[Someone1234]

The article title isn't sexist, you're just hypersensitive.

Nobody with common sense, men or women, could take the title as being anything other than a generic throwback to a bygone era.

The article doesn't really focus on gender beyond the cutesy title.

PS - And you want to talk about sexist titles? Seems like every other day there is a title implying all men in tech are sexist neanderthals. But where are you when they're posted?

[ninjaplease]

It is sexist and you would notice if it was the other way around and, you being as much of an ass as you are, you'd probably be a big fucking douchebag about it too. Way to turn the conversation to you boo-hooing about being called a sexist neanderthal, eh?

[patzerhacker]

I find this comment incredibly ironic considering "ninjaplease" is a reference to an incredibly racist stereotypical saying.

[Someone1234]

Any mere mention of men isn't within its own right sexist.

If it was the other way around and they merely mentioned women I would most assuredly not call that sexist either.

If you feel it is sexist then explain it. Why is mentioning men sexist? Is it the word? The implication that men work in tech' in general? Or something else.

[ninjaplease]

It's not a "mere mention of men" it's some bullshit nonsense that implies men ought to be a certain way and it also subtly implies that we're all men here and that this is no place for women. Christ you are thick.

[Someone1234]

So your trades, name calling, and children temper tantrums are because of a "subtle implication?" Seems quite disproportionate to me.

Did you consider that it is such a subtle implication (your words) that maybe there is no implication there at all? I just ask because that implication doesn't exist anywhere in the actual quote (word for word), so plausibly it is your own baggage that added it to your reading.

You effectively created your own sexism and then got mad at that very same sexism. Maybe you should self-reflect on that a bit after you've calmed down.