[groby_b]

See, it's statements like that which annoy women. What do "pleasing aesthetics" have to do with anything? Why do you even need to refer to that when you talk about women?

And then, just for good measure, the good old "she must've slept her way up the ladder" trope.

No, I can assure you, we (for the large majority, at the very least) have not "charmed our way into the work force". We've worked pretty damn hard to get there. We put up with a lot of bullshit, and yes, we (on average) put up with more bullshit than the average male dev.

[richforrester]

Wow. Way to take those bits out of context.

1) I said that I don't care whether someone's a woman (aesthetically a more pleasing option to me than a man) or a man, as long as they get the job done.

2) I said that whether someone got somewhere by charm or by working hard, I don't give a rats bottom. As long as they get the job done.

Basically, I'm making your case for you and you're still picking a fight?

Would you rather I said "I'd hire a woman because this article says they're better"?

Screw that. I'd hire whomever I think would get the job done. Period.

I hate discrimination. Either way.

[esharef]

Thank god for this comment. "Charmed our way." haha

[richforrester]

See below/above.

I'm saying that I don't give a hoot about how. My point was that discriminating against man is just as stupid as discriminating against women.

[drumdance]

Men can be charmers too. Sales being the obvious example.

[dmorgan]

>See, it's statements like that which annoy women. What do "pleasing aesthetics" have to do with anything? Why do you even need to refer to that when you talk about women?

Because he cares about it. What's YOUR problem?