[potatolicious]

I feel like author went off the rails in a few places, and there were more digs at White Men than I thought was justified (note: I'm a non-white male). It's become somewhat vogue to use "White" as a pejorative and synonym with "bigot", and I'm not okay with that.

If we want people to stop seeing us as our collective racial/gender/cultural stereotypes, then we can't engage in the same shenanigans ourselves.

That being said, this post struck a chord with me. As a pretty vanilla straight male, I can't identify with much of the gender issues she posed, but her blog post reminds me heavily of trying to discuss race on HN.

I frequently see some incredibly racist things being posted around here in the comments, and I've basically stopped calling them out. You see a lot of the same reactions in this community as what she describes - a lot of "why are you so angry", a lot of trivialization of the issue, a lot of unexamined privilege, and lots of people reacting very defensively as if simply by pointing out inequities I'm painting a giant bullseye on your racial-majority forehead.

These problems exist. They are real. If you are not part of a racial minority you probably won't fully comprehend what it's really like. But that's okay, no one expects you to fully grok it, and no one is calling you out just because you're [insert majority race in whatever locale]. What we do want is some modicum of understanding, some modicum of respect, and less middle-brow dismissals of things that millions upon millions of people are experiencing.

So yeah, I think the general thesis of this post is sound. I just wish she were less vitriolic about it - but honestly, having gone through similar things (in a racial, rather than gender, context) I can see why she is.

[polemic]

Going "off the rails" is, I believe, a fair response. It's easy to call out anger when it's a response the relentless passive oppression. But anger is the correct response. Often it's the only way to break through the heavy repressive blanket of faux-politeness.

Otherwise, I agree with you =D

[potatolicious]

Oh, don't get me wrong, I agree with the angry tone of the piece. That part is fine - IMO the opportunity for sober, quiet debate about sexism in IT has sailed.

We work in an industry where blatant sexism can be seen around every corner, and yet every time it is (politely, respectfully, intelligently) brought up the overwhelming community response has been deplorable.

We work in an industry where a large portion of the population does not believe sexism is a real, substantial problem. I think getting angry is about all anyone's got left.

That said, that's not the "off the rails" part I was referring to. Discrimination is, despite the common lay narrative, not frequently about hating anyone, it's about treating individuals by the (alleged) characteristics of some class they belong to. It's about treating someone based on Asian stereotypes if they're Asian, or female stereotypes if they're women, etc etc.

It is an incredibly suffocating environment to be in, where every corner you turn you must first prove "I am more than your mental construct of my class" before you can be treated like an individual.

So it would be doubly hypocritical for those of us fighting these injustices to engage in the same. "White male" is stereotyped with "bigot", but we need not engage in persisting these stereotypes, and we need not paint individuals with large brushes based on the alleged transgressions of their (involuntarily chosen!) groups. This is, after all, exactly what is frequently done to us. The off the rails part is the repeated use of "White male" as a synonym for bigotry and intolerance.