Guys make jokes. Women should learn how to handle them. I like to think I do, even though I realize that you're getting my own perspective on this.
Joke wasn't funny, but it wasn't particularly hostile, and I'm not running and screaming from my job because some dude on a website made a joke about maternity leave.
And if that's the thing that makes you want to quit...well, I guess my best advice for you is to not leave the house.
In fact, I'd say dave420 and AC are far more sexist. You presume that women need standing up for. That's why my sig is what it is. Let women handle their own business. The ones who can are the ones that you want to work with you. Not the ones that get all drippy-eyed at the vaguest and non-general insults.
I think a thing that matters to everyone (yes, even straight people) matters to nerds.
Here's why this is a big deal for everyone: because excluding people from getting married based on sexual orientation means that the Government, at its own discretion, can create arbitrary groups that it can discriminate against based on any number of grounds, for any reason, so long as enough people or deep enough pockets can lobby for it.
For the Supreme Court to come out and say something is a constitutional right and therefore protected under the law for all people is their way of saying that all individuals deserve an equal amount of dignity. And if something was once denied a person based on social mores, it can be corrected.
This has far-reaching implications, not just for homosexuals, but for the population as a whole.
I'm straight, and I'm breathing a sigh of relief over this.
Well, technically, if you're going to talk about the environment that breeds what people perceive to be the rejection of women, then you have to talk about how the environment exists and how it has to change so that when women show up, they don't feel like they've wasted their lives on an education that stops just as soon as they get to the studio.
Or, if that environment is bred in the college classroom and other lab spaces.
Not that it is, at least not everywhere, but if you're going to talk in terms of shortages in a society where it isn't against the law to go into any career to you damned well please, you have to address the problem from top to bottom.
Because when I was 18, I recognized that I was an adult and responsible for myself. I didn't whinge and whine about needing nurturing because I knew that failure would mean a backslide into debt and putting career plans on hold for another half year or more. My need for "nurturing" took a far, far backseat to me getting shit done.
I didn't put my career or my education on anyone else's shoulders. Maybe more kids need to be taught that if you want something, you need to learn not just how to do things, but to claw and scratch if necessary.
Because everyone deserves a "nice" place to learn and work, but sometimes, those things aren't feasible and you have to work with what you get. And yes, for most people that don't have an "in" and cushy life supports behind them, that means toughening up.
Every industry is filled with emotionally stunted people.
If you don't believe that, spend your lunch every working day this week asking your peers about their problems. At least 20% (and I'm being generous here) will be people who can't be bothered to get out of their own way to fix their problems.
I've met sexist men, yes, but I've also met groups of women in the same environment that had a peer support group for being on the Atkins diet (which in that group turned its members miserable).
In one office I worked in, I had one man borderline sexually harass me, and one woman openly try to turn everyone against me (I found out about this because everyone else liked me better than her).
Point is, and I should really make this my sig: if normal people knew how to deal with problems, we wouldn't -have- problems.
If you need to be "nurtured", you don't deserve a career that involves anything more complicated than saying "Do you want fries with that?".
The word "nurturing", when used by an adult in relation to an adult (read: college student or older person, who can vote, drive and have sex), reeks of the kind of person that whines about their needs not being met, and holds everyone but themselves responsible for the task.
Professional careers, especially ones that require a lot of motivation for self-teaching and rapidly move and change in under a decade, and especially ones that command a high salary, don't benefit from people who need to be "nurtured". They benefit the greatest from people who don't need mommy and daddy figures to do inventories on feelings.
Indeed. I've been through this sort of thing before. Tell the people all is well, even though the boots on the ground know that what's going on doesn't pass the smell test.
The layoffs will happen, but they will be done more quietly and more gradually. Count on it.
Eh, in every forum I frequent where there are "big names", those big names got to be where they were precisely because they were social climbers. Or, if you like, attention whores. That's why the people with little competence get so much attention: because they have the time and energy to get people to pay attention to them.
And in principle, there's nothing wrong with that. You want to be praised for the good work that you do, you should spend a little time on your hustle game making sure people know who you are and why they should care.
Yeah, that goes lop-sided because the people who "care" are the ones that are "too busy" to put in the hustle and the people who "just want to sell a product" are visible and are "talking over" the "real deal", but them's the breaks when the "real deal" can't look past his/her own nose and acknowledge the game is so much bigger than them.
Indeed. Another point: I don't get the snobbery around here.
Yes, I know this is "news for nerds", but it shouldn't be so nerdy that the average person or aspiring nerd that shows up feels too intimidated by the articles that they won't read the articles or join in discussion.
For a lot of us, this is old news, sure. But it's not cool to assume that everyone knows what we know.
When the Bluetooth is disconnected, it alerts me. This means I left my phone in the house and I need to go back and get it.
When my customer texts me and requires only a "Yes" or "No" while I'm trying to de-plane, that is a real time and annoyance saver to be able to use one of the pre-programmed Quick Replies.
Looking at time is much easier and socially acceptable on a watch than a phone.
The step counter reminds me that I've been sitting too much (I have to access it, but it's still more convenient than to do on my phone) and should move around more.
The stopwatch/timer gets used for interval training. Better than taking the phone off my arm and fiddle with it or having a stopwatch ready.
I like it, I use it plenty, but I wouldn't say everyone needs one. I even argued with my customer (who doesn't wear a watch) that a smartwatch would be a waste of money for him.
No, I'm an engineer. I know jack about nursing, but so does any politician bending over backwards to get people behind STEM initiatives.
What I know is that STEM is played up as somehow "glamorous"...here we are, the engineers and scientists of the world, the cultural elite, the "geek chic", the ones who make all the money and get all the visibility and notoriety. We're "rock stars" and "ninjas".
Being in STEM, according to politicians, not only confers money, but status. If that wasn't the case, why not push for more nurses? And I'm not saying for boys, I'm saying for all kids. Because it's not "cool" enough.
Because women need "better" representation in fields that provide the potential to make "more money".
Pretty funny, huh?
I mean it couldn't be that a certain stripe of feminists have bought into that idea while some self-serving politicians are trying to drive down salaries by saturating the market with sub-standard labor, could it? Because otherwise, we'd be seeing women push for more women in the trades, huh?
And I'm going to say the worst thing I could because nobody else will: feminists or whoever you are that's crying about nudes being published of you: suck it up. The problem is social, not the person who violated your privacy. Nobody is physically attacking you and if they did it's a social problem- not a communications problem. It's the people physically attacking- not the f'ing words.
Careful with that one there, buddy. Saying "the problem is social" exacerbates an existing problem; that being, you can label someone to be part of a group (let's say "witches") and it's a shortcut used to bypass individual judgment ("Burn the heretic! Damn the lack of evidence!").
I'm a firm believer in personal responsibility. Prove that I, me, this person writing the post, did something wrong. Do not attempt to make me look guilty by association with a group you can tie me to, however loosely. It's intellectually dishonest, at a minimum.
All that ever happens from these anti-harassment laws is the government comes in and uses them against people it doesn't like. There are already laws against murder and other other forms of abuse. You don't need another law to tack on to someone whose murdered because they dislike some racial, social, sexual, or other group.
No, voting with your feet is not a problem at all.
When you have a choice of making yourself into a very visible person by way of complaint, you run the risk of ruining your career.
I've always viewed work as much a relationship as I view a relationship with my husband, and ultimately why I married him and not anyone else I've ever dated: if you're constantly struggling to find happiness in that space, maybe you should stop trying so hard and find someplace where happiness comes naturally.
Now, you might be arguing that workplaces not accepting women is a problem. Which may be correct if you were to generalize and say ALL workplaces, like all men, were the same.
I say it isn't a problem because there are plenty of workplaces that DO accept women and treat them well.
And like any good partner, you have to be willing to walk away from yours if your partner isn't meeting your needs.
Slashdot Mirror
Woman here. Please don't presume to speak for me.
Guys make jokes. Women should learn how to handle them. I like to think I do, even though I realize that you're getting my own perspective on this.
Joke wasn't funny, but it wasn't particularly hostile, and I'm not running and screaming from my job because some dude on a website made a joke about maternity leave.
And if that's the thing that makes you want to quit...well, I guess my best advice for you is to not leave the house.
In fact, I'd say dave420 and AC are far more sexist. You presume that women need standing up for. That's why my sig is what it is. Let women handle their own business. The ones who can are the ones that you want to work with you. Not the ones that get all drippy-eyed at the vaguest and non-general insults.
Shhhh!
And a bit suspect, I think.
Why, Camelot, of course!
Came in just to make this joke. I have no mod points, but I will clap together empty halves of a coconut in approbation.
Time to welcome our new robot overlords.
Nah, if there were ever an opportunity to laugh in the face of all the right-wing lunatics that couldn't hear the train comin', this is it.
I think a thing that matters to everyone (yes, even straight people) matters to nerds.
Here's why this is a big deal for everyone: because excluding people from getting married based on sexual orientation means that the Government, at its own discretion, can create arbitrary groups that it can discriminate against based on any number of grounds, for any reason, so long as enough people or deep enough pockets can lobby for it.
For the Supreme Court to come out and say something is a constitutional right and therefore protected under the law for all people is their way of saying that all individuals deserve an equal amount of dignity. And if something was once denied a person based on social mores, it can be corrected.
This has far-reaching implications, not just for homosexuals, but for the population as a whole.
I'm straight, and I'm breathing a sigh of relief over this.
Well, technically, if you're going to talk about the environment that breeds what people perceive to be the rejection of women, then you have to talk about how the environment exists and how it has to change so that when women show up, they don't feel like they've wasted their lives on an education that stops just as soon as they get to the studio.
Or, if that environment is bred in the college classroom and other lab spaces.
Not that it is, at least not everywhere, but if you're going to talk in terms of shortages in a society where it isn't against the law to go into any career to you damned well please, you have to address the problem from top to bottom.
Really?
My attitude is part of the problem?
Because when I was 18, I recognized that I was an adult and responsible for myself. I didn't whinge and whine about needing nurturing because I knew that failure would mean a backslide into debt and putting career plans on hold for another half year or more. My need for "nurturing" took a far, far backseat to me getting shit done.
I didn't put my career or my education on anyone else's shoulders. Maybe more kids need to be taught that if you want something, you need to learn not just how to do things, but to claw and scratch if necessary.
Because everyone deserves a "nice" place to learn and work, but sometimes, those things aren't feasible and you have to work with what you get. And yes, for most people that don't have an "in" and cushy life supports behind them, that means toughening up.
No mod points, but I did want to at least contribute a *slow clap* for this post.
Every industry is filled with emotionally stunted people.
If you don't believe that, spend your lunch every working day this week asking your peers about their problems. At least 20% (and I'm being generous here) will be people who can't be bothered to get out of their own way to fix their problems.
I've met sexist men, yes, but I've also met groups of women in the same environment that had a peer support group for being on the Atkins diet (which in that group turned its members miserable).
In one office I worked in, I had one man borderline sexually harass me, and one woman openly try to turn everyone against me (I found out about this because everyone else liked me better than her).
Point is, and I should really make this my sig: if normal people knew how to deal with problems, we wouldn't -have- problems.
If you need to be "nurtured", you don't deserve a career that involves anything more complicated than saying "Do you want fries with that?".
The word "nurturing", when used by an adult in relation to an adult (read: college student or older person, who can vote, drive and have sex), reeks of the kind of person that whines about their needs not being met, and holds everyone but themselves responsible for the task.
Professional careers, especially ones that require a lot of motivation for self-teaching and rapidly move and change in under a decade, and especially ones that command a high salary, don't benefit from people who need to be "nurtured". They benefit the greatest from people who don't need mommy and daddy figures to do inventories on feelings.
Indeed. I've been through this sort of thing before. Tell the people all is well, even though the boots on the ground know that what's going on doesn't pass the smell test.
The layoffs will happen, but they will be done more quietly and more gradually. Count on it.
Security is a point where a whole lot of things have to meet.
Indeed. Security is not passive. It's active. And it should be drilled into everyone's head that it's -everyone's- responsibility.
Eh, in every forum I frequent where there are "big names", those big names got to be where they were precisely because they were social climbers. Or, if you like, attention whores. That's why the people with little competence get so much attention: because they have the time and energy to get people to pay attention to them.
And in principle, there's nothing wrong with that. You want to be praised for the good work that you do, you should spend a little time on your hustle game making sure people know who you are and why they should care.
Yeah, that goes lop-sided because the people who "care" are the ones that are "too busy" to put in the hustle and the people who "just want to sell a product" are visible and are "talking over" the "real deal", but them's the breaks when the "real deal" can't look past his/her own nose and acknowledge the game is so much bigger than them.
Indeed. Another point: I don't get the snobbery around here.
Yes, I know this is "news for nerds", but it shouldn't be so nerdy that the average person or aspiring nerd that shows up feels too intimidated by the articles that they won't read the articles or join in discussion.
For a lot of us, this is old news, sure. But it's not cool to assume that everyone knows what we know.
Commenting to remove mis-moderation. Apologies. Your post was "Insightful", but apparently my trigger fingers thought you were a troll.
I also wear one (Samsung).
When the Bluetooth is disconnected, it alerts me. This means I left my phone in the house and I need to go back and get it.
When my customer texts me and requires only a "Yes" or "No" while I'm trying to de-plane, that is a real time and annoyance saver to be able to use one of the pre-programmed Quick Replies.
Looking at time is much easier and socially acceptable on a watch than a phone.
The step counter reminds me that I've been sitting too much (I have to access it, but it's still more convenient than to do on my phone) and should move around more.
The stopwatch/timer gets used for interval training. Better than taking the phone off my arm and fiddle with it or having a stopwatch ready.
I like it, I use it plenty, but I wouldn't say everyone needs one. I even argued with my customer (who doesn't wear a watch) that a smartwatch would be a waste of money for him.
No, I'm an engineer. I know jack about nursing, but so does any politician bending over backwards to get people behind STEM initiatives.
What I know is that STEM is played up as somehow "glamorous"...here we are, the engineers and scientists of the world, the cultural elite, the "geek chic", the ones who make all the money and get all the visibility and notoriety. We're "rock stars" and "ninjas".
Being in STEM, according to politicians, not only confers money, but status. If that wasn't the case, why not push for more nurses? And I'm not saying for boys, I'm saying for all kids. Because it's not "cool" enough.
Because women need "better" representation in fields that provide the potential to make "more money".
Pretty funny, huh?
I mean it couldn't be that a certain stripe of feminists have bought into that idea while some self-serving politicians are trying to drive down salaries by saturating the market with sub-standard labor, could it? Because otherwise, we'd be seeing women push for more women in the trades, huh?
And that wouldn't be nearly as funny either.
And I'm going to say the worst thing I could because nobody else will: feminists or whoever you are that's crying about nudes being published of you: suck it up. The problem is social, not the person who violated your privacy. Nobody is physically attacking you and if they did it's a social problem- not a communications problem. It's the people physically attacking- not the f'ing words.
Careful with that one there, buddy. Saying "the problem is social" exacerbates an existing problem; that being, you can label someone to be part of a group (let's say "witches") and it's a shortcut used to bypass individual judgment ("Burn the heretic! Damn the lack of evidence!").
I'm a firm believer in personal responsibility. Prove that I, me, this person writing the post, did something wrong. Do not attempt to make me look guilty by association with a group you can tie me to, however loosely. It's intellectually dishonest, at a minimum.
All that ever happens from these anti-harassment laws is the government comes in and uses them against people it doesn't like. There are already laws against murder and other other forms of abuse. You don't need another law to tack on to someone whose murdered because they dislike some racial, social, sexual, or other group.
Now this I agree with.
This man did, however. If there ever were a real someone you could nominate as "The Most Interesting Man in the World", he would probably be the guy.
RIP, Sir Lee, and thank you.
I don't know, I'd have modded it "funny" by sheer virtue of sarcasm.
Lighten up, people.
No, voting with your feet is not a problem at all.
When you have a choice of making yourself into a very visible person by way of complaint, you run the risk of ruining your career.
I've always viewed work as much a relationship as I view a relationship with my husband, and ultimately why I married him and not anyone else I've ever dated: if you're constantly struggling to find happiness in that space, maybe you should stop trying so hard and find someplace where happiness comes naturally.
Now, you might be arguing that workplaces not accepting women is a problem. Which may be correct if you were to generalize and say ALL workplaces, like all men, were the same.
I say it isn't a problem because there are plenty of workplaces that DO accept women and treat them well.
And like any good partner, you have to be willing to walk away from yours if your partner isn't meeting your needs.