I only got about halfway through this, far enough to wonder why she didn't tell him that she had to personally play the game in order to review it and, if that had not gotten him to move the fuck out of her way, then just walk off. No need to be "polite" and "respectful" to a dick.
I finished it, and wondered why she consented to such treatment over and over, reinforcing the stereotype instead of objecting and demonstrating competence and tearing down the misconception.
It can be really hard in a situation like that to stand up for yourself, especially if you don't want to cause a public fuss. I'm female, and at PAX East I was approached a couple of times (at social events, by attendees) and rather inappropriate things were said to me; it's hard to do anything other than just want to get out of that sort of a situation. Something inside you says "I can't believe he really means this", or "Did he really just say what I think he said?" - it is very much l'esprit d'escalier when it comes to standing up for yourself.
I always find it easier to speak up for other people than myself. One of the tricks I use when negotiating is to imagine I'm negotiating a salary for someone else so it stops being about me.
I'm also terrible at doing this, too. I think you're right though - it is easier to do it for someone else! But when you're in a confrontational situation that you haven't sought (unlike a salary negotiation, which you have probably sought), it's more about the "seat of your pants" type stuff, in which I tend to try to avoid escalation and/or the confrontation itself. Of course it's always easy to come up with "well I should have said x" or "I should have kicked him in the y" after it's over.
Seat of your pants type stuff is hard. It can help to go over all the "shoulda saids" afterwards so that you are a little quicker on the draw the next time. It also helps me personally to remember that just as I was socialized to behave a certain way, so were men. Many of them are happy to be given a different option for how to interact with women, assuming I give them the benefit of the doubt, treat it like a bad habit rather than a personal sin, and give them some option better than letting me abuse them instead of letting them abuse me.
Intended to be helpful, not critical. Have a great day and thank you for participating.
Yeah, to be fair, I am getting a bit better than I was 10 years ago about this stuff. I'm now far more likely to call someone out on bs than I was back then. But it's taken a long time and a lot of skin-thickening to get that courage up.
Though I have never been to PAX East I would still say: I'm sorry.
It's incredibly perverse, the way I was socialized in the US. I was taught essentially that love was always "at stake" in every discussion with the opposite sex, and that if I didn't have love, whether by commitment or conquest, then I was worthless. I ultimately had to resolve the problem that I wasn't treating ladies as genuine human beings by jumping off the deep end, and accidentally inventing a personal religion. Basically I committed to the worthlessness and resolved to make it my own, because it was better to treat others as real human beings. In doing so I suddenly discovered that love isn't static, isn't a substance, and that along that earlier path, real love was in fact impossible. So by embracing worthlessness I accidentally discovered worth.
I can't apologize to those I have wronged before, and those that have wronged you can't apologize to you now, but though it is empty, I would apologize to you on their behalf. I'm sorry; I've learned.
(Some) guys are told that their value as a man is tied to how good they are at "getting" women. So every conversation with a woman is framed in terms of an existential threat: if you're not getting enough women, you're not a real man.
We seriously need a social protocol for situations where A says something which makes B feel very sorry, but the proper recipients of B's apology are no longer available to hear it. It felt way too cheesy to just apologize to myself, so I apologized to you, but that doesn't make me feel any better about my womanizing and discriminatory past. Live and learn, I guess.
But it's still the right thing to do, and pointing this out is not victim blaming. And posting a blog to an audience that already agrees with you is not going to effect change. Confronting the perpetrators will.
These comments are asking why she didn't do this or that, or saying she shouldn't be upset because that's just how it is, which is textbook victim blaming.
And judging by the comments in this thread alone, I hardly think it was posted to an audience that already agrees.
Sure, it's the right thing to do, that doesn't make it easy. And saying "well, you should have done this" when it's quite difficult to do is moving the responsibility for how the situation progressed to the victim.
The fact that these situations occur frequently in tech circles is indicative that things still need to be done about embedding the issues into the general consciousness of people in tech circles. If it were a one-off situation, and everyone were horrified by it, it would be easier to say "well, it was just that one guy". But the fact that it still happens frequently, and reading the comments here and elsewhere that shift the blame of the outcome to the victim... makes me think that we haven't quite got to that stage yet. Sadly.
I really wish I could find an article I read a while ago, in response to efforts in an open source community to create a "Code of Conduct" for their tech conferences. It was from a woman who had worked in blue-collar industry before and had moved into tech. She said all the things that I, as a man, cannot say, without being labeled a 'victim blamer'. It's not: it's putting the blame on the actual individual who caused the problem, rather than blaming it on the circumstances.
She made a bunch of observations. Firstly, that sexism in tech, while it happens, is nothing compared to the sexism you'd find in the average tattoo parlour or mechanical workshop. At least in tech there is the option of sitting down and writing blog posts about things and getting validation even weeks after the fact. In other sectors, you either confront the sexist in their face immediately, or you will lose face and not be taken seriously.
But she also rightly pointed out that establishing a "code of conduct" and expecting people to abide by it will not change the behavior of those who act sexist or inappropriate today. Either they do it out of ignorance, or they don't care. But they're not going to change until specific instances are pointed out.
Additionally, I've noticed on multiple occasions that putting sexism on a special pedestal and making it a mission to eradicate it just has the opposite effect. People start seeing it as a right to never be offended, based on their own narrow personal and/or cultural view. For example, there was an entire shitstorm in this community about a 'sexist' tweet, which literally did not contain any gender reference. It merely implied that there was a gallery where you could view all the conference attendees that had uploaded a picture and, tongue-in-cheek, suggested you go look for that attractive developer you saw last time. Which isn't that strange, it's hard to remember faces and names in large groups.
You'd think the tweet said "Come perv over hot geek chicks here." It would invite harrassment, sexualizes things unnecessarily, etc., and all this in a completely one-sided debate about validating the hurt feelings of a few women, completely ignoring all the men and women who didn't see any offense, who 'obviously' didn't 'get it'.
And actually, that offended me. Because it implies that a) the only people who picture-stalk are straight men b) if given the opportunity to do so, men can't help themselves.
It takes the discussion away from the individual who did something wrong, and instead paints a giant target on a nebulous generalization of a very diverse group of people.
Echoing liedra's point -- "it's worse elsewhere" is a poor excuse for inaction when we, in fact, are here (not working in tattoo parlors, for example).
Also worth noting that the fact that a woman wrote the article has little to do with how "true" it is; maybe this goes without saying, but "woman" don't have selected representatives who can reasonably speak for all of their experiences. Unless the article author is citing some actual data, she's just guessing as much as you are.
Codes of conduct really can help, if they achieve widespread acceptance. People are social animals; they care if everyone around them thinks less of them because of their actions. They find out what the people around them think sometimes because of direct confrontations, sometimes because of other things... imagine "John Doe" at a popular conference, sitting through a presentation on some retarded code of conduct, dumb modern political correctness cranked up to 11! -- and John leans over to crack a joke about it to the normal-looking guy next to him, but then he realizes the guy is nodding along with the presenter, and was now standing up to give a frickin standing ovation -- what, really? -- and, oh come on, just about everyone was standing up now? Cheering all that rubbish? He'd feel a bit lost, I think -- recognizing the disconnect -- and that probably wouldn't change his habits of thinking all that much... but it could certainly give him pause before telling that same joke about blondes and whiteout on computer screens in front of so many of these same people.
This isn't data; this is my hopeful imagining... but it's worth putting some energy into trying to fix this problem, in many ways at once (why not?) vs. putting energy into stopping others from trying to fix it.
At the very least, if you agree there's a problem, say so (instead of finding ways to dismiss it) when the topic comes up; people are listening.
Just a point about this discussion point - just because a situation is worse elsewhere doesn't make it acceptable in tech.
I agree that sometimes it goes a little overboard. But there are also genuine moments when sexist bullshit should be called out for what it is. I don't know anything about the "gallery" tweet, but you need to consider a wide contextual impact of things you say and do, especially when it comes to minority groups. Having a gallery of people involved in the conference is fine, but why bring attractiveness into it? Why not just say "interesting" or "talented" instead? It strikes me as just being a bit thoughtless of the promoters, really.
At which point does "considering the wider impact of what you do" cross into "pandering to people with an inflated sense of self-importance" though? I've seen endless discussions online where the latter isn't even acknowledged as an actual possibility. In particular, it seems North Americans are far more eager to side with an offendee than e.g. Europeans.
Jesus fucking christ, get some assertiveness training if you're having that much trouble with something so basic. Life is tough, if you don't learn to elbow your way in you'll always stand on the side-lines and will forever be relegated to being a spectator.
You're very privileged to have grown up in a social setting that rewards you for your assertiveness. Not everyone, and especially women, has had the same environment and socio-cultural expectation of them. It'd be lovely to foster a culture in which these issues weren't issues - but for now we have to address the fundamental differences in how we treat women and girls, as far as assertiveness is concerned, from how we treat men and boys.
Actually, I was bullied by a caretaker and certain peers when I was a kid and had anxiety related issues as a result. After abusing drugs and neglecting myself for a long time, I faced my problems and learned to stand up for myself. Way to hold a prejudice against me based on my gender, genius.
There's no need to be rude. Everyone has different experiences. Not everyone is assertive or has the opportunity to learn to be assertive. Especially when social expectation is against them.
You're missing the point of what assertiveness is. It's about creating opportunity, not sitting on your ass and waiting for the world to cater to your needs. Life is what you make it and one has nobody to blame but themselves for where they go. True, we don't choose the starting point, but we do choose the destination.
The core of assertiveness is disregard for cultural expectations. Girls are rewarded for meeting unhealthy expectations, while we boys are punished for failing to meet unrealistic ones, and seeing that and the widespread lack of sympathy is more effective at eventually enabling many of us to start saying "fuck that".
This is an incredibly male view of things. Why is assertiveness the better choice? Why should life be about elbowing your way through everything? Why do you have to be such a tough guy?
> you'll always stand on the side-lines and will forever be relegated to being a spectator.
I don't make the rules, it's just the way nature is.
I think that a distinction must be drawn between being assertive and being abusive. Assertiveness is, in my opinion, nudging your way forward and reacting to people's objections by talking to them then taking their opinions into account and, if they lack assertiveness, representing their opinions. If someone else is also fighting for that spot, team up with them and work together.
In contrast, abusiveness is nudging your way forward at the expense of peoples' well-being and not respecting others' right to assert themselves.
In other words, it's the difference between fighting for yourself and fighting for everyone including yourself.
In fairness to her, women tend to be socialized to do stupid stuff like that. Given a lifetime of such socialization, it can be very hard to come up with a better response on short notice.
I make remarks like the one above in part to help other women realize they do have other options. My experience has been that providing an example of more effective behavior tends to go a very long way towards empowering other people.
Many years ago, probably in my teens, I read a wonderful anecdotal story that I have retold many times on the internet:
In the eighties, a young woman was taking assertiveness training. The instructor was some Nazi-like drill seargent type of a woman. The course was teaching these women to yell at people and be extremely aggressive and pushy. At some point, it was the author's turn to yell and practice asserting herself. She told the instructor she didn't want to do that, she liked being nice to people. She was berated about how it is a tough world and she needed to learn to stand up for herself or people were going to walk all over her. She politely declined. Eventually the instructor moved on. She decided to quietly gather her things and leave. She didn't want to do this anymore. As she left, she overheard someone in the back row say to someone else "God, what a bitch."
So, yes, she should woman up, grow some bigger tits if necessary and wear her brass bustier to mixed gender events if that is what it takes.
Most people put in those situations would freeze up exactly like she did. I'm surprised you would think a game journalist who had no prior expectation of this happening would, when confronted with such a situation, automatically think to "demonstrate confidence and tear down the misconception."
Most people? Who are you referring? Any professional in her situation, male or female, would have spoken up if they had a problem. Period.
Those people may well have stereotyped her, but when she fails to speak up about it and sits there silently giving no indication that something is wrong, what would you expect. This isn't kindergarten. These people don't get paid to read minds. What it sounds like, is at least part of the time these people genuinely thought they were helping her, and she gave no indication yo the contrary.
She is not a professional, pure and simple. If you aren't a professional, then what are you doing at E3? What are you doing in any situation where assertiveness is expected in order to get your job done?
Are you serious? There are many reasons why one mightn't speak out at the time. I'm going to jump to the major conclusion that you're male and have never encountered a situation like this before. If you were female, with all the different social expectations that have been embedded in you since childhood, you might have a different perspective.
I do not think she is arguing in favor of her "limitations". You are completely missing her perspective. The way you seem to value assertiveness is a typically male perspective. The female perspective often devalues assertiveness and instead values community and acceptance. Why should she have to assert herself? Maybe the burden should be on the other party to create an accepting environment.
This is a very culturally biased view of what "professional" means. You would probably get a different response if you were to go outside America. (this is more an argument against the "no exceptions" part of your point above)
I'd like to know how you could have a full female perspective without being female. Let me know when that's possible! I'd love to be able to have a full male perspective about things!
That was my thought, too (followed immediately by "but I imagine there is a large gender difference in doing that"; I wonder how much of an outlier you are). It may have also been a subconscious thought in the people treating her so poorly, "If she is a real gamer, she wouldn't let me take the controls."
But, male or female, somebody shouldn't have to say "back off" to get some respect.
I both agree and disagree. I sometimes wish there were two words for "respect", one that expresses the idea that you shouldn't piss on someone else, that you should be decent to them just because they happen to be human. The other to express the kind of respect that one earns.
I have toyed with the idea of writing a post about that concept. I was thinking along the lines of quoting Riddick -- "There is one speed: My speed. Keep up or get left behind." My experience has been that competent men do not necessarily treat me worse than other men. They sometimes are talking "down" to me because they talk that way to everyone. When you are far more competent than average, it becomes difficult to assume or behave as if others are your equal. I am at times guilty of the same faux pas. In my experience, if you can keep up, some of the most competent men will genuinely respect you. What is tricky is pulling it off in a social situation where other people will interfere or where a man will become uncomfortable with a woman challenging the status quo. Her description sounds like it was fairly one on one, which is part of why I think I would have been inclined to quietly call him on it.
I can fairly confidently admit to being a significant statistical outlier for a woman. Even one of the female big wigs at my former job remarked on me sitting up front (edit: at the time she made the remark, I was sitting closer to the front than she was and she was the highest ranking woman in the department -- however, she was sitting next to a very high ranking male) which other people routinely interpret as Type A behavior, somewhat to my bafflement. I do that for reasons like I have terrible eyesight. But I am aware that other women also have issues like terrible eyesight and still do not sit up front. I have speculated that if I come across like an alpha female it is due in part to having a yawning disinterest in pecking order, not because I am trying to be at the top of the heap.
> "I sometimes wish there were two words for "respect", one that expresses the idea that you ... should be decent to them just because they happen to be human. The other to express the kind of respect that one earns."
Thank you for putting this into words. This summarizes part of what bothered me about this article.
My wife and I are both gamers. Neither of us have ever been treated without human-respect at LAN parties. Competence-respect is usually given to me due to prior reputation (I'm active in the community whose LANs I attend.) She is often assumed to be just tagging along, until she starts destroying people. Competence-respect comes pretty quickly if you demonstrate competence.
There were times in this article when it seemed the author wasn't given human-respect, and that's a circumstance where someone needs to be either told off or walked away from. But at other times, the issue may have been competence-respect, and that's a circumstance where the first attempt at respect-earning should be to say "I can take it from here", pick up the controller, and play.
Personal sympathetic anecdote: I played role playing games in my teens. After I began dating one of my gamer guy friends, I was, unfortunately, prone to being treated like I was just tagging along, in spite of it being a regular group who all knew me to be a gamer. I would have been more offended except I could understand why certain things I did promoted such responses: I used gaming as a means to avoid an unhappy family situation, so I sometimes did sleep on the couch while others played rather than go home.
I didn't have a driver's license or car, so was dependent on others for a ride. If the group chose to play a game that didn't interest me, I went to sleep on the couch until we all left together. So it somewhat annoyed me that my actions got interpretted that way when there were other explanations but I also could kind of understand why.
I've always preferred "courtesy" as describing the way I treat people who haven't yet earned substantive respect. Doesn't seem to be common usage, though.
I think of it in terms of respecting someone's boundaries vs. respecting their character or ability. I wonder what other words might help express this concept.
> But, male or female, somebody shouldn't have to say "back off" to get some respect.
Is this really true? I've had it pounded into my head my whole childhood that you have to stand up for yourself to get any respect in this world. It's the theme of basically any coming-of-age movie. If that's what has to change for equality to work, then I think we're doomed.
That was my reaction too. I'm more than sympathetic when women are made powerless and put down, taken advantage of, harrassed, assaulted, etc.
But this girl was far from powerless in this situation. That doesn't excuse the guy for being an unthinking sexist dick, but her blog post is a little too much of a pitty party.
Or perhaps her blog post is her attempt to begin thinking things through.
I am 47, a good bit older than most people posting on HN or writing tech blogs. I did a lot of journalling pre-internet, thus only read by me and sometimes my therapist. I now routinely examine my belly button in public, but a lot of what I write is stuff I have thought about deeply for many years. I assure you I threw myself plenty of pity parties when I was younger. In fact, I eventually stopped doing therapy because I reached a point where I felt that whining and crying to a therapist was helping me to keep alive a victim mentality and victim self image and I wanted to genuinely move on. But first I had to go through all that.
Both sexes are struggling to leave behind old paradigms. We all have a growth process to go through.
But certainly have an upvote for furthering the discussion.
True that. I suspect she was probably also caught off guard, and that this may have been the first time she was ever treated badly because of her sex, and responded passively because she was somewhat in shock. But hopefully she'll shake it off and if/when it happens again, will take the bull by the horns and channel Angelina Jolie or challenge the guy to a gamer duel or something.
