[token_throwaway]

Ugh, I watched the video, jesus the host might be the least self-aware person who's ever been asked to host anything. I was unreasonably annoyed listening to him.

Anyway I want to share something, made this throwaway account specifically for this. I'm the only female at my company, and a developer to boot. I'm assertive in general, I make sure I'm heard. In fact, I try to be hyper-aware of how much I'm talking in a meeting setting, just to be respectful of others. I also feel that I am virtually unaware of my gender at work. I've been lucky in that respect -- trust me, sexism in the world and sexism in STEM is real, and it's not always easy being a female -- but I'm in agreeance with the author that intent matters, and generally that assumed sexist intent can get a bit dramatic. Whether my personality affects my perception, I can't say.

I work with a lot of very introverted and quiet males -- and a small handful of overpowering, extraverted males. I've found myself doing this exact thing quite often. Weekly even. "Let's let him finish his point", "I'm interested in hearing more from {quiet_guy}", "{quiet_guy}, is {contribution_of_loud_guy} what you meant by that?", et cetera.

I would like to believe that if the panel person was a male, it would have elicited the same building irritation from the audience. Although, I'm less sure that someone would have spoken up. I think someone would have needed to feel personally antagonized in order to speak up, which is exactly what happened here.

Bit of a ramble, sorry. My bottom line is that we should all be looking out for those who speak up less, if we sense that those people are being out-talked. My feeling is that people in that category might be more female than not... but I'm also saying that it doesn't matter either way.

[beaconstudios]

I think your point about there being people who are out-talked is spot on. It seems to me that both quieter women and quieter men both get talked over by domineering men or women, but that due to men generally being more likely to be domineering, the whole situation skews by gender. I think it's one of those situations that seems sexist on the surface, but when you look into it it's more of a social dynamic that correlates with gender.

[Pxtl]

Thank you. As the "loud guy" around the office I have to keep this habit in check myself. I'd hate to think that, if I was drowning out the women, that people thought it was because I was personally discounting them as women.

Obviously sexism of outcome can be just as important to combat as sexism of intent, so of course I have to break the habit talking over people with my loud and opinionated speech.

[gpawl]

Thank you. People get distracted by the difference between "intentional discrimination" and "disparate impact".

You are showing good leadership to your mild-mannered coworkers and also the ones who are better ad speaking than listening, both the women and the men.

[braveo]

> I would like to believe that if the panel person was a male, it would have elicited the same building irritation from the audience. Although, I'm less sure that someone would have spoken up.

This makes me think of a complain I saw years ago from a woman about how she was treated on a mailing list. Apparently someone got aggressive with her and one of the things she complained about is that no one stepped in to defend her.

My response to that was along the lines of "they probably expected you to defend yourself".

Your comment reminded me of that, and even then I thought the same thing. Many women are used to getting defended, but men generally aren't and have learned to defend themselves.

So I think you're right that it would've been less likely for someone to defend the panelist if said panelist had been male and for much the same reason. You would expect the male to defend themselves.

[jshevek]

I'm grateful for your perspective and your values.