[tanglisha]

Women and men are raised differently. Things that come natural to you, having been raised male, do not come naturally to a large number of women. Examples include how to make eye contact in an interview and how to shake hands properly. It is very common for women to be raised with an attitude of quietly waiting to be noticed, rather than pointing out their good traits and skills. This can leave them a bit lost when it comes to an interview, which is essentially the time to brag.

Aside from childbirth itself, women are far more likely to be single parents than men are, and are normally the ones to stay home with sick children, especially when there is a long-term disease involved.

Many women end up dealing with multiple name changes, across degrees and sometimes projects.

Of course not all women lack these skills, we would never pretend that to be the case. But the ones that do are at a distinct disadvantage, and there are more of them out there than you realize.

Who would you turn to if you didn't even know that your handshake felt like a dead fish and you never once made eye contact with the hiring manager? That kind of feedback doesn't exist after interviews.

[kondro]

For each of these issues I can come up with a counter-point but it won't really solve anything.

I agree that having this information available is a positive thing.

Limiting it to either women, or even women in IT seems to be part of the problem (not the solution), in my opinion. By all means, market a generic series at women who may be having these problems, but I fail to see how limiting the audience to ONLY women stands up for equality.

[tanglisha]

The information is targeted at women, because that's what we are. We will not turn anyone away, man, woman, trans, or otherwise: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/166494057/ladycoders-get...

In my opinion, targeting a message makes more sense than trying to make it overly broad to cover everyone, that only dilutes the information. You, of course, are welcome to disagree :)

[jacques_chester]

Again, let me see if I have you right.

A project launched by women, aimed at women, because women are an observable rarity in our industry ... is against equality.

This isn't affirmative action. It's not a hiring policy. It's a private sector effort by interested individuals who want to help others like them.

[kondro]

In my experience, it always pays to substitute the subject to the broader version when determining if something is discriminatory.

How does this project sound?

"A project [to empower men], launched by men, aimed at men, because men are an observable majority in our industry."

[jacques_chester]

> In my experience, it always pays to substitute the subject to the broader version when determining if something is discriminatory.

How does that follow? I'd genuinely like to know your reasoning.

[kondro]

I come from a minority myself (gay from the ironically named Queensland) and find people say the stupidest things that, if modified as suggested, they would be embarrassed to say about themselves.

[jacques_chester]

Gay in Queensland is a tough ask, depending on how far north you are.

But I'm still not following.

How does substituting in "majority" for "minority" undermine the case for the minority?