[readme]

Unfortunately, when approaching an issue like this you cannot do so without adopting a sexist viewpoint yourself. To begin to analyze workers in terms of sex or gender to begin with, itself is sexist, the same way that affirmative action is racist.

It's fine and good that companies want to hire more female engineers. But this article is lame, which you should have picked up on when the author used the word "rockstar"

[warmwaffles]

I hate being referred to as a rockstar developer as a male. I couldn't agree more. I want more engineers, not tokens. If I can work with competent people, I am happy. Even if it's an all male or all female workplace.

[steveklabnik]

> To begin to analyze workers in terms of sex or gender to begin with, itself is sexist, the same way that affirmative action is racist.

Which is, again, not sexist or racist at all. *-ism implies institutional bias of a society, not an individual instance of discrimination.

It is _discriminatory_ against men, for sure. But not 'sexist.'

[cantastoria]

-ism implies institutional bias of a society

Sexism/racism et al. can exist outside of institutions no? "Hate crimes" for instance clearly do not involve any recognizable institutions yet clearly involve an -ism of some kind. Nor do -isms only exist at the society level. For instance it would be possible for a female owned company to not hire men (female hiring bias/sexism) which would run counter to larger societal biases.

[steveklabnik]

> "Hate crimes" for instance clearly do not involve any recognizable institutions yet clearly involve an -ism of some kind.

Only in the sense that they 'reproduce' the broader -ism. The individual act is one of discrimination, the sum of all acts collectively is an *-ism.

> For instance it would be possible for a female owned company to not hire men (female hiring bias/sexism) which would run counter to larger societal biases.

Studies and discussion on this topic are scoped specifically at the societal level for a reason.