The whole "gender (identity) is a social construct" is definitely bs. The sense of which sex you are is innate. It's just how it's expressed that changes with society, and that's kind of to be expected.
What if I told you technology could exist without daily injections of venture capital?
I absolutely agree. It was better before people started throwing mad money at anything even remotely tech. Then people were more focused on making a product that was good enough that it would attract customers, not slide shows of crazy projections using non-working mock-ups to get bought out, or for the founders to cash out.
The type of cell changes over time when it's transformed into a neovagina. It's really quite amazing. But don't let facts stop you from expressing your transphobia.
As for acceptance by other women, haven't you noticed that the ones doing the attacking, both here and in the news media, are almost exclusively male? And that it's pretty much exclusively directed at m2f twomen? Don't hear anyone of either sex complaining about f2m men now, do you?
Now, back on topic - which you seem never to want to do
Most of the comments to this article show, even after the guy admitted he was trying to leverage his position for sex, and after he apologized, many of the guys here kept defending him and blaming the women, going so far as to attribute motives when there's no evidence that they possess the power of clairvoyance or mind-reading abilities.
This further demonstrates the rampant misogyny in IT. That's the message that's being sent out to every woman who reads this site. And the message to men is not to try to defend women, because then you're just a pussy yourself.
This is why the thread is entitled "Expected slashdot post-2000 response". It''s when slashdot became overrun with web monkeys who think they can code and that their shit doesn't stink. What's dismissed as SJW behaviour here now used to be considered normal. Fortunately, it still is for a large portion of the population.
Such a system also allows for disinformation by feeding your troops false data about related stuff. Telling them stuff that they can confirm makes it easier for them to swallow the false information that the soldier believes to be true.
Or do you not compartmentalize sensitive data any more?
At some point we should acknowledge that many people have quit the field over crappy projects that have left a permanent bad taste in their mouth, one job after another with sociopaths for managers or leaders, barely tech-literate "managers" who keep on insisting that the time to do something can be negotiated down without consequences in terms of quality, contradictory requirements, the cult of featuritis even when (not if) it damages the product, lack of a sense of being valued, shitty work environment, and less stressful or more fulfilling opportunities elsewhere.
Even geeks and nerds eventually outgrow all the crap and want a real life. ("outgrow" in the sense that putting up with the bullshit for one more day will send them postal). Eventually the instinct for self-preservation kicks in.
So the guy has found something else to do that he enjoys... we need more stories that show that "yes, there ARE other options, and you may enjoy one of them more".
To the closed-source guys, it's a feature - it makes it easier to sell the next version (which may or may not fix the bug that annoys you, but that uncertainty never stopped people from buying it). And the new version will be "improved" by splitting off some existing handy features into a new "premium" "enterprisey" version, because "professional" doesn't mean what it used to.
But are the resources all that scarce? Seems to me we've gone from "on the internet nobody knows you're a dog" to "on the internet even your dog can be a 'developer' ".
Resources get tight when you want someone to work on your for-profit project for free or at below-market rates. That's entirely normal - the previous hype of all things computer-related is over.
Women in positions of authority over minors (male or female) who have sex with them most certainly do go to jail. Don't take my word for it - you can search yourself, so you can't claim I distorted the search in any way. Your perceptions are distorted by your need for victimhood.
And that's why I will never work for a company that has a woman at a C level. They blame everyone else besides themselves.
Male C-level folks do it too. Ever hear of the expression "shit runs downhill?" We've all had bosses who make serious errors of judgement against our better advice, then when the crap hits the fan it's not their fault. And if you disagree your days are numbered, even if you have all the proof in the world, because "you're a troublemaker who doesn't respect authority."
I'm certainly not okay with it. It's stupid, a Sisyphean task. Even after the guy has said that it's wrong to use power to get sex, and that he's done exactly that, people still attack the women (and many attack all women) and defend the guy instead of admiring the courage it took to own it instead of continuing the denial.
The libertarian bent, all the other crap - what happened to these people that made them so broken? Personally, I suspect it may be that so many of the tech leaders are fairly sociopathic, and they are unconsciously learned what they see - if you want to be successful, treat people like objects - to be disposed of when their usefulness ends - it doesn't matter as long as they get theirs.
There's been a lot of objectification of women in this thread - it's emblematic of the problem.
Here's what I don't get - and it applies to all the men slagging all the women
1. Why do you think you know our experiences better than we do?
2. What do you get out of it?
3. Why is our sense of autonomy and safety not important to you?
4. Why do you persist in saying that these women's experiences aren't valid?
5. Why are you by your actions providing encouragement for denying the validity of women's experiences?
6. Why is offending women okay?
7. Why do you hear but not listen when women talk?
As for me:
8. Would you rather I be dishonest about who I am?
9. Why do you think you know me better than I myself do?
A quick aside, and then back on topic. Male-to-female sex reassignment surgery has one of the best percentages of positive outcomes going. And there are plenty of surgeries that are far more complicated. It's done in private clinics, not hospitals. It's classified as plastic surgery.
Amazing how many posts against women this article has generated. All women - xx and xy. Guess we're more like genetic women than you want to admit, since your misogyny includes us.
Now more on topic - if the majority of responses are misogynistic, why? Is the stereotype of the toxic male tech culture true? And if it is true, why is it that way? Was it inevitable, or did something happen to cause it?
These are questions that need to be answered or we're just going to see this whole mess repeated over and over. Or to simplify - what drives people to hate others who are not like them? What makes them xenophobic, or racist, or misogynistic, or disliking people who are worse off then them, or have a different religion (or no religion)?
- or to make the question more specific to this particular discussion -
The comments have shown that people will continue to defend this guys behaviour well after he himself said it was wrong. Why do people do that? There's more at work here than meets the eye. Personally, I think it's because many people suffer from a rigidity of thought - once they form an idea, facts that discredit that idea are more easily ignored. Can this illogical, dysfunctional behaviour be diagnosed and treated, short of intensive education? Was there some advantage to having this trait at some point in human evolution?
Read James Triptree Jr's Houston Houston Do You Read..." A sci-fi classic written way back in 1976, she pretty much nailed it when it comes to men like you. And she wasn't a misanthrope - read about her life and how she died.
What is it with women who insist on working for companies run by creeps?
What is it with men who think that a position of power is a license to be a creep? Specifically, why do you think it's okay to be a creep? Are you a creep and just being defensive?
If someone is at a social event like a party, and they make non-verbal contact (e.g. smiling at you), your advances are clearly not unwanted. Personally though I prefer to get to know people first and sound them out that way, I'm not big on just approaching strangers.
Some guys seem to think that it's okay to just make advances in every woman in any situation... Like this guy who apparently doesn't see an issue with hitting on women who are asking him for money in a business setting.
Probably because his brain shorted out at the "women asking for money" part. Happens a lot in some of the seedier parts of town, I hear.:-)
It's not about his money - it's about the investor's money. He's perfectly expendable. Problem was, he started treating it like it really was his money to use as a lever against women.
Stick around. The comments of this article just keep on scraping new lows. It's the post-2000 libertarian slashdot, where any sign of compassion, or even acknowledging that people can be the victims of circumstances, is met with Ayn Randian cries of "I got mine Jack, and it's because I'm better than you, you lazy failure". Where wanting people to help each other is seen as opposing the gospel of economic darwinism, and swept away with the label "SJW."
By the same logic, the founding fathers should be shat on because they were SJWs. (Though their idea of justice didn't extend to women, blacks, etc).
Apparently you think men can't be trusted to stop thinking with their dicks. "I couldn't help myself. She shouldn't have dressed the way she did."
Indeed, men who let their little head override their big head shouldn't be working with women. This explains the self-organizing emergent culture that has made tech evolve into such a toxic place for women.
Slashdot Mirror
The whole "gender (identity) is a social construct" is definitely bs. The sense of which sex you are is innate. It's just how it's expressed that changes with society, and that's kind of to be expected.
But if feminists simply avoided assholes, what would they spend their lives bitching about?
But if feminists simply avoided assholes, what would assholes spend their lives bitching about?
FTFY
"I don't like transsexuals. And I deal with it by simply avoiding people I don't like."
Bullshit. You certainly could have avoided any interaction with my by simply not replying. But you've been doing that - a lot. Quit lying to yourself.
What if I told you technology could exist without daily injections of venture capital?
I absolutely agree. It was better before people started throwing mad money at anything even remotely tech. Then people were more focused on making a product that was good enough that it would attract customers, not slide shows of crazy projections using non-working mock-ups to get bought out, or for the founders to cash out.
The type of cell changes over time when it's transformed into a neovagina. It's really quite amazing. But don't let facts stop you from expressing your transphobia.
As for acceptance by other women, haven't you noticed that the ones doing the attacking, both here and in the news media, are almost exclusively male? And that it's pretty much exclusively directed at m2f twomen? Don't hear anyone of either sex complaining about f2m men now, do you?
Now, back on topic - which you seem never to want to do
Most of the comments to this article show, even after the guy admitted he was trying to leverage his position for sex, and after he apologized, many of the guys here kept defending him and blaming the women, going so far as to attribute motives when there's no evidence that they possess the power of clairvoyance or mind-reading abilities.
This further demonstrates the rampant misogyny in IT. That's the message that's being sent out to every woman who reads this site. And the message to men is not to try to defend women, because then you're just a pussy yourself.
This is why the thread is entitled "Expected slashdot post-2000 response". It''s when slashdot became overrun with web monkeys who think they can code and that their shit doesn't stink. What's dismissed as SJW behaviour here now used to be considered normal. Fortunately, it still is for a large portion of the population.
Lack of free consent has nothing t do with whether the person is in an employer-employee relationship.
Dumb is relative. Researcher with smartphone is still way smarter than Trump with smartphone on Twitter.
I know - I actually did RTFA. Just couldn't pass up the joke (which was my first thought after reading the headline!)
It shouldn't be surprising really - social media is such a dopamine rush.
I think you meant "dope mine rush".
Too bad for you that the decision has already been made that telling everything you know makes sense.
Such a system also allows for disinformation by feeding your troops false data about related stuff. Telling them stuff that they can confirm makes it easier for them to swallow the false information that the soldier believes to be true.
Or do you not compartmentalize sensitive data any more?
At some point we should acknowledge that many people have quit the field over crappy projects that have left a permanent bad taste in their mouth, one job after another with sociopaths for managers or leaders, barely tech-literate "managers" who keep on insisting that the time to do something can be negotiated down without consequences in terms of quality, contradictory requirements, the cult of featuritis even when (not if) it damages the product, lack of a sense of being valued, shitty work environment, and less stressful or more fulfilling opportunities elsewhere.
Even geeks and nerds eventually outgrow all the crap and want a real life. ("outgrow" in the sense that putting up with the bullshit for one more day will send them postal). Eventually the instinct for self-preservation kicks in.
So the guy has found something else to do that he enjoys ... we need more stories that show that "yes, there ARE other options, and you may enjoy one of them more".
To the closed-source guys, it's a feature - it makes it easier to sell the next version (which may or may not fix the bug that annoys you, but that uncertainty never stopped people from buying it). And the new version will be "improved" by splitting off some existing handy features into a new "premium" "enterprisey" version, because "professional" doesn't mean what it used to.
But are the resources all that scarce? Seems to me we've gone from "on the internet nobody knows you're a dog" to "on the internet even your dog can be a 'developer' ".
Resources get tight when you want someone to work on your for-profit project for free or at below-market rates. That's entirely normal - the previous hype of all things computer-related is over.
Women in positions of authority over minors (male or female) who have sex with them most certainly do go to jail. Don't take my word for it - you can search yourself, so you can't claim I distorted the search in any way. Your perceptions are distorted by your need for victimhood.
Or men could just learn to control their urges. Why is that such a radical thought?
And that's why I will never work for a company that has a woman at a C level. They blame everyone else besides themselves.
Male C-level folks do it too. Ever hear of the expression "shit runs downhill?" We've all had bosses who make serious errors of judgement against our better advice, then when the crap hits the fan it's not their fault. And if you disagree your days are numbered, even if you have all the proof in the world, because "you're a troublemaker who doesn't respect authority."
I'm certainly not okay with it. It's stupid, a Sisyphean task. Even after the guy has said that it's wrong to use power to get sex, and that he's done exactly that, people still attack the women (and many attack all women) and defend the guy instead of admiring the courage it took to own it instead of continuing the denial.
The libertarian bent, all the other crap - what happened to these people that made them so broken? Personally, I suspect it may be that so many of the tech leaders are fairly sociopathic, and they are unconsciously learned what they see - if you want to be successful, treat people like objects - to be disposed of when their usefulness ends - it doesn't matter as long as they get theirs.
There's been a lot of objectification of women in this thread - it's emblematic of the problem.
Here's what I don't get - and it applies to all the men slagging all the women
1. Why do you think you know our experiences better than we do?
2. What do you get out of it?
3. Why is our sense of autonomy and safety not important to you?
4. Why do you persist in saying that these women's experiences aren't valid?
5. Why are you by your actions providing encouragement for denying the validity of women's experiences?
6. Why is offending women okay?
7. Why do you hear but not listen when women talk?
As for me:
8. Would you rather I be dishonest about who I am?
9. Why do you think you know me better than I myself do?
Food for thought ...
A quick aside, and then back on topic. Male-to-female sex reassignment surgery has one of the best percentages of positive outcomes going. And there are plenty of surgeries that are far more complicated. It's done in private clinics, not hospitals. It's classified as plastic surgery.
Amazing how many posts against women this article has generated. All women - xx and xy. Guess we're more like genetic women than you want to admit, since your misogyny includes us.
Now more on topic - if the majority of responses are misogynistic, why? Is the stereotype of the toxic male tech culture true? And if it is true, why is it that way? Was it inevitable, or did something happen to cause it?
These are questions that need to be answered or we're just going to see this whole mess repeated over and over. Or to simplify - what drives people to hate others who are not like them? What makes them xenophobic, or racist, or misogynistic, or disliking people who are worse off then them, or have a different religion (or no religion)?
- or to make the question more specific to this particular discussion -
The comments have shown that people will continue to defend this guys behaviour well after he himself said it was wrong. Why do people do that? There's more at work here than meets the eye. Personally, I think it's because many people suffer from a rigidity of thought - once they form an idea, facts that discredit that idea are more easily ignored. Can this illogical, dysfunctional behaviour be diagnosed and treated, short of intensive education? Was there some advantage to having this trait at some point in human evolution?
Read James Triptree Jr's Houston Houston Do You Read ..." A sci-fi classic written way back in 1976, she pretty much nailed it when it comes to men like you. And she wasn't a misanthrope - read about her life and how she died.
> Apparently it's some sort of male right to be creepy
Let me stop you there.
That, specifically, absolutely is a right, for people of all ethnicities, persuasions, and genders.
And there are consequences, as we're seeing now, same with any dick move.
What is it with women who insist on working for companies run by creeps?
What is it with men who think that a position of power is a license to be a creep? Specifically, why do you think it's okay to be a creep? Are you a creep and just being defensive?
If someone is at a social event like a party, and they make non-verbal contact (e.g. smiling at you), your advances are clearly not unwanted. Personally though I prefer to get to know people first and sound them out that way, I'm not big on just approaching strangers.
Some guys seem to think that it's okay to just make advances in every woman in any situation... Like this guy who apparently doesn't see an issue with hitting on women who are asking him for money in a business setting.
Probably because his brain shorted out at the "women asking for money" part. Happens a lot in some of the seedier parts of town, I hear. :-)
It's not about his money - it's about the investor's money. He's perfectly expendable. Problem was, he started treating it like it really was his money to use as a lever against women.
Stick around. The comments of this article just keep on scraping new lows. It's the post-2000 libertarian slashdot, where any sign of compassion, or even acknowledging that people can be the victims of circumstances, is met with Ayn Randian cries of "I got mine Jack, and it's because I'm better than you, you lazy failure". Where wanting people to help each other is seen as opposing the gospel of economic darwinism, and swept away with the label "SJW."
By the same logic, the founding fathers should be shat on because they were SJWs. (Though their idea of justice didn't extend to women, blacks, etc).
Apparently you think men can't be trusted to stop thinking with their dicks. "I couldn't help myself. She shouldn't have dressed the way she did."
Indeed, men who let their little head override their big head shouldn't be working with women. This explains the self-organizing emergent culture that has made tech evolve into such a toxic place for women.