[Rumford]

> This is an example of a problem where you think you're being helpful but all you're doing is separating someone from the group and probably harassing them.

Choosing to interpret clumsiness as "abuse" is EXACTLY the problem he's describing. If "jumping over each other to help her" is inappropriate, then someone needs to describe what is appropriate when the group is trying to go out of their way to welcome someone who isn't the group's usual demographic. It is not OK to label everything they do as abusive without explaining what your standard for good behavior would be.

> Were you doing it because you were nice or because it was a woman and you hoped to get something in return?

And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

> Your whole post is about how sneaky and devious you see women as and how you fear for your safety due to these traits.

Again, stupendously wrong. I think you're twisting his words this way on purpose and it turns my stomach that people are getting away with this.

He's not complaining about "women" being "devious." He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.

There is no question we should treat people with respect. But whether they belong to some minority, or some supposedly aggrieved group, DOES NOT MATTER. A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?

If there's a way you need other people to act in order for you to feel comfortable, fine, you have every right to tell people what those boundaries of yours are. At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.

[sanswork]

I'm explaining why it is seen as a negative. Treating that person the same as anyone else is your group is what is appropriate.

>And then you accuse him of viewing all women with suspicion. Do you not see the hypocrisy?

I don't view all men with suspicion so no. I view men who act like he described with suspicion though.

>He's not complaining about "women" being "devious."

"Is she going to report me for code of conduct violations when things don't go her way?"

That's actually exactly what he was doing.

>He's complaining about the poisonous and paranoid culture that is created when certain groups have carte blanche to hang the scarlet letter of "Harassment" on you for God-only-knows what reason.

No group has that ability though. What is happening is he's built up in his mind this boogyman and is letting his fears of it control his actions in such a way that he is actually making himself act in a negative way.

>A person is a person. Isn't that the goal of "equality"?

Yes, and that is exactly what I said above. He was describing a situation where him and his group were specifically not treating people equally and being upset because his actions in differentiating a person from his group was off putting.

>At the same time though, your comfort zone does not automatically obligate everyone around you to change.

The thing is though the community has decided on a set of rules for how people should act to be a part of it. If you can't live by those conventions then fine but you can't complain about being excluded from the community when you don't.

If you find being asked to treat people civilly and equally to be a threat to you then odds are you really need to reevaluate who you are as a person.

No one is perfect, everyone makes mistakes, everyone is an asshole at different times or acts inappropriately. Being able to recognize that you are in the wrong at those times instead of blaming society is a part of belonging to it though.

[Rumford]

> Treating that person the same as anyone else is your group is what is appropriate.

Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."

The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia. It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.

The reason stuff like this scares me is not that I'm accustomed to acting like a troll and don't want to stop. It's because I have spent decades treating everyone I meet with respect, and I now feel I could be punished for a crime I didn't commit at any moment. A good reputation takes a lifetime to build, and in this environment it can be undermined in moments. Now that we seem to be surrounded by people on high alert for signs of thoughtcrime, this asset -- my reputation -- which I've spent a lifetime building is on very thin ice just because my race and sex and politics and gender choices don't intersect with any politically correct victim groups. I don't like it, and I'm not going to just shrink back in fear and say nothing about it.

[sanswork]

>Are you sure? It seems quite likely to me that this sensitive person would lodge exactly the same complaint for totally different behavior. "They didn't roll out the red carpet for me, what a bunch of hostile stunted brogrammers."

It's the beliefs like that which I am talking about. You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you out. And that all women demand a red carpet rolled out for them or else they will file a claim against you.

>The person driving a wedge between females and tech is not the males in tech, it's the people spreading this paranoia.

Right, like you who is spreading this fear that they have to constantly be on their toes because the women are out to catch them making a mistake so they can ruin your life.

>It's the people telling women that every man who codes needs to be reeducated before the field is safe for her to enter.

The thing is it isn't every man that needs to be reeducated. Most of us are perfectly fine interacting with any gender. But there is definitely a minority that is a problem and changes to cultures are a problem for them because they act inappropriately.

Your fear is imaginary if you act the way you claim. There is no boogyman out to get you.

[Rumford]

> You've built up this imaginary view of the world where every woman is just waiting to catch you out.

You've really got to stop doing that. I've already explained this isn't about women in particular. This is about a culture of guilty-until-proven-innocent in cases where one is being charged with having thoughts or intentions that offend the purveyors of grievance culture. A good example is this very conversation. Your tactic here, over and over again, has been to try and put me on the defensive, as if I have to prove I'm not a sexist.

Just stop it. This is a poisonous way to talk to people. You're only sowing division.