[powmonk]

It is a lot more neutral these days, you're not wrong but context is an important part of it.

I'm not a radical feminist or anything, I just think in tech it's quite important to be inclusionary at every given opportunity and every level. The male-only culture we've fostered in the tech industry is becoming poisonous. And nowadays it only takes one person outside of your laser-focused demographic to write the right [insert social media format] that gets your book seen. Especially if you don't have the budget/time/inclination to re-write copy.

[xiaoma]

Wasn't the context "guys who are convinced it will take them months to reach proficiency"? I could easily see a different person upset if it were "gals who are convinced it will take them months to reach proficiency", which indicates ambiguity in the context.

My point was that from a standpoint of odds of success, you're much better off with focused marketing and getting a strong response from a small group than by getting a weak response from a big group. I.e., see if anyone wants the thing at all and then focus on having a broad target to your marketing.

I agree 100% on being inclusive and am no fan of a culture where it's okay to exclude people from events or education based on their gender, race or other demographic identity. That said, lightly throwing around accusations of someone or thing being "___ist" devalues the terms and polarizes people who would otherwise be on the same page (and likely tipped last US elections).

[powmonk]

I don't think I've accused anyone of being anything. I've pointed out some context to someone who's not fluent and may not have been aware of that context.