woman is down on the ground of the parking lot being kicked and punched, and people like you are all "well, wait just a minute, she totally cut that guy up when he was going to park. Who am I going to complain to about that, huh?"
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private, the one being scared and threatened by power is the one who got fired.
Yes. And the reaction to that shifting balance of power is a lot of people who apparently thought their power to do what they like was unquestioned -- so much so that they hate the very idea of even having to be on "their best behaviour" when representing their company -- freaking out.
posted by bonaldi at 7:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Both parties contravened Pycon rules. There are no heros in this story. Everyone behaved badly. The jokers broke the rule about vulgar humour. The tweeter broke the rule about harrassing photography.
All three of them behaved like children, spoiled and demanding special snowflakes who don't have to abide by the rules, incapable of the forward thinking that would have led them to choose to act differently.
A pox on all their houses. Techies like these give everyone in the business a bad name. They should all be banned from future Pycons for being jerks.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
All three of them behaved like children, spoiled and demanding special snowflakes who don't have to abide by the rules, incapable of the forward thinking that would have led them to choose to act differently.
A pox on all their houses. Techies like these give everyone in the business a bad name. They should all be banned from future Pycons for being jerks.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I just don't agree that men's privilege is an overriding concern in college admissions to STEM fields, because a focus on diversity has overcome it in that specific area.
I don't think it's particularly helpful to look at it this way. Nickrussell was positing a wider point, that men have the benefit of not having to wonder if their gender is being used against them nearly as often as women do. It seems really nitpicky to say "WELL IN THIS ONE CASE THEY DO" because even if your suggestion is true, that doesn't really change the overall power dynamic. You admitted as such - retention in those programs is still terrible, post-graduate job placements are terrible, etc. STEM fields even at the undergraduate level still heavily skew male, and that's not necessarily the fault of the individual colleges or admissions officers, but the extended education and socialization system that women go through before they even begin applying for college. I think it's safe to say that a guy who didn't get into a STEM program isn't really in danger of looking at those who did get in, and say to himself "I bet it's because I don't look like the other people in this program".
This derail about power structures is kind of what I meant when I say that this incident muddies the waters in the larger picture. It absolutely sucks that the guy got fired, if he did, but it's ridiculous to say that this one incident of an employer being an ass is evidence that women are suddenly the ones in power, or that the power structure itself has changed. As far as I can tell, no one was calling attention to this guy's employer until the employer themselves did. If Rebecca Watson's public call-out of her harasser at Skeptic Con had gotten that guy fired, that would have also sucked, but it would not have been Watson's fault, or proof of feminism running rampant.
If we all agree that the employer's behaviour was out of bounds, why would we attribute this insanity to Richards any more than we would attribute it to this guy making jokes about it to begin with? Neither is any more rational, but one of them sure makes Richards out to be a vindictive sociopathic jerk.
posted by Phire at 7:42 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
I don't think it's particularly helpful to look at it this way. Nickrussell was positing a wider point, that men have the benefit of not having to wonder if their gender is being used against them nearly as often as women do. It seems really nitpicky to say "WELL IN THIS ONE CASE THEY DO" because even if your suggestion is true, that doesn't really change the overall power dynamic. You admitted as such - retention in those programs is still terrible, post-graduate job placements are terrible, etc. STEM fields even at the undergraduate level still heavily skew male, and that's not necessarily the fault of the individual colleges or admissions officers, but the extended education and socialization system that women go through before they even begin applying for college. I think it's safe to say that a guy who didn't get into a STEM program isn't really in danger of looking at those who did get in, and say to himself "I bet it's because I don't look like the other people in this program".
This derail about power structures is kind of what I meant when I say that this incident muddies the waters in the larger picture. It absolutely sucks that the guy got fired, if he did, but it's ridiculous to say that this one incident of an employer being an ass is evidence that women are suddenly the ones in power, or that the power structure itself has changed. As far as I can tell, no one was calling attention to this guy's employer until the employer themselves did. If Rebecca Watson's public call-out of her harasser at Skeptic Con had gotten that guy fired, that would have also sucked, but it would not have been Watson's fault, or proof of feminism running rampant.
If we all agree that the employer's behaviour was out of bounds, why would we attribute this insanity to Richards any more than we would attribute it to this guy making jokes about it to begin with? Neither is any more rational, but one of them sure makes Richards out to be a vindictive sociopathic jerk.
posted by Phire at 7:42 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
However this situation may have changed my mind. All parties in this situation have been disproportionately harmed because a fairly private matter (not strictly private, but limited in scope) has blown up beyond all rationality due to the matter becoming too public.
And who was it again, who took a private matter and decided to broadcast it on the internet to thousands of people?
posted by crayz at 7:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
And who was it again, who took a private matter and decided to broadcast it on the internet to thousands of people?
posted by crayz at 7:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The jokers broke the rule about vulgar humour. The tweeter broke the rule about harrassing photography.
The joker made a (very, very, incredibly mildly) vulgar joke in the context of a private conversation, which the tweeter only heard because she forced her way into their private conversation. The tweeter took a nonconsensual photo with hate-urging caption in the most public of all forums. There's no comparison.
Yes, they were having a private conversation in a public place. If you don't understand how something in public can be considered private, see the Creepshots thread. Every defense of the tweeter comes down to the idea that private behavior must conform to the most restrictive rules of public behavior, and can be punished accordingly.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 7:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
The joker made a (very, very, incredibly mildly) vulgar joke in the context of a private conversation, which the tweeter only heard because she forced her way into their private conversation. The tweeter took a nonconsensual photo with hate-urging caption in the most public of all forums. There's no comparison.
Yes, they were having a private conversation in a public place. If you don't understand how something in public can be considered private, see the Creepshots thread. Every defense of the tweeter comes down to the idea that private behavior must conform to the most restrictive rules of public behavior, and can be punished accordingly.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 7:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
What would she have done if the two programmers were women making a sexist joke about men?
That's almost a textbook unanswerable question (the only way to make it better, in the sense of less answerable, might be to ask "what would she have thought if..."). The only way to get an answer would be to ask her, and even that answer is not a reliably accurate indicator of what she would have done, because the her you are asking is not the her sitting in a hall at PyCon a few days ago. It's a possibly interesting thought experiment, but I don't think any answer coming into existence after the circumstances in which the question can be asked have come into being could be confidently described as "true".
Speaking of...
One could also construct a hypothetical example where they were joking amongst themselves, but upon being told that they had offended someone, were honestly apologetic, because that hadn't been their intent.
Well, that's not exactly a hypothetical example - it's a supplementary hypothesis. But yes, absolutely - that's totally within the set of possible mental processes they might fairly credibly have gone through.
It's very hard to make verifiable truth-statements about what is happening in people's minds, though. What you decide is most likely will affect how you feel about the events, but how you feel is not in itself impactful with regard to truth statements.
Likewise whether she misconstrued a tech joke or overheard an in-joke or was party to something truly offensive is also one of the unknowns are three possible things-that-happened, but I don't think that supports your subsequent conclusion re: confirmation bias.
Immediately, I don't think I understand what "truly" is doing in "truly offensive", which is something I would hope to improve my understanding of. Do you mean "which would be understood to be offensive by an average (or reasonable) person", or "by which Adria Richards was sincerely offended" or "which would be identified as offensive under the code of conduct of the convention", for example?
Or do you feel there to be an absolute set of things which are offensive, regardless of context - that is, one can say "this is offensive" and be confident that this statement cannot be falsified (i.e., is "true")? In the last case, I think I disagree - offence is generally taken to be contextual, in terms of everyday social interaction and indeed convention codes of conduct or employment law. ericb mentioned George Carlin's "seven words you can never say", but Carlin actually added context in the last two words of the track title ("on television").
"Truth" means something quite specific here, and I don't think "[activity] is offensive" is a statement that can be said to be true or false, in those terms. It's the difference between "mackerel is a fish" and "mackerel is delicious"...
So, depending on what "truly" is doing there, all three of your possibilities, as far as I can tell, could coexist. And none of them are particularly relevant to looking at verifiable statements of events.
And, speaking of events, Playhaven's CEO has made a brief statement. Key quote:
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:55 AM on March 21, 2013
That's almost a textbook unanswerable question (the only way to make it better, in the sense of less answerable, might be to ask "what would she have thought if..."). The only way to get an answer would be to ask her, and even that answer is not a reliably accurate indicator of what she would have done, because the her you are asking is not the her sitting in a hall at PyCon a few days ago. It's a possibly interesting thought experiment, but I don't think any answer coming into existence after the circumstances in which the question can be asked have come into being could be confidently described as "true".
Speaking of...
One could also construct a hypothetical example where they were joking amongst themselves, but upon being told that they had offended someone, were honestly apologetic, because that hadn't been their intent.
Well, that's not exactly a hypothetical example - it's a supplementary hypothesis. But yes, absolutely - that's totally within the set of possible mental processes they might fairly credibly have gone through.
It's very hard to make verifiable truth-statements about what is happening in people's minds, though. What you decide is most likely will affect how you feel about the events, but how you feel is not in itself impactful with regard to truth statements.
Likewise whether she misconstrued a tech joke or overheard an in-joke or was party to something truly offensive is also one of the unknowns are three possible things-that-happened, but I don't think that supports your subsequent conclusion re: confirmation bias.
Immediately, I don't think I understand what "truly" is doing in "truly offensive", which is something I would hope to improve my understanding of. Do you mean "which would be understood to be offensive by an average (or reasonable) person", or "by which Adria Richards was sincerely offended" or "which would be identified as offensive under the code of conduct of the convention", for example?
Or do you feel there to be an absolute set of things which are offensive, regardless of context - that is, one can say "this is offensive" and be confident that this statement cannot be falsified (i.e., is "true")? In the last case, I think I disagree - offence is generally taken to be contextual, in terms of everyday social interaction and indeed convention codes of conduct or employment law. ericb mentioned George Carlin's "seven words you can never say", but Carlin actually added context in the last two words of the track title ("on television").
"Truth" means something quite specific here, and I don't think "[activity] is offensive" is a statement that can be said to be true or false, in those terms. It's the difference between "mackerel is a fish" and "mackerel is delicious"...
So, depending on what "truly" is doing there, all three of your possibilities, as far as I can tell, could coexist. And none of them are particularly relevant to looking at verifiable statements of events.
And, speaking of events, Playhaven's CEO has made a brief statement. Key quote:
PlayHaven had an employee who was identified as making inappropriate comments at PyCon, and as a company that is dedicated to gender equality and values honorable behavior, we conducted a thorough investigation. The result of this investigation led to the unfortunate outcome of having to let this employee go. We value and protect the privacy of our employees, both past and present, and we will not comment on all the factors that contributed to our parting ways.So, we can say "an employee has been let go" is now a verified statement. But "as a direct result of an action taken by Adria Richards" is... well, still unverified, although a person might decide it is safe to proceed with it taken as true. Although that comes back to the question of who is responsible for other people's actions and how.
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:55 AM on March 21, 2013
PyCon code of conduct updated to prohibit public shaming
posted by smackfu at 7:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [17 favorites]
posted by smackfu at 7:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [17 favorites]
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private, the one being scared and threatened by power is the one who got fired.
It wasn't in private it was in a crowded room at a public event. It isn't clear she had even left the conversation. A reasonable a action for a company would be to issue a reprimand, firing would be an over reaction. Whatever action the employeer took it is not Richard's responsibility. The guy in question was wearing representing his company at an event.
Consider an alternative where she reported the behavior privately to conference organizers. I've been in the situation as a conference host where one of the sponsor's reps behaved badly and the matter was reported privately. Because the individual was representing a sponsor we had to inform our prime contact at the sponsoring company that one of their employees had been reprimanded. I doubt the existence of a picture and a tweet would make a significant difference in how the employeer would choose to handle this incident. If she privately reported this incident and the guy was fired does that make a difference?
posted by humanfont at 8:07 AM on March 21, 2013
It wasn't in private it was in a crowded room at a public event. It isn't clear she had even left the conversation. A reasonable a action for a company would be to issue a reprimand, firing would be an over reaction. Whatever action the employeer took it is not Richard's responsibility. The guy in question was wearing representing his company at an event.
Consider an alternative where she reported the behavior privately to conference organizers. I've been in the situation as a conference host where one of the sponsor's reps behaved badly and the matter was reported privately. Because the individual was representing a sponsor we had to inform our prime contact at the sponsoring company that one of their employees had been reprimanded. I doubt the existence of a picture and a tweet would make a significant difference in how the employeer would choose to handle this incident. If she privately reported this incident and the guy was fired does that make a difference?
posted by humanfont at 8:07 AM on March 21, 2013
If she privately reported this incident and the guy was fired does that make a difference?
Yes because posting the picture is harassment in itself.
I mean, imagine the reverse. What if a man tuned around and took a picture of Richards sitting in the audience without her permission and posted it to twitter with the caption "dongle" or something like that? Clearly harassment.
As others have pointed out, Richards can be both right and wrong here.
posted by GuyZero at 8:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes because posting the picture is harassment in itself.
I mean, imagine the reverse. What if a man tuned around and took a picture of Richards sitting in the audience without her permission and posted it to twitter with the caption "dongle" or something like that? Clearly harassment.
As others have pointed out, Richards can be both right and wrong here.
posted by GuyZero at 8:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Consider an alternative where...
Maybe we can start just considering what actually happened, instead of hypotheticals in which doppleganger-Adria's behavior might have been appropriate.
posted by crayz at 8:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Maybe we can start just considering what actually happened, instead of hypotheticals in which doppleganger-Adria's behavior might have been appropriate.
posted by crayz at 8:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
If someone can get a person fired over comments made in private
Correct me if I'm wrong but despite the guy being pictured in his company shirt, we still have no verification if he was actually fired? I love a good sticky situation with no clear right or wrong responses, but I am curious about some of the actual facts. Still.
posted by jessamyn at 8:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Correct me if I'm wrong but despite the guy being pictured in his company shirt, we still have no verification if he was actually fired? I love a good sticky situation with no clear right or wrong responses, but I am curious about some of the actual facts. Still.
posted by jessamyn at 8:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Immediately, I don't think I understand what "truly" is doing in "truly offensive", which is something I would hope to improve my understanding of.
It's mostly there as an intensifier, and to separate the idea of, say, one of the things overheard being simply the use of the phrase 'big dongle', versus something like 'I'd like to slip my big dongle to her.' One can be perceived as a lot more innocuous, and also subject to a greater level of context requirement, than the other.
And the reason I brought up the idea of confirmation bias was that in your effective analysis of what had happened, by starting your examination of truth statements after the inciting incident, you accept the premise, that the men said offensive things, as a de facto truth statement rather than a value statement. While it's undeniable that offense was taken, the lack of knowledge about what was actually said means we can't make our own assessments about it.
And a number of people in this thread (not all privileged men) aren't all that sure what was said was worth getting offended by, seemingly based on the premise that, heh, dongle sounds funny.
Nothing egregious, just it seemed backing it up one step would cover what seems to be the crux of the matter, to many people.
posted by gadge emeritus at 8:17 AM on March 21, 2013
It's mostly there as an intensifier, and to separate the idea of, say, one of the things overheard being simply the use of the phrase 'big dongle', versus something like 'I'd like to slip my big dongle to her.' One can be perceived as a lot more innocuous, and also subject to a greater level of context requirement, than the other.
And the reason I brought up the idea of confirmation bias was that in your effective analysis of what had happened, by starting your examination of truth statements after the inciting incident, you accept the premise, that the men said offensive things, as a de facto truth statement rather than a value statement. While it's undeniable that offense was taken, the lack of knowledge about what was actually said means we can't make our own assessments about it.
And a number of people in this thread (not all privileged men) aren't all that sure what was said was worth getting offended by, seemingly based on the premise that, heh, dongle sounds funny.
Nothing egregious, just it seemed backing it up one step would cover what seems to be the crux of the matter, to many people.
posted by gadge emeritus at 8:17 AM on March 21, 2013
Correct me if I'm wrong but despite the guy being pictured in his company shirt, we still have no verification if he was actually fired? I love a good sticky situation with no clear right or wrong responses, but I am curious about some of the actual facts. Still.
jessamyn: See this post on playhaven's blog. At this point it's safe to say someone has been let go, but the blog says that it wasn't Alex Reid. Alex Reid is (as best as I can read it) the name on the name tag of the guy in the middle of the picture.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 8:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
jessamyn: See this post on playhaven's blog. At this point it's safe to say someone has been let go, but the blog says that it wasn't Alex Reid. Alex Reid is (as best as I can read it) the name on the name tag of the guy in the middle of the picture.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 8:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
There was seemingly only one sexual joke, gadge emeritus, the "dongles" one. We'd some confusion yesterday because, if you assume the "sexual forking jokes" have a person as object, then they can only be interpreted as homosexual. In fact, those remarks were not sexual jokes according to the guy who got fired, although maybe a double entendre or sorts, no clue. Adria Richards is not some homophobe bothered by two gay guys making off color comments, she simply heard a sexual joke where apparently none occurred.
posted by jeffburdges at 8:24 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 8:24 AM on March 21, 2013
Someone has definitely been fired for Pycon, as per Playhaven's statement that running order squabble fest posted. The CEO says it's not the guy sitting closest to the camera in Adria's photo. Probably safe to assume that it was the other guy in the photo, but we're still no closer to the rest of the facts.
posted by forgetful snow at 8:27 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by forgetful snow at 8:27 AM on March 21, 2013
It wasn't in private it was in a crowded room at a public event.
So does privacy cease to exist anywhere outside ones own private residence?
How is this any different from the way some people justify creepshots?
posted by Reggie Knoble at 8:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
So does privacy cease to exist anywhere outside ones own private residence?
How is this any different from the way some people justify creepshots?
posted by Reggie Knoble at 8:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"...we conducted a thorough investigation. The result of this investigation led to the unfortunate outcome of having to let this employee go..."
Perhaps in their thorough investigation, they discovered that the employee was sub-par on more than one level, and they let this be the last straw.
At my hypothetical company, if one of my employees got a complaint about bad public behavior, and in my investigation of such I discovered that they had a pattern of bad behavior that had not heretofore been brought to my attention, I would fire them. Even if the originally reported bad behavior had not been a big deal.
"...we will not comment on all the factors that contributed to our parting ways."
posted by Cookiebastard at 8:32 AM on March 21, 2013
Perhaps in their thorough investigation, they discovered that the employee was sub-par on more than one level, and they let this be the last straw.
At my hypothetical company, if one of my employees got a complaint about bad public behavior, and in my investigation of such I discovered that they had a pattern of bad behavior that had not heretofore been brought to my attention, I would fire them. Even if the originally reported bad behavior had not been a big deal.
"...we will not comment on all the factors that contributed to our parting ways."
posted by Cookiebastard at 8:32 AM on March 21, 2013
I'm a woman in open source and I'm glad PyCon has shown it has my back. I am more likely to attend PyCon in the future because of how they acted in the incidents this year.
People who are interested in thinking about conference culture and what it means to ask for "professional" behavior in public spaces in open source might be interested in Open Source, Closed Minds? A reflection on Joseph Reagle’s “‘Free as in sexist?’ Free culture and the gender gap”. Excerpt:
People who are interested in thinking about conference culture and what it means to ask for "professional" behavior in public spaces in open source might be interested in Open Source, Closed Minds? A reflection on Joseph Reagle’s “‘Free as in sexist?’ Free culture and the gender gap”. Excerpt:
The thing about freedom, at least the way it manifests today in open-source communities, is that it looks a lot like freedom from accountability... It’s free as in freedom, not free as in beer, but I’ve started to hear “free as in free from consequences” when I hear open-source people use “free speech” as a reason to be abusive.posted by brainwane at 8:36 AM on March 21, 2013 [13 favorites]
...
At the same time as for-profit companies began to look harder at how to diversify themselves, how to create policies that would protect workers from sexual harassment and various forms of discrimination, the open source movement gained more and more momentum as a way to recreate all of the good bits of being a software engineer in industry (high social status, freedom, and money) without those annoying parts like human resources departments, processes, accountability, and rules (mostly rules to protect less-powerful members of the community).
In my experience professionalism as typically defined is mainly reserved for proles and public displays (like having a huge Twitter following and effectively representing an employer with a high public profile); as you move up the ladder in an organization, people are increasingly less concerned with professionalism
And this is what offends me. Basically you have a higher-profile marketing personality with a penchant for off-color jokes deciding to go after a pair of staff programmers in the audience engaging in some private joshing between friends. Since no one seems to have chimed in with reports from other women about how this guy is known for harassing women, I assume he was doesn't have a pattern here and was exercising decent judgment, outside of not realizing that other people were in earshot.
This isn't "standing up to fight the power." It's a person who decides that she's going to "put someone in his place." The class dynamics of this interaction rub me the wrong way. She's making a very public naming and shaming and making demands for standards of "professional" behavior that she herself does not even think to abide by. We know what SHE was thinking because she publicly articulated it on her blog. And I conclude, based on that, that it was she who was violating norms of professionalism, and she did so in part because by dint of her position, she is rarely held to account when it comes to professional norms.
I read Joey Michaels' explanation of his workplace, and I can't help but think he is getting it completely wrong. Just because you have messed up workplace policies (which may make sense in a school), doesn't mean that everyone should suffer equally under the same regime. Equity is not, "everyone is treated just as poorly." But maybe some people figure that "heightening the contradictions" by abusing the working classes more will accelerate the drive to the revolution.
posted by deanc at 8:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [24 favorites]
And this is what offends me. Basically you have a higher-profile marketing personality with a penchant for off-color jokes deciding to go after a pair of staff programmers in the audience engaging in some private joshing between friends. Since no one seems to have chimed in with reports from other women about how this guy is known for harassing women, I assume he was doesn't have a pattern here and was exercising decent judgment, outside of not realizing that other people were in earshot.
This isn't "standing up to fight the power." It's a person who decides that she's going to "put someone in his place." The class dynamics of this interaction rub me the wrong way. She's making a very public naming and shaming and making demands for standards of "professional" behavior that she herself does not even think to abide by. We know what SHE was thinking because she publicly articulated it on her blog. And I conclude, based on that, that it was she who was violating norms of professionalism, and she did so in part because by dint of her position, she is rarely held to account when it comes to professional norms.
I read Joey Michaels' explanation of his workplace, and I can't help but think he is getting it completely wrong. Just because you have messed up workplace policies (which may make sense in a school), doesn't mean that everyone should suffer equally under the same regime. Equity is not, "everyone is treated just as poorly." But maybe some people figure that "heightening the contradictions" by abusing the working classes more will accelerate the drive to the revolution.
posted by deanc at 8:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [24 favorites]
All this will do is make male and female devs uncomfortable around each other.
Lots of female devs are already uncomfortable around male devs. That's what they've been saying for years.
If I were at a conference and I was interested in the speaker, and two nitwits behind me were cracking jokes loud enough to be disruptive, I would just turn around and ask, "Do you mind?" or something similar.
So you're saying this woman should have done what you, a man, would have done? Because in this context there are no relevant differences?
is the kind of thing that gives struggles for revolutionary change a bad name even in hindsight.
... and is a strawman. The damage was meted out by this guy's employers, not Adria. Adria may have caused offence to deanc by throwing her weight around, but it's not until (in your terms) the dominant realise that the oppressed are starting to get power that change begins to happen.
That's not a blanket excuse for any and all exercise of power by the oppressed, but "oh the oppressed would get what they want if they were only more restrained/polite/less uppity and didn't behave like X" has a very long history indeed, and it's never been any cop.
posted by bonaldi at 8:57 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Lots of female devs are already uncomfortable around male devs. That's what they've been saying for years.
If I were at a conference and I was interested in the speaker, and two nitwits behind me were cracking jokes loud enough to be disruptive, I would just turn around and ask, "Do you mind?" or something similar.
So you're saying this woman should have done what you, a man, would have done? Because in this context there are no relevant differences?
is the kind of thing that gives struggles for revolutionary change a bad name even in hindsight.
... and is a strawman. The damage was meted out by this guy's employers, not Adria. Adria may have caused offence to deanc by throwing her weight around, but it's not until (in your terms) the dominant realise that the oppressed are starting to get power that change begins to happen.
That's not a blanket excuse for any and all exercise of power by the oppressed, but "oh the oppressed would get what they want if they were only more restrained/polite/less uppity and didn't behave like X" has a very long history indeed, and it's never been any cop.
posted by bonaldi at 8:57 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
So does privacy cease to exist anywhere outside ones own private residence?
How is this any different from the way some people justify creepshots?
I feel like the "creepshots" comparison is tricky - the photo was taken with their knowledge (although without knowledge of the use it was going to be put to), they are fully clothed and over the age of consent, it isn't a sex thing - the things that tend to make creepshots creepy are not present.
Legislatively, the situations are also different. The Video Voyeurism Prevention Act talks about a filming a "private area" of the body in a place where someone has a "reasonable expectation of privacy". That falls apart in case law, generally, because where one might have a reasonable expectation of privacy is highly unclear. If I take a photo of someone bending over in a store, that is certainly creepy, but it's not clear if it's illegal. In response to that lack of clarity, some individual states are introducing their own laws, which often say that it is reasonable to expect parts of your body generally covered by your clothes to be private even in public - so an upskirt shot taken on a train, or indeed at a convention center, would be in violation.
The question of when a private conversation is private is trickier, but it's clearly not the case that a private conversation in a public place must always be considered private. If Tim Cook and Steve Ballmer meet in a hotel bar to hash out a couple of things, a journalist on the next barstool over would be both within his rights and probably professionally encouraged to report what they said. That's why they don't.
Likewise, if two people in a church hall are having an audible conversation in which they are using racially hateful language, or speculating about the sexual attractiveness of the other people present, or doing a number of other not-cool things, it's counterintuitive to demand that nobody respond to that because they are facing each other when they do it. The details of this situation notwithstanding, the idea that a personal conversation in a public space is indistinguishable from a conversation completely in private is not really defendable, from a legal or a common-sense perspective.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
How is this any different from the way some people justify creepshots?
I feel like the "creepshots" comparison is tricky - the photo was taken with their knowledge (although without knowledge of the use it was going to be put to), they are fully clothed and over the age of consent, it isn't a sex thing - the things that tend to make creepshots creepy are not present.
Legislatively, the situations are also different. The Video Voyeurism Prevention Act talks about a filming a "private area" of the body in a place where someone has a "reasonable expectation of privacy". That falls apart in case law, generally, because where one might have a reasonable expectation of privacy is highly unclear. If I take a photo of someone bending over in a store, that is certainly creepy, but it's not clear if it's illegal. In response to that lack of clarity, some individual states are introducing their own laws, which often say that it is reasonable to expect parts of your body generally covered by your clothes to be private even in public - so an upskirt shot taken on a train, or indeed at a convention center, would be in violation.
The question of when a private conversation is private is trickier, but it's clearly not the case that a private conversation in a public place must always be considered private. If Tim Cook and Steve Ballmer meet in a hotel bar to hash out a couple of things, a journalist on the next barstool over would be both within his rights and probably professionally encouraged to report what they said. That's why they don't.
Likewise, if two people in a church hall are having an audible conversation in which they are using racially hateful language, or speculating about the sexual attractiveness of the other people present, or doing a number of other not-cool things, it's counterintuitive to demand that nobody respond to that because they are facing each other when they do it. The details of this situation notwithstanding, the idea that a personal conversation in a public space is indistinguishable from a conversation completely in private is not really defendable, from a legal or a common-sense perspective.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Welp
So now Adria Richards has been terminated from SendGrid.
The moral of the story to me is not that companies believe in justice but that companies hate any connection to public controversy. No one was fired for standing up for making a safe space for women in tech. Everyone was fired for being involved in a fight on Twitter.
posted by GuyZero at 9:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [42 favorites]
So now Adria Richards has been terminated from SendGrid.
The moral of the story to me is not that companies believe in justice but that companies hate any connection to public controversy. No one was fired for standing up for making a safe space for women in tech. Everyone was fired for being involved in a fight on Twitter.
posted by GuyZero at 9:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [42 favorites]
Coda: "Welp."
Which is:
posted by boo_radley at 9:09 AM on March 21, 2013
Which is:
Effective immediately, @AdriaRichards has been terminated from @SendGrid. For more details, please see http://ow.ly/jhW0yI can't get to owly from my current location -- what does the link say?
posted by boo_radley at 9:09 AM on March 21, 2013
Do conferences in other industries have such a draconian public shaming policy for dick jokes?
Scientific conferences, even in the CS industry, don't have this kind of thing (at least I've never been issued such a "norms of behavior" document), but I assume because people are generally more well behaved (in public). I visited another tech conference that's less "sciency" once (though I wasn't a participant), and, quite honestly, I could realize how these behavior codes came about. It was much less professional and much more boys' club/loudmouthed/etc.
posted by deanc at 9:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Scientific conferences, even in the CS industry, don't have this kind of thing (at least I've never been issued such a "norms of behavior" document), but I assume because people are generally more well behaved (in public). I visited another tech conference that's less "sciency" once (though I wasn't a participant), and, quite honestly, I could realize how these behavior codes came about. It was much less professional and much more boys' club/loudmouthed/etc.
posted by deanc at 9:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I can't get to owly from my current location -- what does the link say?
"Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:10 AM on March 21, 2013
"Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive."
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:10 AM on March 21, 2013
SendGrid was being DDoSed and their customers harassed. I don't see how they had any other course of action.
posted by mrbill at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by mrbill at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013
I can't get to owly from my current location -- what does the link say?
posted by boo_radley at 4:09 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
"Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive."
posted by Reggie Knoble at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by boo_radley at 4:09 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
"Effective immediately, SendGrid has terminated the employment of Adria Richards. While we generally are sensitive and confidential with respect to employee matters, the situation has taken on a public nature. We have taken action that we believe is in the overall best interests of SendGrid, its employees, and our customers. As we continue to process the vast amount of information, we will post something more comprehensive."
posted by Reggie Knoble at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013
It's tough to be a developer evangelist when no developer really wants to talk to you anymore.
posted by PenDevil at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [20 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [20 favorites]
The Richards v. SendGrid unlawful termination FPP should be an interesting follow-up to this. Unless of course she signed a massive severance package, which is entirely possible.
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:12 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
SendGrid was being DDoSed and their customers harassed. I don't see how they had any other course of action
Than to give into the mob? God bless reddit.
posted by bonaldi at 9:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Than to give into the mob? God bless reddit.
posted by bonaldi at 9:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
If SendGrid is in California then it's an "at-will" state:
"California’s Labor Code specifies that an employment relationship with no specified duration is presumed to be employment “at-will.” This means, at least in theory, that the employer or employee may terminate the employment relationship at any time, with or without cause."
They don't need any reason at all to fire her, legally speaking.
posted by GuyZero at 9:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"California’s Labor Code specifies that an employment relationship with no specified duration is presumed to be employment “at-will.” This means, at least in theory, that the employer or employee may terminate the employment relationship at any time, with or without cause."
They don't need any reason at all to fire her, legally speaking.
posted by GuyZero at 9:15 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Sharp comment on that facebook post:
The difference between what @adriarichards did and what the anonymous hackers did was, the latter WANTED someone to get fired. She didn't.posted by running order squabble fest at 9:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Oh, internet. Some stupid shit happened. And then some stupid shit happened. And just when you think this huge pile of stupid shit couldn't possibly get any bigger...
posted by forgetful snow at 9:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by forgetful snow at 9:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
Jimbob: "Making a dick joke in one context forever waives your right to complain about others making dick jokes in every other context?
Well what was the reason she complained about the joke? Because she found it offensive? This appears unlikely on the face of it, given that she has previously demonstrated she is not actually offended by dick jokes. Because it created a hostile environment? How was she not creating a hostile environment on Twitter? Is there some reason she feels Twitter is allowed to be a hostile environment?"
Well, then, I suppose I should contact SendGrid and tell them their envangelist offended me on Twitter and she should lose her job?
posted by Samizdata at 9:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well what was the reason she complained about the joke? Because she found it offensive? This appears unlikely on the face of it, given that she has previously demonstrated she is not actually offended by dick jokes. Because it created a hostile environment? How was she not creating a hostile environment on Twitter? Is there some reason she feels Twitter is allowed to be a hostile environment?"
Well, then, I suppose I should contact SendGrid and tell them their envangelist offended me on Twitter and she should lose her job?
posted by Samizdata at 9:19 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
WHOIS data says Colorado.
"Colorado follows the legal doctrine of "employment-at-will" which provides that in the absence of a contract to the contrary, neither an employer nor an employee is required to give notice or advance notice of termination or resignation. Additionally, neither an employer nor an employee is required to give a reason for the separation from employment."posted by mrbill at 9:20 AM on March 21, 2013
GuyZero: "If SendGrid is in California then it's an "at-will" state"
SendGrid is in Boulder, Colorado which is also an at-will state. I'm not sure how this will help SendGrid in the long term. It might alleviate the immediate DDoS problem, but there's sure to be mixed consequences down the line.
The comments on SendGrid's twitter announcement are repulsive. What a mess.
posted by boo_radley at 9:21 AM on March 21, 2013
SendGrid is in Boulder, Colorado which is also an at-will state. I'm not sure how this will help SendGrid in the long term. It might alleviate the immediate DDoS problem, but there's sure to be mixed consequences down the line.
The comments on SendGrid's twitter announcement are repulsive. What a mess.
posted by boo_radley at 9:21 AM on March 21, 2013
SendGrid is located in Boulder according to their Facebook. Colorado has presumably drunk all the right-wing employment theory cool-aid ever produced.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:22 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 9:22 AM on March 21, 2013
I conclude, based on that, that it was she who was violating norms of professionalism, and she did so in part because by dint of her position, she is rarely held to account when it comes to professional norms.
Well, I take that back, now. It turns out that she was "representing the company at a conference."
I don't have a problem with her telling the guys to knock it off or pointing them out to PyCon staffers for violating the PyCon code of conduct. Because they were. But she made herself "the story" in a very public way, publicly portraying herself as a crusading hero when actually she is an employee who has to abide by professional norms. I suspect what happened was that she had been on a long leash for so long that she forgot that she was operating under certain limits and rules.
posted by deanc at 9:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
Well, I take that back, now. It turns out that she was "representing the company at a conference."
I don't have a problem with her telling the guys to knock it off or pointing them out to PyCon staffers for violating the PyCon code of conduct. Because they were. But she made herself "the story" in a very public way, publicly portraying herself as a crusading hero when actually she is an employee who has to abide by professional norms. I suspect what happened was that she had been on a long leash for so long that she forgot that she was operating under certain limits and rules.
posted by deanc at 9:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
Also it's sort of crazy that Adria's personal blog seems to have good DDoS protection, but SendGrid doesn't.
posted by boo_radley at 9:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by boo_radley at 9:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The difference between what @adriarichards did and what the anonymous hackers did was, the latter WANTED someone to get fired. She didn't.
Truth.
I'm curious if anything else was behind Adria's firing, like with playhaven alluding to numerous reasons for their employee being fired. She clearly didn't expect this ("SendGrid supports me").
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 9:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Truth.
I'm curious if anything else was behind Adria's firing, like with playhaven alluding to numerous reasons for their employee being fired. She clearly didn't expect this ("SendGrid supports me").
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 9:24 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Adria Richards is an assclown, and now she is fired; hopefully she realizes that she brought this on herself with her blatant buffoonery. :)
posted by zscore at 9:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by zscore at 9:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Exactly, PenDevil... I'd find it very difficult to take Adria seriously as "technology evangelist" after this incident. Obviously, she doesn't get our community.
posted by ph00dz at 9:26 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by ph00dz at 9:26 AM on March 21, 2013
How about we try not to add to the ugliness?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [15 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [15 favorites]
Two people lose their jobs, all over a dongle joke. Thank god Wang Computers is out of business.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 9:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [53 favorites]
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 9:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [53 favorites]
It sucks that two people have now lost their job over this. But all of this was very preventable.
The moral of the story is an old one: Be careful what you make public, as the results are beyond your control.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
The moral of the story is an old one: Be careful what you make public, as the results are beyond your control.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
Mod note: Seriously folks, just general spleen venting about who you don't like in this scenario is unhelpful. Stop it please.
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 9:32 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
you have a higher-profile marketing personality with a penchant for off-color jokes deciding to go after a pair of staff programmers in the audience engaging in some private joshing between friends.... This isn't "standing up to fight the power." It's a person who decides that she's going to "put someone in his place."...
A thousand times yes! The remark she was offended by was demeaning to no one, and attacked no one, so it can't be called misogynist. Rather, this was about a marketing person wanting to enforce upper-class codes of behavior ("Do not acknowledge the existence of anything below the solar plexus") on others.
I feel like the "creepshots" comparison is tricky - the photo was taken with their knowledge (although without knowledge of the use it was going to be put to), they are fully clothed and over the age of consent, it isn't a sex thing - the things that tend to make creepshots creepy are not present
It seems to have been generally agreed that even when one creepshots someone over the age of consent, it's still creepy. It's also aggreed (I hope) that if you take a picture of someone with their consent and then post it to Creepshots, that's way fucked up (i.e. "Hey, can I get a picture of your family?" [apply crop tool] [upload]) As for it not being a sex thing: I would be much more upset by the thought that someone is posting my picture online in order to get me fired than to masturbate to me, as the former has a much greater material effect than the latter (not to say that the latter isn't unpleasant). So I'd say this is just like Creepshotting, except much worse.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:33 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
A thousand times yes! The remark she was offended by was demeaning to no one, and attacked no one, so it can't be called misogynist. Rather, this was about a marketing person wanting to enforce upper-class codes of behavior ("Do not acknowledge the existence of anything below the solar plexus") on others.
I feel like the "creepshots" comparison is tricky - the photo was taken with their knowledge (although without knowledge of the use it was going to be put to), they are fully clothed and over the age of consent, it isn't a sex thing - the things that tend to make creepshots creepy are not present
It seems to have been generally agreed that even when one creepshots someone over the age of consent, it's still creepy. It's also aggreed (I hope) that if you take a picture of someone with their consent and then post it to Creepshots, that's way fucked up (i.e. "Hey, can I get a picture of your family?" [apply crop tool] [upload]) As for it not being a sex thing: I would be much more upset by the thought that someone is posting my picture online in order to get me fired than to masturbate to me, as the former has a much greater material effect than the latter (not to say that the latter isn't unpleasant). So I'd say this is just like Creepshotting, except much worse.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:33 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
So now Adria Richards has been terminated from SendGrid.
Stupidity upon stupidity here. Neither SendGrid nor that other company comes out looking good with this firings. Another reason I'm glad to live in a country with sensible employment laws.
The only party coming out looking remotely okay is PyCon, which reacted quickly and without fuss to the original complaint.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [26 favorites]
Stupidity upon stupidity here. Neither SendGrid nor that other company comes out looking good with this firings. Another reason I'm glad to live in a country with sensible employment laws.
The only party coming out looking remotely okay is PyCon, which reacted quickly and without fuss to the original complaint.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [26 favorites]
I would be much more upset by the thought that someone is posting my picture online in order to get me fired
I would be very upset by such a thing, also, and as soon as such a situation arises you should absolutely get very angry about it. However, I think no recognizably sane and coherent response to this case has argued that anyone involved was trying to get anyone else fired (at least up to the DDoS attack on SendGrid, which was explicitly an attempt to get Adria Richards fired.)
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I would be very upset by such a thing, also, and as soon as such a situation arises you should absolutely get very angry about it. However, I think no recognizably sane and coherent response to this case has argued that anyone involved was trying to get anyone else fired (at least up to the DDoS attack on SendGrid, which was explicitly an attempt to get Adria Richards fired.)
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I don't really approve of the way that Adria behaved in this incident, but firing her... that's ridiculous. She may (MAY) have made a bad judgement call, but her company's response is the worst possible response.
posted by ChrisR at 9:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by ChrisR at 9:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Neither SendGrid nor that other company comes out looking good with this firings.
Well, sort of. I think they sent their employees the exact message they wanted to send - do not get involved in a public fight with anything even vaguely work-related. From the company's perspective this was their only choice and a pretty good message to send.
Sad but true - both the people fired in this incident and and will be easily replaced.
posted by GuyZero at 9:38 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Well, sort of. I think they sent their employees the exact message they wanted to send - do not get involved in a public fight with anything even vaguely work-related. From the company's perspective this was their only choice and a pretty good message to send.
Sad but true - both the people fired in this incident and and will be easily replaced.
posted by GuyZero at 9:38 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
We could just debate whether SendGrid is a spammer or not, Raining Florence Henderson. I vote spammer.
Wild guess : SendGrid is interested in India. Maybe developer evangelists aren't such great employees when you're considering outsourcing developer jobs?
posted by jeffburdges at 9:38 AM on March 21, 2013
Wild guess : SendGrid is interested in India. Maybe developer evangelists aren't such great employees when you're considering outsourcing developer jobs?
posted by jeffburdges at 9:38 AM on March 21, 2013
Is total thoughtlessness of the consequences of your actions when branding someone a sexist based on extremely weak "evidence" much better?
posted by Reggie Knoble at 9:40 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Reggie Knoble at 9:40 AM on March 21, 2013
jeffburdges: did you even read the article? SendGrid has customers in India as well as developers. Sending email is a non-trivial task, it's hardly a business of all spammers. Congratulations on throwing in xenophobia and jingoism into the sexism and classism already here.
posted by GuyZero at 9:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 9:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Neither SendGrid nor that other company comes out looking good with this firings.
Well, sort of. I think they sent their employees the exact message they wanted to send - do not get involved in a public fight with anything even vaguely work-related. From the company's perspective this was their only choice and a pretty good message to send.
This. The person brought unwarranted and negative attention to the company. Forget all the aspects of the story. From a purely business perspective, she was a liability and should be let go.
One should not think of companies as working within the same emotional framework as humans. When you do, you get Michael Moore.
posted by gcbv at 9:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, sort of. I think they sent their employees the exact message they wanted to send - do not get involved in a public fight with anything even vaguely work-related. From the company's perspective this was their only choice and a pretty good message to send.
This. The person brought unwarranted and negative attention to the company. Forget all the aspects of the story. From a purely business perspective, she was a liability and should be let go.
One should not think of companies as working within the same emotional framework as humans. When you do, you get Michael Moore.
posted by gcbv at 9:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
We could just debate whether SendGrid is a spammer or not, Raining Florence Henderson. I vote spammer.
Did you mean this comment for somebody else? That doesn't seem to address anything I've talked about in this thread.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:42 AM on March 21, 2013
Did you mean this comment for somebody else? That doesn't seem to address anything I've talked about in this thread.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 9:42 AM on March 21, 2013
Can someone with more law experience than me comment on whether "at-will" really means a company doesn't have to have a reason to terminate an employee? I have heard in the past that the at-will thing only goes so far.
I worked remotely for a CA company a number of years ago in an "at-will" capacity, and they let me go without warning and without (in my opinion) cause. However, based on their post-termination behavior there was clearly a tremendous amount of hand-wringing on their side, and they were very anxious about getting me to sign a severance agreement to clear them of any lawsuit. I ended up signing it (because srsly, when faced with this kind of b.s. just get a company in your rearview mirror a.s.a.p.), but why the anxiety if they held all of the cards?
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I worked remotely for a CA company a number of years ago in an "at-will" capacity, and they let me go without warning and without (in my opinion) cause. However, based on their post-termination behavior there was clearly a tremendous amount of hand-wringing on their side, and they were very anxious about getting me to sign a severance agreement to clear them of any lawsuit. I ended up signing it (because srsly, when faced with this kind of b.s. just get a company in your rearview mirror a.s.a.p.), but why the anxiety if they held all of the cards?
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
However, I think no recognizably sane and coherent response to this case has argued that anyone involved was trying to get anyone else fired...
I am curious as to what a supposedly media savy person, representing their employer, was thinking when they made this incident public.
I don't really approve of the way that Adria behaved in this incident, but firing her... that's ridiculous.
She inadvertently caused problems for the company, so it's not too surprising she was fired. This isn't the sort of thing companies want happening again.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I am curious as to what a supposedly media savy person, representing their employer, was thinking when they made this incident public.
I don't really approve of the way that Adria behaved in this incident, but firing her... that's ridiculous.
She inadvertently caused problems for the company, so it's not too surprising she was fired. This isn't the sort of thing companies want happening again.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Neither SendGrid nor that other company comes out looking good with this firings.
So far, I think the big winner is CloudFlare. Richards' personal site is still up, which must be the equivalent of showing how your car wax can repel a laser without scratches.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
So far, I think the big winner is CloudFlare. Richards' personal site is still up, which must be the equivalent of showing how your car wax can repel a laser without scratches.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
You get fired! You get fired! Everybody gets fired! </oprah>
posted by ook at 9:44 AM on March 21, 2013 [19 favorites]
posted by ook at 9:44 AM on March 21, 2013 [19 favorites]
So Adria's been fired, too. (on Preview, a little late. Sorry)
posted by exlotuseater at 9:48 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by exlotuseater at 9:48 AM on March 21, 2013
Lessons hopefully learned: don't be the jerk telling childish sex jokes at conferences and don't publicly shame offenders when the conference organizers have provided avenues for dealing with the jerks.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by five fresh fish at 9:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
SendGrid was being DDoSed and their customers harassed. I don't see how they had any other course of action.Inaction is a course of action, and in this case I think would have been a much better one.
In any case, it's interesting that as of last night, she was claiming on Twitter that SendGrid was supporting her in this.
posted by Flunkie at 9:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Simpler: don't be a jerk
posted by ook at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by ook at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
She inadvertently caused problems for the company, so it's not too surprising she was fired
It's not even surprising that so many people seem to think that this is not expected, but the right thing to do, in both cases.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's not even surprising that so many people seem to think that this is not expected, but the right thing to do, in both cases.
posted by MartinWisse at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
The Aristocrats!
posted by ominous_paws at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by ominous_paws at 9:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [13 favorites]
I think no recognizably sane and coherent response to this case has argued that anyone involved was trying to get anyone else fired
She posted their photos, made sure their faces were identifiable, and addressed them as assclowns in public. She *also* tweeted to PyCon without the photo, asking them to deal with it. Pretty clear that the latter tweet was an attempt to get PyCon to do something, the former was an attempt to get anyone who might recognize them to do something. I'm not sure if she was hoping to get them fired or simply personally attacked, but it wasn't just an attempt to get PyCon to reprimand them.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
She posted their photos, made sure their faces were identifiable, and addressed them as assclowns in public. She *also* tweeted to PyCon without the photo, asking them to deal with it. Pretty clear that the latter tweet was an attempt to get PyCon to do something, the former was an attempt to get anyone who might recognize them to do something. I'm not sure if she was hoping to get them fired or simply personally attacked, but it wasn't just an attempt to get PyCon to reprimand them.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 9:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Can someone with more law experience than me comment on whether "at-will" really means a company doesn't have to have a reason to terminate an employee?
Well, they do have a reason: this is getting them a lot of bad attention. It's like firing someone for being arrested for a crime.
posted by smackfu at 9:51 AM on March 21, 2013
Well, they do have a reason: this is getting them a lot of bad attention. It's like firing someone for being arrested for a crime.
posted by smackfu at 9:51 AM on March 21, 2013
Christ. Things just keep getting stupider. I have even less respect for SendGrid than I did for Playhaven because it seems like they actually just caved to mob justice.
I know corporations function differently from people, but there's no good side to take here no matter where you look.
I'm off to enable CloudFlare on my sites, brb.
posted by Phire at 9:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I know corporations function differently from people, but there's no good side to take here no matter where you look.
I'm off to enable CloudFlare on my sites, brb.
posted by Phire at 9:52 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's appalling that sendgrid fired her. If, as tech people, we're going to be able to get anywhere with this conversation we should at least be able to argue with each other without such serious consequences.
posted by zoo at 9:52 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by zoo at 9:52 AM on March 21, 2013
A person's profit must exceed their cost, or what's a human for?
posted by forgetful snow at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
posted by forgetful snow at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
I vote spammer.
Have you ever used their service? There's a decent barrier to entry on signing up and like MailChimp and plenty of others, they watch their customers' behavior. If you want to spam, it's a lot easier to just buy cheap hosting and let a stupid PHP script rip until (if!) they cancel your account and then move and start up again. That costs like $5/month for as many emails as you can get away with whereas you pay by the email with services designed for it.
posted by yerfatma at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013
Have you ever used their service? There's a decent barrier to entry on signing up and like MailChimp and plenty of others, they watch their customers' behavior. If you want to spam, it's a lot easier to just buy cheap hosting and let a stupid PHP script rip until (if!) they cancel your account and then move and start up again. That costs like $5/month for as many emails as you can get away with whereas you pay by the email with services designed for it.
posted by yerfatma at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013
Well, they do have a reason: this is getting them a lot of bad attention. It's like firing someone for being arrested for a crime.
Let me rephrase then. Do "at-will" laws mean that a wrongful termination lawsuit for a case like this (for either of the fired people) is an immediate non-starter?
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013
Let me rephrase then. Do "at-will" laws mean that a wrongful termination lawsuit for a case like this (for either of the fired people) is an immediate non-starter?
posted by mcstayinskool at 9:53 AM on March 21, 2013
Probably my biggest issue with Richards' handling of this is labeling "professionally inappropriate remarks" as "sexist". It draws too many conclusions.
Really none of these firings probably should've gone on, everyone should've just been made to understand how whack the whack part of their actions were and hopefully given assistance in apologizing publicly for the whack portions (and only the whack portions) of their behavior.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 9:54 AM on March 21, 2013
Really none of these firings probably should've gone on, everyone should've just been made to understand how whack the whack part of their actions were and hopefully given assistance in apologizing publicly for the whack portions (and only the whack portions) of their behavior.
posted by Matt Oneiros at 9:54 AM on March 21, 2013
Last bit re: SendGrid, can you explain why what they do matters so much you've been focusing on it?
posted by yerfatma at 9:54 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by yerfatma at 9:54 AM on March 21, 2013
SendGrid wastes people's time, yerfatma. Yes, they do so legally, but they make the world a worse place.
posted by jeffburdges at 9:57 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 9:57 AM on March 21, 2013
To amend my previous comment, we're now up to: Four wrongs still don't make a right.
The brogrammers were foolish, she was a jerk, PlayHaven overreacted unprofessionally, SendGrid overreacted unprofessionally.
posted by klangklangston at 9:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
The brogrammers were foolish, she was a jerk, PlayHaven overreacted unprofessionally, SendGrid overreacted unprofessionally.
posted by klangklangston at 9:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Let me rephrase then. Do "at-will" laws mean that a wrongful termination lawsuit for a case like this (for either of the fired people) is an immediate non-starter?
Either person would have grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit if their termination was in breach of either their employment contract, or employment law. I would be astounded if either firing met these criteria. Being fired for bringing bad PR to your company is a pretty standard thing.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Either person would have grounds for a wrongful termination lawsuit if their termination was in breach of either their employment contract, or employment law. I would be astounded if either firing met these criteria. Being fired for bringing bad PR to your company is a pretty standard thing.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
A person's profit must exceed their cost, or what's a human for?
Male privilege and power exist, but it is perhaps enlightening to this issue to see even greater privilege and power get exercised by employers.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
Male privilege and power exist, but it is perhaps enlightening to this issue to see even greater privilege and power get exercised by employers.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
Let me rephrase then. Do "at-will" laws mean that a wrongful termination lawsuit for a case like this (for either of the fired people) is an immediate non-starter?
IANAL but there are some specific carve-outs within at-will. But it would be pretty hard to sue, yes. It's doubtful she had an employment contract that gave her very much protection.
posted by GuyZero at 10:01 AM on March 21, 2013
IANAL but there are some specific carve-outs within at-will. But it would be pretty hard to sue, yes. It's doubtful she had an employment contract that gave her very much protection.
posted by GuyZero at 10:01 AM on March 21, 2013
I saw the photo - the look in the guys eyes, come on tell me he's not purposefully trying to troll?
I know it's already been pointed out just how much projecting is going on in this comment, but due to special circumstances I feel like I have to respond.
I need to preface my comment with a request to take me on my word for this: I read this story and all the links initially ... except the link to the actual photo. For no real reason, aside from knowing the photo existed, I hadn't looked. My opinion of the actors in the story was pretty firmly set just based on the text content of the various links, and the conversation.
So then I read this comment about "the look in the guys eyes", and thought to myself, "really?". And I opened the photo.
"Wait", I thought. "Isn't that ... "
Yes. Yes, it is. I know that guy (on the right -- I'm not going to put his name here, the internet remembers enough as is).
Full disclosure: we went to school together. We were in clubs together. Over time, I came to think of him as a friend. After college, we stayed in touch for a while, but one day he chose to move across the country, and as sometimes happens, we fell out of touch. I don't think I've really talked to him in 3 or 4 years. Such is life.
Still, 3-4 years later, I have serious doubts he's that much different than he was in the years I knew him well. If I had to describe him, the first word in my mind would probably be "goofy". He jokes around. He makes light of situations. It's in his nature to be self-deprecating. He's also always been a genuinely nice guy.
Also highly relevant: it's in his nature to mug for cameras. I have seen that look, or a look like it, dozens of times. Point a camera at him, and he's going to make a silly face. It might be a raised eyebrow, it might be a semi-manic look, but it's pretty much instinctive. Why does he do that? Who knows. Why does anyone do anything?
Now, in all seriousness: I'm not saying he wasn't in any way in the wrong here. He's admitted wrongdoing, and he was there, so I'm not going to be refuting that. But looking at the situation, and looking at how he's being picked apart based on something as trivial as the look on his face ... all I can say is this:
He's a human being. Maybe consider stepping back and ascribing something even close to human emotions and motives (flawed as they may be) instead of poring over a single photo like it's the Zapruder film. Humans, even humans who have admitted to having done something wrong, deserve that at the very least.
posted by tocts at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [70 favorites]
I know it's already been pointed out just how much projecting is going on in this comment, but due to special circumstances I feel like I have to respond.
I need to preface my comment with a request to take me on my word for this: I read this story and all the links initially ... except the link to the actual photo. For no real reason, aside from knowing the photo existed, I hadn't looked. My opinion of the actors in the story was pretty firmly set just based on the text content of the various links, and the conversation.
So then I read this comment about "the look in the guys eyes", and thought to myself, "really?". And I opened the photo.
"Wait", I thought. "Isn't that ... "
Yes. Yes, it is. I know that guy (on the right -- I'm not going to put his name here, the internet remembers enough as is).
Full disclosure: we went to school together. We were in clubs together. Over time, I came to think of him as a friend. After college, we stayed in touch for a while, but one day he chose to move across the country, and as sometimes happens, we fell out of touch. I don't think I've really talked to him in 3 or 4 years. Such is life.
Still, 3-4 years later, I have serious doubts he's that much different than he was in the years I knew him well. If I had to describe him, the first word in my mind would probably be "goofy". He jokes around. He makes light of situations. It's in his nature to be self-deprecating. He's also always been a genuinely nice guy.
Also highly relevant: it's in his nature to mug for cameras. I have seen that look, or a look like it, dozens of times. Point a camera at him, and he's going to make a silly face. It might be a raised eyebrow, it might be a semi-manic look, but it's pretty much instinctive. Why does he do that? Who knows. Why does anyone do anything?
Now, in all seriousness: I'm not saying he wasn't in any way in the wrong here. He's admitted wrongdoing, and he was there, so I'm not going to be refuting that. But looking at the situation, and looking at how he's being picked apart based on something as trivial as the look on his face ... all I can say is this:
He's a human being. Maybe consider stepping back and ascribing something even close to human emotions and motives (flawed as they may be) instead of poring over a single photo like it's the Zapruder film. Humans, even humans who have admitted to having done something wrong, deserve that at the very least.
posted by tocts at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [70 favorites]
I have heard in the past that the at-will thing only goes so far.
It goes pretty far. Your employer can fire you, at any time, with no warning, for any, or no, reason unless you have a contract or are part of a union.
The sticky ground for SendGrid, and arguably, for Playhaven here is that there are exceptions. Most companies have a termination procedure that, when they short circuit it, the terminated employee can argue that it wasn't followed and they were wrongfully terminated.
In SendGrid's position, they also appear to have fired someone in retaliation for reporting sexual harassment (whether or not you think it was sexual harassment, Richards obviously did). Unless they've reached a side agreement with Richards already, they've torched her career. She has very little to lose by bringing a wrongful termination suit. If I were her right now, I'd be looking for a lawyer to burn the place to the ground.
posted by IanMorr at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
It goes pretty far. Your employer can fire you, at any time, with no warning, for any, or no, reason unless you have a contract or are part of a union.
The sticky ground for SendGrid, and arguably, for Playhaven here is that there are exceptions. Most companies have a termination procedure that, when they short circuit it, the terminated employee can argue that it wasn't followed and they were wrongfully terminated.
In SendGrid's position, they also appear to have fired someone in retaliation for reporting sexual harassment (whether or not you think it was sexual harassment, Richards obviously did). Unless they've reached a side agreement with Richards already, they've torched her career. She has very little to lose by bringing a wrongful termination suit. If I were her right now, I'd be looking for a lawyer to burn the place to the ground.
posted by IanMorr at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Wow. Just wow. Dongle / forking comments at a conference have now led to a person who uttered the them being fired and a person who was offended being fired.
This reminds me a bit of high school debate policy debate classes where the goal was to show that adopting the resolution would lead to either nuclear war or world economic collapse.
Except this actually happened.
I'm a little more afraid for us all right now.
posted by weston at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
This reminds me a bit of high school debate policy debate classes where the goal was to show that adopting the resolution would lead to either nuclear war or world economic collapse.
Except this actually happened.
I'm a little more afraid for us all right now.
posted by weston at 10:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Yeah, Sendgrid's behaviour proves my earlier comment about professionalism being a mug's game. Here we have somebody, who has partially been hired for her outspokenness, getting shitcanned the moment her outspokenness gets the wrong sort of attention. She had to be loyal to the company, but not the other way around.
posted by MartinWisse at 10:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by MartinWisse at 10:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Let me rephrase then. Do "at-will" laws mean that a wrongful termination lawsuit for a case like this (for either of the fired people) is an immediate non-starter?
There are some protections. My father won a lawsuit arguing that he was fired over a disability, for example, when he had also done something publicly that could reasonably have been considered embarrassing to the company that was used as an excuse.
You might argue that she was fired for complaining about sexual harassment which might be something that would be protected (not a lawyer here) but she didn't exactly follow standard procedure for dealing with it.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:03 AM on March 21, 2013
There are some protections. My father won a lawsuit arguing that he was fired over a disability, for example, when he had also done something publicly that could reasonably have been considered embarrassing to the company that was used as an excuse.
You might argue that she was fired for complaining about sexual harassment which might be something that would be protected (not a lawyer here) but she didn't exactly follow standard procedure for dealing with it.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:03 AM on March 21, 2013
Now CloudFlare just needs to fire someone in solidarity with the other companies.
posted by Anything at 10:05 AM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by Anything at 10:05 AM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Well that escalated quickly.
posted by kbanas at 10:08 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by kbanas at 10:08 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
It's appalling that sendgrid fired her. If, as tech people, we're going to be able to get anywhere with this conversation we should at least be able to argue with each other without such serious consequences.
I will say this: one of the problems that professionals face is that they have to have some kind of public "brand" to remain employable, especially for someone in marketing. Your own employer certainly isn't going to publicize your accomplishments to other employers. So Richards has to constantly and relentless market herself, and to a degree that is what she was doing with her public "call out" of those two guys at PyCon. Making a public to-do about their behavior was part of her personal "brand" in which she was touting her "accomplishments", such as they were in this case.
But this put her on conflict with her employer. Without a higher profile, it is harder for her to find a job and clients. But with that higher profile comes the fact that everything she says reflects on her employer, and the employer is going to hold her to account for everything she does in a quest to keep herself valuable on the job market. So she's in a bind-- she shouldn't have dragged these guys and this dispute into her self-marketing exercise, but it isn't like her employer is going to help promote her profile directly, yet they also hold her repsnsible for her public profile.
posted by deanc at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
I will say this: one of the problems that professionals face is that they have to have some kind of public "brand" to remain employable, especially for someone in marketing. Your own employer certainly isn't going to publicize your accomplishments to other employers. So Richards has to constantly and relentless market herself, and to a degree that is what she was doing with her public "call out" of those two guys at PyCon. Making a public to-do about their behavior was part of her personal "brand" in which she was touting her "accomplishments", such as they were in this case.
But this put her on conflict with her employer. Without a higher profile, it is harder for her to find a job and clients. But with that higher profile comes the fact that everything she says reflects on her employer, and the employer is going to hold her to account for everything she does in a quest to keep herself valuable on the job market. So she's in a bind-- she shouldn't have dragged these guys and this dispute into her self-marketing exercise, but it isn't like her employer is going to help promote her profile directly, yet they also hold her repsnsible for her public profile.
posted by deanc at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Dolan: everything was actually workers' rights issue
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
At will doesn't require you to have a reason, but if you do fire someone for a reason the at will laws also say the reason has to be valid. For example you can fire someone for no reason, but you cannot fire someone because they are a woman. Also firing people for no reason is difficult to prove to a judge or jury. If you say no reason and the person says because of an invalid reason then your lawyers will have heartburn. Therefore always fire someone for a specific valid reason such as clearly documented poor performance or eliminating positions as part of a layoff.
posted by humanfont at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 10:09 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Well, everyone saying that the most important thing in the workplace is to be professional now can see where this leads. HR departments and companies only have ONE PURPOSE: to protect their own ass. Anything that jeopardizes the continuity of the institution will be terminated. Doesn't matter if it's right or wrong. Only the survival of the company matters.
This is depressing. It's even more depressing since a lot of this mirrors what happened that led to my separation of employment. Except the sex joke part, I didn't do that.
posted by FJT at 10:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
This is depressing. It's even more depressing since a lot of this mirrors what happened that led to my separation of employment. Except the sex joke part, I didn't do that.
posted by FJT at 10:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
I wish both ex-employees good luck at finding new jobs.
posted by jeffburdges at 10:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by jeffburdges at 10:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Wow this whole situation is all kinds of fucked up.
posted by Justinian at 10:17 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Justinian at 10:17 AM on March 21, 2013
We could just debate whether SendGrid is a spammer or not, [...]. I vote spammer.
While I think that the conversation here has been pretty good and generally even-handed (with people all over the range of responses), I think it's notable that some folks have been all over what SendGrid's business model is (sending mass e-mails, which may cross into spam, may be "bacn", or may be legit) and how odious they are, as a means to attack Richards by connection.
Not one person in 600+ comments has brought up the relative odiousness of PlayHaven's business model, which is mobile game advertising, crosspromotion, rewards and user data collection: Monetize your game with lucrative, highly-targeted cross-promotions... Segment your in-game marketing and monetization by player purchase behavior, location, engagement, device, game version, and much more. That seems roughly as obnoxious to me as a bacn email sender, and is an interesting double standard.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 10:17 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
While I think that the conversation here has been pretty good and generally even-handed (with people all over the range of responses), I think it's notable that some folks have been all over what SendGrid's business model is (sending mass e-mails, which may cross into spam, may be "bacn", or may be legit) and how odious they are, as a means to attack Richards by connection.
Not one person in 600+ comments has brought up the relative odiousness of PlayHaven's business model, which is mobile game advertising, crosspromotion, rewards and user data collection: Monetize your game with lucrative, highly-targeted cross-promotions... Segment your in-game marketing and monetization by player purchase behavior, location, engagement, device, game version, and much more. That seems roughly as obnoxious to me as a bacn email sender, and is an interesting double standard.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 10:17 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
no sexual jokes were made about forking. My friends and I had decided forking someone's repo is a new form of flattery
This is so completely disingenuous. The reason "I'd fork his repo" is a "witty" compliment is because it sounds like you're saying "I'd hit it" but HAHAHA you're not!
posted by straight at 10:18 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
This is so completely disingenuous. The reason "I'd fork his repo" is a "witty" compliment is because it sounds like you're saying "I'd hit it" but HAHAHA you're not!
posted by straight at 10:18 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Has anyone seen verification that the SendGrid Facebook and Twitter posts are actually from the company as opposed to compromised social media accounts? Occam's razor seems to favor the latter assumption from what I've seen so far.
posted by scottreynen at 10:21 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by scottreynen at 10:21 AM on March 21, 2013
I used Sendgrid for a while as part of a website signup email confirmation registration process. It promised to help improve delivery rates and we were tired of dealing with all the issues with various email services. It didn't seem to deliver nearly as well as our own homegrown stuff, which was disapointing.
posted by humanfont at 10:21 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by humanfont at 10:21 AM on March 21, 2013
So...tweeting absolutely everything you see and do to all your social media contacts isn't always a good idea?
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 10:23 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Well that's shitty.
Shitty + shitty does not make right.
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on March 21, 2013
Shitty + shitty does not make right.
posted by Artw at 10:23 AM on March 21, 2013
scottreynen: "Has anyone seen verification that the SendGrid Facebook and Twitter posts are actually from the company as opposed to compromised social media accounts? Occam's razor seems to favor the latter assumption from what I've seen so far."
1) I'm not sure Occam's razor supports your statement.
2) The official sendgrid blog (sendgrid.com) has the same announcement.
posted by boo_radley at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
1) I'm not sure Occam's razor supports your statement.
2) The official sendgrid blog (sendgrid.com) has the same announcement.
posted by boo_radley at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
scottreynen, its on their blog as well, for the moment i'm undecided, socialmedia and blogs are not that hard to hack.
posted by xcasex at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by xcasex at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
So I can totally see her hearing those guys joking and seeing that girl on stage and imagining assholes "complimenting" her coding someday by saying, "Wow, I'd fork her repo!"
posted by straight at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by straight at 10:24 AM on March 21, 2013
Fucked up situation that is now more fucked up.
My own take is that Adria was out of line - it'd be one thing to take a picture of two bros saying to her "hey, do you want to see my dongle?" or "Adria, I'd like to fork your repo". No question that is over the line and inappropriate.
But overhearing a bawdy joke that has absolutely nothing to do with you and publicly shaming the participants via photography seems just completely far over the line.
Their employers also seem to have wildly overreacted - no one should have been fired for this incident, on either side. The fact that they were sitting in a conference after being sent there seems to have little do with it, as far as I'm concerned. Again, one thing if they are 'presenting on behalf of' their company, but just sitting in the audience? Nuts. I go to conferences regularly at fuck that noise that my employer gets to police everything I say and do 24/7 for the duration of the conference.
This whole story lacks any semblance of reasonableness for anyone involved.
posted by modernnomad at 10:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
My own take is that Adria was out of line - it'd be one thing to take a picture of two bros saying to her "hey, do you want to see my dongle?" or "Adria, I'd like to fork your repo". No question that is over the line and inappropriate.
But overhearing a bawdy joke that has absolutely nothing to do with you and publicly shaming the participants via photography seems just completely far over the line.
Their employers also seem to have wildly overreacted - no one should have been fired for this incident, on either side. The fact that they were sitting in a conference after being sent there seems to have little do with it, as far as I'm concerned. Again, one thing if they are 'presenting on behalf of' their company, but just sitting in the audience? Nuts. I go to conferences regularly at fuck that noise that my employer gets to police everything I say and do 24/7 for the duration of the conference.
This whole story lacks any semblance of reasonableness for anyone involved.
posted by modernnomad at 10:25 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The operative word there is "imaging"
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 10:26 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 10:26 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Occam's razor seems to favor the latter assumption from what I've seen so far.
Pretty sure Occam's razor says that these people were fired. Why the elaborate conspiracy theories? People get fired for petty shit all the time. Thats why a lot of jurisdictions have labour protection laws.
posted by GuyZero at 10:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Pretty sure Occam's razor says that these people were fired. Why the elaborate conspiracy theories? People get fired for petty shit all the time. Thats why a lot of jurisdictions have labour protection laws.
posted by GuyZero at 10:28 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The operative word there is "imaging"
No. Because if you have an environment where the common way to compliment a programmer is to make a pseudo "I'd hit it" comment, then that's creating a hostile environment to women, even if you never say it to a woman.
Women programmers shouldn't have to think, "I wouldn't like my work to be complimented that way."
posted by straight at 10:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
No. Because if you have an environment where the common way to compliment a programmer is to make a pseudo "I'd hit it" comment, then that's creating a hostile environment to women, even if you never say it to a woman.
Women programmers shouldn't have to think, "I wouldn't like my work to be complimented that way."
posted by straight at 10:29 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Occam's razor is bloody today.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 10:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'm trying to see some sort of upside to this whole story, like this is the first time PyCon has tried to enforce a code of conduct, and it definitely hit some bumps and snags and this whole story is a good lesson in what not to do for everyone involved?
I'm trying, but it's tough to even say these are bumps on the road to progress.
posted by mathowie at 10:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'm trying, but it's tough to even say these are bumps on the road to progress.
posted by mathowie at 10:30 AM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
And the flip side to the double standard I mentioned above (where SendGrid is examined and PlayHaven was not) is that the fired developer has been accused of not being the person in question, not having children, and not being fired, and the theory has been advanced that SendGrid's Twitter, Facebook and blog accounts have all been hijacked simultaneously. Once the developer's firing was corroborated on PlayHaven's blog, no one questioned its' reliability.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 10:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 10:31 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
no sexual jokes were made about forking. My friends and I had decided forking someone's repo is a new form of flatteryObviously you're not a golfer. "Forking" is an extremely loaded term in software development, but not at all because of the audio similarity to the word "fucking," and honestly the other loadings are far more controversial and political than any of the various meanings of fucking. Software development of any decently sized project is highly social, and requires editing other people's work, and close collaboration on the same set of files. In the past, "forking" has meant that a schism, a splinter group that takes the current version of the code and works on its own, independently, until the two different versions can no longer be merged together. This happens for political reasons, technical reasons, social reasons, and is generally a move that has detrimental consequences for a project, so must only be undertaken for "really good reasons." A fork was actually a "fuck you" to the existing group collaborating on a project. It happens, and in the past it's been shitty, fragmenting developer efforts and users' attention.
This is so completely disingenuous. The reason "I'd fork his repo" is a "witty" compliment is because it sounds like you're saying "I'd hit it" but HAHAHA you're not!
However, GitHub, which has grown in popularity tremendously in the past few years and provided some absolutely great methods for improving collaboration, has been somewhat successful in redefining the implications and meaning of "forking." Now, because of improved collaboration and decentralization of control and power, a 'fork' is not as permanent. It can be remerged. And on top of it all, every single project web page has a prominent "Fork me on GitHub" banner in the upper right hand of the page, and the source code views always include a "fork" button. This is a radical departure in the terminology of GitHub, and it makes developers nervous when they first encounter it because of 'fork's negative connatitons: it's what you did when you didn't like the direction a project. It's now what you do when you like a project and want to work on it. In fact, it's the very first thing one does! So because of social changes enabled by technological changes and decentralization of control, forking has been redefined from the very worst thing for a project, to a very good thing, a pat on the back and a decision to work with someone. Cursing or copulation pale in comparison to the entertainment or surprise of this new and enjoyable use of 'forking' and the negative implications of 'forking's previous meanings. I still have to cajole and persuade people to click on the 'fork' button on GitHub, because this is a transition still in progress and people are still afraid of the connotations of 'fork.'
posted by Llama-Lime at 10:33 AM on March 21, 2013 [31 favorites]
The future is a gigantic pyramid of shitty...
posted by Artw at 10:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 10:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
The person brought unwarranted and negative attention to the company. Forget all the aspects of the story. From a purely business perspective, she was a liability and should be let go.Wait, I shouldn't want companies to be more like Michael Moore, and less like heartless amoral destroyers of worlds?
One should not think of companies as working within the same emotional framework as humans. When you do, you get Michael Moore.
posted by Flunkie at 10:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
like this is the first time PyCon has tried to enforce a code of conduct
At least IMO PyCon comes out of this whole event looking pretty good. I think they did the right thing at pretty much every turn. I sincerely hope that this episode doesn't have a chilling effect on future women reporting harassing behaviour to the conference organizers. That said, this was clearly a complete mess.
posted by GuyZero at 10:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
At least IMO PyCon comes out of this whole event looking pretty good. I think they did the right thing at pretty much every turn. I sincerely hope that this episode doesn't have a chilling effect on future women reporting harassing behaviour to the conference organizers. That said, this was clearly a complete mess.
posted by GuyZero at 10:34 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
mathowie: I think that there is very real progress here. The conference had 20% female attendance -- which is incredible for the field -- and I saw many families as well, with kids. There was a broad tone of inclusiveness, the trade floor was devoid of (or I didn't see) any sexualized advertisements, and only two incidents happened that required comment... all of which were roundly denounced by central Python community members.
This is progress, trust me.
posted by ChrisR at 10:35 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
This is progress, trust me.
posted by ChrisR at 10:35 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Wait, I shouldn't want companies to be more like Michael Moore, and less like heartless amoral destroyers of worlds?
Just be aware that the world you want and the world you have are two different places.
posted by GuyZero at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Just be aware that the world you want and the world you have are two different places.
posted by GuyZero at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I wouldn't be shocked if SendGrid was hacked and it was faked. Seeing the same news in multiple places doesn't prove much... all it takes is for the CEOs email account to get compromised. I don't think Occam's Razor says that is the most likely option though.
posted by smackfu at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by smackfu at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013
It wouldn't surprise me if SendGrid has actually been looking for an excuse to fire her that lets them go "Oh we're really sorry Adria, but as you can see our hands are tied."
posted by lucidium at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by lucidium at 10:36 AM on March 21, 2013
Yeah, Sendgrid's behaviour proves my earlier comment about professionalism being a mug's game. Here we have somebody, who has partially been hired for her outspokenness, getting shitcanned the moment her outspokenness gets the wrong sort of attention.
Hired to be outspoken doesn't mean "and we therefore have to support her no matter what she says." I suspect a lot of the motivation for firing her here is her resolute (and wildly unprofessional) determination to be the Drama Empress of the Universe over the situation. Had she confined herself to the original tweet (which, even in itself I think was an overreaction, but at least a defensible one) and then left it at "I was offended by what I heard and thought it necessary to inform the conference organizers" I think she'd have probably been safe. But by making herself the Joan of Arc of future female tech people and engaging in a running Twitter war with all her detractors she has seriously compromised her ability to act as a spokesperson for anyone other than herself. No one will hear anything she says as "speaking on behalf of SendGrid" now--her brand has essentially eclipsed theirs.
That said, I suspect that the better move on SendGrid's part would have been to reach out to PlayHaven and say "look, is there any way we can work out how to navigate a way out of this shitstorm? Could you offer to re-employ the guy you fired and we issue a joint statement saying how sorry we all are that this incident blew up so horribly. We get Adria Richards to say that she never imagined that anyone would lose his job, we get the fired guy to say how sorry he is, again, that he made inappropriate jokes in a professional context, we all engage in a group hug and general singing of Kumbaya and the internet pretty quickly loses interest in all of us."
posted by yoink at 10:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [25 favorites]
Hired to be outspoken doesn't mean "and we therefore have to support her no matter what she says." I suspect a lot of the motivation for firing her here is her resolute (and wildly unprofessional) determination to be the Drama Empress of the Universe over the situation. Had she confined herself to the original tweet (which, even in itself I think was an overreaction, but at least a defensible one) and then left it at "I was offended by what I heard and thought it necessary to inform the conference organizers" I think she'd have probably been safe. But by making herself the Joan of Arc of future female tech people and engaging in a running Twitter war with all her detractors she has seriously compromised her ability to act as a spokesperson for anyone other than herself. No one will hear anything she says as "speaking on behalf of SendGrid" now--her brand has essentially eclipsed theirs.
That said, I suspect that the better move on SendGrid's part would have been to reach out to PlayHaven and say "look, is there any way we can work out how to navigate a way out of this shitstorm? Could you offer to re-employ the guy you fired and we issue a joint statement saying how sorry we all are that this incident blew up so horribly. We get Adria Richards to say that she never imagined that anyone would lose his job, we get the fired guy to say how sorry he is, again, that he made inappropriate jokes in a professional context, we all engage in a group hug and general singing of Kumbaya and the internet pretty quickly loses interest in all of us."
posted by yoink at 10:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [25 favorites]
Yeah, I think PyCon did the right thing, just the reactions on all sides escalated to crazy ends.
My hope is other conferences and future PyCons can do this thing better and make it an industry norm. Hopefully the reactions of companies in future events goes differently.
posted by mathowie at 10:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
My hope is other conferences and future PyCons can do this thing better and make it an industry norm. Hopefully the reactions of companies in future events goes differently.
posted by mathowie at 10:37 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Cursing or copulation pale in comparison to the entertainment or surprise of this new and enjoyable use of 'forking' and the negative implications of 'forking's previous meanings.
That's really interesting, Llama-Lime. Thanks.
So you really think there would be no sex-joke connotations to saying "I'd fork her repo"? You think a female programmer who understood that context would be comfortable having her work complimented that way?
posted by straight at 10:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
That's really interesting, Llama-Lime. Thanks.
So you really think there would be no sex-joke connotations to saying "I'd fork her repo"? You think a female programmer who understood that context would be comfortable having her work complimented that way?
posted by straight at 10:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"I'm trying to see some sort of upside to this whole story, like this is the first time PyCon has tried to enforce a code of conduct, and it definitely hit some bumps and snags and this whole story is a good lesson in what not to do for everyone involved?"
Yeah, PyCon did exactly what they should have. It's a shame that the employers are being dickbags, but PyCon was the very model of good governance.
posted by klangklangston at 10:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, PyCon did exactly what they should have. It's a shame that the employers are being dickbags, but PyCon was the very model of good governance.
posted by klangklangston at 10:41 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Welp.
FFS. This whole mess just keeps getting worse.
posted by homunculus at 10:42 AM on March 21, 2013
FFS. This whole mess just keeps getting worse.
posted by homunculus at 10:42 AM on March 21, 2013
According to my time-traveling neighbor from the year 100,000,000,000 : In the future, EVERYONE WILL BE FIRED, constantly, forever. Corporations will sustain themselves from the energy generated by employees turning the revolving door.
(Basically, [proto][ex]workers power the system by transferring to lower [that is, unemployed] energy states. Their own job hunting activities eventually push them into higher energy states. Basically, it's particle physics.)
posted by JHarris at 10:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
(Basically, [proto][ex]workers power the system by transferring to lower [that is, unemployed] energy states. Their own job hunting activities eventually push them into higher energy states. Basically, it's particle physics.)
posted by JHarris at 10:43 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
So...tweeting absolutely everything you see and do to all your social media contacts isn't always a good idea?
That and tweeting socially awkward moments of particular developers when you're a developer evangelist probably isn't the wisest move.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:44 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
That and tweeting socially awkward moments of particular developers when you're a developer evangelist probably isn't the wisest move.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:44 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'd rate them as least culpable in this rolling shitball, TBH. Though their rules of conduct are now effectively a gag order on non-corporate sanctioned communication.
posted by Artw at 10:44 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Artw at 10:44 AM on March 21, 2013
Twitter-shaming can cost you your job
There are some clear lessons in this tale. First, Twitter shaming is clearly no longer for teens, politicians, and celebrities. Simply being cautious as to what you post to Twitter (or Facebook or wherever) doesn't cut it; we evidently need to be mindful of all that we say, do, and wear as we go out in public, because you never know whether someone with influence is quietly monitoring you and has no qualms in outing your subjectively bad behavior to the world. One off-color comment can result in your reputation being tarnished and you losing your job.posted by ericb at 10:45 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
(Incidentally, making off-color jokes in public doesn't necessarily make you a horrible human being who deserves public shaming, a point that Richards herself should appreciate as she recently joked with a fellow Twitter user about stuffing his pants with socks the next time he has to undergo a TSA pat-down.)
Second, it's a reminder as to how sensitive companies have become to even a whiff of potentially bad publicity that social networking can generate so quickly. Just look back at the whole Susan G. Komen-Planned Parenthood spat from last year as a case study in how social networking can rapidly affect an organization's reputation. In this case, the guys' employer's logo could be seen on their shirts in the photo that Richards posted. It's possible that the employer, PlayHaven, fired him for other reasons, but it's a safe bet this incident at least exacerbated by the fact that the company name was being connected to allegedly offensive and sexist comments at a professional conference.
Third: Hopefully this incident will serve as a reminder that there may be more productive and fruitful ways to address personal conflicts and grievances than immediately taking them straight to social networking. How about talking to the offending party face to face to work through any potential misunderstandings?
Ironically, Richards herself alluded to that fact in her blog in which she defended her actions: "What has to change is that everyone must take personal accountability and speak up when they hear something that isn't OK. It takes three words to make a difference: 'That's not cool.' ... We need to build bridges and be aware of our actions and not discount that our words carry weight."
every single project web page has a prominent "Fork me on GitHub" banner in the upper right hand of the page
And are you confident that this isn't an example of the sort of brogrammer humor that excludes women? Are female programers comfortable putting a "Fork me on GitHub" banner on their projects?
posted by straight at 10:45 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
And are you confident that this isn't an example of the sort of brogrammer humor that excludes women? Are female programers comfortable putting a "Fork me on GitHub" banner on their projects?
posted by straight at 10:45 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Hacker News is deleting posts about Adria's firing, suggesting they are probably just posted from a hacked account. This makes sense... what company talks about HR issues on Faebook?
posted by gensubuser at 10:45 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by gensubuser at 10:45 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
So you really think there would be no sex-joke connotations to saying "I'd fork her repo"? You think a female programmer who understood that context would be comfortable having her work complimented that way?
But that's the rub, isn't it? These people didn't say that about a woman's work, nor direct the comment at any woman. It was two colleagues/friends talking to each other about the work of another man.
It's seems a pretty bizarre suggestion that I ought to speak to a co-worker I am on friendly terms with only in the same fashion that I would talk with a stranger in a professional context.
posted by modernnomad at 10:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
But that's the rub, isn't it? These people didn't say that about a woman's work, nor direct the comment at any woman. It was two colleagues/friends talking to each other about the work of another man.
It's seems a pretty bizarre suggestion that I ought to speak to a co-worker I am on friendly terms with only in the same fashion that I would talk with a stranger in a professional context.
posted by modernnomad at 10:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
So you really think there would be no sex-joke connotations to saying "I'd fork her repo"?
Llama-lime gave a good history of 'forking', but just because of the sound of the word, it will always have some juvenile connotations for some. And I can see how, delivered in a certain manner, it could be considered harassing sexual innuendo for a woman. But this is not what happened here, as has been pointed out a hundred times already upthread.
posted by amorphatist at 10:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Llama-lime gave a good history of 'forking', but just because of the sound of the word, it will always have some juvenile connotations for some. And I can see how, delivered in a certain manner, it could be considered harassing sexual innuendo for a woman. But this is not what happened here, as has been pointed out a hundred times already upthread.
posted by amorphatist at 10:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think it's worth thinking about the implications of complimenting programmers in terms that are innocent as long as the programmer isn't a woman.
posted by straight at 10:50 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by straight at 10:50 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
And are you confident that this isn't an example of the sort of brogrammer humor that excludes women? Are female programers comfortable putting a "Fork me on GitHub" banner on their projects?
Yeah, the "Fork me on GitHub" banner is super-common and its meaning as "feel free to branch this code" is clear. I really doubt any female programmers would have a problem with it. "I'd fork her repo," on the other hand, is creepy and gross.
posted by ReadEvalPost at 10:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, the "Fork me on GitHub" banner is super-common and its meaning as "feel free to branch this code" is clear. I really doubt any female programmers would have a problem with it. "I'd fork her repo," on the other hand, is creepy and gross.
posted by ReadEvalPost at 10:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
It seems "Fork my project on GitHub" would be a more natural slogan if there were no innuendo involved.
posted by straight at 10:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by straight at 10:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
jeffburdges: ‘I wish both ex-employees good luck at finding new jobs.”
Just chiming in, one more time, to point out that as far as we know there's only one ex-employee in this situation, and I'm still not going to have blind faith in anonymous Hacker News comments.
posted by koeselitz at 10:53 AM on March 21, 2013
Just chiming in, one more time, to point out that as far as we know there's only one ex-employee in this situation, and I'm still not going to have blind faith in anonymous Hacker News comments.
posted by koeselitz at 10:53 AM on March 21, 2013
So you really think there would be no sex-joke connotations to saying "I'd fork her repo"? You think a female programmer who understood that context would be comfortable having her work complimented that way?Practically anything can be made salacious, so really, it all depends. Personally, I could definitely see myself saying it without even realizing the sexual overtones that it would convey to others, especially if I was in a professional context. If I was in a place without programmers, I would generally avoid it in order to avoid using boring technical jargon. What's that called? Code-switching? In any case, I'll probably avoid the particular phrase "I'd fork X's repo" in the future just because of the ambiguity, and using language one knows to be ambiguous is just plain sloppy speech.
posted by Llama-Lime at 10:55 AM on March 21, 2013
Just chiming in, one more time, to point out that as far as we know there's only one ex-employee in this situation, and I'm still not going to have blind faith in anonymous Hacker News comments.
Wait, which one? Or is it none? Because there's people upthread saying that neither of them have been fired. Is this like some Schrodinger's layoff?
posted by FJT at 10:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Wait, which one? Or is it none? Because there's people upthread saying that neither of them have been fired. Is this like some Schrodinger's layoff?
posted by FJT at 10:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Almost any verb can be made sexual if said in a particular manner ("I'd aspirate her carburettor *wink wink nudge nudge* say no more") . That fork happens to sound like fuck is immaterial. Forking is a legitimate action when describing managing source code.
posted by PenDevil at 10:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by PenDevil at 10:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Just chiming in, one more time, to point out that as far as we know there's only one ex-employee in this situation, and I'm still not going to have blind faith in anonymous Hacker News comments.
I'm not sure what you mean. PlayHaven confirmed that they fired an employee due to the PyCon incident, and SendGrid confirmed on Facebook and Twitter that they let Adria Richards go.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:57 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm not sure what you mean. PlayHaven confirmed that they fired an employee due to the PyCon incident, and SendGrid confirmed on Facebook and Twitter that they let Adria Richards go.
posted by FAMOUS MONSTER at 10:57 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
It seems "Fork my project on GitHub" would be a more natural slogan if there were no innuendo involved.
Ah, I think I might see the disconnect: You put those banners on project documentation pages, meaning the 'me' in question is not the developer but the project.
posted by ReadEvalPost at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Ah, I think I might see the disconnect: You put those banners on project documentation pages, meaning the 'me' in question is not the developer but the project.
posted by ReadEvalPost at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Context and tone are important. 'Fork' is not creepy, it's a perfectly legitimate description of what you're doing when you take the code in a different direction. So "I'd fork her repo" could be as innocent as "that chef is great, I'd eat her meals any day".
posted by IanMorr at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by IanMorr at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013
The word "fork" has a long history of sexualized connotations. That said, it's also perfectly normal most of the time. Github actually got some flack for a "hardcore forking" message (I wonder if it still uses it?) which is much more clearly sexualized. Thus it's entirely possible for one person to entirely honestly make a forking joke and not think it sexual while another thinks it is.
posted by R343L at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by R343L at 11:00 AM on March 21, 2013
what was PyCon's official response again?
They responded to a complaint promptly, they talked to all parties in private and an apology for inappropriate comments was made by the commenter. And they had a policy in place before this all began.
posted by GuyZero at 11:01 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
They responded to a complaint promptly, they talked to all parties in private and an apology for inappropriate comments was made by the commenter. And they had a policy in place before this all began.
posted by GuyZero at 11:01 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Honestly it should be "branch me on GitHub". Git doesn't really have anything called a fork. A fork is more of an abstract concept.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Ad hominem at 11:02 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Googling around on the use of the term "forking" and "fork me on github" etc I find endless utterly mundane, dry, technical uses of the term. I'm sure it's often enough used in a jokey way as well, but it is very clearly not the predominant associations with the term. If you want an example (that also lays out some of the same history Llama-Lime laid out above) that dates from well before the latest controversy you could read this link.
So, yeah, it seems to me it's a term that's neutral in itself but which is also an obvious straight line lying around if someone wants to play it that way. It also seems very easy to imagine that the guys in this scenario could have been using it in the non-sexual way they described while Adria Richards misunderstood it as being used as double-entendre. To decide that question we'd need an audio recording. Given that they all seem to be straight guys and they were all talking about another guy that would seem to be something of a strike against the "double-entendre" reading--but it's hardly dispositive.
posted by yoink at 11:02 AM on March 21, 2013
So, yeah, it seems to me it's a term that's neutral in itself but which is also an obvious straight line lying around if someone wants to play it that way. It also seems very easy to imagine that the guys in this scenario could have been using it in the non-sexual way they described while Adria Richards misunderstood it as being used as double-entendre. To decide that question we'd need an audio recording. Given that they all seem to be straight guys and they were all talking about another guy that would seem to be something of a strike against the "double-entendre" reading--but it's hardly dispositive.
posted by yoink at 11:02 AM on March 21, 2013
I'd never encountered the term bacn before, thanks Homeboy Trouble. Yet, SendGrid and MailChimp are obviously sending way more legal "spam", i.e. mail that nobody wants, than "email you want but not right now." Facebook sends an awful lot of email through SendGrid, but password resets are almost the only emails you'd want from Facebook. Really, this term bacn is designed to confuse the issue and protect direct marketers.
I agree that PlayHaven sounds sleezy and exploitive. And they make the world worse for their customer's customers. And the armchair shrink wonders if video game companies are worse about dick jokes. Yet, ultimately PlayHaven does not impact me, well not a game player, while SendGrid does.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:03 AM on March 21, 2013
I agree that PlayHaven sounds sleezy and exploitive. And they make the world worse for their customer's customers. And the armchair shrink wonders if video game companies are worse about dick jokes. Yet, ultimately PlayHaven does not impact me, well not a game player, while SendGrid does.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:03 AM on March 21, 2013
Git doesn't really have anything called a fork.
Every single github page has a "fork" button at the top right.
posted by yoink at 11:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Every single github page has a "fork" button at the top right.
posted by yoink at 11:03 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Every single github page has a "fork" button at the top right.
That's github, not git. I don't think git uses the term fork.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:05 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
That's github, not git. I don't think git uses the term fork.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:05 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think, though I could be wrong, that she posted the pictures as part of making her complaint to the conference organizers. The photo & tweet may have been the complaint. At any rate, I believe she tweeted the photo before the conference organizers had a chance to respond to the complaint.
posted by GuyZero at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by GuyZero at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013
Honestly it should be "branch me on GitHub". Git doesn't really have anything called a fork. A fork is more of an abstract concept.
In git terms a fork and a branch are two separate but similar concepts. A branch is a different version of a code base inside your own repository. A fork is my copy (with my own changes possibly) of another repository.
On further reflection: git tends to use the word 'clone', GitHub uses 'fork' but seeing as GitHub is the defacto face of git for many I see how fork has become more prevalent.
posted by PenDevil at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
In git terms a fork and a branch are two separate but similar concepts. A branch is a different version of a code base inside your own repository. A fork is my copy (with my own changes possibly) of another repository.
On further reflection: git tends to use the word 'clone', GitHub uses 'fork' but seeing as GitHub is the defacto face of git for many I see how fork has become more prevalent.
posted by PenDevil at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Umm, branches exist within a git repository, but github users have many separate repositories, including forks from other users repositories, Ad hominem. Forks are not git branches.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by jeffburdges at 11:06 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Git itself possibly doesn't have any feature named 'fork', but that term has been used for a long time in the context of, well, forking open source projects. And 'branch' already has its own specific meaning in git, on a lower level of abstraction than the concept of forking a repo. But I suppose there would indeed be less probability of innuendo issues with a phrase like 'Fork Foo on GitHub' for a project called Foo, rather than 'Fork me..'
posted by Anything at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Anything at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
I am tempted to tear the dongle from the shared workstation in my office and smash it with a hammer before this evil consumes us all.
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
GuyZero, from her blog, "I tweeted the PyCon Code of Conduct page and began to contacting the PyCon staff via text message"
posted by gensubuser at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by gensubuser at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
I'm just saying if you read the git book I don't believe it mentions forks, I'm not saying forks are not a thing in general, just that git uses the term branch, a fork is more abstract.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Ad hominem at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013
Afroblanco: Did that happen before or after she posted the pictures online?
After. But that would appear to be because she went public on Twitter with the complaint AS PART OF registering her complaint with PyCon. And that's where I'm having a problem with this.
Turns out Adria and I are in the same industry (I do email stuff). We've attended some of the same industry (email, not dev) conferences. The conferences that we've attended have very clear Codes of Conduct, and expect violations to be reported so they can be dealt with... and, in this instance, she didn't go down that path. She immediately reached for the Giant Stick Of Thousands Of Twitter Followers.
Were the guys being idiots? Yep. Did she need to say "whoa, dudes, not cool"? No. Should she have gone to the PyCon folks FIRST to see if they would deal with it and THEN reached for the nuclear button if she'd not gotten satisfaction? Yes, absolutely.
This may tend to have a chilling effect on other conferences - "Why should we institute and regulate a code of conduct when attendees are just going to dox each other if they don't like something?"
posted by hanov3r at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
After. But that would appear to be because she went public on Twitter with the complaint AS PART OF registering her complaint with PyCon. And that's where I'm having a problem with this.
Turns out Adria and I are in the same industry (I do email stuff). We've attended some of the same industry (email, not dev) conferences. The conferences that we've attended have very clear Codes of Conduct, and expect violations to be reported so they can be dealt with... and, in this instance, she didn't go down that path. She immediately reached for the Giant Stick Of Thousands Of Twitter Followers.
Were the guys being idiots? Yep. Did she need to say "whoa, dudes, not cool"? No. Should she have gone to the PyCon folks FIRST to see if they would deal with it and THEN reached for the nuclear button if she'd not gotten satisfaction? Yes, absolutely.
This may tend to have a chilling effect on other conferences - "Why should we institute and regulate a code of conduct when attendees are just going to dox each other if they don't like something?"
posted by hanov3r at 11:10 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
On non-preview, 'clone' does sound right, since that's pretty much the word for this in git proper -- although it's the less common word for the concept in general than fork is.
posted by Anything at 11:12 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by Anything at 11:12 AM on March 21, 2013
This may tend to have a chilling effect on other conferences - "Why should we institute and regulate a code of conduct when attendees are just going to dox each other if they don't like something?"
I hope that every conference adds "no doxing d00dz" to their code of conduct although it's pretty hard to enforce. Some conferences may simply ban photography which which would be a pity.
posted by GuyZero at 11:13 AM on March 21, 2013
I hope that every conference adds "no doxing d00dz" to their code of conduct although it's pretty hard to enforce. Some conferences may simply ban photography which which would be a pity.
posted by GuyZero at 11:13 AM on March 21, 2013
git and github are very different things in spite of github being built on git and I don't see why it's surprising that a github fork doesn't have a direct or even partial analog in git. github does a ton of stuff that git doesn't. That's why it exists.
posted by GuyZero at 11:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by GuyZero at 11:14 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm just saying if you read the git book I don't believe it mentions forks
Yeah, it does. See e.g. here. Also a good example of the term being used in a clearly 'single entendre' way.
posted by yoink at 11:15 AM on March 21, 2013
Yeah, it does. See e.g. here. Also a good example of the term being used in a clearly 'single entendre' way.
posted by yoink at 11:15 AM on March 21, 2013
and THEN reached for the nuclear button if she'd not gotten satisfaction? Yes, absolutely.
Yes, "absolutely" indeed. What was that thing about nuclear weapons? Mutually assured destruction?
posted by amorphatist at 11:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes, "absolutely" indeed. What was that thing about nuclear weapons? Mutually assured destruction?
posted by amorphatist at 11:16 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
A (development) fork is when software development diverges under different authors. Forks are usually either merged or abandoned eventually, although some persist for extended periods. CyanogenMod is a fork of Android that tracks Android development, for example.
Yes, github executes a clone operation when you press the fork button, but your clone becomes a fork if you change it. So they call it fork to inspire.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:16 AM on March 21, 2013
Yes, github executes a clone operation when you press the fork button, but your clone becomes a fork if you change it. So they call it fork to inspire.
posted by jeffburdges at 11:16 AM on March 21, 2013
fatbird: If her employer dislikes being listed at the top of the page, they can fire her for it.
And look what happened. Hooray!
Jesus what a horribly depressing and senseless story.
posted by leopard at 11:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
And look what happened. Hooray!
Jesus what a horribly depressing and senseless story.
posted by leopard at 11:22 AM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Yeah, it does. See e.g. here. Also a good example of the term being used in a clearly 'single entendre' way
Ok, I stand corrected. But to fork you clone and branch.
First, you’ll probably want to clone the main repository, create a topic branch for the patch or patch series you’re planning to contribute, and do your work there
I still think of a fork as an abstract concept, not an SCM term. I may be wrong though.At any rate I'll drop it.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:23 AM on March 21, 2013
Ok, I stand corrected. But to fork you clone and branch.
First, you’ll probably want to clone the main repository, create a topic branch for the patch or patch series you’re planning to contribute, and do your work there
I still think of a fork as an abstract concept, not an SCM term. I may be wrong though.At any rate I'll drop it.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:23 AM on March 21, 2013
because you never know whether someone with influence is quietly monitoring you and has no qualms in outing your subjectively bad behavior to the world.
Sousveillance.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Sousveillance.
aaaaaaaaaand there's another FPP topic...posted by the man of twists and turns at 11:27 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Here's a question: If she wasn't fired, why hasn't she chimed in on her own twitter to say so? Her silence on the matter kinds leads me to believe she has other things going on in her life right now, like cleaning out her desk.
posted by mullingitover at 11:41 AM on March 21, 2013
posted by mullingitover at 11:41 AM on March 21, 2013
MartinWisse: "She inadvertently caused problems for the company, so it's not too surprising she was fired
It's not even surprising that so many people seem to think that this is not expected, but the right thing to do, in both cases."
As an American, I go to worked every day assuming that I'll get fired/laid-off. If I make it to 6:00 pm and I'm still employed, that's a good day.
posted by octothorpe at 11:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
It's not even surprising that so many people seem to think that this is not expected, but the right thing to do, in both cases."
As an American, I go to worked every day assuming that I'll get fired/laid-off. If I make it to 6:00 pm and I'm still employed, that's a good day.
posted by octothorpe at 11:47 AM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
And I thought the PC days were bad. Sense of humor anyone? I guess the idea is that we should all be completely literal, take offense at the drop of a hat, and be suspicious of everyone all the time. Sounds like fun.
If everyone got offended as easily as this lady the subway'd be a bloodbath every single day. Most NYers are already walking on thin ice tolerance wise.
posted by nowhere man at 11:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
If everyone got offended as easily as this lady the subway'd be a bloodbath every single day. Most NYers are already walking on thin ice tolerance wise.
posted by nowhere man at 11:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
other things going on in her life now
Yeah, like death and rape threats. I would not take her silence as proving or disproving anything.
posted by hanov3r at 11:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, like death and rape threats. I would not take her silence as proving or disproving anything.
posted by hanov3r at 11:48 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Oh let's even forget code and the "fork" jargon and whatnot. Let's talk about hardware engineering. Male connectors? (those are connectors with sticky-outy-pins) Female connectors? (those are the ones that are receptacles for sticky-outy-pins) Genderbenders? (those are adapters you use to make one gender connector into a different one) You "mate" those connectors, of course. You might screw them. If you work in the underwater world like I do, you might have penetrators. Now you get to mate penetrators! lol! Sometimes if you don't have something mated to the penetrator you have to hack a way to make it waterproof just for a quick test so, guess what you put on the penetrator? A condom! (I am not joking, I have put a lot of condoms onto penetrators in my time, they are excellent quick cheap waterproofers) Also, did you know that in Australia, the world "flange" is slang for a woman's genitalia? Guess how excited I was when I found out I (female) had given 30 minutes of training to a bunch of Australian military men including discussion of mating the flanges on our equipment to put some things together?
The tech world is full of "hilariously" sex-related terminology. When you first learn about it, you get a Beavis and Butthead heh-heh-heh phase to go through. Then you stop thinking of it as pervy and you forget it has a meaning outside of the work you do until someone has their Beavis and Butthead moment and giggles at you, usually in the middle of something you're trying to be smart and professional about. Most of the terminology I think was dreamed up by people (mostly men, because that's who was in the industry) who thought it was hilarious and now that there are women in the industry it's even MORE hilarious that they have to learn and use those terms regularly.
I'm a woman in engineering. I'm one of the "cool" girls. I swear and I laugh at dumb inappropriate jokes and i proudly wear our (old, from startup phase) company shirts that say "when size matters" showing the different sizes of our phallic-shaped equipment. But I swear and I laugh and I wear that shirt in the small group of friendly coworkers with whom I am very socially comfortable. When I get the Beavis and Butthead chuckles from those I am not friendly with, it is tiring as all fuck. I don't care about the etymology of the word. I don't care how well-known the word is in the industry jargon. I don't care. What I care about is when I am using the professionally-accepted jargon, someone is giggling at me going "heh heh you know what that sounds like you're saying" because it is immature, distracting, and undermining to me when that's what people are paying attention to when I speak.
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh. And now it's "industry accepted." And now we all have to put up with everyone in their heh-heh-heh moments.
posted by olinerd at 11:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [56 favorites]
The tech world is full of "hilariously" sex-related terminology. When you first learn about it, you get a Beavis and Butthead heh-heh-heh phase to go through. Then you stop thinking of it as pervy and you forget it has a meaning outside of the work you do until someone has their Beavis and Butthead moment and giggles at you, usually in the middle of something you're trying to be smart and professional about. Most of the terminology I think was dreamed up by people (mostly men, because that's who was in the industry) who thought it was hilarious and now that there are women in the industry it's even MORE hilarious that they have to learn and use those terms regularly.
I'm a woman in engineering. I'm one of the "cool" girls. I swear and I laugh at dumb inappropriate jokes and i proudly wear our (old, from startup phase) company shirts that say "when size matters" showing the different sizes of our phallic-shaped equipment. But I swear and I laugh and I wear that shirt in the small group of friendly coworkers with whom I am very socially comfortable. When I get the Beavis and Butthead chuckles from those I am not friendly with, it is tiring as all fuck. I don't care about the etymology of the word. I don't care how well-known the word is in the industry jargon. I don't care. What I care about is when I am using the professionally-accepted jargon, someone is giggling at me going "heh heh you know what that sounds like you're saying" because it is immature, distracting, and undermining to me when that's what people are paying attention to when I speak.
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh. And now it's "industry accepted." And now we all have to put up with everyone in their heh-heh-heh moments.
posted by olinerd at 11:49 AM on March 21, 2013 [56 favorites]
mathowie: It feels like PyCon came out of this pretty well, at least, if one is looking for upsides - the code of conduct broadly worked in a couple of cases, and in this case the part of it about the code of conduct worked - they picked up the complaint, engaged all parties, determined that it was not a banning offence and could be resolved with an apology and treated as a learning opportunity. It was only... well, everything else where things got screwy.
I guess the downside there is that if PyCon is not heavily criticized, I can't use my "I haven't seen PyCon under this kind of attack since the pilot of Battlestar Galactica" gag, but that's probably on reflection an upside also.
posted by running order squabble fest at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I guess the downside there is that if PyCon is not heavily criticized, I can't use my "I haven't seen PyCon under this kind of attack since the pilot of Battlestar Galactica" gag, but that's probably on reflection an upside also.
posted by running order squabble fest at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Sousveillance is where everybody has the capability to watch over each other, peer-to-peer style
East Germany had this: it was call the Stasi. And, in the end, as with this debacle, there is always someone up the food chain (Brin, other Google execs, employers, government officials, etc.) capable of wielding real, true power over eavesdropper and eavesdropee, alike.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
East Germany had this: it was call the Stasi. And, in the end, as with this debacle, there is always someone up the food chain (Brin, other Google execs, employers, government officials, etc.) capable of wielding real, true power over eavesdropper and eavesdropee, alike.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
As an American, I go to worked every day assuming that I'll get fired/laid-off. If I make it to 6:00 pm and I'm still employed, that's a good day.
Uh, I'm an American as well, and I don't do this. This sounds more than a bit neurotic to me.
posted by sweetkid at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Uh, I'm an American as well, and I don't do this. This sounds more than a bit neurotic to me.
posted by sweetkid at 11:51 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh. And now it's "industry accepted." And now we all have to put up with everyone in their heh-heh-heh moments.
Exactly. Thanks for saying this and everything else in your comment, olinerd.
posted by sweetkid at 11:52 AM on March 21, 2013
Exactly. Thanks for saying this and everything else in your comment, olinerd.
posted by sweetkid at 11:52 AM on March 21, 2013
nowhere man: And I thought the PC days were bad. Sense of humor anyone? I guess the idea is that we should all be completely literal, take offense at the drop of a hat, and be suspicious of everyone all the tim?. Sounds like fun.
Yeah, seriously. If I get any lesson to take from those whole ordeal, it's to just shut up at conferences, or at least don't try to engage on any level aside from work (and hope you don't offend anyone with that, either) . Oh, and don't use twitter, but I didn't anyway.
posted by Mitrovarr at 11:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, seriously. If I get any lesson to take from those whole ordeal, it's to just shut up at conferences, or at least don't try to engage on any level aside from work (and hope you don't offend anyone with that, either) . Oh, and don't use twitter, but I didn't anyway.
posted by Mitrovarr at 11:53 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Someone was going heh-heh-heh
And heaven forbid anyone laugh!
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 11:54 AM on March 21, 2013
And heaven forbid anyone laugh!
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 11:54 AM on March 21, 2013
but why was Ricky Gervais at pycon in the first place?
posted by askmehow at 11:55 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by askmehow at 11:55 AM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh.
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
The term 'fork' has been used in source code control before Github (or git) ever existed.
posted by PenDevil at 11:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
The term 'fork' has been used in source code control before Github (or git) ever existed.
posted by PenDevil at 11:56 AM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh.
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
Why exactly is the code personified as a "me?" Why not fork "this?"
posted by Drinky Die at 11:58 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
Why exactly is the code personified as a "me?" Why not fork "this?"
posted by Drinky Die at 11:58 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, seriously. If I get any lesson to take from those whole ordeal, it's to just shut up at conferences, or at least don't try to engage on any level aside from work (and hope you don't offend anyone with that, either) . Oh, and don't use twitter, but I didn't anyway.
Stay home, watch it streaming. Safer for everyone.
posted by Artw at 11:58 AM on March 21, 2013
Stay home, watch it streaming. Safer for everyone.
posted by Artw at 11:58 AM on March 21, 2013
And heaven forbid anyone laugh!
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 2:54 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
When you create industry jargon that is designed to be immature and to make others react immaturely when it is used, then that's just... kind of an assholish thing to do, isn't it? And it does kind of create and awkward and, dare I say, unwelcoming environment for newcomers to the industry who maybe aren't totally into the frat boy sense of humor.
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh.
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
The term 'fork' has been used in source code control before Github (or git) ever existed.posted by PenDevil at 2:56 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
I wasn't referring to "fork." I was referring to the "Fork Me on Github" badges that are apparently so proudly displayed.
posted by olinerd at 11:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 2:54 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
When you create industry jargon that is designed to be immature and to make others react immaturely when it is used, then that's just... kind of an assholish thing to do, isn't it? And it does kind of create and awkward and, dare I say, unwelcoming environment for newcomers to the industry who maybe aren't totally into the frat boy sense of humor.
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh.
There's no way this can ever be proven and there's no reason why your explanation should be assumed correct.
The term 'fork' has been used in source code control before Github (or git) ever existed.posted by PenDevil at 2:56 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
I wasn't referring to "fork." I was referring to the "Fork Me on Github" badges that are apparently so proudly displayed.
posted by olinerd at 11:59 AM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Why exactly is the code personified as a "me?" Why not fork "this?"
Because people often impart personality to impersonal things to make them seem more 'alive' and appealing.
I remember when I bought my car it had a sign on it at the dealer that read "Buy me! I'm on sale!".
posted by PenDevil at 12:02 PM on March 21, 2013
Because people often impart personality to impersonal things to make them seem more 'alive' and appealing.
I remember when I bought my car it had a sign on it at the dealer that read "Buy me! I'm on sale!".
posted by PenDevil at 12:02 PM on March 21, 2013
No one invented "Fork me on GitHub" to be pure and virginal about it. Someone was going heh-heh-heh. And now it's "industry accepted." And now we all have to put up with everyone in their heh-heh-heh moments.
Except that there's no evidence, one way or the other, that what the guys were doing here was a "heh heh heh" moment. They say not. If you were talking about "flanges" and "penetrators" and "condoms" and so forth at a conference and somebody snapped your photo and posted it to twitter calling for everyone to condemn this "assclown" who is obviously engaging in sexual double-entendre how would you go about disproving it other than by saying "hey, these are the normal terms of our trade"?
posted by yoink at 12:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Except that there's no evidence, one way or the other, that what the guys were doing here was a "heh heh heh" moment. They say not. If you were talking about "flanges" and "penetrators" and "condoms" and so forth at a conference and somebody snapped your photo and posted it to twitter calling for everyone to condemn this "assclown" who is obviously engaging in sexual double-entendre how would you go about disproving it other than by saying "hey, these are the normal terms of our trade"?
posted by yoink at 12:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
When you create industry jargon that is designed to be immature and to make others react immaturely when it is used, then that's just... kind of an assholish thing to do, isn't it?
The definition of "mature" as "never laughing at anything sexual" is the result of a whole set of oppressive class relations.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
The definition of "mature" as "never laughing at anything sexual" is the result of a whole set of oppressive class relations.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
When you create industry jargon that is designed to be immature and to make others react immaturely when it is used
This is stupid. The salaciousness is in the eyes of the beholders.
Good grief, was I the only one who used to finger my friends in school?
posted by rr at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
This is stupid. The salaciousness is in the eyes of the beholders.
Good grief, was I the only one who used to finger my friends in school?
posted by rr at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
"Boy. That escalated quickly. I mean that really got out of hand fast."
posted by ericb at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by ericb at 12:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
yoink -- I have a lot of mixed feelings on the whole Adria matter including her posting the picture like she did. I'm not agreeing with her reaction. I am, in these past comments, pointing out the frustratingly immature jargon that is extremely popular throughout STEM fields that does indeed get quite tiring when people make an extra effort to be immature about it, whether it's large dongles or forking someone's repo or being sure to look out for leaky flanges. And it's really really annoying for some people, including myself. Insisting that "but it's jargon" or "but it's a commonly used term" doesn't make it less annoying. In this instance, someone's annoyance rapidly escalated into a disproportionate response from both sides, which is pretty shitty all around. But gosh, sure would be nice if the industry jargon didn't lead itself to these annoyances and offenses in the first place.
I love me an immature joke and laughing at sexual innuendo. I just have enough problems being taken seriously at work as a woman in engineering without all that, so work and other professional events are not where I want to laugh at these jokes.
posted by olinerd at 12:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
I love me an immature joke and laughing at sexual innuendo. I just have enough problems being taken seriously at work as a woman in engineering without all that, so work and other professional events are not where I want to laugh at these jokes.
posted by olinerd at 12:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Because people often impart personality to impersonal things to make them seem more 'alive' and appealing.
I remember when I bought my car it had a sign on it at the dealer that read "Buy me! I'm on sale!".
I would buy that in this particular case if not for the double entendre.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:08 PM on March 21, 2013
I remember when I bought my car it had a sign on it at the dealer that read "Buy me! I'm on sale!".
I would buy that in this particular case if not for the double entendre.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:08 PM on March 21, 2013
This is the cluster of all fucks.
posted by dirigibleman at 12:14 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by dirigibleman at 12:14 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Cursing or copulation pale in comparison to the entertainment or surprise of this new and enjoyable use of 'forking' and the negative implications of 'forking's previous meanings.
Sure, except for the fact that GitHub's first t-shirt design says "Fork You" on the front and the site, until just after their big Series A round, used the phrase "hard-core forking action" when you created a fork of someone's repo. I'm friends with the GitHub folks; they're good people, but pretending that isn't a joke about sex is just willful misrepresentation.
posted by Coda at 12:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Sure, except for the fact that GitHub's first t-shirt design says "Fork You" on the front and the site, until just after their big Series A round, used the phrase "hard-core forking action" when you created a fork of someone's repo. I'm friends with the GitHub folks; they're good people, but pretending that isn't a joke about sex is just willful misrepresentation.
posted by Coda at 12:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
That's the way to nip it in the bud.
Well, sure. But then you wouldn't get a million tumblrs with people adding useful comments such as "THIS.", which is responsible for a sizeable part of the digital economy these days.
I think the Economist should abandon its "Big Mac Index" for a "Howls of Outrage Index".
posted by modernnomad at 12:17 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Well, sure. But then you wouldn't get a million tumblrs with people adding useful comments such as "THIS.", which is responsible for a sizeable part of the digital economy these days.
I think the Economist should abandon its "Big Mac Index" for a "Howls of Outrage Index".
posted by modernnomad at 12:17 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I would buy that in this particular case if not for the double entendre.
...I'm not familiar with the technology or services involved here though. Is the code personified as a "me" elsewhere on the site outside of the forking context?
posted by Drinky Die at 12:17 PM on March 21, 2013
...I'm not familiar with the technology or services involved here though. Is the code personified as a "me" elsewhere on the site outside of the forking context?
posted by Drinky Die at 12:17 PM on March 21, 2013
olinerd I understand entirely how depressing it must be to be constantly subjected to "hur hur hur" double-entendre jokes. My point is, though, that the guys involved in this business claim that that is not what they were doing when it comes to the 'fork his repo" conversation. They entirely cop to the "dongle" one and have apologized for it. Their claim is simply that Adria Richards misunderstood a "straight" usage of the "fork his repo" term of art as a joking one. Again, given that they were all straight guys talking about another guy I find that not too hard to believe (if the context had been that they were talking about a particularly attractive female presenter or something I'd be considerably more suspicious). You might be right about a prevalence of easily sexualized terms being a product of a deeply sexist culture (although your own examples--"flange" and "male/female connectors"--are pretty shaky on that front; not one chose the term "flange" in an engineering context because of the existence of an Australian slang term, and plugs have been coded as 'male' and 'female' since they were first invented; it's not really a coy or jokey reference)--but in any case you can't blame individual people for what the terms of art that reign in their field happen to be. Obviously you use all of the terms you referenced, for example; and there's no much option for it. If the guys were actually saying "hur hur hur, I'd like to fork his repo--know what I'm saying?" then, sure, that's stupid and offensive. My point is simply that they claim that that is not they way they were using the term, that we don't have any evidence one way or the other, and that it's not at all inconceivable that they were using the term in an entirely innocent way and that Adria Richards misunderstood.
posted by yoink at 12:20 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by yoink at 12:20 PM on March 21, 2013
SendGrid Fires Company Evangelist After Twitter Fracas
posted by Foci for Analysis at 12:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Foci for Analysis at 12:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sure, except for the fact that GitHub's first t-shirt design says "Fork You" on the front and the site, until just after their big Series A round, used the phrase "hard-core forking action" when you created a fork of someone's repo. I'm friends with the GitHub folks; they're good people, but pretending that isn't a joke about sex is just willful misrepresentation.
The fact that the phrase is easy to make jokes about does not prove that the phrase itself is inherently or originally "jokey." Tennis players make lots of jokes about "balls" and they have jokey "ball" related t-shirt slogans. This is not evidence that tennis balls were called "balls" in order to make those jokes.
posted by yoink at 12:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
The fact that the phrase is easy to make jokes about does not prove that the phrase itself is inherently or originally "jokey." Tennis players make lots of jokes about "balls" and they have jokey "ball" related t-shirt slogans. This is not evidence that tennis balls were called "balls" in order to make those jokes.
posted by yoink at 12:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
that it's not at all inconceivable that they were using the term in an entirely innocent way and that Adria Richards misunderstood
Yeah, a lot of this seems to be about a marketing dweeb not understanding programmer talk and getting very angry about that.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 12:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, a lot of this seems to be about a marketing dweeb not understanding programmer talk and getting very angry about that.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 12:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
(if the context had been that they were talking about a particularly attractive female presenter
Oh, dude.
I would hope that from the context the meaning "a female presenter that they, personally, considered particularly attractive" was obvious.
posted by yoink at 12:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Oh, dude.
I would hope that from the context the meaning "a female presenter that they, personally, considered particularly attractive" was obvious.
posted by yoink at 12:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
SendGrid Fires Company Evangelist After Twitter Fracas
Isn't it weird to live in an age in which that headline makes any kind of sense?
posted by yoink at 12:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [50 favorites]
Isn't it weird to live in an age in which that headline makes any kind of sense?
posted by yoink at 12:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [50 favorites]
SendGrid Fires Company Evangelist After Twitter Fracas
Mashable is just reporting on the tweet, so if SendGrid was hacked (as pg thinks since they haven't confirmed with any comments to media), this doesn't provide any new information.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013
Mashable is just reporting on the tweet, so if SendGrid was hacked (as pg thinks since they haven't confirmed with any comments to media), this doesn't provide any new information.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013
The fact that the phrase is easy to make jokes about does not prove that the phrase itself is inherently or originally "jokey." Tennis players make lots of jokes about "balls" and they have jokey "ball" related t-shirt slogans. This is not evidence that tennis balls were called "balls" in order to make those jokes.
The phrase itself is just a series of sounds. It cannot be essentially anything without a speaker and a listener and the context in which they exist.
But as software engineer who goes to conferences and who has been using GitHub since before it went public, the prior probability of "forking" being jokey is incredibly high. No one I know would ever say the phrase "I'd fork him" as anything other than a play on words about how "fork" sounds like "fuck". Yes, there is a non-jokey, literal meaning to it, otherwise we'd just call it a fucking single entendre.
posted by Coda at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The phrase itself is just a series of sounds. It cannot be essentially anything without a speaker and a listener and the context in which they exist.
But as software engineer who goes to conferences and who has been using GitHub since before it went public, the prior probability of "forking" being jokey is incredibly high. No one I know would ever say the phrase "I'd fork him" as anything other than a play on words about how "fork" sounds like "fuck". Yes, there is a non-jokey, literal meaning to it, otherwise we'd just call it a fucking single entendre.
posted by Coda at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
yoink, you're digging yourself deeper, mate.
No, you're trying to score a rather silly rhetorical point by deliberately misconstruing what I said.
posted by yoink at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
No, you're trying to score a rather silly rhetorical point by deliberately misconstruing what I said.
posted by yoink at 12:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
No one I know would ever say the phrase "I'd fork him"
Except they said "I'd fork his repo".
posted by PenDevil at 12:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Except they said "I'd fork his repo".
posted by PenDevil at 12:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Except they said "I'd fork his repo".
In the absence of any recording of the event I don't know that you can afford to be that literal-minded.
posted by Coda at 12:33 PM on March 21, 2013
In the absence of any recording of the event I don't know that you can afford to be that literal-minded.
posted by Coda at 12:33 PM on March 21, 2013
nacho fries: "Also, not sure how we know the gents in question are stick-straight."
Focus, please.
posted by boo_radley at 12:37 PM on March 21, 2013
Focus, please.
posted by boo_radley at 12:37 PM on March 21, 2013
When you create industry jargon that is designed to be immature and to make others react immaturely when it is used, then that's just... kind of an assholish thing to do, isn't it?
I don't think this is the case, at least not with the examples you brought up earlier. 'Male' and 'female' connectors, 'mating', 'gender-benders', and others like 'hermaphroditic' connectors are named that way because those are by far the most appropriate pre-existing English terms that could be used. I don't think anyone went out of their way to deliberately choose sexual terminology.
I've seen similar arguments against the use of terms like 'master' and 'slave' interfaces, and the result is the same. There just aren't any other descriptive terms we could replace them with.
The giggling, however, is stupidly immature.
posted by rocket88 at 12:37 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't think this is the case, at least not with the examples you brought up earlier. 'Male' and 'female' connectors, 'mating', 'gender-benders', and others like 'hermaphroditic' connectors are named that way because those are by far the most appropriate pre-existing English terms that could be used. I don't think anyone went out of their way to deliberately choose sexual terminology.
I've seen similar arguments against the use of terms like 'master' and 'slave' interfaces, and the result is the same. There just aren't any other descriptive terms we could replace them with.
The giggling, however, is stupidly immature.
posted by rocket88 at 12:37 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
But to suggest that that would only be the case if the woman were "particularly attractive" is to imply something a bit dark: that good-lookin' gals are complicit in the grody sexualizing of otherwise innocuous commentary.
Yes, in your pretend universe where what I said was "it would be entirely o.k. and understandable if they'd said this of a particular attractive female presenter" you would be exactly right.
My point, obviously, was that if the comment had been "I'd like to fork her repo--hurr hurr hurr" and made about some female presenter it would obviously be a sexualizing comment about the particular attractiveness of that presenter in the eyes of the speaker. It would also be quite obviously gross, over the line and unacceptable and in no way whatsoever "excusable" based on the attractiveness of the speaker. Satisfied?
posted by yoink at 12:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yes, in your pretend universe where what I said was "it would be entirely o.k. and understandable if they'd said this of a particular attractive female presenter" you would be exactly right.
My point, obviously, was that if the comment had been "I'd like to fork her repo--hurr hurr hurr" and made about some female presenter it would obviously be a sexualizing comment about the particular attractiveness of that presenter in the eyes of the speaker. It would also be quite obviously gross, over the line and unacceptable and in no way whatsoever "excusable" based on the attractiveness of the speaker. Satisfied?
posted by yoink at 12:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
In the absence of any recording of the event I don't know that you can afford to be that literal-minded.
It is, in any case, literally and explicitly what Adria Richards charged them with saying in her initial tweet ("forking repos" not "forking people"). So there seems absolutely no basis for making the leap to "I'd like to fork him."
posted by yoink at 12:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It is, in any case, literally and explicitly what Adria Richards charged them with saying in her initial tweet ("forking repos" not "forking people"). So there seems absolutely no basis for making the leap to "I'd like to fork him."
posted by yoink at 12:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
But to suggest that that would only be the case if the woman were "particularly attractive" is to imply something a bit dark: that good-lookin' gals (and only good-lookin' gals) are complicit in the grody sexualizing of otherwise innocuous commentary.
That really took some deepwater offense-mining to arrive at the conclusion that this is the implication of yoink's comment. How does it read other than "offensive d00ds would be more likely to make sexist comments if said d00ds consider woman speaking to be particularly attractive", which seems a verifiable statistical observation?
posted by amorphatist at 12:42 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
That really took some deepwater offense-mining to arrive at the conclusion that this is the implication of yoink's comment. How does it read other than "offensive d00ds would be more likely to make sexist comments if said d00ds consider woman speaking to be particularly attractive", which seems a verifiable statistical observation?
posted by amorphatist at 12:42 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Venturebeat has a picture of Anonymous masked guys at the top of their story on the Sendgrid DDOS attack. Is this just "journalistic license"/hackery (of the old fashioned kind) or is there really some Anonymous angle?
This pastebin post at least appears to point at some Anonymous involvement. It claims that Anonymous is going after Sendgrid, its clients and its financial backers. There's definitely buzz about this on 4chan.
posted by dragoon at 12:43 PM on March 21, 2013
All I can say is that is ended up sadly for all concerned.
posted by Samizdata at 12:44 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Samizdata at 12:44 PM on March 21, 2013
All this talk about forking being offensive-or-no reminds me of a few years ago when someone pointed out to me that the whole hard drive relationship talk in IT circles of "Master" and "Slave" drives was offensive to them, being that they were black.
My first reaction was to say I'd never in a million years thought of hard drives in the context of human slavery and that his pointing this out was silly, but I thought about it for a few minutes and realized if you look at the history of the terms, yeah, they do come from that, and came away thinking there must be more neutral ways of discussing hard disk configurations without using those terms.
posted by mathowie at 12:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [20 favorites]
My first reaction was to say I'd never in a million years thought of hard drives in the context of human slavery and that his pointing this out was silly, but I thought about it for a few minutes and realized if you look at the history of the terms, yeah, they do come from that, and came away thinking there must be more neutral ways of discussing hard disk configurations without using those terms.
posted by mathowie at 12:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [20 favorites]
came away thinking there must be more neutral ways of discussing hard disk configurations without using those terms.
Next up: physicists should come up with a more neutral nickname for "The God Particle", because atheists or polytheists could be offended by the implication. And so on into madness.
posted by amorphatist at 12:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Next up: physicists should come up with a more neutral nickname for "The God Particle", because atheists or polytheists could be offended by the implication. And so on into madness.
posted by amorphatist at 12:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I feel kind of sorry for Sendgrid at this point. While I don't condone their actions, they faced the unenviable decision of having to either fire Adria Richards and risk the wrath of her lawyers (which, considering how easy this is to spin as being fired for reporting sexual harassment, is likely to be significant), or trying to stand up to Anonymous as they deployed a multi-pronged harassment/hacking/DDOS campaign against them, their clients, and their backers.
posted by Mitrovarr at 12:50 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Mitrovarr at 12:50 PM on March 21, 2013
Afroblanco:
If I were at a conference and I was interested in the speaker, and two nitwits behind me were cracking jokes loud enough to be disruptive, I would just turn around and ask, "Do you mind?" or something similar.
As a matter of fact, at the bottom of her post, Adria recommends exactly that:
If I were at a conference and I was interested in the speaker, and two nitwits behind me were cracking jokes loud enough to be disruptive, I would just turn around and ask, "Do you mind?" or something similar.
As a matter of fact, at the bottom of her post, Adria recommends exactly that:
What has to change is that everyone must take personal accountability and speak up when they hear something that isn’t ok. It takes three words to make a difference:posted by rhizome at 12:51 PM on March 21, 2013
“That’s not cool.”
matthowie, out of curiosity, did you ever come up with a "more neutral" terminology for the disk master-slave thing? Nothing good immediately popped up for me.
posted by amorphatist at 12:53 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by amorphatist at 12:53 PM on March 21, 2013
Bwithh: "Statement from apparent Anonymous member ( though who can tell one way or the other, claiming Anonymous membership for whateve aims is pretty much a free-for-all isn't it? ) threatening hacker attacks against SendGrid if Richards isn't fired.
Shouldn't this be call-in-the-FBI time for SendGrid rather than folding right away?"
Uh, the linked statement says explicitly that the author is not affiliated with Anon, just speculating about what they might do.
FTA:
Shouldn't this be call-in-the-FBI time for SendGrid rather than folding right away?"
Uh, the linked statement says explicitly that the author is not affiliated with Anon, just speculating about what they might do.
FTA:
So, in closing, I hope this information helps you make an informed choice on how to deal with the situation. I do not represent, speak for, nor am associated with Anonymous, but I have seen some of their tactics. I present this information NOT as any gesture of threat, but merely to inform.posted by mullingitover at 12:54 PM on March 21, 2013
Afroblanco: "mathowie -- I've totally thought that about "master" and "slave"! I don't know how offensive it actually is, but I would feel seriously self-conscious talking about "master" and "slave" nodes to a black engineer. Usually I try to say "primary" and "secondary" or something like that."
Those terms have been common since I got A+ certified (plus the cup of coffee) back in the early 90s.
posted by boo_radley at 12:54 PM on March 21, 2013
Those terms have been common since I got A+ certified (plus the cup of coffee) back in the early 90s.
posted by boo_radley at 12:54 PM on March 21, 2013
"Boss" and "Employee" drive?
posted by Drinky Die at 12:56 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Drinky Die at 12:56 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Wait, no: primary and secondary were the ide channels. They became "device 0" and "device 1" on each channel.
posted by boo_radley at 12:57 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by boo_radley at 12:57 PM on March 21, 2013
"Dominant" and "Submissive"?
posted by PenDevil at 12:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by PenDevil at 12:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
But to suggest that that would only be the case if the woman were "particularly attractive" is to imply something a bit dark: that good-lookin' gals (and only good-lookin' gals) are complicit in the grody sexualizing of otherwise innocuous commentary.
I went back and read yoink's comment a few times just to make sure, and one of us is having reading comprehension problems, because I can't see any reasonable reading that matches yours.
posted by weston at 12:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I went back and read yoink's comment a few times just to make sure, and one of us is having reading comprehension problems, because I can't see any reasonable reading that matches yours.
posted by weston at 12:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
"Dominant" and "Submissive"?
LOL, try saying that a storage conference, and just wait till the "sexist!" charges start flying!
posted by amorphatist at 12:59 PM on March 21, 2013
LOL, try saying that a storage conference, and just wait till the "sexist!" charges start flying!
posted by amorphatist at 12:59 PM on March 21, 2013
Yes, let's run away from very accurate and descriptive words that describe the roles of these devices because we can't handle thinking about some bad thing from the distant past that never directly affected us.
posted by mullingitover at 1:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by mullingitover at 1:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
We just say parent/child or primary/secondary in the shops I've worked in, which works fine because we're uncomfortable talking about either BDSM or slavery with customers. It doesn't hurt me in the least to use less loaded words.
posted by Lyn Never at 1:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by Lyn Never at 1:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
I would feel seriously self-conscious talking about "master" and "slave" nodes to a black engineer.
Germans were enslaved by Spartacus, so you really have your work cut out for you.
posted by rhizome at 1:04 PM on March 21, 2013
Germans were enslaved by Spartacus, so you really have your work cut out for you.
posted by rhizome at 1:04 PM on March 21, 2013
I'm surprised "parent" and "child" didn't catch on. It certainly shows up in other parts of computing and computer science: graph theory, binary trees, etc.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 1:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
"Dominant" and "Submissive"?
Yeah, and "Switch hit" for cable select.
This is not a suggestion from my employer.
posted by tyllwin at 1:05 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Yeah, and "Switch hit" for cable select.
This is not a suggestion from my employer.
posted by tyllwin at 1:05 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
mullingitover: "Yes, let's run away from very accurate and descriptive words that describe the roles of these devices because we can't handle thinking about some bad thing from the distant past that never directly affected us."
If this is about hard drives, then you're incorrect: The master doesn't "give orders" to the slave, and the slave accepts no input from the master. The master is simply the first device on a channel, slave is second.
posted by boo_radley at 1:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
If this is about hard drives, then you're incorrect: The master doesn't "give orders" to the slave, and the slave accepts no input from the master. The master is simply the first device on a channel, slave is second.
posted by boo_radley at 1:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
The master is simply the first device on a channel, slave is second.
Well, that is certainly not the only meaning in the industry. Outside of specifically HD terminology, master-slave is used in DB replication/distribution as well. And "parent-child" does not capture that relationship.
posted by amorphatist at 1:10 PM on March 21, 2013
Well, that is certainly not the only meaning in the industry. Outside of specifically HD terminology, master-slave is used in DB replication/distribution as well. And "parent-child" does not capture that relationship.
posted by amorphatist at 1:10 PM on March 21, 2013
boo_radley: "If this is about hard drives, then you're incorrect: The master doesn't "give orders" to the slave, and the slave accepts no input from the master. The master is simply the first device on a channel, slave is second."
My bad, I was thinking in terms of database replication.
posted by mullingitover at 1:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
My bad, I was thinking in terms of database replication.
posted by mullingitover at 1:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The "particularly attractive" thing is a bit subtle and I don't think it demands a massive outrage attack or strong language policing, but basically it's part of a whole "I am a man, women exist to provide me with sexual entertainment, I am an arbiter of their sexual value and I deem her to be fuckable of the highest order [or of the second highest order, or not fuckable at all]" mindset. Then this feeds into "only hot women get sexually harassed, because who would want to make sexual remarks about some plain woman" and "sexual harassment is actually a compliment of sorts" and "I really had no choice but to think about her sexually, she's just so damned hot."
posted by leopard at 1:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by leopard at 1:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
[...] which seems a verifiable statistical observation?
I'm interested in what stats you have available, and how they are quantified and verified.
"seems verifiable" != "stats already collected", but you know that already. Can we end this derail about yoink's comment?
posted by amorphatist at 1:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm interested in what stats you have available, and how they are quantified and verified.
"seems verifiable" != "stats already collected", but you know that already. Can we end this derail about yoink's comment?
posted by amorphatist at 1:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
The word "servant" could easily be used instead of "slave" - but it's a little too close to "server" in a field with wide accent variability.
Or we could go with mistress and slave - almost the same but a rather different connotation.
Boss and worker?
On topic... Well, there's nobody in the right here. They should just shake hands and make up, let PyCons be PyCons!
posted by dickasso at 1:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Or we could go with mistress and slave - almost the same but a rather different connotation.
Boss and worker?
On topic... Well, there's nobody in the right here. They should just shake hands and make up, let PyCons be PyCons!
posted by dickasso at 1:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I appreciated @brainwane's link to Tim Chevalier's essay, and how the concept of free speech becomes, in certain contexts, constituted in ways that sidestep accountability. As Chevalier notes, "I hear open-source people use 'free speech' as a reason to be abusive."
How we use language matters.
In Judith Butler's Excitable Speech: The Politics of the Performative she writes:
posted by simulacra at 1:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
How we use language matters.
In Judith Butler's Excitable Speech: The Politics of the Performative she writes:
"Could language injure us if we were not, in some sense, linguistic beings, beings who require language in order to be? Is our vulnerability to language a consequence of our being constituted within its terms?"Or, summarized another way, "[Butler's] assertion [is] that we are constitutive of language and that this constitution makes injury possible[.]"
posted by simulacra at 1:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
SendGrid Fires Company Evangelist After Twitter Fracas
Isn't it weird to live in an age in which that headline makes any kind of sense?
The point's been made before, but we are apparently living in a William Gibson novel.
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 1:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Isn't it weird to live in an age in which that headline makes any kind of sense?
The point's been made before, but we are apparently living in a William Gibson novel.
posted by Mr. Bad Example at 1:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I was at BSidesSF when Violet Blue's talk got canceled, (her talk was about sex, BSidesSF is not about sex, someone from Ada Init pointed out that this was sexualising the environment and not making the talk welcoming, everyone "agreed" to cancel the talk) and I was just waiting for the other shoe to drop and something like this to happen.
There were a lot of rumblings about the BSides event but not enough momentum for the boulder to shift and come careening down the hill to flatten everyone. Then someone came and took a flying kick at it.
TECH INDUSTRY PEOPLE: WHY CAN WE NOT HAVE NICE THINGS?
posted by subbes at 1:58 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
There were a lot of rumblings about the BSides event but not enough momentum for the boulder to shift and come careening down the hill to flatten everyone. Then someone came and took a flying kick at it.
TECH INDUSTRY PEOPLE: WHY CAN WE NOT HAVE NICE THINGS?
posted by subbes at 1:58 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Her tweet: Not cool. Jokes about forking repo's in a sexual way and "big" dongles. Right behind me
People who sexualize as many words as possible, who joke about forking repo's and "big" dongles in a sexual way are harassing a woman at that conference. She took a picture, and made a (as far as I know) true comment and posted it. If the employer is ashamed and embarrassed by their employee's behavior, and fires a man, that's not her fault. She documented a real event. Consequences happen.
If you joke like this in the workplace, you are potentially sexually harassing your co-workers. A woman who will make a sexually charged remark every time the words ball, crack, blow, screw, but, etc. are used at work is sexually harassing her co-workers, and is unprofessional as all get out (I work with her, complained, and find that working with her knife in my back is highly unpleasant).
One of the commenters on HN comments on women talking about their bodies in the workplace. Here's at least 1 difference, a woman who says I have cramps is talking about a medical condition that affects her reproductive organs. A man who says I just learned I should do a testicular self-exam every month. I didn't know testicular cancer happened to young guys like me is talking about a medical condition that affects his reproductive organs. A man who wonders if the Barbie on a cake is a MILF or a woman who accuses her co-workers of being in a bad mood because they aren't getting enough sex is sexually harassing. Yes, there are gray areas, and there are levels of how severe the harassment is.
Grow up, gentlemen and -women. Sexual harassment is a form of bullying. You can be funny without sexually harassing anybody. This form of chatter at a conference also clarifies that you don't have anything more interesting to say, don't seem to have much creativity, and are juvenile. Don't do it, and tolerate this from your co-workers and friends. At home, at play, if you must be a low-life, you're on your own. At work, learn how to be professional.
posted by Mom at 2:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
People who sexualize as many words as possible, who joke about forking repo's and "big" dongles in a sexual way are harassing a woman at that conference. She took a picture, and made a (as far as I know) true comment and posted it. If the employer is ashamed and embarrassed by their employee's behavior, and fires a man, that's not her fault. She documented a real event. Consequences happen.
If you joke like this in the workplace, you are potentially sexually harassing your co-workers. A woman who will make a sexually charged remark every time the words ball, crack, blow, screw, but, etc. are used at work is sexually harassing her co-workers, and is unprofessional as all get out (I work with her, complained, and find that working with her knife in my back is highly unpleasant).
One of the commenters on HN comments on women talking about their bodies in the workplace. Here's at least 1 difference, a woman who says I have cramps is talking about a medical condition that affects her reproductive organs. A man who says I just learned I should do a testicular self-exam every month. I didn't know testicular cancer happened to young guys like me is talking about a medical condition that affects his reproductive organs. A man who wonders if the Barbie on a cake is a MILF or a woman who accuses her co-workers of being in a bad mood because they aren't getting enough sex is sexually harassing. Yes, there are gray areas, and there are levels of how severe the harassment is.
Grow up, gentlemen and -women. Sexual harassment is a form of bullying. You can be funny without sexually harassing anybody. This form of chatter at a conference also clarifies that you don't have anything more interesting to say, don't seem to have much creativity, and are juvenile. Don't do it, and tolerate this from your co-workers and friends. At home, at play, if you must be a low-life, you're on your own. At work, learn how to be professional.
posted by Mom at 2:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Sexual harassment is a form of bullying.
As well, public shaming is a form of bullying.
posted by ericb at 2:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
As well, public shaming is a form of bullying.
posted by ericb at 2:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Consequences happen
Well that certainly seems to be the case, in the absence if anything else, consequences did indeed happen.
posted by Artw at 2:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Well that certainly seems to be the case, in the absence if anything else, consequences did indeed happen.
posted by Artw at 2:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
If the discussion makes you uncomfortable, of course you are free to exercise your free will to not participate. I'm not sure, though, that you are the arbiter of what constitutes a derail.
In a thread about alleged sexism at a conference, an extended discussion of whether another mefite's comments are themselves sexist (or contributing to a hostile environment etc) seems like something that should be brought to MeTa, by my reading of site policy. Obviously YMMV.
posted by amorphatist at 2:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
In a thread about alleged sexism at a conference, an extended discussion of whether another mefite's comments are themselves sexist (or contributing to a hostile environment etc) seems like something that should be brought to MeTa, by my reading of site policy. Obviously YMMV.
posted by amorphatist at 2:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Not only did she send the photo contemporaneously via Twitter, she decided later to post a summary of the entire situation -- with the photo -- on her blog. Not cool. She chose to publicize the entire affair. She chose to bully these two guys. Not cool.
posted by ericb at 2:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by ericb at 2:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Which turned out to be basically calling in an airstrike on her own location. Consequences happened.
Maybe there is room for some fine-tuning to consequences here?
posted by Artw at 2:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Maybe there is room for some fine-tuning to consequences here?
posted by Artw at 2:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I guess the lesson here is don't go to PyCon or you'll be fired.
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 2:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by turgid dahlia 2 at 2:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [13 favorites]
In a thread about alleged sexism at a conference, an extended discussion of whether another mefite's comments are themselves sexist (or contributing to a hostile environment etc) seems entirely appropriate. I don't even see the point of discussing sexism and language if such a discussion is considered a derail. This particular discussion was not personal either.
(On the other hand, comments about how things should be brought to MeTa seem like they should be... brought to...)
posted by leopard at 2:15 PM on March 21, 2013
(On the other hand, comments about how things should be brought to MeTa seem like they should be... brought to...)
posted by leopard at 2:15 PM on March 21, 2013
: "People who sexualize as many words as possible, who joke about forking repo's and "big" dongles in a sexual way are harassing a woman at that conference. She took a picture, and made a (as far as I know) true comment and posted it."
- According to the guy who made the joke (see Hacker News thread on the topic), while there was some 'dongle, har har' going on, the part about forking a git repo was not a joke. Adria took it upon herself to interpret it that way. (I'm inclined to believe him on this part, since if he was going to lie about something, why not blanket deny the whole affair?)
- Using the photo for harassment as she did was just as much a violation of the PyCon's rules as the guy's off-color joke.
- Also, she plays fucking Cards Against Humanity (haha, child molestation and rape jokes aplenty, *so funny!*), so if you think she's legitimately as thin-skinned as she claims to be, I have a bridge to sell you.
posted by mullingitover at 2:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
- According to the guy who made the joke (see Hacker News thread on the topic), while there was some 'dongle, har har' going on, the part about forking a git repo was not a joke. Adria took it upon herself to interpret it that way. (I'm inclined to believe him on this part, since if he was going to lie about something, why not blanket deny the whole affair?)
- Using the photo for harassment as she did was just as much a violation of the PyCon's rules as the guy's off-color joke.
- Also, she plays fucking Cards Against Humanity (haha, child molestation and rape jokes aplenty, *so funny!*), so if you think she's legitimately as thin-skinned as she claims to be, I have a bridge to sell you.
posted by mullingitover at 2:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
People who sexualize as many words as possible, who joke about forking repo's and "big" dongles in a sexual way are harassing a woman at that conference.
No, she was eavesdropping on two people having a private conversation and violating their privacy. They were not talking to her or about her. They did not harass her. She harassed them.
posted by w0mbat at 2:19 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
No, she was eavesdropping on two people having a private conversation and violating their privacy. They were not talking to her or about her. They did not harass her. She harassed them.
posted by w0mbat at 2:19 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Next up: physicists should come up with a more neutral nickname for "The God Particle", because atheists or polytheists could be offended by the implication.
See also Superstitious users and the FreeBSD logo.
posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 2:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
See also Superstitious users and the FreeBSD logo.
posted by Combustible Edison Lighthouse at 2:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
(On the other hand, comments about how things should be brought to MeTa seem like they should be... brought to...)
Wu-oh, recursion!
posted by amorphatist at 2:25 PM on March 21, 2013
Wu-oh, recursion!
posted by amorphatist at 2:25 PM on March 21, 2013
"No, she was eavesdropping on two people having a private conversation and violating their privacy. They were not talking to her or about her. They did not harass her. She harassed them."
As best we know, she did talk to them prior to being offended and taking their picture. Please be scrupulous with your representations — distortions only fuel fallacious narratives.
posted by klangklangston at 2:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
As best we know, she did talk to them prior to being offended and taking their picture. Please be scrupulous with your representations — distortions only fuel fallacious narratives.
posted by klangklangston at 2:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm TBH at this point confused as to if it's one or both of those. The drop feed effect certainly doesn't help keep things calm.
posted by Artw at 2:29 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Artw at 2:29 PM on March 21, 2013
: "As best we know, she did talk to them prior to being offended and taking their picture. Please be scrupulous with your representations — distortions only fuel fallacious narratives."
Nope. According to her blog, her first step was to publicly shame them with her photo.
posted by mullingitover at 2:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Nope. According to her blog, her first step was to publicly shame them with her photo.
posted by mullingitover at 2:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
A very interesting blog post on Amanda Blum's experience interacting with Richards. You should really read the whole thing.
"when Adria is offended, she doesn’t work within the community to resolve the problem, and how ultimately,it actually harms female developers because it forms the perception that we are to be feared, we are humorless, that we are hard to work with."
posted by GuyZero at 2:43 PM on March 21, 2013 [50 favorites]
"when Adria is offended, she doesn’t work within the community to resolve the problem, and how ultimately,it actually harms female developers because it forms the perception that we are to be feared, we are humorless, that we are hard to work with."
posted by GuyZero at 2:43 PM on March 21, 2013 [50 favorites]
Also, she plays fucking Cards Against Humanity (haha, child molestation and rape jokes aplenty, *so funny!*), so if you think she's legitimately as thin-skinned as she claims to be, I have a bridge to sell you.
There is something really satisfyingly geeky about the idea of the "no angel" defence being based not on a penchant for short skirts or drinking, but for a Creative Commons-licensed card game.
posted by running order squabble fest at 2:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
There is something really satisfyingly geeky about the idea of the "no angel" defence being based not on a penchant for short skirts or drinking, but for a Creative Commons-licensed card game.
posted by running order squabble fest at 2:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Brogrammers Making Sex Jokes and Other Reasons Startups Need HR Departments -- "HR departments are ponderous, annoying, stultifying, and sometimes the one thing that can save startups from themselves."
posted by ericb at 2:51 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ericb at 2:51 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Nothing left to do but fire myself, I guess. I do think in all this PyCon seems to be a shining light of reasonableness.
posted by maxwelton at 2:52 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by maxwelton at 2:52 PM on March 21, 2013
A very interesting blog post on Amanda Blum's experience interacting with Richards. You should really read the whole thing.
Highlight: Calling out the portrayal of a woman as a "total ditz" in a shirt based on this XKCD strip. For two bonus points, look only at the XKCD strip and tell me which one is the aforementioned woman.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 3:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Highlight: Calling out the portrayal of a woman as a "total ditz" in a shirt based on this XKCD strip. For two bonus points, look only at the XKCD strip and tell me which one is the aforementioned woman.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 3:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
mullingitover: "- Also, she plays fucking Cards Against Humanity (haha, child molestation and rape jokes aplenty, *so funny!*), so if you think she's legitimately as thin-skinned as she claims to be, I have a bridge to sell you."
This -- to me -- seems like a red herring. I don't care if she has crazy times with her friends in private. Having a different experience in a different place with strangers isn't the same.
posted by boo_radley at 3:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
This -- to me -- seems like a red herring. I don't care if she has crazy times with her friends in private. Having a different experience in a different place with strangers isn't the same.
posted by boo_radley at 3:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I can't believe they fired her. She may have a retaliation basis for filing suit. Plus, they just look creepy for giving in to the mob and for not standing by her when she is under such severe abuse and threats.
Whatever she did - right wrong or indifferent - there is no possible justification for that type of brutalizing. The internet rage mobs are truly unhinged and frightening and the sexual threats are just horrifying.
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Whatever she did - right wrong or indifferent - there is no possible justification for that type of brutalizing. The internet rage mobs are truly unhinged and frightening and the sexual threats are just horrifying.
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma.
posted by madamjujujive at 3:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
madamjujujive: "horrendoma"
That's... that's one effective and powerful word.
posted by boo_radley at 3:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
That's... that's one effective and powerful word.
posted by boo_radley at 3:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma.
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
posted by Authorized User at 3:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
posted by Authorized User at 3:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"Nope. According to her blog, her first step was to publicly shame them with her photo."
You've misunderstood what I wrote. Accorder to her blog post, she talked to the guys prior to being offended by their comments. Once she was offended, she didn't talk to them; she posted a public photo.
(I don't think it's necessary, though it would have been nice, for her to talk to them. I do think that she can use a direct message in twitter so that it's not public when she contacts PyCon staff.)
posted by klangklangston at 3:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
You've misunderstood what I wrote. Accorder to her blog post, she talked to the guys prior to being offended by their comments. Once she was offended, she didn't talk to them; she posted a public photo.
(I don't think it's necessary, though it would have been nice, for her to talk to them. I do think that she can use a direct message in twitter so that it's not public when she contacts PyCon staff.)
posted by klangklangston at 3:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
boo_radley: "mullingitover: "- Also, she plays fucking Cards Against Humanity (haha, child molestation and rape jokes aplenty, *so funny!*), so if you think she's legitimately as thin-skinned as she claims to be, I have a bridge to sell you."
This -- to me -- seems like a red herring. I don't care if she has crazy times with her friends in private. Having a different experience in a different place with strangers isn't the same."
If they'd done something to target her or involved her in any way, sure. But they weren't talking to her, and didn't intend to do anything to offend her. She snooped on their conversation and decided to make a spectacle of it for her own personal gain. This wasn't able dealing with something that offended her, it was about her finding a story that she figured would offend other people and putting it on display and encouraging ridicule.
madamjujujive: "I can't believe they fired her. She may have a retaliation basis for filing suit. Plus, they just look creepy for giving in to the mob and for not standing by her when she is under such severe abuse and threats.
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma."
Paging The World Famous. From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case:
posted by mullingitover at 3:14 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
This -- to me -- seems like a red herring. I don't care if she has crazy times with her friends in private. Having a different experience in a different place with strangers isn't the same."
If they'd done something to target her or involved her in any way, sure. But they weren't talking to her, and didn't intend to do anything to offend her. She snooped on their conversation and decided to make a spectacle of it for her own personal gain. This wasn't able dealing with something that offended her, it was about her finding a story that she figured would offend other people and putting it on display and encouraging ridicule.
madamjujujive: "I can't believe they fired her. She may have a retaliation basis for filing suit. Plus, they just look creepy for giving in to the mob and for not standing by her when she is under such severe abuse and threats.
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma."
Paging The World Famous. From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case:
All of the laws we enforce make it illegal to fire, demote, harass, or otherwise “retaliate” against people (applicants or employees) because they filed a charge of discrimination, because they complained to their employer or other covered entity about discrimination on the job, or because they participated in an employment discrimination proceeding (such as an investigation or lawsuit).The people she harassed didn't work for her employer, and she didn't have any open complaints to her employer AFAIK about discrimination. Realistically I think they have a pretty solid case for firing her on the grounds that she dragged the company into a PR nightmare and they don't support her handling of the matter (in spite of her explicit claim to the contrary).
posted by mullingitover at 3:14 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma.
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
Once the "and they threw the developers out!!!" nonsense got cleared up I'd say that they did, yes. And given they way they did handle it I'd say their CoC is a good idea too.
posted by Artw at 3:19 PM on March 21, 2013
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
Once the "and they threw the developers out!!!" nonsense got cleared up I'd say that they did, yes. And given they way they did handle it I'd say their CoC is a good idea too.
posted by Artw at 3:19 PM on March 21, 2013
I think this whole thing is pretty stupid, but I just love how people who worked themselves into a frenzy about how the dude's firing was the most unjust thing to ever happen and OMG HE HAS A FAMILY are now falling all over themselves to explain why it's 100% right and just and perfect that she was fired for essentially the same reason (bringing negative attention to the company). The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
posted by dialetheia at 3:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by dialetheia at 3:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
ericb: "Brogrammers Making Sex Jokes and Other Reasons Startups Need HR Departments -- "HR departments are ponderous, annoying, stultifying, and sometimes the one thing that can save startups from themselves.""
Further to my earlier comments about the tech industry:
SOFT SKILLS. WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE SOFT SKILLS.
(Answer: because tech is male-dominated and soft skills are generally socialized out of men (and into women). And why's that? Gender socialization. And why's that? The patriarchy. Wheels within wheels.)
posted by subbes at 3:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Further to my earlier comments about the tech industry:
SOFT SKILLS. WHY DO YOU NOT HAVE SOFT SKILLS.
(Answer: because tech is male-dominated and soft skills are generally socialized out of men (and into women). And why's that? Gender socialization. And why's that? The patriarchy. Wheels within wheels.)
posted by subbes at 3:21 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
think this whole thing is pretty stupid, but I just love how people who worked themselves into a frenzy about how the dude's firing was the most unjust thing to ever happen and OMG HE HAS A FAMILY are now falling all over themselves to explain why it's 100% right and just and perfect that she was fired for essentially the same reason (bringing negative attention to the company). The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
I'm sure Reddit are having a parade or something but general consensus here seems to be that they were both fairly shitty.
posted by Artw at 3:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I'm sure Reddit are having a parade or something but general consensus here seems to be that they were both fairly shitty.
posted by Artw at 3:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
My take-away from this, aside from the obvious is that I learned that companies have Developer Evangelists. I have no idea what that means or what Richards's role was in the company, but it would seem that she'd be more of a mediator than a public shaming type of person?
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 3:25 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by 922257033c4a0f3cecdbd819a46d626999d1af4a at 3:25 PM on March 21, 2013
Highlight: Calling out the portrayal of a woman
Because the woman is portrayed as not understanding how technology works. It's a legitimate concern, raised fairly quickly in the comment section of the blog on which it was presented.
posted by IanMorr at 3:29 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Because the woman is portrayed as not understanding how technology works. It's a legitimate concern, raised fairly quickly in the comment section of the blog on which it was presented.
posted by IanMorr at 3:29 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm so sick of developers hiding behind the "we don't have soft skills" trope. Take a class and learn to stop being an ass. You are otherwise a smart, educated professional. You can at least learn to be well mannered and polite, even if you are still an awkward nerd and bad dresser.
posted by humanfont at 3:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 3:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
She snooped on their conversation...
If I can hear your conversation, because you are sitting right behind me, and your words make it to my eardrums, you are not having a private conversation.
posted by Orb at 3:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
If I can hear your conversation, because you are sitting right behind me, and your words make it to my eardrums, you are not having a private conversation.
posted by Orb at 3:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
think this whole thing is pretty stupid, but I just love how people who worked themselves into a frenzy about how the dude's firing was the most unjust thing to ever happen and OMG HE HAS A FAMILY are now falling all over themselves to explain why it's 100% right and just and perfect that she was fired for essentially the same reason (bringing negative attention to the company). The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
Although there are two different responses, it more likely reflects that people respond positively to a humble recognition of having messed up (as the developer did), versus someone who is willing to protect wrong actions at all costs (i.e., Adria). Whether it's right or wrong, people are less likely to extend grace to the person who is unwilling to acknowledge wrongdoing. It tends to lead to schadenfreude and a sense that justice needs to happen for that person, instead of grace.
posted by SpacemanStix at 3:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Although there are two different responses, it more likely reflects that people respond positively to a humble recognition of having messed up (as the developer did), versus someone who is willing to protect wrong actions at all costs (i.e., Adria). Whether it's right or wrong, people are less likely to extend grace to the person who is unwilling to acknowledge wrongdoing. It tends to lead to schadenfreude and a sense that justice needs to happen for that person, instead of grace.
posted by SpacemanStix at 3:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
You can at least learn to be well mannered and polite, even if you are still an awkward nerd and bad dresser.
Your saying the second part of that sentence tends to undercut the first part.
posted by benito.strauss at 3:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Your saying the second part of that sentence tends to undercut the first part.
posted by benito.strauss at 3:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Because the woman is portrayed as not understanding how technology works.
Right, but both stick figures are women (or men with long hair, or.....). And the shirt was either produced by women, or at least by an event that was run by a woman.
While I can see the issues with portraying women as dumb (especially with technology), that call-out just seems rather uninformed.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 3:37 PM on March 21, 2013
Right, but both stick figures are women (or men with long hair, or.....). And the shirt was either produced by women, or at least by an event that was run by a woman.
While I can see the issues with portraying women as dumb (especially with technology), that call-out just seems rather uninformed.
posted by Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug at 3:37 PM on March 21, 2013
If I can hear your conversation, because you are sitting right behind me, and your words make it to my eardrums, you are not having a private conversation.
If you were having lunch with a friend at a restaurant and I sat down at your table and began to correct some you had said a moment before, how would you characterize your conversation to me? Were you making a public speech or having a private conversation?
posted by GuyZero at 3:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
If you were having lunch with a friend at a restaurant and I sat down at your table and began to correct some you had said a moment before, how would you characterize your conversation to me? Were you making a public speech or having a private conversation?
posted by GuyZero at 3:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I think this whole thing is pretty stupid, but I just love how people who worked themselves into a frenzy about how the dude's firing was the most unjust thing to ever happen and OMG HE HAS A FAMILY are now falling all over themselves to explain why it's 100% right and just and perfect that she was fired for essentially the same reason (bringing negative attention to the company). The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
Almost all of the defenders of his firing were also saying that he represented his company poorly. Yet this "represents the company" position likely led to her firing, because her public shaming of developers on a personal blog would be a PR embarrassment to her employer, and perhaps went against her mission or job title, whatever it was.
posted by Brian B. at 3:45 PM on March 21, 2013
Almost all of the defenders of his firing were also saying that he represented his company poorly. Yet this "represents the company" position likely led to her firing, because her public shaming of developers on a personal blog would be a PR embarrassment to her employer, and perhaps went against her mission or job title, whatever it was.
posted by Brian B. at 3:45 PM on March 21, 2013
Whatever the circumstances, the history of men being fired for engaging in questionably sexual talk is so infrequent as for this to be an extreme outlier, and the history of women being fired for attempting to address it is so common as to be a cliche.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
If you were having lunch with a friend at a restaurant and I sat down at your table and began to correct some you had said a moment before, how would you characterize your conversation to me? Were you making a public speech or having a private conversation?
I would characterize it as "not what happened" and "not a relevant analogy". I would also take a bite of your salad because aw yiss salad niçoise.
posted by Coda at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I would characterize it as "not what happened" and "not a relevant analogy". I would also take a bite of your salad because aw yiss salad niçoise.
posted by Coda at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
If I can hear your conversation, because you are sitting right behind me, and your words make it to my eardrums, you are not having a private conversation.
posted by Orb at 11:33 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
Do you really consider every conversation you have outside of your home to be public?
Every single word that has been or could be overheard by a third party is the equivalent of shouting across a room or speaking from a stage?
Would you honestly not mind if third parties started interjecting themselves into every conversation you had at the office, at a bar, a coffee shop, restaurants, the park, a street?
Surely not. And I wouldn't blame you because when two people are speaking to eachother at a reasonable volume allowing them some sense of privacy even if we can hear some of what is said is just not being an arsehole.
posted by Reggie Knoble at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Orb at 11:33 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
Do you really consider every conversation you have outside of your home to be public?
Every single word that has been or could be overheard by a third party is the equivalent of shouting across a room or speaking from a stage?
Would you honestly not mind if third parties started interjecting themselves into every conversation you had at the office, at a bar, a coffee shop, restaurants, the park, a street?
Surely not. And I wouldn't blame you because when two people are speaking to eachother at a reasonable volume allowing them some sense of privacy even if we can hear some of what is said is just not being an arsehole.
posted by Reggie Knoble at 3:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Whatever the circumstances, the history of men being fired for engaging in questionably sexual talk is so infrequent as for this to be an extreme outlier, and the history of women being fired for attempting to address it is so common as to be a cliche.
Since Adria's blog post specifies that she acted only when a photo was shown and she felt she needed to defend the negative possibilities reflected by her interpretation of the content of that photo, it would seem that trying to account for the entire history of gender conflict in this single event is a problematic endeavor.
posted by rhizome at 3:51 PM on March 21, 2013
Since Adria's blog post specifies that she acted only when a photo was shown and she felt she needed to defend the negative possibilities reflected by her interpretation of the content of that photo, it would seem that trying to account for the entire history of gender conflict in this single event is a problematic endeavor.
posted by rhizome at 3:51 PM on March 21, 2013
Would you honestly not mind if third parties started interjecting themselves into every conversation you had at the office, at a bar, a coffee shop, restaurants, the park, a street?
Yes, if by "office", "bar", "coffee shop", "restaurants", "park", or "street" you mean "in the row of the conference hall sitting immediately behind them in the middle of a presentation".
posted by Coda at 3:52 PM on March 21, 2013
Yes, if by "office", "bar", "coffee shop", "restaurants", "park", or "street" you mean "in the row of the conference hall sitting immediately behind them in the middle of a presentation".
posted by Coda at 3:52 PM on March 21, 2013
Since Adria's blog post specifies that she acted only when a photo was shown and she felt she needed to defend the negative possibilities reflected by her interpretation of the content of that photo, it would seem that trying to account for the entire history of gender conflict in this single event is a problematic endeavor.
You know, that's precisely how sexism works, systematically speaking. We think of it as being some guy on the street shouting at a strange woman, and it is that, but that's not why woman make 19% less in the workplace. No, women make less in the workplace because there are a million women, and, for each one of them, a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why they get paid less. A million independent cases of perfectly justifiable wage difference, based on experience, based on how long they have been at the company, based on education, based on a million factors. And it only finally seems to be sexism when we add it up and there it is, the final tally, and the final tally has women as a whole getting the short end of the stick.
I won't have those discussions anymore. A woman addressed inappropriate behavior at a conference -- which both the organizers and one of the people she criticized agree with. She got fired. Every single additional detail beyond that is the justification, the thing that makes it all right in this case, just as there is that one detail in every case, and so it is okay, and then we get a hundred of them, and then a thousand of them, and then, again and again, when women speak up, they are fired.
What is the lesson when it happens this much? Don't eavesdrop? Don't take photos?
No, in these numbers, with this sort of reaction, and with another firing, the lesson is clear: Don't speak up.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [26 favorites]
You know, that's precisely how sexism works, systematically speaking. We think of it as being some guy on the street shouting at a strange woman, and it is that, but that's not why woman make 19% less in the workplace. No, women make less in the workplace because there are a million women, and, for each one of them, a perfectly reasonable explanation as to why they get paid less. A million independent cases of perfectly justifiable wage difference, based on experience, based on how long they have been at the company, based on education, based on a million factors. And it only finally seems to be sexism when we add it up and there it is, the final tally, and the final tally has women as a whole getting the short end of the stick.
I won't have those discussions anymore. A woman addressed inappropriate behavior at a conference -- which both the organizers and one of the people she criticized agree with. She got fired. Every single additional detail beyond that is the justification, the thing that makes it all right in this case, just as there is that one detail in every case, and so it is okay, and then we get a hundred of them, and then a thousand of them, and then, again and again, when women speak up, they are fired.
What is the lesson when it happens this much? Don't eavesdrop? Don't take photos?
No, in these numbers, with this sort of reaction, and with another firing, the lesson is clear: Don't speak up.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [26 favorites]
While I can see the issues with portraying women as dumb (especially with technology), that call-out just seems rather uninformed.
But it was part of a pattern that Adria suffers in which she intentionally creates a public kerfluffle in order to draw attention to herself and to get more hits for her blog. In one case, this urge to exploit opportunities to "go public" in order to draw blog traffic conflicted with her obligation to give a useful presentation to Amanda Blum's conference. In this case, it conflicted with SendGrid's need to have a drama-free developer-friendly face on its marketing efforts.
Here's the irony: her problems are caused by a clear lack of "soft skills." Which is all well and good, because plenty of us lack soft skills, but she specifically chose a profession and created a niche for herself in which her value is based in her ability to trade on her supposedly superior "soft skills" that are supposed to give her and her clients a competitive advantage in the software industry.
posted by deanc at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
But it was part of a pattern that Adria suffers in which she intentionally creates a public kerfluffle in order to draw attention to herself and to get more hits for her blog. In one case, this urge to exploit opportunities to "go public" in order to draw blog traffic conflicted with her obligation to give a useful presentation to Amanda Blum's conference. In this case, it conflicted with SendGrid's need to have a drama-free developer-friendly face on its marketing efforts.
Here's the irony: her problems are caused by a clear lack of "soft skills." Which is all well and good, because plenty of us lack soft skills, but she specifically chose a profession and created a niche for herself in which her value is based in her ability to trade on her supposedly superior "soft skills" that are supposed to give her and her clients a competitive advantage in the software industry.
posted by deanc at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Nobody comes off well in this horrendoma.
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
Yes, I think so. The former PR person in me feels badly for them - they put in policies and procedures to avoid just such problems. No good deed goes unpunished.
From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case
Well I'm no lawyer but it would not surprise me if a good lawyer couldn't make retaliation fly. She was representing her employer when the alleged harassment occurred.
I agree they may have a defense in "she did her job badly by attracting so much negative publicity" - but I think they best have some good documentation in her job description. I used to work in PR and if I had ever attracted such negative attention to the companies I represented for whatever reason - my fault or not - I'd have been expecting to be let go. One time a senior person in a company I worked for fubared badly in a press interview and jeopardized a project. I thought I was going to be the sacrificial victim thrown in the volcano because they weren't going to let him go -- but fortunately, things died down. When you're in charge of putting a positive spin on an organization and things go south, you are vulnerable - and you generally know that.
And both employers talked about these matters on the web, arggh. Two words of advice: Lawyer up.
Bad juju all around.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Hasn't PyCon handled all this quite well?
Yes, I think so. The former PR person in me feels badly for them - they put in policies and procedures to avoid just such problems. No good deed goes unpunished.
From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case
Well I'm no lawyer but it would not surprise me if a good lawyer couldn't make retaliation fly. She was representing her employer when the alleged harassment occurred.
I agree they may have a defense in "she did her job badly by attracting so much negative publicity" - but I think they best have some good documentation in her job description. I used to work in PR and if I had ever attracted such negative attention to the companies I represented for whatever reason - my fault or not - I'd have been expecting to be let go. One time a senior person in a company I worked for fubared badly in a press interview and jeopardized a project. I thought I was going to be the sacrificial victim thrown in the volcano because they weren't going to let him go -- but fortunately, things died down. When you're in charge of putting a positive spin on an organization and things go south, you are vulnerable - and you generally know that.
And both employers talked about these matters on the web, arggh. Two words of advice: Lawyer up.
Bad juju all around.
posted by madamjujujive at 4:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes, if by "office", "bar", "coffee shop", "restaurants", "park", or "street" you mean "in the row of the conference hall sitting immediately behind them in the middle of a presentation".
posted by Coda at 11:52 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
And why does privacy cease to exist in a conference hall?
That fact that it was in the middle of a presentation is irrelevant, at least to Adria Richards, as she had engaged the men in question in conversation right before the dongle incident which shows that she didn't have a problem with talking during the presentation as long as she approved of the content.
posted by Reggie Knoble at 4:01 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Coda at 11:52 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
And why does privacy cease to exist in a conference hall?
That fact that it was in the middle of a presentation is irrelevant, at least to Adria Richards, as she had engaged the men in question in conversation right before the dongle incident which shows that she didn't have a problem with talking during the presentation as long as she approved of the content.
posted by Reggie Knoble at 4:01 PM on March 21, 2013
> A very interesting blog post on Amanda Blum's experience interacting with Richards.
Oof, that is unfortunate. This is going to be waved around by the MRA people forever, isn't it? In fact, the comment thread on that post already has someone saying that assigning any responsibility to the dude is "a bit like blaming the victim".
posted by lucidium at 4:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Oof, that is unfortunate. This is going to be waved around by the MRA people forever, isn't it? In fact, the comment thread on that post already has someone saying that assigning any responsibility to the dude is "a bit like blaming the victim".
posted by lucidium at 4:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
For reference, I think those stick figures are probably Megan and Joanna - it's definitely Joanna (or rather a Joannalog - it's using Joanna's character model) on the left.
It strikes me that she was quite possibly wrong, but the responses to her were nonetheless pretty defensive and in places kinda douchy. Not as much as death threats or threats of rape, of course, but context is important.
posted by running order squabble fest at 4:04 PM on March 21, 2013
It strikes me that she was quite possibly wrong, but the responses to her were nonetheless pretty defensive and in places kinda douchy. Not as much as death threats or threats of rape, of course, but context is important.
posted by running order squabble fest at 4:04 PM on March 21, 2013
And why does privacy cease to exist in a conference hall?
You think if you're speaking loudly enough at a restaurant or bar in an offensive manner they won't throw you out because you're having a "private" conversation? I think you should go try it and tell us how it works. This isn't a public park, this is a private venue with a code of conduct. Speaking loudly enough to be overheard is enough to fall into that code of conduct.
posted by ch1x0r at 4:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
You think if you're speaking loudly enough at a restaurant or bar in an offensive manner they won't throw you out because you're having a "private" conversation? I think you should go try it and tell us how it works. This isn't a public park, this is a private venue with a code of conduct. Speaking loudly enough to be overheard is enough to fall into that code of conduct.
posted by ch1x0r at 4:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well I'm no lawyer but it would not surprise me if a good lawyer couldn't make retaliation fly. She was representing her employer when the alleged harassment occurred.
I'm not a lawyer either, but would happily take the other side. I don't think either of us has a guarantee of victory. I think it'd be an interesting case. The company's position, of course, would be that they would encourage her to report it to Pycon, and are only firing her because she tweeted the photo, thus harming the company's interests, and, arguably, herself violating the conference CoC on company time.
I wonder if it would depend on the jury we got, or if some judge would call it a point of law.
posted by tyllwin at 4:10 PM on March 21, 2013
I'm not a lawyer either, but would happily take the other side. I don't think either of us has a guarantee of victory. I think it'd be an interesting case. The company's position, of course, would be that they would encourage her to report it to Pycon, and are only firing her because she tweeted the photo, thus harming the company's interests, and, arguably, herself violating the conference CoC on company time.
I wonder if it would depend on the jury we got, or if some judge would call it a point of law.
posted by tyllwin at 4:10 PM on March 21, 2013
I think this whole thing is pretty stupid, but I just love how people who worked themselves into a frenzy about how the dude's firing was the most unjust thing to ever happen and OMG HE HAS A FAMILY are now falling all over themselves to explain why it's 100% right and just and perfect that she was fired for essentially the same reason (bringing negative attention to the company). The cognitive dissonance is mind-boggling.
Really? It looked to me like there was a debate between people saying "This thing has gotten blown way out of proportion" and people saying "Look, no one forced these guys to make stupid sexist remarks, this is the real world, they're going to get fired if they bring bad publicity to their employers." Then she got fired, and the second group disappeared.
I wonder if one reason she got fired was for saying something like "SendGrid supports me" during a back-and-forth with some jackass.
posted by leopard at 4:19 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Really? It looked to me like there was a debate between people saying "This thing has gotten blown way out of proportion" and people saying "Look, no one forced these guys to make stupid sexist remarks, this is the real world, they're going to get fired if they bring bad publicity to their employers." Then she got fired, and the second group disappeared.
I wonder if one reason she got fired was for saying something like "SendGrid supports me" during a back-and-forth with some jackass.
posted by leopard at 4:19 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yes, whenever I am outside my house or automobile, I am aware that the things I say may be heard by other people. If I have something private to say to someone, I either lean in and speak quietly (i.e. whispering), or I wait until we are in a more private location where there aren't other people. And if I choose to say something, racist, sexist, or otherwise offensive while out in public and other people hear it and are offended, I would expect there to be possible repercussions.
Especially if I am sitting right next to them while doing so.
posted by Orb at 4:21 PM on March 21, 2013
Especially if I am sitting right next to them while doing so.
posted by Orb at 4:21 PM on March 21, 2013
Re master/slave, on IDE/ATA devices, master means more than just the first device. The master can talk directly to the controller, but the slave has to talk to the master. So the master can prioritize its own I/O. IIRC.
We just say parent/child
Make sure to call waitpid() so your dead child processes don't become zombies.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 4:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
We just say parent/child
Make sure to call waitpid() so your dead child processes don't become zombies.
posted by Pruitt-Igoe at 4:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm not a fan of Adria Richards, and I think she's projecting her anti-porn hangups to the world, however this whole situation really angers me.
The thing that pisses me off the most about this whole fiasco is that the "Men's Rights Activists" now think they've won the argument on the internet, and that there isn't really a problem with women being treated poorly or outright being sexually harassed in the tech community.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
The thing that pisses me off the most about this whole fiasco is that the "Men's Rights Activists" now think they've won the argument on the internet, and that there isn't really a problem with women being treated poorly or outright being sexually harassed in the tech community.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Yes, if you ignore some of the most relevant details of a situation, everything looks rather simple and clear-cut, doesn't it?
Alternately, I provided some broader context.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:26 PM on March 21, 2013
Alternately, I provided some broader context.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 4:26 PM on March 21, 2013
And why does privacy cease to exist in a conference hall?
Because it's a public space. With other people in it. People you don't know. People you can't and shouldn't assume will enjoy your sotto voce asides to your friends.
Are you honestly shaky on the notion of a public space?
posted by Coda at 4:27 PM on March 21, 2013
Because it's a public space. With other people in it. People you don't know. People you can't and shouldn't assume will enjoy your sotto voce asides to your friends.
Are you honestly shaky on the notion of a public space?
posted by Coda at 4:27 PM on March 21, 2013
Let's just let PyCons be PyCons.
posted by ShutterBun at 4:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
posted by ShutterBun at 4:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [16 favorites]
I emailed SendGrid via friends who worked there to inform them of the pattern: when Adria is offended, she doesn’t work within the community to resolve the problem...
Boy, did Adria Richards really piss off Amanda Blum. Blum took the time to email Richards' employer to tell them that Richards wasn't capable of performing her job. Blum may have very well felt that Richards' actions "harms female developers," but you have to be MAJORLY PISSED OFF to email someone's employer. Did Blum really think SendGrid would respond in a constructive way?
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 4:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Boy, did Adria Richards really piss off Amanda Blum. Blum took the time to email Richards' employer to tell them that Richards wasn't capable of performing her job. Blum may have very well felt that Richards' actions "harms female developers," but you have to be MAJORLY PISSED OFF to email someone's employer. Did Blum really think SendGrid would respond in a constructive way?
posted by TrolleyOffTheTracks at 4:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Actually, to clarify my own comment, I'm referring to the discussion on this thread, not the general internet uproar, which was for the most part disgusting and ugly.
posted by leopard at 4:30 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by leopard at 4:30 PM on March 21, 2013
The CEO of SendGrid makes a public comment on their blog.
posted by GuyZero at 4:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by GuyZero at 4:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Because it's a public space. With other people in it. People you don't know. People you can't and shouldn't assume will enjoy your sotto voce asides to your friends.
Are you honestly shaky on the notion of a public space?
posted by Coda at 12:27 AM on March 22 [+] [!]
Previously you said
Yes, if by "office", "bar", "coffee shop", "restaurants", "park", or "street" you mean "in the row of the conference hall sitting immediately behind them in the middle of a presentation".
posted by Coda at 11:52 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
Which suggested you believed there was a difference between a conference hall and the rest of those places.
I just asked what that difference was. Shall I take it you don't actually believe in any such difference and were just being snarky?
posted by Reggie Knoble at 4:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Are you honestly shaky on the notion of a public space?
posted by Coda at 12:27 AM on March 22 [+] [!]
Previously you said
Yes, if by "office", "bar", "coffee shop", "restaurants", "park", or "street" you mean "in the row of the conference hall sitting immediately behind them in the middle of a presentation".
posted by Coda at 11:52 PM on March 21 [+] [!]
Which suggested you believed there was a difference between a conference hall and the rest of those places.
I just asked what that difference was. Shall I take it you don't actually believe in any such difference and were just being snarky?
posted by Reggie Knoble at 4:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
A woman addressed inappropriate behavior at a conference -- which both the organizers and one of the people she criticized agree with. She got fired. Every single additional detail beyond that is the justification
It's true that if you add the part about addressing behavior with the person she criticized (which she didn't do), and omit the part about taking a picture of someone without their permission and tweeting it to thousands of people (which she did), it does seem like a much simpler situation. Indeed, had the thing you describe happened, there'd be little to complain about at all. But that's not at all what happened.
Richardson's job is working with developers, using social media, and making good PR for clients. She has proven herself spectacularly bad at all three of those. She does not deserve death threats, but she absolutely deserves to be fired.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 4:37 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
It's true that if you add the part about addressing behavior with the person she criticized (which she didn't do), and omit the part about taking a picture of someone without their permission and tweeting it to thousands of people (which she did), it does seem like a much simpler situation. Indeed, had the thing you describe happened, there'd be little to complain about at all. But that's not at all what happened.
Richardson's job is working with developers, using social media, and making good PR for clients. She has proven herself spectacularly bad at all three of those. She does not deserve death threats, but she absolutely deserves to be fired.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 4:37 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
The CEO of SendGrid makes a public comment on their blog.
That should pretty much put the speculation to rest, one hopes.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:39 PM on March 21, 2013
That should pretty much put the speculation to rest, one hopes.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 4:39 PM on March 21, 2013
The CEO of SendGrid makes a public comment on their blog.
Well, at the least it's good to get something official out there, so we can stop speculating if their FB/Twitter accounts were hacked.
posted by mathowie at 4:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, at the least it's good to get something official out there, so we can stop speculating if their FB/Twitter accounts were hacked.
posted by mathowie at 4:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Unless the blog was hacked. Unless this blog was hacked! Matt - is that really you?
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Richardson's job is working with developers, using social media, and making good PR for clients. She has proven herself spectacularly bad at all three of those. She does not deserve death threats, but she absolutely deserves to be fired.
I think she is very good at using social media, just not for the benefit of her clients or anyone else she works with. I am kind of impressed with how she has built a brand for herself and attracted a following using social media. At the same time, if I had a company, I would never, ever hire her or in any way use her as the public face of any endeavor.
posted by deanc at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I think she is very good at using social media, just not for the benefit of her clients or anyone else she works with. I am kind of impressed with how she has built a brand for herself and attracted a following using social media. At the same time, if I had a company, I would never, ever hire her or in any way use her as the public face of any endeavor.
posted by deanc at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
A very interesting blog post on Amanda Blum's experience interacting with Richards.
I wanted to nth other commenters and say that this post is a really interesting read. She comes at it with a disclosed personal distaste for Richards, but is still fair and balanced and productive in her analysis.
I do want to point out that the first comment is honest to god a comment that says "Why do women think getting death threats and being called names is bad?" But... yeah.
posted by Phire at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I wanted to nth other commenters and say that this post is a really interesting read. She comes at it with a disclosed personal distaste for Richards, but is still fair and balanced and productive in her analysis.
I do want to point out that the first comment is honest to god a comment that says "Why do women think getting death threats and being called names is bad?" But... yeah.
posted by Phire at 4:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
If you are at a conference wearing a company t-shirt and your badge says "sponsor". Then you really should expect strangers will come up and talk to you. Your company didn't spend all that money so you could stand around running your gams with your buddies in the next cubical.
posted by humanfont at 4:47 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by humanfont at 4:47 PM on March 21, 2013
At the same time, if I had a company, I would never, ever hire her or in any way use her as the public face of any endeavor.
Why though? I mean, if you go back to before this happened, and you have a role in your company for a public face, and there's someone that made a name for themselves on Twitter and are really good at social media, wouldn't you hire them for a social media-heavy role at a company?
posted by mathowie at 4:51 PM on March 21, 2013
Why though? I mean, if you go back to before this happened, and you have a role in your company for a public face, and there's someone that made a name for themselves on Twitter and are really good at social media, wouldn't you hire them for a social media-heavy role at a company?
posted by mathowie at 4:51 PM on March 21, 2013
I would never hire her because she appears to be a sociopath.
posted by Artw at 4:55 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Artw at 4:55 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Why though? I mean, if you go back to before this happened, and you have a role in your company for a public face, and there's someone that made a name for themselves on Twitter and are really good at social media, wouldn't you hire them for a social media-heavy role at a company?
Not that I really think she should have been fired (and it goes without saying the death threats and the like are atrocious), but I wouldn't be enthusiastic about hiring someone who apparently said "@SendGrid supports me" when the controversy was breaking. It's rarely a good idea to put your employer in that situation.
posted by dsfan at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Not that I really think she should have been fired (and it goes without saying the death threats and the like are atrocious), but I wouldn't be enthusiastic about hiring someone who apparently said "@SendGrid supports me" when the controversy was breaking. It's rarely a good idea to put your employer in that situation.
posted by dsfan at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah, aside from all this mess Richards seems like a competent marketing employee. Like I said before, people seem to think it's somehow cool to trash-talk people in marketing but whatever. They have a job to do and most companies wouldn't survive without them. I don't know about her a as developer evangelist per se, but I have my own biases in that regard.
I would never hire her because she appears to be a sociopath.
Marketing people are not like developers. And that's OK.
posted by GuyZero at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2013
I would never hire her because she appears to be a sociopath.
Marketing people are not like developers. And that's OK.
posted by GuyZero at 4:57 PM on March 21, 2013
there's someone that made a name for themselves on Twitter and are really good at social media, wouldn't you hire them for a social media-heavy role at a company?
I feel, because someone who's good at making a name for themselves isn't necessary going to know how to appropriately represent your company. You need to keep that stuff separate. Very separate. Especially if you're going to start using your fame to start throwing your weight around, fighting your individual battles from the same account you "evangelize" for your employer. Surely, the ability to attract Twitter followers isn't the sole qualification to be a professional marketer, otherwise horse_ebooks would have gainful employment by now.
posted by Jimbob at 5:00 PM on March 21, 2013
I feel, because someone who's good at making a name for themselves isn't necessary going to know how to appropriately represent your company. You need to keep that stuff separate. Very separate. Especially if you're going to start using your fame to start throwing your weight around, fighting your individual battles from the same account you "evangelize" for your employer. Surely, the ability to attract Twitter followers isn't the sole qualification to be a professional marketer, otherwise horse_ebooks would have gainful employment by now.
posted by Jimbob at 5:00 PM on March 21, 2013
Why though? I mean, if you go back to before this happened, and you have a role in your company for a public face, and there's someone that made a name for themselves on Twitter and are really good at social media, wouldn't you hire them for a social media-heavy role at a company?
I'm guessing that deanc is probably referring to not hiring her at this point in time, as she has shown herself to be unaware of how particular uses of social media can be inappropriate.
posted by SpacemanStix at 5:00 PM on March 21, 2013
I'm guessing that deanc is probably referring to not hiring her at this point in time, as she has shown herself to be unaware of how particular uses of social media can be inappropriate.
posted by SpacemanStix at 5:00 PM on March 21, 2013
A developer evangelist is a developer who can sit down with developers and exain to them how to use your products SDK. You have to be able to write code, write copy and sell. They are rare creatures who can span marketing and development.
posted by humanfont at 5:01 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 5:01 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
That CEO announcement confirms something I have been suspecting for a long time.
We really need another term for "public shaming". For real, we're wearing a groove in those words.
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
We really need another term for "public shaming". For real, we're wearing a groove in those words.
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:08 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I would never hire her because I'm not in management, and anyway, we're a non-profit so we're kinda tight on budget right now.
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 5:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
You know, I'm mildly against Ms. Richard's handling of the whole situation; I do think she knowingly made it into a high-drama event, when it absolutely did not merit any reaction of the sort. As far as I'm concerned, the offenders at PyCon stuck a toe over the line, and it's putting those toes over the line that makes so much humor work. (Even so, the line they were actually sticking their toes over was the not the line she was accusing them of violating.) That guy being fired, as a consequence, was unjust and wrong.
But then the Internet Hate Squad getting her fired as well? What a nightmare. The terrorists win.
SendGrid: even if she was in the wrong, which I think she was to some degree, she needed you at her back, and you comprehensively let her down. Women will now be that much more afraid to speak up when things actually ARE harassing, because they'll know their careers will be destroyed if they do.
You screwed that up bad. Of all the choices you could have made, that was the worst possible one.
posted by Malor at 5:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
But then the Internet Hate Squad getting her fired as well? What a nightmare. The terrorists win.
SendGrid: even if she was in the wrong, which I think she was to some degree, she needed you at her back, and you comprehensively let her down. Women will now be that much more afraid to speak up when things actually ARE harassing, because they'll know their careers will be destroyed if they do.
You screwed that up bad. Of all the choices you could have made, that was the worst possible one.
posted by Malor at 5:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
I think the Internet should have gotten fired.
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 5:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
posted by It's Raining Florence Henderson at 5:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
You can't fire the Internet, because it quits!
posted by Jimbob at 5:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [23 favorites]
posted by Jimbob at 5:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [23 favorites]
The Internet got fired. Fired up.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:15 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Jimbob: You can't fire the Internet, because it quits!
It would have been so great if that was the last post, so that in the future the next thing that came after was 'This thread is archived and is closed to new comments'.
Not that it's time for the thread to end or anything, but that would have been a perfect last post for it.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
It would have been so great if that was the last post, so that in the future the next thing that came after was 'This thread is archived and is closed to new comments'.
Not that it's time for the thread to end or anything, but that would have been a perfect last post for it.
posted by Mitrovarr at 5:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
from the PyCon Code of Conduct
This Code of Conduct was forked from the example policy from the Geek Feminism wiki
in other words, they forked the Geek Feminism wiki's policy.
posted by cupcake1337 at 5:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
This Code of Conduct was forked from the example policy from the Geek Feminism wiki
in other words, they forked the Geek Feminism wiki's policy.
posted by cupcake1337 at 5:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
wait, how can the internet get fired? - i thought we all worked for IT
posted by pyramid termite at 5:22 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by pyramid termite at 5:22 PM on March 21, 2013
Of all the choices you could have made, that was the worst possible one.
I think the real mistake on their part was sitting quiet for too long. By the time they acted the whole thing had become a perfect shitstorm (and Adria Richards had nailed her colors to the mast and sailed, like the HMS Bounty, straight into the middle of it). I think if they'd jumped on it a.s.a.p, when it was first blowing up, had asked Adria to apologize for the twitter photo and to cease to engage in any way with the controversy they could then have come out with a "We feel that she acted inappropriately in moving so rapidly to make this situation public, but we support her right to respond to unwelcome comments at the conference" statement. As I said above, it would have been especially useful if they could have somehow negotiated with PlayHaven to get the fired guy reinstalled. Then it would just have been a matter of hunkering down until some other issue took over the twitterverse.
But having failed to jump on it early, and with Adria Richards having continued to make this issue pretty much the only thing anyone could possibly think about in association with her name and her work, I'm not sure they had any good alternatives left to firing her. They have a responsibility to all of their employees, after all, not just to her. If keeping her on would have meant losing contracts and losing work it's asking an awful lot of them to do it in the name of "not letting the MRA assholes feel like they won a round."
posted by yoink at 5:23 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think the real mistake on their part was sitting quiet for too long. By the time they acted the whole thing had become a perfect shitstorm (and Adria Richards had nailed her colors to the mast and sailed, like the HMS Bounty, straight into the middle of it). I think if they'd jumped on it a.s.a.p, when it was first blowing up, had asked Adria to apologize for the twitter photo and to cease to engage in any way with the controversy they could then have come out with a "We feel that she acted inappropriately in moving so rapidly to make this situation public, but we support her right to respond to unwelcome comments at the conference" statement. As I said above, it would have been especially useful if they could have somehow negotiated with PlayHaven to get the fired guy reinstalled. Then it would just have been a matter of hunkering down until some other issue took over the twitterverse.
But having failed to jump on it early, and with Adria Richards having continued to make this issue pretty much the only thing anyone could possibly think about in association with her name and her work, I'm not sure they had any good alternatives left to firing her. They have a responsibility to all of their employees, after all, not just to her. If keeping her on would have meant losing contracts and losing work it's asking an awful lot of them to do it in the name of "not letting the MRA assholes feel like they won a round."
posted by yoink at 5:23 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I would never hire her because she appears to be a sociopath.
You know, that's a really blunt assessment. But it's hard to not at least consider and it reminds of a comment that Jessamyn made earlier in response to some guy.
The stress of having to deal with a constant barrage of sexism can drive someone nuts and it's not surprising when they lash out, especially over a comparatively small incident. That doesn't excuse Richards' behavior at all, but she deserves a bit of sympathy for losing it. None of us are perfect or could be when dealing with years of low and high key sexism (or racism or another 'ism). We all mistakes, hopefully everyone personally involved in this situation has learned and the internet mob can move on.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
You know, that's a really blunt assessment. But it's hard to not at least consider and it reminds of a comment that Jessamyn made earlier in response to some guy.
But part if being professional keeping your emotions in check and acting like a professional.Richards described how she had already dealt with a much more offensive comment earlier in the day, with little success. In that instance she was calm and tried to use it as teaching moment, but was met with a brick wall. Fast forward to the two guys cracking jokes behind her and it sounds like she'd had enough and wasn't going to take another damn inch of shit, even if it was seemingly small incident.
And that's the argument that gets trotted out consistently to women who have a difficult time dealing with sexism, harassment and general hurf durfery in the workplace: you're not being professional if you make a thing about it. Because professional has been outlined as putting up with this sort of thing. And somehow that needs to change.
The stress of having to deal with a constant barrage of sexism can drive someone nuts and it's not surprising when they lash out, especially over a comparatively small incident. That doesn't excuse Richards' behavior at all, but she deserves a bit of sympathy for losing it. None of us are perfect or could be when dealing with years of low and high key sexism (or racism or another 'ism). We all mistakes, hopefully everyone personally involved in this situation has learned and the internet mob can move on.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 5:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
it was call the Stasi
And now we are all Stasi. Everything you say will most definitely be used against you.
I think the real lesson here is that tech people like to think they're special snowflakes, with all their fine gadgets and Instagram accounts and social-media skills and airplane tickets and groovy conferences -- WITH NAME BADGES! -- and exciting job titles like "Evangelist" -- whoa, just like Steve Wozniak! -- but in reality you're all just ditch-diggers like the rest of us, able to be fired on a whim because the boss's coffee got cold. We're all just pieces of dumb meat. And all your fancy social media, and all your whispered jokes and asides, and everything you have or are, belongs to the people who tell you what to do.
Two dopes tell a stupid joke or two, another twit takes a picture of it, a thousand little shits fire up their DDOS machine, and the whole world burns down because of it.
Good going, all. Tomorrow I'm going to kill a puppy. I assume you'll do your part and turn me in.
posted by Fnarf at 5:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
And now we are all Stasi. Everything you say will most definitely be used against you.
I think the real lesson here is that tech people like to think they're special snowflakes, with all their fine gadgets and Instagram accounts and social-media skills and airplane tickets and groovy conferences -- WITH NAME BADGES! -- and exciting job titles like "Evangelist" -- whoa, just like Steve Wozniak! -- but in reality you're all just ditch-diggers like the rest of us, able to be fired on a whim because the boss's coffee got cold. We're all just pieces of dumb meat. And all your fancy social media, and all your whispered jokes and asides, and everything you have or are, belongs to the people who tell you what to do.
Two dopes tell a stupid joke or two, another twit takes a picture of it, a thousand little shits fire up their DDOS machine, and the whole world burns down because of it.
Good going, all. Tomorrow I'm going to kill a puppy. I assume you'll do your part and turn me in.
posted by Fnarf at 5:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
This Code of Conduct was forked from the example policy from the Geek Feminism wiki
Huh. What a perfect example of the "single entendre" use of the term--and of its endless potential for "double entendre" misunderstandings.
posted by yoink at 5:28 PM on March 21, 2013
Huh. What a perfect example of the "single entendre" use of the term--and of its endless potential for "double entendre" misunderstandings.
posted by yoink at 5:28 PM on March 21, 2013
The second post by the CEO is obvious damage control because the first post looked like a pretty clear case of retaliation. This entire situation has been horribly managed.
posted by humanfont at 5:39 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by humanfont at 5:39 PM on March 21, 2013
The guy who was actually rather contrite about having inadvertadly offended someone despite that person causing significant unwarranted trouble for them, and isn't claiming to be Joan of Ark on the Internet and to my knowledge doesn't go through this whole cycle every six months?
Because he does not appear to be a sociopath.
It's a sick sad world, I know.
posted by Artw at 5:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Because he does not appear to be a sociopath.
It's a sick sad world, I know.
posted by Artw at 5:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I wanted to nth other commenters and say that this post is a really interesting read. She comes at it with a disclosed personal distaste for Richards, but is still fair and balanced and productive in her analysis.
I'd go so far as to say that's the definitive take on the subject. Richards behaved like a complete asshole, but Jesus Christ, Internet Hate Machine: if you're making me want to side with a complete asshole, maybe you should reconsider your tactics.
posted by Amanojaku at 5:42 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'd go so far as to say that's the definitive take on the subject. Richards behaved like a complete asshole, but Jesus Christ, Internet Hate Machine: if you're making me want to side with a complete asshole, maybe you should reconsider your tactics.
posted by Amanojaku at 5:42 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
The "fork" argument here is kind of weird to me. Of course "fork" has a perfectly valid and nonsexual meaning. And of course they could have been using it to mean that. But it's not a question of whether the word in isolation has a nonsexual meaning or not. According to (whoever wrote the thing that claims to be by the fired guy), it was being used as "I'd fork his repo".
The phraseology "I'd X his/her Y", where "X" and "Y" could be basically anything, is almost cliché salaciousness. It's almost completely unbelievable to me that this particular phrase about forking entered their lexicon without knowledge of this fact, or even to a large degree because of this fact. I don't doubt that they could have been using it to mean something nonsexual; in fact it sounds astronomically more likely to me that they meant "I like that guy's code" than "I'd fuck him". But it's intentionally loaded phraseology regardless of, and in addition to, its meaning, whatever its meaning in any particular context might be.
posted by Flunkie at 5:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The phraseology "I'd X his/her Y", where "X" and "Y" could be basically anything, is almost cliché salaciousness. It's almost completely unbelievable to me that this particular phrase about forking entered their lexicon without knowledge of this fact, or even to a large degree because of this fact. I don't doubt that they could have been using it to mean something nonsexual; in fact it sounds astronomically more likely to me that they meant "I like that guy's code" than "I'd fuck him". But it's intentionally loaded phraseology regardless of, and in addition to, its meaning, whatever its meaning in any particular context might be.
posted by Flunkie at 5:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Maybe there is some kind of upside to this whole mess. I don't know, some Conservation of Trainwrecks law may exist, so some other grotesque event now won't happen.
posted by thelonius at 5:46 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by thelonius at 5:46 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
a pretty clear case of retaliation
What are they supposed to have been "retaliating" against? I don't quite get this. She didn't attack or badmouth them.
Jesus Christ, Internet Hate Machine: if you're making me want to side with a complete asshole, maybe you should reconsider your tactics.
I don't know what useful lesson of any kind we can draw from the "Internet Hate Machine"--I mean, it's not surprise, sadly, to anyone that they're out there and that they'd pounce on a situation like this. They're obviously sick, disgusting pigs and it's also obviously completely appalling that Adria Richards has been subject to the kind of vicious and sexist harassment that has taken place. But I'm not sure it makes any sense for anyone involved to recalibrate their judgments about what basically happened here on a kind of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" basis. These are related but separable issues and I think it makes most sense to keep them as separate as possible.
posted by yoink at 5:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
What are they supposed to have been "retaliating" against? I don't quite get this. She didn't attack or badmouth them.
Jesus Christ, Internet Hate Machine: if you're making me want to side with a complete asshole, maybe you should reconsider your tactics.
I don't know what useful lesson of any kind we can draw from the "Internet Hate Machine"--I mean, it's not surprise, sadly, to anyone that they're out there and that they'd pounce on a situation like this. They're obviously sick, disgusting pigs and it's also obviously completely appalling that Adria Richards has been subject to the kind of vicious and sexist harassment that has taken place. But I'm not sure it makes any sense for anyone involved to recalibrate their judgments about what basically happened here on a kind of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" basis. These are related but separable issues and I think it makes most sense to keep them as separate as possible.
posted by yoink at 5:48 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
Maybe the little girl will grow up in a world full of casual sexism AND office psychopaths.
posted by Artw at 5:49 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 5:49 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I feel like "sociopath" and "psychopath" migh be starting a little high. If we are making amateur psychiatric diagnoses, maybe we should start at "compulsive hand-washer" or "alektorophobe" and work up?
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:55 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:55 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
I'd expect she'll find another job lickety split, yes she's an asshat, but that's useful for some roles. I merely worried that Boulder sounds like a smallish place, so she might need to move, maybe inconveniencing her personal life, real estate, etc., that sucks. Apparently Boulder has a quarter million though, so she's probably okay. PlayHaven is based in San Francisco and Portland, so presumably the PlayHaven guy should manage okay. It'll suck mightily losing a couple months to the unpaid full-time job of job hunting, but hey. As I mentioned upthread, this could've gone so much worse for Adria Richards if she'd done this in a country with ridiculous libel laws, like England.
posted by jeffburdges at 5:57 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 5:57 PM on March 21, 2013
The phraseology "I'd X his/her Y", where "X" and "Y" could be basically anything, is almost cliché salaciousness.
But only if said in a particular tone or with a wink or whatever. After all "I'd like to X his/her/your Y" is also one of those formulations we use all the time in ordinary life. "I'd like to mend your sweater," "I'd like to see his play," "I'd like to catch her show" etc. etc. etc. Say any of those with a leer and the emphasis on the pronoun and they sound dirty. But in 99.9% of the cases where we use it it's entirely innocent and sounds to all involved entirely innocent.
The reason the "fork his repo" sounds so obviously dirty to most of us is simply that we don't have any "normal" context for "fork" used this way (or for "repo" come to that). It's a trade-specific term, so there's pretty much nowhere for our minds to go but the "hurr hurr hurr" route. But obviously for the participants in that fatal conversation that's not the case. "Forking" in the technical sense is an everyday, utterly banal term. So the issue is not "is it possible to read this as a double entendre"--obviously it's only all too easy. The issue is "is it plausible that the argument made by the fired guy that she completely misconstrued the tone and intent of the comment is true?" And I think the answer to that is "yes." They may have been using the term in an entirely innocent way, and she simply misunderstood it.
posted by yoink at 5:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
But only if said in a particular tone or with a wink or whatever. After all "I'd like to X his/her/your Y" is also one of those formulations we use all the time in ordinary life. "I'd like to mend your sweater," "I'd like to see his play," "I'd like to catch her show" etc. etc. etc. Say any of those with a leer and the emphasis on the pronoun and they sound dirty. But in 99.9% of the cases where we use it it's entirely innocent and sounds to all involved entirely innocent.
The reason the "fork his repo" sounds so obviously dirty to most of us is simply that we don't have any "normal" context for "fork" used this way (or for "repo" come to that). It's a trade-specific term, so there's pretty much nowhere for our minds to go but the "hurr hurr hurr" route. But obviously for the participants in that fatal conversation that's not the case. "Forking" in the technical sense is an everyday, utterly banal term. So the issue is not "is it possible to read this as a double entendre"--obviously it's only all too easy. The issue is "is it plausible that the argument made by the fired guy that she completely misconstrued the tone and intent of the comment is true?" And I think the answer to that is "yes." They may have been using the term in an entirely innocent way, and she simply misunderstood it.
posted by yoink at 5:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I do have a normal context for fork and repo being used in this way, and it's anything but obvious to me that the participants in that fatal conversation are any different with respect to either that or the hurr hurr hurr route.
posted by Flunkie at 6:04 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Flunkie at 6:04 PM on March 21, 2013
So is Github itself an oppressive environment for women or not?
posted by Jimbob at 6:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Jimbob at 6:09 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The debate about whether or not "fork his repo" is dirty or not is a bit silly to me, because with only the least bit of prompting human beings will find anything smutty.
There was a comedian (George Carlin?) who used to do a bit where he would engage with an audience member in the front row and say "How's your thing?", with just the smallest amount of "you know what I'm talking about" in his manner, and everyone would laugh because it sounded smutty.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:23 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
There was a comedian (George Carlin?) who used to do a bit where he would engage with an audience member in the front row and say "How's your thing?", with just the smallest amount of "you know what I'm talking about" in his manner, and everyone would laugh because it sounded smutty.
posted by benito.strauss at 6:23 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
... she should have known what would happen when she posted that photo.
And, then later (many hours after the conference event) she decided to make a blog post outlining the entire incident. She consciously decided to take things a step further (after the conference folks had already spoken with the two developers ... and they apologized and ackowledged their involvment). She knew what she was doing. She thought she was "in the right," " fighting for a cause." Or, she was so out-of-touch and tone-deaf as to the potential of the firestorm that was to come. I would never entrust her to be involved in any of my company's online/social media endeavors ever.
posted by ericb at 6:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
And, then later (many hours after the conference event) she decided to make a blog post outlining the entire incident. She consciously decided to take things a step further (after the conference folks had already spoken with the two developers ... and they apologized and ackowledged their involvment). She knew what she was doing. She thought she was "in the right," " fighting for a cause." Or, she was so out-of-touch and tone-deaf as to the potential of the firestorm that was to come. I would never entrust her to be involved in any of my company's online/social media endeavors ever.
posted by ericb at 6:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [9 favorites]
She was doing it for the children.
posted by klangklangston at 6:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by klangklangston at 6:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
"I'd go so far as to say that's the definitive take on the subject. Richards behaved like a complete asshole, but Jesus Christ, Internet Hate Machine: if you're making me want to side with a complete asshole, maybe you should reconsider your tactics."
No doubt. It's like, "You gave me a papercut? BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!"
What she deserved was, "Yeah, sexism sucks, but the way you handled it was kinda classless, and it came across as more about your ego than solving the problem. Maybe next time try this." She deserved the same level of mild reprimand that the guys did, and no one should have been fired.
(If this standard was applied to any of the jobs I've ever held, everyone in every one of them would have been fired.)
posted by klangklangston at 6:31 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
No doubt. It's like, "You gave me a papercut? BURN YOUR HOUSE DOWN!"
What she deserved was, "Yeah, sexism sucks, but the way you handled it was kinda classless, and it came across as more about your ego than solving the problem. Maybe next time try this." She deserved the same level of mild reprimand that the guys did, and no one should have been fired.
(If this standard was applied to any of the jobs I've ever held, everyone in every one of them would have been fired.)
posted by klangklangston at 6:31 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Screw 'public shaming.' What about 'dog shaming.'
Think about the dogs!
posted by ericb at 6:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Think about the dogs!
posted by ericb at 6:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The reason the "fork his repo" sounds so obviously dirty to most of us is simply that we don't have any "normal" context for "fork" used this way (or for "repo" come to that). It's a trade-specific term, so there's pretty much nowhere for our minds to go but the "hurr hurr hurr" route.
I don't know if this is how those two publicly shamed guys were talking, but to muddy the waters a bit, Github used to have a caption under a progress bar that said "hardcore forking action" when you forked a repo.
I guess the waters were already pretty muddy.
posted by ignignokt at 6:39 PM on March 21, 2013
I don't know if this is how those two publicly shamed guys were talking, but to muddy the waters a bit, Github used to have a caption under a progress bar that said "hardcore forking action" when you forked a repo.
I guess the waters were already pretty muddy.
posted by ignignokt at 6:39 PM on March 21, 2013
So is Github itself an oppressive environment for women or not?
This has been discussed in this thread. Some good posts to look at include this one (about the "hardcore forking action" gag), this look at the traditionally negative connotation of "fork" in the FOSS community, and olinerd's excellent comparison of the language of hardware engineering, here. Also, there's quite a good joke about why double entendres are called double entendres, here.
One of the interesting things about these environments - FOSS and hardware engineering - is that they were so overwhelmingly male for so long that a whole language and culture evolved before there was a meaningful female presence in them - or at least a meaningful recognized female presence. So, there's a process going on of working out what these already-evolved forms mean to and for women, which is ongoing and by no means painless.
You can see something similar happening with gaming, where some men are responding very badly to the entrance of women into "their" world, both as players and as producers. I've mentioned the treatment of Jennifer Hepler, above. Anita Sarkeesian got something similar. This has all happened before, and this will all happen again. Over time, there will hopefully be a general upward motion, but the people with the rape and death threats, and indeed the DDoS attacks, are probably not going to follow this path upward. That's a shame, and working out what to do with a group of people who think this is a useful way to interact with the world - who are, in effect, damaged beyond easy repair - is a real problem, and a bigger one than whether or not "fork" is an intrinsically funny word. And, speaking personally, I suspect that giving them the sense that they succeeded in getting their target fired is not going to help.
(If I were a DDoSing troll right now, I'd be wondering what else I could get SendGrid to do. A little dance, maybe?)
Regarding the humor inherent in "fork", I think it's best to consult an expert.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
This has been discussed in this thread. Some good posts to look at include this one (about the "hardcore forking action" gag), this look at the traditionally negative connotation of "fork" in the FOSS community, and olinerd's excellent comparison of the language of hardware engineering, here. Also, there's quite a good joke about why double entendres are called double entendres, here.
One of the interesting things about these environments - FOSS and hardware engineering - is that they were so overwhelmingly male for so long that a whole language and culture evolved before there was a meaningful female presence in them - or at least a meaningful recognized female presence. So, there's a process going on of working out what these already-evolved forms mean to and for women, which is ongoing and by no means painless.
You can see something similar happening with gaming, where some men are responding very badly to the entrance of women into "their" world, both as players and as producers. I've mentioned the treatment of Jennifer Hepler, above. Anita Sarkeesian got something similar. This has all happened before, and this will all happen again. Over time, there will hopefully be a general upward motion, but the people with the rape and death threats, and indeed the DDoS attacks, are probably not going to follow this path upward. That's a shame, and working out what to do with a group of people who think this is a useful way to interact with the world - who are, in effect, damaged beyond easy repair - is a real problem, and a bigger one than whether or not "fork" is an intrinsically funny word. And, speaking personally, I suspect that giving them the sense that they succeeded in getting their target fired is not going to help.
(If I were a DDoSing troll right now, I'd be wondering what else I could get SendGrid to do. A little dance, maybe?)
Regarding the humor inherent in "fork", I think it's best to consult an expert.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:43 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
The reason the "fork his repo" sounds so obviously dirty to most of us is simply that we don't have any "normal" context for "fork" used this way (or for "repo" come to that).
I've been using GitHub for five years and git for at least six and for God's sake I even spoke at GitHub's one and only conference and I would think two guys at a conference chuckling and saying "fork his repo" were probably being jokey about it. What context am I missing?
posted by Coda at 6:46 PM on March 21, 2013
I've been using GitHub for five years and git for at least six and for God's sake I even spoke at GitHub's one and only conference and I would think two guys at a conference chuckling and saying "fork his repo" were probably being jokey about it. What context am I missing?
posted by Coda at 6:46 PM on March 21, 2013
Companies shouldn't ever fire employees as a result of DDoS attacks, and people who participate in them should be criminally prosecuted, although perhaps the punishment should be relatively light. If a group was damaging or disrupting a business in any other way to pressure them to fire an employee this would be obvious to everyone.
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 6:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by L.P. Hatecraft at 6:50 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
So... Everyone is award of the origins of the word Git, right?
posted by Artw at 6:52 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 6:52 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Probably something about the Irish.
posted by klangklangston at 6:57 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by klangklangston at 6:57 PM on March 21, 2013
Scottish - from "get", the illegitimate offspring of a sexual liaison.
You're all fired.
posted by Artw at 7:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
You're all fired.
posted by Artw at 7:00 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Proposal: let's retire the term 'forking' and replace it with 'sporking.' What double entendres am I missing?
posted by ericb at 7:00 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by ericb at 7:00 PM on March 21, 2013
Linus Torvalds = Huge Monkees fan.
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:01 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:01 PM on March 21, 2013
So... Everyone is award of the origins of the word Git, right?
Monty Python took a lot of British English words and turned them into shibboleths of funny + smart for large parts of my generation.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:02 PM on March 21, 2013
Monty Python took a lot of British English words and turned them into shibboleths of funny + smart for large parts of my generation.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:02 PM on March 21, 2013
So... Everyone is award of the origins of the word Git, right?
No, but I heard that Linus Torvalds said that both pieces of software he's responsible for were named after him, so it must be a pretty fine upstanding term.
posted by A dead Quaker at 7:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
No, but I heard that Linus Torvalds said that both pieces of software he's responsible for were named after him, so it must be a pretty fine upstanding term.
posted by A dead Quaker at 7:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Also I just fixed a leaky toilet by adjusting the ball-cock.
posted by Artw at 7:05 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 7:05 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I just masturbated by adjusting my penis.
That didn't fix anything though.
posted by klangklangston at 7:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
That didn't fix anything though.
posted by klangklangston at 7:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
That's obscure slang for parsing XML using RegEx -you really shouldn't do that, as you might go blind.
posted by Artw at 7:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 7:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
you're sharing too much, man
posted by pyramid termite at 7:11 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by pyramid termite at 7:11 PM on March 21, 2013
Oh, fuck the MRA douchebags. Don't bring them into this. There's so much else that's more important than what loons have to say. Complete derail.
posted by five fresh fish at 7:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 7:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
What she deserved was, "Yeah, sexism sucks, but the way you handled it was kinda classless, and it came across as more about your ego than solving the problem. Maybe next time try this." She deserved the same level of mild reprimand that the guys did, and no one should have been fired.
I mentioned this further up, but the firestorm was a direct result of a lack of humility when confronted about it and digging in her heels. You can argue that it still did not deserve the response that she got, and I wouldn't disagree with that. But there's a reason why the person in this scenario who genuinely apologized did not receive a public backlash. It's not because he's male, it's because people appreciate it when they receive a genuine apology. If someone refuses to apologize, it should not be surprising that more people will try to bring it to your attention. That should be a classy endeavor, as well, but no one should be shocked that a public response is happening. It has less to do with gender issues than a lack of public respect and perceived hubris.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
I mentioned this further up, but the firestorm was a direct result of a lack of humility when confronted about it and digging in her heels. You can argue that it still did not deserve the response that she got, and I wouldn't disagree with that. But there's a reason why the person in this scenario who genuinely apologized did not receive a public backlash. It's not because he's male, it's because people appreciate it when they receive a genuine apology. If someone refuses to apologize, it should not be surprising that more people will try to bring it to your attention. That should be a classy endeavor, as well, but no one should be shocked that a public response is happening. It has less to do with gender issues than a lack of public respect and perceived hubris.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Oh, fuck the MRA douchebags. Don't bring them into this. There's so much else that's more important than what loons have to say. Complete derail.
Oh, I think MRA bullshit and swarms of Internet assholes are worthy of discussion, and they are part of this story, and of every other story like this, so that's a discussion worth having - there just doesn't seem to be a handle here to discuss it other than "this always happens and it's awful".
Oh, and Richards doesn't prove them "right" any more than they prove her right - that's just silly.
posted by Artw at 7:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Oh, I think MRA bullshit and swarms of Internet assholes are worthy of discussion, and they are part of this story, and of every other story like this, so that's a discussion worth having - there just doesn't seem to be a handle here to discuss it other than "this always happens and it's awful".
Oh, and Richards doesn't prove them "right" any more than they prove her right - that's just silly.
posted by Artw at 7:30 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
But there's a reason why the person in this scenario who genuinely apologized did not receive a public backlash. It's not because he's male, it's because people appreciate it when they receive a genuine apology. If someone refuses to apologize, it should not be surprising that more people will try to bring it to your attention. That should be a classy endeavor, as well, but no one should be shocked that a public response is happening. It has less to do with gender issues than a lack of public respect and perceived hubris.
John Scalzi: The Sort of Crap I Don't Get.
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
John Scalzi: The Sort of Crap I Don't Get.
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
John Scalzi: The Sort of Crap I Don't Get.
running order squabble fest, thanks for posting that. I just read it through, and I'll actually take that to heart as I think further about this situation.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
running order squabble fest, thanks for posting that. I just read it through, and I'll actually take that to heart as I think further about this situation.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
The problem is that the MRA douchebags won here, and I think that's a very important point. They came out of this thinking they got her fired and won the argument, and genuinely believe that there isn't a discrimination problem in the tech community (when actually it's endemic).
The problem is that Adria Richards is promoting anti-sex as a priori, which is causing problems for the rest of us that believe feminism is a cause worth fighting for, but taking the flag of anti-porn/anti-sex a la MacKinnon to publicly shame people is downright counterproductive when there are real problems here.
By associating her anti-sex hangups with a real legitimate problem, she's doing the cause a serious disservice. At conferences, a problem with "promoting porn" (Amanda Blum's blog), and with a phrase like "forking his repo". It's clear that she isn't actually anti-sex, from her jokes published on social media.
The fundamental issue at play here is somewhat interesting to me, because the MRA issue is actually central to this. On the internet, "Tumblr Social Justice" and "MRA" people on a operational/psychological perspective, are one at the same. The only difference is that the "social justice" people are on the right side of what's ethically right/correct/rational/etc. Where they are similar, however is fascinating.
Adria Richard's methods are directly related to MRA because her modus operandi is the exact same (as her methods are very "tumblr social justice"-y).
The "tumblr social justice" / "MRA" modus operandi is simple. Find someone to public shame and troll the fuck out of them. The social issue at hand is incendental, the primary focus is enjoyment from trolling. I'd argue that this trolling method is interesting because you can view it within schoolyard gender roles of trolling. It's interesting, historically trolling was very much based on direct conflict, e.g. one person beating up another person. This somewhat newer form of trolling is akin to a group a school children shittalking and ostracizing one person, bullying by making them outcasts from the social in-group. It's interesting because this is easily mapped along gender roles in a schoolyard environment, and I'd directly map that to gender roles in this situation, if it weren't for the MRA folks doing the same thing.
Note: I don't believe I'm being sexist by making this assertion, as I'm exclusively being descriptive here, NOT prescriptive. It's not an unreasonable assertion to say that how bullying occurs is mapped to gender (I would assume this occurs due to existing gender social norms/etc, but I'm just talking about what tends to happen). I'd also like to note that this type of trolling had never happened before these past few years, but it has certainly become commonplace only in the last 2-3 years. The last prominent example was the Gawker/Reddit drama, where both sides had a big campaign of social ostracization.
This new form of trolling is interesting to me because this kind of trolling is somewhat problematic for people that actually care about issues like racism and feminism, because they are real issues that must be addressed whenever it rears its ugly head. I do think she should have said something, I wouldn't even have a problem with her blogging about it. What becomes problematic is when the side you are fighting for isn't interested in convincing the other party, but for enjoyment from the process of public shaming. Her use of public shaming as a technique, deep disinterest in discussing the actual problem that she has (to convince the other party), and an outright hostile attitude towards resolving this issue makes her no different than the methods used by MRAs.
I believe both Adria Richards and the MRAs are guilty parties here, and this new form of trolling where MRA activists and tumblr-social-justice activists fight, have now bled into the real world is new and an important issue that cannot be separated out from what's going on.
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
The problem is that Adria Richards is promoting anti-sex as a priori, which is causing problems for the rest of us that believe feminism is a cause worth fighting for, but taking the flag of anti-porn/anti-sex a la MacKinnon to publicly shame people is downright counterproductive when there are real problems here.
By associating her anti-sex hangups with a real legitimate problem, she's doing the cause a serious disservice. At conferences, a problem with "promoting porn" (Amanda Blum's blog), and with a phrase like "forking his repo". It's clear that she isn't actually anti-sex, from her jokes published on social media.
The fundamental issue at play here is somewhat interesting to me, because the MRA issue is actually central to this. On the internet, "Tumblr Social Justice" and "MRA" people on a operational/psychological perspective, are one at the same. The only difference is that the "social justice" people are on the right side of what's ethically right/correct/rational/etc. Where they are similar, however is fascinating.
Adria Richard's methods are directly related to MRA because her modus operandi is the exact same (as her methods are very "tumblr social justice"-y).
The "tumblr social justice" / "MRA" modus operandi is simple. Find someone to public shame and troll the fuck out of them. The social issue at hand is incendental, the primary focus is enjoyment from trolling. I'd argue that this trolling method is interesting because you can view it within schoolyard gender roles of trolling. It's interesting, historically trolling was very much based on direct conflict, e.g. one person beating up another person. This somewhat newer form of trolling is akin to a group a school children shittalking and ostracizing one person, bullying by making them outcasts from the social in-group. It's interesting because this is easily mapped along gender roles in a schoolyard environment, and I'd directly map that to gender roles in this situation, if it weren't for the MRA folks doing the same thing.
Note: I don't believe I'm being sexist by making this assertion, as I'm exclusively being descriptive here, NOT prescriptive. It's not an unreasonable assertion to say that how bullying occurs is mapped to gender (I would assume this occurs due to existing gender social norms/etc, but I'm just talking about what tends to happen). I'd also like to note that this type of trolling had never happened before these past few years, but it has certainly become commonplace only in the last 2-3 years. The last prominent example was the Gawker/Reddit drama, where both sides had a big campaign of social ostracization.
This new form of trolling is interesting to me because this kind of trolling is somewhat problematic for people that actually care about issues like racism and feminism, because they are real issues that must be addressed whenever it rears its ugly head. I do think she should have said something, I wouldn't even have a problem with her blogging about it. What becomes problematic is when the side you are fighting for isn't interested in convincing the other party, but for enjoyment from the process of public shaming. Her use of public shaming as a technique, deep disinterest in discussing the actual problem that she has (to convince the other party), and an outright hostile attitude towards resolving this issue makes her no different than the methods used by MRAs.
I believe both Adria Richards and the MRAs are guilty parties here, and this new form of trolling where MRA activists and tumblr-social-justice activists fight, have now bled into the real world is new and an important issue that cannot be separated out from what's going on.
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [12 favorites]
These discussions always remind me of Fry saying sagaciously, "Leela, there's nothing wrong with anything." There's nothing wrong with anything women point out as sexism or harassment, essentially. Not if you think about it enough. Nothing wrong.
These guys were dumb and did something dumb which is annoying and alienating to many women in a male-dominated tech environment and which definitely does affect the way women and girls view tech and its accessibility to them. That's just the truth. If you're a man and you don't understand that, take some time to try, because it's absolutely real. I don't even know how to illustrate this-- imagine being in a workplace dominated by women where women are very often making jokes about periods and vaginas, I guess? That doesn't even touch the entrentched sexism part of the problem (which is the most gutwrenching) but it illustrates the claustrophobia part. What are you going to do? Develop menstruation envy? Start feeling like not having a vagina is making you fundamentally different from the people who lead your workplace and the way they joke and socialize? Start making jokes about periods and vaginas that sort of weirdly imply that you have one, because it's become a "symbolic phallus"? Sounds dumb but how many women say thing like "suck my dick," a whole lot, including me. I don't hear a lot of men saying, "ha, I just want to bleed all over that stupid motherfucker," for some odd reason. Doesn't give them a lot of power or social cachet.
If you're a guy and you feel like weeping over the idea of not being able to freely make penis jokes in the maximum number of environments, you are really unable to sympathize with women, who aren't allowed to freely bring up their bodies and sexual functions as an expression of humor or power nearly as often. You already get to talk about your penises pretty much all the time. Compare the number of hilarious penis jokes as general discourse on Metafilter to hilarious vagina jokes. The latter doesn't even really happen, not in the same carefree, sophomoric way. And that's not because women don't make those jokes-- my sisters and I are kind of disgusting about the number of vagina/period/tampon jokes we make to one another. But in a group environment? In an audience at a conference? When men are present, or women we don't know very well? Really not going to happen. And it's not that women are fighting for the right to do this-- it's simply that men being able to do it much more freely is a very alienating display of power, the allusion to the male body as power and a kind of default discourse about bodies. This is something I felt in my gut wwwwwwell before I was bored enough to write multiple paragraphs about it on Metafilter.
I'm kind of a rowdy loudmouth around the right kind of people, and I've been known to make an off-color joke a little too loud in the supermarket, and when an old person or a parent turns around and gives me a dirty look, I feel bad. I feel bad that I made them uncomfortable because I wasn't being tactful. I don't wave my big dongle in their face and tell them to suck it because I'm not going to let the jackboot of political correctness stomp my face forever, geez. These guys probably shouldn't have been fired but they should have been called out and told to stop being idiots. There's really no other way to address this kind of thing. Women can bring up their concerns one-on-one all day long, and that should be a part of the process, I think, but it's not going to stop the kind of people who keep wanting to do it. Why would it? Not all of these assholes are decent. Lots of people can muster an apology for things they're going to keep on doing forever unless there are consequences. Firing? No. But being told to quit being dumbasses lest there be more severe disciplinary action, yes, definitely, for sure, yes.
Which is to say that apologies are nice, but don't mean a whole lot-- a man does something dumb, he apologizes, he's brave and noble and learned from a trying experience. A woman puts up with these dumb events all her life, gets angry and does something "disproportionate," and she is a hypocritical prude who would probably kick a guy in the balls for asking her out, and there's no graceful way to exit the situation except sitting back down in the middle of rape threats and slurs and saying "yes apology accepted thank you, problem solved, will never be a systemic issue again." Basically accepting the male chivalry and humbleness (so much braver for a man to apologize! I mean, women do it all the time) we perceive in public apologies and then shutting up again.
posted by stoneandstar at 7:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [36 favorites]
These guys were dumb and did something dumb which is annoying and alienating to many women in a male-dominated tech environment and which definitely does affect the way women and girls view tech and its accessibility to them. That's just the truth. If you're a man and you don't understand that, take some time to try, because it's absolutely real. I don't even know how to illustrate this-- imagine being in a workplace dominated by women where women are very often making jokes about periods and vaginas, I guess? That doesn't even touch the entrentched sexism part of the problem (which is the most gutwrenching) but it illustrates the claustrophobia part. What are you going to do? Develop menstruation envy? Start feeling like not having a vagina is making you fundamentally different from the people who lead your workplace and the way they joke and socialize? Start making jokes about periods and vaginas that sort of weirdly imply that you have one, because it's become a "symbolic phallus"? Sounds dumb but how many women say thing like "suck my dick," a whole lot, including me. I don't hear a lot of men saying, "ha, I just want to bleed all over that stupid motherfucker," for some odd reason. Doesn't give them a lot of power or social cachet.
If you're a guy and you feel like weeping over the idea of not being able to freely make penis jokes in the maximum number of environments, you are really unable to sympathize with women, who aren't allowed to freely bring up their bodies and sexual functions as an expression of humor or power nearly as often. You already get to talk about your penises pretty much all the time. Compare the number of hilarious penis jokes as general discourse on Metafilter to hilarious vagina jokes. The latter doesn't even really happen, not in the same carefree, sophomoric way. And that's not because women don't make those jokes-- my sisters and I are kind of disgusting about the number of vagina/period/tampon jokes we make to one another. But in a group environment? In an audience at a conference? When men are present, or women we don't know very well? Really not going to happen. And it's not that women are fighting for the right to do this-- it's simply that men being able to do it much more freely is a very alienating display of power, the allusion to the male body as power and a kind of default discourse about bodies. This is something I felt in my gut wwwwwwell before I was bored enough to write multiple paragraphs about it on Metafilter.
I'm kind of a rowdy loudmouth around the right kind of people, and I've been known to make an off-color joke a little too loud in the supermarket, and when an old person or a parent turns around and gives me a dirty look, I feel bad. I feel bad that I made them uncomfortable because I wasn't being tactful. I don't wave my big dongle in their face and tell them to suck it because I'm not going to let the jackboot of political correctness stomp my face forever, geez. These guys probably shouldn't have been fired but they should have been called out and told to stop being idiots. There's really no other way to address this kind of thing. Women can bring up their concerns one-on-one all day long, and that should be a part of the process, I think, but it's not going to stop the kind of people who keep wanting to do it. Why would it? Not all of these assholes are decent. Lots of people can muster an apology for things they're going to keep on doing forever unless there are consequences. Firing? No. But being told to quit being dumbasses lest there be more severe disciplinary action, yes, definitely, for sure, yes.
Which is to say that apologies are nice, but don't mean a whole lot-- a man does something dumb, he apologizes, he's brave and noble and learned from a trying experience. A woman puts up with these dumb events all her life, gets angry and does something "disproportionate," and she is a hypocritical prude who would probably kick a guy in the balls for asking her out, and there's no graceful way to exit the situation except sitting back down in the middle of rape threats and slurs and saying "yes apology accepted thank you, problem solved, will never be a systemic issue again." Basically accepting the male chivalry and humbleness (so much braver for a man to apologize! I mean, women do it all the time) we perceive in public apologies and then shutting up again.
posted by stoneandstar at 7:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [36 favorites]
Hi everyone. I'm on the PyCon staff — I was this years' program chair, and I was involved in creating our code of conduct. I was involved in our handling of both of these events.
I'm way too burnt out to handle reading this whole thread right now, but I wanted to invite anyone who has any questions about PyCon, our code of conduct, or our handling of this situation to email me (jacob at jacobian dot org) or MeMail me. If there are particular questions in this thread that haven't been answered point me too them and I'll try to answer them, too.
posted by jacobian at 8:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [23 favorites]
I'm way too burnt out to handle reading this whole thread right now, but I wanted to invite anyone who has any questions about PyCon, our code of conduct, or our handling of this situation to email me (jacob at jacobian dot org) or MeMail me. If there are particular questions in this thread that haven't been answered point me too them and I'll try to answer them, too.
posted by jacobian at 8:02 PM on March 21, 2013 [23 favorites]
The problem is that Adria Richards is promoting anti-sex as a priori, which is causing problems for the rest of us that believe feminism is a cause worth fighting for, but taking the flag of anti-porn/anti-sex a la MacKinnon to publicly shame people is downright counterproductive when there are real problems here.
I don't know that it helps the discussion to recharacterize her position as anti-sex. She wasn't bursting into any bedrooms and telling lovers they were sinners. People have different standards for comfort with sexual innuendo in a professional environment, and we may not agree with those standards, but that doesn't mean that the other person is trying to rid the world of the wonders of whoopie.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't know that it helps the discussion to recharacterize her position as anti-sex. She wasn't bursting into any bedrooms and telling lovers they were sinners. People have different standards for comfort with sexual innuendo in a professional environment, and we may not agree with those standards, but that doesn't mean that the other person is trying to rid the world of the wonders of whoopie.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
The problem is that the MRA douchebags won here, and I think that's a very important point.
No, they didn't. Not in my books. Not in this thread. Not at Pycon. Not at all.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:07 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
No, they didn't. Not in my books. Not in this thread. Not at Pycon. Not at all.
posted by five fresh fish at 8:07 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
Thoughts from a Development Manager in NSW, Australia (excerpt):
posted by simulacra at 8:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
Some people have called out Adria [Richards'] complaint as petty; that she should have just turned around and told the guys to quit it and move on; that involving the committee and taking a photo was unwarranted.Inspired by running order squabble fest's linked Scalzi essay.
What I have realised from my months of reading is that, as white males, we very very rarely feel in a situation where we are unsafe. I’ve only really felt physically threatened 3 times in my life, and I can recount to you those incidents in specific detail. They stick with me not only because they were intense moments, but also because they are definitely not the norm - typically, I never need to give my safety a second thought. ...
The irony is here that most of us have made a similar decision to Adria in different situations - where we’ve backed down, asked someone more experienced or influential to handle a situation, because, well, it’s not worth it and the potential risks are many. If you’ve ever hit Submit on a complaint form, or marked a tweet as spam, you’ve done exactly the same thing - extracted yourself from the situation and let a higher authority handle it. ...
Codes of Conduct exist not just to enforce the most common areas where people screw up, but to educate them that these areas are likely to cause offense. ...
The important bit of this incident is [that] it gives us a real opportunity to actually challenge whether our perspective is the only valid one, and start discussing the horrible situation that lies under the surface of all this.
posted by simulacra at 8:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
stoneandstar: The problem with women and its issues w/r/t sexual capital and slut-shaming are real. I disagree that the solution is to outright prevent men from making harmless dick jokes to the point where they should be shamed on the internet for doing so.
Under that line of thinking, if I am correct in your understanding of the issue, a man saying "I'd like to fork his repo" is problematic because a woman cannot say "I'd like to fork her repo" due to slut-shaming issues.
I'm not so sure there is necessarily a problem with a joke like "I'd like to fork his repo", especially as it was a man talking about another man, the problem is that women are not afforded the ability to do the same. I think the solution absolutely should not be reduce the ability for one to make sex jokes in response, it simply buries the real problem. The solution for inequal pay isn't reduce men's pay to women's. (Note: if he was saying "I'd like to for HER repo", then it would be problematic and rapey)
Bunny Ultramod: Perhaps it's a bit too much to characterize her behavior as anti-sex, but it's easy to reach that conclusion when she publicly shamed conference hosters for "promoting porn" from a title "Getting the money shot". Being anti-porn plus being offended by a phrase "forking his repo" certainly comes off as anti-sex. Perhaps she is isn't precise in her words on what problems she has with that title, but my central point is in her methods, not on whether she's anti-sex or not. I'd certainly concede that she isn't actually anti-sex, but ostensibly more interested that conferences do not talk about sex at all.
five fresh fish: They thought they won, and that's what annoys me.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:12 PM on March 21, 2013
Under that line of thinking, if I am correct in your understanding of the issue, a man saying "I'd like to fork his repo" is problematic because a woman cannot say "I'd like to fork her repo" due to slut-shaming issues.
I'm not so sure there is necessarily a problem with a joke like "I'd like to fork his repo", especially as it was a man talking about another man, the problem is that women are not afforded the ability to do the same. I think the solution absolutely should not be reduce the ability for one to make sex jokes in response, it simply buries the real problem. The solution for inequal pay isn't reduce men's pay to women's. (Note: if he was saying "I'd like to for HER repo", then it would be problematic and rapey)
Bunny Ultramod: Perhaps it's a bit too much to characterize her behavior as anti-sex, but it's easy to reach that conclusion when she publicly shamed conference hosters for "promoting porn" from a title "Getting the money shot". Being anti-porn plus being offended by a phrase "forking his repo" certainly comes off as anti-sex. Perhaps she is isn't precise in her words on what problems she has with that title, but my central point is in her methods, not on whether she's anti-sex or not. I'd certainly concede that she isn't actually anti-sex, but ostensibly more interested that conferences do not talk about sex at all.
five fresh fish: They thought they won, and that's what annoys me.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:12 PM on March 21, 2013
No, they didn't.
Yes, they did. Who do you think ran the DDOS attack against SendGrid and got precisely the result that they demanded?
posted by dialetheia at 8:13 PM on March 21, 2013
Yes, they did. Who do you think ran the DDOS attack against SendGrid and got precisely the result that they demanded?
posted by dialetheia at 8:13 PM on March 21, 2013
'd certainly concede that she isn't actually anti-sex, but ostensibly more interested that conferences do not talk about sex at all.
During the actual conference, in a public sphere, representing their employer, in a crowd, in earshot of others, I would rather they not as well. That's not anti-sex; it's pro-work-environment-where-the-focus-in-on-work-and-not-on-dick-jokes.
Fortunately, it happens already to have been against the rules at this conference.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:16 PM on March 21, 2013
During the actual conference, in a public sphere, representing their employer, in a crowd, in earshot of others, I would rather they not as well. That's not anti-sex; it's pro-work-environment-where-the-focus-in-on-work-and-not-on-dick-jokes.
Fortunately, it happens already to have been against the rules at this conference.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:16 PM on March 21, 2013
Yes, they did. Who do you think ran the DDOS attack against SendGrid and got precisely the result that they demanded?
They definitely think they won...and they are SHOCKED by it. They really believe they are on the oppressed side of a power imbalance with feminists and that it is historic that a woman was held accountable for her actions. So, when someone asks what makes them think death/rape threats or a DDoS are an appropriate response I just don't know what to answer other than that they are very angry people who have a tenuous grasp on reality.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
They definitely think they won...and they are SHOCKED by it. They really believe they are on the oppressed side of a power imbalance with feminists and that it is historic that a woman was held accountable for her actions. So, when someone asks what makes them think death/rape threats or a DDoS are an appropriate response I just don't know what to answer other than that they are very angry people who have a tenuous grasp on reality.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Being pro-work-envrionment is very different than being a sexist bigot. I'm not disagreeing that it's unprofessional to make dick jokes.
I just don't believe the pharse "I'd like to fork his repo" is inherently sexist. Certainly not to go on a public name and shame campaign. My comment above was that very much in the style of "tumblr social activist" and "MRA" people to do a public name and shame, and her methods were very much in a similar style.
Her having fun trolling MRA bigots is all fun and games, but it's clear she's counterproductive to the issues she claims to care about.
My point isn't whether dick jokes are appropriate, if you want, you can ignore I said that. The larger issue is with "tumblr-social-justice" and "MRA" types using schoolyard social ostracization as a somewhat new technique of social bullying. This is a pretty new social phenomenon that has been brewing for a while, and it looks like it's only going to get bigger. The MRA types now think not only they're in the right, but they can get results through their "social activism" (see: trolling via ostracization) -- that's a problem.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I just don't believe the pharse "I'd like to fork his repo" is inherently sexist. Certainly not to go on a public name and shame campaign. My comment above was that very much in the style of "tumblr social activist" and "MRA" people to do a public name and shame, and her methods were very much in a similar style.
Her having fun trolling MRA bigots is all fun and games, but it's clear she's counterproductive to the issues she claims to care about.
My point isn't whether dick jokes are appropriate, if you want, you can ignore I said that. The larger issue is with "tumblr-social-justice" and "MRA" types using schoolyard social ostracization as a somewhat new technique of social bullying. This is a pretty new social phenomenon that has been brewing for a while, and it looks like it's only going to get bigger. The MRA types now think not only they're in the right, but they can get results through their "social activism" (see: trolling via ostracization) -- that's a problem.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Adria Richard's methods are directly related to MRA because her modus operandi is the exact same (as her methods are very "tumblr social justice"-y).
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also, which is not exactly how the MRAs have been behaving about her job.
And, also, I don't think she threatened to rape or kill anyone, or launched any DDoS attacks... there seems to me to be a considerable space between "she handled that situation badly" and "she behaved just like the people posting her address and threatening to kill her".
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also, which is not exactly how the MRAs have been behaving about her job.
And, also, I don't think she threatened to rape or kill anyone, or launched any DDoS attacks... there seems to me to be a considerable space between "she handled that situation badly" and "she behaved just like the people posting her address and threatening to kill her".
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:27 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Her having fun trolling MRA bigots is all fun and games
I'd rather we not make presumptions about her intent, which describing her actions as "trolling" does, and I'd rather we not make assumptions about her feelings about sex, if you don't mind. I will not be entertaining that discussion anymore, as it is all conjecture, and especially unpleasant conjecture at that.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'd rather we not make presumptions about her intent, which describing her actions as "trolling" does, and I'd rather we not make assumptions about her feelings about sex, if you don't mind. I will not be entertaining that discussion anymore, as it is all conjecture, and especially unpleasant conjecture at that.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 8:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
running order squabble fest: Oh for sure the MRA types are more scummy than the tumblr-social-justice types. However, her intention of posting the pictures of people were clearly to shame them. She did want them to face some form of personal punishment. She was attacking their identity online, the fallout was bigger than what she intended. She was playing a game of ruin-the-other-person's-reputation, and someone got hurt. However, her intention WAS to hurt their identity, what actually happened (them getting fired) isn't as relevant to me as her intentions.
Bunny Ultramod: Sure, I agree, her issue in this particular case is definitely that people should not talk about sex at conferences. I'd like to note that the only "intent" I care about is her similarity to MRA-vs-TumblrSocialJustice as her behavior is very much that of publicly naming and shaming, and it's the same process that tumblr-social-justice activists as well as MRAs use. Considering her issue and process is the same, and the retaliation of MRAs is the same, it's reasonable to conclude that the tumblr-social-justice vs. reddit-MRAs issue have bled into the real world again.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:34 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Bunny Ultramod: Sure, I agree, her issue in this particular case is definitely that people should not talk about sex at conferences. I'd like to note that the only "intent" I care about is her similarity to MRA-vs-TumblrSocialJustice as her behavior is very much that of publicly naming and shaming, and it's the same process that tumblr-social-justice activists as well as MRAs use. Considering her issue and process is the same, and the retaliation of MRAs is the same, it's reasonable to conclude that the tumblr-social-justice vs. reddit-MRAs issue have bled into the real world again.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:34 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
She got pretty deep in the weeds with some critics on Twitter after the fact. I would definitely not call it trolling, but I think linking the "White Male Easy Mode" stuff at an MRA is one of those things that while not trolling will have functionally the same result for that audience. They won't be appreciating the nuance. I wouldn't be surprised if getting into those kinds of arguments while Tweeting that her company still supported her contributed to their final decision.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:35 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by Drinky Die at 8:35 PM on March 21, 2013
The problem is that the MRA douchebags won here, and I think that's a very important point.
Nah. The logic of "we must not give in to terrorism" is stupid. The fact that terrorist groups wanted the US to leave Iraq is not a good reason to stay in Iraq. The fact that a lot of assholes wanted this horrible sociopath to be fired is not a good reason to regret the firing of this horrible sociopath.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 8:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Nah. The logic of "we must not give in to terrorism" is stupid. The fact that terrorist groups wanted the US to leave Iraq is not a good reason to stay in Iraq. The fact that a lot of assholes wanted this horrible sociopath to be fired is not a good reason to regret the firing of this horrible sociopath.
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 8:39 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Considering her issue and process is the same, and the retaliation of MRAs is the same, it's reasonable to conclude that the tumblr-social-justice vs. reddit-MRAs issue have bled into the real world again.
Certainly, if you consider something that is clearly not the case to be the case, then... yes, it is reasonable to conclude something based on that consideration. I'm not totally sure how useful that is, though, in relation to the situation as it is.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:39 PM on March 21, 2013
Certainly, if you consider something that is clearly not the case to be the case, then... yes, it is reasonable to conclude something based on that consideration. I'm not totally sure how useful that is, though, in relation to the situation as it is.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:39 PM on March 21, 2013
To me, attention-seeking-behavior through social ostricization is pretty trolly.
I tried to differentiate this new form of attack from previous personal individual antisocial behavior. Trolling used to be exclusively one person annoys another or generally makes their life miserable for no good reason other than to be mean. It's equivalent to beating someone else up in the schoolyard.
This new form of trolling via social ostraciziation is more interesting because the parties involved believe their cause is right and just. Much like how people who ostracize an individual for being an "annoying personality" in the schoolyard believe they are in the right for doing so.
It's not unreasonable to claim that the second is becoming VERY common on the internet. It's also clear that her methods are the same, and the MRAs response is the same.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I tried to differentiate this new form of attack from previous personal individual antisocial behavior. Trolling used to be exclusively one person annoys another or generally makes their life miserable for no good reason other than to be mean. It's equivalent to beating someone else up in the schoolyard.
This new form of trolling via social ostraciziation is more interesting because the parties involved believe their cause is right and just. Much like how people who ostracize an individual for being an "annoying personality" in the schoolyard believe they are in the right for doing so.
It's not unreasonable to claim that the second is becoming VERY common on the internet. It's also clear that her methods are the same, and the MRAs response is the same.
I'm not totally sure how useful that is, though, in relation to the situation as it is.It's useful because when you look at this issue within the lens of "tumblr-social-justice" vs "MRA", it's bleeding into the real world again, and will happen more and more. It's interesting to think about this as an issue to look out for and how to react to this.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:45 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
ThatFuzzyBastard: I think we're in agreement, I also think that she should be fired. My point is that the MRAs are relevant here, not that they should be catered to, but that we need to think about how to react to situations like these in the future in a smarter way, because at the end of the day the MRAs think they won via their shitty methods.
It becomes even more volatile when the person on "your side" isn't acting in good faith and isn't turing-test different from looking like a troll. This conflicted feeling is the same that I felt during the whole Gawker/Reddit fiasco, and I'm concerned that this will blow up even worse next time.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:52 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It becomes even more volatile when the person on "your side" isn't acting in good faith and isn't turing-test different from looking like a troll. This conflicted feeling is the same that I felt during the whole Gawker/Reddit fiasco, and I'm concerned that this will blow up even worse next time.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:52 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Trolling used to be exclusively one person annoys another or generally makes their life miserable for no good reason other than to be mean.
That's not at all what trolling used to be. Trolling used to be posting deliberately provocative content to newsgroups in order to attract responses from as many people as possible. It's decayed to just meaning harassment and abuse. I do not think you have a model here which is closely related to the history of Internet interaction.
What I do think you have is a theory (the tumblr social justice types are just like the MRA types), and you're trying to fit the available evidence of this case to support that theory, but I don't think it works.
I get that you believe you can read Adria Richards' mind and glean her intentions. Amateur psychology is absolutely the preserve of the Internet - see the confident diagnoses of sociopathy pinging around this thread at the moment. And I get that you want this to be an example of a model you are proposing - that two buzzword-groups are escaping from the Internet into "the real world". But I just don't think it's particularly relevant in this case. This wasn't "tumblr social justice types". It was one person, one piece of con drama, and then a series of failures of systems and good sense which led to where we are now.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
That's not at all what trolling used to be. Trolling used to be posting deliberately provocative content to newsgroups in order to attract responses from as many people as possible. It's decayed to just meaning harassment and abuse. I do not think you have a model here which is closely related to the history of Internet interaction.
What I do think you have is a theory (the tumblr social justice types are just like the MRA types), and you're trying to fit the available evidence of this case to support that theory, but I don't think it works.
I get that you believe you can read Adria Richards' mind and glean her intentions. Amateur psychology is absolutely the preserve of the Internet - see the confident diagnoses of sociopathy pinging around this thread at the moment. And I get that you want this to be an example of a model you are proposing - that two buzzword-groups are escaping from the Internet into "the real world". But I just don't think it's particularly relevant in this case. This wasn't "tumblr social justice types". It was one person, one piece of con drama, and then a series of failures of systems and good sense which led to where we are now.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also, which is not exactly how the MRAs have been behaving about her job.
She did? In that case I dial back my bad opinion of her quite a few notches.
posted by Artw at 9:00 PM on March 21, 2013
She did? In that case I dial back my bad opinion of her quite a few notches.
posted by Artw at 9:00 PM on March 21, 2013
It is true that the big angry Internet swarm could be seen as originating with Racefail and the like. And then there are Anonymous, who I guess could be called social justice types. The big angry MRA cloud of misogyny and rape threats is a newish and particularly crappy variety of this kind of thing, and the kind I'd most like to see stomped out, but I think ultimatly all angry Internet swarms are kind of suspect.
posted by Artw at 9:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:06 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
running order squabble fest: I think my summary was a pretty accurate statement. Trolls make people's life miserable by increasing signal/noise, acting in a antisocial way. I'm pretty familiar with that form of trolling. One of my first interactions on the internet was probably getting trolled on usenet (hhhehehe).
The trolls before the past couple years didn't believe they were in the right. Everyone that trolled knew they were in the wrong. Much like how a schoolyard bully who uses physical violence/intimidation doesn't believe what they're doing is right. They did it to piss people off.
This is absolutely the same as "tumblr social justice" and "MRA" types because she posted on here twitter something equivalent to, "look at this asshole", which is what they do. It's social ostracizing someone. This isn't a person-to-person or person-to-community conflict for antisocial reasons as we've seen in years past.
My point about gender roles (again, I'm being descriptive not prescriptive here!!) in the schoolyard with bullying methods is something which I do find interesting as a theory, but don't have it fully fleshed out. I'd like to note that tumblr and twitter have near equal if not majority female dominated. The center of this is tumblr, they're, last I looked 60% female active users. I wouldn't ascribe the previous trolling style as "male", I think that would be incorrect. I'd ascribe this more towards historically gender norms in bullying, and the ways trolling gets exhibited as a natural fallout from that. Again, I'm not ascribing natural gender roles here, as MRAs do the same social ostracize bullshit.
Resolving this form of trolling is much more difficult than banning someone that posts an intentionally obvious inflammatory comment, as there are larger social dynamics at work. It's also a lot more difficult to resolve bullying in the schoolyard when it's a group that simply refuses to talk to one person and to shame them at every opportunity for having some faults which the larger group dislikes (even if the larger group is justified).
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:13 PM on March 21, 2013
The trolls before the past couple years didn't believe they were in the right. Everyone that trolled knew they were in the wrong. Much like how a schoolyard bully who uses physical violence/intimidation doesn't believe what they're doing is right. They did it to piss people off.
This is absolutely the same as "tumblr social justice" and "MRA" types because she posted on here twitter something equivalent to, "look at this asshole", which is what they do. It's social ostracizing someone. This isn't a person-to-person or person-to-community conflict for antisocial reasons as we've seen in years past.
My point about gender roles (again, I'm being descriptive not prescriptive here!!) in the schoolyard with bullying methods is something which I do find interesting as a theory, but don't have it fully fleshed out. I'd like to note that tumblr and twitter have near equal if not majority female dominated. The center of this is tumblr, they're, last I looked 60% female active users. I wouldn't ascribe the previous trolling style as "male", I think that would be incorrect. I'd ascribe this more towards historically gender norms in bullying, and the ways trolling gets exhibited as a natural fallout from that. Again, I'm not ascribing natural gender roles here, as MRAs do the same social ostracize bullshit.
Resolving this form of trolling is much more difficult than banning someone that posts an intentionally obvious inflammatory comment, as there are larger social dynamics at work. It's also a lot more difficult to resolve bullying in the schoolyard when it's a group that simply refuses to talk to one person and to shame them at every opportunity for having some faults which the larger group dislikes (even if the larger group is justified).
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:13 PM on March 21, 2013
What with the two scumbag employers, the puritanical language policing, the Tumblr SJ warriors and the global tide of MRAs and anti-feminists claiming victory, I kinda hate everyone at this point.
posted by dontjumplarry at 9:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by dontjumplarry at 9:13 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
I think the internet reaction to her is both expected and sad that it's to be expected, because no-one deserves to be subjected to the kind of shitstorm that routinely rains down on women.
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also, which is not exactly how the MRAs have been behaving about her job.
I'm legit confused about one thing, though - are we taking Hacker News comments seriously as a source of information or not? Like, was this a verified comment or post, or was this the same level of authenticated as the post purportedly from the fired guy?
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:14 PM on March 21, 2013
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also, which is not exactly how the MRAs have been behaving about her job.
I'm legit confused about one thing, though - are we taking Hacker News comments seriously as a source of information or not? Like, was this a verified comment or post, or was this the same level of authenticated as the post purportedly from the fired guy?
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:14 PM on March 21, 2013
You mean, the post on Hacker News saying:
I'm sorry to hear your employer deciding to not to work with you on this and I hope they reconsider, bring you back on and dealing with it constructively.?
That was either actual Richards, or someone playing a very long game - that ID has existed for over a year, whereas "mr_hank" (whose realness is less of an issue now that the firing has been corroborated by Playhaven) was registered three days ago (i.e. specifically to make that post).
A friend of Richards' also said on Twitter that she had been badly upset by the guy losing his job - which I guess could be image management. but does not seem incredible in the context.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm sorry to hear your employer deciding to not to work with you on this and I hope they reconsider, bring you back on and dealing with it constructively.?
That was either actual Richards, or someone playing a very long game - that ID has existed for over a year, whereas "mr_hank" (whose realness is less of an issue now that the firing has been corroborated by Playhaven) was registered three days ago (i.e. specifically to make that post).
A friend of Richards' also said on Twitter that she had been badly upset by the guy losing his job - which I guess could be image management. but does not seem incredible in the context.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
turgid dahlia 2: I guess the lesson here is don't go to PyCon or you'll be fired.
:(
I hope this is a joke. What could we have done differently to make you not feel this way?
posted by jacobian at 9:31 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
:(
I hope this is a joke. What could we have done differently to make you not feel this way?
posted by jacobian at 9:31 PM on March 21, 2013 [5 favorites]
It really isn't that unreasonable to ask you to stop talking about your dick when you are in public at a professional conference surrounded by a few thousand strangers. This isn't some new rule created by liberal college's secret language police. My old fashioned cattle ranching grandfather would have smacked the shit out of them boys for "using that kind of talk around ladies."
posted by humanfont at 9:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 9:32 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
The word "shaming" is doing a lot of work in this discussion (both here and on the wider internet), and I'm not sure I understand exactly what is meant when it's used in this context. "Public shaming" even made it into the new PyCon CoC in response to this incident. What exactly is implied by shaming, public or otherwise? Where's the line between shaming and just calling somebody out for doing something problematic? Conversely, are there behaviors that it would be acceptable to publicly shame people for?
Posting the picture is where she went over the line here, it seems clear, and the consequences for all parties involved were disproportionate to their offenses. But would everyone still have called it shaming if she had simply called attention to them in public at the conference and called them out there? Everyone is using the term shaming as if it's a commonly understood set of behaviors (like trolling used to be), but I hadn't seen it in common usage until this brouhaha and I don't see why it's necessarily a self-evidently terrible thing to do in every situation, as seems to be implied by a lot of the language here.
posted by dialetheia at 9:34 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Posting the picture is where she went over the line here, it seems clear, and the consequences for all parties involved were disproportionate to their offenses. But would everyone still have called it shaming if she had simply called attention to them in public at the conference and called them out there? Everyone is using the term shaming as if it's a commonly understood set of behaviors (like trolling used to be), but I hadn't seen it in common usage until this brouhaha and I don't see why it's necessarily a self-evidently terrible thing to do in every situation, as seems to be implied by a lot of the language here.
posted by dialetheia at 9:34 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
That was either actual Richards, or someone playing a very long game - that ID has existed for over a year, whereas "mr_hank" (whose realness is less of an issue now that the firing has been corroborated by Playhaven) was registered three days ago (i.e. specifically to make that post).
That's what I wanted to know, thanks.
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:34 PM on March 21, 2013
That's what I wanted to know, thanks.
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:34 PM on March 21, 2013
jacobian: "I hope this is a joke. What could we have done differently to make you not feel this way?"
Pretty sure it's dark humor. Honestly, PyCon is probably the only party that comes out "looking ok" in all this.
posted by boo_radley at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
Pretty sure it's dark humor. Honestly, PyCon is probably the only party that comes out "looking ok" in all this.
posted by boo_radley at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [8 favorites]
jacobian: ":( I hope this is a joke. What could we have done differently to make you not feel this way"
jacobian, based on turgid dahlia 2's posting style, almost certainly one of their jokes! It's my impression that, regardless of the "side" anyone comes down on here, PyCon is the only party in this entire fiasco that came out looking good. PyCon handled it quickly, appropriately, had codes of conduct in place, and has been good throughout. It's unfortunate that your conference has been caught in the crossfire, but you all seemed to have done everything as well as you could.
posted by barnacles at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
jacobian, based on turgid dahlia 2's posting style, almost certainly one of their jokes! It's my impression that, regardless of the "side" anyone comes down on here, PyCon is the only party in this entire fiasco that came out looking good. PyCon handled it quickly, appropriately, had codes of conduct in place, and has been good throughout. It's unfortunate that your conference has been caught in the crossfire, but you all seemed to have done everything as well as you could.
posted by barnacles at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [7 favorites]
amuseDetachment, I am serious in asking those who don't understand to please consider why making penis jokes might feel hostile in a male-dominated industry where very bad behavior has been tolerated for a long time. I do NOT think that women not being able to make jokes about their own sexual functions or anatomy at work is the injustice, here. The injustice is that men making sexual jokes at work is part of a much larger, more powerful pattern of male dominance that has concrete economic effects for women at work. You could say the same thing about work hangouts happening at strip clubs-- awesome for men who love strip clubs! Awful for women (and men, for that matter) who do not feel comfortable at strip clubs. The answer isn't "hold work meetings at Chippendales shows!" ... because that isn't a priority in the workplace. Sex jokes are not a priority in the workplace. Gender parity is.
I am telling you as a fact that the dominant culture of machismo/penis jokes/&c. in tech makes many women feel alienated, even if they don't speak up-- it is a fact, you can read more about it in many places. Women do not speak up because it's often very laborious and retaliation is often severe. If a person's immediate response to this issue is "but where CAN we make penis jokes?" I fundamentally don't understand why penis jokes are more important to them than a non-alienating workplace. Why they don't think seriously about workplaces (and draw the subsequent conclusion that penis jokes will work themselves out in the larger culture), and instead think seriously about penis jokes. Why they immediately jump to the conclusion that penis jokes are now illegal throughout society instead of the conclusion that workplaces are an environment of serious consequence for people and should thus not contain alienating or hostile behavior. (If many many women saying this feels alienating or hostile is not convincing, what would be convincing?)
Also, the idea that she's anti-sex at all is completely ludicrous, and the fact that her objecting to what is a really colossally inappropriate "money shot" reference is characterized as her being a prude with personal failings is such an obvious instance of workplace hostility to women, I can't even really say more than that. I would maybe be slightly annoyed, slightly disheartened to listen to out-of-place chatter about big dongles during a work conference-- I would be upset and angry about the normalization of porn lingo in the workplace. In itself, that's not even anti-porn-- I watch porn, as a matter of fact-- but it's a huge statement of power to refer to the hugely fucked industry of male-oriented porn and the glorification of male ejaculation at a fucking work conference, and that is some firing-level behavior, imo.
posted by stoneandstar at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [19 favorites]
I am telling you as a fact that the dominant culture of machismo/penis jokes/&c. in tech makes many women feel alienated, even if they don't speak up-- it is a fact, you can read more about it in many places. Women do not speak up because it's often very laborious and retaliation is often severe. If a person's immediate response to this issue is "but where CAN we make penis jokes?" I fundamentally don't understand why penis jokes are more important to them than a non-alienating workplace. Why they don't think seriously about workplaces (and draw the subsequent conclusion that penis jokes will work themselves out in the larger culture), and instead think seriously about penis jokes. Why they immediately jump to the conclusion that penis jokes are now illegal throughout society instead of the conclusion that workplaces are an environment of serious consequence for people and should thus not contain alienating or hostile behavior. (If many many women saying this feels alienating or hostile is not convincing, what would be convincing?)
Also, the idea that she's anti-sex at all is completely ludicrous, and the fact that her objecting to what is a really colossally inappropriate "money shot" reference is characterized as her being a prude with personal failings is such an obvious instance of workplace hostility to women, I can't even really say more than that. I would maybe be slightly annoyed, slightly disheartened to listen to out-of-place chatter about big dongles during a work conference-- I would be upset and angry about the normalization of porn lingo in the workplace. In itself, that's not even anti-porn-- I watch porn, as a matter of fact-- but it's a huge statement of power to refer to the hugely fucked industry of male-oriented porn and the glorification of male ejaculation at a fucking work conference, and that is some firing-level behavior, imo.
posted by stoneandstar at 9:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [19 favorites]
... and the reason it's firing-level misbehavior because being that tone deaf toward gender disparity in the workplace should be seen as a liability for any company that isn't actively trying to time-travel to the Stone Age.
posted by stoneandstar at 9:36 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by stoneandstar at 9:36 PM on March 21, 2013
"To me, attention-seeking-behavior through social ostricization is pretty trolly.
I tried to differentiate this new form of attack from previous personal individual antisocial behavior. Trolling used to be exclusively one person annoys another or generally makes their life miserable for no good reason other than to be mean. It's equivalent to beating someone else up in the schoolyard.
This new form of trolling via social ostraciziation is more interesting because the parties involved believe their cause is right and just. Much like how people who ostracize an individual for being an "annoying personality" in the schoolyard believe they are in the right for doing so.
You're totally and bizarrely wrong here.
Trolling is pretty much provoking anger online because online people are impotently angry. They're not doing it for no other reason than to be mean; they're doing it for lulz. It is not the equivalent of beating someone up on the schoolyard in any way that's salient to this discussion.
This is not a new form of trolling because the goal is neither, as you posited, just to be mean, nor lulz, the regular usage of trolling.
You don't know what you're talking about.
posted by klangklangston at 9:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I tried to differentiate this new form of attack from previous personal individual antisocial behavior. Trolling used to be exclusively one person annoys another or generally makes their life miserable for no good reason other than to be mean. It's equivalent to beating someone else up in the schoolyard.
This new form of trolling via social ostraciziation is more interesting because the parties involved believe their cause is right and just. Much like how people who ostracize an individual for being an "annoying personality" in the schoolyard believe they are in the right for doing so.
You're totally and bizarrely wrong here.
Trolling is pretty much provoking anger online because online people are impotently angry. They're not doing it for no other reason than to be mean; they're doing it for lulz. It is not the equivalent of beating someone up on the schoolyard in any way that's salient to this discussion.
This is not a new form of trolling because the goal is neither, as you posited, just to be mean, nor lulz, the regular usage of trolling.
You don't know what you're talking about.
posted by klangklangston at 9:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
"This is absolutely the same as "tumblr social justice" and "MRA" types because she posted on here twitter something equivalent to, "look at this asshole", which is what they do. It's social ostracizing someone. This isn't a person-to-person or person-to-community conflict for antisocial reasons as we've seen in years past."
You are conflating trolling with bullying in a way that makes me suspect that you can't explain the difference between the two, nor are able to understand why this situation differs from both.
posted by klangklangston at 9:43 PM on March 21, 2013
You are conflating trolling with bullying in a way that makes me suspect that you can't explain the difference between the two, nor are able to understand why this situation differs from both.
posted by klangklangston at 9:43 PM on March 21, 2013
dialetheia: Calling them out at the conference is 100% appropriate, writing about it to encourage change is also definitely appropriate (even naming names). The problem arises when it turns into, "look at these two assholes" with tons of retweets/reblogs on a twitter photo.
stoneandstar: Strip clubs are not acceptable as a place to hold meetings due to the nature of male dominance and opression, I think we're in agreement there. Simply going to a chippendale's show as well as a strip club isn't equivalent because the singular act of going to a strip club is unacceptable, you cannot counter that with fake equality. If a male manager decided to go to a Chippendale's show without going to a strip club, that would be sexist, as it's effectively forcing her to shove a dick to the woman's face. I do believe a lot of sex jokes should not be allowed in the workplace, however I disagree that a male audience person to another male audience person saying "I'd like to fork his repo" crosses a line. I'm not sure we'll ever see eye to eye here, but I do understand your concern and would agree that in many, if not most cases of sex jokes in the workplace, they're probably inappropriate and wrong.
klangklangston: People beat each other up on the schoolyard because they feel impotent in real life or at home, and express it, it's an analogy. This new form is different from historical trolling, but I call it trolling, if you want to classify it as another word, you're welcome to. My intention when calling it trolling is, it due to its similarity in creating a lot of infighting and conflict online intentionally, which the tumblr-social-justice and MRA types do. I used trolling because the social fallout was similar, but if there's a better concise word, I'd use it.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:55 PM on March 21, 2013
stoneandstar: Strip clubs are not acceptable as a place to hold meetings due to the nature of male dominance and opression, I think we're in agreement there. Simply going to a chippendale's show as well as a strip club isn't equivalent because the singular act of going to a strip club is unacceptable, you cannot counter that with fake equality. If a male manager decided to go to a Chippendale's show without going to a strip club, that would be sexist, as it's effectively forcing her to shove a dick to the woman's face. I do believe a lot of sex jokes should not be allowed in the workplace, however I disagree that a male audience person to another male audience person saying "I'd like to fork his repo" crosses a line. I'm not sure we'll ever see eye to eye here, but I do understand your concern and would agree that in many, if not most cases of sex jokes in the workplace, they're probably inappropriate and wrong.
klangklangston: People beat each other up on the schoolyard because they feel impotent in real life or at home, and express it, it's an analogy. This new form is different from historical trolling, but I call it trolling, if you want to classify it as another word, you're welcome to. My intention when calling it trolling is, it due to its similarity in creating a lot of infighting and conflict online intentionally, which the tumblr-social-justice and MRA types do. I used trolling because the social fallout was similar, but if there's a better concise word, I'd use it.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:55 PM on March 21, 2013
but it's a huge statement of power to refer to the hugely fucked industry of male-oriented porn and the glorification of male ejaculation at a fucking work conference, and that is some firing-level behavior, imo.
Does it change anything that it was a woman whose presentation that was?
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:58 PM on March 21, 2013
Does it change anything that it was a woman whose presentation that was?
posted by gadge emeritus at 9:58 PM on March 21, 2013
I also wanted to clarify to amuseD that I did spend a lot of time with facetious "what if" scenarios about vulgar language in the workplace, but my point was that:
1) there is a power imbalance in society that makes male bodies default and more inviolate than female bodies (female bodies are discussed predominantly as objects, not the bodies of subjects; as submissive bodies, not dominating bodies)
2) the dominant embodied discourse of frustration and power and dominance is funneled through male bodies-- having "balls," "suck my dick," "raping" that problem set, ha-ha-having-a-big-punishing-penis, &c.
3) thus male bodies and sexuality mirror symbolic power (dominance, &c.), at the same time that some men also use their physical bodies to assert power over women and create fear in women, to the degree that women are at a high risk for rape, domestic violence, &c.
4) making jokes about big dicks, rape, machismo, almost always wittingly or unwittingly transmits that message of male dominance channeled through the body which is only male and which cannot be possessed by the female
5) women who participate in this discourse of bodies and power have to adopt a kind of male performative drag, where they too "have balls" when they're brave and in charge, can say "suck my dick" when they want to dismiss someone as submissive and subservient, &c.
All this actually does arise in the mind of many women who work and exist in male-dominated environments-- not just work, but in the culture as a whole. Do I want to stop everyone everywhere from making penis jokes? No. I make penis jokes and find penis jokes funny. But while finding it funny I also find it problematic in an instinctive, visceral way, and I emphatically do not want to put up with that in the workplace. It is very distracting and exclusionary and ubiquitous, even if men do not realize it. The "humor" of male dominance has been falling out of favor for a long time, but the workplace should be free of jokes about big dicks and fucking (which itself is a typically male-inflected term, reflecting just how entrenched the male POV is in discussing even the most reciprocal notions of sex.) The dominant discourse about sex and male bodies is already inherently hostile to women; that can't change overnight, but reducing the profound impact sex and male machismo have on keeping women out of work spaces is to me an important and immediate goal.
Seriously, I understand the tendency to minimize and say "why would a big dick joke make a young girl feel alienated from an entire field of work? That's hyperbole," ... but I can say from experience that it has a deep effect on a young girl to first notice a male-dominated culture of sexual machismo in a field she previously felt was wide open to her. It is discouraging and alienating and to be honest, unsettling and vaguely threatening. If you think I'm being a hyperbolic feminist bitch, you are thinking the same of my 14-year-old self.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
1) there is a power imbalance in society that makes male bodies default and more inviolate than female bodies (female bodies are discussed predominantly as objects, not the bodies of subjects; as submissive bodies, not dominating bodies)
2) the dominant embodied discourse of frustration and power and dominance is funneled through male bodies-- having "balls," "suck my dick," "raping" that problem set, ha-ha-having-a-big-punishing-penis, &c.
3) thus male bodies and sexuality mirror symbolic power (dominance, &c.), at the same time that some men also use their physical bodies to assert power over women and create fear in women, to the degree that women are at a high risk for rape, domestic violence, &c.
4) making jokes about big dicks, rape, machismo, almost always wittingly or unwittingly transmits that message of male dominance channeled through the body which is only male and which cannot be possessed by the female
5) women who participate in this discourse of bodies and power have to adopt a kind of male performative drag, where they too "have balls" when they're brave and in charge, can say "suck my dick" when they want to dismiss someone as submissive and subservient, &c.
All this actually does arise in the mind of many women who work and exist in male-dominated environments-- not just work, but in the culture as a whole. Do I want to stop everyone everywhere from making penis jokes? No. I make penis jokes and find penis jokes funny. But while finding it funny I also find it problematic in an instinctive, visceral way, and I emphatically do not want to put up with that in the workplace. It is very distracting and exclusionary and ubiquitous, even if men do not realize it. The "humor" of male dominance has been falling out of favor for a long time, but the workplace should be free of jokes about big dicks and fucking (which itself is a typically male-inflected term, reflecting just how entrenched the male POV is in discussing even the most reciprocal notions of sex.) The dominant discourse about sex and male bodies is already inherently hostile to women; that can't change overnight, but reducing the profound impact sex and male machismo have on keeping women out of work spaces is to me an important and immediate goal.
Seriously, I understand the tendency to minimize and say "why would a big dick joke make a young girl feel alienated from an entire field of work? That's hyperbole," ... but I can say from experience that it has a deep effect on a young girl to first notice a male-dominated culture of sexual machismo in a field she previously felt was wide open to her. It is discouraging and alienating and to be honest, unsettling and vaguely threatening. If you think I'm being a hyperbolic feminist bitch, you are thinking the same of my 14-year-old self.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:03 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
Does it change anything that it was a woman whose presentation that was?
I think it lessens the severity compared to a presentation by a man, but still places pressure on women to play along despite their gut feelings of alienation, domination, &c. I still find it extremely inappropriate. Both due to the effect on women and men in the audience who would find it alienating-- because I also know at least several men who would be very uncomfortable with porn references at work.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:08 PM on March 21, 2013
I think it lessens the severity compared to a presentation by a man, but still places pressure on women to play along despite their gut feelings of alienation, domination, &c. I still find it extremely inappropriate. Both due to the effect on women and men in the audience who would find it alienating-- because I also know at least several men who would be very uncomfortable with porn references at work.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:08 PM on March 21, 2013
"klangklangston: People beat each other up on the schoolyard because they feel impotent in real life or at home, and express it, it's an analogy. This new form is different from historical trolling, but I call it trolling, if you want to classify it as another word, you're welcome to. My intention when calling it trolling is, it due to its similarity in creating a lot of infighting and conflict online intentionally, which the tumblr-social-justice and MRA types do. I used trolling because the social fallout was similar, but if there's a better concise word, I'd use it."
People beat each other up in the schoolyard for all sorts of reasons.
If you call it trolling, you're inventing a special use and by doing so muddling all sorts of things together. There's no way to come up with any valid conclusion based on a special use of trolling and also conflating bullying, public consequences, trolling, tumblr-social-justice and MRA.
So maybe think about what you really want to communicate and leave out trying to come up with categories of offense based on inflammatory language.
posted by klangklangston at 10:10 PM on March 21, 2013
People beat each other up in the schoolyard for all sorts of reasons.
If you call it trolling, you're inventing a special use and by doing so muddling all sorts of things together. There's no way to come up with any valid conclusion based on a special use of trolling and also conflating bullying, public consequences, trolling, tumblr-social-justice and MRA.
So maybe think about what you really want to communicate and leave out trying to come up with categories of offense based on inflammatory language.
posted by klangklangston at 10:10 PM on March 21, 2013
The word "shaming" is doing a lot of work in this discussion (both here and on the wider internet), and I'm not sure I understand exactly what is meant when it's used in this context. "Public shaming" even made it into the new PyCon CoC in response to this incident. What exactly is implied by shaming, public or otherwise? Where's the line between shaming and just calling somebody out for doing something problematic?
Shaming, or more appropriately, bullying is the proper terminology, because she took their picture and reposted in front of a large Internet mob.
She wasn't calling the two men out in order to correct their behavior. If she had, she would not have reposted their photos without permission. She would have discussed their behavior with them like a normal adult. Or she would have discussed their behavior with the PyCon moderators like a normal adult.
Instead, she did anything but what normal, adult, mature human beings do when initially confronting rude behavior. Specifically, she preemptively escalated her response by posting the photos to evoke a typical mob response from the thousands of people who followed her social media feed.
She did this because, as she well knew from her experience as a public relations staffer, she could count on those people acting in typical mob fashion, amplifying her fake outrage through various Internet social networks and press outlets.
She didn't count on the Internet mob she invoked from turning on her, but getting herself fired makes her initial behavior no less public shaming or bullying.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Shaming, or more appropriately, bullying is the proper terminology, because she took their picture and reposted in front of a large Internet mob.
She wasn't calling the two men out in order to correct their behavior. If she had, she would not have reposted their photos without permission. She would have discussed their behavior with them like a normal adult. Or she would have discussed their behavior with the PyCon moderators like a normal adult.
Instead, she did anything but what normal, adult, mature human beings do when initially confronting rude behavior. Specifically, she preemptively escalated her response by posting the photos to evoke a typical mob response from the thousands of people who followed her social media feed.
She did this because, as she well knew from her experience as a public relations staffer, she could count on those people acting in typical mob fashion, amplifying her fake outrage through various Internet social networks and press outlets.
She didn't count on the Internet mob she invoked from turning on her, but getting herself fired makes her initial behavior no less public shaming or bullying.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:10 PM on March 21, 2013 [11 favorites]
Maybe she did it because she was pissed off and sick and tired of men acting like douches at work. Also, maybe not every "outrage" felt by a woman is fake!
posted by stoneandstar at 10:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by stoneandstar at 10:12 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I don't think you're being a "hyperbolic feminist bitch" at all. I agree, "big dick" jokes, telling someone to "man up" or "brass balls", or EVERY rape joke EVER is not okay and should not be made in any conference environment or workplace. I genuinely think those are issues that are commonly ignored by people who care and should speak up more. I think the end result of what happened in this case probably hurt those that want to raise their concerns more.
My concern is the MRA crowd has created and fostered a negative reputation Nash Equilibirum for those who wish to speak out. Before, people "on our side", would publicly shame others' reputation, and it would get results. Now, MRAs have wised up and are using similar tactics, creating a mutually assured destruction. Because the MRAs don't have social capital, sullying their reputation isn't important, so they intentionally create an environment where raising issues via social media mob justice creates a net negative Nash Equilibrium for the reputation of both sides, but the MRA is winning out because it discourages women from speaking up on real issues. Ignoring MRAs won't solve that problem, to do so would be missing the forest from the trees.
posted by amuseDetachment at 10:15 PM on March 21, 2013
My concern is the MRA crowd has created and fostered a negative reputation Nash Equilibirum for those who wish to speak out. Before, people "on our side", would publicly shame others' reputation, and it would get results. Now, MRAs have wised up and are using similar tactics, creating a mutually assured destruction. Because the MRAs don't have social capital, sullying their reputation isn't important, so they intentionally create an environment where raising issues via social media mob justice creates a net negative Nash Equilibrium for the reputation of both sides, but the MRA is winning out because it discourages women from speaking up on real issues. Ignoring MRAs won't solve that problem, to do so would be missing the forest from the trees.
posted by amuseDetachment at 10:15 PM on March 21, 2013
Also, maybe not every "outrage" felt by a woman is fake!
Not every outrage felt by a woman is fake, no. But if she uses the same demeaning language she is "calling out", that makes her outrage fake, to me, even if some want to make excuses for her own shoddy public behavior.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:16 PM on March 21, 2013
Not every outrage felt by a woman is fake, no. But if she uses the same demeaning language she is "calling out", that makes her outrage fake, to me, even if some want to make excuses for her own shoddy public behavior.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:16 PM on March 21, 2013
Hey though, to clarify my precise feelings about a woman making a "money shot" reference at work-- if I admired her, I would have very conflicted feelings about whether or not my feelings of alienation and shame were "wrong," which is already creating a profound conflict for me at work specifically because I am a woman-- women being continually placed in situations where they must decide whether discrimination is real, worth speaking up about, crazy, &c. Women not only put up with hostility and alienation, but unless they are exceptionally strong, they are in a constant loop of self-doubt about it.
If I didn't know the woman from Eve, I would most likely still feel pressure to be "cool" and "one of the guys," no matter how long ago I would like to say I grew out of that kind of peer pressure. The point being that as a woman, I would go through a mental reckoning, no matter how momentary-- one that most likely, a man would not. So in that way I think it's very possible for women to perpetrate sexual hostility toward other women in the workplace without directly sexually harassing them or benefiting from it.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:18 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
If I didn't know the woman from Eve, I would most likely still feel pressure to be "cool" and "one of the guys," no matter how long ago I would like to say I grew out of that kind of peer pressure. The point being that as a woman, I would go through a mental reckoning, no matter how momentary-- one that most likely, a man would not. So in that way I think it's very possible for women to perpetrate sexual hostility toward other women in the workplace without directly sexually harassing them or benefiting from it.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:18 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I don't think that makes outrage fake unless you think that women have to be perfect to call out instances of inequality, or that let-he-among-us-without-sin applies stringently to issues of social inequality. I don't think her public behavior was exemplary, but I think she was right to be annoyed, even angry at two men acting inappropriately. Plenty of people cut people off on the freeway, but that doesn't mean their outrage is "fake" when someone else cuts them off.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by stoneandstar at 10:20 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Maybe she did it because she was pissed off and sick and tired of men acting like douches at work.
I think that is why she did this, but having an entirely legitimate reason to be outraged does not necessarily legitimize how you may express that outrage.
As a big kid who was socially bullied I appreciated the value of a punch as a much more effective resolution method than talking to a teacher, but if it meant blowback on me it wasn't really worthwhile. An alternative form of bullying isn't a good solution for bullying.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think that is why she did this, but having an entirely legitimate reason to be outraged does not necessarily legitimize how you may express that outrage.
As a big kid who was socially bullied I appreciated the value of a punch as a much more effective resolution method than talking to a teacher, but if it meant blowback on me it wasn't really worthwhile. An alternative form of bullying isn't a good solution for bullying.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:22 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
While I was appalled by Richards' actions, I get no joy from the fact that she was fired. As others have said: everybody loses as a result of this drama.
posted by Broseph at 10:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Broseph at 10:24 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Which is to say that she could very well be a publicity-mongering egomaniac but is still right that that kind of behavior is alienating both to women and to girls interested in entering the field.
I didn't say it legitimized how she expressed that outrage, but plenty of people think that because her actions were flawed, her outrage was fake/wrong/flawed/&c. The day when every woman can perfectly, un-self-interestedly, gracefully and kindly object to every instance of sexism they encounter in a day will be the day that sexism ends, I guess.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I didn't say it legitimized how she expressed that outrage, but plenty of people think that because her actions were flawed, her outrage was fake/wrong/flawed/&c. The day when every woman can perfectly, un-self-interestedly, gracefully and kindly object to every instance of sexism they encounter in a day will be the day that sexism ends, I guess.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
Speaking for myself, the repetition of "public shaming" is sort of reminding me of that Margaret Atwood quote about how men worry that women will laugh at them...
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:25 PM on March 21, 2013 [10 favorites]
I didn't say it legitimized how she expressed that outrage, but plenty of people think that because her actions were flawed, her outrage was fake/wrong/flawed/&c. The day when every woman can perfectly, un-self-interestedly, gracefully and kindly object to every instance of sexism they encounter in a day will be the day that sexism ends, I guess.
Yeah I'm with ya.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:26 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah I'm with ya.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:26 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Also, it's so incredibly condescending to say "everybody loses" from the "drama" of a woman being angry about low-level sexism.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:26 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by stoneandstar at 10:26 PM on March 21, 2013 [3 favorites]
I don't think that makes outrage fake unless you think that women have to be perfect to call out instances of inequality
I don't know how to respond to this, because I never said this. I do think Ms. Richards' bullying speaks for itself, regardless of what excuses people continue to make for it. It's unfortunate she got herself fired, but she rose the metaphorical Internet Golem and it turned on her. Mobs are unpredictable like that. Hopefully, she learned to be a bit more careful about invoking an Internet mob as a response to dealing with behavior she doesn't like.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
I don't know how to respond to this, because I never said this. I do think Ms. Richards' bullying speaks for itself, regardless of what excuses people continue to make for it. It's unfortunate she got herself fired, but she rose the metaphorical Internet Golem and it turned on her. Mobs are unpredictable like that. Hopefully, she learned to be a bit more careful about invoking an Internet mob as a response to dealing with behavior she doesn't like.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:28 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
My concern is the MRA crowd has created and fostered a negative reputation Nash Equilibirum for those who wish to speak out. Before, people "on our side", would publicly shame others' reputation, and it would get results.
This is a very rose-tinted version of the recent past. MRAs have maybe specifically become snakier as a group, but I don't think it poses a unique threat. Sexist men have always used these same tactics of indignation and so forth. I think the dominant culture is changing, and I think MRAs are dumbfucks but not much worse or virulent than the slowly fading misogynist dominant culture in general.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:32 PM on March 21, 2013
This is a very rose-tinted version of the recent past. MRAs have maybe specifically become snakier as a group, but I don't think it poses a unique threat. Sexist men have always used these same tactics of indignation and so forth. I think the dominant culture is changing, and I think MRAs are dumbfucks but not much worse or virulent than the slowly fading misogynist dominant culture in general.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:32 PM on March 21, 2013
Blazecock, to stick more closely to your post then, you said that because she did something similar to the men she criticized, she could not be feeling outraged. I think that is an inexplicable and demonstrably untrue view of human nature; people are often hypocrites. That doesn't mean that their objections do not have a basis or that they do not feel them.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by stoneandstar at 10:35 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Also, it's so incredibly condescending to say "everybody loses" from the "drama" of a woman being angry about low-level sexism.
Except that's not what I actually said.
And I don't see what's condescending about pointing out that fact that the dongle joker, Richards herself, their respective employers, and a whole bunch of other people are worse off now.
posted by Broseph at 10:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
Broseph:"While I was appalled by Richards' actions, I get no joy from the fact that she was fired. As others have said: everybody loses as a result of this drama."
Look, I agree that she made a stupid little mistake, but I think we need to keep some perspective and remember that it is a stupid little mistake people make every day. People forget that Twitter is public. That's not great, but it's also not something they deserve to be fired over. It's also not something that warrants the harassment she's experienced.
There's no indication that she was trying to get anybody fired; in fact, the accounts I've seen indicate that she was devastated when she found out that had happened.
It would be really cool if the Internet could learn to accept that people have suffered enough and to forgive them for their stupid little mistakes. I don't expect that to happen tomorrow, but I still hold out hope.
posted by koeselitz at 10:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Look, I agree that she made a stupid little mistake, but I think we need to keep some perspective and remember that it is a stupid little mistake people make every day. People forget that Twitter is public. That's not great, but it's also not something they deserve to be fired over. It's also not something that warrants the harassment she's experienced.
There's no indication that she was trying to get anybody fired; in fact, the accounts I've seen indicate that she was devastated when she found out that had happened.
It would be really cool if the Internet could learn to accept that people have suffered enough and to forgive them for their stupid little mistakes. I don't expect that to happen tomorrow, but I still hold out hope.
posted by koeselitz at 10:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
I mean to be honest I've made stupid jokes that at the time I felt were kind of borderline sexist/misogynist and which I felt ashamed of, while also enjoying them and the social dominance they bought me. It's very exhausting to have your real anger called "fake" all the time because someone else doesn't sympathize with it, even if you have done stupid, contradictory, or hypocritical things in the past.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by stoneandstar at 10:36 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
"Hey though, to clarify my precise feelings about a woman making a "money shot" reference at work-- if I admired her, I would have very conflicted feelings about whether or not my feelings of alienation and shame were "wrong," which is already creating a profound conflict for me at work specifically because I am a woman-- women being continually placed in situations where they must decide whether discrimination is real, worth speaking up about, crazy, &c. Women not only put up with hostility and alienation, but unless they are exceptionally strong, they are in a constant loop of self-doubt about it."
It's worth noting that "money shot" is the shot that takes the most amount of money to produce, i.e. the big pyrotechnic climax. Which was adopted for porn in an ironic way. So, if a woman makes a money shot joke, I don't necessarily assume it's a porn reference.
posted by klangklangston at 10:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's worth noting that "money shot" is the shot that takes the most amount of money to produce, i.e. the big pyrotechnic climax. Which was adopted for porn in an ironic way. So, if a woman makes a money shot joke, I don't necessarily assume it's a porn reference.
posted by klangklangston at 10:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
(Broseph: I think it comes down to what you mean by "this drama," which kind of makes it sound like you mean "everyone loses as a result of" Richards' actions. Which doesn't seem quite accurate to me; the firings were unforeseen by all.)
posted by koeselitz at 10:38 PM on March 21, 2013
posted by koeselitz at 10:38 PM on March 21, 2013
So, if a woman makes a money shot joke, I don't necessarily assume it's a porn reference.
If you're talking about the talk I think you're talking about, the speaker specifically referenced "why you have to think like a porn director to get the money shot," in those words.
posted by KathrynT at 10:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
If you're talking about the talk I think you're talking about, the speaker specifically referenced "why you have to think like a porn director to get the money shot," in those words.
posted by KathrynT at 10:40 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Broseph, it's condescending because women learn lessons about what speaking up means for their whole lives, and she is most likely devastated and unhappy-- but calling it drama that just hurt people like there was no real issue involved is blind. Almost no woman needs to be told that "everyone is worse off" when she speaks up about sexism-- she is probably well aware that the situation is going to be a shitstorm. If I were angry about sexism and spoke up and the situation were botched, by me or another party, the very very last thing I would want would be someone wringing their hands about how I should have been quiet because, I don't know, I am just a harbinger of doom? O woman, thy name is chaos.
klangklangston, possible but very unlikely, in my opinion.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
klangklangston, possible but very unlikely, in my opinion.
posted by stoneandstar at 10:41 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
Mod note: Note: a few comments deleted upthread. Don't make personal insulting comments about other users.
posted by taz (staff) at 10:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by taz (staff) at 10:44 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Koeselitz: Did you miss the part where I said I took no joy in her firing? I'm pretty much in full agreement with your last paragraph also. And the harassment, death threats, rape threats, etc are disgusting and completely undeserved.
I should probably clarify that what I was appalled by wasn't that she got offended, wasn't appalled by the fact that the guy got fired (which wasn't even her doing), but the whole photo-on-twitter thing and her conduct after the incident. Making it into a hyperbole-loaded hero story about herself on her blog (which is down now, as far as I know, but I hope people read it), comparing herself to Joan of Arc, etc. I haven't read any of the accounts you speak of where she was devastated. She seemed pretty unrepentant on her blog, but I can't remember if that was written before, or after the news of his firing became public.
posted by Broseph at 10:46 PM on March 21, 2013
I should probably clarify that what I was appalled by wasn't that she got offended, wasn't appalled by the fact that the guy got fired (which wasn't even her doing), but the whole photo-on-twitter thing and her conduct after the incident. Making it into a hyperbole-loaded hero story about herself on her blog (which is down now, as far as I know, but I hope people read it), comparing herself to Joan of Arc, etc. I haven't read any of the accounts you speak of where she was devastated. She seemed pretty unrepentant on her blog, but I can't remember if that was written before, or after the news of his firing became public.
posted by Broseph at 10:46 PM on March 21, 2013
"If you're talking about the talk I think you're talking about, the speaker specifically referenced "why you have to think like a porn director to get the money shot," in those words."
Yeah, you're right. I'd missed that earlier. The quote actually is "… how thinking like a porn director will help you be sure to achieve the 'money shot.'" So the porn context is there.
(I will say that the people who make porn — directors, camera ops, etc. — tend to be pretty good at their jobs, and if you're making short digital video, they're people who do it professionally all the time.
I'll also note that if the Blum post is accurate, again, Richards didn't talk that through with the people putting on the conference.)
posted by klangklangston at 10:51 PM on March 21, 2013
Yeah, you're right. I'd missed that earlier. The quote actually is "… how thinking like a porn director will help you be sure to achieve the 'money shot.'" So the porn context is there.
(I will say that the people who make porn — directors, camera ops, etc. — tend to be pretty good at their jobs, and if you're making short digital video, they're people who do it professionally all the time.
I'll also note that if the Blum post is accurate, again, Richards didn't talk that through with the people putting on the conference.)
posted by klangklangston at 10:51 PM on March 21, 2013
On a psephological note, I don't think there was a mob, exactly, on the 18th March - the idea that she is being consumed by her own magefire is poetic but I think inaccurate.
There are maybe 3-4 comments and replies to each of her posts on the day. It is only after that, and some time after that, that things go crazy - specifically when the reports started coming in that Playhaven had let an employee go, and when that spread from HN to Reddit and 4chan.
I know there is some fairly elevated phrasing in her blog post, but I doubt anyone with social media experience would imagine that the percentage of less than 10,000 Twitter followers who could be interested in getting involved would constitute a mob. To have a proper Twitter storm, you need a Stephen Fry figure - someone with a million or more followers, and with followers who are unusually emotionally involved with them - to act as a signal booster.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
There are maybe 3-4 comments and replies to each of her posts on the day. It is only after that, and some time after that, that things go crazy - specifically when the reports started coming in that Playhaven had let an employee go, and when that spread from HN to Reddit and 4chan.
I know there is some fairly elevated phrasing in her blog post, but I doubt anyone with social media experience would imagine that the percentage of less than 10,000 Twitter followers who could be interested in getting involved would constitute a mob. To have a proper Twitter storm, you need a Stephen Fry figure - someone with a million or more followers, and with followers who are unusually emotionally involved with them - to act as a signal booster.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:57 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
but calling it drama that just hurt people like there was no real issue involved is blind.
Yeah, well... didn't do that either.
posted by Broseph at 10:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, well... didn't do that either.
posted by Broseph at 10:59 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Shit like this is annoying and insensitive and all around shitty. I don't think the comment was sexist in the audience, but this comes of as gloaty and offensive. Girls Who Code should refuse their money.
posted by amuseDetachment at 11:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by amuseDetachment at 11:04 PM on March 21, 2013 [2 favorites]
"Adria Richards, PyCon, and How We All Lost"
posted by blueberry at 11:04 PM on March 21, 2013
—amandablumwords.wordpress.composted by blueberry at 11:04 PM on March 21, 2013
Look, I agree that she made a stupid little mistake, but I think we need to keep some perspective and remember that it is a stupid little mistake people make every day.
True enough, except that the same generosity isn't always being extended to the two guys who were plastered as sexists. Their mistake wasn't posting a shaming picture on the internet, it was to swap personal, juvenile jokes in a public forum.
posted by gadge emeritus at 11:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
True enough, except that the same generosity isn't always being extended to the two guys who were plastered as sexists. Their mistake wasn't posting a shaming picture on the internet, it was to swap personal, juvenile jokes in a public forum.
posted by gadge emeritus at 11:11 PM on March 21, 2013 [6 favorites]
And those jokes were not sexist!
posted by Malor at 11:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Malor at 11:16 PM on March 21, 2013 [1 favorite]
Broseph: “Koeselitz: Did you miss the part where I said I took no joy in her firing? I'm pretty much in full agreement with your last paragraph also. And the harassment, death threats, rape threats, etc are disgusting and completely undeserved.”
Well, I was mostly trying to say what I think stoneandstar was getting at; I think it might have seemed like an implication in what you said, though I don't know that you meant it at all.
“I should probably clarify that what I was appalled by wasn't that she got offended, wasn't appalled by the fact that the guy got fired (which wasn't even her doing), but the whole photo-on-twitter thing and her conduct after the incident. Making it into a hyperbole-loaded hero story about herself on her blog (which is down now, as far as I know, but I hope people read it), comparing herself to Joan of Arc, etc. I haven't read any of the accounts you speak of where she was devastated. She seemed pretty unrepentant on her blog, but I can't remember if that was written before, or after the news of his firing became public.”
First of all, we should note that she hasn't said a word in public since the firing was even hinted at. The account I was referring to was this tweet:
Second, honestly if there's anything I was reacting to in your comment it was the word "appalled." I think all we can say here is that she really didn't think about what it meant to publicly identify these guys. I don't see any evidence that she intended to shame them – only to identify them to PyCon organizers (which was in her rights, and which was frankly probably the best thing to do.) And if this lapse - the misunderstanding of the public-ness of Twitter, and the mistaking it for a catch-all response tool designed for quick communication in all situations - is something that appalls us, then we'd have to be appalled all day, every day, because this is a thing that happens constantly. I don't think it's fair to paint this as a great moral lapse when it's such a common mistake.
But honestly, Broseph, I'm reacting to a single word in your comment, so I appreciate that I'm probably reading a bit into it that you might not have been actually saying.
me: “Look, I agree that she made a stupid little mistake, but I think we need to keep some perspective and remember that it is a stupid little mistake people make every day.”
gadge emeritus: “True enough, except that the same generosity isn't always being extended to the two guys who were plastered as sexists. Their mistake wasn't posting a shaming picture on the internet, it was to swap personal, juvenile jokes in a public forum.”
I think that saying anybody was "plastered as sexist" in this situation is inflammatory and not helpful. Even Adria Richards didn't "plaster" anyone as sexist. She reported an incident that was clearly against the PyCon guidelines. You may disagree with the guidelines, but this incident was against them. Adria Richards happened to report this incident in the absolute worst way possible, and in making that mistake she inadvertently triggered an unfortunate chain of events. But I have not read any account anywhere that ends up painting these two guys as egregious sexists who must be stopped. You're free to correct me if you've seen that happening, but until I see it, I'm going to say that it's inflammatory to suggest that happened.
Malor: “And those jokes were not sexist!”
Did you miss the interesting part where nobody said the jokes themselves were sexist?
Jokes like this are not inherently sexist. Hardly anything is inherently sexist. Baking pies is not inherently sexist; women staying home and cleaning and mothering is not inherently sexist; wearing an apron is not inherently sexist; liking particular sex acts is not inherently sexist. What makes these things sexist is the context in which they occur.
What makes this sexist is that it creates an environment where there's a demand placed on women (and men) to put up what has historically been a way of framing women out of the equation. Yes, dirty jokes like this have historically been used as an exclusionary device intended to mark the conversation as "for men" and "not for women." I know older men who are otherwise quite equitable who still feel like it's necessary to observe "not around the ladies" rules. And I'm not the only one to point this out in this thread; olinerd said it above better than I can:
posted by koeselitz at 11:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
Well, I was mostly trying to say what I think stoneandstar was getting at; I think it might have seemed like an implication in what you said, though I don't know that you meant it at all.
“I should probably clarify that what I was appalled by wasn't that she got offended, wasn't appalled by the fact that the guy got fired (which wasn't even her doing), but the whole photo-on-twitter thing and her conduct after the incident. Making it into a hyperbole-loaded hero story about herself on her blog (which is down now, as far as I know, but I hope people read it), comparing herself to Joan of Arc, etc. I haven't read any of the accounts you speak of where she was devastated. She seemed pretty unrepentant on her blog, but I can't remember if that was written before, or after the news of his firing became public.”
First of all, we should note that she hasn't said a word in public since the firing was even hinted at. The account I was referring to was this tweet:
For the record, @adriarichards called me, SICKENED, the night she saw one guy got fired. It was not her intent. She was not happy.This seems plausible to me, not least because, as I said, we haven't heard from Adria Richards since the firing(s) came out.
Second, honestly if there's anything I was reacting to in your comment it was the word "appalled." I think all we can say here is that she really didn't think about what it meant to publicly identify these guys. I don't see any evidence that she intended to shame them – only to identify them to PyCon organizers (which was in her rights, and which was frankly probably the best thing to do.) And if this lapse - the misunderstanding of the public-ness of Twitter, and the mistaking it for a catch-all response tool designed for quick communication in all situations - is something that appalls us, then we'd have to be appalled all day, every day, because this is a thing that happens constantly. I don't think it's fair to paint this as a great moral lapse when it's such a common mistake.
But honestly, Broseph, I'm reacting to a single word in your comment, so I appreciate that I'm probably reading a bit into it that you might not have been actually saying.
me: “Look, I agree that she made a stupid little mistake, but I think we need to keep some perspective and remember that it is a stupid little mistake people make every day.”
gadge emeritus: “True enough, except that the same generosity isn't always being extended to the two guys who were plastered as sexists. Their mistake wasn't posting a shaming picture on the internet, it was to swap personal, juvenile jokes in a public forum.”
I think that saying anybody was "plastered as sexist" in this situation is inflammatory and not helpful. Even Adria Richards didn't "plaster" anyone as sexist. She reported an incident that was clearly against the PyCon guidelines. You may disagree with the guidelines, but this incident was against them. Adria Richards happened to report this incident in the absolute worst way possible, and in making that mistake she inadvertently triggered an unfortunate chain of events. But I have not read any account anywhere that ends up painting these two guys as egregious sexists who must be stopped. You're free to correct me if you've seen that happening, but until I see it, I'm going to say that it's inflammatory to suggest that happened.
Malor: “And those jokes were not sexist!”
Did you miss the interesting part where nobody said the jokes themselves were sexist?
Jokes like this are not inherently sexist. Hardly anything is inherently sexist. Baking pies is not inherently sexist; women staying home and cleaning and mothering is not inherently sexist; wearing an apron is not inherently sexist; liking particular sex acts is not inherently sexist. What makes these things sexist is the context in which they occur.
What makes this sexist is that it creates an environment where there's a demand placed on women (and men) to put up what has historically been a way of framing women out of the equation. Yes, dirty jokes like this have historically been used as an exclusionary device intended to mark the conversation as "for men" and "not for women." I know older men who are otherwise quite equitable who still feel like it's necessary to observe "not around the ladies" rules. And I'm not the only one to point this out in this thread; olinerd said it above better than I can:
I'm a woman in engineering. I'm one of the "cool" girls. I swear and I laugh at dumb inappropriate jokes and i proudly wear our (old, from startup phase) company shirts that say "when size matters" showing the different sizes of our phallic-shaped equipment. But I swear and I laugh and I wear that shirt in the small group of friendly coworkers with whom I am very socially comfortable. When I get the Beavis and Butthead chuckles from those I am not friendly with, it is tiring as all fuck. I don't care about the etymology of the word. I don't care how well-known the word is in the industry jargon. I don't care. What I care about is when I am using the professionally-accepted jargon, someone is giggling at me going "heh heh you know what that sounds like you're saying" because it is immature, distracting, and undermining to me when that's what people are paying attention to when I speak.As she says, these aren't inherently sexist things to say. What's sexist is the environment that is created when we force them on people and demand that they accept all the implications of that environment.
posted by koeselitz at 11:33 PM on March 21, 2013 [18 favorites]
Thanks for your thoughtful and well-reasoned reply, koeselitz. I don't really have much to add, but I appreciate it.
posted by Broseph at 11:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by Broseph at 11:38 PM on March 21, 2013 [4 favorites]
What could we have done differently to make you not feel this way?
Pycon did everything right, as far as we know. Somebody complained, you took the complaint seriously, talked to the people she complained about, they apologised, shit was done. Everything else was outside of Pycon's control and not their fault.
In an alternate universe, where Adria Richards had written a blogpost that focused more on the handling of this case, rather than on the offenders, it might've been held up as a great example to other technical cons.
posted by MartinWisse at 1:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Pycon did everything right, as far as we know. Somebody complained, you took the complaint seriously, talked to the people she complained about, they apologised, shit was done. Everything else was outside of Pycon's control and not their fault.
In an alternate universe, where Adria Richards had written a blogpost that focused more on the handling of this case, rather than on the offenders, it might've been held up as a great example to other technical cons.
posted by MartinWisse at 1:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Previously : Ariel Meadow Stallings on privilege-checking and call-out culture
posted by jeffburdges at 2:09 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by jeffburdges at 2:09 AM on March 22, 2013
koeselitz: I completely understand that sentiment and would usually agree, however in the circumstance cited, I don't consider it an issue. Now, I do agree that in most circumstances, making sexual jokes is usually sexist and shouldn't be acceptable in any work environment, as I've said above. Further, with respect to the specific comment you quoted from olinerd, I would agree that the comments to her were overwhelmingly likely to be unacceptable as well.
However, I'd like to clarify my thoughts, I'm not sure we will ever see eye to eye on this issue, so I'm saying this less to convince you than to express my point of view on why "I'd like to fork his repo" not on the same level as your examples, so you can see at least see where someone who empathizes with feminist causes (but nonetheless has no problem with that comment) comes from. I don't believe that sexual talk as a priori is sexist, nor sexual talk in an environment with women around is necessarily sexist (but it usually is). I think our difference lies in the importance you place on environmental context. I believe that an overwhelming majority of sexist comments said in the workplace are unacceptable no matter whether women are present. Using the phrase like "grow some balls" in private company is sexist no matter which gender is listening. Put simply, it perpetuates gender oppression and I'm sure nearly everyone here agrees that such language abhorrent in the workplace (even though it's common). Those jokes are inherently sexist.
Harm from creating an environment which accepts sexual oppression is fairly obvious when telling someone to "grow a pair of balls". Going from that towards one in which harm occurs due to a hostile environment due to talk from a sexual nature is something I've thought about. After all, if I believe that it's inappropriate to make sex jokes at the work place, it's probably inappropriate to make sex jokes amongst mixed company of friends and acquaintances. Nowadays, I certainly wouldn't tell a friend to "grow a pair".
On the other hand, I would have absolutely no problem making sex jokes amongst mixed company of friends and acquaintances on the same level as "Fork his repo". In a perfect world in which genders are treated equally, "I'd like to fork his repo" is not inherently sexist. In a prefect world in which both genders are treated equally, someone coming in and saying "grow a pair" is still sexist.
However (!!!), the case for avoiding it is that women cannot make jokes in the same way. I would agree, and that part is problematic. Sexual objectification, sexual capital, and slut shaming are massive problems, and those issues are what women face whenever they make sex jokes. That part is absolutely a problem and must be rectified. Whenever someone makes a sex joke on the level of "I'd like to fork his repo," I can understand why some would be uncomfortable that they cannot socially make the same jokes, that create a discriminatory environment in which women cannot be as chummy and jovial as their male peers. My issue is that anything but avoiding any sex talk at all would be sexist is too much. Not to mention it's a bad solution because those underlying issues will remain. It would be preferable in which both are accepted and women are not slut-shamed for making sex jokes. I'd also like to add that this situation would be entirely different if the group already makes sexist jokes (in the class/level I've given above), and made non-gendered sex jokes on the level of "I'd like to fork her repo." Within that context, it'd be offensive and with those men proving to be sexist, probably make those comments sexist as well within the context and environment.
I think the primary difference in our opinion lies in the fact that this contextual requirement is an issue, if I can project your opinion (do correct me if I am mistaken), that the tech community has proven to be sexist as a group and therefore any sexual comments represent the comments of a group that tends to be sexist. Even if sexual comments are not directly sexist on a systemic level, they're still problematic because the group has proven to be without trust in this matter. I take a different view in that individuals in the tech community cannot be automatically assumed to be sexist. I'm pretty sure many of us would feel differently if she had outed people who were sexist (in my criteria above), and then later overheard someone else saying "I'd like to fork his repo." I'm sure she's faced many sexist comments in the past, but our difference lies in whether to ascribe systemic sexism to individual tech communities or the tech community as a whole. Perhaps I am naively optimistic in that way of thinking, but it is something with which I've given some thought, I'm fairly sure we'll never agree, though.
To me, the test of a community is whether it slut-shames, objectifies, or treats woman in a different way when a woman makes a sex joke. That is where I believe the problem actually lies. I don't see it in the sex joke itself. I would concede, however, that it's much harder to call someone out on that, I don't have a solution. I also don't consider publicly shaming men whenever they make sex jokes as an appropriate solution either. I'd like to also emphasize that we agree that it's probably impolite and not professional to use sexual language because people might be offended, and therefore should not be used for that reason (from my vantage point, I can see that religious people would get offended too). I think we'd also both agree that it'd be nice if a conference, as a policy, discouraged making sex jokes and sex euphemisms (at least insofar as it isn't germane to the presentation or discussion).
Sorry for the long reply.
posted by amuseDetachment at 2:16 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
However, I'd like to clarify my thoughts, I'm not sure we will ever see eye to eye on this issue, so I'm saying this less to convince you than to express my point of view on why "I'd like to fork his repo" not on the same level as your examples, so you can see at least see where someone who empathizes with feminist causes (but nonetheless has no problem with that comment) comes from. I don't believe that sexual talk as a priori is sexist, nor sexual talk in an environment with women around is necessarily sexist (but it usually is). I think our difference lies in the importance you place on environmental context. I believe that an overwhelming majority of sexist comments said in the workplace are unacceptable no matter whether women are present. Using the phrase like "grow some balls" in private company is sexist no matter which gender is listening. Put simply, it perpetuates gender oppression and I'm sure nearly everyone here agrees that such language abhorrent in the workplace (even though it's common). Those jokes are inherently sexist.
Harm from creating an environment which accepts sexual oppression is fairly obvious when telling someone to "grow a pair of balls". Going from that towards one in which harm occurs due to a hostile environment due to talk from a sexual nature is something I've thought about. After all, if I believe that it's inappropriate to make sex jokes at the work place, it's probably inappropriate to make sex jokes amongst mixed company of friends and acquaintances. Nowadays, I certainly wouldn't tell a friend to "grow a pair".
On the other hand, I would have absolutely no problem making sex jokes amongst mixed company of friends and acquaintances on the same level as "Fork his repo". In a perfect world in which genders are treated equally, "I'd like to fork his repo" is not inherently sexist. In a prefect world in which both genders are treated equally, someone coming in and saying "grow a pair" is still sexist.
However (!!!), the case for avoiding it is that women cannot make jokes in the same way. I would agree, and that part is problematic. Sexual objectification, sexual capital, and slut shaming are massive problems, and those issues are what women face whenever they make sex jokes. That part is absolutely a problem and must be rectified. Whenever someone makes a sex joke on the level of "I'd like to fork his repo," I can understand why some would be uncomfortable that they cannot socially make the same jokes, that create a discriminatory environment in which women cannot be as chummy and jovial as their male peers. My issue is that anything but avoiding any sex talk at all would be sexist is too much. Not to mention it's a bad solution because those underlying issues will remain. It would be preferable in which both are accepted and women are not slut-shamed for making sex jokes. I'd also like to add that this situation would be entirely different if the group already makes sexist jokes (in the class/level I've given above), and made non-gendered sex jokes on the level of "I'd like to fork her repo." Within that context, it'd be offensive and with those men proving to be sexist, probably make those comments sexist as well within the context and environment.
I think the primary difference in our opinion lies in the fact that this contextual requirement is an issue, if I can project your opinion (do correct me if I am mistaken), that the tech community has proven to be sexist as a group and therefore any sexual comments represent the comments of a group that tends to be sexist. Even if sexual comments are not directly sexist on a systemic level, they're still problematic because the group has proven to be without trust in this matter. I take a different view in that individuals in the tech community cannot be automatically assumed to be sexist. I'm pretty sure many of us would feel differently if she had outed people who were sexist (in my criteria above), and then later overheard someone else saying "I'd like to fork his repo." I'm sure she's faced many sexist comments in the past, but our difference lies in whether to ascribe systemic sexism to individual tech communities or the tech community as a whole. Perhaps I am naively optimistic in that way of thinking, but it is something with which I've given some thought, I'm fairly sure we'll never agree, though.
To me, the test of a community is whether it slut-shames, objectifies, or treats woman in a different way when a woman makes a sex joke. That is where I believe the problem actually lies. I don't see it in the sex joke itself. I would concede, however, that it's much harder to call someone out on that, I don't have a solution. I also don't consider publicly shaming men whenever they make sex jokes as an appropriate solution either. I'd like to also emphasize that we agree that it's probably impolite and not professional to use sexual language because people might be offended, and therefore should not be used for that reason (from my vantage point, I can see that religious people would get offended too). I think we'd also both agree that it'd be nice if a conference, as a policy, discouraged making sex jokes and sex euphemisms (at least insofar as it isn't germane to the presentation or discussion).
Sorry for the long reply.
posted by amuseDetachment at 2:16 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Afroblanco:"I'm 100% in the anti-Adria camp, but I gotta ask : what the hell is up with the people who post the rape threats and death threats? Seriously. Like, I want to know what makes them tick. Who are these people?Sad to say, but I think they're our plumbers, our builders, our butchers, our waiters, our colleagues, our bosses, our teachers, our uncles, our cousins, our nephews, our brothers, our sons, ...
Anonymity brings out the worst in people.
Incidentally I much prefer the older meaning of troll (and of hacker), the kind of single-post snowball-effect threadshit that was occasionally elevated to an art form. In this story, the perfect troll would have been if that guy saying he lost his job was a fake - but sadly that appears to have been true. Bullying is different and never approaches artistry.
posted by dickasso at 2:30 AM on March 22, 2013
what the hell is up with the people who post the rape threats and death threats? Seriously. Like, I want to know what makes them tick. Who are these people? Why do they do what they do? Are they actual psychopaths who would like to rape or kill her? Are they 12-year-old boys who don't know the meaning of their words? Are they just random assholes who think it's funny? I'm serious. Who are these people? Why do they do what they do?
Why do people wipe shit on bathroom walls? Have you ever looked at the hate mail section of the Daily Koz? Who knows? I view it as a complete side issue.
posted by bongo_x at 2:32 AM on March 22, 2013
Why do people wipe shit on bathroom walls? Have you ever looked at the hate mail section of the Daily Koz? Who knows? I view it as a complete side issue.
posted by bongo_x at 2:32 AM on March 22, 2013
I find it odd that people can’t see the difference between these two firings; One of them involved someone who’s job was to be a public relations expert, someone who handled a situation very poorly and publicly, and brought a shitstorm down on their company. Someone whose judgement in public matters seems very suspect at this point. That firing doesn’t seem odd to me.
posted by bongo_x at 2:37 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
posted by bongo_x at 2:37 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
dickasso: The MRA crowd are doing the equivalent of a threadshit on the entire tech community by going after her. They're pretty damn close to trolling, they're intentionally causing mayhem and creating drama for their own entertainment. MRAs and tumblr social justice warriors do believe what they do (which is the one difference from traditional trolls), but they do it for the lols and "le epikkkk baits xD". I consider this single page selling a t-shirt a troll.
The reason I've been using the word troll is also because I'm very much averse to calling it bullying, especially amongst those who are not feminist. I agree that it's bullying, it probably is a more accurate term for what's going on here, but I fear that calling someone a bully means the next time someone raises issues with gender discrimination they get called out for being a bully. People that get trolled may be seen as foolish. People that get bullied are often called victims. I don't want MRA types to consider themselves a victim (any more so than they already see themselves) when someone raises sexual/gender discrimination issues.
posted by amuseDetachment at 2:47 AM on March 22, 2013
The reason I've been using the word troll is also because I'm very much averse to calling it bullying, especially amongst those who are not feminist. I agree that it's bullying, it probably is a more accurate term for what's going on here, but I fear that calling someone a bully means the next time someone raises issues with gender discrimination they get called out for being a bully. People that get trolled may be seen as foolish. People that get bullied are often called victims. I don't want MRA types to consider themselves a victim (any more so than they already see themselves) when someone raises sexual/gender discrimination issues.
posted by amuseDetachment at 2:47 AM on March 22, 2013
Yeah, that's it - they believe what they're saying, so it's not trolling. The skill in trolling comes from crafting the perfect believable-yet-utterly-objectionable opinion and expressing it in the most inflammatory way. These guys are only half way there - that makes them assholes, not trolls.
Of course in the new broader definition (sigh; I hate broader definitions, what's the point in having a good word if we make it mean the same as other words?!) everybody who types a mean thing on the internet is a troll, so fine, they're trolls now and the 'art' which I spoke of is nameless again.
posted by dickasso at 3:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Of course in the new broader definition (sigh; I hate broader definitions, what's the point in having a good word if we make it mean the same as other words?!) everybody who types a mean thing on the internet is a troll, so fine, they're trolls now and the 'art' which I spoke of is nameless again.
posted by dickasso at 3:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
It appears as though who misuse your prescriptivist application of the word troll are inadvertently trolling you on an epic scale.
Seriously though, saying they're similar in their end goals and to associate them with trolling is reasonable, especially because they take up the cause as a convenience. That they agree with their stated pitchforking is coincidental and convenient. Are they what one would traditionally call a troll? No. I think we're in agreement there. I'd just like to use a word other than bullying is all.
posted by amuseDetachment at 3:35 AM on March 22, 2013
Seriously though, saying they're similar in their end goals and to associate them with trolling is reasonable, especially because they take up the cause as a convenience. That they agree with their stated pitchforking is coincidental and convenient. Are they what one would traditionally call a troll? No. I think we're in agreement there. I'd just like to use a word other than bullying is all.
posted by amuseDetachment at 3:35 AM on March 22, 2013
Women aren't equal until we can speak freely without being threatened with violence and violation -- but we also aren't equal until we can make mistakes without having them minimized, explained away, and desperately mined for tiny slivers of acceptable intent. Because we're grown up people. We're full moral agents. We're supposed to think before we act, and stop before we go too far, and apologise when we are wrong. Richards had a point, but she behaved poorly and recklessly, and apparently not for the first time. You need not take a blowtorch to a spider, especially if you live in a house of straw.
The threats against her are horrifying, frightening and outrageous (and sadly, not surprising). The things she did and said are nothing in comparison. I still think, though, that they are quite bad compared to the behaviour she was actually calling out, and that not wanting to hurry past that on the way to a more comfortable discussion about how bad sexism is and how women should be able to say so is not the same as not understanding or agreeing with those two things.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 4:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [29 favorites]
The threats against her are horrifying, frightening and outrageous (and sadly, not surprising). The things she did and said are nothing in comparison. I still think, though, that they are quite bad compared to the behaviour she was actually calling out, and that not wanting to hurry past that on the way to a more comfortable discussion about how bad sexism is and how women should be able to say so is not the same as not understanding or agreeing with those two things.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 4:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [29 favorites]
I feel it's worth pointing out here that she was apparently distraught that anyone had been fired, and immediately expressed her hopes that he be reinstated on Hacker News also
That is all well and good, but for a couple of days, she forgot that the guy "existed," just as for a while she forgot that Amanda Blum's conference an her obligations to the commitments she made at the conference "existed." Instead, they were merely fodder for her blog and a means of promoting Adria Richards™.
There's a certain genre of blogs that seems to draw traffic to themselves by pointing their readers to an "outrage of the day," and based on Amanda Blum's experience, this seems to be Richards' stock-in-trade. And it's one thing to trade in "outrage-of-the-day" blog fodder from other bloggers or random situations, but in this case she turned her professional life into a forum for generating "outrage of the day/two minutes of hate" material.
As far as the threats directed at Adria, this is a pattern and a sign that we are quite simply horrible people. Zeina Maxwell (warning: offensive language) received an avalanche of them for saying that men should stop rape while on the Sean Hannity show. This happens time and time again and for women, and it's repulsive. But somehow it's considered semi-acceptable behavior online. It's not going to stop until it's treated by the legal system on the same criminal level as calling someone up and threatening them. People are doing this, and there are enough of them that we probably socially overlap with them in some way but don't realize it.
posted by deanc at 5:08 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
That is all well and good, but for a couple of days, she forgot that the guy "existed," just as for a while she forgot that Amanda Blum's conference an her obligations to the commitments she made at the conference "existed." Instead, they were merely fodder for her blog and a means of promoting Adria Richards™.
There's a certain genre of blogs that seems to draw traffic to themselves by pointing their readers to an "outrage of the day," and based on Amanda Blum's experience, this seems to be Richards' stock-in-trade. And it's one thing to trade in "outrage-of-the-day" blog fodder from other bloggers or random situations, but in this case she turned her professional life into a forum for generating "outrage of the day/two minutes of hate" material.
As far as the threats directed at Adria, this is a pattern and a sign that we are quite simply horrible people. Zeina Maxwell (warning: offensive language) received an avalanche of them for saying that men should stop rape while on the Sean Hannity show. This happens time and time again and for women, and it's repulsive. But somehow it's considered semi-acceptable behavior online. It's not going to stop until it's treated by the legal system on the same criminal level as calling someone up and threatening them. People are doing this, and there are enough of them that we probably socially overlap with them in some way but don't realize it.
posted by deanc at 5:08 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
One of the things about MetaFilter that annoys me is its inability to ignore trolls. Stop posting about the damn Westboro Baptist Church, for instance. Ditto harping on "MRA" in this thread as if it's an actual thing. Yes, a bunch of idiots said horrible, sexist things about Adria Richards and called for her to be fired. And yes, she was fired. No serious adult thinks these two things are linked.
posted by cribcage at 6:52 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by cribcage at 6:52 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
Look, responding to situations you're offended by in an unnecessarily public fashion, it's not the best way you can spend your time. Using your offense to spark controversy and draw attention to yourself is a tactic plenty of people who mean well stumble upon, because they think, "As long as I'm drawing a crowd, that means I'm starting a conversation and making people feel like this is more okay." That is a problematic way of thinking, not in the least of which is because not all conversations are created equal, but it is an understandable one, and not exactly one where there's a rulebook explaining why don't do that.
The responses to Adria's unnecessary public tweet have been an increasing shitshow of awful. That guy at the conference shouldn't have been fired. Period. Lectured, sure. Told by his company that he was on thin ice and don't do it again, why not. Fired? Well, that was bound to turn a public spectacle even more spectacular.
Adria's firing I understand. But I wish it hadn't happened, because, again, all it's going to do is inflame the situation further. I do feel that companies have certain responsibilities to their employees, and firing Adria in the middle of the backlash she was receiving was not the right move. Maybe they could have quietly let her go a month or two from now, if they really felt like that was necessary – and from the way she acted during this situation, maybe she's not the best evangelist in the world. But firing her publicly while the backlash is in full force is kind of a shitty thing for a company to do.
All of this pales to the responses Adria's received, however, and you can oppose her actions/personality as much as you like and still feel like she's getting the shit end of this deal. Nobody deserves rape threats, let alone as many as I'm sure she's getting. That is beyond the pale. No amount of obnoxiousness, inappropriate public shaming, or what-have-you should warrant a response like that. It's not okay when people send rape threats to Ann Coulter, and if you think Adria is a tenth the horrible nightmare that Ann Coulter is you've got another thing coming. So, I feel bad for her.
Another thing: this detached observing-and-judging that we're doing of Adria's actions, this talk of what trolling and shaming are and whether she crossed a line... can we cut that shit the fuck out? It is very, very hard to understand your own public persona. It is even harder to control your public actions when you're being thrown into an emotional wringer AKA thousands of people screaming hate at you. I think we should find it a lot easier to accept that people make mistakes sometimes than we're doing right here. Adria made a mistake, cool. She didn't get that guy fired – that guy's stupid company did that. Adria posted some silly things on Twitter – believe me, I see a lot worse posted from radical liberals on my Facebook feed, what she said barely twitches the meter. This doesn't make her an awful horrible person, and I think that anybody with any meager amount of sympathy can see that she is currently in a terrible situation. It would be nice if we could accept the ambiguity of human nature a little bit instead of jumping to condemn somebody whose intentions were, at the very least, good-ish.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:00 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
The responses to Adria's unnecessary public tweet have been an increasing shitshow of awful. That guy at the conference shouldn't have been fired. Period. Lectured, sure. Told by his company that he was on thin ice and don't do it again, why not. Fired? Well, that was bound to turn a public spectacle even more spectacular.
Adria's firing I understand. But I wish it hadn't happened, because, again, all it's going to do is inflame the situation further. I do feel that companies have certain responsibilities to their employees, and firing Adria in the middle of the backlash she was receiving was not the right move. Maybe they could have quietly let her go a month or two from now, if they really felt like that was necessary – and from the way she acted during this situation, maybe she's not the best evangelist in the world. But firing her publicly while the backlash is in full force is kind of a shitty thing for a company to do.
All of this pales to the responses Adria's received, however, and you can oppose her actions/personality as much as you like and still feel like she's getting the shit end of this deal. Nobody deserves rape threats, let alone as many as I'm sure she's getting. That is beyond the pale. No amount of obnoxiousness, inappropriate public shaming, or what-have-you should warrant a response like that. It's not okay when people send rape threats to Ann Coulter, and if you think Adria is a tenth the horrible nightmare that Ann Coulter is you've got another thing coming. So, I feel bad for her.
Another thing: this detached observing-and-judging that we're doing of Adria's actions, this talk of what trolling and shaming are and whether she crossed a line... can we cut that shit the fuck out? It is very, very hard to understand your own public persona. It is even harder to control your public actions when you're being thrown into an emotional wringer AKA thousands of people screaming hate at you. I think we should find it a lot easier to accept that people make mistakes sometimes than we're doing right here. Adria made a mistake, cool. She didn't get that guy fired – that guy's stupid company did that. Adria posted some silly things on Twitter – believe me, I see a lot worse posted from radical liberals on my Facebook feed, what she said barely twitches the meter. This doesn't make her an awful horrible person, and I think that anybody with any meager amount of sympathy can see that she is currently in a terrible situation. It would be nice if we could accept the ambiguity of human nature a little bit instead of jumping to condemn somebody whose intentions were, at the very least, good-ish.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:00 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
Ditto harping on "MRA" in this thread as if it's an actual thing. Yes, a bunch of idiots said horrible, sexist things about Adria Richards and called for her to be fired. And yes, she was fired. No serious adult thinks these two things are linked.
Except here's the thing:
– MRA is an actual thing, and it is big. No, not many people identify directly with the MRA movement, but many people read what they're about and go, "Huh, that makes a lot of sense," and then walk about talking about how women are greedy and want an imbalanced system that favors them and how men are so so so sooooo oppressed in today's day and age. I know many of people who think their take on feminism is the correct one. I thought they had a good point for a long while – in fact, when I joined MetaFilter in 2009, I still felt like feminism was a deluded cause. It took a long time to rethink that particular idiocy. So, yes, this is a movement that needs to be paid attention to.
– Nobody will think "oh this company fired Adria because we said sexist things about her." They will think "oh Adria was fired because all of the horrible sexist things we said about her were accurate." This will confirm, for many people, that complaining about sex jokes in a professional environment is stupid, harassment is nonexistent, and women generally don't understand equality. Don't believe me? Read one of the ten thousand Hacker News threads in which that's one of the main stances being taken.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:05 AM on March 22, 2013 [20 favorites]
Except here's the thing:
– MRA is an actual thing, and it is big. No, not many people identify directly with the MRA movement, but many people read what they're about and go, "Huh, that makes a lot of sense," and then walk about talking about how women are greedy and want an imbalanced system that favors them and how men are so so so sooooo oppressed in today's day and age. I know many of people who think their take on feminism is the correct one. I thought they had a good point for a long while – in fact, when I joined MetaFilter in 2009, I still felt like feminism was a deluded cause. It took a long time to rethink that particular idiocy. So, yes, this is a movement that needs to be paid attention to.
– Nobody will think "oh this company fired Adria because we said sexist things about her." They will think "oh Adria was fired because all of the horrible sexist things we said about her were accurate." This will confirm, for many people, that complaining about sex jokes in a professional environment is stupid, harassment is nonexistent, and women generally don't understand equality. Don't believe me? Read one of the ten thousand Hacker News threads in which that's one of the main stances being taken.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:05 AM on March 22, 2013 [20 favorites]
It's interesting to me that her tweeting the photo is considered the main event here, and the relentless online bullying she received in response is the sideshow. It really is as though you guys were saying, well, yes, rape and murder threats, that's just the web, but somewhere a woman tweeted a photo, and that's what we should be discussing.
I don't think the rape and death threats are a sideshow. They're the show. I don't know why we're expected to ignore them as trolls and just continue spending hundreds of words of text discussing how she was a bully because she posted photos. She oughtn't have, but if she oughtn't have, this campaign of online bullying against her oughtn't have by a factor of a thousand. Why is her gaffe the focus while the actual crime of online threats is just what happens when you taunt the web community?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:14 AM on March 22, 2013 [17 favorites]
I don't think the rape and death threats are a sideshow. They're the show. I don't know why we're expected to ignore them as trolls and just continue spending hundreds of words of text discussing how she was a bully because she posted photos. She oughtn't have, but if she oughtn't have, this campaign of online bullying against her oughtn't have by a factor of a thousand. Why is her gaffe the focus while the actual crime of online threats is just what happens when you taunt the web community?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:14 AM on March 22, 2013 [17 favorites]
two or three cars parked under the stars: “Women aren't equal until we can speak freely without being threatened with violence and violation -- but we also aren't equal until we can make mistakes without having them minimized, explained away, and desperately mined for tiny slivers of acceptable intent.”
I don't really think Adria Richards is in danger of having her mistakes minimized or explained away.
posted by koeselitz at 7:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I don't really think Adria Richards is in danger of having her mistakes minimized or explained away.
posted by koeselitz at 7:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I can't help but be disheartened to know that we live in a world where women should know that if they step slightly out of line in the online sphere, they will be besieged with criminal terrorism.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [12 favorites]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [12 favorites]
I think, Bunny, that for a lot of people now, the 4chan culture is old enough that it is the one with which people grew up. I mean, I started frequenting 4chan when I was 14 years old and a freshman in high school; I'm guessing that for a lot of people, it was a college thing that they stayed interested in throughout their professional lives.
The sort of 4chan nihilistic attitude is that you cause as much outrage and offense as possible, then laugh about it because nobody should take the Internet seriously. So the over-the-top-ness is part of the fun – if you can say something that's truly unsettling, then maybe you'll even get Oprah talking about 9,000 penises on national TV! None of those 9,000 penises are real, but unless you know about 4chan, you can't be sure of that. It's a secret little club dedicated to mayhem and "culture jamming".
That doesn't make it any less reprehensible, but I think that the reason a lot of people are treating these threats less seriously are that they're assuming they're being shot at Adria in the old 4chan tradition. They're a smokescreen to be ignored, not a serious indication of malicious intent. From that perspective, anyway.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:24 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
The sort of 4chan nihilistic attitude is that you cause as much outrage and offense as possible, then laugh about it because nobody should take the Internet seriously. So the over-the-top-ness is part of the fun – if you can say something that's truly unsettling, then maybe you'll even get Oprah talking about 9,000 penises on national TV! None of those 9,000 penises are real, but unless you know about 4chan, you can't be sure of that. It's a secret little club dedicated to mayhem and "culture jamming".
That doesn't make it any less reprehensible, but I think that the reason a lot of people are treating these threats less seriously are that they're assuming they're being shot at Adria in the old 4chan tradition. They're a smokescreen to be ignored, not a serious indication of malicious intent. From that perspective, anyway.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:24 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
That's a very easy presumption for men to make. It's much harder when you're a woman and you're raised in the shadow of the threat of constant and inevitable sexual violence. Whether or not these threats are serious, they are serious, if you see what I am saying. They function to terrorize, and the fact that a large group of men can say, well, that's just 4chan being 4chan -- frankly, that's a problem.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 7:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
I didn't say that it wasn't. But that's why those threats are being minimized by such a significant audience.
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:29 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by Rory Marinich at 7:29 AM on March 22, 2013
I'm surprised to find myself agreed with Bunny Ultramod that it's Friday, but he's 100% dead on here. There's no excuse. None.
And y'know, frankly, some of this behavior is criminal. If we want to move shit forward, I'd like to see some of the people making death/rape threats prosecuted for it. I don't understand why there's no will to do that. If anyone's going to be "shamed" I'd like to see some of these people shamed as they try to defend their threats in court.
posted by tyllwin at 7:41 AM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
And y'know, frankly, some of this behavior is criminal. If we want to move shit forward, I'd like to see some of the people making death/rape threats prosecuted for it. I don't understand why there's no will to do that. If anyone's going to be "shamed" I'd like to see some of these people shamed as they try to defend their threats in court.
posted by tyllwin at 7:41 AM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
I don't think anyone is saying "if you criticize women or feminists, you're an MRA". I haven't seen that here, and I certainly don't agree with the sentiment. But it's also silly to dismiss the MRA as a fringe extremist movement that's not really a Thing that no one really pays attention to. I honestly think that the MRA movement could end up becoming the Tea Party of gender politics. As Rory says, so much of what they parrot makes sense on the surface and so few people stop to think the implications through. I've had conversations with a family friend--a very smart, very kind PhD level scientist--who was convinced that his son was at a disadvantage compared to his daughter because the pendulum has now swung too far. Plus, men are the victims of domestic violence just as much as women, but we don't hear about it because FEMINIST OPPRESSION?! Sure, why not.
I've been more and more terrified of how frequently I see MRA-sown sentiment show up in otherwise reasonable places. A school newspaper at my alma mater writes a piece denouncing victim-blaming, and you get a comment section full of angry "of course we should blame the victim" and "women make up rape all the time". This is a newspaper that maybe gets three comments on a particularly contentious article on mental health. An otherwise unremarkable webcomic showing cartoon violence draws legions of commenters snarling about the oppression of men. The student association at Carleton University voted to basically eliminate their anti-discrimination policy because it was hostile to male supremacy and white supremacy voices. The University of Toronto has given free lecture space to a tenured MRA-sympathizing professor from the University of Ottawa who thinks that any discussion of misogyny (or race, or sexuality) is "victim studies", after a previously planned lecture by notorious MRA-author Warren Farrell drew protests by liberal students. (The MRA responded by launching a massive online harassment campaign against women who were present and made my friend's life hell for months on end. Their creeptastic diatribes are still the top search result for her name.)
I think it's important to pay attention to their development precisely because of this faux "both sides have merits" bullshit we get in the media. I want to loudly tell everyone who even has a passing familiarity with gender issues why exactly the movement is little more than homophobia, hatred of women, and traditional gender roles wrapped up in a cute acronym, because I want there to be no doubt in their minds about how credible the movement is when some dumb mainstream news outlet inevitably reaches out to A Voice For Men about why the feminists have gone too far.
So in this specific instance, yes, it absolutely is important to me that the MRA think they've won, that they have identified a power-crazed feminist and put her in her place. It's not as important as the fact that Richards was fired, or the other guy was fired, or that the tech community is set back once again when it comes to figuring out inclusiveness. But there are going to be reverberating effects from their involvement in this debacle in the future, and that sucks. As I said elsewhere, it absolutely sucks that the guy got fired. It also absolutely sucks that Richards got fired. But at the end of the day, the guy is a martyr, and Richards is fielding rape threats. At the end of the day, it’s female developers now and in the future who will be disproportionately harmed by this clusterfuck.
posted by Phire at 7:49 AM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
I've been more and more terrified of how frequently I see MRA-sown sentiment show up in otherwise reasonable places. A school newspaper at my alma mater writes a piece denouncing victim-blaming, and you get a comment section full of angry "of course we should blame the victim" and "women make up rape all the time". This is a newspaper that maybe gets three comments on a particularly contentious article on mental health. An otherwise unremarkable webcomic showing cartoon violence draws legions of commenters snarling about the oppression of men. The student association at Carleton University voted to basically eliminate their anti-discrimination policy because it was hostile to male supremacy and white supremacy voices. The University of Toronto has given free lecture space to a tenured MRA-sympathizing professor from the University of Ottawa who thinks that any discussion of misogyny (or race, or sexuality) is "victim studies", after a previously planned lecture by notorious MRA-author Warren Farrell drew protests by liberal students. (The MRA responded by launching a massive online harassment campaign against women who were present and made my friend's life hell for months on end. Their creeptastic diatribes are still the top search result for her name.)
I think it's important to pay attention to their development precisely because of this faux "both sides have merits" bullshit we get in the media. I want to loudly tell everyone who even has a passing familiarity with gender issues why exactly the movement is little more than homophobia, hatred of women, and traditional gender roles wrapped up in a cute acronym, because I want there to be no doubt in their minds about how credible the movement is when some dumb mainstream news outlet inevitably reaches out to A Voice For Men about why the feminists have gone too far.
So in this specific instance, yes, it absolutely is important to me that the MRA think they've won, that they have identified a power-crazed feminist and put her in her place. It's not as important as the fact that Richards was fired, or the other guy was fired, or that the tech community is set back once again when it comes to figuring out inclusiveness. But there are going to be reverberating effects from their involvement in this debacle in the future, and that sucks. As I said elsewhere, it absolutely sucks that the guy got fired. It also absolutely sucks that Richards got fired. But at the end of the day, the guy is a martyr, and Richards is fielding rape threats. At the end of the day, it’s female developers now and in the future who will be disproportionately harmed by this clusterfuck.
posted by Phire at 7:49 AM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
they're assuming they're being shot at Adria in the old 4chan tradition.
This also requires the assumption that the target of this harassment should know this, somehow, and share that feeling that it's all for the lulz. We deal with a lot of this "The internet's not serious" stuff here at MetaFilter too which has resulted in some (not much but more than zero) harassment of our mods, both male and female but mostly female. And in very rare situations we have to make a decision about whether banning someone is worth the almost inevitable personal harassment that would likely be coming from that user in that case. I've dealt with some creepy shit that I would love to have not dealt with.
But ultimately, I think this is like the "video games inure people to actual violence" argument that people here tend to dislike. People are responsible for understanding the difference between real violence and blowing up a cartoon character. People who are willing to harass and threaten Adria online are probably smart enough to not threaten the president or a female superior at work, most of the time. People know, they just don't care.
posted by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
This also requires the assumption that the target of this harassment should know this, somehow, and share that feeling that it's all for the lulz. We deal with a lot of this "The internet's not serious" stuff here at MetaFilter too which has resulted in some (not much but more than zero) harassment of our mods, both male and female but mostly female. And in very rare situations we have to make a decision about whether banning someone is worth the almost inevitable personal harassment that would likely be coming from that user in that case. I've dealt with some creepy shit that I would love to have not dealt with.
But ultimately, I think this is like the "video games inure people to actual violence" argument that people here tend to dislike. People are responsible for understanding the difference between real violence and blowing up a cartoon character. People who are willing to harass and threaten Adria online are probably smart enough to not threaten the president or a female superior at work, most of the time. People know, they just don't care.
posted by jessamyn at 7:53 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
I agree with the assessment that her tweet and blog post was really pretty limited in terms if reach. It was the 4chan and other boards that started pushing it. The over-reaction and threats are the story here.
It seems that we still live in an era where women have to report this behavior anonymously or face terrible personal risks.
posted by humanfont at 7:57 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
It seems that we still live in an era where women have to report this behavior anonymously or face terrible personal risks.
posted by humanfont at 7:57 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Well, in that case I'm sorry it happens, and I'm sorry if it happened to you. It's likely I don't notice it because I'm rarely in the position to be targeted by those comments (though I certainly experience plenty of anxiety about being called out for not being feminist enough), but I'll keep that in mind and try to call it out when I see it. Petty tactics like that don't help anyone.
posted by Phire at 7:59 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by Phire at 7:59 AM on March 22, 2013
This also requires the assumption that the target of this harassment should know this, somehow, and share that feeling that it's all for the lulz.
To be honest, I think this gives too much credit to the participants in this discussion. Plenty of them don't care if Adria knows, even if she thinks the threats are real, and is terrified by them. Considering her as a human being with feelings is not their priority.
Again, I don't sympathize with that attitude, I was just presenting it for people here who might not be so familiar with 4chan's history of pulling mass threats like this, and who feel genuinely baffled as to why some people care more about the tweeting of a photo than about the rape threats which followed it. From one cynical-but-popular Internet lens, it's all about the lulz.
posted by Rory Marinich at 8:10 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
To be honest, I think this gives too much credit to the participants in this discussion. Plenty of them don't care if Adria knows, even if she thinks the threats are real, and is terrified by them. Considering her as a human being with feelings is not their priority.
Again, I don't sympathize with that attitude, I was just presenting it for people here who might not be so familiar with 4chan's history of pulling mass threats like this, and who feel genuinely baffled as to why some people care more about the tweeting of a photo than about the rape threats which followed it. From one cynical-but-popular Internet lens, it's all about the lulz.
posted by Rory Marinich at 8:10 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Afroblanco: “I've actually seen it quite a lot. It always seems to come up. Not quite as bad as Godwinning a thread, but in the same vein.”
My feeling is that we won't get anywhere on fixing these kinds of things unless we deal with specific instances, pointing it out directly to the people who do it. A general "let's all stop unfairly painting people as MRAs" doesn't really get us anywhere, unfortunately. Better to try to do something more like: "X, when you made this comment associating Y with MRAs even though Y really didn't seem to be espousing such extreme beliefs, that was inflammatory and probably unhelpful."
posted by koeselitz at 8:10 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
My feeling is that we won't get anywhere on fixing these kinds of things unless we deal with specific instances, pointing it out directly to the people who do it. A general "let's all stop unfairly painting people as MRAs" doesn't really get us anywhere, unfortunately. Better to try to do something more like: "X, when you made this comment associating Y with MRAs even though Y really didn't seem to be espousing such extreme beliefs, that was inflammatory and probably unhelpful."
posted by koeselitz at 8:10 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think being sensitive to dirty jokes is a female thing. Many guys don't want to hear dirty jokes. Many women like them. Seems weirdly condescending to me to think "don't say 'dongle' around women -- they can't handle it!"
posted by chasing at 8:13 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by chasing at 8:13 AM on March 22, 2013
Many guys don't want to hear dirty jokes.
I have honestly yet to meet one.
posted by amorphatist at 8:18 AM on March 22, 2013
I have honestly yet to meet one.
posted by amorphatist at 8:18 AM on March 22, 2013
From one cynical-but-popular Internet lens, it's all about the lulz
Sure, Rory. It's about the lulz. But it's about the lulz because it's allowed to be. If Law Enforcement took as much time investigating this as they did, say, looking at ways to impede Occupy, or help the MPAA, or spent the same effort that was was used to track down someone downloading academic articles, the lulz would get a hell of a lot less funny.
posted by tyllwin at 8:20 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Sure, Rory. It's about the lulz. But it's about the lulz because it's allowed to be. If Law Enforcement took as much time investigating this as they did, say, looking at ways to impede Occupy, or help the MPAA, or spent the same effort that was was used to track down someone downloading academic articles, the lulz would get a hell of a lot less funny.
posted by tyllwin at 8:20 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
chasing: “Many guys don't want to hear dirty jokes.”
amorphatist: “I have honestly yet to meet one.”
Hi, amorphatist. My name's Jeff in real life, but I go by koeselitz here and several other places.
There – now you can say that you've met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes.
posted by koeselitz at 8:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [16 favorites]
amorphatist: “I have honestly yet to meet one.”
Hi, amorphatist. My name's Jeff in real life, but I go by koeselitz here and several other places.
There – now you can say that you've met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes.
posted by koeselitz at 8:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [16 favorites]
"The things she did and said are nothing in comparison."
Yeah, I was thinking about this last night, where I'd put her actions, the dude's jokes, and then the overall reactions on a scale from 1 to 10 of offense. Without knowing specifics, the dude falls between one and fourish for me; she's whatever the inverse of him would be in that range; then the reactions she's gotten is about an eight or so — like, direly fucked up.
posted by klangklangston at 8:24 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, I was thinking about this last night, where I'd put her actions, the dude's jokes, and then the overall reactions on a scale from 1 to 10 of offense. Without knowing specifics, the dude falls between one and fourish for me; she's whatever the inverse of him would be in that range; then the reactions she's gotten is about an eight or so — like, direly fucked up.
posted by klangklangston at 8:24 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
There – now you can say that you've met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes.
Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?
posted by amorphatist at 8:25 AM on March 22, 2013
Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?
posted by amorphatist at 8:25 AM on March 22, 2013
It's about the lulz. But it's about the lulz because it's allowed to be.
Rape lulz are the broken windows of the Internet.
posted by Artw at 8:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Rape lulz are the broken windows of the Internet.
posted by Artw at 8:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I have yet to meet a woman who doesn't want to hear sexual jokes in any context, by anybody. I imagine there are very few such men women people.
posted by yaymukund at 8:29 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by yaymukund at 8:29 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
The sort of 4chan nihilistic attitude is that you cause as much outrage and offense as possible, then laugh about it because nobody should take the Internet seriously.
As jessamyn alludes to, they don't send these emails and tweets to their female supervisors (or even their male ones) because they realize that lots of people would "take the Internet seriously" if they did so. Similarly, men who beat their wives don't go around physically threatening or assaulting police officers. They are very selective about their targets.
posted by deanc at 8:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
As jessamyn alludes to, they don't send these emails and tweets to their female supervisors (or even their male ones) because they realize that lots of people would "take the Internet seriously" if they did so. Similarly, men who beat their wives don't go around physically threatening or assaulting police officers. They are very selective about their targets.
posted by deanc at 8:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
The University of Toronto has given free lecture space to a tenured MRA-sympathizing professor from the University of Ottawa who thinks that any discussion of misogyny (or race, or sexuality) is "victim studies", after a previously planned lecture by notorious MRA-author Warren Farrell drew protests by liberal students.If it's the one I think it is, didn't those protests involve the protestors physically blocking the entrance in order to try and stop anyone entering the talk, then accusing anyone who supported the police removing the protestors of hating women and wanting them to be arrested for peacefully protesting? If MRAs are on the rise, the main reason for that is probably less that the men's rights movement is particularly appealing and more that feminism is blowing away its own credibility - not just individual feminists, but the entire movement, which stands by its own no matter what - and men's rights is the only alternative other than an outright return to traditional values.
(It's not a great alternative. On the other hand, some MRA factions seem to be making a decent attempt at dealing with gender-based biases in society without either turning a blind eye to them or entrenching more gender-based assumptions in their solutions, which is nice if a bit unexpected coming from the Men's Rights movement. I mean, even radicals who wanted to end all gender couldn't manage that!)
posted by makomk at 8:31 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
amorphatist: “Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?”
Why would we be talking about in any context? From strangers, in public. That's been the framing this whole conversation, I thought. "But everybody secretly likes dirty jokes" is not a reason to force me to listen uncomfortably while people impose that crap on me. And people have. And it has really bothered me.
posted by koeselitz at 8:32 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
Why would we be talking about in any context? From strangers, in public. That's been the framing this whole conversation, I thought. "But everybody secretly likes dirty jokes" is not a reason to force me to listen uncomfortably while people impose that crap on me. And people have. And it has really bothered me.
posted by koeselitz at 8:32 AM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'm gonna give up on saying that I find the 4chan thing reprehensible and awful because people are clearly ignoring the parts where I keep saying that.
posted by Rory Marinich at 8:32 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Rory Marinich at 8:32 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
There – now you can say that you've met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes.
Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?
I mean, how do you get through the act of sexual intercourse? That shit is hilarious.
posted by amorphatist at 8:33 AM on March 22, 2013
Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?
I mean, how do you get through the act of sexual intercourse? That shit is hilarious.
posted by amorphatist at 8:33 AM on March 22, 2013
Again – that is utterly beside the point here.
posted by koeselitz at 8:34 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by koeselitz at 8:34 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm gonna give up on saying that I find the 4chan thing reprehensible and awful because people are clearly ignoring the parts where I keep saying that.
Only because I never for a moment thought that you would personally view it any other way. I was taking that as a given and moving on to how I think we need to address the place where their lulz intersect with other people's noses. If I gave you any impression that I thought you viewed it as lulzsy, I didn't mean to.
posted by tyllwin at 8:40 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Only because I never for a moment thought that you would personally view it any other way. I was taking that as a given and moving on to how I think we need to address the place where their lulz intersect with other people's noses. If I gave you any impression that I thought you viewed it as lulzsy, I didn't mean to.
posted by tyllwin at 8:40 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
amorphatist – let me try to explain myself a little better:
Dirty jokes told in public are kind of this obnoxious boy's club that I've never felt like I could actually have membership in. There's a kind of emotional violence that they do – they're told as this sort of test, like "are you man enough to laugh at this?" and if you fail the test you've proven yourself unworthy. I get that they're sort of this shared thing, and that laughing together is a bonding experience; that's why jokes in general are great. But dirty jokes impose this kind of demand on you that you rise to some sort of challenge about how socialized you are or how much your tastes are like those of the person telling the joke. It's particularly weird in professional settings like a tech conference, where frankly a thoughtful person can be forgiven for feeling uneasy at hearing that type of joke and wondering if it's inappropriate. Imposing those feelings and misgivings on people isn't really very cool, in my opinion. And although I guess I technically get a free pass to belong to the approved privilege club, by virtue of my being a guy, it still bugs me and makes me uncomfortable when that happens, and (as I said) I still have a hard time knowing that I'm actually approved for the man club. I know for a fact that I'm not the only guy who feels that way.
posted by koeselitz at 8:43 AM on March 22, 2013 [17 favorites]
Dirty jokes told in public are kind of this obnoxious boy's club that I've never felt like I could actually have membership in. There's a kind of emotional violence that they do – they're told as this sort of test, like "are you man enough to laugh at this?" and if you fail the test you've proven yourself unworthy. I get that they're sort of this shared thing, and that laughing together is a bonding experience; that's why jokes in general are great. But dirty jokes impose this kind of demand on you that you rise to some sort of challenge about how socialized you are or how much your tastes are like those of the person telling the joke. It's particularly weird in professional settings like a tech conference, where frankly a thoughtful person can be forgiven for feeling uneasy at hearing that type of joke and wondering if it's inappropriate. Imposing those feelings and misgivings on people isn't really very cool, in my opinion. And although I guess I technically get a free pass to belong to the approved privilege club, by virtue of my being a guy, it still bugs me and makes me uncomfortable when that happens, and (as I said) I still have a hard time knowing that I'm actually approved for the man club. I know for a fact that I'm not the only guy who feels that way.
posted by koeselitz at 8:43 AM on March 22, 2013 [17 favorites]
There – now you can say that you've met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes.
amorphatist: “Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?”
Why would we be talking about in any context?
Well, now I still cannot say that I've "met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes", so I have no idea what you were trying to do here, and must strongly concur with you that your interjection must have been utterly beside the point.
posted by amorphatist at 8:44 AM on March 22, 2013
amorphatist: “Just for the record: Ever, in any context, by anybody?”
Why would we be talking about in any context?
Well, now I still cannot say that I've "met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes", so I have no idea what you were trying to do here, and must strongly concur with you that your interjection must have been utterly beside the point.
posted by amorphatist at 8:44 AM on March 22, 2013
If I gave you any impression that I thought you viewed it as lulzsy, I didn't mean to.
Likewise, I got your point and didn't mean my response to be directed at you.
However, I think people understand the 4chan-ish view on the world, the question is how to deal with it and how not to accidentally fall into the "Yeah this was just a joke why can't people take these threats as the lulz they were intended as?" trap. A trap which I do not think you are personally in.
posted by jessamyn at 8:48 AM on March 22, 2013
Likewise, I got your point and didn't mean my response to be directed at you.
However, I think people understand the 4chan-ish view on the world, the question is how to deal with it and how not to accidentally fall into the "Yeah this was just a joke why can't people take these threats as the lulz they were intended as?" trap. A trap which I do not think you are personally in.
posted by jessamyn at 8:48 AM on March 22, 2013
I have yet to meet a woman who doesn't want to hear sexual jokes in any context, by anybody. I imagine there are very few such people.
I think we're all agreed that context counts for a lot though. Which is part of the reason the varying accounts make for such varying reactions.
posted by Artw at 8:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think we're all agreed that context counts for a lot though. Which is part of the reason the varying accounts make for such varying reactions.
posted by Artw at 8:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
amorphatist: “Well, now I still cannot say that I've ‘met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes’, so I have no idea what you were trying to do here, and must strongly concur with you that your interjection must have been utterly beside the point.”
Honestly, I'm kind of confused at this point. I assumed at the beginning that your question somehow had something to do with the conversation at hand; now it turns out you apparently were just asking out of an idle curiosity completely unrelated to what we're talking about. I will say that your question rubbed me wrong in a number of ways, not least because it sounded distinctly like the "are you really a guy?" tests that we males are constantly given in a kyriarchy.
Sorry for my general misunderstanding here. I guess I really just don't understand what exactly you were getting at.
posted by koeselitz at 8:51 AM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
Honestly, I'm kind of confused at this point. I assumed at the beginning that your question somehow had something to do with the conversation at hand; now it turns out you apparently were just asking out of an idle curiosity completely unrelated to what we're talking about. I will say that your question rubbed me wrong in a number of ways, not least because it sounded distinctly like the "are you really a guy?" tests that we males are constantly given in a kyriarchy.
Sorry for my general misunderstanding here. I guess I really just don't understand what exactly you were getting at.
posted by koeselitz at 8:51 AM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
Though I do think it's trickier for a woman to encounter sexual jokes because people might interpret her response (or lack thereof) as a woman's endorsement or rebuke of the heh-heh-heh culture that olinerd refers to. Sometimes you don't want to speak for your whole gender when you make a comment. That's precisely why this kind of humor is a minefield.
More generally, I like dejah's and melissam's comments. I feel like there's an openness in tech companies that makes it a home for some really vile stuff. The hard part is to discourage sexism while preserving the informal, honest culture that attracted so many geeks in the first place.
posted by yaymukund at 8:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
More generally, I like dejah's and melissam's comments. I feel like there's an openness in tech companies that makes it a home for some really vile stuff. The hard part is to discourage sexism while preserving the informal, honest culture that attracted so many geeks in the first place.
posted by yaymukund at 8:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
If it's the one I think it is, didn't those protests involve the protestors physically blocking the entrance in order to try and stop anyone entering the talk, then accusing anyone who supported the police removing the protestors of hating women and wanting them to be arrested for peacefully protesting?
That really depends on who you ask. From what I heard from people who were there, the protest was peaceful and non-violent until the police showed up and started knocking protestors to the ground. I don't agree with blocking entryway to fucked up things, but I also don't see anything wrong with showing up to protest a fucked up thing, nor does it discount my point that reputable organizations are happy to play host to these viewpoints.
Additionally, it's pretty superficial analysis to paint feminism as "an entire movement" that "stands by its own" no matter what. Feminists are the often the most strident critics of other feminists - even a little bit of reading of the writing about this incident, or about the Quvenzhané Wallis incident, or any major gender-related issue will show you that. Hell, look into womanism. You may hear a few voices over and over again in mainstream media representing feminism, but that is not the entirety of the movement. If anything, we get more grief from supposed allies about how we're not overlooking the crimes of fellow feminists and just ~*working together*~ than we do for being too uniform.
I'd be happy to talk about the varied aspects of feminism that I observe and the many internal conflicts that take place, but that should probably happen in private; I've taken up enough space in this thread and probably need to walk away for a bit. I just wanted to protest the facile statement that "the MRA assholes are winning because your monolithic movement stands by its own". There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of feminism - we suck at intersectionality, transmisogyny, racism, and classism among other things - but I don't agree that lack of internal criticism is one of them.
posted by Phire at 8:59 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
That really depends on who you ask. From what I heard from people who were there, the protest was peaceful and non-violent until the police showed up and started knocking protestors to the ground. I don't agree with blocking entryway to fucked up things, but I also don't see anything wrong with showing up to protest a fucked up thing, nor does it discount my point that reputable organizations are happy to play host to these viewpoints.
Additionally, it's pretty superficial analysis to paint feminism as "an entire movement" that "stands by its own" no matter what. Feminists are the often the most strident critics of other feminists - even a little bit of reading of the writing about this incident, or about the Quvenzhané Wallis incident, or any major gender-related issue will show you that. Hell, look into womanism. You may hear a few voices over and over again in mainstream media representing feminism, but that is not the entirety of the movement. If anything, we get more grief from supposed allies about how we're not overlooking the crimes of fellow feminists and just ~*working together*~ than we do for being too uniform.
I'd be happy to talk about the varied aspects of feminism that I observe and the many internal conflicts that take place, but that should probably happen in private; I've taken up enough space in this thread and probably need to walk away for a bit. I just wanted to protest the facile statement that "the MRA assholes are winning because your monolithic movement stands by its own". There are many legitimate criticisms to be made of feminism - we suck at intersectionality, transmisogyny, racism, and classism among other things - but I don't agree that lack of internal criticism is one of them.
posted by Phire at 8:59 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
MRA types are the restroom shit-smearers of the internet. Troubled fuck-ups who have to express their issues through anonymous, regressive behaviour that screams for mental services intervention.
It is unpleasant to deal with shit-smearing, true. What one does not do, however, is treat the shit-smearer as a credible force, an influencer of opinion, an adversary to debate, an equal.
In my opinion, we devalue ourselves and our community by treating the MRA shit-smearers as anything more than a few hundred loud-mouthed fuck-ups who should be locked in a padded cell for their own protection.
Allowing them to shape any part of your life is a mistake.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:01 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
It is unpleasant to deal with shit-smearing, true. What one does not do, however, is treat the shit-smearer as a credible force, an influencer of opinion, an adversary to debate, an equal.
In my opinion, we devalue ourselves and our community by treating the MRA shit-smearers as anything more than a few hundred loud-mouthed fuck-ups who should be locked in a padded cell for their own protection.
Allowing them to shape any part of your life is a mistake.
posted by five fresh fish at 9:01 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Rory, I don't think that you have a "4chan view of the world" or that you're endorsing it. I also think, however, that people who claim to have a "4chan view of the world" don't actually have such a view. In short, they're very selective when it comes to choosing whom to harass and when they think "the Internet isn't serious." That selectivity is determined by whether they think they will face consequences. When the prospect of consequences is real, suddenly the Internet is "serious" to them, and they make decisions accordingly. They are much, much worse people than you give them credit for.
posted by deanc at 9:03 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by deanc at 9:03 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, if the question about not liking dirty jokes wasn't related to the context here, it's sort of a derail... although I am sure there are men who do not like to hear dirty jokes at all. You may not meet them because they are members of the Exclusive Brethren or the Amish. They are also unlikely to be on MetaFilter, but if you genuinely want to find them I can give you some pointers.
If it was related to the topic, then I'm, with koeselitz - dirty jokes in a professional environment make me deeply uncomfortable, in many situations, because it means that the person I am talking to has iffy boundaries, and more importantly that the person I am talking to is a potential issue waiting to happen, because they may at some point force me to decide whether to make a complaint against them, which will be a whole lot of hassle, or try to ignore them and let them either make work more difficult for other people in the same way or end up with me having to explain why I didn't raise concerns earlier.
It's a headache, which makes it not worth the non-certain possibility that I might be amused by the joke. There are many other ways to be amused.
Walking back topicwards a bit, though...
Nobody will think "oh this company fired Adria because we said sexist things about her." They will think "oh Adria was fired because all of the horrible sexist things we said about her were accurate."
Partly this, but I think also partly "this company fired Adria because we made them. And we can get other companies to fire other women we don't like, using the same methods." SendGrid have kind of created a rod for their own backs by explicitly saying:
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:05 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
If it was related to the topic, then I'm, with koeselitz - dirty jokes in a professional environment make me deeply uncomfortable, in many situations, because it means that the person I am talking to has iffy boundaries, and more importantly that the person I am talking to is a potential issue waiting to happen, because they may at some point force me to decide whether to make a complaint against them, which will be a whole lot of hassle, or try to ignore them and let them either make work more difficult for other people in the same way or end up with me having to explain why I didn't raise concerns earlier.
It's a headache, which makes it not worth the non-certain possibility that I might be amused by the joke. There are many other ways to be amused.
Walking back topicwards a bit, though...
Nobody will think "oh this company fired Adria because we said sexist things about her." They will think "oh Adria was fired because all of the horrible sexist things we said about her were accurate."
Partly this, but I think also partly "this company fired Adria because we made them. And we can get other companies to fire other women we don't like, using the same methods." SendGrid have kind of created a rod for their own backs by explicitly saying:
In the end, the consequences that resulted from how she reported the conduct put our business in danger. Our commitment to our 130 employees, their families, our community members and our more than 130,000 valued customers is our primary concern.That is going to be read as "if you don't like someone who works for us, see if you can whip up a DDoS by telling a bunch of half-truths to credulous forum members, and we'll probably fire them. Try it with other companies!" Which is... unfortunate. I think SendGrid were in a very difficult position, but this seems like a response that is not good for SME technology industry generally.
posted by running order squabble fest at 9:05 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I think the whole decision to fire her was incorrect, but it was so deeply strange that they put an official announcement on their website like that. Probably terrible for office morale.
posted by sweetkid at 9:17 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by sweetkid at 9:17 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
: "That is going to be read as "if you don't like someone who works for us, see if you can whip up a DDoS by telling a bunch of half-truths to credulous forum members, and we'll probably fire them. Try it with other companies!" Which is... unfortunate. I think SendGrid were in a very difficult position, but this seems like a response that is not good for SME technology industry generally."
Or the takeaway could be that "if you act in a shameful manner while representing our company, we will fire you." I don't think the DDoS was necessarily the last straw for them. It might be enough to simply drag the company's name through the mud.
posted by mullingitover at 9:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Or the takeaway could be that "if you act in a shameful manner while representing our company, we will fire you." I don't think the DDoS was necessarily the last straw for them. It might be enough to simply drag the company's name through the mud.
posted by mullingitover at 9:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Phire, yes, I've noticed there's plenty of internal criticism, but in almost every area it flows in one distinct direction. Take for instance transphobia - there are both transphobic feminists and trans-inclusive feminists, and the transphobic feminists have all sorts of awful things to say about anyone who dares treat trans women as human beings, but for the most part the trans-inclusive feminists actually protect the transphobes from criticism and from responsibility for their own actions, and the more influential they are the more true this is. The criticism is a one-way phenomena that happens in the wrong direction. I'm guessing this is related to the pressure to work together that you've seen, probably also one-sided. (This is as you say getting really off-topic though. Hmmmmm.)
posted by makomk at 9:24 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by makomk at 9:24 AM on March 22, 2013
Sorry for my general misunderstanding here. I guess I really just don't understand what exactly you were getting at.
Likewise, sorry, I think we crossed wires on the context. My original comment was meant to be to the effect that I never, ever, not in a month of sundays, had met somebody who just simply didn't care to hear a dirty joke, and would have been very surprised to learn of the existence of such a person. I now see that your response was intended to mean something along the lines that you didn't like the way (or how often, or when/where) people sometimes told them because it makes you uncomfortable about your status in the group, and I agree there must be many more like you who feel the same, and yes there are lots of people who do a shitty job at judging the appropriateness of a dirty joke, or who tell them for reasons other than a reflection on the comedy that is the human reproductive mechanism, or just get the timing all wrong, and I wish they would just tone it down, for everybody's sake. So alas I must continue my quixotic quest to locate the one person who doesn't like dirty jokes, and armed with a bottle of bushmills, convert them to the cause with the one about young sean mccarthy going down the aisle and into the confessional.
posted by amorphatist at 9:25 AM on March 22, 2013
Likewise, sorry, I think we crossed wires on the context. My original comment was meant to be to the effect that I never, ever, not in a month of sundays, had met somebody who just simply didn't care to hear a dirty joke, and would have been very surprised to learn of the existence of such a person. I now see that your response was intended to mean something along the lines that you didn't like the way (or how often, or when/where) people sometimes told them because it makes you uncomfortable about your status in the group, and I agree there must be many more like you who feel the same, and yes there are lots of people who do a shitty job at judging the appropriateness of a dirty joke, or who tell them for reasons other than a reflection on the comedy that is the human reproductive mechanism, or just get the timing all wrong, and I wish they would just tone it down, for everybody's sake. So alas I must continue my quixotic quest to locate the one person who doesn't like dirty jokes, and armed with a bottle of bushmills, convert them to the cause with the one about young sean mccarthy going down the aisle and into the confessional.
posted by amorphatist at 9:25 AM on March 22, 2013
I don't think the rape and death threats are a sideshow. They're the show. I don't know why we're expected to ignore them as trolls and just continue spending hundreds of words of text discussing how she was a bully because she posted photos. She oughtn't have, but if she oughtn't have, this campaign of online bullying against her oughtn't have by a factor of a thousand. Why is her gaffe the focus while the actual crime of online threats is just what happens when you taunt the web community?
I think it's because the tweet incident was the show before all the threats started showing up, and people were initially trying to have a conversation about what happened between those two (or three) people. It's kind of annoying, actually, that the mob shows up, and then that initial discussion should become unimportant, because the world is filled with jerks. It's okay, I think, to have that initial conversation still while asking what to do about the jerks. I'm even okay if someone decides they'd rather talk about the jerks than the initial incident. But I'd prefer to not tell people they shouldn't talk about the initial incident if they find it to still be pretty important.
posted by SpacemanStix at 9:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
I think it's because the tweet incident was the show before all the threats started showing up, and people were initially trying to have a conversation about what happened between those two (or three) people. It's kind of annoying, actually, that the mob shows up, and then that initial discussion should become unimportant, because the world is filled with jerks. It's okay, I think, to have that initial conversation still while asking what to do about the jerks. I'm even okay if someone decides they'd rather talk about the jerks than the initial incident. But I'd prefer to not tell people they shouldn't talk about the initial incident if they find it to still be pretty important.
posted by SpacemanStix at 9:28 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
amorphatist: I have met such men. They were devout Catholics, if that helps.
posted by koeselitz at 9:29 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by koeselitz at 9:29 AM on March 22, 2013
I'm guessing most of them [MRA] had really unfavorable divorce settlements?
I actually know an MRA-type. He is, in fact, divorced. His wife filed for divorce after it came to light that he had been sleeping with her sister for a couple of years and had no intention of stopping. She had to pay him alimony to the tune of $1200 a month for 18 months, as she had the higher-earning job -- he actually had NO job, since he had quit his job a year earlier while she was abroad on business and didn't tell her until she'd been back for a week. He is furious, furious, FURIOUS that the feminazi courts sided with his bitch ex and ruined his life.
I think these guys are just jerks with little to no connection to reality.
posted by KathrynT at 9:31 AM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
I actually know an MRA-type. He is, in fact, divorced. His wife filed for divorce after it came to light that he had been sleeping with her sister for a couple of years and had no intention of stopping. She had to pay him alimony to the tune of $1200 a month for 18 months, as she had the higher-earning job -- he actually had NO job, since he had quit his job a year earlier while she was abroad on business and didn't tell her until she'd been back for a week. He is furious, furious, FURIOUS that the feminazi courts sided with his bitch ex and ruined his life.
I think these guys are just jerks with little to no connection to reality.
posted by KathrynT at 9:31 AM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
"Well, now I still cannot say that I've "met a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes", so I have no idea what you were trying to do here, and must strongly concur with you that your interjection must have been utterly beside the point."
You can however say that you know a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes in the workplace, in fact you can say you know two, and that is in addition to the big pile of women who have spoken up in this thread if their voices really don't count for you.
I like dirty jokes, heck I even like dirty jokes related to my work, the gender field in my profile is one of them - immediately parsable by maybe a couple dozen people on Earth - but I don't tell them to people who are subordinate to me ever, I don't tell them in the workplace ever, I don't tell them to people I'm not already familiar with on that level ever, and I have indeed not been silenced all my life. Despite the fact that I make and love dirty jokes, it still makes me extremely uncomfortable when my boss tells them no matter how artful the delivery or funny the joke is. In addition to the fact that even though I really like my boss and generally love the familiar atmosphere he works hard to promote, I don't really want to be familiar with any boss in that kind of way - and even if I did I would still not want to be part of a boys club that was exclusive to other people who felt that way. It creates a really fucked up dynamic that forces familiarity, much less sexual familiarity, on people who don't want it and can't afford to be 'that bitch who can't take it.'
As Gore Vidal once said of the Puritans, that they didn't leave England to escape persecution but to find a country in which they could freely persecute others, geek culture seems to often focus on finding ways to exclude others and wrapping them in its own persecution complex. Fuck the boys club, fuck the position it puts people who don't want to hear dick jokes where they work, and fuck the hostile atmosphere they create.
posted by Blasdelb at 9:33 AM on March 22, 2013 [26 favorites]
You can however say that you know a guy who doesn't want to hear dirty jokes in the workplace, in fact you can say you know two, and that is in addition to the big pile of women who have spoken up in this thread if their voices really don't count for you.
I like dirty jokes, heck I even like dirty jokes related to my work, the gender field in my profile is one of them - immediately parsable by maybe a couple dozen people on Earth - but I don't tell them to people who are subordinate to me ever, I don't tell them in the workplace ever, I don't tell them to people I'm not already familiar with on that level ever, and I have indeed not been silenced all my life. Despite the fact that I make and love dirty jokes, it still makes me extremely uncomfortable when my boss tells them no matter how artful the delivery or funny the joke is. In addition to the fact that even though I really like my boss and generally love the familiar atmosphere he works hard to promote, I don't really want to be familiar with any boss in that kind of way - and even if I did I would still not want to be part of a boys club that was exclusive to other people who felt that way. It creates a really fucked up dynamic that forces familiarity, much less sexual familiarity, on people who don't want it and can't afford to be 'that bitch who can't take it.'
As Gore Vidal once said of the Puritans, that they didn't leave England to escape persecution but to find a country in which they could freely persecute others, geek culture seems to often focus on finding ways to exclude others and wrapping them in its own persecution complex. Fuck the boys club, fuck the position it puts people who don't want to hear dick jokes where they work, and fuck the hostile atmosphere they create.
posted by Blasdelb at 9:33 AM on March 22, 2013 [26 favorites]
if you don't like someone who works for us, see if you can whip up a DDoS by telling a bunch of half-truths to credulous forum members, and we'll probably fire them.
I think their decision was made easier by the fact that if she hadn't tweeted the picture, maybe five people would have known about the whole incident and no one would have gotten fired.
I strongly disagree with those above calling Richards a "sociopath." I think she miscalculated. She promotes her employer (and herself) through social media and generally seems pretty good at that. I think she thought that she was taking a stand on a moral cause -- sexism in tech -- and doing so in a way that would generate good publicity for both herself and her employer. She tweeted the picture and wrote about the incident on her blog not just because she was upset, but because she thought this was a battle she would win and would reflect well on herself and SendGrid.
She was disastrously wrong unfortunately. Part of this is because people are horrible monsters who deserve to die in a fire, but part of it is because she simply didn't have the right perspective and was overconfident. She honestly doesn't seem that thoughtful to me about feminist issues.
Some people seem to think that this is just another "women complains about injustice, gets shot down" story, but I think that's a bit too pessimistic. For one thing, her overconfidence suggests to me that she has generally been very successful at raising her voice and making things happen the way she wants them to. Her actions were not the actions of an insecure person whose concerns are always ignored and dismissed.
At any rate, she's not just someone who the masses don't like -- she's someone who deliberately publicized an incident and wound up creating a PR mess for her company. She screwed up her job.
posted by leopard at 9:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [14 favorites]
I think their decision was made easier by the fact that if she hadn't tweeted the picture, maybe five people would have known about the whole incident and no one would have gotten fired.
I strongly disagree with those above calling Richards a "sociopath." I think she miscalculated. She promotes her employer (and herself) through social media and generally seems pretty good at that. I think she thought that she was taking a stand on a moral cause -- sexism in tech -- and doing so in a way that would generate good publicity for both herself and her employer. She tweeted the picture and wrote about the incident on her blog not just because she was upset, but because she thought this was a battle she would win and would reflect well on herself and SendGrid.
She was disastrously wrong unfortunately. Part of this is because people are horrible monsters who deserve to die in a fire, but part of it is because she simply didn't have the right perspective and was overconfident. She honestly doesn't seem that thoughtful to me about feminist issues.
Some people seem to think that this is just another "women complains about injustice, gets shot down" story, but I think that's a bit too pessimistic. For one thing, her overconfidence suggests to me that she has generally been very successful at raising her voice and making things happen the way she wants them to. Her actions were not the actions of an insecure person whose concerns are always ignored and dismissed.
At any rate, she's not just someone who the masses don't like -- she's someone who deliberately publicized an incident and wound up creating a PR mess for her company. She screwed up her job.
posted by leopard at 9:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [14 favorites]
amorphatist: I have met such men. They were devout Catholics, if that helps.
As I would suspect, and that's why I come armed with the sean mccarthy joke. Many such hard cases have already fallen beneath its sword.
posted by amorphatist at 9:36 AM on March 22, 2013
As I would suspect, and that's why I come armed with the sean mccarthy joke. Many such hard cases have already fallen beneath its sword.
posted by amorphatist at 9:36 AM on March 22, 2013
Ars Technica has a good writeup of this: How “dongle” jokes got two people fired—and led to DDoS attacks.
Also, an opinion piece from their editor: “Donglegate” is classic overreaction—and everyone pays.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 9:47 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Also, an opinion piece from their editor: “Donglegate” is classic overreaction—and everyone pays.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 9:47 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Book deals, talk show appearances, speaking engagements.
What? I really don't think so, unless by talk show appearances you mean techy podcasts. Pretty sure this is a nonstory outside of tech.
posted by sweetkid at 9:47 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
What? I really don't think so, unless by talk show appearances you mean techy podcasts. Pretty sure this is a nonstory outside of tech.
posted by sweetkid at 9:47 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I went over to 4chan to see what the MRAs were saying so you guys don't have to. I found out from /b/ that Adria Richards had a cat named Turtle, who she gave away after 18 years because her new place didn't allow pets. These pictures of Turtle are the saddest thing I have seen today, just look at her adorable face peering out of that horrible cage. Adria and that developer will no doubt be ok, I just hope the same thing can be said of Turtle.
posted by Ad hominem at 9:51 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Ad hominem at 9:51 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think Richards can recover pretty easily if she acknowledges making some mistakes (change her position to something like "sexism is a real problem in tech, but I handled things terribly"). I mean, bad publicity is still publicity, and controversy generates buzz.
posted by leopard at 9:52 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by leopard at 9:52 AM on March 22, 2013
Afroblanco: “Check google news. Most headlines seem to be in the pro-Adria camp.”
That is not what I see at all. The internet has been hating on her since the moment this happened, and plenty of people are still expressing delight that she was fired. To be clear, I'm not just talking about MRAs. I'm talking about the consensus opinion on Hacker News, for one, which (for all its faults) at least seems to express the general across-the-board feelings in the tech industry.
posted by koeselitz at 9:54 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
That is not what I see at all. The internet has been hating on her since the moment this happened, and plenty of people are still expressing delight that she was fired. To be clear, I'm not just talking about MRAs. I'm talking about the consensus opinion on Hacker News, for one, which (for all its faults) at least seems to express the general across-the-board feelings in the tech industry.
posted by koeselitz at 9:54 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
/b/ that Adria Richards had a cat named Turtle, who she gave away after 18 years because her new place didn't allow pets.
ew. really? That is awful. Poor Turtle. 18 years? I can't even understand that.
(Maybe she gave it to a friend or family or something?)
posted by sweetkid at 9:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
ew. really? That is awful. Poor Turtle. 18 years? I can't even understand that.
(Maybe she gave it to a friend or family or something?)
posted by sweetkid at 9:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
(And for the record, I did check Google News and look at the headlines. The Atlantic's headline looks like it's sort of on Adria's side, but that article is mostly just about her firing. A much more common attitude is New York Magazine's, which trivializes the whole thing by saying it was just a "stupid dongle joke.")
posted by koeselitz at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by koeselitz at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
: "ew. really? That is awful. Poor turtle. 18 years? I can't even understand that."
Aaand here comes the DDOS on her new landlord.
posted by mullingitover at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Aaand here comes the DDOS on her new landlord.
posted by mullingitover at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Again, the mainstream news sites mostly seem bemused that anybody would get upset about a stupid little joke.
posted by koeselitz at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by koeselitz at 9:58 AM on March 22, 2013
I looked at Google News and I'm not seeing much on there about this. Also, I don't know why you think the developer is "fucked." He will probably be OK getting a new job.
I don't think this "book deal" future for Richards is really something that's going to happen though.
posted by sweetkid at 9:59 AM on March 22, 2013
I don't think this "book deal" future for Richards is really something that's going to happen though.
posted by sweetkid at 9:59 AM on March 22, 2013
And the stance of the tech industry matters because it dictates whether she or he will get another job. From the looks of things right now, there are legions of people that will be delighted to give the guy a new job. Adria Richards, not so much. And the idea that people will just get "book deals" and suddenly be just fine is kind of silly.
posted by koeselitz at 10:01 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 10:01 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I think the whole decision to fire her was incorrect, but it was so deeply strange that they put an official announcement on their website like that. Probably terrible for office morale.
Or, maybe not.
posted by ericb at 10:04 AM on March 22, 2013
Or, maybe not.
posted by ericb at 10:04 AM on March 22, 2013
: "A much more common attitude is New York Magazine's, which trivializes the whole thing by saying it was just a "stupid dongle joke.")"
This is probably the most appropriate take on the whole fiasco. The whole thing really is ridiculous when you step back; it's the tech world's version of an episode of the Jerry Springer Show. Everyone commenting on the story is essentially an audience member who Jerry helpfully hands the microphone so they can share their important thoughts on the matter. Then you throw in GIFW theory on top of that. It's a joke.
The only sane thing to do here is laugh at how ridiculous it is.
posted by mullingitover at 10:04 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
This is probably the most appropriate take on the whole fiasco. The whole thing really is ridiculous when you step back; it's the tech world's version of an episode of the Jerry Springer Show. Everyone commenting on the story is essentially an audience member who Jerry helpfully hands the microphone so they can share their important thoughts on the matter. Then you throw in GIFW theory on top of that. It's a joke.
The only sane thing to do here is laugh at how ridiculous it is.
posted by mullingitover at 10:04 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I have honestly yet to meet one.
I've only honestly met one murderer, a fellow class mate in high school who was extremely intelligent in many ways and utterly insane in others. He later killed a guy execution style.
All the other people I have met have not been murderers as far as I know but that said, I don't have any problem with the concept that other people murder others just because I haven't met more of them.
As for MRA "types", I'm reminded of a very unpleasant experience in my first year at University. I was enrolled in Humanities (not particularly respected at the time) and some guy sat beside me in a TA session for a literature class. He was forced to take a Humanities course as part of his Engineering degree. The TA was a woman and the mix of people in the class was pretty balanced in terms of gender. This guy immediately starts going off about "liberals" and "women" in a way I had naively thought at the time, was well behind us as a culture. His hatred of liberals (of any gender) and women not in the kitchen was indescribable. The idea that "liberal" was a bad thing was completely alien to me. He just assumed I'd agree to him because I was a guy in a Humanities class. When he found I had willing enrolled in the course and the program he joked that I was one of those guys born from anal rather than vaginal sex. I didn't care for joke. This sort of assumption happens fairly frequently. Some other guys make horribly inappropriate remarks about women or men, about races, etc., and think you're just like them. Sorry, no, not my type of thing.
He didn't last long in that course and I have no idea if he lasted long at the University. Never saw him again. Of course I've since seen this attitude again and again, particularly espoused by those that are often classified as being on the "right" (this left/right dichotomy just isn't as strong and prevalent in Canada as it is in the States, at least in my circle). Extremists of any sort are problematic to say the least and I am not surprised, though I am saddened, that they can post horrific threats on the Internet that most would probably only mumble to themselves in public.
Being "classified" due to your gender is a very unpleasant thing. It's very annoying to have assumptions made about you because you're male or female and it happens far to frequently. A few times I haven't been man enough for certain women because I didn't sexualize them or treat them like shit (though I realize this points to a wider problem in socialization between genders). I remember I went to a documentary about older Japanese women who had not married in Japan. It was obviously about how that makes them feel in a culture where this is frowned upon. I went with a couple of friends and one them introduced me to a friend of hers that we ran into in the queue. My friend said something about me liking Japanese films and her friend immediately guffawed and said "So he's one of those guys." Yeah, I'm one of those guys who studied International Cinema so I'm familiar with some Japanese films amongst films from a number of countries but I don't watch any Japanese films no matter what, don't have any posters, etc., and so forth. But apparently I am a pervert who loves to watch Japanese sex cinema or something.
These extreme, unpleasant people, can make our lives miserable. Just relax and be reasonable seems to be something alien to them, as is finding out what a person is about rather than just assuming what they are. I find the idea that we should watch what we say and do because it might give extremists ammo to be absurd. We shouldn't let them quiet any voices just because it might advantage them in their twisted mentality somehow. I don't believe for a moment that the firing was a result of DDoS or the assholes who post deplorable things about people but about making this whole thing public rather than handling it professionally.
I have some experience with this mode of communication. A friend of mine collaborated with 2 other writers on writing a play that was staged and was quite successful. After it had completed it's run he ripped the other 2 writers in his blog for destroying his vision basically and not listening to him, none of which he ever said to them during the entire writing and run of the play. He claimed he didn't want to be involved but still was involved anyway. My take was that I would never collaborate with this guy if he can't keep a personal situation private but rather makes his grievances with specific people public without warning just to shame them. I think it's fine to publicly talk about the struggles of collaborative writing of course, just as it is on any issue, but to lambast others publicly without warning and without ever bringing it up means you can't trust that person in a collaborative situation. Sometimes we all make mistakes don't we? Sometimes we don't see things. Sometimes our awareness isn't quite there. Aren't we constantly learning through life? If we make a bad and insensitive joke shouldn't we be given the chance to learn why it is so or should we just be publicly shamed and derided?
Similarly, there was no need for any of this to be elevated to the level it has been. Poorly handled is an understatement of course. Opinions vary, as they often to, and what weight we give to certain events in the grand scheme also varies. In the end, this is very much a storm in teacup that has accomplished nothing positive or particularly relevant. It's like food having gone through our digestive system and come out the other end when we should have been talking about the food before hand.
posted by juiceCake at 10:11 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
I've only honestly met one murderer, a fellow class mate in high school who was extremely intelligent in many ways and utterly insane in others. He later killed a guy execution style.
All the other people I have met have not been murderers as far as I know but that said, I don't have any problem with the concept that other people murder others just because I haven't met more of them.
As for MRA "types", I'm reminded of a very unpleasant experience in my first year at University. I was enrolled in Humanities (not particularly respected at the time) and some guy sat beside me in a TA session for a literature class. He was forced to take a Humanities course as part of his Engineering degree. The TA was a woman and the mix of people in the class was pretty balanced in terms of gender. This guy immediately starts going off about "liberals" and "women" in a way I had naively thought at the time, was well behind us as a culture. His hatred of liberals (of any gender) and women not in the kitchen was indescribable. The idea that "liberal" was a bad thing was completely alien to me. He just assumed I'd agree to him because I was a guy in a Humanities class. When he found I had willing enrolled in the course and the program he joked that I was one of those guys born from anal rather than vaginal sex. I didn't care for joke. This sort of assumption happens fairly frequently. Some other guys make horribly inappropriate remarks about women or men, about races, etc., and think you're just like them. Sorry, no, not my type of thing.
He didn't last long in that course and I have no idea if he lasted long at the University. Never saw him again. Of course I've since seen this attitude again and again, particularly espoused by those that are often classified as being on the "right" (this left/right dichotomy just isn't as strong and prevalent in Canada as it is in the States, at least in my circle). Extremists of any sort are problematic to say the least and I am not surprised, though I am saddened, that they can post horrific threats on the Internet that most would probably only mumble to themselves in public.
Being "classified" due to your gender is a very unpleasant thing. It's very annoying to have assumptions made about you because you're male or female and it happens far to frequently. A few times I haven't been man enough for certain women because I didn't sexualize them or treat them like shit (though I realize this points to a wider problem in socialization between genders). I remember I went to a documentary about older Japanese women who had not married in Japan. It was obviously about how that makes them feel in a culture where this is frowned upon. I went with a couple of friends and one them introduced me to a friend of hers that we ran into in the queue. My friend said something about me liking Japanese films and her friend immediately guffawed and said "So he's one of those guys." Yeah, I'm one of those guys who studied International Cinema so I'm familiar with some Japanese films amongst films from a number of countries but I don't watch any Japanese films no matter what, don't have any posters, etc., and so forth. But apparently I am a pervert who loves to watch Japanese sex cinema or something.
These extreme, unpleasant people, can make our lives miserable. Just relax and be reasonable seems to be something alien to them, as is finding out what a person is about rather than just assuming what they are. I find the idea that we should watch what we say and do because it might give extremists ammo to be absurd. We shouldn't let them quiet any voices just because it might advantage them in their twisted mentality somehow. I don't believe for a moment that the firing was a result of DDoS or the assholes who post deplorable things about people but about making this whole thing public rather than handling it professionally.
I have some experience with this mode of communication. A friend of mine collaborated with 2 other writers on writing a play that was staged and was quite successful. After it had completed it's run he ripped the other 2 writers in his blog for destroying his vision basically and not listening to him, none of which he ever said to them during the entire writing and run of the play. He claimed he didn't want to be involved but still was involved anyway. My take was that I would never collaborate with this guy if he can't keep a personal situation private but rather makes his grievances with specific people public without warning just to shame them. I think it's fine to publicly talk about the struggles of collaborative writing of course, just as it is on any issue, but to lambast others publicly without warning and without ever bringing it up means you can't trust that person in a collaborative situation. Sometimes we all make mistakes don't we? Sometimes we don't see things. Sometimes our awareness isn't quite there. Aren't we constantly learning through life? If we make a bad and insensitive joke shouldn't we be given the chance to learn why it is so or should we just be publicly shamed and derided?
Similarly, there was no need for any of this to be elevated to the level it has been. Poorly handled is an understatement of course. Opinions vary, as they often to, and what weight we give to certain events in the grand scheme also varies. In the end, this is very much a storm in teacup that has accomplished nothing positive or particularly relevant. It's like food having gone through our digestive system and come out the other end when we should have been talking about the food before hand.
posted by juiceCake at 10:11 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
/b/ that Adria Richards had a cat named Turtle, who she gave away after 18 years because her new place didn't allow pets.The comment she wrote along with those pictures says, in part, "Thank you to everyone who helped spread the word and helped me find her a home!"
ew. really? That is awful. Poor Turtle. 18 years? I can't even understand that.
(Maybe she gave it to a friend or family or something?)
So apparently she gave Turtle away. Maybe to a friend, maybe a friend of a friend, maybe random Twitter-enabled person.
posted by Flunkie at 10:12 AM on March 22, 2013
The only sane thing to do here is laugh at how ridiculous it is.
People have lost their jobs and been threatened with murder and rape. That's not really "laughs" so much as "lulz", I think.
And the shlub who lost his job? Yeah, he's kinda fucked.
I wouldn't be so sure. This is the San Francisco startup scene, right? If the guy is able to deliver, then he'll get a new job pretty quickly. There are examples of people with far bigger clouds over them walking into high-level roles. If he wasn't delivering, then Adria Richards is not really the biggest problem he has.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:14 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
People have lost their jobs and been threatened with murder and rape. That's not really "laughs" so much as "lulz", I think.
And the shlub who lost his job? Yeah, he's kinda fucked.
I wouldn't be so sure. This is the San Francisco startup scene, right? If the guy is able to deliver, then he'll get a new job pretty quickly. There are examples of people with far bigger clouds over them walking into high-level roles. If he wasn't delivering, then Adria Richards is not really the biggest problem he has.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:14 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
These pictures of Turtle are the saddest thing I have seen today, just look at her adorable face peering out of that horrible cage. Adria and that developer will no doubt be ok, I just hope the same thing can be said of Turtle.
I really really wouldn't drag that into this. Judging from the photo and its caption, that's a cat carrier, not a cage, and she's taking Turtle to a new home, not the pound or a sidewalk or something. And it sounds like she put considerable effort into finding her a new home. I mean, I'd take every possible step to make sure my cat can always live with me, but sometimes that's not possible, and we don't know the circumstances that led to Adria's decision. Sure, maybe it was a callous "ooh this new place is sweet but it's no-pets, see ya furball," but maybe she was evicted and searched high and low to find a way to stay with Turtle, but could not find anything.
Regardless of the details, it's not even relevant, it's just gossip. I strongly disapprove of what Adria Richards did in this situation (and I sympathize with her over the fallout she's had to deal with); I don't need to go searching for reasons to hate her.
posted by Metroid Baby at 10:17 AM on March 22, 2013 [11 favorites]
I really really wouldn't drag that into this. Judging from the photo and its caption, that's a cat carrier, not a cage, and she's taking Turtle to a new home, not the pound or a sidewalk or something. And it sounds like she put considerable effort into finding her a new home. I mean, I'd take every possible step to make sure my cat can always live with me, but sometimes that's not possible, and we don't know the circumstances that led to Adria's decision. Sure, maybe it was a callous "ooh this new place is sweet but it's no-pets, see ya furball," but maybe she was evicted and searched high and low to find a way to stay with Turtle, but could not find anything.
Regardless of the details, it's not even relevant, it's just gossip. I strongly disapprove of what Adria Richards did in this situation (and I sympathize with her over the fallout she's had to deal with); I don't need to go searching for reasons to hate her.
posted by Metroid Baby at 10:17 AM on March 22, 2013 [11 favorites]
Well, the New York article does get it right.
In summary: Two people have lost their jobs, a sexist hell-storm has been unleashed on an undeserving target, and thousands of man-hours in Silicon Valley have been spent taking sides on an Internet skirmish instead of building burrito-finder apps and self-driving cars. And all over an unfunny dongle joke.posted by ericb at 10:17 AM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
It seems that Adria Richards has annoyed a few people in the past. Here was one thing that stunned me. She took offense at a t-shirt that had been created for WCSF. Here it is. Take a look. Honestly, can you tell me what bugged her about it? I couldn't. I was scratching my head wondering what the hell her problem was.
Then I scrolled down to the second comment.
She's a nut.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 10:19 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Then I scrolled down to the second comment.
She's a nut.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 10:19 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
And the shlub who lost his job? Yeah, he's kinda fucked.In one of the Hacker News comments that are apparently from him, he said "I've already got a few leads, I met with a local start-up guru who's going to introduce me to some CEO's. I feel confidant I'll be employed very shortly."
posted by Flunkie at 10:20 AM on March 22, 2013
Afroblanco: “I think this is an area where the mainstream press will disagree with the tech press. The public shaming of the dude is basically a privacy issue, and Americans care more about feminism than privacy.”
I disagree, and I have a hard time not saying that it seems kind of crazy to me to say that Americans care about feminism at all. 90% of the people I know recoil at the mention of the term. Famous people are hesitant even to sympathize with feminists. "Privacy" is something everybody champions happily, debating only its limits, and even most conservatives tend to agree that one should be free to do what one likes in private. "Feminism" is much more fraught, and much less well-liked. I would doubt that "feminism" is a priority at all to most Americans. Most men I know view it as a threat.
And, again, you've claimed that Google News will corroborate this, but you haven't offered up any evidence. I mean, what search term were you using on Google News to come up with the idea that the mainstream press is sympathetic to Adria Richards? I was searching for "PyCon." Maybe I should have chosen a different term.
posted by koeselitz at 10:20 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I disagree, and I have a hard time not saying that it seems kind of crazy to me to say that Americans care about feminism at all. 90% of the people I know recoil at the mention of the term. Famous people are hesitant even to sympathize with feminists. "Privacy" is something everybody champions happily, debating only its limits, and even most conservatives tend to agree that one should be free to do what one likes in private. "Feminism" is much more fraught, and much less well-liked. I would doubt that "feminism" is a priority at all to most Americans. Most men I know view it as a threat.
And, again, you've claimed that Google News will corroborate this, but you haven't offered up any evidence. I mean, what search term were you using on Google News to come up with the idea that the mainstream press is sympathetic to Adria Richards? I was searching for "PyCon." Maybe I should have chosen a different term.
posted by koeselitz at 10:20 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
That's not really "laughs" so much as "lulz", I think.
No, isn't lulz from the term "for the lulz", meaning you did something just to laugh at the poor misfortune another person suffers, like schadenfreude. I don't think that's the case here.
I think mullingitover's laugh is the dark cynical laughter coming from deep within a soul that is slowly being driven insane by the harsh realities of the world. Kind of like that Tom Hanks laugh in Money Pit. Or
posted by FJT at 10:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
No, isn't lulz from the term "for the lulz", meaning you did something just to laugh at the poor misfortune another person suffers, like schadenfreude. I don't think that's the case here.
I think mullingitover's laugh is the dark cynical laughter coming from deep within a soul that is slowly being driven insane by the harsh realities of the world. Kind of like that Tom Hanks laugh in Money Pit. Or
posted by FJT at 10:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think Richards can recover pretty easily if she acknowledges making some mistakes (change her position to something like "sexism is a real problem in tech, but I handled things terribly"). I mean, bad publicity is still publicity, and controversy generates buzz.
I don't think her mob would let her apologize — she went all in on this pretty early, so she's pretty committed to whatever motivated her to publicly shame those two guys, whether she likes it or not, whether of not she even agrees with or understands her more vociferous proponents. That's the power of a mob; this thing has been running on its on own steam for a few days now.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't think her mob would let her apologize — she went all in on this pretty early, so she's pretty committed to whatever motivated her to publicly shame those two guys, whether she likes it or not, whether of not she even agrees with or understands her more vociferous proponents. That's the power of a mob; this thing has been running on its on own steam for a few days now.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ad hominem: "I found out from /b/ that Adria Richards had a cat named Turtle"
Man, ain't nobody need her flickr feed for this nonsense.
posted by boo_radley at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013
Man, ain't nobody need her flickr feed for this nonsense.
posted by boo_radley at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013
Adria is not very popular I guess with Reddit's female community TwoXXChromosomes
http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1aoeii/adria_richards_calls_out_sexism_at_pycon_on/
And the shlub who lost his job? Yeah, he's kinda fucked.
I don't think so. The great thing about being a dev is you can pretty much pick up freelance work no matter how crazy you are. And I've definitely worked with people with far more checkered pasts. HRish jobs like Adria's are much less forgiving. Maybe she should learn to code.
posted by melissam at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
http://www.reddit.com/r/TwoXChromosomes/comments/1aoeii/adria_richards_calls_out_sexism_at_pycon_on/
And the shlub who lost his job? Yeah, he's kinda fucked.
I don't think so. The great thing about being a dev is you can pretty much pick up freelance work no matter how crazy you are. And I've definitely worked with people with far more checkered pasts. HRish jobs like Adria's are much less forgiving. Maybe she should learn to code.
posted by melissam at 10:25 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I really really wouldn't drag that into this. Judging from the photo and its caption, that's a cat carrier, not a cage, and she's taking Turtle to a new home, not the pound or a sidewalk or something
Oh I'm not trying to dig up reasons to hate her, and I understand she took care to find Turtle a good home. Looking at the top two pictures I saw what looked like the back of a cage behind her but looking again it could be the same cat carrier from the bottom right picture.
Just reporting back that the MRAs at 4chan are all bent out of shape over Turtle.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:28 AM on March 22, 2013
Oh I'm not trying to dig up reasons to hate her, and I understand she took care to find Turtle a good home. Looking at the top two pictures I saw what looked like the back of a cage behind her but looking again it could be the same cat carrier from the bottom right picture.
Just reporting back that the MRAs at 4chan are all bent out of shape over Turtle.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:28 AM on March 22, 2013
Americans care more about feminism than privacy.
Adria Richards: I don't consider myself a feminist.
I don't think her mob would let her apologize — she went all in on this pretty early, so she's pretty committed to whatever motivated her to publicly shame those two guys, whether she likes it or not, whether of not she even agrees with or understands her more vociferous proponents. That's the power of a mob; this thing has been running on its on own steam for a few days now.
Seriously, you think "her mob" is a bigger obstacle to her continuing her career than the people making death threats, rape threats, calling her a sociopath, and launching DDOS attacks against her employer?
posted by leopard at 10:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Adria Richards: I don't consider myself a feminist.
I don't think her mob would let her apologize — she went all in on this pretty early, so she's pretty committed to whatever motivated her to publicly shame those two guys, whether she likes it or not, whether of not she even agrees with or understands her more vociferous proponents. That's the power of a mob; this thing has been running on its on own steam for a few days now.
Seriously, you think "her mob" is a bigger obstacle to her continuing her career than the people making death threats, rape threats, calling her a sociopath, and launching DDOS attacks against her employer?
posted by leopard at 10:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Just reporting back that the MRAs at 4chan are all bent out of shape over Turtle.
It would actually be great if we could leave the MRAs of 4chan/reddit on 4chan/reddit unless there's some reason this is relevant here? Going comment trawling on other websites for reasons to dislike anyone are sort of weirdly far afield and gossipy. I get that people find the accumulation of factoids confusing and interesting, but crosstalk between sites rarely ends well and sometimes ends very poorly.
posted by jessamyn at 10:31 AM on March 22, 2013 [14 favorites]
It would actually be great if we could leave the MRAs of 4chan/reddit on 4chan/reddit unless there's some reason this is relevant here? Going comment trawling on other websites for reasons to dislike anyone are sort of weirdly far afield and gossipy. I get that people find the accumulation of factoids confusing and interesting, but crosstalk between sites rarely ends well and sometimes ends very poorly.
posted by jessamyn at 10:31 AM on March 22, 2013 [14 favorites]
Just reporting back that the MRAs at 4chan are all bent out of shape over Turtle.
That actually does seem like it shows her at her worst
posted by tyllwin at 10:32 AM on March 22, 2013
That actually does seem like it shows her at her worst
posted by tyllwin at 10:32 AM on March 22, 2013
It's Never Lurgi: “It seems that Adria Richards has annoyed a few people in the past. Here was one thing that stunned me. She took offense at a t-shirt that had been created for WCSF. Here it is. Take a look. Honestly, can you tell me what bugged her about it? I couldn't. I was scratching my head wondering what the hell her problem was. Then I scrolled down to the second comment. She's a nut.”
Er – did you actually read that comment? Her opinion was wrong. It's kind of silly, yeah. But she expresses it in a thoughtful and decent way, rounding it off by saying she's happy to attend and she's totally a fan of Randall and of XKCD. Would that all "nuts" were so polite.
Honestly, people would love to see her as a random crazy here, but I don't think that's fair at all.
posted by koeselitz at 10:34 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
Er – did you actually read that comment? Her opinion was wrong. It's kind of silly, yeah. But she expresses it in a thoughtful and decent way, rounding it off by saying she's happy to attend and she's totally a fan of Randall and of XKCD. Would that all "nuts" were so polite.
Honestly, people would love to see her as a random crazy here, but I don't think that's fair at all.
posted by koeselitz at 10:34 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
It would actually be great if we could leave the MRAs of 4chan/reddit unless there's some reason this is relevant here?
Ok, just thought it would be more useful that pure conjecture over what 4chan or reddit or anyone was saying. I mean the later half of this thread is guesswork over what 4chan may or may not think about lulz.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013
Ok, just thought it would be more useful that pure conjecture over what 4chan or reddit or anyone was saying. I mean the later half of this thread is guesswork over what 4chan may or may not think about lulz.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013
I disagree, and I have a hard time not saying that it seems kind of crazy to me to say that Americans care about feminism at all.
Agree 100%. I'd kind of like to live in the bizarro world in which most Americans care about feminism.
posted by sweetkid at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
Agree 100%. I'd kind of like to live in the bizarro world in which most Americans care about feminism.
posted by sweetkid at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
Imperfect handling of cat re-homing does not make her argument invalid. Can we not go down the road of whether she ever broke up with someone awkwardly or was feeling really sad one day and wasn't very nice to someone she bumped into or whatever as some kind of excuse to invalidate her?
posted by Lyn Never at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by Lyn Never at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [8 favorites]
This may be confirmation bias, but I don't see any sign of a "mob" around or behind Adria Richards. The whole narrative is more that she went out on a limb and found that she didn't have the support she expected (at least until the actual mob turned up, at which point a lot of 'nobody deserves that' kicked in). Is there any evidence to that effect? Any DDoS attacks on Playhaven for not sacking both guys, for example? Death threats to Jim Franklin?
In a way, SendGrid may actually have helped her, by terminating her in a sufficiently sympathy-generating way; she's already getting invitations to come and talk to other companies about jobs. Whereas if she had been kept on but found herself unable to perform her duties for reasons either o community anomie or harassment-induced stress, to the point where she got terminated a few months later without any fanfare, that might have left her in a much worse position, employment-wise.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
In a way, SendGrid may actually have helped her, by terminating her in a sufficiently sympathy-generating way; she's already getting invitations to come and talk to other companies about jobs. Whereas if she had been kept on but found herself unable to perform her duties for reasons either o community anomie or harassment-induced stress, to the point where she got terminated a few months later without any fanfare, that might have left her in a much worse position, employment-wise.
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:35 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
"Take for instance transphobia - there are both transphobic feminists and trans-inclusive feminists, and the transphobic feminists have all sorts of awful things to say about anyone who dares treat trans women as human beings, but for the most part the trans-inclusive feminists actually protect the transphobes from criticism and from responsibility for their own actions, and the more influential they are the more true this is. The criticism is a one-way phenomena that happens in the wrong direction. I'm guessing this is related to the pressure to work together that you've seen, probably also one-sided. (This is as you say getting really off-topic though. Hmmmmm.)"
From someone who works with trans issues pretty regularly, that is just not true at all. Hell, even if you search for trans on MeFi, you'll find FPPs about cack feminists getting knocked hard for their transphobic bullshit.
posted by klangklangston at 10:36 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
From someone who works with trans issues pretty regularly, that is just not true at all. Hell, even if you search for trans on MeFi, you'll find FPPs about cack feminists getting knocked hard for their transphobic bullshit.
posted by klangklangston at 10:36 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Imperfect handling of cat re-homing does not make her argument invalid. Can we not go down the road of whether she ever broke up with someone awkwardly or was feeling really sad one day and wasn't very nice to someone she bumped into or whatever as some kind of excuse to invalidate her?
I agree with this and regret adding somewhat to the derail.
posted by sweetkid at 10:37 AM on March 22, 2013
I agree with this and regret adding somewhat to the derail.
posted by sweetkid at 10:37 AM on March 22, 2013
Interesting comment over at Ars Technica:
Anyone remember this SuperBowl commercial? [animated GIF of Best Buy commercial with Amy Poehler saying to male Best Buy store rep: "Does it make you uncomfortable when I use the word 'dongle?']posted by ericb at 10:40 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I came across that image while poking around for image ideas for this story, and Peter made an excellent observation: "dongle" jokes are obviously mainstream and tame enough that you can air them on the largest commercial broadcast in the world (eek hope that's true, it's big though!) and apparently no one blinks.
We don't know what the joke actually was, and I'm not even really trying to excuse it, but I do think it's fascinating that it's apparently part of our cultural experience, and not just limited to bearded programmers.
Honestly, can you tell me what bugged her about it?
The woman on the left seems to be saying, "I don't understand all that technical stuff, I just know this lets me post my photos and writing." Richards seems to have thought it was reinforcing stereotypes of women not being able to understand technical stuff.
(Never mind the next panel which is a woman explaining technical stuff and dismissing all the content stuff, although the non-technical woman seems to be the blonder one, so I guess you could get upset about that.)
posted by straight at 10:40 AM on March 22, 2013
The woman on the left seems to be saying, "I don't understand all that technical stuff, I just know this lets me post my photos and writing." Richards seems to have thought it was reinforcing stereotypes of women not being able to understand technical stuff.
(Never mind the next panel which is a woman explaining technical stuff and dismissing all the content stuff, although the non-technical woman seems to be the blonder one, so I guess you could get upset about that.)
posted by straight at 10:40 AM on March 22, 2013
And I've met a crazy number of MRAs, as well as a surprising number of racists and homophobes. I'm a straight white dude, so there's a pretty big assumption that I'm sympathetic to that bullshit, and I'm also generally not afraid to mock the shit out of someone who spouts off on their pet prejudices about race, gender or sexuality.
(It's weird, I'm far nicer here than I am out amungst the Anglisch, but people read me as much more of a dick here than in IRL.)
posted by klangklangston at 10:40 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
(It's weird, I'm far nicer here than I am out amungst the Anglisch, but people read me as much more of a dick here than in IRL.)
posted by klangklangston at 10:40 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Thanks for clarifying, Ad hominem. I'm all in favor of wrapping up the cat derail.
posted by Metroid Baby at 10:41 AM on March 22, 2013
posted by Metroid Baby at 10:41 AM on March 22, 2013
Anyone remember this SuperBowl commercial?
Well there you go. It's obviously not sexist if it's appeared in a Super Bowl commercial.
posted by straight at 10:42 AM on March 22, 2013 [10 favorites]
Well there you go. It's obviously not sexist if it's appeared in a Super Bowl commercial.
posted by straight at 10:42 AM on March 22, 2013 [10 favorites]
But I have not read any account anywhere that ends up painting these two guys as egregious sexists who must be stopped.
You're quite right, and I apologise. I mean, I went through the thread again, and while they are referred to as sexists only a couple of times, assholes numerous times, and parallels and analogies drawn between them and racists, the Reubenville coaches enabling rapists, and that they deserved any consequences they encountered, people here were in fact generally very good about referring to their sexual jokes rather than as sexism.
I would check other sites, but re-reading the thread reinforced that even though I think she overreacted, and even though I dislike the idea that people can be considered offensive even if they've been misheard or misconstrued, that at the end of the day there's a woman who managed to commit the cardinal sin of Using The Internet While Female, and she definitely doesn't deserve any of the mountains of crap that have come her way. So instead I'm just sad, and hope she's OK.
posted by gadge emeritus at 10:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
You're quite right, and I apologise. I mean, I went through the thread again, and while they are referred to as sexists only a couple of times, assholes numerous times, and parallels and analogies drawn between them and racists, the Reubenville coaches enabling rapists, and that they deserved any consequences they encountered, people here were in fact generally very good about referring to their sexual jokes rather than as sexism.
I would check other sites, but re-reading the thread reinforced that even though I think she overreacted, and even though I dislike the idea that people can be considered offensive even if they've been misheard or misconstrued, that at the end of the day there's a woman who managed to commit the cardinal sin of Using The Internet While Female, and she definitely doesn't deserve any of the mountains of crap that have come her way. So instead I'm just sad, and hope she's OK.
posted by gadge emeritus at 10:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
A few more headlines from major news outlets that seem to support the notion that Richards' firing and the backlash against her is the mainstream meat of the story (via Google News search for "Adria Richards"):
USA TODAY: SendGrid fires staffer for sex jokes tweet
San Francisco Chronicle: Rachel Sklar: The Firing Of Adria Richards Looks Like Kneejerk Appeasement
Denver Post: SendGrid fires Adria Richards after online firestorm over inappropriate jokes
San Jose Mercury News: Firings, backlash follow tweets of 'sexual' comments at tech conference
The Atlantic Wire: Hackers Got a Woman Fired by a Startup After She Called Out Sexual Harassment
posted by 0 at 10:45 AM on March 22, 2013
USA TODAY: SendGrid fires staffer for sex jokes tweet
San Francisco Chronicle: Rachel Sklar: The Firing Of Adria Richards Looks Like Kneejerk Appeasement
Denver Post: SendGrid fires Adria Richards after online firestorm over inappropriate jokes
San Jose Mercury News: Firings, backlash follow tweets of 'sexual' comments at tech conference
The Atlantic Wire: Hackers Got a Woman Fired by a Startup After She Called Out Sexual Harassment
posted by 0 at 10:45 AM on March 22, 2013
Can we not go down the road of whether she ever broke up with someone awkwardly or was feeling really sad one day and wasn't very nice to someone she bumped into or whatever as some kind of excuse to invalidate her
Yeah, that's regrettable, but I think this is how the Internet essentially works for better or worse. It happens to celebrities and Mitt Romney, so it wouldn't be hard to imagine to happen to some tech industry folks that have gotten a spurt of fame or infamy. Everything you've done is there, and it's just looks as present as it does now.
It's kind of like that tethercat comic that Gary Larson got complaints from in The Far Side. He said he got a lot of complaints for it. And I think he said it was kind of odd that particular one did, and he speculates it's possible that because it's a static image, the cat is perpetually being abused by those dogs. So, it's always present when someone looks at it.
I think it'll take a long time for us to have a more sophisticated understanding of the Internet that doesn't involve all of us becoming overzealous hall monitors.
I think it's telling that the joker guy hasn't gotten the same sort of thorough internet combing as Adria though.
posted by FJT at 10:46 AM on March 22, 2013
Yeah, that's regrettable, but I think this is how the Internet essentially works for better or worse. It happens to celebrities and Mitt Romney, so it wouldn't be hard to imagine to happen to some tech industry folks that have gotten a spurt of fame or infamy. Everything you've done is there, and it's just looks as present as it does now.
It's kind of like that tethercat comic that Gary Larson got complaints from in The Far Side. He said he got a lot of complaints for it. And I think he said it was kind of odd that particular one did, and he speculates it's possible that because it's a static image, the cat is perpetually being abused by those dogs. So, it's always present when someone looks at it.
I think it'll take a long time for us to have a more sophisticated understanding of the Internet that doesn't involve all of us becoming overzealous hall monitors.
I think it's telling that the joker guy hasn't gotten the same sort of thorough internet combing as Adria though.
posted by FJT at 10:46 AM on March 22, 2013
"dongle" jokes are obviously mainstream and tame enough that you can air them on the largest commercial broadcast in the world (eek hope that's true, it's big though!) and apparently no one blinks.
Eh, a lot of humor on TV, not just in SuperBowl ads, relies on watching people squirm when put in uncomfortable situations. And I can think of lots of behavior I've seen in ads that would make me uncomfortable if I was exposed to it in real life, to the point where I would ask someone to cut it out.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Eh, a lot of humor on TV, not just in SuperBowl ads, relies on watching people squirm when put in uncomfortable situations. And I can think of lots of behavior I've seen in ads that would make me uncomfortable if I was exposed to it in real life, to the point where I would ask someone to cut it out.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't see any sign of a "mob" around or behind Adria Richards.
It is difficult to look from the outside when one is inside, I agree.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
It is difficult to look from the outside when one is inside, I agree.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:48 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Anyone remember this SuperBowl commercial? [animated GIF of Best Buy commercial with Amy Poehler saying to male Best Buy store rep: "Does it make you uncomfortable when I use the word 'dongle?']
Ehh, this is different though. She's a woman saying it to a man, so that's the whole "punching up" in comedy. She's also a professional comedian in a commercial space known to do this sort of thing. And the people watching are not going to be in a formal setting. So, it's very contextual.
posted by FJT at 10:50 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Ehh, this is different though. She's a woman saying it to a man, so that's the whole "punching up" in comedy. She's also a professional comedian in a commercial space known to do this sort of thing. And the people watching are not going to be in a formal setting. So, it's very contextual.
posted by FJT at 10:50 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
It seems that Adria Richards has annoyed a few people in the past. Here was one thing that stunned me. She took offense at a t-shirt that had been created for WCSF. Here it is. Take a look. Honestly, can you tell me what bugged her about it? I couldn't. I was scratching my head wondering what the hell her problem was.I actually did figure that out when I first read it in Blum's article about Richards, but it took a while, and I wasn't quite convinced that I had figured it out until I read what she said about it. I don't think it's necessarily "nutty", but it does seem to me to be assumptive, and also not demonstrative of the best reading comprehension skills. My eventual thought was:
Then I scrolled down to the second comment.
She's a nut.
"Maybe... is she assuming the stick figure with the pony tail is a woman? And that the stick figure with the shoulder length hair is not? And maybe she understands that Pony Tail is saying something silly, but does not understand that Shoulder Length is also saying something silly?"
Then I looked at her explanation in the comments, and bingo.
posted by Flunkie at 10:51 AM on March 22, 2013
Ehh, this is different though.
Yeah, it's Amy Poehler. She could probably stab someone on live tv and get away with it based on her timing and comedic skills.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:55 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yeah, it's Amy Poehler. She could probably stab someone on live tv and get away with it based on her timing and comedic skills.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 10:55 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
It is difficult to look from the outside when one is inside, I agree.
Oh, OK, Blazecock - being a "mob" in this case doesn't actually mean taking any action, or even gathering in a group, just not agreeing with you? And that is worse than DDoS attacks or death threats because of reasons? I think I understand - or rather, I understand that I don't understand, and why. I think I have what I need now for understanding what you mean when you talk about ravening mobs in this case, and how to respond to it, i.e. not at all.
Anyone remember this SuperBowl commercial? [animated GIF of Best Buy commercial with Amy Poehler saying to male Best Buy store rep: "Does it make you uncomfortable when I use the word 'dongle?'
To which the correct response is, of course, "Yes, Ms Poehler. It does. Because you are almost certainly using it to described a USB flash memory storage drive, or a USB-connected wireless cellular modem. Fake geek girl."
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
Oh, OK, Blazecock - being a "mob" in this case doesn't actually mean taking any action, or even gathering in a group, just not agreeing with you? And that is worse than DDoS attacks or death threats because of reasons? I think I understand - or rather, I understand that I don't understand, and why. I think I have what I need now for understanding what you mean when you talk about ravening mobs in this case, and how to respond to it, i.e. not at all.
Anyone remember this SuperBowl commercial? [animated GIF of Best Buy commercial with Amy Poehler saying to male Best Buy store rep: "Does it make you uncomfortable when I use the word 'dongle?'
To which the correct response is, of course, "Yes, Ms Poehler. It does. Because you are almost certainly using it to described a USB flash memory storage drive, or a USB-connected wireless cellular modem. Fake geek girl."
posted by running order squabble fest at 10:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
Blazecock Pileon: “It is difficult to look from the outside when one is inside, I agree.”
If you're going to accuse running order squabble fest of being part of a "mob," could you please offer some evidence or maybe explanation?
posted by koeselitz at 10:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you're going to accuse running order squabble fest of being part of a "mob," could you please offer some evidence or maybe explanation?
posted by koeselitz at 10:56 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
USA TODAY: SendGrid fires staffer for sex jokes tweet
San Francisco Chronicle: Rachel Sklar: The Firing Of Adria Richards Looks Like Kneejerk Appeasement
Denver Post: SendGrid fires Adria Richards after online firestorm over inappropriate jokes
San Jose Mercury News: Firings, backlash follow tweets of 'sexual' comments at tech conference
The Atlantic Wire: Hackers Got a Woman Fired by a Startup After She Called Out Sexual Harassment
And there are those who doubt Ms. Richards skill at communicating a message. Frankly most marketing people spend their entire lives trying to get this much press coverage. And while I don't think most articles make her look great, she certainly seems like a sympathetic party in most of them.
posted by GuyZero at 11:08 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
San Francisco Chronicle: Rachel Sklar: The Firing Of Adria Richards Looks Like Kneejerk Appeasement
Denver Post: SendGrid fires Adria Richards after online firestorm over inappropriate jokes
San Jose Mercury News: Firings, backlash follow tweets of 'sexual' comments at tech conference
The Atlantic Wire: Hackers Got a Woman Fired by a Startup After She Called Out Sexual Harassment
And there are those who doubt Ms. Richards skill at communicating a message. Frankly most marketing people spend their entire lives trying to get this much press coverage. And while I don't think most articles make her look great, she certainly seems like a sympathetic party in most of them.
posted by GuyZero at 11:08 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Moving on to the future; I wonder if she has any kind of wrongful termination case? I mean, she is not responsible for the dudes company firing them; she certainly is not responsible for the DDOS attacks. She did nothing against the rules, she just filed a complaint at a conference that was clearly allowed for by the rules of that conference. (Whether you or I agree with those rules, or dick jokes in general, or what forking means, is not really relevant here).
And now she's out of a job. Can her employer honestly say that she wasn't fired simply for reporting harassment and then getting hit with a shitstorm she did not seek to cause?
And then there's this:
I don't think this is the case, at least not with the examples you brought up earlier. 'Male' and 'female' connectors, 'mating', 'gender-benders', and others like 'hermaphroditic' connectors are named that way because those are by far the most appropriate pre-existing English terms that could be used. I don't think anyone went out of their way to deliberately choose sexual terminology.I've seen similar arguments against the use of terms like 'master' and 'slave' interfaces, and the result is the same. There just aren't any other descriptive terms we could replace them with.
This is ridiculous. Of course we could use different names for them. It would be trivally easy to replace master/slave with primary/sub or any other variation.
As for connectors, it might be a bit harder because the standard equation of them with types of genitalia is an old one. But there is nothing that makes those the "most appropriate" or "natural" terms. Human beings are pretty creative; we could surely figure that out. IF we found the implications of using genitalia-based or racism-based terms distasteful enough, we would figure that out.
It's worth asking why the idea of doing so offends anyone or makes them drag out some sort of mystical belief in the One True Naming Convention.
posted by emjaybee at 11:08 AM on March 22, 2013
And now she's out of a job. Can her employer honestly say that she wasn't fired simply for reporting harassment and then getting hit with a shitstorm she did not seek to cause?
And then there's this:
I don't think this is the case, at least not with the examples you brought up earlier. 'Male' and 'female' connectors, 'mating', 'gender-benders', and others like 'hermaphroditic' connectors are named that way because those are by far the most appropriate pre-existing English terms that could be used. I don't think anyone went out of their way to deliberately choose sexual terminology.I've seen similar arguments against the use of terms like 'master' and 'slave' interfaces, and the result is the same. There just aren't any other descriptive terms we could replace them with.
This is ridiculous. Of course we could use different names for them. It would be trivally easy to replace master/slave with primary/sub or any other variation.
As for connectors, it might be a bit harder because the standard equation of them with types of genitalia is an old one. But there is nothing that makes those the "most appropriate" or "natural" terms. Human beings are pretty creative; we could surely figure that out. IF we found the implications of using genitalia-based or racism-based terms distasteful enough, we would figure that out.
It's worth asking why the idea of doing so offends anyone or makes them drag out some sort of mystical belief in the One True Naming Convention.
posted by emjaybee at 11:08 AM on March 22, 2013
As for connectors, it might be a bit harder because the standard equation of them with types of genitalia is an old one. But there is nothing that makes those the "most appropriate" or "natural" terms. Human beings are pretty creative; we could surely figure that out. IF we found the implications of using genitalia-based or racism-based terms distasteful enough, we would figure that out.Just use a different part of the body: innies and outies.
posted by Flunkie at 11:11 AM on March 22, 2013
For those pointing to the superbowl Amy Poehler joke,
The joke, indeed the whole punchline, is that the sexual connotations in word 'dongle' is making a person at work uncomfortable. How in the hell is anyone citing the presumed acceptability of that jokes as evidence that no one should be made uncomfortable from the sly use of the word 'dongle'? The whole point of the joke is that saying dongle makes people uncomfortable.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:11 AM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
The joke, indeed the whole punchline, is that the sexual connotations in word 'dongle' is making a person at work uncomfortable. How in the hell is anyone citing the presumed acceptability of that jokes as evidence that no one should be made uncomfortable from the sly use of the word 'dongle'? The whole point of the joke is that saying dongle makes people uncomfortable.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:11 AM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
: "The whole point of the joke is that saying dongle makes people uncomfortable."
Transgression is a major component of humor. It's possible to make jokes without it, but we all get pretty bored with knock knock jokes and 'why did the chicken cross the road' before we're in middle school.
posted by mullingitover at 11:19 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Transgression is a major component of humor. It's possible to make jokes without it, but we all get pretty bored with knock knock jokes and 'why did the chicken cross the road' before we're in middle school.
posted by mullingitover at 11:19 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
She did nothing against the rules
It is against Pycon rules to take harrassing photographs. She harrassed them with the twitter photo post, and then harrassed them on her blog.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
It is against Pycon rules to take harrassing photographs. She harrassed them with the twitter photo post, and then harrassed them on her blog.
posted by five fresh fish at 11:21 AM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
no no no
The goal of the joke itself is not to make people uncomfortable-- the joke is about how this word makes people uncomfortable. The commercial isn't there to make the audience uncomfortable, its to make the character in the joke uncomfortable.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
The goal of the joke itself is not to make people uncomfortable-- the joke is about how this word makes people uncomfortable. The commercial isn't there to make the audience uncomfortable, its to make the character in the joke uncomfortable.
posted by MisantropicPainforest at 11:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Best Buy commercial with Amy Poehler saying to male Best Buy store rep: "Does it make you uncomfortable when I use the word 'dongle?'
Asking Amy: 2013 Best Buy Game Day Commercial
She also says to the Blue Shirt: "Do you deliver? [sly grin/tilted head]. No, I mean: Do you deliver?"
posted by ericb at 11:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Asking Amy: 2013 Best Buy Game Day Commercial
She also says to the Blue Shirt: "Do you deliver? [sly grin/tilted head]. No, I mean: Do you deliver?"
posted by ericb at 11:22 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
koeselitz Er – did you actually read that comment? Her opinion was wrong.
Yes. It was wrong. She saw sexism where no one else saw sexism. A number of other women, many, if not most, of whom, I would assume would call themselves feminists, said, essentially "WTF"? That wasn't the only thing. She's irritated other people as well, over various issues. I liked the following:
To be clear, I believe the tech industry, of which I am a part, is rampantly sexist. It runs so deep and so organic to the industry that even men who would see it in other places don’t recognize it in our insulated world. So rampant, often females don’t even see it-it usually happens quietly- a lack of female speakers, a male praised for something a female said earlier, unnoticed. But at the Boston conference, great strides were made to have a strong female presence. Almost 40% of attendees at Boston were female, almost 40% of speakers (at the time these numbers were VERY high), there were multiple women (including myself) on the organizing committee. Jane Wells has long sought to inject opportunities for women into WordCamps and the tech community at large. Danielle Morrill was a highly regarded female in the startup arena, at the time the first employee at Twilio who spoke frequently at conferences. Unequivocally, each of us would have been very receptive to Adria if she’d just approached us instead of attacked us.
Once is happenstance. Twice is co-incidence. The third time? You are acting like a nut. Stop acting like a nut.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 11:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yes. It was wrong. She saw sexism where no one else saw sexism. A number of other women, many, if not most, of whom, I would assume would call themselves feminists, said, essentially "WTF"? That wasn't the only thing. She's irritated other people as well, over various issues. I liked the following:
To be clear, I believe the tech industry, of which I am a part, is rampantly sexist. It runs so deep and so organic to the industry that even men who would see it in other places don’t recognize it in our insulated world. So rampant, often females don’t even see it-it usually happens quietly- a lack of female speakers, a male praised for something a female said earlier, unnoticed. But at the Boston conference, great strides were made to have a strong female presence. Almost 40% of attendees at Boston were female, almost 40% of speakers (at the time these numbers were VERY high), there were multiple women (including myself) on the organizing committee. Jane Wells has long sought to inject opportunities for women into WordCamps and the tech community at large. Danielle Morrill was a highly regarded female in the startup arena, at the time the first employee at Twilio who spoke frequently at conferences. Unequivocally, each of us would have been very receptive to Adria if she’d just approached us instead of attacked us.
Once is happenstance. Twice is co-incidence. The third time? You are acting like a nut. Stop acting like a nut.
posted by It's Never Lurgi at 11:23 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
MisantropicPainforest: "no no no
The goal of the joke itself is not to make people uncomfortable-- the joke is about how this word makes people uncomfortable. The commercial isn't there to make the audience uncomfortable, its to make the character in the joke uncomfortable."
It's not a joke, it's a comedy skit. The discomfort for the audience is through empathy with the employee who's being sexually harassed by a customer.
posted by mullingitover at 11:27 AM on March 22, 2013
The goal of the joke itself is not to make people uncomfortable-- the joke is about how this word makes people uncomfortable. The commercial isn't there to make the audience uncomfortable, its to make the character in the joke uncomfortable."
It's not a joke, it's a comedy skit. The discomfort for the audience is through empathy with the employee who's being sexually harassed by a customer.
posted by mullingitover at 11:27 AM on March 22, 2013
This may not have been the first time she has done things like this.
Oh, and the SlashDot chatter.
posted by Samizdata at 11:27 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Oh, and the SlashDot chatter.
posted by Samizdata at 11:27 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
You know what would be very novel and interesting? If somebody were to check what Amanda Blum feels about this situation. I don't think anyone has done that in the thread so far.
/comedy
Speaking of comedy - the SuperBowl ad is also scripted - so, we know Amy Poehler isn't actually sexually harassing a dude in real time, but rather playing a part for comic purposes. So, it's funny rather than embarrassing or horrible.
Similarly, in How I Met Your Mother Barney Stinson is sold as a loveable rogue, rather than a genuinely sociopathic sexual predator and arguably a repeat sexual offender (from sexual harassment to videotaping a woman during sex without her consent through to some really iffy consent-skirting). Nobody involved is real, and everyone is reading from a script. We know that the characters do not exist in the way that we exist; the woman Barney abandons in an apartment he is pretending he owns is not going to end up pregnant with no way to contact him, because she winks out of existence after servicing that punchline.
Which doesn't mean that these shows are without impact or affect - but it does make it materially different from a situation where nobody knows what the next line is going to be. I don't think that "if everyone involved were characters in a Superbowl advert/ Second City Improv first-stringers then this would be funny" is necessarily a useful conditional, because I can't see a way that could be made the case.
posted by running order squabble fest at 11:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
/comedy
Speaking of comedy - the SuperBowl ad is also scripted - so, we know Amy Poehler isn't actually sexually harassing a dude in real time, but rather playing a part for comic purposes. So, it's funny rather than embarrassing or horrible.
Similarly, in How I Met Your Mother Barney Stinson is sold as a loveable rogue, rather than a genuinely sociopathic sexual predator and arguably a repeat sexual offender (from sexual harassment to videotaping a woman during sex without her consent through to some really iffy consent-skirting). Nobody involved is real, and everyone is reading from a script. We know that the characters do not exist in the way that we exist; the woman Barney abandons in an apartment he is pretending he owns is not going to end up pregnant with no way to contact him, because she winks out of existence after servicing that punchline.
Which doesn't mean that these shows are without impact or affect - but it does make it materially different from a situation where nobody knows what the next line is going to be. I don't think that "if everyone involved were characters in a Superbowl advert/ Second City Improv first-stringers then this would be funny" is necessarily a useful conditional, because I can't see a way that could be made the case.
posted by running order squabble fest at 11:30 AM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I just looked at the Poehler ad for the first time. I don't know that the idea for humor in it is "The word 'dongle' makes people uncomfortable". I think it might be along more cynical lines: "The word 'dongle' makes men uncomfortable when spoken by a woman". After all, the ad would (in my opinion) have a much more creepy and less funny vibe if the two characters were reversed.
But I don't really think that's it, either. What I actually think is that the idea for humor in it is "People are made uncomfortable by being directly and personally confronted sexually." And I still don't think it's clear that anything like that happened to Richards.
posted by Flunkie at 11:37 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
But I don't really think that's it, either. What I actually think is that the idea for humor in it is "People are made uncomfortable by being directly and personally confronted sexually." And I still don't think it's clear that anything like that happened to Richards.
posted by Flunkie at 11:37 AM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
the fact that she immediately absolved herself of all responsibility for some dude getting fired by his employer (it was their decision!) at least means we don't have to hear her claim that her backlashers caused her to lose her own job.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 11:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by fallacy of the beard at 11:44 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
I'm all in favor of wrapping up the cat derail.
I considered it a gentle reminder that when you try to guess what 4chan is saying, you are probably wrong.Well maybe Rory knows what they think,but he ain't saying.
If only we could stop people from derailing with all this talk about the Amy Poehler and 50 links to Amanda Blum.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:45 AM on March 22, 2013
I considered it a gentle reminder that when you try to guess what 4chan is saying, you are probably wrong.Well maybe Rory knows what they think,but he ain't saying.
If only we could stop people from derailing with all this talk about the Amy Poehler and 50 links to Amanda Blum.
posted by Ad hominem at 11:45 AM on March 22, 2013
But I don't really think that's it, either. What I actually think is that the idea for humor in it is "People are made uncomfortable by being directly and personally confronted sexually." And I still don't think it's clear that anything like that happened to Richards.
As we've come back to repeated times throughout the conversation, really it's all about context. I think it's actually 100% okay from Richards to have a context were she finds silly dongle jokes uncomfortable, and I think it's entirely possible for the fired dude to have a different idea of what context they are in without necessarily being a bad guy or a horrendous sexist or whatever. I also think its great that PyCon have mechanisms in place for setting people back on track over these contextual matters - Richards is entirely right to call them in, they were entirely right to step in, fired dude is right to adjust behavior... Hey, everything's great.
So for those aspects of the story and those aspects only everything went well, it's just everything else that went to hell.
posted by Artw at 11:53 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
As we've come back to repeated times throughout the conversation, really it's all about context. I think it's actually 100% okay from Richards to have a context were she finds silly dongle jokes uncomfortable, and I think it's entirely possible for the fired dude to have a different idea of what context they are in without necessarily being a bad guy or a horrendous sexist or whatever. I also think its great that PyCon have mechanisms in place for setting people back on track over these contextual matters - Richards is entirely right to call them in, they were entirely right to step in, fired dude is right to adjust behavior... Hey, everything's great.
So for those aspects of the story and those aspects only everything went well, it's just everything else that went to hell.
posted by Artw at 11:53 AM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
the fact that she immediately absolved herself of all responsibility for some dude getting fired by his employer (it was their decision!) at least means we don't have to hear her claim that her backlashers caused her to lose her own job.
One hopes.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:55 AM on March 22, 2013
One hopes.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 11:55 AM on March 22, 2013
> Pretty sure this is a nonstory outside of tech
I'm seeing it on Facebook now, being discussed by friends who don't work directly in tech but who are interested in feminist issues.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:00 PM on March 22, 2013
I'm seeing it on Facebook now, being discussed by friends who don't work directly in tech but who are interested in feminist issues.
posted by The corpse in the library at 12:00 PM on March 22, 2013
Artw, sure, I also think it's OK for her to feel uncomfortable in situations where I wouldn't, and I also think it's good that a convention would have rules that in effect keep people away from obvious lines rather than keeping them from crossing over those obvious lines. I wasn't saying otherwise.
All I was saying is that the idea that the Poehler commercial is based on the idea that "The word 'dongle' makes people uncomfortable" doesn't really seem to be true to me, and moreover that the idea that I think the commercial actually is based on doesn't seem to have necessarily happened to Richards.
posted by Flunkie at 12:06 PM on March 22, 2013
All I was saying is that the idea that the Poehler commercial is based on the idea that "The word 'dongle' makes people uncomfortable" doesn't really seem to be true to me, and moreover that the idea that I think the commercial actually is based on doesn't seem to have necessarily happened to Richards.
posted by Flunkie at 12:06 PM on March 22, 2013
It's Never Lurgi: “A number of other women, many, if not most, of whom, I would assume would call themselves feminists, said, essentially 'WTF'? That wasn't the only thing. She's irritated other people as well, over various issues. I liked the following...”
Of course you did – it fits your preconceptions. But it doesn't seem to fit with reality. Adria wasn't being cruel or annoying or irritating at all in the comments you've linked or in the situations Amanda Blum discusses. She's expressing an opinion I happen to disagree with in a perfectly nice and respectful way.
I mean, you seem to be saying that any person who expresses an opinion you disagree with is being "irritating" or "nuts." Is that really the case? Are people really not allowed to disagree in a civil way, like Adria Richards seems to have done?
posted by koeselitz at 12:08 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Of course you did – it fits your preconceptions. But it doesn't seem to fit with reality. Adria wasn't being cruel or annoying or irritating at all in the comments you've linked or in the situations Amanda Blum discusses. She's expressing an opinion I happen to disagree with in a perfectly nice and respectful way.
I mean, you seem to be saying that any person who expresses an opinion you disagree with is being "irritating" or "nuts." Is that really the case? Are people really not allowed to disagree in a civil way, like Adria Richards seems to have done?
posted by koeselitz at 12:08 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
If I'm understanding Blum, her criticism isn't exactly that Richards failed to disagree in a civil manner. It's that Richards chose, apparently in a pattern, to air her disagreements as public spectacles instead of voicing them directly. That seems like a fair criticism and representative of what happened in this instance.
posted by cribcage at 12:15 PM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
posted by cribcage at 12:15 PM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
So now every banner ad that google is serving me is for SendGrid.
posted by boo_radley at 12:56 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by boo_radley at 12:56 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
I get kind of annoyed when people throw you in with the MRA folk any time you say anything that isn't 100% the feminist party line.
Well that's still a hair better than the MRA folk calling you a feminist followed by either a four letter word that begins with a c- or a five letter word that begins with a b- when you've uttered anything that could doubt their victimhood. And from what I've seen from most of the gender discussions that have become straight out arguments in Metafilter, it's usually 2 or 3 users arguing with one user, which is hardly representative of all feminists.
I've been thinking that every time one of these imbroglios happen on the Internet, I find that it's not that the feminists are actively pulling me into their side, it's more like the MRAs and those that sympathize with MRAs are shoving me into feminist territory.
posted by FJT at 1:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well that's still a hair better than the MRA folk calling you a feminist followed by either a four letter word that begins with a c- or a five letter word that begins with a b- when you've uttered anything that could doubt their victimhood. And from what I've seen from most of the gender discussions that have become straight out arguments in Metafilter, it's usually 2 or 3 users arguing with one user, which is hardly representative of all feminists.
I've been thinking that every time one of these imbroglios happen on the Internet, I find that it's not that the feminists are actively pulling me into their side, it's more like the MRAs and those that sympathize with MRAs are shoving me into feminist territory.
posted by FJT at 1:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think their decision was made easier by the fact that if she hadn't tweeted the picture, maybe five people would have known about the whole incident and no one would have gotten fired.
Probably the man would still be fired. Pycon would still have followed their harassment policy, which would have created an incident. The incident would need to be reported to the sponsoring company. The company should be using the same escalation and investigation process because it is important for EEOC rules that the company follow consistent policies around harassment claims.
The only difference is that she wouldn't have become a target for retribution and threats.
posted by humanfont at 1:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Probably the man would still be fired. Pycon would still have followed their harassment policy, which would have created an incident. The incident would need to be reported to the sponsoring company. The company should be using the same escalation and investigation process because it is important for EEOC rules that the company follow consistent policies around harassment claims.
The only difference is that she wouldn't have become a target for retribution and threats.
posted by humanfont at 1:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Probably the man would still be fired. Pycon would still have followed their harassment policy, which would have created an incident. The incident would need to be reported to the sponsoring company. The company should be using the same escalation and investigation process because it is important for EEOC rules that the company follow consistent policies around harassment claims.
That would be pretty shitty if it was the case. Perhaps Jacobian can shed some light on process here?
The only difference is that she wouldn't have become a target for retribution and threats.
I have a feeling PyCon would.
posted by Artw at 1:11 PM on March 22, 2013
That would be pretty shitty if it was the case. Perhaps Jacobian can shed some light on process here?
The only difference is that she wouldn't have become a target for retribution and threats.
I have a feeling PyCon would.
posted by Artw at 1:11 PM on March 22, 2013
I can only speak as a manager at a company who sponsors and sends staff to these types of conferences. If the conference feels the need to pull one of my people out of a session and talk to them about their behavior. Then reprimands them and demands an apology. I would anticipate a call from them. If I didn't get a call and found out later, I'd be pretty upset at the event organizers.
posted by humanfont at 1:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 1:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Then all paths lead to firings and Internet clusterfucks and probably insistances that this person shouldn't have gone to the staff over some trivial shit because She Knew What Would Happen and the MRA hate squad would still mobilize etc... etc...
On the plus side, her company wouldn't have cause to fire her. I am against firings, in general.
PyCon probably catches a lot more heat though.
posted by Artw at 1:49 PM on March 22, 2013
On the plus side, her company wouldn't have cause to fire her. I am against firings, in general.
PyCon probably catches a lot more heat though.
posted by Artw at 1:49 PM on March 22, 2013
I quite liked the Blum post in the beginning, but the more I think and read about it, the more uncomfortable it makes me. There's something vaguely petty about it that I haven't been able to articulate...the opening volley feels too much like "I don't like you, but I guess I should support you, but not really support you and let's instead talk about why you screwed it all up". I still think it's really interesting that there is a pattern of behaviour that some people have problems with (and other people apparently haven't), but I wonder if this was maybe the wrong time to highlight that front and center.
This discomfort is caused in no little part by the fact that it's being held up by the Technorati on Twitter and HN and otherwise as being The Definitive Account Of PyCon, because it's really become a bludgeon of character assassination - look at this, obviously she had it coming / she wanted this to happen, etc. I may find Richards abrasive, but I don't have to like someone to want them to feel comfortable speaking out. No matter how eloquent Blum is and how much personal experience she has with Richards, she doesn't speak for everyone in the industry, and there's a distinct feeling of prescriptivism in the post. It's not Blum's fault that there is a strong pattern of behaviour, in tech and elsewhere, of people saying "See this person in the in-group also has this opinion, all others in the in-group who are uncomfortable are invalid", but I think important to keep in mind when you're writing an ostensibly impartial big-picture-wrap-up and publishing it on a large platform.
Here are a few other pieces on the situation that I also appreciated:
Thinking about Adria Richards and other black women in STEM
Why asking what Adria Richards could have done differently is the wrong question
A woman walks into a tech conference
posted by Phire at 1:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [10 favorites]
This discomfort is caused in no little part by the fact that it's being held up by the Technorati on Twitter and HN and otherwise as being The Definitive Account Of PyCon, because it's really become a bludgeon of character assassination - look at this, obviously she had it coming / she wanted this to happen, etc. I may find Richards abrasive, but I don't have to like someone to want them to feel comfortable speaking out. No matter how eloquent Blum is and how much personal experience she has with Richards, she doesn't speak for everyone in the industry, and there's a distinct feeling of prescriptivism in the post. It's not Blum's fault that there is a strong pattern of behaviour, in tech and elsewhere, of people saying "See this person in the in-group also has this opinion, all others in the in-group who are uncomfortable are invalid", but I think important to keep in mind when you're writing an ostensibly impartial big-picture-wrap-up and publishing it on a large platform.
Here are a few other pieces on the situation that I also appreciated:
Thinking about Adria Richards and other black women in STEM
Why asking what Adria Richards could have done differently is the wrong question
A woman walks into a tech conference
posted by Phire at 1:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [10 favorites]
Just use a different part of the body: innies and outies.You generally don't put outies into innies. Although, it is a bizarre thought. :-)
More likely, "plug" and "socket", but naming the changers and various configurations of cables is harder and would require neologisms of some sort, I suppose. Whether someone could come up with something which is as convenient as an analogy in this particular case *is* doubtful, but that is irrelevant.
It's worth asking why the idea of doing so offends anyone or makes them drag out some sort of mystical belief in the One True Naming Convention.Maybe it's worth asking, but you might not like the answer. I don't think your implication really holds up. I really don't like this idea that anyone who appears to disagree with an idea has to be influenced by the patriarchy. It's bizarre, vaguely insulting (removes their agency) and not terribly well justified.
Mainly, I think the offense comes from the negative implication and the weak justification for the idea. And the argument comes from the analogy having been highly useful so far in practice vs. the corresponding argument from the other side being: Remove vaguely sexual terms, ???, Profit.
And these things aren't really that crudely named. I think an adult can handle male/female/hermaphroditic and the various names for adapters as technical terms. If they have to crack dumb-ass jokes, giggle or get deeply nervous about gender relations, it is their problem. It has nothing to do with the naming except that being proximate trigger.
Also, part of the defensive reaction you get to this kind of suggestion is the understanding that there is a clear problem if you attempt to fix things based on theories based on generalized discomfort. Obviously, discomfort at seeing two men kiss or black people walking down the street happens to people, but we realize that it is the observer's fault, not the kissers or the walkers.
There has to be a more principled way to go from that to understanding that a general atmosphere of discomfort can flip the equation such that it is the problem of those making people uncomfortable. Because I can agree with that --- but I can't agree with this idea that language and behavior must be tailored such that nothing resembling sex can be mentioned because women are oppressed. It seems completely backwards to me.
posted by smidgen at 1:54 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Also, there is now a hashtag #IAskedPolitely featuring women talking about the reactions they've received when asking politely, as everyone is saying Richards should have.
posted by Phire at 1:56 PM on March 22, 2013 [12 favorites]
posted by Phire at 1:56 PM on March 22, 2013 [12 favorites]
The Blum post outs Richards as a serial creator of clusterfucks, which is perhaps the most damaging thing to her as it starts looking like her hobby, and you would never hire anyone who has that as their hobby.
So that not happening would be another upside of the Richards-goes-straight-to-PyCon chain of events, I guess.
posted by Artw at 1:57 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
So that not happening would be another upside of the Richards-goes-straight-to-PyCon chain of events, I guess.
posted by Artw at 1:57 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Here are a few other pieces on the situation that I also appreciated:
Thinking about Adria Richards and other black women in STEM
Why asking what Adria Richards could have done differently is the wrong question
Having just read these two pieces, this is now a black woman vs white woman thing now?
Fuck, and I thought I had issues.
posted by GuyZero at 2:01 PM on March 22, 2013
Thinking about Adria Richards and other black women in STEM
Why asking what Adria Richards could have done differently is the wrong question
Having just read these two pieces, this is now a black woman vs white woman thing now?
Fuck, and I thought I had issues.
posted by GuyZero at 2:01 PM on March 22, 2013
#IAskedPolitely seems like a worthwhile exercise and I'm glad it's happening, but I'm not sure it's a rebuttal to this situation. "Direct" and "polite" are not synonymous, and "ask politely" and "post photos to Twitter" are not the only options available to a person.
posted by cribcage at 2:06 PM on March 22, 2013 [11 favorites]
posted by cribcage at 2:06 PM on March 22, 2013 [11 favorites]
Much of modern feminism has a women of colour vs. white women thing. Large, multitudes, etc.
posted by Phire at 2:07 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Phire at 2:07 PM on March 22, 2013
If outing people on Twitter is the only reasonable course of action I have to wonder what would be in it for PyCon to even try to deal with this sort of thing. It also means taking a complete lack of action or "man fired for saying 'dongle'" headlines as the only two possible outcomes, both of which suck and set everybody back.
posted by Artw at 2:11 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Artw at 2:11 PM on March 22, 2013
From the "Why asking what Adria Richards could have done differently…" post:
"Is it possible that by asking this question, that we’re digitally asking if maybe Adria shouldn’t have been drinking or wearing that short skirt, shouldn’t have been walking home from the subway stop by herself, shouldn’t have walked by that proverbial construction site where she knew she was going to get catcalled and harassed?"
It is possible, but by phrasing like this, she implies it is probable and maybe even certain, and discounts the fairly reasonable point that there were better ways for Adria Richards to handle it, and that by framing it as if this isn't a a valid point, she implies that bad behavior is justified in this instance. Now, again, I don't think it was a hugely bad call on Richards' part, but this is a really dishonest and corrosive rhetorical technique and uses inflammatory language to conflate the vicious point of victim blaming — which would be saying that Richards deserved the death/rape threats — with exculpating Richards for her faux pas. That's not fair, and makes the conversation worse.
(Similarly, I'm a dude calling out a woman here for making the conversation worse by using a dishonest rhetocial technique: Isn't that the same thing as saying that she shouldn't have been drinking or wearing that short skirt? No. Richards, and the Forbes writer, isn't a synecdoche for women or feminists, and it's reasonable to critique her behavior without using that critique as a stand-in for other bad behavior.)
posted by klangklangston at 2:13 PM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
"Is it possible that by asking this question, that we’re digitally asking if maybe Adria shouldn’t have been drinking or wearing that short skirt, shouldn’t have been walking home from the subway stop by herself, shouldn’t have walked by that proverbial construction site where she knew she was going to get catcalled and harassed?"
It is possible, but by phrasing like this, she implies it is probable and maybe even certain, and discounts the fairly reasonable point that there were better ways for Adria Richards to handle it, and that by framing it as if this isn't a a valid point, she implies that bad behavior is justified in this instance. Now, again, I don't think it was a hugely bad call on Richards' part, but this is a really dishonest and corrosive rhetorical technique and uses inflammatory language to conflate the vicious point of victim blaming — which would be saying that Richards deserved the death/rape threats — with exculpating Richards for her faux pas. That's not fair, and makes the conversation worse.
(Similarly, I'm a dude calling out a woman here for making the conversation worse by using a dishonest rhetocial technique: Isn't that the same thing as saying that she shouldn't have been drinking or wearing that short skirt? No. Richards, and the Forbes writer, isn't a synecdoche for women or feminists, and it's reasonable to critique her behavior without using that critique as a stand-in for other bad behavior.)
posted by klangklangston at 2:13 PM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
Surprise! Lots of people are shitheads. Asking, to verify this, does not exclude complaining. One can ask, and then one can escalate. This is conflict 101.
A list of shitty responses to polite requests notwithstanding, it doesn't really excuse turning what could have been a quick lesson learned by some man-children into a huge mess because you want everyone to pay attention to you.
posted by smidgen at 2:13 PM on March 22, 2013
A list of shitty responses to polite requests notwithstanding, it doesn't really excuse turning what could have been a quick lesson learned by some man-children into a huge mess because you want everyone to pay attention to you.
posted by smidgen at 2:13 PM on March 22, 2013
"I quite liked the Blum post in the beginning, but the more I think and read about it, the more uncomfortable it makes me. There's something vaguely petty about it that I haven't been able to articulate...the opening volley feels too much like "I don't like you, but I guess I should support you, but not really support you and let's instead talk about why you screwed it all up". I still think it's really interesting that there is a pattern of behaviour that some people have problems with (and other people apparently haven't), but I wonder if this was maybe the wrong time to highlight that front and center."
You seem to be subscribing to the fallacy that group solidarity is always more important than individual experience. If someone has a history of using inappropriate conflict resolution techniques, and there's a controversy over whether their conflict resolution techniques were appropriate in this instance, letting the impulse to solidarity overwhelm your ability to reasonably consider the facts as we have them can lead to you enabling bad actors. Whether you believe that will result in a greater good, e.g. lessening of sexism toward women in tech, is a calculus you have to make on your own, but sometimes jerks are jerks even when they're part of an ideology, affinity group, cause or socio-demographic group that we also belong to or are sympathetic to. While I tend to give credence to complaints about sexism (in part because I know that the barriers to complaining can be high) that doesn't mean that all complaints are valid.
posted by klangklangston at 2:20 PM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
You seem to be subscribing to the fallacy that group solidarity is always more important than individual experience. If someone has a history of using inappropriate conflict resolution techniques, and there's a controversy over whether their conflict resolution techniques were appropriate in this instance, letting the impulse to solidarity overwhelm your ability to reasonably consider the facts as we have them can lead to you enabling bad actors. Whether you believe that will result in a greater good, e.g. lessening of sexism toward women in tech, is a calculus you have to make on your own, but sometimes jerks are jerks even when they're part of an ideology, affinity group, cause or socio-demographic group that we also belong to or are sympathetic to. While I tend to give credence to complaints about sexism (in part because I know that the barriers to complaining can be high) that doesn't mean that all complaints are valid.
posted by klangklangston at 2:20 PM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
Also, there is now a hashtag #IAskedPolitely featuring women talking about the reactions they've received when asking politely, as everyone is saying Richards should have.
The unspoken premise being that bullying, public shaming, and inciting Internet mobs are the only other options available.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:24 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
The unspoken premise being that bullying, public shaming, and inciting Internet mobs are the only other options available.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 2:24 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
If someone actually does something harmful and possibly illegal chances are the victim will be too stunned to do anything about it.
Time after time your real hardcore abusers, manipulators, and rapists get away clean and it's always some relatively harmless schmuck that gets slapped down and made an example of.
Well, this story has me rethinking my entire position on revenge, at least. I mean, if you soak up anger and view yourself as an avenger, but you're still basically afraid.. you're not going to bring down the ones who have it coming, you're going to go after the one who's small enough for you to take. Meanwhile, the real criminals go free.
posted by yonega at 2:26 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
Time after time your real hardcore abusers, manipulators, and rapists get away clean and it's always some relatively harmless schmuck that gets slapped down and made an example of.
Well, this story has me rethinking my entire position on revenge, at least. I mean, if you soak up anger and view yourself as an avenger, but you're still basically afraid.. you're not going to bring down the ones who have it coming, you're going to go after the one who's small enough for you to take. Meanwhile, the real criminals go free.
posted by yonega at 2:26 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I would be all for her having the option of having PyCon ask for her, with whatever degree of forcefullnesss is demeed necessary, without automatically invoking a nuclear option.
posted by Artw at 2:27 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Artw at 2:27 PM on March 22, 2013
I remain firmly opposed to public Twitter-shaming for being overheard making mildly inappropriate jokes to your seatmate in the middle of a boring lecture, but at this point I really wish the people making rape and death threats were the ones having their real identities discussed and judged by the court of internet justice and losing their jobs for their participation in this clusterfuck.
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
posted by prize bull octorok at 2:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
No, I don't think that's the point of the hashtag. Rather that "asking politely" is not any sort of protection from being abused afterwards. We can say Richards handled this situation wrong, but when has a woman handled the situation right in such a way that she was then immediately listened to with no subsequent harassment and derision? You can't win, really.
Klang, I think it's super important to be able to criticize individual actors for bad behaviour, but I also think it's important to be mindful of the narrative we shape. I think I've been clear in this thread that I don't personally agree with Richards' handling of the situation, but it's also important for me to acknowledge that I am not her, and was not there. It's so easy to fall into questioning someone's motives and character when we're trying to figure out why something happened, but I'm trying to keep in mind how infuriating it is when people attribute motives and morality issues to me because they thought the way I handled X was stupid. I think we need to be able to criticize behaviour without pulling in integrity, and that's a distinction that's often too muddied.
It's easy to say neither Blum nor Richards are a synecdoche for the entire movement, but tokenism is alive and well and used to silence more frequently than anything else. It's the equivalent of "I have a friend who is [X] so your criticisms of me regarding X is invalid." I'm still very ambivalent on how I feel about the Blum article, but I don't see why a discussion of Richards' problematic conflict resolution habits couldn't have happened after the bulk of the controversy passed, when it wouldn't be fuel to the fire. It would be still incisive, but it wouldn't be misappropriated to nearly the same extent. Maybe I'm blinded by what you call solidarity, but what did the character profile contribute to the aftermath of this specific incident? That Richards sure was wrong? We haven't exactly had a shortage of that.
posted by Phire at 2:36 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
Klang, I think it's super important to be able to criticize individual actors for bad behaviour, but I also think it's important to be mindful of the narrative we shape. I think I've been clear in this thread that I don't personally agree with Richards' handling of the situation, but it's also important for me to acknowledge that I am not her, and was not there. It's so easy to fall into questioning someone's motives and character when we're trying to figure out why something happened, but I'm trying to keep in mind how infuriating it is when people attribute motives and morality issues to me because they thought the way I handled X was stupid. I think we need to be able to criticize behaviour without pulling in integrity, and that's a distinction that's often too muddied.
It's easy to say neither Blum nor Richards are a synecdoche for the entire movement, but tokenism is alive and well and used to silence more frequently than anything else. It's the equivalent of "I have a friend who is [X] so your criticisms of me regarding X is invalid." I'm still very ambivalent on how I feel about the Blum article, but I don't see why a discussion of Richards' problematic conflict resolution habits couldn't have happened after the bulk of the controversy passed, when it wouldn't be fuel to the fire. It would be still incisive, but it wouldn't be misappropriated to nearly the same extent. Maybe I'm blinded by what you call solidarity, but what did the character profile contribute to the aftermath of this specific incident? That Richards sure was wrong? We haven't exactly had a shortage of that.
posted by Phire at 2:36 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
really wish the people making rape and death threats were the ones having their real identities discussed and judged by the court of internet justice and losing their jobs for their participation in this clusterfuck.
Stare too long into the darkness and the darkness stares into you (or whatever).
Seriously, what mentally well-balanced has the time or patience for that sort of jihad against jihadists? Please make justice less tedious.
posted by GuyZero at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013
Stare too long into the darkness and the darkness stares into you (or whatever).
Seriously, what mentally well-balanced has the time or patience for that sort of jihad against jihadists? Please make justice less tedious.
posted by GuyZero at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013
The unspoken premise being that bullying, public shaming, and inciting Internet mobs are the only other options available.
god no. the implication being that asking politely is not some sort of panacea that some think it would be. that women could get this exact same reaction even when they've done everything right (even in circumstances much more egregious than what we have here). i doubt every single woman using that hashtag would defend richards 100%, but they all are probably saying politeness did not shield them in their own examples.
posted by twist my arm at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
god no. the implication being that asking politely is not some sort of panacea that some think it would be. that women could get this exact same reaction even when they've done everything right (even in circumstances much more egregious than what we have here). i doubt every single woman using that hashtag would defend richards 100%, but they all are probably saying politeness did not shield them in their own examples.
posted by twist my arm at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [7 favorites]
: "I remain firmly opposed to public Twitter-shaming for being overheard making mildly inappropriate jokes to your seatmate in the middle of a boring lecture, but at this point I really wish the people making rape and death threats were the ones having their real identities discussed and judged by the court of internet justice and losing their jobs for their participation in this clusterfuck."
I hope everyone who's commented on this ends up on Oprah. At some point on the show she asks the audience members to look under their seats and find their severance notices.
"YOU'RE GETTING FIRED!"
"YOU'RE GETTING FIRED!"
"EVERYONE'S GETTING FIRED!"
That or she just unleashes the bees.
posted by mullingitover at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
I hope everyone who's commented on this ends up on Oprah. At some point on the show she asks the audience members to look under their seats and find their severance notices.
"YOU'RE GETTING FIRED!"
"YOU'RE GETTING FIRED!"
"EVERYONE'S GETTING FIRED!"
That or she just unleashes the bees.
posted by mullingitover at 2:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
Oprah is a vengeful god and it is perilous to invoke her.
posted by Artw at 2:42 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by Artw at 2:42 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
koeselitz: "I know for a fact that I'm not the only guy who feels that way."
You aren't. I am stereotypically male: 6'3", bearded, big guy, raconteur, life of the party.
I loathe sexualized and gendered "humor". It seems to target a funnybone I lack, because I'll hear some douchebro telling a table full of his asshole friends a HNUR HNUR joke about women, and they'll be laughing uproariously, and I literally do not get it.
It just comes off sounding like an asshole with issues.
So, no, you're not the only one.
posted by scrump at 3:05 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
You aren't. I am stereotypically male: 6'3", bearded, big guy, raconteur, life of the party.
I loathe sexualized and gendered "humor". It seems to target a funnybone I lack, because I'll hear some douchebro telling a table full of his asshole friends a HNUR HNUR joke about women, and they'll be laughing uproariously, and I literally do not get it.
It just comes off sounding like an asshole with issues.
So, no, you're not the only one.
posted by scrump at 3:05 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
I loathe sexualized and gendered "humor".
douchebro
Um.
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:11 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
douchebro
Um.
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:11 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
You shouldn't have to ask someone to behave like a civilize human being at a professional event. It wasn't a party, a music festival or a concert. This was a professional event. The guys fired were paid to be there to represent their company. They were there on the company's dime, in company t-shirts and wearing a badge wiith their name on it. They were in a big public area surrounded by hundreds of attendeess. Under those circumstances I just don't see how anyone can defend the notion that making penis and forking jokes is acceptable. In fact I have a hard time understanding why you would think that this kind of behavior wouldn't have negative impacts on the career. The notion that she should have kept her mouth shut or just asked nicely is bullshit. These guys were working at the conference. Would you ask nicely if you saw a waiter spit in the food? No you'd call the manager. Would it be wrong to write that up on twitter or Yelp? No it wouldn't.
posted by humanfont at 3:15 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 3:15 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
prize bull octorok: "I loathe sexualized and gendered "humor".
douchebro
Um."
WOW TRENCHANT INSULT BRO.
Given that you wrote "um", I'm going to have to extrapolate that you think there's some sort of hypocrisy to me using, what, a "gendered insult" to describe a situation that just about every one of us has encountered in the wild? If so, go for it. Knock yourself out.
I was using "douchebro" as shorthand for "asshole white male with privilege blindness". If I insulted any douchebros in the audience, I apologize that you were offended by what I said.
posted by scrump at 3:24 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
douchebro
Um."
WOW TRENCHANT INSULT BRO.
Given that you wrote "um", I'm going to have to extrapolate that you think there's some sort of hypocrisy to me using, what, a "gendered insult" to describe a situation that just about every one of us has encountered in the wild? If so, go for it. Knock yourself out.
I was using "douchebro" as shorthand for "asshole white male with privilege blindness". If I insulted any douchebros in the audience, I apologize that you were offended by what I said.
posted by scrump at 3:24 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I apologize that you were offended by what I said.
Actually I was going for something like "good-natured needling," but I realize tone doesn't carry over the internet very well.
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:27 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Actually I was going for something like "good-natured needling," but I realize tone doesn't carry over the internet very well.
posted by prize bull octorok at 3:27 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
"Asshole" strikes me as a somewhat sexualized term as well. (insofar as it's referring to naughty bits)
posted by ShutterBun at 3:30 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by ShutterBun at 3:30 PM on March 22, 2013
prize bull octorok: "Actually I was going for something like "good-natured needling," but I realize tone doesn't carry over the internet very well."
Well, don't I look like a douchebro now.
facepalm
posted by scrump at 3:31 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, don't I look like a douchebro now.
facepalm
posted by scrump at 3:31 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
You shouldn't have to ask someone to behave like a civilize human being at a professional event.
That's non-robot humanity for you... Audiences chatter amongst themselves, people get bored and fiddle with phones, doodle, munch food, and generally goof off. People are, in general social creatures with low boredom thresholds and a high capacity for irritating each other.
Firings and Internet clusterfucks should not be the go-to method for dealing with this.
posted by Artw at 3:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
That's non-robot humanity for you... Audiences chatter amongst themselves, people get bored and fiddle with phones, doodle, munch food, and generally goof off. People are, in general social creatures with low boredom thresholds and a high capacity for irritating each other.
Firings and Internet clusterfucks should not be the go-to method for dealing with this.
posted by Artw at 3:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [13 favorites]
The guys fired were paid to be there to represent their company.
Um, only one was fired.
posted by ericb at 3:35 PM on March 22, 2013
Um, only one was fired.
posted by ericb at 3:35 PM on March 22, 2013
"Asshole" strikes me as a somewhat sexualized term as well. (insofar as it's referring to naughty bits)
Dongles.
posted by Artw at 3:36 PM on March 22, 2013
Dongles.
posted by Artw at 3:36 PM on March 22, 2013
If we think Ms. Richards was overreacting to the language use, and many do, can we not play this game of language gotcha on each other in this thread?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:42 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:42 PM on March 22, 2013
Y'know, I've followed this whole thing pretty closely and I've taken away a couple of things.
1) The reporting has been horrible. I'd say about 90% of what I've read omitted or misconstrued information in a case where the facts have actually been fairly stable. It seems like most people made up their minds first and then tried to frame the debate in a way that favours their interpretation.
2) Something needs to be done about internet hate mobs. At the very least we need to attest those people who make rape/death threats. How feasible is this?
posted by Maugrim at 3:48 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
1) The reporting has been horrible. I'd say about 90% of what I've read omitted or misconstrued information in a case where the facts have actually been fairly stable. It seems like most people made up their minds first and then tried to frame the debate in a way that favours their interpretation.
2) Something needs to be done about internet hate mobs. At the very least we need to attest those people who make rape/death threats. How feasible is this?
posted by Maugrim at 3:48 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Was It Appropriate For Adria Richards To Tweet A Photo Of Two Men At PyCon And Accuse Them Of Being Sexist?
It was highly inappropriate and probably illegal. If I were them, I’d explore filing suit against her for “false light” invasion of privacy at a minimum, perhaps other privacy and defamation claims as well.posted by ericb at 3:55 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
The two aspects eliciting tremendous backlash are (1) plain hypersensitivity to an overheard conversation not intended for her, and (2) extreme overreaction involving multiple steps taken, knowingly and intentionally, to inflict public damage on private individuals — whether as retribution, for her own self-aggrandizement, or other reasons.
In general, we are not entitled to ambush an ordinary person on private property, photograph them up close without their consent, broadcast those photos to thousands of members of the general public while claiming on a pure hearsay basis that the people pictured are guilty of misconduct. Ironically, Richards used (abused) her own privilege to publicly shame two previously unknown guys to make a point about privilege. A much safer way to report this kind of thing while seeking maximum publicity would be to go to the press, giving them the photos and telling the story. Decent journalists would research it, look to verify facts and seek comment, etc. before running the story.
Saying off-color things to each other, not intending to be overheard is not harassment.
Reddit Men's Rights Activists Are Fundraising For The “Victim” Of Adria Richards.
posted by ericb at 3:56 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by ericb at 3:56 PM on March 22, 2013
I wouldn't touch that money with a stick. Here's hoping it is returned or sent to a women's shelter or something.
posted by Artw at 4:01 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
posted by Artw at 4:01 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Helen A.S. Popkin | NBC News:
In her own blog post describing her actions, Richards implied she did it for the kids, specifically the female kids ... who, no doubt, are too busy making dongle jokes of their own to notice. But as any decent Human Resources department can tell you, it's not sexual harassment worthy of report unless you've asked the offender(s) to stop and he/they refuse. By Richards' own admission on her personal blog — "I didn't want to be heckled or have my experience denied" — she never addressed these dudes directly.posted by ericb at 4:06 PM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
As for the joke ... well ... much like MacFarlane’s “Boob Song,” the real victim here is comedy, not women. (Though to be fair, these dudes weren't telling their jokes at the Oscars.)
If there's any lesson here, it's the very same one everyone keeps not learning. Sure, dealing with even the most mundane problem in a mundane manner deprives you of the opportunity to broadcast it on social networks. But nine times out of ten, not broadcasting is the way to go.
Something needs to be done about internet hate mobs. At the very least we need to attest those people who make rape/death threats. How feasible is this?
How feasible is it to provide ID and your real name in order to create a Twitter account?
We'll probably find out the answer to that soon, as various governments are thinking about attempting exactly this sort of thing.
posted by Jimbob at 4:07 PM on March 22, 2013
How feasible is it to provide ID and your real name in order to create a Twitter account?
We'll probably find out the answer to that soon, as various governments are thinking about attempting exactly this sort of thing.
posted by Jimbob at 4:07 PM on March 22, 2013
But nine times out of ten, not broadcasting is the way to go.
It's amazing that the dirtiest word in this whole episode seems to be "pragmatism".
posted by Jimbob at 4:10 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
It's amazing that the dirtiest word in this whole episode seems to be "pragmatism".
posted by Jimbob at 4:10 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
How feasible is it to provide ID and your real name in order to create a Twitter account?You can use Weibo for that. Chinese nationals are required to submit government ID in order to talk online.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:12 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Threats Posted on Facebook Are Crimes, Florida Court Rules
posted by madamjujujive at 4:12 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by madamjujujive at 4:12 PM on March 22, 2013
I wouldn't touch that money with a stick. Here's hoping it is returned or sent to a women's shelter or something.
I am of course kidding myself that the money isn't going straight into PUA dude's pocket.
posted by Artw at 4:12 PM on March 22, 2013
I am of course kidding myself that the money isn't going straight into PUA dude's pocket.
posted by Artw at 4:12 PM on March 22, 2013
And there are those who doubt Ms. Richards skill at communicating a message. Frankly most marketing people spend their entire lives trying to get this much press coverage.
Yes, she is good at getting press coverage for herself. Her job, however, was to promote SendGrid and make SendGrid look good to developers. She made herself a liability to SendGrid, not an asset, precisely because she is more focused on promoting herself rather than using her social media skills to benefit her client/employer.
That's the pattern here elucidated by Blum: whenever you work with Adria, if the choice comes down between promoting herself or helping your organization, Adria will choose "promoting herself" every single time.
The proof is in the pudding, here: the original offender who was fired has comported himself in an extremely classy manner and seems to have had his character vouched for by those who know him and have worked with him. Adria Richards decompensated into a self-aggrandizing festival of self-serving attention-grabbing and over-the-stop self-justification on twitter and her blog and those who have worked with her in the past have pointed out that this is part of an established pattern on her part. Some people are going to great lengths to argue that the guy from PlayHaven has shamed his employer and committed huge disciplinary fault, but at the end of the day, of these two employees, which one would you rather have working for you?
posted by deanc at 4:17 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yes, she is good at getting press coverage for herself. Her job, however, was to promote SendGrid and make SendGrid look good to developers. She made herself a liability to SendGrid, not an asset, precisely because she is more focused on promoting herself rather than using her social media skills to benefit her client/employer.
That's the pattern here elucidated by Blum: whenever you work with Adria, if the choice comes down between promoting herself or helping your organization, Adria will choose "promoting herself" every single time.
The proof is in the pudding, here: the original offender who was fired has comported himself in an extremely classy manner and seems to have had his character vouched for by those who know him and have worked with him. Adria Richards decompensated into a self-aggrandizing festival of self-serving attention-grabbing and over-the-stop self-justification on twitter and her blog and those who have worked with her in the past have pointed out that this is part of an established pattern on her part. Some people are going to great lengths to argue that the guy from PlayHaven has shamed his employer and committed huge disciplinary fault, but at the end of the day, of these two employees, which one would you rather have working for you?
posted by deanc at 4:17 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
What? I really don't think so, unless by talk show appearances you mean techy podcasts. Pretty sure this is a nonstory outside of tech.
The BBC's article on this is linked on the front page of their website, under the Tech section: 'Sexist joke' web developer whistle-blower fired. So that's probably a large chunk of the UK covered.
"plug" and "socket"
Those already have a connector-related meaning that's different from "male" and "female", though. You can have both male and female plugs and the same thing with sockets; back in the days when serial was common PCs had both variations and the difference between them mattered.
posted by makomk at 4:20 PM on March 22, 2013
The BBC's article on this is linked on the front page of their website, under the Tech section: 'Sexist joke' web developer whistle-blower fired. So that's probably a large chunk of the UK covered.
"plug" and "socket"
Those already have a connector-related meaning that's different from "male" and "female", though. You can have both male and female plugs and the same thing with sockets; back in the days when serial was common PCs had both variations and the difference between them mattered.
posted by makomk at 4:20 PM on March 22, 2013
Reddit Men's Rights Activists Are Fundraising For The “Victim” Of Adria Richards.
They hope to raise at least $1,000 by bitcoin, which they will then send to the victim.
Which will drop to $8.75 by the time the email gets to him.
posted by yerfatma at 4:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
They hope to raise at least $1,000 by bitcoin, which they will then send to the victim.
Which will drop to $8.75 by the time the email gets to him.
posted by yerfatma at 4:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
I just had a literal shriek of unrestrained delight at the fact that they're doing the fundraising by bitcoin. It's like when I found out, earlier today, that the Seattle Police Department has an official police Mobile Espresso Unit that they tow to crime scenes so that the police dont have to leave the scene to get a latte. It's just too perfect.
posted by KathrynT at 4:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [22 favorites]
posted by KathrynT at 4:37 PM on March 22, 2013 [22 favorites]
I like bitcoin. I think it's a very technically interesting project and not an inherently sexist protocol/monetary-system. I agree the MRA people are scum and their money should not be accepted. I'd like to avoid derailing this topic, though.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:42 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:42 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Establishing new social norms is a bumpy process. Telling juvenile dongle jokes at conference: no longer acceptable. Telling conference managers about jevenile dongle humourists: acceptable. Photo-shaming juvenile dongle humourists: not acceptable. Creeping on women at a conference: not acceptable. Sending the net mob after nasty creepers: acceptable.
There's a range of acceptable and unacceptable behaviours and a range of acceptable and unacceptable reactions/consequences to those behaviours.
This unfortunate debacle was all about establishing new conventions. One can only hope that tens of thousands of people have learned something from it.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:45 PM on March 22, 2013
There's a range of acceptable and unacceptable behaviours and a range of acceptable and unacceptable reactions/consequences to those behaviours.
This unfortunate debacle was all about establishing new conventions. One can only hope that tens of thousands of people have learned something from it.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:45 PM on March 22, 2013
that the Seattle Police Department has an official police Mobile Espresso Unit that they tow to crime scenes so that the police dont have to leave the scene to get a latte.
Uh, say what now? You need to share the source of this. For science.
posted by GuyZero at 4:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [8 favorites]
Uh, say what now? You need to share the source of this. For science.
posted by GuyZero at 4:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [8 favorites]
The donuts question is important.
posted by Artw at 5:00 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 5:00 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
The Santa Clara Convention Center is a public venue, not a private home. The individuals were in a large area surrounded by hundreds, if not thousands of people. They had no expectation of privacy. Adria was an eyewitness to their behavior so it was not hearsay testimony. The individual involved admitted their words and conduct matched her general description of the facts. Her opinion that it was harassing her is an opinion, which is protected speech. Finally while she did take a photo, she did not actually name any of the individuals and as far as I know we do not have the name of the man who was fired. A defamation suit brought by any of the participants would bring them additional public scrutiny and cost.
posted by humanfont at 5:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
That's non-robot humanity for you... Audiences chatter amongst themselves, people get bored and fiddle with phones, doodle, munch food, and generally goof off. People are, in general social creatures with low boredom thresholds and a high capacity for irritating each other.The company paid tens if not hundreds of thousands of dollars to sponsor the conference. Paid for your badge. Printed you a t-shirt. The held webinars and meetings, printed survival guides, coordinated sessions to attend, and a booth duty schedule. They gave you warnings that you'd be in the presence of competitors, clients, members of the press and prospects so you need to be on your best behavior. We hired you to do a simple job. You couldn't do it. Of course we're going to fire you if you are anything other than some junior right out of college rookie who screwed up. You are a professional, put down your smart phone, stop clumping with your buddies and go out there and engage with our clients and prospects. If you can't do that job, then find a different one. That's the job we had for you.
Firings and Internet clusterfucks should not be the go-to method for dealing with this.
posted by humanfont at 5:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
the Seattle Police Department has an official police Mobile Espresso Unit that they tow to crime scenes
Wait, what?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:17 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Wait, what?
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 5:17 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Just to be clear here humanfront - this would also be a call for the firing of Adria Richards, wouldn't it?
posted by Artw at 5:27 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 5:27 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
god no. the implication being that asking politely is not some sort of panacea that some think it would be.
There is certainly a lot of Adria Richards fanfiction being written at the moment, where she just finds the right words, and everyone is happy. I don't know if this maps to the actual world, and at this point never will, because conditional perfect constructions are unverifiable. That's grammar/chronotics 101.
"This could have gone differently" is not the same as "I know how this would have gone differently".
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:31 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
There is certainly a lot of Adria Richards fanfiction being written at the moment, where she just finds the right words, and everyone is happy. I don't know if this maps to the actual world, and at this point never will, because conditional perfect constructions are unverifiable. That's grammar/chronotics 101.
"This could have gone differently" is not the same as "I know how this would have gone differently".
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:31 PM on March 22, 2013 [5 favorites]
Humanfont: Like I said before, don't just invent shit based on your opinion of the events. It makes the conversation worse.
posted by klangklangston at 5:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by klangklangston at 5:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
On the other hand, maybe I lack imagination, but I cannot think of a way in which it realistically could've turned out any worse.
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:34 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
The Santa Clara Convention Center is a public venue, not a private home.
Actually, the SCCC was rented out by the folks who run PyCon US. It was a private event ... and a private venue. Attendees had to pay to be there. It was not open to the 'general public.' The folks at PyCon set up standards and codes of behavior. They are permitted to due so since it was a PRIVATE event. They have even come out to say that they forbid 'harassing photography.' They can set the rules.
When in a public venue ... the street, etc. ... a person has no expectation of privacy. Hence, you can be photographed ... and you have no rights unless your image is used for commercial purposes.
posted by ericb at 5:36 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
Actually, the SCCC was rented out by the folks who run PyCon US. It was a private event ... and a private venue. Attendees had to pay to be there. It was not open to the 'general public.' The folks at PyCon set up standards and codes of behavior. They are permitted to due so since it was a PRIVATE event. They have even come out to say that they forbid 'harassing photography.' They can set the rules.
When in a public venue ... the street, etc. ... a person has no expectation of privacy. Hence, you can be photographed ... and you have no rights unless your image is used for commercial purposes.
posted by ericb at 5:36 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
"This could have gone differently" is not the same as "I know how this would have gone differently".
That's a coin with two sides though, isn't it?
Also... Didn't PyCon staff approach them and they acted perfectly reasonably? Was that before or after the Internet blew up?
posted by Artw at 5:45 PM on March 22, 2013
That's a coin with two sides though, isn't it?
Also... Didn't PyCon staff approach them and they acted perfectly reasonably? Was that before or after the Internet blew up?
posted by Artw at 5:45 PM on March 22, 2013
Those already have a connector-related meaning that's different from "male" and "female", though.
Wow, if we have gotten to the point of actually, literally arguing about 'male' and 'female' plugs as somehow pushing sexism, then goddamn, that movement has swallowed its own tail.
If that group wants to be taken seriously, by actual people in the actual world, picking stupid fights like this is not the way to get anywhere or do anything. "Male" and "female" are functional descriptions. Neither side is superior or inferior. Neither is better. The 'male' part has the extruded bit, and the 'female' part has the socket to accept the extruded part. And that's all. No value judgement.
Like it or not, men and women are physically different. As long as we are still human, that will continue to be the case. Describing other physical things in a way that reflects this fundamental reality of nature is not sexist or demeaning to anyone.
If you're seriously thinking this is an issue, you have a problem with sex, not with society or social constructs.
posted by Malor at 5:50 PM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
Wow, if we have gotten to the point of actually, literally arguing about 'male' and 'female' plugs as somehow pushing sexism, then goddamn, that movement has swallowed its own tail.
If that group wants to be taken seriously, by actual people in the actual world, picking stupid fights like this is not the way to get anywhere or do anything. "Male" and "female" are functional descriptions. Neither side is superior or inferior. Neither is better. The 'male' part has the extruded bit, and the 'female' part has the socket to accept the extruded part. And that's all. No value judgement.
Like it or not, men and women are physically different. As long as we are still human, that will continue to be the case. Describing other physical things in a way that reflects this fundamental reality of nature is not sexist or demeaning to anyone.
If you're seriously thinking this is an issue, you have a problem with sex, not with society or social constructs.
posted by Malor at 5:50 PM on March 22, 2013 [21 favorites]
A defamation suit brought by any of the participants would bring them additional public scrutiny and cost.
That is something they may want to pursue and willing to do so as to clear their names and reputation from Adria's charge that they were being sexist in their behavior.
Risk/reward -- based on legal counsel is it worth my pursuing a defamation suit to clarify the events that occurred? Is there redress that will benefit me for my personal and professional life by doing so?
posted by ericb at 5:50 PM on March 22, 2013
That is something they may want to pursue and willing to do so as to clear their names and reputation from Adria's charge that they were being sexist in their behavior.
Risk/reward -- based on legal counsel is it worth my pursuing a defamation suit to clarify the events that occurred? Is there redress that will benefit me for my personal and professional life by doing so?
posted by ericb at 5:50 PM on March 22, 2013
Also... Didn't PyCon staff approach them and they acted perfectly reasonably? Was that before or after the Internet blew up?
I'm not sure how these two questions relate to each other, and would possibly be able to respond more usefully if I did. But the Internet blew up, as near as one can tell, around the time of the post to ycombinator by Mr_Hank. More or less accurate accounts were posted on Reddit, 4chan and elsewhere, and it went from there. There wasn't really a "mob" before that - just a fairly small number of people leaving comments on twitter and a few blog posts, for and against.
Regarding PyCon staff - well, there's one reading this, at least count, so it might be best to ask him. But, in terms of simple causality, "when this happened, this happened" is not the same things as "if this had happend, this would have happened". Hypotheticals are hypotheticals - they are tools for inquiry and exploration, not verifiable statements.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:09 PM on March 22, 2013
I'm not sure how these two questions relate to each other, and would possibly be able to respond more usefully if I did. But the Internet blew up, as near as one can tell, around the time of the post to ycombinator by Mr_Hank. More or less accurate accounts were posted on Reddit, 4chan and elsewhere, and it went from there. There wasn't really a "mob" before that - just a fairly small number of people leaving comments on twitter and a few blog posts, for and against.
Regarding PyCon staff - well, there's one reading this, at least count, so it might be best to ask him. But, in terms of simple causality, "when this happened, this happened" is not the same things as "if this had happend, this would have happened". Hypotheticals are hypotheticals - they are tools for inquiry and exploration, not verifiable statements.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:09 PM on March 22, 2013
Right... But the were approached by PyCon staff at Richards request prior to having any knowledge of the impending shitfest and responded to it in a reasonable manner?
posted by Artw at 6:12 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Artw at 6:12 PM on March 22, 2013
leopard: " Really? It looked to me like there was a debate between people saying "This thing has gotten blown way out of proportion" and people saying "Look, no one forced these guys to make stupid sexist remarks, this is the real world, they're going to get fired if they bring bad publicity to their employers." Then she got fired, and the second group disappeared."
I'd like to make it clear that I didn't disappear, but that my capacity and desire to engage in these discussions is limited, and I do have a life outside Metafilter and have only begun to catch up on the thread. Also, I do not represent any particular side of the argument by engaging here or not, and my presence or absence in the thread doesn't indicate anything in and of itself about the validity of those arguments. That said, I am not surprised that SendGrid fired Adria due to the publicity. On a personal level, I was hoping they would not have done so, but that is indeed par for the course.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:15 PM on March 22, 2013
I'd like to make it clear that I didn't disappear, but that my capacity and desire to engage in these discussions is limited, and I do have a life outside Metafilter and have only begun to catch up on the thread. Also, I do not represent any particular side of the argument by engaging here or not, and my presence or absence in the thread doesn't indicate anything in and of itself about the validity of those arguments. That said, I am not surprised that SendGrid fired Adria due to the publicity. On a personal level, I was hoping they would not have done so, but that is indeed par for the course.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:15 PM on March 22, 2013
Klangklangston if you want to accuse me of making stuff up, please be specific or stop your bullshit.
posted by humanfont at 6:16 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by humanfont at 6:16 PM on March 22, 2013
Right... But the were approached by PyCon staff at Richards request prior to having any knowledge of the impending shitfest and responded to it in a reasonable manner?
Again, I don't wholly understand the question. Were they aware of things that would happen in the future? Probably not. The future is to a degree unknowable, although not wholly unpredictable. I predicted some things here, here, for example, many of which have come to pass. Although the cat was a surprise.
Possibly if you explain the point you are seeking to make, rather than using the elenchic method? I think that what you are saying is that she should have initiated a polite and respectful dialog. What is confusing me is that your line of argumentation seems to be that she should have known that this would have been the right thing to do based on events that had not at that point happened, and which would not have happened if she had, except in the parallel universe that we are currently occupying.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:22 PM on March 22, 2013
Again, I don't wholly understand the question. Were they aware of things that would happen in the future? Probably not. The future is to a degree unknowable, although not wholly unpredictable. I predicted some things here, here, for example, many of which have come to pass. Although the cat was a surprise.
Possibly if you explain the point you are seeking to make, rather than using the elenchic method? I think that what you are saying is that she should have initiated a polite and respectful dialog. What is confusing me is that your line of argumentation seems to be that she should have known that this would have been the right thing to do based on events that had not at that point happened, and which would not have happened if she had, except in the parallel universe that we are currently occupying.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:22 PM on March 22, 2013
Right. So we do know that politely asking them to desist would have been the right course of action because she asked someone to do it and it worked. No guesswork is required there.
She just happened to ALSO take the nuclear option, which resulted in a massive clusterfuck.
So we kind of know the results of both paths.
posted by Artw at 6:32 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
She just happened to ALSO take the nuclear option, which resulted in a massive clusterfuck.
So we kind of know the results of both paths.
posted by Artw at 6:32 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
Mod note: klang, humanfont, cool it or go elsewhere or something.
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:37 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by cortex (staff) at 6:37 PM on March 22, 2013
but she'll be better off than where she started off as.
So will the rest of the world. We'll know to avoid her.
posted by amorphatist at 6:41 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
So will the rest of the world. We'll know to avoid her.
posted by amorphatist at 6:41 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
amuseDetachment: "Perhaps it's a bit too much to characterize her behavior as anti-sex, but it's easy to reach that conclusion when she publicly shamed conference hosters for "promoting porn" from a title "Getting the money shot"."
I'm personally not anti-porn, but it's kind of shocking to me to see a jokey reference to the scene in a porn film where the man ejaculates on a woman's face, in what is purportedly a professional presentation.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:46 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
I'm personally not anti-porn, but it's kind of shocking to me to see a jokey reference to the scene in a porn film where the man ejaculates on a woman's face, in what is purportedly a professional presentation.
posted by krinklyfig at 6:46 PM on March 22, 2013 [9 favorites]
That was what you were heading for, Artw? Well, that is more useful than the Colombo approach, certainly.
So, in this case the clusterfuck was directly causally related to a series of posts to online communities, which were outside Richards' control or ability to predict. And the post to Hacker News which inspired those, although it was largely thoughtful and decent, struck a chord of "this super-powered mistress of the media has taken the bread from the mouths of three tiny children!" MRA victimology, which the poster probably did not predict. And that post came from the decision by Playhaven to terminate an employee for what seem to be unclear reasons. That was pretty egregious, and certainly not easy to predict.
All of which are events which were not predictable. However, nobody in this situation was The Midnighter. Probably if they had been it would all have gone very differently.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:48 PM on March 22, 2013
So, in this case the clusterfuck was directly causally related to a series of posts to online communities, which were outside Richards' control or ability to predict. And the post to Hacker News which inspired those, although it was largely thoughtful and decent, struck a chord of "this super-powered mistress of the media has taken the bread from the mouths of three tiny children!" MRA victimology, which the poster probably did not predict. And that post came from the decision by Playhaven to terminate an employee for what seem to be unclear reasons. That was pretty egregious, and certainly not easy to predict.
All of which are events which were not predictable. However, nobody in this situation was The Midnighter. Probably if they had been it would all have gone very differently.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:48 PM on March 22, 2013
krinklyfig: I don't think it's appropriate, but I also don't think it's sexist. I agree that it shouldn't be in a conference presentation. The problem is that it is unnecessary and unprofessional, not because it "promotes porn".
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:52 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
I just had a literal shriek of unrestrained delight at the fact that they're doing the fundraising by bitcoin.that's internet poisoning. you've reached toxicity and you need to pull out and go for a walk or your mind will get all weird and start writing blog posts that are scary to everyone but a tiny, insular group of people.
posted by This, of course, alludes to you at 7:03 PM on March 22, 2013 [4 favorites]
As I understand it, those two guys are computer programmers whose primary job 51 weeks of the year is to write and maintain software. They are not marketing or PR people. So, while they were apparently in the wrong, it wasn't as if they failed at their primary jobs.
You are expected to act like a professional every day you are at work. This policy is not limited to the marketing and PR team, it is for the whole company, even the programmers. You probably shouldn't tell dirty jokes in the break room either.
posted by humanfont at 7:28 PM on March 22, 2013
You are expected to act like a professional every day you are at work. This policy is not limited to the marketing and PR team, it is for the whole company, even the programmers. You probably shouldn't tell dirty jokes in the break room either.
posted by humanfont at 7:28 PM on March 22, 2013
You are expected to act like a professional every day you are at work.
And what if you're having a really bad day or stressed, and you still have to go to work because you still have to support yourself? I mean, by Adria's account she's been on the road for weeks, and I'm sure the joker guy also works hard too, and yet they're expected to be 'professional' all the time? And yet when they slip up even FUCKING once then their employer has the right to throw them out like yesterday's newspaper? You don't see anything wrong with that? How instead of issuing a warning and allowing an employee to learn their lesson their decision was to give them a pink slip? Hell, we don't even know if they've been laid off, they could have been fired and now they don't even have a chance to collect unemployment.
posted by FJT at 7:38 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
And what if you're having a really bad day or stressed, and you still have to go to work because you still have to support yourself? I mean, by Adria's account she's been on the road for weeks, and I'm sure the joker guy also works hard too, and yet they're expected to be 'professional' all the time? And yet when they slip up even FUCKING once then their employer has the right to throw them out like yesterday's newspaper? You don't see anything wrong with that? How instead of issuing a warning and allowing an employee to learn their lesson their decision was to give them a pink slip? Hell, we don't even know if they've been laid off, they could have been fired and now they don't even have a chance to collect unemployment.
posted by FJT at 7:38 PM on March 22, 2013 [2 favorites]
melissam: "Maybe she should learn to code"
As far as I understand, her role as evangelist requires her to be able to code as well as promote and work with developers.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:39 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
As far as I understand, her role as evangelist requires her to be able to code as well as promote and work with developers.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:39 PM on March 22, 2013 [3 favorites]
amuseDetachment: "krinklyfig: I don't think it's appropriate, but I also don't think it's sexist. I agree that it shouldn't be in a conference presentation. The problem is that it is unnecessary and unprofessional, not because it "promotes porn"."
I think splitting hairs about what a person's specific objection should be is unnecessary, if it's really not appropriate in the first place.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:42 PM on March 22, 2013
I think splitting hairs about what a person's specific objection should be is unnecessary, if it's really not appropriate in the first place.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:42 PM on March 22, 2013
Inappropriateness is not black and white. There is a difference between "I'd fork his repo" and a rape joke -- I'm trying to make it as clear as possible, but there is definitely more nebulous/insidious ways in which sexism rears its ugly head. I think the ensuing actions that need to be taken have to consider the context. If it's sexist, then it's a much bigger problem than being inconsiderate and unprofessional.
Not thinking things through and offering lunch with pork in it when you know that a large portion of the guests are muslim/jewish/buddhist may be inconsiderate and extremely unprofessional. One would be 100% justified in blogging about it and naming names as to why it's completely unacceptable. However, it isn't religious persecution, and I think there is a difference. To be posting pictures of your lunch and the lunch coordinator with "Look at this asshole" (without even directly informing them about the dietary concerns) is counterproductive, mean-spirited, and gives no confidence that they are acting in good faith.
Snarky comments and calling people out is an incredibly effective tool of the disempowered to ensure power dynamics are resolved because the disempowered are not able to face a fight head on. Using that as a tool for something like "I'd fork his repo" is not helpful. It would be justified in the context of someone making, for example, rape jokes, because there is that history of disempowerment with regards to sexism. If it's sexism, posting a picture and saying "look at this asshole", is fully justified full stop. The nature of the disempowerment of sexist jokes justifies the less-than-polite behavior. If it's not sexist, I think there is less of a license to act in a way that is not directly socially constructive.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:05 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Not thinking things through and offering lunch with pork in it when you know that a large portion of the guests are muslim/jewish/buddhist may be inconsiderate and extremely unprofessional. One would be 100% justified in blogging about it and naming names as to why it's completely unacceptable. However, it isn't religious persecution, and I think there is a difference. To be posting pictures of your lunch and the lunch coordinator with "Look at this asshole" (without even directly informing them about the dietary concerns) is counterproductive, mean-spirited, and gives no confidence that they are acting in good faith.
Snarky comments and calling people out is an incredibly effective tool of the disempowered to ensure power dynamics are resolved because the disempowered are not able to face a fight head on. Using that as a tool for something like "I'd fork his repo" is not helpful. It would be justified in the context of someone making, for example, rape jokes, because there is that history of disempowerment with regards to sexism. If it's sexism, posting a picture and saying "look at this asshole", is fully justified full stop. The nature of the disempowerment of sexist jokes justifies the less-than-polite behavior. If it's not sexist, I think there is less of a license to act in a way that is not directly socially constructive.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:05 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
ericb: " We don't know what the joke actually was, and I'm not even really trying to excuse it, but I do think it's fascinating that it's apparently part of our cultural experience, and not just limited to bearded programmers."
Setting the bar at what would fly in a Super Bowl commercial as to what should be appropriate conduct at work is ridiculous. I like Amy Poehler, but Super Bowl advertising humor is locker-room by definition.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:26 PM on March 22, 2013
Setting the bar at what would fly in a Super Bowl commercial as to what should be appropriate conduct at work is ridiculous. I like Amy Poehler, but Super Bowl advertising humor is locker-room by definition.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:26 PM on March 22, 2013
amuseDetachment: " If it's sexism, posting a picture and saying "look at this asshole", is fully justified full stop."
It doesn't matter if it were sexist per se. And the forking thing, put that aside. Just take the dongle joke alone for what it was intended to be, which was a sexual joke, and the person who told the joke admitted as much. It's considered sexual harassment to tell such jokes in the workplace, because it contributes to a hostile work environment. Contributing to a hostile work environment for women perpetuates sexism in the workplace, by making the workplace unwelcome to women.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:32 PM on March 22, 2013
It doesn't matter if it were sexist per se. And the forking thing, put that aside. Just take the dongle joke alone for what it was intended to be, which was a sexual joke, and the person who told the joke admitted as much. It's considered sexual harassment to tell such jokes in the workplace, because it contributes to a hostile work environment. Contributing to a hostile work environment for women perpetuates sexism in the workplace, by making the workplace unwelcome to women.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:32 PM on March 22, 2013
FWIW -- your attribution of that quote to me -- those are not my words. They are those of the creative director at Ars Technica. Granted, I am the one to have posted the quote - with attribution to him.
posted by ericb at 8:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by ericb at 8:33 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
ericb: "FWIW -- your attribution of that quote to me -- those are not my words. They are those of the creative director at Ars Technica. Granted, I am the one to have posted the quote - with attribution to him."
Yes, and I did not intend to create any confusion. But my point remains the same.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:36 PM on March 22, 2013
Yes, and I did not intend to create any confusion. But my point remains the same.
posted by krinklyfig at 8:36 PM on March 22, 2013
krinklyfig: Big dongles is probably not okay and possibly a bit sexist. However, in this thread, you'll find many that disagree, and you're speaking with people who are generally with feminist causes. To say that it is a clear black and white issue that justifies going full nuclear "look at this asshole" mode is taking a radical stance at what should be a much simpler process. My point is that there are times when public shaming in a non-constructive manner is justified.
If this was her first incident where handling gray areas is a problem then, yes, I would tend to be more empathetic. However, as published, her reaction with "Money shot" gives me the impression that she is looking to start a fight and is trying to get her twitter followers riled up. I automatically don't think she's acting in good faith. So when she's reacting in the same way with "Big dongles" and "Fork his repo", I don't give her the benefit of the doubt. I don't immediately consider that she is in a disempowered position and has no alternative to direct confrontation (e.g. direct confrontation may cause penalties in her career and psychological well-being).
When she claims to have a problem with "promoting porn" as a priori and comments like "I'd like to fork his repo", I get the impression that her possibly legitimate claim with "big dongles" is not in good faith. I don't give her the credit that she has no alternatives.
Because no matter what both of us think, the "ideal" way is to resolve this head on and to directly resolve this with the individuals and conference organizers. Her actions with "Money shot" and other individual anecdotal evidence (which is gossip, I admit), give me the impression that she's not doing this from the perspective of the disempowered.
Ultimately, I think we can agree that sexism in the workplace is endemic, especially with euphemisms that do not help either gender at all.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:52 PM on March 22, 2013
If this was her first incident where handling gray areas is a problem then, yes, I would tend to be more empathetic. However, as published, her reaction with "Money shot" gives me the impression that she is looking to start a fight and is trying to get her twitter followers riled up. I automatically don't think she's acting in good faith. So when she's reacting in the same way with "Big dongles" and "Fork his repo", I don't give her the benefit of the doubt. I don't immediately consider that she is in a disempowered position and has no alternative to direct confrontation (e.g. direct confrontation may cause penalties in her career and psychological well-being).
When she claims to have a problem with "promoting porn" as a priori and comments like "I'd like to fork his repo", I get the impression that her possibly legitimate claim with "big dongles" is not in good faith. I don't give her the credit that she has no alternatives.
Because no matter what both of us think, the "ideal" way is to resolve this head on and to directly resolve this with the individuals and conference organizers. Her actions with "Money shot" and other individual anecdotal evidence (which is gossip, I admit), give me the impression that she's not doing this from the perspective of the disempowered.
Ultimately, I think we can agree that sexism in the workplace is endemic, especially with euphemisms that do not help either gender at all.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:52 PM on March 22, 2013
Setting the bar at what would fly in a Super Bowl commercial as to what should be appropriate conduct at work is ridiculous. I like Amy Poehler, but Super Bowl advertising humor is locker-room by definition.
Primetime broadcast American TV is a pretty heavily regulated and censored medium. The Super Bowl is an event in which a not quite exposed nipple was a massive national controversy. The content displayed must be appropriate for all audiences including children.
I think you can make a pretty good case that making a joke similar to one that was allowed there is not something someone should be obviously aware is across a line for a professional mixed company setting.
Now, that doesn't mean it's absolutely totally kosher but I think it does suggest more "talking to" territory than firing territory. This of course depends on what was actually said, because tone and precise words can easily take this sort of thing over the line.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:52 PM on March 22, 2013
Primetime broadcast American TV is a pretty heavily regulated and censored medium. The Super Bowl is an event in which a not quite exposed nipple was a massive national controversy. The content displayed must be appropriate for all audiences including children.
I think you can make a pretty good case that making a joke similar to one that was allowed there is not something someone should be obviously aware is across a line for a professional mixed company setting.
Now, that doesn't mean it's absolutely totally kosher but I think it does suggest more "talking to" territory than firing territory. This of course depends on what was actually said, because tone and precise words can easily take this sort of thing over the line.
posted by Drinky Die at 8:52 PM on March 22, 2013
(To be clear, it's regulated for obscenity, not offensiveness. However, a network like CBS does have a family friendly reputation to uphold)
posted by Drinky Die at 8:56 PM on March 22, 2013
posted by Drinky Die at 8:56 PM on March 22, 2013
To be especially clear, while researching and asking around about this issue, I noticed her website URI is ButYoureAGirl.com. I have a problem with that. That doesn't for a second excuse what the other side is doing (her website is getting DDoSed i think, so her death threats are probably not over), you can do a google search and view the website cache.
We can judge each other by what name we choose, I know I've chosen my metafilter handle when I was a teenager.
I don't have a problem that she uses the word "girl". I don't have a problem that she first and foremost associates her identity as being a woman in technology, even though I do find that an issue innately coupled with sexism in technology and is an all around minefield.
My issue is with the first word in her domain. "But". "But you're a girl". That's a very antagonistic way to look at gender relations from the get go. I'm certain she's faced sexual discrimination, I've seen with my own eyes and have raised issues (as well as avoided rocking the boat but wished we spoke up, as I'm sure we all have). It, however, does not remove the fact that her primary face to the web, her front of her personality is one of antagonism along gender relations.
Her URI is not "yesimagirl" that would be very assertive and proud, "yes, I am, do you have something wrong with me?", it would be feminist and bold.
"But you're a girl" predicates on a male in technology being befuddled and sexist that a woman is capable of working in technology.
That assumption comes off as inherently combative, counterproductive, and hostile. She can call herself whatever she wants, but that further creates the impression that she is not acting in good faith. Those of us that automatically assume she isn't acting in good faith from the evidence are reasonable. As a feminist it is not my responsiblity to protect jerks just because it creates the environment where women are afraid to speak up. The blame lies with the actual attention-seeking jerks, those who wrongfully get accused of being attention-seeking jerks are the fallout and that blame rests completely on Adria Richard's actions.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:19 PM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
We can judge each other by what name we choose, I know I've chosen my metafilter handle when I was a teenager.
I don't have a problem that she uses the word "girl". I don't have a problem that she first and foremost associates her identity as being a woman in technology, even though I do find that an issue innately coupled with sexism in technology and is an all around minefield.
My issue is with the first word in her domain. "But". "But you're a girl". That's a very antagonistic way to look at gender relations from the get go. I'm certain she's faced sexual discrimination, I've seen with my own eyes and have raised issues (as well as avoided rocking the boat but wished we spoke up, as I'm sure we all have). It, however, does not remove the fact that her primary face to the web, her front of her personality is one of antagonism along gender relations.
Her URI is not "yesimagirl" that would be very assertive and proud, "yes, I am, do you have something wrong with me?", it would be feminist and bold.
"But you're a girl" predicates on a male in technology being befuddled and sexist that a woman is capable of working in technology.
That assumption comes off as inherently combative, counterproductive, and hostile. She can call herself whatever she wants, but that further creates the impression that she is not acting in good faith. Those of us that automatically assume she isn't acting in good faith from the evidence are reasonable. As a feminist it is not my responsiblity to protect jerks just because it creates the environment where women are afraid to speak up. The blame lies with the actual attention-seeking jerks, those who wrongfully get accused of being attention-seeking jerks are the fallout and that blame rests completely on Adria Richard's actions.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:19 PM on March 22, 2013 [6 favorites]
"It's considered sexual harassment to tell such jokes in the workplace, because it contributes to a hostile work environment. Contributing to a hostile work environment for women perpetuates sexism in the workplace, by making the workplace unwelcome to women."
No. It can be considered sexual harassment, but that is not a necessary consequence of making a dongle joke. And in order for it to be a hostile work environment, that has to be a pervasive and repeated climate of jokes like that, and they can't have ended when the person complaining asked them to stop.
Now, granted, things can be crappy prior to rising to the level of a hostile work environment, but it's not an inevitable consequence.
posted by klangklangston at 9:32 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
No. It can be considered sexual harassment, but that is not a necessary consequence of making a dongle joke. And in order for it to be a hostile work environment, that has to be a pervasive and repeated climate of jokes like that, and they can't have ended when the person complaining asked them to stop.
Now, granted, things can be crappy prior to rising to the level of a hostile work environment, but it's not an inevitable consequence.
posted by klangklangston at 9:32 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
klangklangston: " Now, granted, things can be crappy prior to rising to the level of a hostile work environment, but it's not an inevitable consequence."
Fair enough. But it appears to me that too many people are getting stuck on whether the behavior could be constituted as sexist, which is besides the point. Sexual jokes and innuendo are not considered appropriate in the workplace, and the conference rules had specific rules regarding such. From everything I've heard and read about these conferences (and from my personal experiences in tech), the hostile work environment is very much at issue, not whether the participants are sexist people or if their jokes are specifically sexist.
posted by krinklyfig at 9:47 PM on March 22, 2013
Fair enough. But it appears to me that too many people are getting stuck on whether the behavior could be constituted as sexist, which is besides the point. Sexual jokes and innuendo are not considered appropriate in the workplace, and the conference rules had specific rules regarding such. From everything I've heard and read about these conferences (and from my personal experiences in tech), the hostile work environment is very much at issue, not whether the participants are sexist people or if their jokes are specifically sexist.
posted by krinklyfig at 9:47 PM on March 22, 2013
I'm having flashbacks to days it sucks to be a manager. Any employee can and will have a bad day or an off moment and that may have major consequences. Hopefully the consequences match up with the offense. Sometimes even when the offense is minor in your opinion you have no choice but to fire the person. In the circumstance of the male employee we have no idea why he was selected from the group making jokes and fired. In the case of Ms Richards we have more information and I'm troubled by Sendgrid's behavior.
posted by humanfont at 10:12 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 10:12 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
All are punished.
posted by bq at 10:55 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by bq at 10:55 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
The thing I gather from this thread is that developers believe that all non-developers are inherently liars who have no business drawing a paycheque from the same company as them, but of course still won't answer the damn support e-mail.
posted by Space Coyote at 11:43 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Space Coyote at 11:43 PM on March 22, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sexual jokes and innuendo are not considered appropriate in the workplace, and the conference rules had specific rules regarding such
You keep desperately, desperately wanting to frame it that way.
But it is not that way. Adria Richards did the framing; she was protecting the little girl from the evils of sexism. And that is why she was ridiculed and, ultimately, fired, because there was just about zero sexism in what was going on.
You can try to change the subject to be something else, but your interpretation is not what she was complaining about.
"Oh, but it was unprofessional!" may or may not be true, but that's not that charge that was leveled.
posted by Malor at 12:34 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
You keep desperately, desperately wanting to frame it that way.
But it is not that way. Adria Richards did the framing; she was protecting the little girl from the evils of sexism. And that is why she was ridiculed and, ultimately, fired, because there was just about zero sexism in what was going on.
You can try to change the subject to be something else, but your interpretation is not what she was complaining about.
"Oh, but it was unprofessional!" may or may not be true, but that's not that charge that was leveled.
posted by Malor at 12:34 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
This story keeps getting worse.
Here's where I am with it now. This woman is being systematically attacked from all sides. Even on metafilter, some people seem to be focusing on tiny semantic points and ignoring the fact that she's being threatened with rape, that she's being doxxed, that she's being racially attacked, constantly threatened and name called.
I've been embarrassed to be a man before, but where this is now just disgusts me. I'm appalled. I don't care even if she is were some weirdo who used the language of social justice to bully and self-aggrandize. If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
Sisters: Pick up whatever tools you have, and smash this fucking corrupted, broken, women hating system to pieces. Organize, and hack the fuck out of the system. DDOS the living shit out of reddit, HN and 4Chan. Call out injustice where it is and just for the "LOLZ" call out injustice where it isn't.
There's a whole metric bunch of men out there making tech difficult for women, and they deserve a whole heap of shit pouring down on their smug, nasty, nitpicking heads.
posted by zoo at 3:06 AM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
Here's where I am with it now. This woman is being systematically attacked from all sides. Even on metafilter, some people seem to be focusing on tiny semantic points and ignoring the fact that she's being threatened with rape, that she's being doxxed, that she's being racially attacked, constantly threatened and name called.
I've been embarrassed to be a man before, but where this is now just disgusts me. I'm appalled. I don't care even if she is were some weirdo who used the language of social justice to bully and self-aggrandize. If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
Sisters: Pick up whatever tools you have, and smash this fucking corrupted, broken, women hating system to pieces. Organize, and hack the fuck out of the system. DDOS the living shit out of reddit, HN and 4Chan. Call out injustice where it is and just for the "LOLZ" call out injustice where it isn't.
There's a whole metric bunch of men out there making tech difficult for women, and they deserve a whole heap of shit pouring down on their smug, nasty, nitpicking heads.
posted by zoo at 3:06 AM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
I can only speak as a manager at a company who sponsors and sends staff to these types of conferences. If the conference feels the need to pull one of my people out of a session and talk to them about their behavior. Then reprimands them and demands an apology. I would anticipate a call from them.
What does your company do, hall school monitoring? Had Richards not posted the incident to the internet, nobody needed to have learned about it apart from her, the guys she called out and the Pycon staffer handling it.
posted by MartinWisse at 3:38 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
What does your company do, hall school monitoring? Had Richards not posted the incident to the internet, nobody needed to have learned about it apart from her, the guys she called out and the Pycon staffer handling it.
posted by MartinWisse at 3:38 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
This was a public event. Potentially with media/journalism coverage. If a reporter wrote this story, including a picture, which led to a firing, would he be morally culpable and blameworthy? I think that in a country with such robust freedom of press, it's a hard argument to make that a private citizen reporting on her experiences (pretty much anywhere but especially at an industry conference) is inappropriate and insufficiently considerate of others' privacy concerns.
posted by Salamandrous at 3:49 AM on March 23, 2013
posted by Salamandrous at 3:49 AM on March 23, 2013
Here's where I am with it now. This woman is being systematically attacked from all sides. Even on metafilter, some people seem to be focusing on tiny semantic points and ignoring the fact that she's being threatened with rape, that she's being doxxed, that she's being racially attacked, constantly threatened and name called. [...] If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
I'm not sure if this is part of your "just for the "LOLZ" call out injustice where it isn't" premise, but I've been reading the thread very differently from you. Obviously someone, anyone, getting rape threats/death threats/personal harassment shouldn't. That is not appropriate treatment for any human being. I cannot condemn the 4chan-style harassment Adria Richards has received in strong enough words. I think that MetaFilter is the sort of place where that pretty well goes without saying, so it mostly went without saying.
Not entirely without saying, of course:
the cydonian: Death/rape threats, DDoS attacks and personal attacks on Richards are beyond the pale, of course.
Afroblanco: Threatening rape or death is a hell of a lot more offensive than telling a stupid joke at conference or even getting somebody fired. That should be the real issue here.
Artw: She did a semi-shitty thing with super shitty repercussions. Some of the repercussions have fallen upon her, in the form of a bug disgusting ball of Internet idiots
Malor: But then the Internet Hate Squad getting her fired as well? What a nightmare. The terrorists win.
Broseph: And the harassment, death threats, rape threats, etc are disgusting and completely undeserved.
Rory Marinich: Nobody deserves rape threats, let alone as many as I'm sure she's getting. That is beyond the pale. No amount of obnoxiousness, inappropriate public shaming, or what-have-you should warrant a response like that.
Note: These are all from people who have criticized some aspect of Richards' behaviour in this thread, not from her defenders. It's actually harder to find quotes like these from people who think she did nothing wrong -- because it goes without saying. I haven't seen anyone say or even imply that the Two Minutes Hate she has received from this incident is "in any way acceptable". If I've missed a comment that says this, point me to it so I can flag it and send a harshly-worded MeMail.
My take on this thread is that this was -- from the distance we have as strangers -- an interesting incident with a number of points to discuss: the relatively minor nature of the offending speech, the public nature of Richards' callout, PyCon's handling of the incident, the subsequent firings, Richards' similar previous episodes, sexist treatment of women in technical environments, the use of charged language in technology, and more. These are the things that are remarkable about this incident, and the things that people disagree about and therefore discuss at length. A thousand posts, all saying "rape threats are despicable" / "yes, death threats are also terrible" is not a valuable discussion. In fact, there is a history of posts that are nothing but "let's all say this terrible thing that happened was terrible" getting deleted.
I'm reminded of the recent Steubenville rape case thread. There, the majority of the discussion was about the media's reporting on the case. It's not because people thought that the rape wasn't so bad, but the CNN report was totally unacceptable. It's because everybody agreed that the rape was a terrible crime, and with that out of the way, there was room to discuss the more interesting issue.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:23 AM on March 23, 2013 [21 favorites]
I'm not sure if this is part of your "just for the "LOLZ" call out injustice where it isn't" premise, but I've been reading the thread very differently from you. Obviously someone, anyone, getting rape threats/death threats/personal harassment shouldn't. That is not appropriate treatment for any human being. I cannot condemn the 4chan-style harassment Adria Richards has received in strong enough words. I think that MetaFilter is the sort of place where that pretty well goes without saying, so it mostly went without saying.
Not entirely without saying, of course:
the cydonian: Death/rape threats, DDoS attacks and personal attacks on Richards are beyond the pale, of course.
Afroblanco: Threatening rape or death is a hell of a lot more offensive than telling a stupid joke at conference or even getting somebody fired. That should be the real issue here.
Artw: She did a semi-shitty thing with super shitty repercussions. Some of the repercussions have fallen upon her, in the form of a bug disgusting ball of Internet idiots
Malor: But then the Internet Hate Squad getting her fired as well? What a nightmare. The terrorists win.
Broseph: And the harassment, death threats, rape threats, etc are disgusting and completely undeserved.
Rory Marinich: Nobody deserves rape threats, let alone as many as I'm sure she's getting. That is beyond the pale. No amount of obnoxiousness, inappropriate public shaming, or what-have-you should warrant a response like that.
Note: These are all from people who have criticized some aspect of Richards' behaviour in this thread, not from her defenders. It's actually harder to find quotes like these from people who think she did nothing wrong -- because it goes without saying. I haven't seen anyone say or even imply that the Two Minutes Hate she has received from this incident is "in any way acceptable". If I've missed a comment that says this, point me to it so I can flag it and send a harshly-worded MeMail.
My take on this thread is that this was -- from the distance we have as strangers -- an interesting incident with a number of points to discuss: the relatively minor nature of the offending speech, the public nature of Richards' callout, PyCon's handling of the incident, the subsequent firings, Richards' similar previous episodes, sexist treatment of women in technical environments, the use of charged language in technology, and more. These are the things that are remarkable about this incident, and the things that people disagree about and therefore discuss at length. A thousand posts, all saying "rape threats are despicable" / "yes, death threats are also terrible" is not a valuable discussion. In fact, there is a history of posts that are nothing but "let's all say this terrible thing that happened was terrible" getting deleted.
I'm reminded of the recent Steubenville rape case thread. There, the majority of the discussion was about the media's reporting on the case. It's not because people thought that the rape wasn't so bad, but the CNN report was totally unacceptable. It's because everybody agreed that the rape was a terrible crime, and with that out of the way, there was room to discuss the more interesting issue.
posted by Homeboy Trouble at 4:23 AM on March 23, 2013 [21 favorites]
"What does your company do, hall school monitoring?"
I imagine not, but presumably they employ adults who should not require babysitting and who should be quite capable of keeping their dick jokes to themselves while in the workplace. An ability to not create a hostile work environment for the people around you is and should be a basic expectation for both conferences and employers to have and share.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:23 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
I imagine not, but presumably they employ adults who should not require babysitting and who should be quite capable of keeping their dick jokes to themselves while in the workplace. An ability to not create a hostile work environment for the people around you is and should be a basic expectation for both conferences and employers to have and share.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:23 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
I think her getting fired is very acceptable, while the threats obviously aren't. Do we have a problem?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
I think her getting fired is very acceptable, while the threats obviously aren't. Do we have a problem?
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
Sisters: Pick up whatever tools you have, and smash this fucking corrupted, broken, women hating system to pieces. Organize, and hack the fuck out of the system. DDOS the living shit out of reddit, HN and 4Chan. Call out injustice where it is and just for the "LOLZ" call out injustice where it isn't.What the fuck no. This isn't a game where you score points by DDoSing and raiding/shitposting social communities. Real peoples' lives are affected. I've said it before and I'll say it again, MRA's new tactics have changed the dynamic, refusing to see it is ignoring the forest from the trees.
Historically, the methods of shaming and grouping up to shame one person has worked very well on tumblr/twitter/SRS. As I've explained above, the methods can be justified, as disempowered people are justified in using unorthodox means, as fighting directly is simply not possible. It's problematic, it's not preferrable, but is understandable.
The problem is that MRAs are using the same tactics, and it's working. The reason it's working is because they don't fear reputation loss. They're already viewed as (and are) sexists, so they don't really have anything to lose by playing dirty with intimidation.
By creating some kind of insane war of shaming (as in this case) or worse, escalating it to DDoS atacks, you're encouraging a situation where reasonable people will think to themselves, "oh, both sides are acting like assholes, let me just reinforce my ingrained beliefs." It creates an environment where average, reasonable people, will go, "I guess there's both sides to the story." False equivalence is literally one of the worst things you can do when you're running a negative reputation nash equilibrium.
The end result will be women feel intimidated from coming out with real issues, because of fear of reprisals from MRAs, while MRAs suffer zero consequences beyond reputation loss. Since their reputation is worthless, they have actually traded their reputation for the gains of intimidation of women.
Escalation is not a solution, especially when it's to back up someone who is clearly acting in her own interests over resolving actual social justice issues.
posted by amuseDetachment at 4:59 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'd like to emphasize again that I'm not discouraging women from speaking out when faced with sexism. They can certainly make a blogpost and have an honest discussion with people that are receptive to it. I'm saying that posting pics of "Look at this shitlord" and doxing people has historically "worked" but it isn't going to any longer. The solution is to be more reasonable, thoughtful, and levelheaded than the MRAs. The correct tactic is to make them look like the unreasonable bad guys.
I know it's certainly a lot less "fun", which is why a lot of people do those screenshots on tumblr/twitter. It's certainly convenient that you can do something fun and do some good at the same time (that's win-win! it's like breakfast for dinner!), but this "fun" is at the expense of real issues. Posting "look at this asshole" is going to be a problem, even though it's certainly fun to do so, and to rally the troops to call them names on the internet. It's certainly no fun to write a balanced, thoughtful reply to an MRA bigot the 3000th time. Unfortunately, I see no other solution. It's clear that posting and reblogging screenshots of shitlords on tumblr without commentary/effort-to-fix-the-problem will end in an environment where women will be less inclined to speak up out when sexism occurs.
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:14 AM on March 23, 2013
I know it's certainly a lot less "fun", which is why a lot of people do those screenshots on tumblr/twitter. It's certainly convenient that you can do something fun and do some good at the same time (that's win-win! it's like breakfast for dinner!), but this "fun" is at the expense of real issues. Posting "look at this asshole" is going to be a problem, even though it's certainly fun to do so, and to rally the troops to call them names on the internet. It's certainly no fun to write a balanced, thoughtful reply to an MRA bigot the 3000th time. Unfortunately, I see no other solution. It's clear that posting and reblogging screenshots of shitlords on tumblr without commentary/effort-to-fix-the-problem will end in an environment where women will be less inclined to speak up out when sexism occurs.
posted by amuseDetachment at 5:14 AM on March 23, 2013
> If the conference feels the need to pull one of my people out of a session and talk to them about their behavior. Then reprimands them and demands an apology. I would anticipate a call from them. If I didn't get a call and found out later, I'd be pretty upset at the event organizers.
Combine "at will" with conference organisers who will run and tell the teacher (which was what the hall monitor joke was about, not whether it's OK to say "big dongle") and you get perverse incentives. In such an environment, if you're accused of saying "big dongle" by an expert self-publicist, it's prudent to refuse to answer questions about it without a lawyer present: it's become one of those never talk to the police situations. As FJT has already pointed out, like the cops, the conference organisers and the Management are not on your side, and if you're unfortunate enough to live in Libertopia, the Management can fire you because they feel like it.
This is perverse if you'd like the guy to apologise and keep his job rather than lawyer up, entrench his position and maybe get fired. As a result of Pycon's intervention, the guys apologised and will probably be more careful in future. Given the scale of the offence that we can see from the blog posting, that's all that needed to happen. humanfont has inferred a sort of dramatised version by filling in some gaps, as others have noted.
Surely the right response to this is to campaign against "at will" laws?
posted by pw201 at 5:28 AM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
Combine "at will" with conference organisers who will run and tell the teacher (which was what the hall monitor joke was about, not whether it's OK to say "big dongle") and you get perverse incentives. In such an environment, if you're accused of saying "big dongle" by an expert self-publicist, it's prudent to refuse to answer questions about it without a lawyer present: it's become one of those never talk to the police situations. As FJT has already pointed out, like the cops, the conference organisers and the Management are not on your side, and if you're unfortunate enough to live in Libertopia, the Management can fire you because they feel like it.
This is perverse if you'd like the guy to apologise and keep his job rather than lawyer up, entrench his position and maybe get fired. As a result of Pycon's intervention, the guys apologised and will probably be more careful in future. Given the scale of the offence that we can see from the blog posting, that's all that needed to happen. humanfont has inferred a sort of dramatised version by filling in some gaps, as others have noted.
Surely the right response to this is to campaign against "at will" laws?
posted by pw201 at 5:28 AM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
But as any decent Human Resources department can tell you, it's not sexual harassment worthy of report unless you've asked the offender(s) to stop and he/they refuse.Incidentally, this is untrue. A decent human resources department would not tell you this, because a decent human resources department would understand that a significant part of its job is to avoid leaving the company open to legal action.
What the writer seems to have misunderstood is the dictum that if possible and appropriate sexual harassment is best dealt with informally rather than formally. This can mean the person involved asking the person doing it to stop - again, the ideal circumstance is where one person tells the other that they believe their conduct is harassing, and asks them to stop, and the other person stops immediately - this minimizes both time spent by the HR department in sorting it out and legal exposure for the employer.
However, there are allowances built into boilerplate sexual harassment policies for circumstances in which the person who is feeling harassed does not feel able to speak informally to the harasser - often because they fear that they will encounter a hostile response or professional reprisals. The next step is usually to tell a manager or HR representative about the situation and, again if it can be dealt with informally, they approach the other party.
There are also procedures built in, of course, to deal with a single act of sexual harassment sufficiently severe to short-circuit the "give them a chance to stop" guideline.
This isn't really related to this case, which is about a conference's code of conduct rather than a workplace sexual harassment policy, but it's an incorrect and misleading statement about how employees should feel able to respond to sexual harassment, and ought to be corrected. Sadly, this is the Internet, where even if you don't know anything, you can almost certainly reckon something.
posted by running order squabble fest at 5:42 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
amuseDetachment: I'm saying that posting pics of "Look at this shitlord" and doxing people has historically "worked" but it isn't going to any longer.
But these guys aren't even shitlords. One or more of them made slightly off-color comments, among themselves, in an audience, comments that were not sexist, and were not suppressive of, or demeaning toward, anyone.
I think they're getting lumped in, kind of by default, with the insane online assholes. It's important to remember that those two guys didn't even deserve public shame for what happened; it was very minor, and it was handled locally. And that's a lot of why this shitstorm started, because they committed a peccadillo at most, and she (and many of her followers) were treating it like a capital crime, and one of the guys lost his job. That's not cool.
Some of you are justifying shaming these guys because OTHER guys suck. That is not okay. If you absolutely must shame, then be certain that the shaming is fully justified.
In this case, it absolutely was not, and that's what has the MRA guys in unusually vicious attack mode. What they're doing is awful and wrong and should not be tolerated. But, at the same time, they were set off by an active wrong that was done to men because they are men. It is never okay to punish someone for being in a class of people. Never, never, not ever. It happens all the goddamn time, and it absolutely shouldn't. Doing more of the same does not help, it just makes things worse. Many police, for instance, are horribly abusive toward blacks in particular, but that doesn't mean that blacks then have an automatic license to abuse cops, simply because they're police. They just don't.
Each time you commit that injustice, you commit it against someone new, who probably wasn't involved in the original wrong at all. It perpetuates racism and classism, it divides people into groups, instead of making them into a whole society. When you point at specific people because they are doing bad things, especially to weaker groups, that's justified, even laudable. We should be in full-throated support when that happens. But, in this case, there seems to be a very real component of pointing at these two men because they reminded her of other men she didn't like, and that's committing a very grave wrong to them. And then some of you seem to be on her side because those two guys remind you of men you don't like, and you compound the wrong being done.
What they did was really no big deal, and there's no sense in coming down on them like a sack of hammers because other guys are jerks. They deserved a slight scolding; they were scolded, they apologized, and it should have ended there. But she wanted to make an example out of them; she couldn't come down on the one earlier in the day who really pissed her off, so she tried to beat up on these two instead. That was the wrong thing to do.
When you attack the wrong people, then you make those horrible, horrible people in the MRA look justified and reasonable. They aren't, but attacking the wrong people, the wrong way, makes it look like they are. (This is much of why I was so upset, upthread, that SendGrid fired her, because it means A) that those assholes win, B) that those are good tactics to use, because they work, and C) that other people will assume that must have been right to do what they did, because she was fired. )
If you're going to engage in this fight, and I encourage you to do so, fight the right people. If you don't, your real targets will see the threat, and will use your mistake to mess up your life just as bad as they can. If you're actually in the right, and have your ducks in a row, you are far less vulnerable.
Attacking random men who simply remind you of jerks, and happen to be men, is the surest path to total failure I can see.
posted by Malor at 5:44 AM on March 23, 2013 [19 favorites]
But these guys aren't even shitlords. One or more of them made slightly off-color comments, among themselves, in an audience, comments that were not sexist, and were not suppressive of, or demeaning toward, anyone.
I think they're getting lumped in, kind of by default, with the insane online assholes. It's important to remember that those two guys didn't even deserve public shame for what happened; it was very minor, and it was handled locally. And that's a lot of why this shitstorm started, because they committed a peccadillo at most, and she (and many of her followers) were treating it like a capital crime, and one of the guys lost his job. That's not cool.
Some of you are justifying shaming these guys because OTHER guys suck. That is not okay. If you absolutely must shame, then be certain that the shaming is fully justified.
In this case, it absolutely was not, and that's what has the MRA guys in unusually vicious attack mode. What they're doing is awful and wrong and should not be tolerated. But, at the same time, they were set off by an active wrong that was done to men because they are men. It is never okay to punish someone for being in a class of people. Never, never, not ever. It happens all the goddamn time, and it absolutely shouldn't. Doing more of the same does not help, it just makes things worse. Many police, for instance, are horribly abusive toward blacks in particular, but that doesn't mean that blacks then have an automatic license to abuse cops, simply because they're police. They just don't.
Each time you commit that injustice, you commit it against someone new, who probably wasn't involved in the original wrong at all. It perpetuates racism and classism, it divides people into groups, instead of making them into a whole society. When you point at specific people because they are doing bad things, especially to weaker groups, that's justified, even laudable. We should be in full-throated support when that happens. But, in this case, there seems to be a very real component of pointing at these two men because they reminded her of other men she didn't like, and that's committing a very grave wrong to them. And then some of you seem to be on her side because those two guys remind you of men you don't like, and you compound the wrong being done.
What they did was really no big deal, and there's no sense in coming down on them like a sack of hammers because other guys are jerks. They deserved a slight scolding; they were scolded, they apologized, and it should have ended there. But she wanted to make an example out of them; she couldn't come down on the one earlier in the day who really pissed her off, so she tried to beat up on these two instead. That was the wrong thing to do.
When you attack the wrong people, then you make those horrible, horrible people in the MRA look justified and reasonable. They aren't, but attacking the wrong people, the wrong way, makes it look like they are. (This is much of why I was so upset, upthread, that SendGrid fired her, because it means A) that those assholes win, B) that those are good tactics to use, because they work, and C) that other people will assume that must have been right to do what they did, because she was fired. )
If you're going to engage in this fight, and I encourage you to do so, fight the right people. If you don't, your real targets will see the threat, and will use your mistake to mess up your life just as bad as they can. If you're actually in the right, and have your ducks in a row, you are far less vulnerable.
Attacking random men who simply remind you of jerks, and happen to be men, is the surest path to total failure I can see.
posted by Malor at 5:44 AM on March 23, 2013 [19 favorites]
Yes, I am in complete agreement that those two didn't commit some cardinal sin where they should be made fun of on twitter, I think I've said so earlier and did a poor job communicating that sentiment in that particular comment. I have zero trust in Adria Richard's actions.
What I meant was that the tactic of ridicule and intimidation online by posting pictures of "look at that shitload" and invading communities in a less-than-constructive way is now an inferior tactic no matter how justified the target, though, because it will fail from a strategic perspective.
MRAs have won because they used the same tactics of online harassment in this case. Only the net result is that sexists continue to be sexists, but women will stop raising issues for fear of MRA reprisals. That fear of MRA reprisals has gotten much worse now the tumblr social justice crowd is interested in escalating harassment as a game to score points rather than actually trying to come off more levelheaded than the opposition. Treating it as a game will no longer work, because now, without the advantage of looking like the more reasonable party, MRAs have no penalty for increasing the severity of their attacks on people speaking up (whereas the penalty before was public sentiment would go against them when they attack women for speaking up).
Escalation and a cavalier attitude towards looking like the more reasonable party means significantly higher risks/costs of speaking up with all sexism, big and small.
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:04 AM on March 23, 2013
What I meant was that the tactic of ridicule and intimidation online by posting pictures of "look at that shitload" and invading communities in a less-than-constructive way is now an inferior tactic no matter how justified the target, though, because it will fail from a strategic perspective.
MRAs have won because they used the same tactics of online harassment in this case. Only the net result is that sexists continue to be sexists, but women will stop raising issues for fear of MRA reprisals. That fear of MRA reprisals has gotten much worse now the tumblr social justice crowd is interested in escalating harassment as a game to score points rather than actually trying to come off more levelheaded than the opposition. Treating it as a game will no longer work, because now, without the advantage of looking like the more reasonable party, MRAs have no penalty for increasing the severity of their attacks on people speaking up (whereas the penalty before was public sentiment would go against them when they attack women for speaking up).
Escalation and a cavalier attitude towards looking like the more reasonable party means significantly higher risks/costs of speaking up with all sexism, big and small.
posted by amuseDetachment at 6:04 AM on March 23, 2013
MRAs have won because they used the same tactics of online harassment in this case.
I'm seeing more instances of the case being mentioned in the general press, usually in the context of lawyers commenting on whether Richards has strong legal case. If this incident does go to trial, the only winners will be the lawyers and consultants hired to ensure new workplace and conference rules.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:15 AM on March 23, 2013
I'm seeing more instances of the case being mentioned in the general press, usually in the context of lawyers commenting on whether Richards has strong legal case. If this incident does go to trial, the only winners will be the lawyers and consultants hired to ensure new workplace and conference rules.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 6:15 AM on March 23, 2013
Here's where I am with it now. This woman is being systematically attacked from all sides. Even on metafilter, some people seem to be focusing on tiny semantic points and ignoring the fact that she's being threatened with rape, that she's being doxxed, that she's being racially attacked, constantly threatened and name called.
I've been embarrassed to be a man before, but where this is now just disgusts me. I'm appalled. I don't care even if she is were some weirdo who used the language of social justice to bully and self-aggrandize. If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
I absolutely don't think it's right, but it's not for some reason as upsetting as it all happening to someone who didn't take it upon herself to go and open up the gates of hell.
I'm not saying she deserves it, or that she's responsible or going into all those homes and driving those men insane to the point where they'd do this to a stranger.
But we all know they're out there. Sometimes they come for people for no reason at all. I'm terrified of them and I'm not even a woman. I don't post anything online that expresses any sort of opinion on any identities that connected to my real name and visible to the public internet.
She went overboard with the picture. The picture was invasive and unnecessary. Most everyone is looking at this and saying the picture was too much, considering that next to nothing actually happened and the matter could've been resolved in good faith without broadcasting a picture of the jokers. The picture is gross. The picture is offensive. It's offensive for her to put a picture of two relatively harmless people on the twitter when everyone who actually did her dirty is probably unphotographed and unpublicized.
It sucks that she's getting attacked, it really does. But this is the internet, and we all know where the escalator is. Some people get thrown onto it, but she decided to ride the escalator on her own when she tried to invoke the Human Flesh Search Engine on these guys with twitter.
Oh and I don't know why you're calling for people to attack Reddit and HN. Both of those sites have a lot to offer.
posted by yonega at 6:27 AM on March 23, 2013
I've been embarrassed to be a man before, but where this is now just disgusts me. I'm appalled. I don't care even if she is were some weirdo who used the language of social justice to bully and self-aggrandize. If you think what's happening to her is in any way acceptable, then you and I have a problem.
I absolutely don't think it's right, but it's not for some reason as upsetting as it all happening to someone who didn't take it upon herself to go and open up the gates of hell.
I'm not saying she deserves it, or that she's responsible or going into all those homes and driving those men insane to the point where they'd do this to a stranger.
But we all know they're out there. Sometimes they come for people for no reason at all. I'm terrified of them and I'm not even a woman. I don't post anything online that expresses any sort of opinion on any identities that connected to my real name and visible to the public internet.
She went overboard with the picture. The picture was invasive and unnecessary. Most everyone is looking at this and saying the picture was too much, considering that next to nothing actually happened and the matter could've been resolved in good faith without broadcasting a picture of the jokers. The picture is gross. The picture is offensive. It's offensive for her to put a picture of two relatively harmless people on the twitter when everyone who actually did her dirty is probably unphotographed and unpublicized.
It sucks that she's getting attacked, it really does. But this is the internet, and we all know where the escalator is. Some people get thrown onto it, but she decided to ride the escalator on her own when she tried to invoke the Human Flesh Search Engine on these guys with twitter.
Oh and I don't know why you're calling for people to attack Reddit and HN. Both of those sites have a lot to offer.
posted by yonega at 6:27 AM on March 23, 2013
Some people get thrown onto it, but she decided to ride the escalator on her own when she tried to invoke the Human Flesh Search Engine on these guys with twitter.
Dude, click on the picture. She doesn't need to use the Human Flesh Search Engine on these guys. They are wearing nametags. You can read one name in the photo. She will already know their names and their employer because they are wearing badges with their names on, and T-shirts with their employer's name on.
It's fun and occasionally useful to speculate about motives, of course, and "she was trying to raise her profile as a feminist in the technology industry" is a perfectly good piece of speculation, although on the available evidence it's hard to know why anyone would want to, if it gets you doxxed, fired and threatened with rape and murder by a long tail of weirdos for basically the rest of your life.
However, the idea that she is trying to rally Twitter to find out who these guys are and where they work, in order to rain hell down on them, is kind of a stretch if you've actually looked at the photo. This ties into AmuseDetachment's and Blazecock's idée fixe that this is a tale of two mobs: there isn't really any evidence to suggest that there was a massed response against Playhaven or its employees - no DDoSes, no death threats that we know of. Some people went "ugh". Some people went "so what?". She blogged about it. PyCon blogged about it as part of their code of conduct procedure. That was pretty much it until Playhaven fired the guy.
If you have evidence to the contrary, go for it, but if Richards is as media-savvy as people here seem to think, she would probably have a realistic picture of what 9,000 twitter followers (of whom maybe a few hundred will see any individual twitter post) can actually be expected to do. PlayHaven's decision to sack their employee was out of left field, and it was at that point that this became more than just another potential entry in the Geek Feminism wiki.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:47 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
Dude, click on the picture. She doesn't need to use the Human Flesh Search Engine on these guys. They are wearing nametags. You can read one name in the photo. She will already know their names and their employer because they are wearing badges with their names on, and T-shirts with their employer's name on.
It's fun and occasionally useful to speculate about motives, of course, and "she was trying to raise her profile as a feminist in the technology industry" is a perfectly good piece of speculation, although on the available evidence it's hard to know why anyone would want to, if it gets you doxxed, fired and threatened with rape and murder by a long tail of weirdos for basically the rest of your life.
However, the idea that she is trying to rally Twitter to find out who these guys are and where they work, in order to rain hell down on them, is kind of a stretch if you've actually looked at the photo. This ties into AmuseDetachment's and Blazecock's idée fixe that this is a tale of two mobs: there isn't really any evidence to suggest that there was a massed response against Playhaven or its employees - no DDoSes, no death threats that we know of. Some people went "ugh". Some people went "so what?". She blogged about it. PyCon blogged about it as part of their code of conduct procedure. That was pretty much it until Playhaven fired the guy.
If you have evidence to the contrary, go for it, but if Richards is as media-savvy as people here seem to think, she would probably have a realistic picture of what 9,000 twitter followers (of whom maybe a few hundred will see any individual twitter post) can actually be expected to do. PlayHaven's decision to sack their employee was out of left field, and it was at that point that this became more than just another potential entry in the Geek Feminism wiki.
posted by running order squabble fest at 6:47 AM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
My point is that both communities process is to screenshot something they dislike and then flood social networks ridiculing them. If the parties get doxed, they conduct ruin life tactics by directly contacting employers, family members, advertising sponsors, etc.
Have you seen what goes on in reddit's r/mensrights and r/shitredditsays?
Do you think it's not only possible, but most likely that they received many emails calling those two sexists? How do you think Playhaven found out?
My problem is that this behavior, while effective for the past couple years, is becoming damaging towards women, and it seems like neither community gives a damn because they treat it as entertainment.
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:19 AM on March 23, 2013
Have you seen what goes on in reddit's r/mensrights and r/shitredditsays?
Do you think it's not only possible, but most likely that they received many emails calling those two sexists? How do you think Playhaven found out?
My problem is that this behavior, while effective for the past couple years, is becoming damaging towards women, and it seems like neither community gives a damn because they treat it as entertainment.
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:19 AM on March 23, 2013
Also, she wouldn't be media savvy about this because the game has always worked. She has used it before with success with "money shot". It has only changed after Gawker vs. Reddit. Calling people out for being sexist on the Internet (whether it is perceived as "legitimate" is irrelevant) via photo collage/screenshots has been a moderately low-risk affair until very recently.
Calling people out via reasoned and thoughtful blogposts have always stirred up drama, but drive-by screenshots and mocking/harassment were never this serious until MRAs adopted similar screenshot->mocking/invasion->doxing/ruin-life-tactics that we see on both sides with regards to sexism, and Adria Richards is operating in that space whether she intends to or not. Considering her methods with "money shot" and other communications online, she's not operating out of ignorance. She probably expected a flood of emails, not a firing (which sparked the MRA goons into action).
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:40 AM on March 23, 2013
Calling people out via reasoned and thoughtful blogposts have always stirred up drama, but drive-by screenshots and mocking/harassment were never this serious until MRAs adopted similar screenshot->mocking/invasion->doxing/ruin-life-tactics that we see on both sides with regards to sexism, and Adria Richards is operating in that space whether she intends to or not. Considering her methods with "money shot" and other communications online, she's not operating out of ignorance. She probably expected a flood of emails, not a firing (which sparked the MRA goons into action).
posted by amuseDetachment at 7:40 AM on March 23, 2013
It has only changed after Gawker vs. Reddit. Calling people out for being sexist on the Internet (whether it is perceived as "legitimate" is irrelevant) via photo collage/screenshots has been a moderately low-risk affair until very recently.
This thesis is immediately falsifiable. Dickwolves - 2010. Jennifer Hepler - February 2012. Anita Sarkeesian - May 2012. Reddit vs Gawker - Fall 2012
And the idea that women have only recently started being harassed on the Internet for being vocal and visible women in technology, which this sits on top of, is of course wholly and easily falsifiable. Telsa Gwynne - 2006. Kathy Sierra - 2007.
I feel like you have a specific personal history of women on the Internet, which does not match external reality, here.
Do you think it's not only possible, but most likely that they received many emails calling those two sexists?
So, you're guessing that there were unverifiable actions, based on your convictions of what is "most likely", rather than on visible evidence? OK, that's useful to know.
If we are using the scientific method rather than guesswork, however, we can observe what a mob looks like and how it behaves, and then see if those observations can be replicated.
Let's take a look at the "mob" behavior identified in this case. We have publishing of home addresses. We have threats of violence. We have digging through personal histories and Internet presences looking for ways to stoke further anger in self and others. We have people threatening to stop using the offending party's employers' service unless the offending party is fired.
Now, at the moment it seems, absent evidence of this, that you are using a faith-based argument. You see the PlayHaven firing, and as an article of faith you believe that it must have been caused by a "Tumblr social justice" mob, because you have faith that this is how this kind of thing always happens. Like the Sun rising in the morning - people didn't see the dung beetle pushing it across the sky, but that was how the Sun moved across the sky, so obviously the dung beetle is there.
Let's look, however, at the evidence base. Are you saying that there was an invisible mob, but that it must have existed? So, it must just have been a very quiet and well-behaved mob, which limited itself to email?
How do you think Playhaven found out?
Well, two of their employees were written up by a convention they had been sent to. And they probably monitor appearances of their name on the web. It seems again a faith-based argument that their awareness of this could only have come from the presence of a (stealthy) mob... it's possible, of course, but it's an article of faith.
So, yes. Scientifically, not based on what you believe has happened in the past or what you believe must have happened in the present: what actual evidence of a mob targeting PlayHaven do you have, here?
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:54 AM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
This thesis is immediately falsifiable. Dickwolves - 2010. Jennifer Hepler - February 2012. Anita Sarkeesian - May 2012. Reddit vs Gawker - Fall 2012
And the idea that women have only recently started being harassed on the Internet for being vocal and visible women in technology, which this sits on top of, is of course wholly and easily falsifiable. Telsa Gwynne - 2006. Kathy Sierra - 2007.
I feel like you have a specific personal history of women on the Internet, which does not match external reality, here.
Do you think it's not only possible, but most likely that they received many emails calling those two sexists?
So, you're guessing that there were unverifiable actions, based on your convictions of what is "most likely", rather than on visible evidence? OK, that's useful to know.
If we are using the scientific method rather than guesswork, however, we can observe what a mob looks like and how it behaves, and then see if those observations can be replicated.
Let's take a look at the "mob" behavior identified in this case. We have publishing of home addresses. We have threats of violence. We have digging through personal histories and Internet presences looking for ways to stoke further anger in self and others. We have people threatening to stop using the offending party's employers' service unless the offending party is fired.
Now, at the moment it seems, absent evidence of this, that you are using a faith-based argument. You see the PlayHaven firing, and as an article of faith you believe that it must have been caused by a "Tumblr social justice" mob, because you have faith that this is how this kind of thing always happens. Like the Sun rising in the morning - people didn't see the dung beetle pushing it across the sky, but that was how the Sun moved across the sky, so obviously the dung beetle is there.
Let's look, however, at the evidence base. Are you saying that there was an invisible mob, but that it must have existed? So, it must just have been a very quiet and well-behaved mob, which limited itself to email?
How do you think Playhaven found out?
Well, two of their employees were written up by a convention they had been sent to. And they probably monitor appearances of their name on the web. It seems again a faith-based argument that their awareness of this could only have come from the presence of a (stealthy) mob... it's possible, of course, but it's an article of faith.
So, yes. Scientifically, not based on what you believe has happened in the past or what you believe must have happened in the present: what actual evidence of a mob targeting PlayHaven do you have, here?
posted by running order squabble fest at 7:54 AM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
Running order, you've made some good points before, but you're being a complete dickbag here. "Scientific method"? Really, you have got to be fucking kidding.
Do you have any evidence they were "written up by a convention" rather than spoken to, as the convention organizers said? Or did you just get high on your own fumes?
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 8:03 AM on March 23, 2013
Do you have any evidence they were "written up by a convention" rather than spoken to, as the convention organizers said? Or did you just get high on your own fumes?
posted by ThatFuzzyBastard at 8:03 AM on March 23, 2013
Oh and I don't know why you're calling for people to attack Reddit and HN. Both of those sites have a lot to offer.
You know, I'm really, really not sure of that, after watching the glee on Reddit about Ms. Richards being fired. I only read a little way in that thread, and was utterly repulsed.
I like that place a lot less than I did three or four years ago.
Not that anyone should be attacking it, just that -- I'm not sure how much actual value the place has, anymore.
posted by Malor at 8:08 AM on March 23, 2013
You know, I'm really, really not sure of that, after watching the glee on Reddit about Ms. Richards being fired. I only read a little way in that thread, and was utterly repulsed.
I like that place a lot less than I did three or four years ago.
Not that anyone should be attacking it, just that -- I'm not sure how much actual value the place has, anymore.
posted by Malor at 8:08 AM on March 23, 2013
The examples you provided were raised and responded to via very reasoned blogposts. It's not a screenshot or camera pic going "look at this asshole". They fully justified their problems and tried to find constructive solutions. I'm talking about the screenshot/camera phone with minimal comments beyond a mere description of what occurred.
Women have always been harassed. The risk of harassment from raising issues with sexism is becoming worse, the risk of personal attacks to one's livelihood is higher.
It's not a faith based argument, you're saing "we'll never know how Playhaven found out". I'm saying it's not magic, someone saw the picture and told them. Probably a lot of people and they called them sexists in the email. Their immediate firing makes it pretty obvious. If you believe this stuff doesn't happen (I think you'd be selectively ignorant of how the communities operate) you'd at least agree that the social media fallout made playhaven panic. And we both know the MRAs contacted Sendgrid. The problem that exists in these communities is not simply about email.
My problem with it is larger in scope and deals with the common practice of screenshotting, community outrage/invasion, and mob justice. My point is the balance of power is turning for the worse.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:09 AM on March 23, 2013
Women have always been harassed. The risk of harassment from raising issues with sexism is becoming worse, the risk of personal attacks to one's livelihood is higher.
It's not a faith based argument, you're saing "we'll never know how Playhaven found out". I'm saying it's not magic, someone saw the picture and told them. Probably a lot of people and they called them sexists in the email. Their immediate firing makes it pretty obvious. If you believe this stuff doesn't happen (I think you'd be selectively ignorant of how the communities operate) you'd at least agree that the social media fallout made playhaven panic. And we both know the MRAs contacted Sendgrid. The problem that exists in these communities is not simply about email.
My problem with it is larger in scope and deals with the common practice of screenshotting, community outrage/invasion, and mob justice. My point is the balance of power is turning for the worse.
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:09 AM on March 23, 2013
Anyway I'm done debating this with you, it's so obvious, it's like we're arguing about basic facts. The moment both sides think they are objectively right and the other side is operating on faith is the moment where any possibility of common understanding is lost. I'll be taking a break, I don't think it's possible we can ever agree (to no fault I just think our worldview is too far apart).
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:21 AM on March 23, 2013
posted by amuseDetachment at 8:21 AM on March 23, 2013
Tfb - there was a blog post the PyCon blog. That was the PyCon "write up", in terms of how Playhaven might have found out. Which was the thing under discussion.
The scientific method is a way to test hypotheses. I think the hypothesis here needs to be tested. It's a pretty common way to do that.
I am sorry if you were offended by my approach.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:34 AM on March 23, 2013
The scientific method is a way to test hypotheses. I think the hypothesis here needs to be tested. It's a pretty common way to do that.
I am sorry if you were offended by my approach.
posted by running order squabble fest at 8:34 AM on March 23, 2013
The risk of harassment from raising issues with sexism is becoming worse, the risk of personal attacks to one's livelihood is higher.
So false.
posted by stoneandstar at 8:52 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
So false.
posted by stoneandstar at 8:52 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you've been on the internet more than five minutes, and you somehow think posting a picture of someone else with some kind of derogatory comment attached to that picture is an awful thing that we SHOULD NOT STAND FOR, then I look forward to you pointing me towards all the noise you've made about, oh I don't know...
- All the photo's mocking people from New Jersey.
- Photographs of hipsters
- Blake Boston
- The Star Wars Kid.
- Comicon mockery.
- etc, ad-infinitum.
I sort of felt she crossed the line when this first came up, but on reflection - that's utter nonsense. That's my own fear of "The Feminazi" giving me a good old boost of bias. She didn't cross a line. If the photograph had been captioned "These dickwads were being loud and distracting me, so I got them kicked out of the talk", we might think it was a bit OTT, but we wouldn't be spending this time criticising her and cross examining each other about what she did. Even if she had a blog called "People I got kicked from places because they be loud", we'd pretty much just gloss over it. "Yeah, she's got form" we'd say, and that'd be that.
We're obsessing over this because we're scared that Internet Women Want Us Out.
The people harassing her now are not doing it because she in some way invited it. They did it because there's a big old line of people who are ready and eager to harass someone, and she just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. If it hadn't been her, it'd have been the next shmuck in the line, and we'd be having exactly the same conversation.
posted by zoo at 8:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
- All the photo's mocking people from New Jersey.
- Photographs of hipsters
- Blake Boston
- The Star Wars Kid.
- Comicon mockery.
- etc, ad-infinitum.
I sort of felt she crossed the line when this first came up, but on reflection - that's utter nonsense. That's my own fear of "The Feminazi" giving me a good old boost of bias. She didn't cross a line. If the photograph had been captioned "These dickwads were being loud and distracting me, so I got them kicked out of the talk", we might think it was a bit OTT, but we wouldn't be spending this time criticising her and cross examining each other about what she did. Even if she had a blog called "People I got kicked from places because they be loud", we'd pretty much just gloss over it. "Yeah, she's got form" we'd say, and that'd be that.
We're obsessing over this because we're scared that Internet Women Want Us Out.
The people harassing her now are not doing it because she in some way invited it. They did it because there's a big old line of people who are ready and eager to harass someone, and she just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. If it hadn't been her, it'd have been the next shmuck in the line, and we'd be having exactly the same conversation.
posted by zoo at 8:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
This is a shitstorm. Everyone could have behaved better, and I feel sorry for the guy who got fired. But the real story here is blindingly obvious: complaining women are going to experience massive retaliation. Adria is being threatened with rape. She's being called racist names. Her site, and her employer's site, have been DDoSed. She's being told to kill herself. Her home address has been published. She's getting death threats.
Well okay, we get it. Uncle.
posted by Susan PG at 8:58 AM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
Well okay, we get it. Uncle.
posted by Susan PG at 8:58 AM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
Okay with a response like that I have to respond even if you're acting trollish. Come on, sorry that you think I disapprove of the scientific method?
The blog post in question did not name names and implies they didn't contact their employers.
On the other hand, the blog from playhaven implies that they were forced into it because of overwhelming social media interaction, it's reasonable to assume some of that social media directly contacted them.
I'm not acting on faith here, I'm reaching very reasonable conclusions from the facts, which are women who speak out are having their livelihoods threatened from the escalation from both communities.
I'm going for a walk for real this is insane.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:01 AM on March 23, 2013
The blog post in question did not name names and implies they didn't contact their employers.
On the other hand, the blog from playhaven implies that they were forced into it because of overwhelming social media interaction, it's reasonable to assume some of that social media directly contacted them.
It has come to our attention that a topic concerning a former PlayHaven employee has generated a passionate online debate.I'd also note that the cause of sendgrid firing Adria Richards was likely related to sendgrid receiving an anonymous email that the anonymous MRA had a list of all their clients and will be contacting their clients if she was not fired. Sendgrid's CEO then made a blogpost about protecting their jobs and families.
I'm not acting on faith here, I'm reaching very reasonable conclusions from the facts, which are women who speak out are having their livelihoods threatened from the escalation from both communities.
I'm going for a walk for real this is insane.
posted by amuseDetachment at 9:01 AM on March 23, 2013
Mod note: rosf, please drop the weird aggro "you don't believe in scientific method" stuff; everybody else, please no namecalling. Thanks.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Oh yeah, and she got fired, and the whole mess is easily Googleable for her future prospective employers. I forgot about that part.
(It's actually interesting that she's the only person whose real name is publicly attached to this -- that the two guys' names haven't been widely published by anyone.)
posted by Susan PG at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
(It's actually interesting that she's the only person whose real name is publicly attached to this -- that the two guys' names haven't been widely published by anyone.)
posted by Susan PG at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
amuseDetachment, I'm pretty sure she was responding to ThatFuzzyBastard's comments about the "scientific method."
posted by stoneandstar at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by stoneandstar at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Here's another thing. The people who say you need to talk about this rationally, and nicely, and you need to make sure no innocents get caught up in the cross-fire. They're not doing it because rational discussion is the best way to fix this issue. They're doing it because they don't want to be the innocents caught in the cross-fire.
If you're one of the Tumblr Feminist Mafiosa, you need to meet up, you need to organise, and when shit like this blows up, you need to respond to force with force. Keep it anonymous, keep yourselves safe, make sure you can individually deny it, but cause some damage.
It's nonsense that as women, you have to be the rational calm ones.
posted by zoo at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you're one of the Tumblr Feminist Mafiosa, you need to meet up, you need to organise, and when shit like this blows up, you need to respond to force with force. Keep it anonymous, keep yourselves safe, make sure you can individually deny it, but cause some damage.
It's nonsense that as women, you have to be the rational calm ones.
posted by zoo at 9:07 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
I really hate that culture that makes sex jokes or talk about sex okay in a work context. Not because I have no sense of humour, and not because I have no taste for bawdy jokes, but because it forces me to reveal things I don't want to reveal in that context.
Even completely unintentionally, discussions/jokes about sex at work are basically heterosexuality litmus tests. So if you're like me you're presented with two options in those situations: lie and give the answer everyone is clearly expecting from you (then at some unspecified date get side-eye when the word gets out), or absolutely ruin the jokey atmosphere by coming out right then and there, even though you really don't want to.
It's annoying and frustrating, because there's no earthly reason for the conversation to be taking place at all, and there I am in a split second trying to work out how to react to this in a way that will cause as little feather-ruffling as possible but not be dishonest. I don't want to talk about my orientation at work. I don't want to tell this person about it right now. It's none of his business. I resent being forced to out myself. Can't we just get back to work? Isn't that what we're here to do?
Lots of pixels have been spent in this thread trying to justify the use of words like "forking" etc., and pointing out that a sexual innuendo wasn't directed at Richards specifically, and arguing that dick jokes and bawdy comparisons aren't sexist, etc. etc. When this kind of conversation is deemed normal in any work-related context, it's intensely exclusionary of and deeply uncomfortable for all kinds of people. The obvious and annoying objectification of the female body both literally (half-naked anime girls as desktop backgrounds) and metaphorically (in this "technical language" that uses penetrative, heterosexual sex as a core metaphor), as well as and the default normalization of one particular (very gendered) sexuality (and often one particular sex act) in a place where it's neither relevant nor appropriate creates a hostile and uncomfortable environment for pretty much everyone else. Perhaps it's just what happens when a sector has been dominated by a very homogenous segment of the population, I don't know.
It's not that your dick joke isn't funny. It's just that you're shoving your sexuality in everyone's face, as if our perspective is exactly the same as yours, and expecting us to join in. At work. When we all have better things to do.
posted by Hildegarde at 9:17 AM on March 23, 2013 [9 favorites]
Even completely unintentionally, discussions/jokes about sex at work are basically heterosexuality litmus tests. So if you're like me you're presented with two options in those situations: lie and give the answer everyone is clearly expecting from you (then at some unspecified date get side-eye when the word gets out), or absolutely ruin the jokey atmosphere by coming out right then and there, even though you really don't want to.
It's annoying and frustrating, because there's no earthly reason for the conversation to be taking place at all, and there I am in a split second trying to work out how to react to this in a way that will cause as little feather-ruffling as possible but not be dishonest. I don't want to talk about my orientation at work. I don't want to tell this person about it right now. It's none of his business. I resent being forced to out myself. Can't we just get back to work? Isn't that what we're here to do?
Lots of pixels have been spent in this thread trying to justify the use of words like "forking" etc., and pointing out that a sexual innuendo wasn't directed at Richards specifically, and arguing that dick jokes and bawdy comparisons aren't sexist, etc. etc. When this kind of conversation is deemed normal in any work-related context, it's intensely exclusionary of and deeply uncomfortable for all kinds of people. The obvious and annoying objectification of the female body both literally (half-naked anime girls as desktop backgrounds) and metaphorically (in this "technical language" that uses penetrative, heterosexual sex as a core metaphor), as well as and the default normalization of one particular (very gendered) sexuality (and often one particular sex act) in a place where it's neither relevant nor appropriate creates a hostile and uncomfortable environment for pretty much everyone else. Perhaps it's just what happens when a sector has been dominated by a very homogenous segment of the population, I don't know.
It's not that your dick joke isn't funny. It's just that you're shoving your sexuality in everyone's face, as if our perspective is exactly the same as yours, and expecting us to join in. At work. When we all have better things to do.
posted by Hildegarde at 9:17 AM on March 23, 2013 [9 favorites]
Reddit is constructed entirely out of massive liabilities - which occasionally they realize and do some cosmetic tidying up to obscure, but they never do anything much about the root causes. They even gave the creepshots guy a special trophy for being an outstanding community member.
posted by Artw at 9:17 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 9:17 AM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
The root cause of Internet swarm problems is that everything has to be turned up to 11 at all times. Turning everything up to 12 doesn't seem like a very good counter to that.
posted by Artw at 9:21 AM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Artw at 9:21 AM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
This was a public event.
Again, this was a PRIVATE event.
posted by ericb at 9:51 AM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
Again, this was a PRIVATE event.
posted by ericb at 9:51 AM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
On the other hand, the blog from playhaven implies that they were forced into it because of overwhelming social media interaction...
No, the blog from Playhaven specifically states why they fired the guy:
PlayHaven had an employee who was identified as making inappropriate comments at PyCon, and as a company that is dedicated to gender equality and values honorable behavior, we conducted a thorough investigation. The result of this investigation led to the unfortunate outcome of having to let this employee go.
Since everyone sees fit to make guesses about things, I will too. My guess is that Unnamed Fired Guy had other things in his file or that while they were investigating, they discovered he has a history of other problem behavior, so they decided that unlike Unfired Alex, who they call a "valuable employee", Unnamed Fired Guy was no longer worth employing.
posted by Orb at 9:58 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
No, the blog from Playhaven specifically states why they fired the guy:
PlayHaven had an employee who was identified as making inappropriate comments at PyCon, and as a company that is dedicated to gender equality and values honorable behavior, we conducted a thorough investigation. The result of this investigation led to the unfortunate outcome of having to let this employee go.
Since everyone sees fit to make guesses about things, I will too. My guess is that Unnamed Fired Guy had other things in his file or that while they were investigating, they discovered he has a history of other problem behavior, so they decided that unlike Unfired Alex, who they call a "valuable employee", Unnamed Fired Guy was no longer worth employing.
posted by Orb at 9:58 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
This was a public event. Potentially with media/journalism coverage. If a reporter wrote this story, including a picture, which led to a firing, would he be morally culpable and blameworthy? I think that in a country with such robust freedom of press, it's a hard argument to make that a private citizen reporting on her experiences (pretty much anywhere but especially at an industry conference) is inappropriate and insufficiently considerate of others' privacy concerns.
From a editorial quote previously mentioned above:
From a editorial quote previously mentioned above:
In general, we are not entitled to ambush an ordinary person on private property, photograph them up close without their consent, broadcast those photos to thousands of members of the general public while claiming on a pure hearsay basis that the people pictured are guilty of misconduct. Ironically, Richards used (abused) her own privilege to publicly shame two previously unknown guys to make a point about privilege. A much safer way to report this kind of thing while seeking maximum publicity would be to go to the press, giving them the photos and telling the story. Decent journalists would research it, look to verify facts and seek comment, etc. before running the story.posted by ericb at 10:02 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
Saying off-color things to each other, not intending to be overheard is not harassment.
Mod note: Comment deleted; metacommentary about very specific moderation decisions is best handled via the contact form.
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:28 AM on March 23, 2013
posted by LobsterMitten (staff) at 10:28 AM on March 23, 2013
"It's not that your dick joke isn't funny. It's just that you're shoving your sexuality in everyone's face, as if our perspective is exactly the same as yours, and expecting us to join in. At work. When we all have better things to do."
You know, I totally get that this is your experience, and it's totally valid in your circumstances. But I work at about the queerest place possible, and everyone makes sex jokes pretty much all the time. When I was supervising folks, we had occasionally people feel uncomfortable about specific things, but that got dealt with on the "Not cool" level. It does help that everyone likes each other, pretty much, but sex jokes don't have to be about enforcing heteronormitivity; they can pretty often be about subverting it.
posted by klangklangston at 11:33 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
You know, I totally get that this is your experience, and it's totally valid in your circumstances. But I work at about the queerest place possible, and everyone makes sex jokes pretty much all the time. When I was supervising folks, we had occasionally people feel uncomfortable about specific things, but that got dealt with on the "Not cool" level. It does help that everyone likes each other, pretty much, but sex jokes don't have to be about enforcing heteronormitivity; they can pretty often be about subverting it.
posted by klangklangston at 11:33 AM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
When you are in a room with hundred of people at an event where there are signs encouraging people to tweet, share photos and blog with specific hashtags; then you have no reasonable expectation of privacy. Just because you are on private property, and had to pay to attend does not make it a private place. Just because you are in a public restroom stall doesn't make it a public place. The test is would a reasonable person have an expectation of privacy in this situation.
posted by humanfont at 11:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 11:57 AM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
This ties into AmuseDetachment's and Blazecock's idée fixe that this is a tale of two mobs
Maybe the universe is a random box of atoms, but people's behaviors are rarely without motivations of one sort or another.
It seems highly unlikely that she randomly pointed a camera behind her and randomly plugged her camera into her computer and randomly downloaded photographs and randomly typed letters into a web form to get some random response.
Perhaps some cosmic lottery occurred and she acted without any agency, as you seem to be arguing. Seems very unlikely, though. Occam's Razor and all that — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
I would be greatly surprised if she did not have some basic understanding of what she was starting: That she did not comprehend the meaning of the words she typed, nor her re-contextualization of the photograph she shot and posted, that she did not have any understanding of how the gears turn in the social media she was publishing on, nor cognizance of the audience to which her words and image were directed (to the extent of not anticipating any kind of amplified, cascading reaction directed against her victims whatsoever) — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
It seems somewhat insulting on your part to the intelligence of women, to the intelligence of human beings, in general, and particularly to the intelligence of Ms. Richards, herself, that someone as media savvy as her could not comprehend what would she would be initiating from posting her photo with her choice of tagline — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
In sum, it should not be impossible to criticize the two gentlemen's behavior while acknowledging that she knew on some level, as someone cognizant of and deeply involved in social media on a professional level, about what she was trying to do, without having folks like you constantly and unceasingly scrambling to make excuses for it — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:30 PM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
Maybe the universe is a random box of atoms, but people's behaviors are rarely without motivations of one sort or another.
It seems highly unlikely that she randomly pointed a camera behind her and randomly plugged her camera into her computer and randomly downloaded photographs and randomly typed letters into a web form to get some random response.
Perhaps some cosmic lottery occurred and she acted without any agency, as you seem to be arguing. Seems very unlikely, though. Occam's Razor and all that — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
I would be greatly surprised if she did not have some basic understanding of what she was starting: That she did not comprehend the meaning of the words she typed, nor her re-contextualization of the photograph she shot and posted, that she did not have any understanding of how the gears turn in the social media she was publishing on, nor cognizance of the audience to which her words and image were directed (to the extent of not anticipating any kind of amplified, cascading reaction directed against her victims whatsoever) — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
It seems somewhat insulting on your part to the intelligence of women, to the intelligence of human beings, in general, and particularly to the intelligence of Ms. Richards, herself, that someone as media savvy as her could not comprehend what would she would be initiating from posting her photo with her choice of tagline — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
In sum, it should not be impossible to criticize the two gentlemen's behavior while acknowledging that she knew on some level, as someone cognizant of and deeply involved in social media on a professional level, about what she was trying to do, without having folks like you constantly and unceasingly scrambling to make excuses for it — even if the end result for all parties involved was unexpected and unfortunate.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:30 PM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
It's nonsense that as women, you have to be the rational calm ones.
Nobody is saying for only women to be the rational calm ones. I tend to think the reasonable people (who are both men and women) don't need to be told this at all. And the anonymous hate brigade and the MRA types can't be reasoned with, that's why nobody really wants to deal with them. But there's a whole 'nother reason why I think creating a punitive e-mob to counter another punitive e-mob is a terrible idea.
Look at the 2008 Beijing Torch Relay. One of the most famous photos was taken in London, where a protester was attempting to yank a lit torch out of the hands of a paralympic Chinese athlete. Afterwards, the pro-China mob got riled up and found out the guy's name was Lobsang Gendun, and started sending threatening phone calls and emails to the guy. Great job, but it turns out there's more than one Lobsang Gendun, and they were attacking a different person in fucking Utah.
posted by FJT at 12:35 PM on March 23, 2013
Nobody is saying for only women to be the rational calm ones. I tend to think the reasonable people (who are both men and women) don't need to be told this at all. And the anonymous hate brigade and the MRA types can't be reasoned with, that's why nobody really wants to deal with them. But there's a whole 'nother reason why I think creating a punitive e-mob to counter another punitive e-mob is a terrible idea.
Look at the 2008 Beijing Torch Relay. One of the most famous photos was taken in London, where a protester was attempting to yank a lit torch out of the hands of a paralympic Chinese athlete. Afterwards, the pro-China mob got riled up and found out the guy's name was Lobsang Gendun, and started sending threatening phone calls and emails to the guy. Great job, but it turns out there's more than one Lobsang Gendun, and they were attacking a different person in fucking Utah.
posted by FJT at 12:35 PM on March 23, 2013
The test is would a reasonable person have an expectation of privacy in this situation.
The test is would a reasonable person, upon overhearing a juvenile dongle joke, post a shaming photo and then follow it up with a hyperbolic shaming blog post promoting herself as Joan of Arc and saviour of children — and all without first shushing the fools?
No, a reasonable person would not do that, and the vast majority of her peer group says so.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:08 PM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
The test is would a reasonable person, upon overhearing a juvenile dongle joke, post a shaming photo and then follow it up with a hyperbolic shaming blog post promoting herself as Joan of Arc and saviour of children — and all without first shushing the fools?
No, a reasonable person would not do that, and the vast majority of her peer group says so.
posted by five fresh fish at 1:08 PM on March 23, 2013 [7 favorites]
This whole "two mobs" bullshit is incredibly dumb. No one DDOS'd PlayHaven; no one made death or rape threats against any PlayHaven employees; no one called for a PlayHaven employee to get fired; etc etc etc. The comment that the biggest obstacle to Adria Richards moving on with her career is her mob not letting her back down is one of the most special I've ever read on this site.
Yeah, Adria Richards intentionally publicized and escalated a trivial incident in an inappropriate way. In response she received death threats and was fired from her job. I think she's received her just desserts. I don't have much sympathy for her, but at some point it becomes interesting that her tweeting that picture is considered the purest expression of free will while everything that happened afterwards was just a series of mechanical events that only Adria Richards could be held responsible for.
posted by leopard at 1:09 PM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
Yeah, Adria Richards intentionally publicized and escalated a trivial incident in an inappropriate way. In response she received death threats and was fired from her job. I think she's received her just desserts. I don't have much sympathy for her, but at some point it becomes interesting that her tweeting that picture is considered the purest expression of free will while everything that happened afterwards was just a series of mechanical events that only Adria Richards could be held responsible for.
posted by leopard at 1:09 PM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
of these two employees, which one would you rather have working for you?
The one that can do the job.
This goes back a bit, but the firings themselves, and the corporate culture that produced them, deserve a little more attention. I think most people here have deplored them, but there's been a lot of defenses too. But we should always look at power relationships, and the power relationship that's being reinforced by this incident is that of companies over workers.
It's impossible to fire everyone who is ever unprofessional. Did everyone who made a dirty joke that day get fired? Does everyone who tweets about someone obnoxious on company time get fired? It's arbitrary, and arbitrary justice is injustice.
Plus, it's not the '90s. Getting fired in a time of 8% unemployment, when there's someone in Bangalore who'll do your job for a third of the pay, is no fun. Being in IT, both of these people probably regularly put in 60 hour weeks for their company, only to be thrown under the bus on one bad day. And when both are not going to have a good answer to the question "Why did you leave your last job?", a firing could jeopardize their whole career.
Companies hate bad publicity, of course, but the firings will only intensify this. Neither company has exactly shown that it's a nice place to work or that its executives respond well to Internet shitstorms. The Sendmail CEO especially should have thought a long time about what message his action was sending.
posted by zompist at 1:21 PM on March 23, 2013 [8 favorites]
The one that can do the job.
This goes back a bit, but the firings themselves, and the corporate culture that produced them, deserve a little more attention. I think most people here have deplored them, but there's been a lot of defenses too. But we should always look at power relationships, and the power relationship that's being reinforced by this incident is that of companies over workers.
It's impossible to fire everyone who is ever unprofessional. Did everyone who made a dirty joke that day get fired? Does everyone who tweets about someone obnoxious on company time get fired? It's arbitrary, and arbitrary justice is injustice.
Plus, it's not the '90s. Getting fired in a time of 8% unemployment, when there's someone in Bangalore who'll do your job for a third of the pay, is no fun. Being in IT, both of these people probably regularly put in 60 hour weeks for their company, only to be thrown under the bus on one bad day. And when both are not going to have a good answer to the question "Why did you leave your last job?", a firing could jeopardize their whole career.
Companies hate bad publicity, of course, but the firings will only intensify this. Neither company has exactly shown that it's a nice place to work or that its executives respond well to Internet shitstorms. The Sendmail CEO especially should have thought a long time about what message his action was sending.
posted by zompist at 1:21 PM on March 23, 2013 [8 favorites]
I still don't get why anyone thinks Richards--history of actions, tweets, whether she should have taken a picture or asked politely notwithstanding---is responsible for the dude getting fired.
She was not his fucking boss. She had no power to fire him.
Why is she being subjected to this kind of scrutiny? And per the "she's a nut! She's inflammatory!" stuff up above...what does that have to do with this dude's company firing him?
Absolutely fucking nothing.
I am sorry to see so many in this discussion honestly believing that Richards is the problem here, not the company that fired this guy. That's just unbelievably sexist and not what I would expect to happen here.
I don't care if she's a grade-A jerk. She. did. not. fire. this. guy. She is not responsible for him being fired.
The only reason, frankly, that I can see why there is ire and character-smirching going on here and elsehwhere against her rather than the dude's employer is some sort of sexist assumption that if anything goes wrong and a woman is involved, obviously it's her fault. Somehow.
And that, my beloved Internet, is complete bullshit.
posted by emjaybee at 1:41 PM on March 23, 2013 [10 favorites]
She was not his fucking boss. She had no power to fire him.
Why is she being subjected to this kind of scrutiny? And per the "she's a nut! She's inflammatory!" stuff up above...what does that have to do with this dude's company firing him?
Absolutely fucking nothing.
I am sorry to see so many in this discussion honestly believing that Richards is the problem here, not the company that fired this guy. That's just unbelievably sexist and not what I would expect to happen here.
I don't care if she's a grade-A jerk. She. did. not. fire. this. guy. She is not responsible for him being fired.
The only reason, frankly, that I can see why there is ire and character-smirching going on here and elsehwhere against her rather than the dude's employer is some sort of sexist assumption that if anything goes wrong and a woman is involved, obviously it's her fault. Somehow.
And that, my beloved Internet, is complete bullshit.
posted by emjaybee at 1:41 PM on March 23, 2013 [10 favorites]
None of the following comment should be construed to suggest that I think Adria "deserved" the Internet Hate Machine vomiting on her. Threats are unacceptable, and should be prosecutable. That said; I cannot imagine how anyone in the 21st century wouldn't know that the Internet Hate Machine is a dangerous toy before they decide to wind it up and let it go.
A few years ago, I quit writing for a gaming site that I love when they decided that everyone had to use their real name; and a free gig with limited exposure wasn't worth the risk to me of being "out" on a site where I also posted and played on the forums, and would have had to clear out pictures and kid names, etc. A couple of years ago, when WoW said that you were going to have to use your real name to use their forums, and within days there was a hack to grab players real names via command line; I stopped playing Wow; because people get heated over PvP.
(FWIW, I publish in artificial intelligence journals and engineering journals under my real name, because I have never once worried about a philosopher or an electrical engineer crouching outside my door with a jar of vicks vapor rub in one hand and a machete in the other, even when I say things about their products that they don't agree with. )
I suck at social media because I do my damnedest to not be "me" online. Primarily because I've had stalkers, I've dealt with restraining orders and their absolute uselessness, and there is no way that I'm willing to put my kid in the line of fire, because some people really are freaking insane. (Also, I'm quite possibly paranoid.)
But this is not new. This has been going on since Usenet; hence the reason that nobody ever used their real name once Arpanet was in our rear view mirror. And it hasn't just been women, although women lately have been getting more than their fair share. My point is that the IHM is a tightly wound tiger, and the odds of holding on to the tail when you set it off intentionally, are low.
The problem with seeking notoriety, is that you find it.
posted by dejah420 at 1:42 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
A few years ago, I quit writing for a gaming site that I love when they decided that everyone had to use their real name; and a free gig with limited exposure wasn't worth the risk to me of being "out" on a site where I also posted and played on the forums, and would have had to clear out pictures and kid names, etc. A couple of years ago, when WoW said that you were going to have to use your real name to use their forums, and within days there was a hack to grab players real names via command line; I stopped playing Wow; because people get heated over PvP.
(FWIW, I publish in artificial intelligence journals and engineering journals under my real name, because I have never once worried about a philosopher or an electrical engineer crouching outside my door with a jar of vicks vapor rub in one hand and a machete in the other, even when I say things about their products that they don't agree with. )
I suck at social media because I do my damnedest to not be "me" online. Primarily because I've had stalkers, I've dealt with restraining orders and their absolute uselessness, and there is no way that I'm willing to put my kid in the line of fire, because some people really are freaking insane. (Also, I'm quite possibly paranoid.)
But this is not new. This has been going on since Usenet; hence the reason that nobody ever used their real name once Arpanet was in our rear view mirror. And it hasn't just been women, although women lately have been getting more than their fair share. My point is that the IHM is a tightly wound tiger, and the odds of holding on to the tail when you set it off intentionally, are low.
The problem with seeking notoriety, is that you find it.
posted by dejah420 at 1:42 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
Female Computer Scientist has a timeline with links
posted by hydropsyche at 1:46 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 1:46 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
In response she received death threats and was fired from her job. I think she's received her just desserts.
You sure you want to put those two sentences together like that, Leopard?
posted by fatbird at 1:51 PM on March 23, 2013
You sure you want to put those two sentences together like that, Leopard?
posted by fatbird at 1:51 PM on March 23, 2013
Correction: She's "more than received" her just desserts.
(I'm sure the commenter who wrote "If her employer dislikes being listed at the top of the page, they can fire her for it" won't argue that it was inappropriate for her employer to fire her.)
posted by leopard at 2:01 PM on March 23, 2013
(I'm sure the commenter who wrote "If her employer dislikes being listed at the top of the page, they can fire her for it" won't argue that it was inappropriate for her employer to fire her.)
posted by leopard at 2:01 PM on March 23, 2013
Actually, I think it was wrong for Sendgrid to fire her in these circumstances. I think it was cowardly knuckling under to a DDOS; I think it was sending a message to women in tech that the likely cost of triggering the Internet Hate Machine is to lose your job.
Clearly what I was referring to in my original comment was that Sendgrid was free to fire her if the dick joke she made in her twitter feed offended them.
posted by fatbird at 2:04 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Clearly what I was referring to in my original comment was that Sendgrid was free to fire her if the dick joke she made in her twitter feed offended them.
posted by fatbird at 2:04 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
My sense is that PlayHaven and Sendgrid are both pretty douchey companies that the Internet can survive just fine without, so that they may have acted hastily and self-interestedly toward their employees comes as little surprise to me.
posted by rhizome at 2:17 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rhizome at 2:17 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Actually, I think it was wrong for Sendgrid to fire her in these circumstances. I think it was cowardly knuckling under to a DDOS; I think it was sending a message to women in tech that the likely cost of triggering the Internet Hate Machine is to lose your job.
Accidentally triggering the Internet Hate Machine can cost you way more than your job. Intentionally triggering the Internet Hate Machine is just negligent.
The Internet Hate Machine is terrifying. I'm terrified of the Internet Hate Machine. My public online persona that is tied to my real name is fucking bland. I share code, I ask and answer questions, I never use any harsh language, strongly disagree with anyone, or express any kind of potentially controversial view.
You can have a great time on the internet, until you get Noticed.. then it all goes bad--real bad.
When you take someone's picture and post it online with a caption saying 'this person did bad', you're sending a prayer to the Internet Hate Machine--period. If you're REALLY lucky, the Internet Hate Machine won't notice that you tried to wake it up. If you're only very lucky, for good or ill, the Internet Hate Machine will agree with you and destroy your target. If you're unlucky.. well, this happens.
This is like troll food, or demon food, or whatever horrible beasts you might imagine live in the dark food. I don't know what they eat but I imagine it's soft, unhappy, and bleeding.
Everything about this story is designed to be provocative. (Hyperbole ahead:) Gender war, an incredibly minor offense, A GOOD MAN FIRED, a hateful attention-loving bitch!
I sympathize with her, I really do. She clearly has a lot of sensitivity around this stuff, and had already been provoked earlier in the day in a much worse fashion. I'm not a woman so I don't have the same calibration to this exact sort of thing, but I completely understand what it's like to be provoked in the same way by ignorant people to the point where you're thinking "the next so-and-so who such-and-suches..." But the danger of that is sometimes you go off on the wrong person, sometimes you handle a situation in a way that achieves nothing and only serves to cost you dignity and respect. That's a reality of oppression that I know well and I can sympathize with. As a man I'm not expecting any woman to just soak up sexism with a smile in the name of professionalism. As a black man sometimes the constant unconscious eurocentrism in the world around me drives me nuts, but there's basically absolutely nothing I can do about it, because who am I to tell people to stop talking about their culture and origin as if it's the only and most interesting and important thing on the planet. On a day when I'd been pre-primed with some legitimate racism, I might--if I'm not careful--react unfortunately to something that evokes similar feelings but is not actually the thing I want to see removed from the world.
The thing is.. she shot first, at her peers, without asking questions, on the internet, with pictures, there's nothing anyone can do for her now.
It would have been better--for her sake--for her to have to stood up in the middle of the room and balled them out than to appeal to the Internet Hate Machine.
posted by yonega at 2:29 PM on March 23, 2013 [14 favorites]
Accidentally triggering the Internet Hate Machine can cost you way more than your job. Intentionally triggering the Internet Hate Machine is just negligent.
The Internet Hate Machine is terrifying. I'm terrified of the Internet Hate Machine. My public online persona that is tied to my real name is fucking bland. I share code, I ask and answer questions, I never use any harsh language, strongly disagree with anyone, or express any kind of potentially controversial view.
You can have a great time on the internet, until you get Noticed.. then it all goes bad--real bad.
When you take someone's picture and post it online with a caption saying 'this person did bad', you're sending a prayer to the Internet Hate Machine--period. If you're REALLY lucky, the Internet Hate Machine won't notice that you tried to wake it up. If you're only very lucky, for good or ill, the Internet Hate Machine will agree with you and destroy your target. If you're unlucky.. well, this happens.
This is like troll food, or demon food, or whatever horrible beasts you might imagine live in the dark food. I don't know what they eat but I imagine it's soft, unhappy, and bleeding.
Everything about this story is designed to be provocative. (Hyperbole ahead:) Gender war, an incredibly minor offense, A GOOD MAN FIRED, a hateful attention-loving bitch!
I sympathize with her, I really do. She clearly has a lot of sensitivity around this stuff, and had already been provoked earlier in the day in a much worse fashion. I'm not a woman so I don't have the same calibration to this exact sort of thing, but I completely understand what it's like to be provoked in the same way by ignorant people to the point where you're thinking "the next so-and-so who such-and-suches..." But the danger of that is sometimes you go off on the wrong person, sometimes you handle a situation in a way that achieves nothing and only serves to cost you dignity and respect. That's a reality of oppression that I know well and I can sympathize with. As a man I'm not expecting any woman to just soak up sexism with a smile in the name of professionalism. As a black man sometimes the constant unconscious eurocentrism in the world around me drives me nuts, but there's basically absolutely nothing I can do about it, because who am I to tell people to stop talking about their culture and origin as if it's the only and most interesting and important thing on the planet. On a day when I'd been pre-primed with some legitimate racism, I might--if I'm not careful--react unfortunately to something that evokes similar feelings but is not actually the thing I want to see removed from the world.
The thing is.. she shot first, at her peers, without asking questions, on the internet, with pictures, there's nothing anyone can do for her now.
It would have been better--for her sake--for her to have to stood up in the middle of the room and balled them out than to appeal to the Internet Hate Machine.
posted by yonega at 2:29 PM on March 23, 2013 [14 favorites]
dejah, I think that you're right about that, but at the same time, nobody here can say they've never done something in anger that they wouldn't have done if they had thought it through.
She got angry, she took that anger public, and a shitstorm resulted. Ok, whatever, but because she's female, that shitstorm took a particular form that most dudes, in general, would never get for a similar action.
It's not surprising at all, but let's not pretend that, in the long run, it's ever entirely avoidable. Holding her or women up to some impossible "never get angry! Or only get angry in this proper way that I've just now pulled out of my ass but that was never written down anywhere! Or only get angry in a way that doesn't offend any man, anywhere for any reason!" is a mug's game. You can't win it, no matter how nice you are. You will always be rule-lawyered and second-guessed and Monday-morning-quarterbacked after the fact by a bunch of people who were not there but who know exactly what you should have done, so fuck you for being stupid.
Which is why lovely people like dejah, who knows a hell of a lot about internet business, doesn't want to be herself on the internet. How many other women are there just like her? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it--even when it affects nonperfect women--ensuring that it keeps going on?
I'm ranting now, so I'm gonna step out and go play with my kid for a while.
posted by emjaybee at 2:33 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
She got angry, she took that anger public, and a shitstorm resulted. Ok, whatever, but because she's female, that shitstorm took a particular form that most dudes, in general, would never get for a similar action.
It's not surprising at all, but let's not pretend that, in the long run, it's ever entirely avoidable. Holding her or women up to some impossible "never get angry! Or only get angry in this proper way that I've just now pulled out of my ass but that was never written down anywhere! Or only get angry in a way that doesn't offend any man, anywhere for any reason!" is a mug's game. You can't win it, no matter how nice you are. You will always be rule-lawyered and second-guessed and Monday-morning-quarterbacked after the fact by a bunch of people who were not there but who know exactly what you should have done, so fuck you for being stupid.
Which is why lovely people like dejah, who knows a hell of a lot about internet business, doesn't want to be herself on the internet. How many other women are there just like her? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it--even when it affects nonperfect women--ensuring that it keeps going on?
I'm ranting now, so I'm gonna step out and go play with my kid for a while.
posted by emjaybee at 2:33 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
A 4chan user allegedly released Richards's personal information. But few reactions were more disturbing than this one, sent to her Wednesday evening: a photo (blurred but still NSFW) of a bloody, beheaded woman, bound and stripped, with the caption "when Im done." Next to it was a home address and phone number, ostensibly Richards's. -- from the Daily Dot, via the Female Computer Scientist timeline above.Nobody intentionally triggers something like that. This level of threat is without a doubt worthy of jail time by the perpetrator.
I think it's hard for normal people to imagine the vileness of the dark corners of the internet.
posted by Llama-Lime at 2:34 PM on March 23, 2013 [5 favorites]
MetaFilter: crouching outside my door with a jar of vicks vapor rub in one hand and a machete in the other.
posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by ericb at 2:36 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
Too late for an edit, but there was one thing I meant to add:
The idea that Internet Hate Machine might have eyes in a room I might occupy is also scary. Telling the PyCon staff is the established procedure, if something illegal happens tell the police, or hire a bounty hunter or something.. but don't be a spy for the IHM!
posted by yonega at 2:37 PM on March 23, 2013
The idea that Internet Hate Machine might have eyes in a room I might occupy is also scary. Telling the PyCon staff is the established procedure, if something illegal happens tell the police, or hire a bounty hunter or something.. but don't be a spy for the IHM!
posted by yonega at 2:37 PM on March 23, 2013
The Sendmail CEO especially should have thought a long time about what message his action was sending.
FWIW -- I suspect that the decision to fire Adria was made in consultation with a lot of folks -- the company's Board (on which investors sit), the company's outside counsel, internal HR, etc. This was not as "rash" decision made solely by the CEO.
posted by ericb at 2:39 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
FWIW -- I suspect that the decision to fire Adria was made in consultation with a lot of folks -- the company's Board (on which investors sit), the company's outside counsel, internal HR, etc. This was not as "rash" decision made solely by the CEO.
posted by ericb at 2:39 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Which is why lovely people like dejah, who knows a hell of a lot about internet business, doesn't want to be herself on the internet. How many other women are there just like her? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it--even when it affects nonperfect women--ensuring that it keeps going on?
Which is why many people (male and female), who know a Hell of a lot about Internet business, don't want to be themselves on the Internet. How many other people are there just like them? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it -- even when it affects non-perfect people -- ensuring that it keeps going on?
posted by ericb at 2:54 PM on March 23, 2013
Which is why many people (male and female), who know a Hell of a lot about Internet business, don't want to be themselves on the Internet. How many other people are there just like them? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it -- even when it affects non-perfect people -- ensuring that it keeps going on?
posted by ericb at 2:54 PM on March 23, 2013
If you're one of the Tumblr Feminist Mafiosa, you need to meet up, you need to organise, a
Actually, now that I've given it some thought, what IS the Tumblr Feminist Mafiosa? I have no idea about Tumblr communities and organizations at all. Are they anything like Shit Reddit Says?
posted by FJT at 3:12 PM on March 23, 2013
Actually, now that I've given it some thought, what IS the Tumblr Feminist Mafiosa? I have no idea about Tumblr communities and organizations at all. Are they anything like Shit Reddit Says?
posted by FJT at 3:12 PM on March 23, 2013
I wonder if 4chan or reddit could be listed as a terrorist organization or hate group based on this.
posted by humanfont at 3:59 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by humanfont at 3:59 PM on March 23, 2013
Really? Are you sure you want to say that? Because I doubt that you're wondering that at all. I think it's much more likely that you're just engaged in hyperbole now. To what end, I don't know, because there's really no good response to such a statement, other than to express embarrassment for you.
posted by five fresh fish at 4:11 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 4:11 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
Which is why lovely people like dejah, who knows a hell of a lot about internet business, doesn't want to be herself on the internet. How many other women are there just like her? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it--even when it affects nonperfect women--ensuring that it keeps going on?Which is why many people (male and female), who know a Hell of a lot about Internet business, don't want to be themselves on the Internet. How many other people are there just like them? Isn't letting this shit go on without calling it -- even when it affects non-perfect people -- ensuring that it keeps going on?
Exactly. None of those issues with the internet are gender specific. I for one will never let my real name even be associated with even the blandest kind of public internet activity.
Frankly this whole episode just illustrates (from both the dongle-joking developer and the Adria Richards angles) the impossible standards and intolerance for human imperfection that society (especially internet society) is rife with today, and why it's just so much easier to just hide yourself away and disengage.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 4:15 PM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
I wonder if 4chan or reddit could be listed as a terrorist organization or hate group based on this.
NO! Yet, another overreaction!
4chan and reddit (like MetaFilter) are websites that are not organized groups focused primarily on "terrorism" or "hate." There are many others who voice their thoughts/ideas/words on these websites' comment threads which counter those who speak (freely) their (to many/most) abhorrent words.
Threats (of rape, death, etc.) made by an individual on any of these sites, though, IMHO, should be reviewed and considered for potential criminal indictment.
These websites are 'safe harbors' not responsible for the threats and disgusting words/behavior of those who post such on their websites.
posted by ericb at 4:18 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
NO! Yet, another overreaction!
4chan and reddit (like MetaFilter) are websites that are not organized groups focused primarily on "terrorism" or "hate." There are many others who voice their thoughts/ideas/words on these websites' comment threads which counter those who speak (freely) their (to many/most) abhorrent words.
Threats (of rape, death, etc.) made by an individual on any of these sites, though, IMHO, should be reviewed and considered for potential criminal indictment.
These websites are 'safe harbors' not responsible for the threats and disgusting words/behavior of those who post such on their websites.
posted by ericb at 4:18 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
"These websites are 'safe harbors' not responsible for the threats and disgusting words/behavior of those who post such on their websites."
Try telling that to Catholic threads.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:20 PM on March 23, 2013
Try telling that to Catholic threads.
posted by Blasdelb at 4:20 PM on March 23, 2013
So Adria explicitly states early on and quite adamantly in the comments to her blog post that she doesn't consider herself a feminist, but doesn't say why .... I'm curious why identifying as a feminist - any kind of feminist - is an negative for her...
This is something I just don't understand—why are people afraid to say they're a feminist?—who doesn't believe that men and women should have the same rights?
Is this because right-wing talking heads have for years mis-used the word instead to describe "people who are treated lesser-than but somehow think they should have equal rights"?
Do we just need a new word—"humanist" or something—something that says "Sweet jesus, you're all missing the point—if you're born into this world you get the same rights as anyone else, no matter your height, skin, hair, or chromosomes"...
No, screw that, we need to take back the word.
This is something I just don't understand—why are people afraid to say they're a feminist?—who doesn't believe that men and women should have the same rights?
Is this because right-wing talking heads have for years mis-used the word instead to describe "people who are treated lesser-than but somehow think they should have equal rights"?
Do we just need a new word—"humanist" or something—something that says "Sweet jesus, you're all missing the point—if you're born into this world you get the same rights as anyone else, no matter your height, skin, hair, or chromosomes"...
No, screw that, we need to take back the word.
Q: "What are you, some kind of feminist or something?"posted by blueberry at 4:20 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
A: "Do I believe my (and your) daughters and sons should both have the same rights and opportunities?—you bet your ass I do. So, yes, in answer to your question, I am a feminist. As are all those who believe in justice."
Try telling that to Catholic threads.
I'm confused. What does this mean?
posted by ericb at 4:23 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
I'm confused. What does this mean?
posted by ericb at 4:23 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Recent Tweet from Richards:"Thank you to the people who support me. Your efforts are appreciated!"
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:25 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 4:25 PM on March 23, 2013
Do we just need a new word—"humanist" or something—something that says "Sweet jesus, you're all missing the point—if you're born into this world you get the same rights as anyone else, no matter your height, skin, hair, or chromosomes"...
Personally, I like egalitarianism, since the word itself is actually inclusive.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 4:33 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
Personally, I like egalitarianism, since the word itself is actually inclusive.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 4:33 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
Twenty years ago (ten years ago?) this reaction would never have happened: Adria Richards' would have had to send her complaint to SendGrid itself, which would probably have yawned or (at most) given the employees a talking to. Twenty years ago (ten years ago?) the Internet Hate Machine wouldn't have found out about her action, or at least found out about it slowly and without the ability to mass itself overnight. People upthread are saying "Oh dear, so people have to watch their behavior now," but that's not really the point: we're going to be living in a panopticon where every slip is noticed; and where the consequences of error are huge because you only need one person in a million, worldwide, to object to your behavior, and you will have thousands of people pursuing you. This is a real problem that we're experiencing right now and it's only going to get worse.
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:52 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 4:52 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
Try telling that to Catholic threads.
I'm confused. What does this mean?
Sounds like a band.
posted by juiceCake at 5:12 PM on March 23, 2013
I'm confused. What does this mean?
Sounds like a band.
posted by juiceCake at 5:12 PM on March 23, 2013
Ugh, okay, pet peeve. This rant is not targeted at anyone in this thread, and it's a long-standing issue I've had with the fight about labels for movements.
My issue with anything like "humanism" and "egalitarianism" is that it frequently implies that if something is focused more on women than on men, it is less deserving of attention, thus we need a word that encompasses both women and men equally in order for it to be a worthy label to carry. And that really sucks, because rights for just women are still super important rights, and should be no less important just because they're explicitly for women.
Yes, feminism as an umbrella movement cares about more than women's rights. When done right, feminism should be looking at dismantling all axes of oppression, and that includes changing the rigid binary gender role conceptions that we have that also harm men in measurable and deplorable ways.
But words have meaning, and history has meaning. The feminist movement started out not because men and women were equally in need of uplifting against similar types of oppressive forces. The movement started because women couldn't vote, or own land, or get jobs in certain fields. The patriarchy--or whatever non-loaded word you want to insert here for the power structures in society as they currently exist--hurts men, too, absolutely, but it does not hurt men to the same extent and in the same way that it hurts women. And to disregard the history of the movement and to replace feminism with a neologism is to diminish just how unequal the gender power relations still are, and how much women are still harmed.
If your reason for not wanting to identify with the label "feminism" is because you have legitimate gripes with the movement's history of ugliness, modus operandi, current manifestation of the ideology - okay, that's fair. I call myself a feminist knowing that there will be allies who do not trust me because they've been harmed by feminists before. That's okay, because I think labels matter and cohesiveness matters. But you don't have to. Be a womanist. Be nothing. You don't have to label yourself anything.
But if you agree with everything that feminism stands for, and avoid the label because stupid people with no critical thinking skills will make fun of you, or because it has "fem" as a prefix - then, I'm sorry, that's just dumb, and I will think lesser of you.
/rant
posted by Phire at 5:20 PM on March 23, 2013 [23 favorites]
My issue with anything like "humanism" and "egalitarianism" is that it frequently implies that if something is focused more on women than on men, it is less deserving of attention, thus we need a word that encompasses both women and men equally in order for it to be a worthy label to carry. And that really sucks, because rights for just women are still super important rights, and should be no less important just because they're explicitly for women.
Yes, feminism as an umbrella movement cares about more than women's rights. When done right, feminism should be looking at dismantling all axes of oppression, and that includes changing the rigid binary gender role conceptions that we have that also harm men in measurable and deplorable ways.
But words have meaning, and history has meaning. The feminist movement started out not because men and women were equally in need of uplifting against similar types of oppressive forces. The movement started because women couldn't vote, or own land, or get jobs in certain fields. The patriarchy--or whatever non-loaded word you want to insert here for the power structures in society as they currently exist--hurts men, too, absolutely, but it does not hurt men to the same extent and in the same way that it hurts women. And to disregard the history of the movement and to replace feminism with a neologism is to diminish just how unequal the gender power relations still are, and how much women are still harmed.
If your reason for not wanting to identify with the label "feminism" is because you have legitimate gripes with the movement's history of ugliness, modus operandi, current manifestation of the ideology - okay, that's fair. I call myself a feminist knowing that there will be allies who do not trust me because they've been harmed by feminists before. That's okay, because I think labels matter and cohesiveness matters. But you don't have to. Be a womanist. Be nothing. You don't have to label yourself anything.
But if you agree with everything that feminism stands for, and avoid the label because stupid people with no critical thinking skills will make fun of you, or because it has "fem" as a prefix - then, I'm sorry, that's just dumb, and I will think lesser of you.
/rant
posted by Phire at 5:20 PM on March 23, 2013 [23 favorites]
emjaybee: She. did. not. fire. this. guy. She is not responsible for him being fired.
Clause A is true. Clause B is not true.
If you knowingly start a boulder rolling downhill, you are responsible if it crushes someone's house. Even if you didn't mean to crush the house, and it was totally an accident, you are absolutely still responsible for the outcome. Many, many people are in jail on very similar reasoning.
She knew that there would be lots of public shaming and condemnation from her thousands of Twitter followers when she posted that picture and leveled the accusation. And when the rock she started rolling destroyed that man's job, she's just as responsible for that outcome as she would be if it had been a real rock destroying his real house.
posted by Malor at 5:56 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Clause A is true. Clause B is not true.
If you knowingly start a boulder rolling downhill, you are responsible if it crushes someone's house. Even if you didn't mean to crush the house, and it was totally an accident, you are absolutely still responsible for the outcome. Many, many people are in jail on very similar reasoning.
She knew that there would be lots of public shaming and condemnation from her thousands of Twitter followers when she posted that picture and leveled the accusation. And when the rock she started rolling destroyed that man's job, she's just as responsible for that outcome as she would be if it had been a real rock destroying his real house.
posted by Malor at 5:56 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Malor, we are grown-ups, we do not blame the tattle-tale for the punishment received by the offender.
posted by Space Coyote at 5:58 PM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by Space Coyote at 5:58 PM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
(or at least leveling a false accusation, that of sexism, and then calling in the Internet hordes. That's not tattling, that's public shaming, and in this case, it was wrong of her to do it. She cost that man his job for something that she totally misunderstood. )
posted by Malor at 6:02 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by Malor at 6:02 PM on March 23, 2013
Malor: Clause A is true. Clause B is not true.
If you knowingly start a boulder rolling downhill, you are responsible if it crushes someone's house. Even if you didn't mean to crush the house, and it was totally an accident, you are absolutely still responsible for the outcome. Many, many people are in jail on very similar reasoning.
Absolutely right, I think. Note the distinctions in some legal codes that differentiate between intentional and unintentional consequences of a particular action. The latter is less weighty usually, but it's not nonexistent.
Space Coyote: Malor, we are grown-ups, we do not blame the tattle-tale for the punishment received by the offender.
Space Coyote, the nuancing of this argument has been generally hinging not on the issue of telling, but on the way it was done. One can be held responsible for a careless action.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:06 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
If you knowingly start a boulder rolling downhill, you are responsible if it crushes someone's house. Even if you didn't mean to crush the house, and it was totally an accident, you are absolutely still responsible for the outcome. Many, many people are in jail on very similar reasoning.
Absolutely right, I think. Note the distinctions in some legal codes that differentiate between intentional and unintentional consequences of a particular action. The latter is less weighty usually, but it's not nonexistent.
Space Coyote: Malor, we are grown-ups, we do not blame the tattle-tale for the punishment received by the offender.
Space Coyote, the nuancing of this argument has been generally hinging not on the issue of telling, but on the way it was done. One can be held responsible for a careless action.
posted by SpacemanStix at 6:06 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
The obvious difference being that one is a rock, and the other is a number of individuals with responsibility for their own actions.
posted by fatbird at 6:07 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by fatbird at 6:07 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
You are deciding that she made a false accusation based on your subjective evaluation of the behavior of the two men. This does not seem like solid ground to defend your reasoning.
posted by humanfont at 6:44 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 6:44 PM on March 23, 2013 [6 favorites]
From VentureBeat's John Koetsier:
posted by simulacra at 6:55 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
What does this mean for women in the future who try to take a stand (whether right or not)? What do you do now if you are a woman in technology and you feel harassed or abused and want to shine a light on it, but now see this prominent woman totally abandoned by her company?And, from Kathy Sierra (mentioned in above linked article), who took her presence off-line in 2007 (emphasis in original):
I’ll tell you what you do, unless you’re a saint or a hero. You shut up. You put your head down. You grin and bear it, because it’s a man’s world. And you leave, eventually, for a better place.
And we’re all poorer as a result.
Adria Richards’ Twitter account has 32,383 tweets and 12,204 followers. Most days, she would post multiple times, adding her voice to the wider conversation that is technology.
Since March 20, she has not published a single tweet. There have been no new posts on her blog.
She’s been silenced.
Congratulations, Internet.
[from article "Adria Richards: 'I'm Staying Safe' "]
A quick explanation for the critics:"Thank you to the people who support me. Your efforts are appreciated!"
When I was first bombarded by the media about this story, I refused to answer questions. Having no media experience, I found that when you don't answer a reporter, they'll tell your story without you, so I agreed to speak with a few. When I was asked for a short CNN interview, I said that I would do it only if they would let me invite Chris Locke as well. Needless to say, everyone including Chris was stunned to hear this.
But these stories should not be about me... I am simply one of a gazillion examples about what's happening today both on and offline. Nor is it a simple Nice Vs. Bully story, and I thought having us come to an understanding would encourage others to stop fighting on either of our behalves and try to listen first, and then talk, and maybe something good and useful really will come of this.
posted by simulacra at 6:55 PM on March 23, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm starting to get to the point that I really think what Adria Richards did now is such a small tactical point that to ascribe who was more to blame doesn't really matter. Either that or, there's actually two separate issues. The first issue starts at Pycon and ends with the Playhaven employee getting fired or let go. The second issue starts with the mob against Ms. Richards and ends with her getting fired by Sendgrid. Whatever people's view on the nuances of the first issue, it seems at lest on Metafilter there is a general agreement on the second issue.
posted by FJT at 6:58 PM on March 23, 2013 [8 favorites]
posted by FJT at 6:58 PM on March 23, 2013 [8 favorites]
Blaming Richards for the firing only begins to make a lick of sense if reasonable person could have expected that an accusation of sexism raised by a non-celebrity at a tech conference would have resulted in anything worse than a mild reprimand and a promise to do better.
But how much have we heard about misogyny at tech- or geek- oriented events in the past few years? It seems like they happen every other week, now. How many people lost their jobs because they made women feel uncomfortable at such an event, and were subsequently publicly called out for it by the woman in question? How much have women railed against sexism and tried to call in the internet hordes to do something, only to be ignored or belittled with no real subsequent change enacted?
Now tell me why Richards should have been able to predict that her case would be different, that her boulder would crush someone when so many others' before her have simply fallen into the ravine with a loud noise never to be seen again?
We don't blame the butterfly for causing a tornado on the other side of the world, either.
posted by Phire at 7:08 PM on March 23, 2013 [9 favorites]
But how much have we heard about misogyny at tech- or geek- oriented events in the past few years? It seems like they happen every other week, now. How many people lost their jobs because they made women feel uncomfortable at such an event, and were subsequently publicly called out for it by the woman in question? How much have women railed against sexism and tried to call in the internet hordes to do something, only to be ignored or belittled with no real subsequent change enacted?
Now tell me why Richards should have been able to predict that her case would be different, that her boulder would crush someone when so many others' before her have simply fallen into the ravine with a loud noise never to be seen again?
We don't blame the butterfly for causing a tornado on the other side of the world, either.
posted by Phire at 7:08 PM on March 23, 2013 [9 favorites]
Blaming Richards for the firing only begins to make a lick of sense if reasonable person could have expected that an accusation of sexism raised by a non-celebrity at a tech conference would have resulted in anything worse than a mild reprimand and a promise to do better.
No, it's not an issue of blaming her for the overreaction. It's saying that it was wrong to take shame someone in the way that she did, and she should have known better about that, in terms of her own employment.
I think FJT is right, though. It's two different issues now, but I'm having hard time being overly concerned with the first one any more in light of how bad the mob mentality has gotten. I've become a bit concerned for her safety, and I feel like something of an ass for rehashing the arguments for why she shouldn't have taken the picture.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:47 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
No, it's not an issue of blaming her for the overreaction. It's saying that it was wrong to take shame someone in the way that she did, and she should have known better about that, in terms of her own employment.
I think FJT is right, though. It's two different issues now, but I'm having hard time being overly concerned with the first one any more in light of how bad the mob mentality has gotten. I've become a bit concerned for her safety, and I feel like something of an ass for rehashing the arguments for why she shouldn't have taken the picture.
posted by SpacemanStix at 7:47 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think it's reasonable to equate the harm suffered by a family losing its breadwinner (one of its breadwinners?) with the harm suffered by someone being stalked by the Legion of Vindictiveness. They're both pretty serious.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:56 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:56 PM on March 23, 2013
Not when that breadwinner has multiple interviews lined up already, Joe.
Seriously, I don't know why anyone thought this would be a career killer for him. Besides the fact that competent coders in the Valley are still in a seller's market, the volume of pro-coder backlash should have quickly indicated that there's no real stigma in what he did, and for which he was fired, in his particular segment of the market.
posted by fatbird at 8:10 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
Seriously, I don't know why anyone thought this would be a career killer for him. Besides the fact that competent coders in the Valley are still in a seller's market, the volume of pro-coder backlash should have quickly indicated that there's no real stigma in what he did, and for which he was fired, in his particular segment of the market.
posted by fatbird at 8:10 PM on March 23, 2013 [4 favorites]
That's not really consistent with him being fired from his original job, but in any case I'm glad to hear that he has new interviews lined up. I hope the people harassing Adria Richards find something else to focus on, too.
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:49 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Joe in Australia at 8:49 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
He was fired for PR reasons to do with PlayHaven's relationship to the larger business community. He has interviews for reasons internal to the culture of the Valley and his specific network of contacts. Apparently one prominent CTO has already reached out to him to ensure he finds a job. There's no inconsistency here because different audiences are involved.
posted by fatbird at 9:00 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by fatbird at 9:00 PM on March 23, 2013
Reddit and 4chan seem to me to be serving as command posts for a campaign to harass and terrorize Richards via threats, DDOS and other means. Isn't there some moral obligation by the owners if these sites to act to stop this? If they don't act doesn't it suggest that they support this behavior by their community? If this is what their community has become then at some point why shouldn't we label them a hate or terrorist group?
posted by humanfont at 9:04 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 9:04 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well, can you link us to the relevant discussions?
posted by Drinky Die at 9:07 PM on March 23, 2013
posted by Drinky Die at 9:07 PM on March 23, 2013
The Dailydot made screencaps of some of what happened on /b over at 4chan. Here is one of the reddit posts on /r/technology for just a small sample if the kind of vitrol. Someone got 184 points for a post that consisted of calling her the c-word. There were many up votes given to call her employeer and otherwise go after her.
posted by humanfont at 10:10 PM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 10:10 PM on March 23, 2013 [2 favorites]
Mod note: A couple of comments deleted; Metafilter will not be a staging ground for any kind of doxxing activity. Please do not do this here.
posted by taz (staff) at 10:35 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by taz (staff) at 10:35 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
The 4chan stuff is worse than I expected, I thought they took that kind of thing to IRC lately. I don't think you could declare the site a hate site based on it but you could take action against the posters if you had the legal means to do so.
The Reddit stuff I only skimmed because I can never read that friggin site without my eyes glazing over, but it didn't seem on the same level.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:41 PM on March 23, 2013
The Reddit stuff I only skimmed because I can never read that friggin site without my eyes glazing over, but it didn't seem on the same level.
posted by Drinky Die at 10:41 PM on March 23, 2013
If they [the owners of these sites] don't act doesn't it suggest that they support this behavior by their community?
Not necessarily. I may be wrong, but I think the owners of both of those sites intend them to be uncensored to the maximum extent possible, and any editorial control to make the sites reflect what the owners support would contradict that.
If this is what their community has become then at some point why shouldn't we label them a hate or terrorist group?
First, calling anyone involved with this a terrorist is way overblown: it's just harassment, and I'm pretty sure there's no organized campaign to do any real physical harm to anyone. Second, both these sites host diverse communities (reddit more so than 4chan), so treating them as a single unit is incorrect. Third, while organized harassment is practically a sport on some parts of 4chan (which is pretty shitty), I don't think it makes them a hate group since they'll target pretty much anyone for any reason (even no reason).
Disclaimer: I don't actively visit either reddit or 4chan, but I'm somewhat familiar with them.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 11:48 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
Not necessarily. I may be wrong, but I think the owners of both of those sites intend them to be uncensored to the maximum extent possible, and any editorial control to make the sites reflect what the owners support would contradict that.
If this is what their community has become then at some point why shouldn't we label them a hate or terrorist group?
First, calling anyone involved with this a terrorist is way overblown: it's just harassment, and I'm pretty sure there's no organized campaign to do any real physical harm to anyone. Second, both these sites host diverse communities (reddit more so than 4chan), so treating them as a single unit is incorrect. Third, while organized harassment is practically a sport on some parts of 4chan (which is pretty shitty), I don't think it makes them a hate group since they'll target pretty much anyone for any reason (even no reason).
Disclaimer: I don't actively visit either reddit or 4chan, but I'm somewhat familiar with them.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 11:48 PM on March 23, 2013 [1 favorite]
but I think the owners of both of those sites intend them to be uncensored to the maximum extent possible, and any editorial control to make the sites reflect what the owners support would contradict that.
Wasn't the whole violentacrez thing prove that Reddit's whole thing about "uncensoring" is selective. I mean, they were okay (and possibly still are since there are numerous reddits including private ones) with posting pictures of women that were taken without their permission, while they are generally against taking pictures or having revealing information about prominent redditors posted?
posted by FJT at 12:19 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
Wasn't the whole violentacrez thing prove that Reddit's whole thing about "uncensoring" is selective. I mean, they were okay (and possibly still are since there are numerous reddits including private ones) with posting pictures of women that were taken without their permission, while they are generally against taking pictures or having revealing information about prominent redditors posted?
posted by FJT at 12:19 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
but presumably they employ adults who should not require babysitting and who should be quite capable of keeping their dick jokes to themselves while in the workplace. An ability to not create a hostile work environment for the people around you is and should be a basic expectation for both conferences and employers to have and share.
Yeah, but that's not what this was about, was it? They weren't at their workplace, they were having a private conservation between the two of them somebody else objected to. Telling them to be careful about what they're talking about in a semi-public environment is one thing, expecting the con to tattle to their employers, quite another, especially when it can and does lead to people getting fired.
Consider also these people where all there in the weekend, not actually getting paid to be there even if their company picked up their expense and all the bluster about professionalism and workplace behaviour wears thin.
posted by MartinWisse at 2:25 AM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
Yeah, but that's not what this was about, was it? They weren't at their workplace, they were having a private conservation between the two of them somebody else objected to. Telling them to be careful about what they're talking about in a semi-public environment is one thing, expecting the con to tattle to their employers, quite another, especially when it can and does lead to people getting fired.
Consider also these people where all there in the weekend, not actually getting paid to be there even if their company picked up their expense and all the bluster about professionalism and workplace behaviour wears thin.
posted by MartinWisse at 2:25 AM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
I wish I had a foolproof manual outlining the best way to report and stop sexist or harassing behavior, because I feel like I have read two hundred Metafilter threads about such incidents where one of the main takeaways is that the woman in question has failed because she did it wrong. If only she had done it the right way, we could have supported her, but, sorry! Yes, maybe the men were being "immature," but her reaction was so disproportionate!
When I see this and I think back to all the sexism that I have been subject to that I have been too meek and afraid of the consequences to report (and boy howdy I am talking about some get-your-name-in-the-paper goings on), I see how the system is working. It is a minefield for reporting women. It's as if people are saying, "Do it just right, or fuck off." Really? I just don't think it should be this way.
posted by onlyconnect at 7:54 AM on March 24, 2013 [21 favorites]
When I see this and I think back to all the sexism that I have been subject to that I have been too meek and afraid of the consequences to report (and boy howdy I am talking about some get-your-name-in-the-paper goings on), I see how the system is working. It is a minefield for reporting women. It's as if people are saying, "Do it just right, or fuck off." Really? I just don't think it should be this way.
posted by onlyconnect at 7:54 AM on March 24, 2013 [21 favorites]
It's as if people are saying, "Do it just right, or fuck off." Really? I just don't think it should be this way.
no, the issue is that in her position she knew exactly what route to take to report offensive behavior, but she opted for public shaming instead.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 8:04 AM on March 24, 2013 [4 favorites]
no, the issue is that in her position she knew exactly what route to take to report offensive behavior, but she opted for public shaming instead.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 8:04 AM on March 24, 2013 [4 favorites]
I have read the links and the whole thread, and, respectfully, I do not need to be told what the issue is.
posted by onlyconnect at 8:19 AM on March 24, 2013 [10 favorites]
posted by onlyconnect at 8:19 AM on March 24, 2013 [10 favorites]
onlyconnect: "If only she had done it the right way, we could have supported her, but, sorry! Yes, maybe the men were being "immature," but her reaction was so disproportionate!"
If you ignore the context, this is an appropriate criticism, but at some point, we have to go back to the fact that the jokes in question were material that would be considered tame by Big Bang Theory standards. The phenomenon you're talking (silencing women who've been the victim of sexual harassment or assault) is a serious issue, and we should have that discussion. But really, if someone is offended by "dongle" and "fork" double-entendres, I think they have a responsibility to use minimal force in response to a minimal threat to their sensibilities. Anyone reporting sexual harassment should get the benefit of the doubt, but when it requires suspension of disbelief, I think it's okay to start asking if we're really in a sexual harassment situation.
Richards has a right to go to a conference without being disturbed by PG-rated humor, and nobody has a right to make lame wiener jokes that other people can hear, but there are so many clicks on the dial before you get to "using your Twitter platform to publicly shame them" that I don't think asking someone in Richards' situation to use more discretion is a lot to ask. Of course there are people out there who want to silence victims, and that is NOT OKAY, but I don't think anyone who claims to be offended by anything of a vaguely sexual nature has the right to use whatever force they'd like in response, either. Is it too much to ask that we try to find a balance?
posted by tonycpsu at 9:01 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
If you ignore the context, this is an appropriate criticism, but at some point, we have to go back to the fact that the jokes in question were material that would be considered tame by Big Bang Theory standards. The phenomenon you're talking (silencing women who've been the victim of sexual harassment or assault) is a serious issue, and we should have that discussion. But really, if someone is offended by "dongle" and "fork" double-entendres, I think they have a responsibility to use minimal force in response to a minimal threat to their sensibilities. Anyone reporting sexual harassment should get the benefit of the doubt, but when it requires suspension of disbelief, I think it's okay to start asking if we're really in a sexual harassment situation.
Richards has a right to go to a conference without being disturbed by PG-rated humor, and nobody has a right to make lame wiener jokes that other people can hear, but there are so many clicks on the dial before you get to "using your Twitter platform to publicly shame them" that I don't think asking someone in Richards' situation to use more discretion is a lot to ask. Of course there are people out there who want to silence victims, and that is NOT OKAY, but I don't think anyone who claims to be offended by anything of a vaguely sexual nature has the right to use whatever force they'd like in response, either. Is it too much to ask that we try to find a balance?
posted by tonycpsu at 9:01 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
I have to agree that the joke(s) in question "would be considered tame by Big Bang Theory standards." Moreover, publishing somebody's photo to your 10,000 followers on Twitter is pretty extreme. This is sort of an edge case on both edges.
I understand and agree there's a larger context of women reporting sexism and sexual harassment in our society. As I said above, that #IAskedPolitely hashtag is a worthwhile thing. But it's one thing to acknowledge that larger context exists, and another to insist that every individual instance having any tangent of similarity is a part of the quilt. It's hard for me to take seriously anybody who looks at this PyCon incident and feels that it's any kind of last straw.
posted by cribcage at 9:16 AM on March 24, 2013
I understand and agree there's a larger context of women reporting sexism and sexual harassment in our society. As I said above, that #IAskedPolitely hashtag is a worthwhile thing. But it's one thing to acknowledge that larger context exists, and another to insist that every individual instance having any tangent of similarity is a part of the quilt. It's hard for me to take seriously anybody who looks at this PyCon incident and feels that it's any kind of last straw.
posted by cribcage at 9:16 AM on March 24, 2013
Assuming these are salaried workers. From the employer's POV working the weekend was a job duty that was factored into the annual compensation. The employer sent them to this conference to work, and that makes it a workplace. Your statement is a common misunderstanding.
posted by humanfont at 9:43 AM on March 24, 2013
posted by humanfont at 9:43 AM on March 24, 2013
There's a difference between "being disturbed by PG-humor" and recognizing that sexual innuendo is inappropriate in the workplace and calling it out when it happens.
In other words: I'm not offended. I'm contemptuous.
posted by hydropsyche at 9:54 AM on March 24, 2013 [9 favorites]
In other words: I'm not offended. I'm contemptuous.
posted by hydropsyche at 9:54 AM on March 24, 2013 [9 favorites]
If only she had done it the right way, we could have supported her, but, sorry! Yes, maybe the men were being "immature," but her reaction was so disproportionate!
Yes, and? I -- and I think all reasonable people, and almost everyone on this site -- do very much support Richards' right not to be threatened, attacked and harassed for any reason at all. But I'm not prepared to get behind every random jackass action of any woman anywhere, and I don't see what's controversial about that.
I wasn't going to post again in this thread, because I really think the barrage of brutality Richards is receiving has moved far past the original event in significance. But if people continue to insist that she is not only totally undeserving of the violence directed at her, but innocent of any wrongdoing worth notice, and to conflate rejection of the latter opinion with rejection of the former, well, to hell with that. I don't support the feminism of zero responsibility. The stupid conference man isn't responsible for the consequences of his speech to Richards' sense of belonging unless she's responsible for the consequences of her speech to his life. Some people can't be told they're control of their feelings and actions unless all people have to be. I feel like we do this all the time, and often I do get angry enough about various outrages to see things this way myself. But when I stop to think, I can't really support it.
I don't want mindless solidarity with my "sisters". I don't believe a just movement can afford to start out from the assumption that its natural sympathies lead to correct conclusions. It's not just alienating to me and my own sense of fairness. It's the tendency that leads all of us, feminists included, to be so racist, so homophobic, so transphobic, so ableist, so ignorant of and indifferent to what the diverse community of all people and all women are going through. Metafilter is also a diverse community in a lot of ways, and I think advanced on these issues compared to many places. But this attitude, even in response to an incident as minor as the one that started all this, only undermines that. I can think a woman was wrong this one time, and even say so, and still be against sexism.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 10:00 AM on March 24, 2013 [15 favorites]
Yes, and? I -- and I think all reasonable people, and almost everyone on this site -- do very much support Richards' right not to be threatened, attacked and harassed for any reason at all. But I'm not prepared to get behind every random jackass action of any woman anywhere, and I don't see what's controversial about that.
I wasn't going to post again in this thread, because I really think the barrage of brutality Richards is receiving has moved far past the original event in significance. But if people continue to insist that she is not only totally undeserving of the violence directed at her, but innocent of any wrongdoing worth notice, and to conflate rejection of the latter opinion with rejection of the former, well, to hell with that. I don't support the feminism of zero responsibility. The stupid conference man isn't responsible for the consequences of his speech to Richards' sense of belonging unless she's responsible for the consequences of her speech to his life. Some people can't be told they're control of their feelings and actions unless all people have to be. I feel like we do this all the time, and often I do get angry enough about various outrages to see things this way myself. But when I stop to think, I can't really support it.
I don't want mindless solidarity with my "sisters". I don't believe a just movement can afford to start out from the assumption that its natural sympathies lead to correct conclusions. It's not just alienating to me and my own sense of fairness. It's the tendency that leads all of us, feminists included, to be so racist, so homophobic, so transphobic, so ableist, so ignorant of and indifferent to what the diverse community of all people and all women are going through. Metafilter is also a diverse community in a lot of ways, and I think advanced on these issues compared to many places. But this attitude, even in response to an incident as minor as the one that started all this, only undermines that. I can think a woman was wrong this one time, and even say so, and still be against sexism.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 10:00 AM on March 24, 2013 [15 favorites]
The employer sent them to this conference to work, and that makes it a workplace.
I don't know what the law is, but an employers opinion of what is or isn't part of the workplace is far from definitive and likely to be biased against individual rights.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:10 AM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
I don't know what the law is, but an employers opinion of what is or isn't part of the workplace is far from definitive and likely to be biased against individual rights.
posted by benito.strauss at 10:10 AM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
But really, if someone is offended by "dongle" and "fork" double-entendres, I think they have a responsibility to use minimal force in response to a minimal threat to their sensibilities.
I have to agree that the joke(s) in question "would be considered tame by Big Bang Theory standards." Moreover, publishing somebody's photo to your 10,000 followers on Twitter is pretty extreme.
The stupid conference man isn't responsible for the consequences of his speech to Richards' sense of belonging unless she's responsible for the consequences of her speech to his life.
People are blaming Richards for the firing of the guy who admitted his sexual joke was inappropriate. The argument is that she was wrong to post his picture to Twitter and she should have been able to predict that someone would get fired.
But if SHE should have been able to predict that he would get fired, then HE and his friends also should have been able to predict that openly making those kinds of jokes at a professional conference where they were representing their companies could get them fired. (Whether or not HE thought the fork joke was sexual, given past uses of the word he certainly should have known that others hearing the remarks may have thought they were invoking a sexual context.)
Yes, let's all take responsibility for our actions, but honestly, how difficult is it to refrain from making a dick joke at a big conference after you have just been in conversation with a female colleague?
Could she have reported the incident in a better way? Yes. But guess what would have been an even surer way to not get fired? Don't make a dick joke at a professional conference. Full stop.
It should not be such a surprise that making such a joke in a professional context can get you fired, and if Richards should have been able to predict it, than so should the person who made the joke.
posted by onlyconnect at 11:56 AM on March 24, 2013 [10 favorites]
I have to agree that the joke(s) in question "would be considered tame by Big Bang Theory standards." Moreover, publishing somebody's photo to your 10,000 followers on Twitter is pretty extreme.
The stupid conference man isn't responsible for the consequences of his speech to Richards' sense of belonging unless she's responsible for the consequences of her speech to his life.
People are blaming Richards for the firing of the guy who admitted his sexual joke was inappropriate. The argument is that she was wrong to post his picture to Twitter and she should have been able to predict that someone would get fired.
But if SHE should have been able to predict that he would get fired, then HE and his friends also should have been able to predict that openly making those kinds of jokes at a professional conference where they were representing their companies could get them fired. (Whether or not HE thought the fork joke was sexual, given past uses of the word he certainly should have known that others hearing the remarks may have thought they were invoking a sexual context.)
Yes, let's all take responsibility for our actions, but honestly, how difficult is it to refrain from making a dick joke at a big conference after you have just been in conversation with a female colleague?
Could she have reported the incident in a better way? Yes. But guess what would have been an even surer way to not get fired? Don't make a dick joke at a professional conference. Full stop.
It should not be such a surprise that making such a joke in a professional context can get you fired, and if Richards should have been able to predict it, than so should the person who made the joke.
posted by onlyconnect at 11:56 AM on March 24, 2013 [10 favorites]
I have read the links and the whole thread, and, respectfully, I do not need to be told what the issue is.
so don't ask questions you don't want answered.
It's as if people are saying, "Do it just right, or fuck off." Really?
no, not really. this is an oversimplification of the situation. it is also a disservice to women or anyone who does report an incident of harassment or intimidation to lump them in with someone who turns that unfortunate experience into self-aggrandizing public spectacle.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 11:57 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
so don't ask questions you don't want answered.
It's as if people are saying, "Do it just right, or fuck off." Really?
no, not really. this is an oversimplification of the situation. it is also a disservice to women or anyone who does report an incident of harassment or intimidation to lump them in with someone who turns that unfortunate experience into self-aggrandizing public spectacle.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 11:57 AM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
the argument continues that these guys were essentially at their place of work when this happened and so should be held to certain standards. what gets lost is that she was thus at her place of work as well. so i wouldn't say she got fired because she reported an incident she interpreted as harassment, or even that she did it in a bad way. i think she got fired because she established the expectation that anyone she encounters at her place of work, even those she does not deal with directly, if they happen to say something she does not like, are fair game for public humiliation on her popular blog.
posted by fallacy of the beard at 12:13 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by fallacy of the beard at 12:13 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
It should not be such a surprise that making such a joke in a professional context can get you fired,
Just because it's within an employer's legal right to fire you over such an infraction, doesn't make it morally right. Most HR departments have disciplinary processes that involve warnings, write-ups, and taking away bonus pay before considering the immediate termination of employment.
I've been saying throughout this debacle that I'm a little dismayed that people are so ready to defend companies and throw Ms. Richards and/or the joker involved right under the bus.
And to shift from what onlyconnect said to the topic at large, I'm beginning to realize that there's a selective responsibility that people give to either the firms involved or the internet mob. I mean, some seem to be framing that being fired is like a mechanical reaction to the employee's wrongdoing, just like how some have been framing the internet mob as an uncontrollable force of nature. But that's incorrect. Both companies and mobs had to organize themselves, discuss, decide, and execute (double entendre intended). They were the big that decided to chew up and spit out the small, especially in Ms. Richards case. Let's not forget that.
posted by FJT at 1:05 PM on March 24, 2013 [6 favorites]
Just because it's within an employer's legal right to fire you over such an infraction, doesn't make it morally right. Most HR departments have disciplinary processes that involve warnings, write-ups, and taking away bonus pay before considering the immediate termination of employment.
I've been saying throughout this debacle that I'm a little dismayed that people are so ready to defend companies and throw Ms. Richards and/or the joker involved right under the bus.
And to shift from what onlyconnect said to the topic at large, I'm beginning to realize that there's a selective responsibility that people give to either the firms involved or the internet mob. I mean, some seem to be framing that being fired is like a mechanical reaction to the employee's wrongdoing, just like how some have been framing the internet mob as an uncontrollable force of nature. But that's incorrect. Both companies and mobs had to organize themselves, discuss, decide, and execute (double entendre intended). They were the big that decided to chew up and spit out the small, especially in Ms. Richards case. Let's not forget that.
posted by FJT at 1:05 PM on March 24, 2013 [6 favorites]
Can't we all agree that everyone involved in this debacle is a ripe royal asshole?
posted by five fresh fish at 1:20 PM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by five fresh fish at 1:20 PM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
What is the difference between what she did and People of Walmart or most of the Meme Gifs that flood reddit and 4chan? At least the guy in her photo hasn't become an overly attached boyfriend, or scumbag Steve meme.
posted by humanfont at 2:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 2:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think one thing I find puzzling is framing her tweet as public humiliation. Didn't it just show a picture of them and a description of what she heard them saying? That's practically reporting. There needs to be a difference between reporting, which is necessary and valuable and legally protected, and pointing and laughing. If people are doing something which they find humiliating simply to have it reported on, then I think it's fair that the burden is on them to do that thing carefully and discreetly. It's not like they could never have anticipated that their conversation could be overheard, or that people might be live tweeting.
posted by Salamandrous at 2:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by Salamandrous at 2:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [6 favorites]
On preview, many people, among them me, think that People of Walmart is a classist, humiliating, and wrong invasion of people's privacy.
Whether or not HE thought the fork joke was sexual, given past uses of the word he certainly should have known that others hearing the remarks may have thought they were invoking a sexual context.
If you don't think it matters what really happened, I'm not sure there's any point arguing about it.
However, making a juvenile joke to a friend at a conference is not as likely to get you fired as someone overhearing it, which is not as likely to get you fired as their complaining to the event authorities, which is not as likely to get you fired as their complaining directly to your boss, which is not as likely to get you fired as their ensuring that your boss hears about it by reporting (arguably, misreporting) what you said to as many people as they can reach in the most emotive language they can use.
Richards deliberately magnified the little bit of damage the man did to his own reputation, going out of her way to call as much attention of the most outraged sort to what he'd said as it was in her power to. Public shame is not a reasonable consequence of some fourteen-year-old taking their clothes off for a photo - even if their bully can reach a thousand people who might think so. Public shame is not a reasonable consequence of some celebrity being seen cheating on their SO, even if that's wrong - even if a reporter can reach a million people who might think so. And public shame is not, in my view, a reasonable consequence of some stupid man evoking cock in an inappropriate place, even if that's already public, even if that's already shameful - even if Adria Richards can reach as many people as follow her on Twitter, and potentially, in turn, everyone they can reach anywhere.
The man at the conference certainly does have to take responsibility for his firing; he's just not the only one. Sharing information means taking some responsibility for the accuracy and tone with which you present it, the kinds of people you share it with, and the number of people you share it with. Sharing information indiscriminately probably just means taking more.
Anyway, like I said, I feel bad about lingering on Richards' relatively minor wrongdoings, so I'm out.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 2:39 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
Whether or not HE thought the fork joke was sexual, given past uses of the word he certainly should have known that others hearing the remarks may have thought they were invoking a sexual context.
If you don't think it matters what really happened, I'm not sure there's any point arguing about it.
However, making a juvenile joke to a friend at a conference is not as likely to get you fired as someone overhearing it, which is not as likely to get you fired as their complaining to the event authorities, which is not as likely to get you fired as their complaining directly to your boss, which is not as likely to get you fired as their ensuring that your boss hears about it by reporting (arguably, misreporting) what you said to as many people as they can reach in the most emotive language they can use.
Richards deliberately magnified the little bit of damage the man did to his own reputation, going out of her way to call as much attention of the most outraged sort to what he'd said as it was in her power to. Public shame is not a reasonable consequence of some fourteen-year-old taking their clothes off for a photo - even if their bully can reach a thousand people who might think so. Public shame is not a reasonable consequence of some celebrity being seen cheating on their SO, even if that's wrong - even if a reporter can reach a million people who might think so. And public shame is not, in my view, a reasonable consequence of some stupid man evoking cock in an inappropriate place, even if that's already public, even if that's already shameful - even if Adria Richards can reach as many people as follow her on Twitter, and potentially, in turn, everyone they can reach anywhere.
The man at the conference certainly does have to take responsibility for his firing; he's just not the only one. Sharing information means taking some responsibility for the accuracy and tone with which you present it, the kinds of people you share it with, and the number of people you share it with. Sharing information indiscriminately probably just means taking more.
Anyway, like I said, I feel bad about lingering on Richards' relatively minor wrongdoings, so I'm out.
posted by two or three cars parked under the stars at 2:39 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
onlyconnect: " The argument is that she was wrong to post his picture to Twitter and she should have been able to predict that someone would get fired. "
If some people are making that argument, they are wrong. She of course had no reasonable expectation of her tweet leading to people (including herself) being fired. But the argument that she was wrong to post the pictures does not require a belief that she could predict the severity of the shitstorm -- it just requires an understanding that publicly shaming people on your Twitter feed is itself an inherently hostile act that isn't okay in every circumstance where you might be offended by something.
posted by tonycpsu at 3:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
If some people are making that argument, they are wrong. She of course had no reasonable expectation of her tweet leading to people (including herself) being fired. But the argument that she was wrong to post the pictures does not require a belief that she could predict the severity of the shitstorm -- it just requires an understanding that publicly shaming people on your Twitter feed is itself an inherently hostile act that isn't okay in every circumstance where you might be offended by something.
posted by tonycpsu at 3:27 PM on March 24, 2013 [3 favorites]
What is the difference between what she did and People of Walmart or most of the Meme Gifs that flood reddit and 4chan?
I think one thing I find puzzling is framing her tweet as public humiliation.
I think this is the disconnect: It wasn't the tweet, it was the 1,000 word blog post she made about it. That took it from something that would have faded among her followers into the other off-color jokes she herself has made on Twitter, into an issue with much larger meaning (as she described it) via her blog, which is a different context and (I would say) media than the tweet.
Other memes don't get that kind of focus and amplification of implication. In order for the analogy to be apt, the person who coined Scumbag Steve would have described how "Hey, can I borrow...everything?" is an indictment of the welfare state or something.
posted by rhizome at 7:45 PM on March 24, 2013
I think one thing I find puzzling is framing her tweet as public humiliation.
I think this is the disconnect: It wasn't the tweet, it was the 1,000 word blog post she made about it. That took it from something that would have faded among her followers into the other off-color jokes she herself has made on Twitter, into an issue with much larger meaning (as she described it) via her blog, which is a different context and (I would say) media than the tweet.
Other memes don't get that kind of focus and amplification of implication. In order for the analogy to be apt, the person who coined Scumbag Steve would have described how "Hey, can I borrow...everything?" is an indictment of the welfare state or something.
posted by rhizome at 7:45 PM on March 24, 2013
I have a hard time believing that there is any significant readership for her blog. Also so someone posted a picture of you sitting in a chair on their blog or twitter and said you made a dick joke in public. Is that really public humiliation? How is it that the joke can be no big deal, and something she shouldn't have been upset about, but posting a photo, not the guys name, just a photo anda description of the incident which causes collective get over yourself lady eye rolls...how is that in any way shape or form publically shaming someone? Talk about just get over it and let it go. Don't go crying to the HN forums about how it cost you your job, when obviously either your employer over-reacted or there was a hell of a lot more you did than just one dongle joke.
I think it is absurd that of all the people mocked on the Internet, you've chosen to make your stand for a rich middle aged white guy making dick jokes. He has three kids and was the primary breadwinner for his family and as a programmer in the valley was probably pulling down over $100,000 a year. This wasn't some awkward teenager doing something dumb. This wasn't some underprivileged poor person waking a leopard print and flip flops while shopping at Walmart. Oh is the rich, highly educated, white guy hurt by something someone wrote on their personal blog and twitter, quick Internets rise up, this terrible injustice must not stand. Some terrible manager made him work the weekend too-- to arms to arms. And by work I mean attend a conference with food, parties, free stuff and entertainment. Yes him. We must stand up for that guy, or there will be no one left to stand for us. First they always come for the rich, white, educated guys.
posted by humanfont at 8:37 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
I think it is absurd that of all the people mocked on the Internet, you've chosen to make your stand for a rich middle aged white guy making dick jokes. He has three kids and was the primary breadwinner for his family and as a programmer in the valley was probably pulling down over $100,000 a year. This wasn't some awkward teenager doing something dumb. This wasn't some underprivileged poor person waking a leopard print and flip flops while shopping at Walmart. Oh is the rich, highly educated, white guy hurt by something someone wrote on their personal blog and twitter, quick Internets rise up, this terrible injustice must not stand. Some terrible manager made him work the weekend too-- to arms to arms. And by work I mean attend a conference with food, parties, free stuff and entertainment. Yes him. We must stand up for that guy, or there will be no one left to stand for us. First they always come for the rich, white, educated guys.
posted by humanfont at 8:37 PM on March 24, 2013 [2 favorites]
Humanfont, I think your level of snarkiness over someone who's lost his job is not only unfortunate and offensive, but undermines whatever outrage your feel over someone else who lost her job.
posted by zompist at 9:29 PM on March 24, 2013 [24 favorites]
posted by zompist at 9:29 PM on March 24, 2013 [24 favorites]
So it seems that this is the latest MRA thing all over Twitter.
posted by Artw at 9:54 PM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by Artw at 9:54 PM on March 24, 2013 [1 favorite]
Surprised no one mentioned Brandeis and Warren on privacy.
posted by Ideefixe at 10:52 PM on March 24, 2013
posted by Ideefixe at 10:52 PM on March 24, 2013
So it seems that this is the latest MRA thing all over Twitter.
Which just goes to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
posted by amorphatist at 7:43 AM on March 25, 2013
Which just goes to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
posted by amorphatist at 7:43 AM on March 25, 2013
Humanfont, I think your level of snarkiness over someone who's lost his job is not only unfortunate and offensive, but undermines whatever outrage your feel over someone else who lost her job.
I agree; it's not helpful.
...so I'm going to bow out now because I think this conversation has reached the point where it can't be constructive anymore.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 8:56 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
I agree; it's not helpful.
...so I'm going to bow out now because I think this conversation has reached the point where it can't be constructive anymore.
posted by cosmic.osmo at 8:56 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
unfortunately, most of the news headlines reduce this to a narrative of woman speaks out about sexist dudes and is punished by the sexist internet despite the fact that nothing indicates that these dudes are sexist and richards is the one who pushed this story to online discussion. there's some satisfaction in seeing her personally punished for her histrionics, but it's disappointing that it's women who face actual discrimination and harassment who lose out the most here (more so because they will reflexively put the blame for that on the men and not on richards, where it belongs).
posted by fallacy of the beard at 9:00 AM on March 25, 2013
posted by fallacy of the beard at 9:00 AM on March 25, 2013
It is my understanding that he already has a new job. Given the scarcity of python developers in the Valley he probably got a signing bonus and a bump in pay. Oh what cruel fate. He had to suffer the ills of unemployment for days. Sure there are guys who lost their pensions and their livelihood when the mill closed. 55 years old and 60 months unemployed with no benefits left and no prospects other than the stocking shelves at Walmart. The guy who stripped the mill of its assets and sent the jobs to China got the nomination of the MRA for President last year. So pardon my sarcasm and snark about his poor terrible fate. I can't find my tiny violin so I shan't be uploading my tribute song.
posted by humanfont at 10:14 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 10:14 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
From a month and a half ago: How Etsy upped its female engineers by 500%:
posted by Llama-Lime at 10:19 AM on March 25, 2013 [5 favorites]
Simply saying that you value diversity internally isn’t enough – there’s just no reason for an outside observer to believe you if they come and see a scarcity of women in the organization.The video of the talk by the Etsy CTO is really great, and not just for the crowd's reaction to being polled about gender disparity in engineering teams. Also a great point:
We all know why it's hard to hire great engineers. Great engineers aren't looking for work. Great women engineers are not only not looking for work, there is a decent chance, based on their experience in industry that your workplace is going to suck. How do you convince them that's not true?It's much easier to build a company culture from the ground up than to change it once it's in place.
posted by Llama-Lime at 10:19 AM on March 25, 2013 [5 favorites]
It is my understanding that he already has a new job.
Would you please share where this understanding came from?
posted by 0 at 10:20 AM on March 25, 2013 [3 favorites]
Would you please share where this understanding came from?
posted by 0 at 10:20 AM on March 25, 2013 [3 favorites]
Reddit Cofounder Scolds “Fellow Geeks” For Sexism.
posted by ericb at 11:03 AM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by ericb at 11:03 AM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
Reddit Cofounder Scolds “Fellow Geeks” For Sexism.
It's a good write up, but the actual blog entry is even better (included in the Buzzfeed article at ericb's link).
posted by sweetkid at 11:13 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's a good write up, but the actual blog entry is even better (included in the Buzzfeed article at ericb's link).
posted by sweetkid at 11:13 AM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sure there are guys who lost their pensions and their livelihood when the mill closed. 55 years old and 60 months unemployed with no benefits left and no prospects other than the stocking shelves at Walmart. The guy who stripped the mill of its assets and sent the jobs to China got the nomination of the MRA for President last year. So pardon my sarcasm and snark about his poor terrible fate.
I'm a little puzzled as to the relevance of purported actions from Mitt Romney on whether one should be sympathetic to a programmer who lost his job. Empathy isn't a zero-sum game where if you feel bad for the fired guy, you can't also feel bad for Adria Richards (or for a mill worker).
posted by dsfan at 11:17 AM on March 25, 2013 [5 favorites]
I'm a little puzzled as to the relevance of purported actions from Mitt Romney on whether one should be sympathetic to a programmer who lost his job. Empathy isn't a zero-sum game where if you feel bad for the fired guy, you can't also feel bad for Adria Richards (or for a mill worker).
posted by dsfan at 11:17 AM on March 25, 2013 [5 favorites]
I think it is absurd that of all the people mocked on the Internet, you've chosen to make your stand for a rich middle aged white guy making dick jokes.
I'd still rather take my stand with a person, rather than a company or corporate policies, which is what you've done for half this thread.
posted by FJT at 11:27 AM on March 25, 2013 [6 favorites]
I'd still rather take my stand with a person, rather than a company or corporate policies, which is what you've done for half this thread.
posted by FJT at 11:27 AM on March 25, 2013 [6 favorites]
I think it is absurd that of all the people mocked on the Internet, you've chosen to make your stand for a rich middle aged white guy making dick jokes.
He's rich? Source?
Anyone taking a stand is doing so in regard to the practice of public shaming, not because of the sex or race of the person in question, but rather, regardless of it.
posted by juiceCake at 12:28 PM on March 25, 2013 [3 favorites]
He's rich? Source?
Anyone taking a stand is doing so in regard to the practice of public shaming, not because of the sex or race of the person in question, but rather, regardless of it.
posted by juiceCake at 12:28 PM on March 25, 2013 [3 favorites]
>> She may have a retaliation basis for filing suit.
> From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case
Lawyers have started weighing in & some do:
> From my layman's reading of the rules about retaliation, I don't think she has a case
Lawyers have started weighing in & some do:
> Based on our experiences in representing Colorado employees in wrongful termination lawsuits, it appears that SendGrid's termination of Ms. Richards was unlawfully retaliatory.posted by morganw at 12:44 PM on March 25, 2013 [3 favorites]
> The law is strong in protecting people who make complaints of harassment, or who participate in an investigation about complaints of harassment.
> The anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 make it unlawful to discriminate against an individual because s/he has opposed any practice made unlawful under the employment discrimination statutes (i.e., a protected activity).
The law itself does not place any restrictions on the manner in which an employee complains about discrimination
As frustrating and difficult as this conversation has been both here in this thread and elsewhere on the Internet, thanks everyone for engaging and please look for ways to use your power and talents to make something good come of this. I'm not looking for cookies here. If you, dear reader, have a choice between spending your energy reading my comment or going and making the world more inclusive, stop reading here and go be awesome. Still need convincing? How about an example: I am on the board of a Linux Users Group. We had a mailing list fight back in 2007 about instituting a Code of Conduct. Those of us pushing for it back then caved and did not implement it. This has given me new courage to make a Code of Conduct happen, and I think we'll try to start with our barcamp coming up in May. Maybe you're not on the board of a tech nonprofit, but you're on a mailing list of one or more. You could look for language on inclusivity on the website, and if you don't find it, now might be a good time to press for it. I'm sure you're more clever than I am in thinking of ways you can make a difference. Please have the courage to do it. You're on metafilter, so chances are good you are better educated and have more resources (social capital, financial, etc.) than the average person who has heard about this. Use that. This week.
Okay now I really have to make this Code of Conduct happen....
posted by tarheelcoxn at 1:31 PM on March 25, 2013 [6 favorites]
Okay now I really have to make this Code of Conduct happen....
posted by tarheelcoxn at 1:31 PM on March 25, 2013 [6 favorites]
There are examples of discussions like these having positive effects, and that there are a number of us in the software industry/community that want to make sure everyone feels welcome.
The javascript testing framework 'testacular' (which was created by a russian developer that wanted to shorten 'spectular' and 'tests') has recently been renamed to 'karma'
Also, a python testing framework 'testosterone' was renamed for similar reasons
the devs are alright, but these things take time
posted by askmehow at 3:35 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
The javascript testing framework 'testacular' (which was created by a russian developer that wanted to shorten 'spectular' and 'tests') has recently been renamed to 'karma'
Also, a python testing framework 'testosterone' was renamed for similar reasons
the devs are alright, but these things take time
posted by askmehow at 3:35 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
My understanding of the fired man's current employment status was formed based on his own post on Hacker News 5 days ago where he described having several leads, assistance from a startup guru and set the expectation he wouldn't be unemployed for long. Other sites such as reddit have suggested he has since found new work.
posted by humanfont at 4:33 PM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by humanfont at 4:33 PM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
He's rich? Source?
juiceCake, I read this as an oblique reference to last week's Feminist Housewife thread, where several people argued that anyone making a "low-six-figure" salary is not middle class but upper class, i.e., rich.
morganw, I was really wondering if there would be a retaliation claim there. I'm not an employment lawyer, but my impression was that if your employee makes a complaint of harassment, they cannot then subsequently be fired as a direct result of that complaint. (Maybe there is a little leeway here because Richards complained to the conference organizers and not to her employer?)
posted by onlyconnect at 5:50 PM on March 25, 2013
juiceCake, I read this as an oblique reference to last week's Feminist Housewife thread, where several people argued that anyone making a "low-six-figure" salary is not middle class but upper class, i.e., rich.
morganw, I was really wondering if there would be a retaliation claim there. I'm not an employment lawyer, but my impression was that if your employee makes a complaint of harassment, they cannot then subsequently be fired as a direct result of that complaint. (Maybe there is a little leeway here because Richards complained to the conference organizers and not to her employer?)
posted by onlyconnect at 5:50 PM on March 25, 2013
I think it is absurd that of all the people mocked on the Internet, you've chosen to make your stand for a rich middle aged white guy making dick jokes..
Middle aged? Really?
posted by ericb at 6:49 PM on March 25, 2013
Middle aged? Really?
posted by ericb at 6:49 PM on March 25, 2013
juiceCake, I read this as an oblique reference to last week's Feminist Housewife thread, where several people argued that anyone making a "low-six-figure" salary is not middle class but upper class, i.e., rich.
This exactly.
Middle aged? Really?
Well first I said he looked young, but was rebuked and told he looked mid thirties. I continue to doubt that the entire story is that Playhaven fired him soley because his pic was on twitter along with Richards' accusations alone. Why just him and not the other Dev whose badge was more visible? Playhaven's post left open the door that there was more to the story.
Anyone taking a stand is doing so in regard to the practice of public shaming, not because of the sex or race of the person in question, but rather, regardless of it.
Except for those on Reddit and 4chan for whom public shaming is a sport.
Empathy isn't a zero-sum game where if you feel bad for the fired guy, you can't also feel bad for Adria Richards (or for a mill worker).
It doesn't seem like there is a lot of empathy for Ms Richards above. She's been judged by a few posters here to be a sociopath making her decisions from the worst of intentions. That is a long distance from a posiotion of empathy. Try to consider how she might have legitimately but awkwardly acted based on a legitimate feeling of offense and now faces terrible consequences.
posted by humanfont at 9:33 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
This exactly.
Middle aged? Really?
Well first I said he looked young, but was rebuked and told he looked mid thirties. I continue to doubt that the entire story is that Playhaven fired him soley because his pic was on twitter along with Richards' accusations alone. Why just him and not the other Dev whose badge was more visible? Playhaven's post left open the door that there was more to the story.
Anyone taking a stand is doing so in regard to the practice of public shaming, not because of the sex or race of the person in question, but rather, regardless of it.
Except for those on Reddit and 4chan for whom public shaming is a sport.
Empathy isn't a zero-sum game where if you feel bad for the fired guy, you can't also feel bad for Adria Richards (or for a mill worker).
It doesn't seem like there is a lot of empathy for Ms Richards above. She's been judged by a few posters here to be a sociopath making her decisions from the worst of intentions. That is a long distance from a posiotion of empathy. Try to consider how she might have legitimately but awkwardly acted based on a legitimate feeling of offense and now faces terrible consequences.
posted by humanfont at 9:33 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
humanfont, it is my understanding, from feminists no less, that the existence of greater crimes does not excuse lesser crimes. This is why "yeah well women in Saudi Arabia aren't even allowed to drive" is not considered an acceptable response to criticisms regarding female inequality in Western countries.
posted by MattMangels at 10:16 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by MattMangels at 10:16 PM on March 25, 2013 [1 favorite]
juiceCake, I read this as an oblique reference to last week's Feminist Housewife thread, where several people argued that anyone making a "low-six-figure" salary is not middle class but upper class, i.e., rich.
Ok, sure, whatever, I'd agree with that, particularly the anyone, whether they be black, blue, green, white, male, female, whatever, but where is the evidence this particular person was making 6 figures?
posted by juiceCake at 10:18 PM on March 25, 2013
Ok, sure, whatever, I'd agree with that, particularly the anyone, whether they be black, blue, green, white, male, female, whatever, but where is the evidence this particular person was making 6 figures?
posted by juiceCake at 10:18 PM on March 25, 2013
This exactly.
Wonderful, so that's the proof. What does "This Precisely" mean in terms of salary? 7, 8, 4?
posted by juiceCake at 10:21 PM on March 25, 2013
Wonderful, so that's the proof. What does "This Precisely" mean in terms of salary? 7, 8, 4?
posted by juiceCake at 10:21 PM on March 25, 2013
Haven't we had this argument before? Making $100,000 annually is technically "six figures" and is not rich in the Bay Area by any means. Not when rent is $3000 a month. The odds of a random developer working for a small startup making more than $200k are very low unless this person was a manager or director or had some unique skill.
posted by GuyZero at 10:24 PM on March 25, 2013
posted by GuyZero at 10:24 PM on March 25, 2013
"She's been judged by a few posters here to be a sociopath making her decisions from the worst of intentions."
By, like, three outta thirty. Compared to a good number of folks who said that even if she didn't do things perfectly, she didn't deserve to be fired and she definitely didn't deserve the hate wave that found her. So characterizing that as anything but a minority view is disingenuous.
"Try to consider how she might have legitimately but awkwardly acted based on a legitimate feeling of offense and now faces terrible consequences."
Even if she'd been a total jerkass about the whole thing, she still doesn't deserve the terrible consequences. Doesn't mean that if she acted like a jerkass, she doesn't deserve some consequences — the same goes for the guys. But since we have no real ability to tell that, why can't we let it go with her not deserving the shitstorm and be good with that?
posted by klangklangston at 10:25 PM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
By, like, three outta thirty. Compared to a good number of folks who said that even if she didn't do things perfectly, she didn't deserve to be fired and she definitely didn't deserve the hate wave that found her. So characterizing that as anything but a minority view is disingenuous.
"Try to consider how she might have legitimately but awkwardly acted based on a legitimate feeling of offense and now faces terrible consequences."
Even if she'd been a total jerkass about the whole thing, she still doesn't deserve the terrible consequences. Doesn't mean that if she acted like a jerkass, she doesn't deserve some consequences — the same goes for the guys. But since we have no real ability to tell that, why can't we let it go with her not deserving the shitstorm and be good with that?
posted by klangklangston at 10:25 PM on March 25, 2013 [2 favorites]
According to the folks at indeed.com the average salary for a python developer in San Fransisco is $121,000/year. The US Census have pegged median household income in San Francisco at $72,947/year.
Also for klangklangston -- per Merriam-Webster Few: not many persons or things. 3 of 30 is a few.
posted by humanfont at 11:33 PM on March 25, 2013
Also for klangklangston -- per Merriam-Webster Few: not many persons or things. 3 of 30 is a few.
posted by humanfont at 11:33 PM on March 25, 2013
According to the folks at indeed.com the average salary for a python developer in San Fransisco is $121,000/year. The US Census have pegged median household income in San Francisco at $72,947/year.
There's a pretty important difference between median and average, especially when it comes to income.
posted by ShutterBun at 12:32 AM on March 26, 2013 [1 favorite]
There's a pretty important difference between median and average, especially when it comes to income.
posted by ShutterBun at 12:32 AM on March 26, 2013 [1 favorite]
Not to derail a derail about middle class income and the various trappings of that concept, but to retread my earlier point about MRAs, this is on the Toronto city website:
posted by Phire at 5:47 AM on March 26, 2013 [1 favorite]
From Misogyny & Misandry to Intersexual DialogueThe subtitle of the first book is "Teaching contempt for men in popular culture". So you know, not quite so fringe as that.
A conversation exploring the effects on both men and women of our current approach to gender...with presentations by Dr. Katherine Young and Dr. Paul Nathanson, authors of Spreading Misandry and Legalizing Misandry
posted by Phire at 5:47 AM on March 26, 2013 [1 favorite]
According to the folks at indeed.com the average salary for a python developer in San Fransisco is $121,000/year. The US Census have pegged median household income in San Francisco at $72,947/year.
Ok. Again though, where is the proof that this individual is rich and/or making 6 figures? This proves nothing. It's mere speculation.
House hold income can include 2 incomes for example, that combined can still add up to less than 6 figures and even less then the average since anyone who knows what average means is that there are lower amounts then the average and higher amounts then the average.
The statement that he is rich is groundless.
posted by juiceCake at 6:23 AM on March 26, 2013
Ok. Again though, where is the proof that this individual is rich and/or making 6 figures? This proves nothing. It's mere speculation.
House hold income can include 2 incomes for example, that combined can still add up to less than 6 figures and even less then the average since anyone who knows what average means is that there are lower amounts then the average and higher amounts then the average.
The statement that he is rich is groundless.
posted by juiceCake at 6:23 AM on March 26, 2013
My understanding of the fired man's current employment status was formed based on his own post on Hacker News 5 days ago where he described having several leads, assistance from a startup guru and set the expectation he wouldn't be unemployed for long. Other sites such as reddit have suggested he has since found new work.
You mean this?
-> "I've already got a few leads, I met with a local start-up guru who's going to introduce me to some CEO's. I feel confidant I'll be employed very shortly."
That was in response to somebody saying they hope he finds work soon. To my reading, he is supporting Richards right to speak (as he has done all along by all accounts) by assuring people he will be ok.
Your reading that five days later "he already has a new job... a signing bonus and a bump in pay" is pure speculation if that is the basis. I don't think a vague "sites such as reddit have suggested" is compelling as supporting evidence.
Why are you so fixated on the idea that mr-hank and his family won't face financial difficulties arising from this that you need to create these distorted "understandings"?
posted by 0 at 7:02 AM on March 26, 2013 [2 favorites]
You mean this?
-> "I've already got a few leads, I met with a local start-up guru who's going to introduce me to some CEO's. I feel confidant I'll be employed very shortly."
That was in response to somebody saying they hope he finds work soon. To my reading, he is supporting Richards right to speak (as he has done all along by all accounts) by assuring people he will be ok.
Your reading that five days later "he already has a new job... a signing bonus and a bump in pay" is pure speculation if that is the basis. I don't think a vague "sites such as reddit have suggested" is compelling as supporting evidence.
Why are you so fixated on the idea that mr-hank and his family won't face financial difficulties arising from this that you need to create these distorted "understandings"?
posted by 0 at 7:02 AM on March 26, 2013 [2 favorites]
I continue to doubt that the entire story is that Playhaven fired him soley because his pic was on twitter along with Richards' accusations alone. Why just him and not the other Dev whose badge was more visible?
do you have any evidence besides some fuzzy feeling? the guy who got fired didn't hesitate to take responsibility for it online, so perhaps, as the two of them were confronted by their employer, he did the same thing then. maybe the guy who got fired was the one who actually made the comments and the other guy just listened and didn't say anything in particular. why sit around and invent something nefarious when there are a variety of simpler explanations?
posted by fallacy of the beard at 8:47 AM on March 26, 2013
do you have any evidence besides some fuzzy feeling? the guy who got fired didn't hesitate to take responsibility for it online, so perhaps, as the two of them were confronted by their employer, he did the same thing then. maybe the guy who got fired was the one who actually made the comments and the other guy just listened and didn't say anything in particular. why sit around and invent something nefarious when there are a variety of simpler explanations?
posted by fallacy of the beard at 8:47 AM on March 26, 2013
The last 20 comments here are comprised mostly of "Yeah? Well how do you know?"
posted by rhizome at 10:36 AM on March 26, 2013
posted by rhizome at 10:36 AM on March 26, 2013
There's a whole MeTa for you two to play in.
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:59 AM on March 26, 2013
posted by the man of twists and turns at 10:59 AM on March 26, 2013
Mod note: klang/humanfont, get out of here and go to MetaTalk
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:03 AM on March 26, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by jessamyn (staff) at 11:03 AM on March 26, 2013 [2 favorites]
Dirty jokes told in public are kind of this obnoxious boy's club that I've never felt like I could actually have membership in. There's a kind of emotional violence that they do – they're told as this sort of test, like "are you man enough to laugh at this?" and if you fail the test you've proven yourself unworthy.
My very first job, when I was 16 or so, was in a factory that made underwear for Marks and Spencers. There were only three men there. There was the boss (who I believe owned the place), there was a guy in the office who kept the books, and there was me. My job was to put rolls of fabric onto a machine and cut it into ribbons which would then be used as trimmings for the underwear.
Every day, I'd clock on and walk across the shop floor past a couple of hundred battle-scarred working class women, a large proportion of whom would be shouting invitations and suggestions about what they'd like to do to me (or what they'd have me do to them.)
I never for a moment realized they were subjecting me to emotional violence.
I wonder if they do the same thing in the Chinese factories where they now make Marks and Spencers underwear?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:05 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
My very first job, when I was 16 or so, was in a factory that made underwear for Marks and Spencers. There were only three men there. There was the boss (who I believe owned the place), there was a guy in the office who kept the books, and there was me. My job was to put rolls of fabric onto a machine and cut it into ribbons which would then be used as trimmings for the underwear.
Every day, I'd clock on and walk across the shop floor past a couple of hundred battle-scarred working class women, a large proportion of whom would be shouting invitations and suggestions about what they'd like to do to me (or what they'd have me do to them.)
I never for a moment realized they were subjecting me to emotional violence.
I wonder if they do the same thing in the Chinese factories where they now make Marks and Spencers underwear?
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:05 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
That said, even I tended to get a little anxious if I happened to be on the bus going past Hunters Handy Hams when the workforce there was finishing their shift.
Those women were rough.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:10 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
Those women were rough.
posted by PeterMcDermott at 2:10 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
An ethicist's take on the whole mess
posted by hydropsyche at 8:41 AM on March 27, 2013 [4 favorites]
posted by hydropsyche at 8:41 AM on March 27, 2013 [4 favorites]
Elise Andrew on science and sexism: ‘Is this really 2013?’
The Internet issued a collective gasp last week at news that the creative force behind its favourite science page, I F***ing Love Science, is a woman.posted by Golden Eternity at 8:48 AM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
Elise Andrew’s defiant, funny and profane manner had apparently led the site’s more than 4.2 million fans to believe it was the product of a male mind.
Predictably, her reveal prompted an onslaught of sexist comments, from “Are there kitchens in space?” to endless threads on her looks. “EVERY COMMENT is about how shocking it is that I’m a woman! Is this really 2013?” Andrew tweeted in response—but her case is hardly unique.
Richards had gone quiet since the craziness of last week, but today she put out a public statement.
posted by 0 at 10:46 AM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by 0 at 10:46 AM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
Do yourself a favor and don't read the comments on that page.
posted by rocket88 at 11:24 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rocket88 at 11:24 AM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
We've learned that there are lots of people (including women!) who don't like Adria Richards, but it seems clear to me that there remains an expectation that a code of conduct that discourages sexualized talk at a tech conference must be enforced by the women attendees, and they absolutely must enforce it properly, with wit and humour and friendliness, so that everyone feels good about it. That's a hell of an expectation, and one can hardly be surprised that someone snapped and overreacted.
While so many people seem to understand Richards' actions as an attempt at public shaming, I understood it as a way of asking everyone else at the conference to pay attention to what's going on around them and act with her in enforcing that code of conduct. Because she was tired of feeling like it was always her job. That's how I made sense of her blog post, anyway. She said this was the last in a long line of conferences, and she described some frankly horrendous commentary that she'd already addressed earlier in the day. I can understand being exhausted by constantly being the one who has to say, "guys, not cool," over and over and over, even though the expectations had already been set prior to the start of the conference, and everyone was already supposed to understand that this kind of thing wasn't appropriate.
And I don't think it's ridiculous for her to look up at the photo of young girls learning to code and think, I don't want you to be in this same situation. I don't think that's an outrageous thought. I don't think she was doing it to self-promote. I don't think she was trying to shame. I think she was just trying to say, can you help me out here? Not just to the conference staff, who by all accounts handled it admirably. To everyone in the audience. To the entire conference. And they should have.
posted by Hildegarde at 11:32 AM on March 27, 2013 [12 favorites]
While so many people seem to understand Richards' actions as an attempt at public shaming, I understood it as a way of asking everyone else at the conference to pay attention to what's going on around them and act with her in enforcing that code of conduct. Because she was tired of feeling like it was always her job. That's how I made sense of her blog post, anyway. She said this was the last in a long line of conferences, and she described some frankly horrendous commentary that she'd already addressed earlier in the day. I can understand being exhausted by constantly being the one who has to say, "guys, not cool," over and over and over, even though the expectations had already been set prior to the start of the conference, and everyone was already supposed to understand that this kind of thing wasn't appropriate.
And I don't think it's ridiculous for her to look up at the photo of young girls learning to code and think, I don't want you to be in this same situation. I don't think that's an outrageous thought. I don't think she was doing it to self-promote. I don't think she was trying to shame. I think she was just trying to say, can you help me out here? Not just to the conference staff, who by all accounts handled it admirably. To everyone in the audience. To the entire conference. And they should have.
posted by Hildegarde at 11:32 AM on March 27, 2013 [12 favorites]
Instead, I want to be an integral part of a diverse, core group of individuals that comes together in a spirit of healing and openness to devise answers to the many questions that have arisen in the last week.
It is unfortunate that she does not understand or acknowledge that her actions precipitated the ugliness that followed, and while it is admirable she wants to help with resolving this, given her actions, perhaps she should step out of the spotlight.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:56 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
It is unfortunate that she does not understand or acknowledge that her actions precipitated the ugliness that followed, and while it is admirable she wants to help with resolving this, given her actions, perhaps she should step out of the spotlight.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:56 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
In related news: Really? IGDA Party at GDC Brings On the Female Dancers.
Brings to mind shameful (IMHO) 'booth babes' at CES, past COMDEXs and other tech conferences/conventions.
Brings to mind shameful (IMHO) 'booth babes' at CES, past COMDEXs and other tech conferences/conventions.
CES Doesn't Think Booth Babes Are A Problem. Here's Why They're Wrong.posted by ericb at 2:47 PM on March 27, 2013
Great comment, Hildegarde.
posted by sweetkid at 2:58 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by sweetkid at 2:58 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
I have been following, favoriting, reading all the links and even yelling at my screen occasionally, but this is my first comment since Donglegate began.
First, not that it matters, but to put one derail to bed, the average salary for a Playhaven employee, according to Simply Hired, is $66K, not six figures. So there's that. Also, as a 46 year-old, I don't think I'd characterize a young 30-something professional as "middle-aged", but that could just be my own denial about my advanced age getting in the way. ;)
More importantly, if anything positive comes out of all this, I hope it is that going forward we are all a bit more mindful of how our own actions affect others as well as ourselves, no matter how well-intentioned, or even unintentional they might be. So I agree with you, BlazecockPileon, that making herself the focus of any more attention is not in Richards', or anyone else concerned's, best interests right now.
I want to thank Jacobian for taking the time, in what truly must have been a hellacious last few days, to come into this thread with the express purpose of answering any questions or concerns anyone had about how PyCon handled all this. That's admirable conduct on their part, all around, and though I don't know a damn thing about python development, fwiw I'm coming away from all this with respect and appreciation for the folks behind PyCon.
One thing I haven't seen anyone bring up that also concerned me, btw, is that Jesse from PyCon and his family received disturbing phone calls because of this kerfuffle (which I learned from the timeline linked above). I think that everyone here seems to agree (amazingly, for Metafilter) that PyCon alone acted entirely appropriately in this debacle, and I hope that Jesse's family aren't bothered any further.
I also hope we continue to have the kind of thoughtful debate we've had here. I know there were some deletions, and I'm sure the mods were kept really busy monitoring this thread, but I learned a lot from all of you, especially dejah420, whose comments lent insightful perspective to what it is actually like for a woman working in tech right now.
posted by misha at 3:16 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
First, not that it matters, but to put one derail to bed, the average salary for a Playhaven employee, according to Simply Hired, is $66K, not six figures. So there's that. Also, as a 46 year-old, I don't think I'd characterize a young 30-something professional as "middle-aged", but that could just be my own denial about my advanced age getting in the way. ;)
More importantly, if anything positive comes out of all this, I hope it is that going forward we are all a bit more mindful of how our own actions affect others as well as ourselves, no matter how well-intentioned, or even unintentional they might be. So I agree with you, BlazecockPileon, that making herself the focus of any more attention is not in Richards', or anyone else concerned's, best interests right now.
I want to thank Jacobian for taking the time, in what truly must have been a hellacious last few days, to come into this thread with the express purpose of answering any questions or concerns anyone had about how PyCon handled all this. That's admirable conduct on their part, all around, and though I don't know a damn thing about python development, fwiw I'm coming away from all this with respect and appreciation for the folks behind PyCon.
One thing I haven't seen anyone bring up that also concerned me, btw, is that Jesse from PyCon and his family received disturbing phone calls because of this kerfuffle (which I learned from the timeline linked above). I think that everyone here seems to agree (amazingly, for Metafilter) that PyCon alone acted entirely appropriately in this debacle, and I hope that Jesse's family aren't bothered any further.
I also hope we continue to have the kind of thoughtful debate we've had here. I know there were some deletions, and I'm sure the mods were kept really busy monitoring this thread, but I learned a lot from all of you, especially dejah420, whose comments lent insightful perspective to what it is actually like for a woman working in tech right now.
posted by misha at 3:16 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
but I learned a lot from all of you, especially dejah420, whose comments lent insightful perspective to what it is actually like for a woman working in tech right now.
With all due respect to dejah420, her viewpoint does not represent the majority viewpoint of women I know working in tech, myself included. It's what many people here want to hear, that Adria overreacted and did the wrong thing, but there are many of us that don't think this is the cut and dried case. If all you're hearing is "some women in tech have experienced sexism and think she overreacted", you're not really listening to the full conversation.
I do think that the way things played out has in many ways made things worse for women in tech, but it is not Adria's fault that this is so. This incident just revealed the ugly underbelly of sexism (and racism) that has always been there, and all the "playing by the rules" that women in tech might or might not do won't make that underbelly go away. The minute you transgress in a way that causes consequences for men, accidentally or intentionally, the fury of a thousand trolls is unleashed onto you. That's what we've learned. You must walk the line. Maybe dejah420 is comfortable walking that line and thinks it's easier and will lead to improvements in the tech culture. I don't personally agree. Women in tech are not actually a unified front on all (or even most) issues. FWIW, I think dejah420 is making it harder to have real conversations about the silencing of women who speak out in the tech industry by following the unthreatening party line of how women should and should not behave in given scenarios, and disparaging the way another person reacted in a particular situation where none of us was actually there and knows all of the details.
posted by ch1x0r at 4:52 PM on March 27, 2013 [6 favorites]
With all due respect to dejah420, her viewpoint does not represent the majority viewpoint of women I know working in tech, myself included. It's what many people here want to hear, that Adria overreacted and did the wrong thing, but there are many of us that don't think this is the cut and dried case. If all you're hearing is "some women in tech have experienced sexism and think she overreacted", you're not really listening to the full conversation.
I do think that the way things played out has in many ways made things worse for women in tech, but it is not Adria's fault that this is so. This incident just revealed the ugly underbelly of sexism (and racism) that has always been there, and all the "playing by the rules" that women in tech might or might not do won't make that underbelly go away. The minute you transgress in a way that causes consequences for men, accidentally or intentionally, the fury of a thousand trolls is unleashed onto you. That's what we've learned. You must walk the line. Maybe dejah420 is comfortable walking that line and thinks it's easier and will lead to improvements in the tech culture. I don't personally agree. Women in tech are not actually a unified front on all (or even most) issues. FWIW, I think dejah420 is making it harder to have real conversations about the silencing of women who speak out in the tech industry by following the unthreatening party line of how women should and should not behave in given scenarios, and disparaging the way another person reacted in a particular situation where none of us was actually there and knows all of the details.
posted by ch1x0r at 4:52 PM on March 27, 2013 [6 favorites]
So it seems that this is the latest MRA thing all over Twitter.
Which just goes to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Hrrrrrrrm.
posted by Artw at 6:37 PM on March 27, 2013
Which just goes to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
Hrrrrrrrm.
posted by Artw at 6:37 PM on March 27, 2013
ch1x0r, could you explain to me how this this incident reveals racism? I can see how, in America in 2013, any time you have people of two different races involved in something there is a whole unpleasant history of race relations (well, let's not be squeamish, a whole horrible history of mistreatment of "people of color") laying around, ready to complicate things. But I can't see anything beyond that in this incident.
(In all honesty, there is one slim way I could see this involving race, but the connection is about as tenuous as bad crossword puzzle clue, so I'd rather not inject it into this conversation unnecessarily.)
posted by benito.strauss at 7:03 PM on March 27, 2013
(In all honesty, there is one slim way I could see this involving race, but the connection is about as tenuous as bad crossword puzzle clue, so I'd rather not inject it into this conversation unnecessarily.)
posted by benito.strauss at 7:03 PM on March 27, 2013
ch1x0r, could you explain to me how this this incident reveals racism?
At a minimum in the fact that many of the slurs cast at Adria by various internet trolls were explicitly racial slurs. I think the reaction is mostly because she is female, but she definitely then got random racist bullshit thrown on top of it. There are people that speculate more than that but it's a speculation that I'm not comfortable personally getting into.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:11 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
At a minimum in the fact that many of the slurs cast at Adria by various internet trolls were explicitly racial slurs. I think the reaction is mostly because she is female, but she definitely then got random racist bullshit thrown on top of it. There are people that speculate more than that but it's a speculation that I'm not comfortable personally getting into.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:11 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
The problem with this kickstarter thing is that people think they have the right to an opinion about everything. Tell me that a millionaire is using her privileged position to run a fake fundraiser so that her privileged daughter "can go" to some camp for privileged kids and I'll say "Wow, that sucks." Tell me that someone encouraged her daughter to raise her own tuition so she can go off and learn how to code, giving her supporters an actual game in return for their assistance, and I'll say "Wow, that's cool!" Any opinion I have is totally superficial and is defined by the way the thing was presented to me.
The Adria Richards affair is similar: most people here, including me, only have an opinion about it because we've been invited to have one. Yes, I suppose my support for a non-oppressive society means that I have some interest in correct public behavior, but there are zillions of other things that I should be worried about first. What Adria Richards should or should not have done, or whether that guy should have bit his tongue, aren't really on the list of things that affect me or that I can affect.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:12 PM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
The Adria Richards affair is similar: most people here, including me, only have an opinion about it because we've been invited to have one. Yes, I suppose my support for a non-oppressive society means that I have some interest in correct public behavior, but there are zillions of other things that I should be worried about first. What Adria Richards should or should not have done, or whether that guy should have bit his tongue, aren't really on the list of things that affect me or that I can affect.
posted by Joe in Australia at 7:12 PM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
ch1x0r: "FWIW, I think dejah420 is making it harder to have real conversations about the silencing of women who speak out in the tech industry by following the unthreatening party line of how women should and should not behave in given scenarios, and disparaging the way another person reacted in a particular situation where none of us was actually there and knows all of the details."
This cuts both ways. Just as we don't know whether it was unreasonable for Richards to react in the way we did, we don't know the real story of the moments leading up to her tweet and blog post. dejah420 can certainly defend her own comments without my help, but speaking only for myself, I find your insinuation that she's just "following the party line" to be very dismissive and condescending, with the clear implication being that she hasn't looked at the facts as we all know them and determined that Richards deserves some blame for the situation. Read these excerpts of dejah420's commentary from this thread:
Yes, these clowns had a responsibility to shut their pieholes and maintain a professional attitude with no wiener jokes during the conference, but I really have a hard time blindly accepting the notion that their actions were in any way sexist, with the charge of racism being even more tenuous and reckless given the very sketchy picture we have of the situation.
If you're going to ask for others to not fill in the gaps with details charitable toward the two men in this situation, I think you ought to consider that you might be filling in many of those same gaps with your own biases. We ought to give women the benefit of the doubt whenever it comes to a sexual harassment claim, but when there are facts that cast the situation in a different light, you can't just shoo them away with accusations that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow deluded, misled, or "following the unthreatening party line."
posted by tonycpsu at 7:12 PM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
This cuts both ways. Just as we don't know whether it was unreasonable for Richards to react in the way we did, we don't know the real story of the moments leading up to her tweet and blog post. dejah420 can certainly defend her own comments without my help, but speaking only for myself, I find your insinuation that she's just "following the party line" to be very dismissive and condescending, with the clear implication being that she hasn't looked at the facts as we all know them and determined that Richards deserves some blame for the situation. Read these excerpts of dejah420's commentary from this thread:
I believe that what Adria did was both an overreaction, and in the long term, a damaging thing for other women who attend conferences. I'm not suggesting that women should tolerate sexism, but it's also ridiculous to publicly humiliate and destroy the career of someone who wasn't even speaking TO her.Does this read like someone who's just being flippant and reflexively blaming the woman? To me, it reads like someone who understands the real-world consequences of sexism, yet still sees this as a step backwards for women attending conferences in the future, because it plays into the hands of the MRA assholes and other observers who see someone with a history of having a hair trigger on issues of a vaguely sexual nature, none of which were directed at her based on what we know of the exchange.
...
I'm upset because I've spent almost 30 years of my life fighting REAL sexism in tech. Like being asked to go get coffee for the team, when I'm the team leader, like being asked to promote a man over a woman because "he's a provider and she's going to get married", like seeing contemporaries make less money because they have boobs.
I'm furious when people take the fight I've been fighting for all these years, and turn it in to "I"m gonna have someone thrown out of a conference, and publicly shame them for the rest of their lives because I don't like what they said, even though I didn't hear the whole conversation, I don't understand the inside joke".
Yes, these clowns had a responsibility to shut their pieholes and maintain a professional attitude with no wiener jokes during the conference, but I really have a hard time blindly accepting the notion that their actions were in any way sexist, with the charge of racism being even more tenuous and reckless given the very sketchy picture we have of the situation.
If you're going to ask for others to not fill in the gaps with details charitable toward the two men in this situation, I think you ought to consider that you might be filling in many of those same gaps with your own biases. We ought to give women the benefit of the doubt whenever it comes to a sexual harassment claim, but when there are facts that cast the situation in a different light, you can't just shoo them away with accusations that anyone who disagrees with you is somehow deluded, misled, or "following the unthreatening party line."
posted by tonycpsu at 7:12 PM on March 27, 2013 [3 favorites]
At a minimum in the fact that many of the slurs cast at Adria by various internet trolls were explicitly racial slurs.
Ah, gotcha, thanks. I thought "this incident" was referring to what happened at PyCon. I confess I haven't read anything the internet trolls were saying, 'cause I assumed they'd be horrible, horrible people saying horrible, horrible things.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:23 PM on March 27, 2013
Ah, gotcha, thanks. I thought "this incident" was referring to what happened at PyCon. I confess I haven't read anything the internet trolls were saying, 'cause I assumed they'd be horrible, horrible people saying horrible, horrible things.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:23 PM on March 27, 2013
tonycpsu: with the charge of racism being even more tenuous
The racism wasn't imputed to the two men at PyCon, but to the internet trolls. I made the same reading as you, which ch1x0r cleared up.
This is the trouble we get into when an incident is viewed as picking which side is right and which side is wrong, as opposed to my preferred view, where both/all participants can be wrong, each in their own way, and each to their own degree. (They can also each be right, each in their own way/degree, but I like stating it the other way.)
My favorite example is bicyclist vs. car drivers. The car drivers point at the 5% of bicyclist who bike like crazy idiots and say "Bicyclist are dangerous." Meanwhile, the bicyclists look at the 5% of drivers who threaten their lives on the road and say "Motorists are killers." 95% of the people are doing right, but 100% of people are angry, and not at the 5% responsible for all the problems.
People suck.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:36 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
The racism wasn't imputed to the two men at PyCon, but to the internet trolls. I made the same reading as you, which ch1x0r cleared up.
This is the trouble we get into when an incident is viewed as picking which side is right and which side is wrong, as opposed to my preferred view, where both/all participants can be wrong, each in their own way, and each to their own degree. (They can also each be right, each in their own way/degree, but I like stating it the other way.)
My favorite example is bicyclist vs. car drivers. The car drivers point at the 5% of bicyclist who bike like crazy idiots and say "Bicyclist are dangerous." Meanwhile, the bicyclists look at the 5% of drivers who threaten their lives on the road and say "Motorists are killers." 95% of the people are doing right, but 100% of people are angry, and not at the 5% responsible for all the problems.
People suck.
posted by benito.strauss at 7:36 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
tonycpsu, in your quoted text, dejah420 is saying exactly that it's not real sexism that Adria experienced because it's not to the level of get me coffee and I'll promote others over you, and to me that is bullshit. I think that kind of concern trolling hardship oneupmanship does none of us any good, and many other women in tech agree. There are also many women in tech of dejah420's point of view or even more extreme, as well.
I'm not interested in arguing the merits of the case with you. But to say that women in tech mostly have a perspective that Adria raised a fuss over something that doesn't reach the bar of "serious enough" is incorrect. So don't walk around with the idea that the female tech perspective agrees with you that Adria set equality in tech back by overreacting, because many of us think that all she did was turn over a rock and reveal what was always there.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:43 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm not interested in arguing the merits of the case with you. But to say that women in tech mostly have a perspective that Adria raised a fuss over something that doesn't reach the bar of "serious enough" is incorrect. So don't walk around with the idea that the female tech perspective agrees with you that Adria set equality in tech back by overreacting, because many of us think that all she did was turn over a rock and reveal what was always there.
posted by ch1x0r at 7:43 PM on March 27, 2013 [2 favorites]
ch1x0r: "But to say that women in tech mostly have a perspective that Adria raised a fuss over something that doesn't reach the bar of "serious enough" is incorrect. So don't walk around with the idea that the female tech perspective agrees with you that Adria set equality in tech back by overreacting, because many of us think that all she did was turn over a rock and reveal what was always there."
Please to be pointing out where I said that. Thanks.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:47 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
Please to be pointing out where I said that. Thanks.
posted by tonycpsu at 7:47 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
This cuts both ways.
No it doesn't, because "privilege". Or so I've been informed.
posted by Jimbob at 7:55 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
No it doesn't, because "privilege". Or so I've been informed.
posted by Jimbob at 7:55 PM on March 27, 2013 [1 favorite]
Please to be pointing out where I said that. Thanks.
Given that the whole point of my original comment was that many women in tech don't agree with dejah420's POV and indeed find it problematic for various reasons, what is even your point in responding to me if you aren't interested in discussing that? That is all I am addressing, because I think that many men in the thread want to have a "woman in tech seal of approval" for their opinion, and I think it's important to note that there is no one "woman in tech" position.
posted by ch1x0r at 8:04 PM on March 27, 2013
Given that the whole point of my original comment was that many women in tech don't agree with dejah420's POV and indeed find it problematic for various reasons, what is even your point in responding to me if you aren't interested in discussing that? That is all I am addressing, because I think that many men in the thread want to have a "woman in tech seal of approval" for their opinion, and I think it's important to note that there is no one "woman in tech" position.
posted by ch1x0r at 8:04 PM on March 27, 2013
Yeah, but that's actually not all you were addressing. If anyone was sincerely confused as to whether dejah420 speaks for all women in tech, I'm glad you've corrected their misunderstanding. But in addition to making that point, you also called her ability to fairly judge the merits of the situation into question, suggesting that she's merely falling into line with the party line coming from people who are hostile or toward women, or at best indifferent toward sexism. This casts your own judgement of the underlying events as the only logical one, with any other interpretation being merely the result of delusion or a willingness to follow others.
You've said you'd prefer not to discuss the merits of the case, and I'll respect that wish, but I find your demand that others not make assumptions about the encounter puzzling when you're not willing to discuss your own interpretation of those same events, because you're essentially claiming a right to use certain data points to advance your argument without being willing to defend them or examine your own biases. In my opinion, that's not the kind of frank, open discussion this topic deserves.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:43 PM on March 27, 2013 [5 favorites]
You've said you'd prefer not to discuss the merits of the case, and I'll respect that wish, but I find your demand that others not make assumptions about the encounter puzzling when you're not willing to discuss your own interpretation of those same events, because you're essentially claiming a right to use certain data points to advance your argument without being willing to defend them or examine your own biases. In my opinion, that's not the kind of frank, open discussion this topic deserves.
posted by tonycpsu at 8:43 PM on March 27, 2013 [5 favorites]
ch1x0r, I'm the one that originally remarked on how I personallys appreciated dejah420's perspective as that of a woman who works in a tech field. Maybe you are operating under the misconception from that that I'm a man?!
I'm not, for the record. Though I don't work in tech, I'm a woman who has at least a decade on you (looks like dejah420 and I are of a similar age), and I've endured sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace before. I've also worked alongside some amazing men. I understand what dejah420 meant exactly, and the distinction she was making between actual sexism in the workplace and what happened with Adria Richards at PyCon. Adria may have been offended by what she heard (though I personally doubt it), but whether she was or not, this was not an example of sexism, or sexual harassment in the workplace. These men made no sexist remarks (though perhaps sexual innuendoes) and they were not her employers.
Of course all women in tech don't agree with each other, as all women don't agree with each other! We're all individuals, after all. The fact that you acknowledge that makes it all the more puzzling to me that you would characterize dejah420's perspective as "concern trolling hardship oneupmanship", which I really agree with tonycpus is an incredibly uncharitable view for you to take. Why you can give Adia the benefit of the doubt when you have nothing more to go on from her than her own grandiose, self-serving blog posts (Joan of Arc, really?!), and not extend dejah420 the same courtesy is beyond me.
That being said, I think what tonycpsu took issue to in your comment was not the opinion you held, but rather your dismissiveness of those who disagreed with you, exacerbated by your attributing statements to him that he simply did not make.
posted by misha at 9:01 PM on March 27, 2013 [12 favorites]
I'm not, for the record. Though I don't work in tech, I'm a woman who has at least a decade on you (looks like dejah420 and I are of a similar age), and I've endured sexual harassment and discrimination in the workplace before. I've also worked alongside some amazing men. I understand what dejah420 meant exactly, and the distinction she was making between actual sexism in the workplace and what happened with Adria Richards at PyCon. Adria may have been offended by what she heard (though I personally doubt it), but whether she was or not, this was not an example of sexism, or sexual harassment in the workplace. These men made no sexist remarks (though perhaps sexual innuendoes) and they were not her employers.
Of course all women in tech don't agree with each other, as all women don't agree with each other! We're all individuals, after all. The fact that you acknowledge that makes it all the more puzzling to me that you would characterize dejah420's perspective as "concern trolling hardship oneupmanship", which I really agree with tonycpus is an incredibly uncharitable view for you to take. Why you can give Adia the benefit of the doubt when you have nothing more to go on from her than her own grandiose, self-serving blog posts (Joan of Arc, really?!), and not extend dejah420 the same courtesy is beyond me.
That being said, I think what tonycpsu took issue to in your comment was not the opinion you held, but rather your dismissiveness of those who disagreed with you, exacerbated by your attributing statements to him that he simply did not make.
posted by misha at 9:01 PM on March 27, 2013 [12 favorites]
Related: Twitter can get you fired! Here's (more) proof
FireMe! provides a real-time list of public tweets that may double as firing offenses. New Scientist first wrote about the new system, developed by research team at Germany's University of Hanover.posted by ericb at 6:50 AM on March 28, 2013 [1 favorite]
ericb: "In related news: Really? IGDA Party at GDC Brings On the Female Dancers."
IGDA draws backlash, member resignations over female dancers at GDC party
posted by the_artificer at 1:27 PM on March 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
IGDA draws backlash, member resignations over female dancers at GDC party
posted by the_artificer at 1:27 PM on March 28, 2013 [3 favorites]
Ugh, that Kate Edwards apology about the IGDA thing is weaker than weak. It doesn't even rise to "passing the buck."
"We regret the reactions they've given us."
posted by rhizome at 2:49 PM on March 28, 2013
"We regret the reactions they've given us."
posted by rhizome at 2:49 PM on March 28, 2013
Donglegate: why the tech community hates feminists is interesting also.
posted by jeather at 8:14 AM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
In short, it requires geeks to re-examine their own revenge fantasies of being outsiders who now rule the world and admit that they might, themselves, be actively excluding others.Because if you do speak out, first, you will have spoken out in the wrong way, no matter what way you did it. Too mean! Too nice! Too public! Too private! Too minor to complain about! How could anyone know since you never complained about the minor easy to fix things! And then you will get threats.
This is why seemingly tiny, individual acts of sexism — like innocent dongle jokes – matter. Such “microaggressions” combine to reinforce structural sexism. MRAs and garden-variety geeks expressing similar attitudes may not be radical activists … but they’re radical defenders of the status quo.
In such a context, what happened to Richards has very little to do with the impact of her tweet and much more to do with deterring future women from speaking out.
posted by jeather at 8:14 AM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
IGDA draws backlash, member resignations over female dancers at GDC party
Huh. They used the same party company that gave them female dancers last year:
Kazemi added that he had "massive reservations using YetiZen as our sponsor the second year in a row after they burned us last year by using scantily clad women," and apologized for not speaking up about the partnership before the party.
Stupid squared.
posted by mediareport at 8:33 AM on March 29, 2013
Huh. They used the same party company that gave them female dancers last year:
Kazemi added that he had "massive reservations using YetiZen as our sponsor the second year in a row after they burned us last year by using scantily clad women," and apologized for not speaking up about the partnership before the party.
Stupid squared.
posted by mediareport at 8:33 AM on March 29, 2013
ArtW: That would be pretty shitty if it was the case. Perhaps Jacobian can shed some light on process here?
Sorry, missed this until now; following this thread has been hard.
Our staff manual for handling incidents is public, and you can take a look. We followed it closely in both cases -- in fact, I'm really glad we had one because having a playbook really helped us be sure we were being fair.
The basic outline is: meet with everyone involved, get every side of the story; meet with staff and determine what sort of response is warranted; communicate the response to all parties; make a public statement if necessary.
In this case, there wasn't really any disagreement about what had actually happened -- everyone told the same version of events -- so that part wasn't complicated.
Of course, when it comes to the actual response and/or sanctions there's a fair bit of judgement involved here. We're not a court; we don't have anything like "sentencing guidelines." So it's up to the staff to consider the severity of the incident and respond accordingly. In the other case we dealt with, we felt that using illegal drugs in a conference venue during an event was a severe enough lapse of judgement that it warranted fairly severe sanctions -- ejection, and a two-year ban. In this case, we felt that the jokes were clearly out of line, but didn't warrant any sanctions beyond a formal reprimand.
So would we have reported the incident to their employers? In this case, no; we felt that the reprimand was sufficient. I can certainly imagine hypothetical situations where we *would* feel that it was necessary to report an incident to someone's employer. Consider someone staffing a sponsor booth and harassing women who walk by (a thing that's happened at other conferences); I can imagine that in a case like that we'd feel that the sponsor had a need to know.
Ultimately, hard rules are impossible. We're talking about human behavior here, not computer code. As programmers I think we want to be able to have perfect, algorithmic rules… but we can't when it comes to human behavior. So, ultimately, it's almost always going to come down to a judgement call. That's exactly what happened in this case: we received some complaints, discussed the issue internally and then with the attendee, and came to consensus on the response.
I'm quite comfortable with this: I've been around these sorts of things for long enough to know that no hard and fast set of rules will ever truly encompass human behavior. And I certainly don't want to have to publish some massive list of "Do Nots". The vast (VAST) majority of the Python community has good judgement and an appropriate set of boundaries; for the few people and events at the margins, well, we have staff.
posted by jacobian at 8:51 AM on March 29, 2013 [14 favorites]
Sorry, missed this until now; following this thread has been hard.
Our staff manual for handling incidents is public, and you can take a look. We followed it closely in both cases -- in fact, I'm really glad we had one because having a playbook really helped us be sure we were being fair.
The basic outline is: meet with everyone involved, get every side of the story; meet with staff and determine what sort of response is warranted; communicate the response to all parties; make a public statement if necessary.
In this case, there wasn't really any disagreement about what had actually happened -- everyone told the same version of events -- so that part wasn't complicated.
Of course, when it comes to the actual response and/or sanctions there's a fair bit of judgement involved here. We're not a court; we don't have anything like "sentencing guidelines." So it's up to the staff to consider the severity of the incident and respond accordingly. In the other case we dealt with, we felt that using illegal drugs in a conference venue during an event was a severe enough lapse of judgement that it warranted fairly severe sanctions -- ejection, and a two-year ban. In this case, we felt that the jokes were clearly out of line, but didn't warrant any sanctions beyond a formal reprimand.
So would we have reported the incident to their employers? In this case, no; we felt that the reprimand was sufficient. I can certainly imagine hypothetical situations where we *would* feel that it was necessary to report an incident to someone's employer. Consider someone staffing a sponsor booth and harassing women who walk by (a thing that's happened at other conferences); I can imagine that in a case like that we'd feel that the sponsor had a need to know.
Ultimately, hard rules are impossible. We're talking about human behavior here, not computer code. As programmers I think we want to be able to have perfect, algorithmic rules… but we can't when it comes to human behavior. So, ultimately, it's almost always going to come down to a judgement call. That's exactly what happened in this case: we received some complaints, discussed the issue internally and then with the attendee, and came to consensus on the response.
I'm quite comfortable with this: I've been around these sorts of things for long enough to know that no hard and fast set of rules will ever truly encompass human behavior. And I certainly don't want to have to publish some massive list of "Do Nots". The vast (VAST) majority of the Python community has good judgement and an appropriate set of boundaries; for the few people and events at the margins, well, we have staff.
posted by jacobian at 8:51 AM on March 29, 2013 [14 favorites]
Donglegate: why the tech community hates feminists is interesting also.
Interesting article, and I had not yet heard of Lewis's Law: the comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.
The comments on that article then immediately proved Lewis's Law.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 9:50 AM on March 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
Interesting article, and I had not yet heard of Lewis's Law: the comments on any article about feminism justify feminism.
The comments on that article then immediately proved Lewis's Law.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 9:50 AM on March 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
The comments on that article then immediately proved Lewis's Law.
Well the title sure isn't helping. Is there a law that covers stories about contentious topics being framed polemically? Linkbait for sure, at any rate.
posted by rhizome at 10:58 AM on March 29, 2013
Well the title sure isn't helping. Is there a law that covers stories about contentious topics being framed polemically? Linkbait for sure, at any rate.
posted by rhizome at 10:58 AM on March 29, 2013
jacobian, thanks to all of you involved with organizing and running PyCon for having really sane policies in place and handling this really well. (And thank you very much for coming back and commenting here. I know this is a really long thread to slog through. especially considering all the other stuff you must be having to read and respond to.)
posted by nangar at 11:16 AM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by nangar at 11:16 AM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Well the title ["Why the Tech Community Hates Feminists"] sure isn't helping. Is there a law .....?
It's bikes vs. cars. (Yes, I'm deliberately trying to turn my comment into a popular and convenient meme.)
posted by benito.strauss at 12:07 PM on March 29, 2013
It's bikes vs. cars. (Yes, I'm deliberately trying to turn my comment into a popular and convenient meme.)
posted by benito.strauss at 12:07 PM on March 29, 2013
Well the title sure isn't helping. Is there a law that covers stories about contentious topics being framed polemically? Linkbait for sure, at any rate.
I would prefer to no longer blame authors and headlines for the egregious sexism of commenters.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:19 PM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
I would prefer to no longer blame authors and headlines for the egregious sexism of commenters.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:19 PM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
The way I've heard it, one shouldn't blame authors for headline titles.
I've read too many reporters saying "I didn't write the title, some editor did, and they really misrepresented the story I wrote."
posted by benito.strauss at 12:40 PM on March 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
I've read too many reporters saying "I didn't write the title, some editor did, and they really misrepresented the story I wrote."
posted by benito.strauss at 12:40 PM on March 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
I'm not presenting a totalizing argument. However, what you prefer and the reality of framing may be at odds in practice. Unless maybe you deny the existence of the concepts of framing and context? I don't think a perception of egregiousness negates real-world affects.
posted by rhizome at 12:42 PM on March 29, 2013
posted by rhizome at 12:42 PM on March 29, 2013
Unless maybe you deny the existence of the concepts of framing and context?
I deny that any framing or context earns or justifies sexism. Does it happen? Of course. But it shouldn't. And there has been a lot of "what did they expect"-ing going on in this thread, and I would prefer that we replace it with a "what should she expect," and the answer being that she should be able to expect not to be met with a whirlwind of sexist abuse.
But, then, I gues Is also disagree with your assertion. In my experience, whatever the headline, the comments would have been the same.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:46 PM on March 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
I deny that any framing or context earns or justifies sexism. Does it happen? Of course. But it shouldn't. And there has been a lot of "what did they expect"-ing going on in this thread, and I would prefer that we replace it with a "what should she expect," and the answer being that she should be able to expect not to be met with a whirlwind of sexist abuse.
But, then, I gues Is also disagree with your assertion. In my experience, whatever the headline, the comments would have been the same.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 12:46 PM on March 29, 2013 [2 favorites]
In my experience, whatever the headline, the comments would have been the same.
Is there a story published under two disparate headlines with separate sets of comments that we can use to test this certainty?
posted by rhizome at 1:07 PM on March 29, 2013
Is there a story published under two disparate headlines with separate sets of comments that we can use to test this certainty?
posted by rhizome at 1:07 PM on March 29, 2013
If that's a research project you wish to undertake, be my guest, but I am not convinced that it would make a difference to my larger point, which is that whatever the headline or content, it neither invites nor justifies sexist abuse.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 1:38 PM on March 29, 2013
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 1:38 PM on March 29, 2013
You are so resolute about your conclusion that I thought you may have already researched it.
posted by rhizome at 1:59 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by rhizome at 1:59 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
You're being weirdly picky. I am resolute in my conclusion because it is consistent with my experience, which is a prefaced it with "in my experience."
Is there some benefit to arguing this point?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 2:03 PM on March 29, 2013
Is there some benefit to arguing this point?
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 2:03 PM on March 29, 2013
the answer being that she should be able to expect not to be met with a whirlwind of sexist abuse.
thank you! this is my issue in this whole incident. So many of the comments (Wired comment section included, but yea don't even go there) seem to go..."Richards should not be experiencing this level of sexist/racist abuse, full stop. "Yea but she tweeted this picture, what did she expect, goes both ways etc." "They don't MEAN the abuse, they are just frustrated because she tweeted this picture." And then lots of discussions of tone, and what these people sitting behind their computers would have done in her place.
Belittling/handwaving the abuse away.
posted by sweetkid at 2:31 PM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
thank you! this is my issue in this whole incident. So many of the comments (Wired comment section included, but yea don't even go there) seem to go..."Richards should not be experiencing this level of sexist/racist abuse, full stop. "Yea but she tweeted this picture, what did she expect, goes both ways etc." "They don't MEAN the abuse, they are just frustrated because she tweeted this picture." And then lots of discussions of tone, and what these people sitting behind their computers would have done in her place.
Belittling/handwaving the abuse away.
posted by sweetkid at 2:31 PM on March 29, 2013 [4 favorites]
Also the picture that goes with the Wired article is perfect.
posted by sweetkid at 2:34 PM on March 29, 2013
posted by sweetkid at 2:34 PM on March 29, 2013
Is there some benefit to arguing this point?
Sure. As a member of "the tech community," I've been told by that headline that I "hate feminists." I think that might affect the way I comment on that article if I did do so, yet here you are telling me that it doesn't matter, that I can only respond however I would have regardless of the headline, regardless of content, which is an assertion that sounds positively insane to me.
I just thought I'd inquire about any background to all that.
posted by rhizome at 2:54 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sure. As a member of "the tech community," I've been told by that headline that I "hate feminists." I think that might affect the way I comment on that article if I did do so, yet here you are telling me that it doesn't matter, that I can only respond however I would have regardless of the headline, regardless of content, which is an assertion that sounds positively insane to me.
I just thought I'd inquire about any background to all that.
posted by rhizome at 2:54 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
As a member of "the tech community," I've been told by that headline that I "hate feminists."
Hmm. No, this is not exactly the case. I'm a member of the "tech community" and I don't feel like I've been told this.
posted by sweetkid at 3:01 PM on March 29, 2013
Hmm. No, this is not exactly the case. I'm a member of the "tech community" and I don't feel like I've been told this.
posted by sweetkid at 3:01 PM on March 29, 2013
As a member of "the tech community," I've been told by that headline that I "hate feminists." I think that might affect the way I comment on that article if I did do so, yet here you are telling me that it doesn't matter, that I can only respond however I would have regardless of the headline, regardless of content, which is an assertion that sounds positively insane to me.
I'm presuming that you're not making the case that you would then be justified in trolling the comments section with sexist comments, so it seems to me we are talking around each other.
Look, I'm sorry you felt the headline addressed you specifically. Had you read the article, you would discovered it only addresses itself to members of the tech community that engage in specific behavior, and, if you do not engage in that behavior, it doesn't apply to you. At that moment, I presume you would have responded to the actual content of the article, rather than pick a fight with a misreading of the headline.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:02 PM on March 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
I'm presuming that you're not making the case that you would then be justified in trolling the comments section with sexist comments, so it seems to me we are talking around each other.
Look, I'm sorry you felt the headline addressed you specifically. Had you read the article, you would discovered it only addresses itself to members of the tech community that engage in specific behavior, and, if you do not engage in that behavior, it doesn't apply to you. At that moment, I presume you would have responded to the actual content of the article, rather than pick a fight with a misreading of the headline.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 3:02 PM on March 29, 2013 [3 favorites]
I read that line differently. I don't read it as saying there are no women in tech, or that women are actually unwelcome in tech. I read it as saying that it sends a message that women are unwelcome in tech -- whether or not that's actually true, it is a message this incident communicates.
It's absolutely the message I got from this, and I suspect I am not the only one.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 10:45 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
It's absolutely the message I got from this, and I suspect I am not the only one.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 10:45 PM on March 29, 2013 [1 favorite]
Sure. The same circumstances in, say, my field -- the arts -- would likewise communicate that women were not welcome in the arts. That being said, I can't imagine theater people mobilizing an online response of such force and vituperativeness, but it may be because they are not as web savvy.
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:27 PM on March 29, 2013
posted by Bunny Ultramod at 11:27 PM on March 29, 2013
olinerd: "The tech world is full of "hilariously" sex-related terminology."
Lots of professions are like this. I'm an electrician. I probably use the word nipple (meaning a short length of pipe externally threaded on both ends) on average a dozen times a day. A quick google seems to indicate that nipple in both senses derives from the word meaning a short protuberance. And of course my job is filled with female this and male that and talk about lube. And those are those things real names just like dongle and fork.
But on top of that we have all the, slang? for objects that is pretty inappropriate but entrenched. Like Plastic Assholes, Horse Cocks, and Emily Knobs. It can be pretty juvenile.
running order squabble fest: "Similarly, in How I Met Your Mother Barney Stinson is sold as a loveable rogue, rather than a genuinely sociopathic sexual predator and arguably a repeat sexual offender ."
Barney is a straight up serial rapist via false promises/pretenses/deception/fraud.
smidgen: "More likely, "plug" and "socket", but naming the changers and various configurations of cables is harder and would require neologisms of some sort, I suppose. . "
It was noted up thread but plugs and sockets both come in female and male varieties and it's not just plugs and sockets; anytime you have two piece component where one fits into the other you differentiate with a male and a female. Pipe, connectors, plugs, ball joints, etc. ad naseum.
Orb: "My guess is that Unnamed Fired Guy had other things in his file or that while they were investigating, they discovered he has a history of other problem behavior, so they decided that unlike Unfired Alex, who they call a "valuable employee", Unnamed Fired Guy was no longer worth employing."
Or the not fired guy is friends with management, is vitally important to a current project or knows where a metaphoric body or two is buried. Or even fired guy is disabled/Religious/going bankrupt/Canadian/some other protected class and they are using this as a cover for their discriminatory real reason.
posted by Mitheral at 1:44 AM on March 30, 2013
Lots of professions are like this. I'm an electrician. I probably use the word nipple (meaning a short length of pipe externally threaded on both ends) on average a dozen times a day. A quick google seems to indicate that nipple in both senses derives from the word meaning a short protuberance. And of course my job is filled with female this and male that and talk about lube. And those are those things real names just like dongle and fork.
But on top of that we have all the, slang? for objects that is pretty inappropriate but entrenched. Like Plastic Assholes, Horse Cocks, and Emily Knobs. It can be pretty juvenile.
running order squabble fest: "Similarly, in How I Met Your Mother Barney Stinson is sold as a loveable rogue, rather than a genuinely sociopathic sexual predator and arguably a repeat sexual offender ."
Barney is a straight up serial rapist via false promises/pretenses/deception/fraud.
smidgen: "More likely, "plug" and "socket", but naming the changers and various configurations of cables is harder and would require neologisms of some sort, I suppose. . "
It was noted up thread but plugs and sockets both come in female and male varieties and it's not just plugs and sockets; anytime you have two piece component where one fits into the other you differentiate with a male and a female. Pipe, connectors, plugs, ball joints, etc. ad naseum.
Orb: "My guess is that Unnamed Fired Guy had other things in his file or that while they were investigating, they discovered he has a history of other problem behavior, so they decided that unlike Unfired Alex, who they call a "valuable employee", Unnamed Fired Guy was no longer worth employing."
Or the not fired guy is friends with management, is vitally important to a current project or knows where a metaphoric body or two is buried. Or even fired guy is disabled/Religious/going bankrupt/Canadian/some other protected class and they are using this as a cover for their discriminatory real reason.
posted by Mitheral at 1:44 AM on March 30, 2013
I'm frustrated that the industry I know and love is being painted so darkly. Yes, there are assholes abounding (male and female), but such is true of all parts of life. I feel free and happy in my line of work. I *am* the Tech Community. I refuse to be made invisible or discounted by slanted journalism that is trying to work an angle.
Eh, as someone who has worked in multiple industries now, I think the darkness is warranted. I've never seen such unreconstructed sexism as I do in tech. Tech is still in the dark ages of arguing that sexism is right, ffs. (Different brains, women can't code, duh)
The only industries that would come close for brazeness are some manual labour industries (eg construction), and it's of an entirely different tenor there. In the other intellectual professions, you do get a similar "smart" sexism (law and journalism are both notable here) that can be equally nasty, but these days it's at least couched in a degree of awareness and subterfuge; it's rare it will be brazen.
In tech, it's both brazen and smart. This is a horrible combination. Add to that mix that the most vocal people in tech are often early 20-something men who often haven't given feminist arguments much consideration but nonetheless are used to being the most correct person in the room and so will argue their gut instincts about men and women to the death.
In short: You don't get builders doxxing women in the street; you don't get lawyers posting rape threats on twitter. Tech is different.
posted by bonaldi at 2:13 PM on March 30, 2013 [11 favorites]
Eh, as someone who has worked in multiple industries now, I think the darkness is warranted. I've never seen such unreconstructed sexism as I do in tech. Tech is still in the dark ages of arguing that sexism is right, ffs. (Different brains, women can't code, duh)
The only industries that would come close for brazeness are some manual labour industries (eg construction), and it's of an entirely different tenor there. In the other intellectual professions, you do get a similar "smart" sexism (law and journalism are both notable here) that can be equally nasty, but these days it's at least couched in a degree of awareness and subterfuge; it's rare it will be brazen.
In tech, it's both brazen and smart. This is a horrible combination. Add to that mix that the most vocal people in tech are often early 20-something men who often haven't given feminist arguments much consideration but nonetheless are used to being the most correct person in the room and so will argue their gut instincts about men and women to the death.
In short: You don't get builders doxxing women in the street; you don't get lawyers posting rape threats on twitter. Tech is different.
posted by bonaldi at 2:13 PM on March 30, 2013 [11 favorites]
ericb: "In related news: Really? IGDA Party at GDC Brings On the Female Dancers."
"YetiZen did not hire dancers. We hired avid gamers, who happened to be models, to discuss gaming with the invited guests."
posted by the_artificer at 4:51 PM on March 30, 2013
"YetiZen did not hire dancers. We hired avid gamers, who happened to be models, to discuss gaming with the invited guests."
posted by the_artificer at 4:51 PM on March 30, 2013
(Different brains, women can't code, duh)
Yeah this has been blowing my mine recently - I can't believe the tech industry is this fucking stupid. I work in science/academia, and while the male-female mix isn't even (probably more like 60-40 in my field), and there are the usual issues regarding women missing out on careers due to raising children, I am surrounded by women who shoot down branches from trees with guns to measure the pre-dawn water potential in the morning, and then put together generalized linear mixed models in R to analyse the data in the evening. Programming is a big part of the job we do - from Postgres to Python, to rigging widgets to serial ports. And I have never encountered the attitude that "women can't code" in my industry, because it's patently, ridiculously wrong. We do, however, refer to "dongles".
posted by Jimbob at 6:05 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]
Yeah this has been blowing my mine recently - I can't believe the tech industry is this fucking stupid. I work in science/academia, and while the male-female mix isn't even (probably more like 60-40 in my field), and there are the usual issues regarding women missing out on careers due to raising children, I am surrounded by women who shoot down branches from trees with guns to measure the pre-dawn water potential in the morning, and then put together generalized linear mixed models in R to analyse the data in the evening. Programming is a big part of the job we do - from Postgres to Python, to rigging widgets to serial ports. And I have never encountered the attitude that "women can't code" in my industry, because it's patently, ridiculously wrong. We do, however, refer to "dongles".
posted by Jimbob at 6:05 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]
nacho fries: “I'm frustrated that the industry I know and love is being painted so darkly. Yes, there are assholes abounding (male and female), but such is true of all parts of life. I feel free and happy in my line of work. I *am* the Tech Community. I refuse to be made invisible or discounted by slanted journalism that is trying to work an angle.”
As someone who's been in the tech industry for seven years, in many different roles and situations, let me tell you: the tech industry is bad. Really bad. Sexism is endemic here in a way that it just isn't in other industries. This is documented; there are simply fewer women in tech, and that's part of it, but what's more outstanding and frightening is the attitudes behind it. bonaldi is right – it is routine for male tech guys to respond to this gap by saying "well, women's brains just aren't very good at computers." You don't believe me? Go over to Hacker News and check out any discussion of the gender gap in tech – this argument always comes up.
The fact that we say this doesn't mean we don't love the industry, that we aren't happy to be part of it. To the contrary, we say these things because technology deserves better than this, damn it. We're supposed to be some of the smarter folks in the room, at least on some level. Why are we talking like neanderthals?
Jimbob: “Programming is a big part of the job we do - from Postgres to Python, to rigging widgets to serial ports. And I have never encountered the attitude that 'women can't code' in my industry, because it's patently, ridiculously wrong.”
It is pretty shocking. I mean – the number of guys I've met who talk this way since I got into the tech industry almost scares me. I have actually genuinely met more full-on misogynists in tech than I did in phone sales, and that's a frightful thing right there.
What's ironic and hilarious is that, right now, women programmers are doing awesome at the company I work at and rising rapidly, while the dudebros I know who used to be a bit smug about their positions are really slipping. I know that I'm lucky enough to work for a company that's a bit more equitable than many, though.
posted by koeselitz at 11:04 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]
As someone who's been in the tech industry for seven years, in many different roles and situations, let me tell you: the tech industry is bad. Really bad. Sexism is endemic here in a way that it just isn't in other industries. This is documented; there are simply fewer women in tech, and that's part of it, but what's more outstanding and frightening is the attitudes behind it. bonaldi is right – it is routine for male tech guys to respond to this gap by saying "well, women's brains just aren't very good at computers." You don't believe me? Go over to Hacker News and check out any discussion of the gender gap in tech – this argument always comes up.
The fact that we say this doesn't mean we don't love the industry, that we aren't happy to be part of it. To the contrary, we say these things because technology deserves better than this, damn it. We're supposed to be some of the smarter folks in the room, at least on some level. Why are we talking like neanderthals?
Jimbob: “Programming is a big part of the job we do - from Postgres to Python, to rigging widgets to serial ports. And I have never encountered the attitude that 'women can't code' in my industry, because it's patently, ridiculously wrong.”
It is pretty shocking. I mean – the number of guys I've met who talk this way since I got into the tech industry almost scares me. I have actually genuinely met more full-on misogynists in tech than I did in phone sales, and that's a frightful thing right there.
What's ironic and hilarious is that, right now, women programmers are doing awesome at the company I work at and rising rapidly, while the dudebros I know who used to be a bit smug about their positions are really slipping. I know that I'm lucky enough to work for a company that's a bit more equitable than many, though.
posted by koeselitz at 11:04 PM on March 30, 2013 [2 favorites]
The relative level of sexism is pretty irrelevant. The abuse inflicted on Richards is terrible. I'm not sure the biggest attackers are even coders or in the tech industry. I don't even think we should single this out as a tech industry problem. In a number of cases where women have complained about conduct the women judged offnsive, exclusionary or sexist, there has been vocal blowback against them. The idea that this is just those stupid brogrammers is a bit silly.
posted by humanfont at 2:19 PM on March 31, 2013 [1 favorite]
posted by humanfont at 2:19 PM on March 31, 2013 [1 favorite]
IMO the "Crying Wolf" peice by Litwak contains some deep rooted patriarchical thinking. I doubt he is conscious of it, and many of you may disagree with my reading of this.
1. He assumes that the termination was only about a penis joke. It seems to me he forecloses even the possibility that her claim might have been legitimate or that Playhaven could of acted in a measured and rational way. The woman's accusation and the Playhaven response are given the presumption of irrationality and over-reaction. It was "crying wolf". He gives the presumption to the man.
2. A presumption that boys will be boys and we men must not be denied our penis jokes. We men can't help ourselves. That assumes that men are powerless to change as well. Men must be given an exception on their self control and women must control their emotional response. Again it puts the onus on women and leaves men free to mis-behave.
3. The man losing his job is particularly outrageous because he has children. It suggests that the event is more notable because of the status of the man as a father of three. This is a paternalistic hierarchy. Men with good jobs, a wife and kids are higher status and deserving of extra protection.
posted by humanfont at 6:11 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
1. He assumes that the termination was only about a penis joke. It seems to me he forecloses even the possibility that her claim might have been legitimate or that Playhaven could of acted in a measured and rational way. The woman's accusation and the Playhaven response are given the presumption of irrationality and over-reaction. It was "crying wolf". He gives the presumption to the man.
2. A presumption that boys will be boys and we men must not be denied our penis jokes. We men can't help ourselves. That assumes that men are powerless to change as well. Men must be given an exception on their self control and women must control their emotional response. Again it puts the onus on women and leaves men free to mis-behave.
3. The man losing his job is particularly outrageous because he has children. It suggests that the event is more notable because of the status of the man as a father of three. This is a paternalistic hierarchy. Men with good jobs, a wife and kids are higher status and deserving of extra protection.
posted by humanfont at 6:11 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
nacho fries: “I base my comments on my experience, across 30-plus years in the workforce, in a variety of male-dominated industries. Engineering; architecture; academia; and for the last 20 years, programming/tech. In my personal experience, tech has been the 'cleanest' industry. I don't claim my experience is any way universal among women; but it is true for me, and anyone who tells me otherwise wasn't there in my shoes all those years.”
Well – on one level, I think we have to admit that experience is subjective. As you say, I can't tell you your experience wasn't true for you, just as I know that my own experience was true for me.
However, there are levels on which the status of women in tech is quantifiable. And on almost all of them, the situation isn't that great. Wikipedia has a good overview of the employment numbers; in short, where more than one out of every three people in computing were women in 1984, only about one in four people in computing are women today. And it appears to be getting worse; the percentage of women computer science degree graduates has fallen below 12%.
I don't deny that, as you say, these numbers are better in computing than they are in, say, engineering (everything I can find indicates that it's actually much better for women in academia, though I know that academia is much more segmented and often there are places where old, bad habits die hard). But what's remarkable about our industry is that the status of women in computing is actually getting worse; women are apparently (looking at the statistics, at least) being slowly and surely driven out of technology, both in the academic realm which computing feeds on and in the industry itself. At this rate, in ten or fifteen years engineering will be a much more welcoming place for women than computing.
That's a problem worth trying to solve.
Again, I want to underline the fact that I don't say this stuff because I hate computing. I love computing; and it's an awesome thing how involved and important women have been in computing over its history, from Ada Lovelace on down. It's just that – right now, we're on a downward trajectory. And I'd really, really like to see that corrected. Because computing is an awesome, positive, creative and constructive industry that does remarkable things; and we really need to have an equitable workforce if we're going to continue that legacy.
posted by koeselitz at 6:34 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
Well – on one level, I think we have to admit that experience is subjective. As you say, I can't tell you your experience wasn't true for you, just as I know that my own experience was true for me.
However, there are levels on which the status of women in tech is quantifiable. And on almost all of them, the situation isn't that great. Wikipedia has a good overview of the employment numbers; in short, where more than one out of every three people in computing were women in 1984, only about one in four people in computing are women today. And it appears to be getting worse; the percentage of women computer science degree graduates has fallen below 12%.
I don't deny that, as you say, these numbers are better in computing than they are in, say, engineering (everything I can find indicates that it's actually much better for women in academia, though I know that academia is much more segmented and often there are places where old, bad habits die hard). But what's remarkable about our industry is that the status of women in computing is actually getting worse; women are apparently (looking at the statistics, at least) being slowly and surely driven out of technology, both in the academic realm which computing feeds on and in the industry itself. At this rate, in ten or fifteen years engineering will be a much more welcoming place for women than computing.
That's a problem worth trying to solve.
Again, I want to underline the fact that I don't say this stuff because I hate computing. I love computing; and it's an awesome thing how involved and important women have been in computing over its history, from Ada Lovelace on down. It's just that – right now, we're on a downward trajectory. And I'd really, really like to see that corrected. Because computing is an awesome, positive, creative and constructive industry that does remarkable things; and we really need to have an equitable workforce if we're going to continue that legacy.
posted by koeselitz at 6:34 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
(Oh, and I wanted to say – it's worth thinking about the interesting fact that it was apparently a lot easier for women to do well in tech twenty years ago than it is now. The changes that have happened in that time have been bigger than one might think.)
posted by koeselitz at 6:36 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
posted by koeselitz at 6:36 PM on March 31, 2013 [2 favorites]
The story continues to have legs: Here's The Real Reason SendGrid Fired The Woman Who Complained About 'Dongle' Jokes.
Of course, this is Business Insider and the "real reason" is the exact same story SendGrid already put forward - that Richards was too divisive. It's not really any new insight.
Anyway, this is a weak story that rehashes old news for ongoing reader of this thread, but I thought it was interesting that news outlets are still trying to get some clicks out of it.
posted by GuyZero at 10:08 AM on April 1, 2013 [1 favorite]
Of course, this is Business Insider and the "real reason" is the exact same story SendGrid already put forward - that Richards was too divisive. It's not really any new insight.
Anyway, this is a weak story that rehashes old news for ongoing reader of this thread, but I thought it was interesting that news outlets are still trying to get some clicks out of it.
posted by GuyZero at 10:08 AM on April 1, 2013 [1 favorite]
A better headline for that article would be: Local tech reporter moonlights doing damage control for CEO friend. So helpful that CEO pointing to Amanda Blum's article. Here is an alternate take on that by the way that presents Ms Richard's actions in a more reasonable light.
Rather than the old saw about his wife and daughter and charity demonstrate his commitment to equality it would be better to know some stars about the diversity of the company's management team and board of directors. How many women are working there, how many are in senior roles. Do they have a written procedure for reporting and investigsting harassment and discrimination? Do they have an employee social media policy? Do they have ADA and social media training. Was Ms. Richards an authorized spokesperson, do they have specific authorized spokespeople.
If they had issued these guidelines to their employees then those would provide more insight into their justification for firing Richards. They probably didn't; because of they had they could have said we have fired Ms Richards for failing to follow our established processes regarding harassment issues and policies on employee use of social media.
posted by humanfont at 3:03 PM on April 1, 2013 [2 favorites]
Rather than the old saw about his wife and daughter and charity demonstrate his commitment to equality it would be better to know some stars about the diversity of the company's management team and board of directors. How many women are working there, how many are in senior roles. Do they have a written procedure for reporting and investigsting harassment and discrimination? Do they have an employee social media policy? Do they have ADA and social media training. Was Ms. Richards an authorized spokesperson, do they have specific authorized spokespeople.
If they had issued these guidelines to their employees then those would provide more insight into their justification for firing Richards. They probably didn't; because of they had they could have said we have fired Ms Richards for failing to follow our established processes regarding harassment issues and policies on employee use of social media.
posted by humanfont at 3:03 PM on April 1, 2013 [2 favorites]
And another interesting discussion from Colorlines.
posted by jeather at 3:13 PM on April 1, 2013 [3 favorites]
posted by jeather at 3:13 PM on April 1, 2013 [3 favorites]
Humanfont, here's my take on the linked article, which is quite different from yours.
1. As far as Richards' 'legitimate claim' being 'denied', I don't even know what you are referring to. Both she and the man in question agree this was, yes really, over dongle jokes. No one is implying Richards made the whole incisent up, just that she created drama where there was no need for any, by over reacting to an absurd degree over an insignificant incident. She didn't even let the men know she was uncomfortable or ask them to stop!
2. An assumption that you pick your battles wisely if you want to be taken seriously and make any kind of progress against actual sexism in the workplace. , as Richards joked about them, too.
Look, most men are not 'terrified' of women. Setting up ridiculous strawmen only alienates potential allies. The point of the linked article wasn't AT ALL 'boys will be boys', and I think you know that, humanfont.
Tweeting the picture, and then grandiloquently comparing herself to a fearless crusader against sexism for the sake of all the future women in technology over penis jokes, after she herself had recently publicly Tweeted a (far more graphic) penis joke, makes Richards look hypocritical AND needlessly combative. Choosing (and she makes it clear herself that this was a choice she made) to go into overdrive and report the men makes her come off as someone wanting to pick a fight as well. This is not a courageous stance but bullying that culminated in people getting fired, including Richards herself. No win for women in tech at all.
3. No one thinks this man is a raving sexist who should get a pass on his sexism because he has a family! The reason the family is brought up is to *show who the real innocent victims of this debacle are*. Richards does NOT deserve the internet abuse she's recieved, but she and the man she complained about arguably both made poor decisions at PyCon in the first place.
His wife and kids, though, did nothing, and yet they are worse off because of this whole debacle. Again, no win for feminists, especially since it turns out this guy is not a raving sexist at all. He only joked, but he still apologized for the jokes he made anyway, and bears no ill will towards Richards as far as I can tell. Meanwhile, Richards just doubles down and compares herself to Joan of Arc.
posted by misha at 12:55 AM on April 3, 2013
1. As far as Richards' 'legitimate claim' being 'denied', I don't even know what you are referring to. Both she and the man in question agree this was, yes really, over dongle jokes. No one is implying Richards made the whole incisent up, just that she created drama where there was no need for any, by over reacting to an absurd degree over an insignificant incident. She didn't even let the men know she was uncomfortable or ask them to stop!
2. An assumption that you pick your battles wisely if you want to be taken seriously and make any kind of progress against actual sexism in the workplace. , as Richards joked about them, too.
Look, most men are not 'terrified' of women. Setting up ridiculous strawmen only alienates potential allies. The point of the linked article wasn't AT ALL 'boys will be boys', and I think you know that, humanfont.
Tweeting the picture, and then grandiloquently comparing herself to a fearless crusader against sexism for the sake of all the future women in technology over penis jokes, after she herself had recently publicly Tweeted a (far more graphic) penis joke, makes Richards look hypocritical AND needlessly combative. Choosing (and she makes it clear herself that this was a choice she made) to go into overdrive and report the men makes her come off as someone wanting to pick a fight as well. This is not a courageous stance but bullying that culminated in people getting fired, including Richards herself. No win for women in tech at all.
3. No one thinks this man is a raving sexist who should get a pass on his sexism because he has a family! The reason the family is brought up is to *show who the real innocent victims of this debacle are*. Richards does NOT deserve the internet abuse she's recieved, but she and the man she complained about arguably both made poor decisions at PyCon in the first place.
His wife and kids, though, did nothing, and yet they are worse off because of this whole debacle. Again, no win for feminists, especially since it turns out this guy is not a raving sexist at all. He only joked, but he still apologized for the jokes he made anyway, and bears no ill will towards Richards as far as I can tell. Meanwhile, Richards just doubles down and compares herself to Joan of Arc.
posted by misha at 12:55 AM on April 3, 2013
It doesn't really matter whether Adria Richards misunderstood the conversation or whether she overreacted. Neither of those would explain the viciousness of the sustained counter-reaction against her, or go any way towards justifying it. The fact that a woman's complaint can inspire this sort of hatred is frightening, and is a very real problem for anyone else who wants to speak up. I also don't see anyone trying to do anything about it, which is another problem.
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:22 AM on April 3, 2013 [6 favorites]
posted by Joe in Australia at 1:22 AM on April 3, 2013 [6 favorites]
Misha do we know the exact dongle joke made? How are we to judge how offensive it was? The idea that she is a hypocrit and wasn't really offended or shouldn't have been is what I mean by denial that she has a legitimate claim.
It seems to me that critics are making a rather unreasonable claim that there exists some well known cultural taboo on taking pictures of people engaged in notable behavior in public and tweeting about it. That seems like a stretch. Most conferences I attend encourage participants to share photos and tweet their experiences. The man broke an actual written rule.
People didn't stop saying the words like nigger in ordinary workplace conversations until it was publicaly called out. There were accusations that folks were over-reacting. Other protestations that African Americans say it.
posted by humanfont at 2:54 AM on April 3, 2013 [1 favorite]
It seems to me that critics are making a rather unreasonable claim that there exists some well known cultural taboo on taking pictures of people engaged in notable behavior in public and tweeting about it. That seems like a stretch. Most conferences I attend encourage participants to share photos and tweet their experiences. The man broke an actual written rule.
People didn't stop saying the words like nigger in ordinary workplace conversations until it was publicaly called out. There were accusations that folks were over-reacting. Other protestations that African Americans say it.
posted by humanfont at 2:54 AM on April 3, 2013 [1 favorite]
I think Richards used poor judgement about reporting the incident via Twitter, but hey, that was a judgement call - I am sure she never expected it to attract so much attention or lead to the outcomes that actually occurred.
Despite my disagreeing with her action, I still think her employers were creeps to fire her, particularly in the face of the way she is being harassed. They look like they caved to mob rule. I still believe she may have suit against her employer - anti-retaliation is a strong principle in employment law. It's interesting to see the case discussed by employment law attorneys: Employee gets fired for tweeting complaints about discrimination
Fired tech worker's firm: Tweets were inappropriate
SendGrid's Unlawful and Retaliatory Termination of Adria Richards.
posted by madamjujujive at 12:50 PM on April 3, 2013 [1 favorite]
Despite my disagreeing with her action, I still think her employers were creeps to fire her, particularly in the face of the way she is being harassed. They look like they caved to mob rule. I still believe she may have suit against her employer - anti-retaliation is a strong principle in employment law. It's interesting to see the case discussed by employment law attorneys: Employee gets fired for tweeting complaints about discrimination
The anti-retaliation provisions of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 make it unlawful to discriminate against an individual because s/he has opposed any practice made unlawful under the employment discrimination statutes (i.e., a protected activity).
The law itself does not place any restrictions on the manner in which an employee complains about discrimination. Before the advent of social media, employees generally complained about workplace harassment in-person, via telephone, in a letter, or through email. A tweet and a blog post may be anything but the traditional way to complain. But a complaint via social media is a complaint nonetheless. Call it the 21st century equivalent of taking an ad out in The New York Times, or maybe the actions taken in this 1990 case, where the plaintiff wrote letters to customers criticizing her employer's alleged discrimination.
So, the issue of law here is not how Ms. Richards complained. Rather, it's whether Ms. Richards opposed a practice made unlawful under the employment discrimination statutes? That is, did SendGrid have any responsibility to offer protection to Ms. Richards from sexual comments made on a business trip by non-employees?See also:
Fired tech worker's firm: Tweets were inappropriate
SendGrid's Unlawful and Retaliatory Termination of Adria Richards.
posted by madamjujujive at 12:50 PM on April 3, 2013 [1 favorite]
« Older First Openly Trans MMA fighter. | If You Rebuild It, They Might Not Come Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Jesus, there's less drama on LiveJournal.
posted by desjardins at 3:22 PM on March 20, 2013 [79 favorites]