[curiousgal]

>I never felt discriminated against or thwarted in my calling

This just goes to prove my stance whenever the whole women in STEM fields debate is brought up. You have two kinds of women, those who are out there doing science, building things and being badasses (The likes of Veronika and Julia Evans, ones I consider as role-models) and then you have women that have questionable technical skills who keep whining about sexism and lack of women in tech. Veronica wasn't concerned with the perceived sexism and was interested in physics, Marilee, a specimen of the second category, gave herself a pat on the shoulder for standing up to Veronica.

[watwut]

> and then you have women that have questionable technical skills who keep whining about sexism

I noted this as a pattern - if you complain about sexism then you put shadow over your technical skills. You have to choose between being seen as capable and between pointing out unfairness if you think it happens.

Also, Veronika Hubeny said that there is sexism in science. She did not had negative feelings about this panel. It is possible to watch the video and come to different interpretation as she did. Just like it is possible to see the video of someone accused of sexism and conclude it was not sexism. The latter is quite common occurence on these forums.

[natch]

The real world is just not as simple as your bimodal stance.

First off, sexist environments do exist. So that alone should invalidate how you think of this as either competence versus whining. Also, there are varying degrees of sexism, including places where it is not present at all. How can we know this? Zipf's law. Or by just doing a thought experiment, which I'll leave out here (just think about the simplest possible workplace).

On the issue of technical skills, everyone is incompetent at something. Even if you are highly technically skilled in your chosen field, these days almost every field has overlap, including new and emerging areas of overlap, with other fields including new fields. There are also new techniques being developed all the time. Everyone is learning on the job, and that's as it should be. Does that mean it's OK to whine about non-existent sexism? No, but does it mean that sexism does not exist? Also no. And if it does, it should be called out, regardless of whether someone is a Nobel laureate or a student.

Going to the extreme, if you're not at all skilled in any field but are just learning, that doesn't mean that speaking up about sexism is just whining about imagined problems in every case.

I have no doubt that some of what you're talking about is going on. But my point is it just doesn't begin to explain the whole picture.

[Tomis02]

> Veronica wasn't concerned with the perceived sexism

Citation needed. If you read her comment carefully she acknowledges there is sexism in science but says that it should not put off people from pursuing what they love. And in this case she said she just gave the host the benefit of the doubt, since his attitude could be interpreted in multiple ways.

> Marilee, a specimen of the second category, gave herself a pat on the shoulder for standing up to Veronica.

That's an asshole thing to say, and your comment makes it look like it's a full-blown trait, not a one-time accident. Out of a whole theater who noticed the incident, she was the only one who had the balls to stand up. You may disagree that it was sexism (can't be proven either way, you can't know the host's state of mind at that time), but you can't in good conscience disagree that it wasn't right, and it's a good thing someone said something.

And yes, the way you phrased your comment clearly implies that there are two categories of people, the doers and the whiners; it reeks of assholery. There are people who do a lot and "whine" a lot; just because you're good at something doesn't mean you should bury your head in the sand when you see something wrong.

[awinder]

Men of "questionable technical skills" have a whole raft of culturally acceptable crutches at their disposal, including dominance behavior, Machiavellian strategies towards conflict, etc. A lot of these antisocial behaviors have come to define "good leadership" even in the past few decades, so I find it completely laughable to draw equality to calling out sexism. Even IF sexism charges were completely unfounded & a crutch, so what, men have gotten away with highway robbery by comparison.

[andrepd]

These two things aren't mutually exclusive. You can do both (even though granted there are lots of people out there in the latter category). You can obviously be an excellent physicist and argue against unjust situations at the same time, and also you don't have to be an expert in a field in order to recognize and protest extant sexism.

[d3ad1ysp0rk]

Veronika stated quite clearly that sexism in STEM is an issue. Julia Evans has wrote in bulk regarding issues she has experienced and ways she is trying to get more women in STEM.

[curiousgal]

I didn't say the two categories are mutually exclusive. But you can notice where the bulk of each person's efforts is directed.

[d3ad1ysp0rk]

Who is to say that those people who's bulk of effort is spent programming, designing, or doing other technical activities don't appreciate the work other's do on a more full time basis to improve issues they see?