[beat]

We already understand the roots of the problem quite well... comparing to other industries won't make much difference.

1. Male-dominated environment, women are a significant minority.

2. Inexcusable tolerance of sexist behavior - not calling it out when we see it.

3. "Why are you blaming me? I'm not one of those guys. Men might listen to you if you'd just stop the blanket accusations." (extra credit: count how many comments on this thread can be reduced to that sentiment.)

[nwhitmore]

"Have you stopped enabling sexism in tech?". That's what most of the replies sound like to me. Sort of like "have you stopped beating your wife?". Hard to come up with a good response without looking guilty isn't it?

[mreiland]

it should be noted that pointing out #3 doesn't make it an invalid point, and it certainly has nothing to do with why the issue exists in the first place.

[webmaven]

The problem, at it's root, is a set of self-reinforcing cycles, such as:

1. More men than women

2. Male harrasers feel safe to harass women

3. Women do not feel welcome

4. Women leave

5. Goto 1

Or:

1. Harassers target women in ways that are deniable and/or less visible

2. Well meaning men assume that if they if don't see it, it must not be happening very often

3. Women get tired of having their personal experiences questioned, denied, dismissed, and belittled

4. Women stay silent, or leave

5. The impression among bystander men that this must not happen that often is strengthened, emboldening harassers

6. Goto 1

Etc.

Given that, it is entirely fair to say to non-harrasser men that if they are not actively part of the solution, they are still pàrt if the problem.

[mreiland]

And after the umpteenth time of someone telling me I'm a terrible person ... I decide to be terrible by not caring about it anymore.

This is why your attitude is actively hurting you. It's driving away people like me, who actually agree with the basic premise that women should be treated equally.

[webmaven]

Being part of of the problem (that is, tacitly consenting to bad behavior by staying silent and not confronting it directly) does not make you a terrible person, or even a bad one. It just means that you are part of the problem.

The thing is, you can't expect a cookie for not doing terrible things. Not doing terrible things is the absolute minimum that is expected of you as an adult member of society. Only doing the bare minimum doesn't make you a good person or a bad one, but it shouldn't really be surprising that the great majority of people who are merely not doing terrible things have an inertia that keeps things from improving, and are thus part of the problem.

[mreiland]

Logically speaking, since folks with your attitude are a large part of the reason people like me don't bother, wouldn't that also make you, and your actions here, a part of the problem?

And wouldn't that imply the solution is to stop doing what you're doing?

So in essence, didn't you just admonish yourself?

[webmaven]

Let's just say that your retort, "well I would have helped if only you didn't make such a big deal about it", is awfully convenient as an excuse to do nothing (and is very nearly the same as the 'tone argument'). Because, of course, if no one makes a big deal about something, that also provides an excuse.

[JoeAltmaier]

That's black/white thinking. Folks do a lot of things in a lot of spheres. Not doing one terrible thing doesn't imply they're doing nothing else at all.

Take off the blinders - there're a lot more issues in the world than this one. Lots of people just don't have the emotional energy to invest in all of them, or even in very many of them.

[webmaven]

Well, sure. There are many issues on which I am still part of the problem. As I said, that doesn't make me a bad person.