[rewqfdsa]

You have an anecdote. I don't know the timeframe for the events you described, but it's a widespread international connectivity to the internet developed much later outside the US than it did inside it, so all things being equal, I suspect there were simply more international participants available during your tenure than during the previous years.

This experience may have convinced you that language policing is effective, but it doesn't convince me. Bragging about your karma likewise has no effect on my evaluation of the merits of your argument.

> That gets done to me quite a lot.

It happens to everyone a lot. In context, I get the feeling that you're suggesting it happens to you because you're a woman. Am I wrong? These sly implications of sexism where none really exist are extremely offensive and offputting and make me less likely to sympathize with your cause.

[Mz]

Well, you are, in fact, dismissing it as merely coincidence, as I predicted.

Nor did I say it gets done to me because I am a woman. It does get done to me a lot. I don't know that it has anything to do with my gender. It may have more to do with the fact that I have formally and informally studied certain things about social psychology and I have well developed mental models for how these things work that most people are not very familiar with. Since social psychology is a "soft science," it is much harder to convince people that X is true than, say, for physics or math. That doesn't mean there are not studies or established principles, etc, to call upon for drawing conclusions.

Anyway, I have work to do and this seems fruitless, alas.

Have a good day.

[rewqfdsa]

Yes, I am dismissing your anecdote as mere coincidence. I can't justify on an intellectual basis doing anything else. Am I supposed to just listen and believe?

> I have formally and informally studied certain things about social psychology

Your continuing reliance on credentials isn't helping your credibility.

[Mz]

You generally are being dismissive, not just "dismissing my anecdote". Women are frequently treated in a dismissive fashion by men. You dismiss my presumed hurt feelings over being misgendered as unimportant and something you cannot be bothered to put any effort into avoiding. You dismiss my accomplishments in gaining status on a predominantly male forum. You dismiss my "anecdote". And then you think that women should apparently be perfectly comfortable here in the face of you and thousands of other men like you being generally dismissive, disrespectful and insensitive towards them.

I don't imagine there is any hope of educating you as to why your behavior would drive off women and make them reluctant to participate here. But perhaps pointing it out will cast some light on the issue for other people.

Edit: And then you edit your comment to further dismiss my credentials as not helping my credibility. Just icing on the cake of a mountain of dismissiveness.

[rewqfdsa]

> Women are frequently treated in a dismissive fashion by men.

Everyone is treated in a dismissive fashioned by everyone. Only evidence and careful reasoning can rebut this default policy. You have presented none.

It galls me you interpret treatment that everyone receives as hostility directed toward the group to which you happen to belong. I am under no obligation to give additional weight to your argument merely because you are a woman. That you consider my dismissal of your unsupported claims is intellectually dishonest. You're smart enough to know better.

You're essentially claiming that everyone who doesn't accept your unsupported claims is sexist. You're free to do make this claim, but in doing so, you're crying wolf and weakening your cause.

You're right that I'm being dismissive. I'm also veering toward being disrespectful. That's not because you're a woman, but because you're demanding unearned special treatment. You're a technologist. Gaining status on a technologist's forum is no great accomplishment.

[Mz]

I wouldn't call myself a technologist. I do have a Certicate in GIS. But I intended to be an urban planner before life got in the way and I have failed, so far, to get a job in tech. However, I also know of a man high on the leader board who is a school teacher. Being a technologist seems to not be required to have status here. Being male does seem to be a requirement. There do not appear to be any women currently on the leaderboard. So I believe you to be wrong that it is no great accomplishment for a woman to gain status here.

You're smart enough to know better.

Thank you for saying that. But it does not change the fact that men here are routinely asked to show their work and women are routinely told they are simply full of shit. I have tried to show you what I know. You dismiss it and seem unopen to considering additional evidence.

There is a big difference between skepticism or desiring firmer evidence and disrespect. I don't expect you to give me special treatment. The standard on HN is supposed to be civil, respectful discourse. But my history suggests that standard applies to men and not women. It has improved, quite a lot, but there are still differences.

When I joined Hacker News, there was much more collegial respect here -- for the men, not the women. That has deteriorated some over the years. It is perhaps being repaired. My hope is that if it is fully restored, it will apply equally to all members.

[rewqfdsa]

If the vast majority of HN participants are male, the leaderboard composition is a function of demographics, not some kind of "man filter" you've had to overcome. If your username is so generic that people frequently misgender you, how can it also be the case that you're simultaneously held to a higher standard on account of being a woman?

(Well, you might imagine that commentators here are _deliberately_ misgendering you, which is a suggestion so preposterous that I can't entertain it. It might also conceivably be the case that you've gained so much karma _because_ you have an androgynous username, but see below.)

As a man, I find it extremely frustrating when advocates for women in technology look at a phenomenon where men and women are imbalanced and immediately jump to sexism as the explanation. I've had a long career in technology. Not once have I seen a woman discriminated against or her ideas held to a higher standard than the ideas of men. I've seen plenty of mentoring, encouragement, and outreach however. I've personally worked to mentor women in computer science. The idea that there is some systemic bias against women on Hacker News or in the workplace is inconsistent with my experience and with the professed views of my colleagues.

I think we need additional empathy here. Maybe it's the case that _everyone's_ ideas are dismissed too quickly. Numerous times in my career, I've proposed $FOO, been told $FOO is impossible, and only been believed after actually _implementing_ $FOO, often on my own time after tending to my official responsibilities. When some women get this treatment, they call it sexism. When I get it, I call it the reality of working in a world that combines empiricism and huge egos. I think a lot of women in technology are genuinely unaware that men get this treatment too. Maybe it's shitty for everyone and not just women.

[mcguire]

"Everyone is treated in a dismissive fashioned by everyone."

Citation? I strongly believe this to be false in general; certainly it has been in my experience.

[tptacek]

How are these kinds of rebuttals helpful? How are we learning anything more about your perspective on this issue by watching you police another commenter for providing their own narrative?

Do you have something more to say than "I would need many thousands more narratives like this to care what you have to say"? Do you have a substantial criticism of what this particular narrative suggests?

[DanBC]

> How are we learning anything more about your perspective on this issue

I learnt a lot. It was a pretty big flag.