[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.

[DanBC]

> Well, you might imagine that commentators here are _deliberately_ misgendering you, which is a suggestion so preposterous that I can't entertain it.

There are a bunch of people who chose to misgender others, even when they know the preferred terms.

Whether they get flagged or not seems random.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9896908

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9896788 etc.

[Mz]

Have an upvote.

I agree with some of your points. It took me a very long time to conclude my gender was a factor on HN. Compared to other male dominated environments I have spent time in, my treatment here has been spectacularly good. It is one of the reasons I worked my ass off to resolve some of the problems I had here.

I went through a period where I was getting a helluva lot of flack, where it was clear to me that men on the leaderboard were closing ranks to shut me out. But my karma was so far below what qualifies one for the leaderboard, I was baffled by social evidence that I was "prominent -- for a woman." After managing to gather objective data that fit with that fact, I handled things differently here.

Here is a summary, with supporting links, to the data I gathered: http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2015/01/some-raw-dat...

I don't think anyone is consciously, intentionally trying to exclude women. I do think the apparent lack of women on the leaderboard is not a mere happenstance of numbers.

It is possible for your experiences and views to have validity and for mine to also. I have written about this issue previously. I think you and I might agree more than it seems had we not gotten off on the wrong foot. I also think you are bringing personal baggage and frustrations to the discussion that biases your interpretation of my position. You "heard" me accusing you of dismissing it as coincidence because of my gender when that wasn't my intent. That kind of thing does wind up being a problem for women. It ends up being a kind of de facto sexism.

I also did not say I was held to a higher standard. That isn't how I would frame the problem space. But, given that you are not sympathetic to my views or testimony concerning my firsthand experience, I see little point at this time in trying to figure out how to communicate more on that piece of what you said.

Edit:

FYI: You can take my continued engagement as evidence that, while I think you are wrong about a lot of things, I don't think you are simply and intentionally being an asshole. I don't debate people that I think are not engaging in good faith to at least some degree. I stop replying when I think it is straight up assholery.

[douche]

Does it occur to you that you might be getting a lot of flack because you can be so combative and come across, frankly, as a little paranoid?

This is not the first subthread I've seen get detached and marked off-topic because it degenerated into a back-and-forth scrum that doesn't make anyone look good. It's too bad; I was getting a pretty good return of InternetPoints™ for my quip about bronies...

[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.