6 ms·

You are painting these things as universal. If there were some rule about women and potlucks I'd care. As it is, there is not. I have never even seen a potluck

You are painting these things as universal. If there were some rule about women and potlucks I'd care. As it is, there is not. I have never even seen a potluck in the workplace! There are much bigger, structural problems to worry about right now. It's like we're on a boat with a hole in the bottom and every interest group is complaining that their feet are getting wetter than all the others. We wouldn't have this problem if the environment were more conducive to smaller businesses - women could avoid these problems by becoming their own bosses. Instead of escaping our entrapments we are arguing for better conditions in the prison.

javascriptlol 15y ago
Don't downvote, respond. I am not abusing anyone here.
- jasonlotito 15y ago
  I'm not downvoting, or commenting on the topic. However, comments like yours here should be downvotes. It's a comment that contributes nothing, simply you whining about being downvoted. If you honestly care about quality, you shut up about pointless numbers that mean nothing.
  - javascriptlol 15y ago
    The "pointless numbers" hide the comments and make it hard for people to read them. They encourage more group think, which is apparently rampant in these parts.
antiterra 15y ago
It seems you're suggesting that working for a company in the technology industry is being imprisoned or that it's prohibitively (and increasingly?) difficult to start a small technology business. As far as I can tell, tech is still a growth industry, and the boats are floating higher, not sinking. Even if so, why is it irrelevant to bring up a specific reason that women might leave a company? If I was my own boss and had female employees that I wished to retain, I'd consider OP's article to contain a very important lesson. Also, just because someone has a serious case of cancer doesn't mean it's a waste of their time to complain about someone punching them in the face. Yes, they have a 'much bigger' problem to worry about, but that doesn't mean everything else goes out the window.
- javascriptlol 15y ago
  You use sophistry. Punches to the face face will make a cancer patient worse. In fact, getting the flu may kill them. The poster is not a cancer patient; presumably, they are a reasonable independent person with some self esteem. So they are capable of learning resilience. We need to distinguish between small harms that ultimately do us good and large harms that are sending society on a destructive course.
  - antiterra 15y ago
    Because of your plea for civil discussion, I mistakenly assumed that you would interpret my words in good faith (and, for the record, I can't downvote.) Instead, I suppose I should have qualified the hypothetical punches as just sufficient in force to cause pain and irritation but not enough to exacerbate health issues. I'm really not sure what the flu has to do with anything, facial contusions are quite a different thing than a systemic infection. The point still stands, that small issues matter even when there are bigger issues. You have given nothing to support the argument that treating someone as subservient based on gender 'ultimately does us good.' Toughening (or lightening) up is a good thing. I was bullied in school to a distressing degree. Later in my life, I went through training where I learned to shrug off hits far worse than any bully had given me. Sometimes they were accidental and I laughed about it. However, that doesn't mean it's ok for someone to just walk up to me and sock me in the face. It doesn't mean that it's ok to attack people and just demand that they toughen up and deal with it. By your argument we should all treat each other like complete crap at home and at work, because it will build character like a lifelong boot camp. Heck, maybe we should treat women specifically like crap so they can get more resilient and perform better than men. Of course, another poster claims that computer programmers are awkward around women and have such bad self-esteem they should be forgiven. I wonder how well they would fare if the tables were turned. Honestly, it sounds like an argument born out of the desire to not give up being a jerk to women. It sounds like "lighten up," for no real reason. And, whatever the development potential, it's pushing women away from the field.
    - javascriptlol 15y ago

javascriptlol 15y ago

Don't downvote, respond. I am not abusing anyone here.

jasonlotito 15y ago
I'm not downvoting, or commenting on the topic. However, comments like yours here should be downvotes. It's a comment that contributes nothing, simply you whining about being downvoted. If you honestly care about quality, you shut up about pointless numbers that mean nothing.
- javascriptlol 15y ago
  The "pointless numbers" hide the comments and make it hard for people to read them. They encourage more group think, which is apparently rampant in these parts.

antiterra 15y ago

It seems you're suggesting that working for a company in the technology industry is being imprisoned or that it's prohibitively (and increasingly?) difficult to start a small technology business. As far as I can tell, tech is still a growth industry, and the boats are floating higher, not sinking. Even if so, why is it irrelevant to bring up a specific reason that women might leave a company? If I was my own boss and had female employees that I wished to retain, I'd consider OP's article to contain a very important lesson. Also, just because someone has a serious case of cancer doesn't mean it's a waste of their time to complain about someone punching them in the face. Yes, they have a 'much bigger' problem to worry about, but that doesn't mean everything else goes out the window.

javascriptlol 15y ago
You use sophistry. Punches to the face face will make a cancer patient worse. In fact, getting the flu may kill them. The poster is not a cancer patient; presumably, they are a reasonable independent person with some self esteem. So they are capable of learning resilience. We need to distinguish between small harms that ultimately do us good and large harms that are sending society on a destructive course.
- antiterra 15y ago
  Because of your plea for civil discussion, I mistakenly assumed that you would interpret my words in good faith (and, for the record, I can't downvote.) Instead, I suppose I should have qualified the hypothetical punches as just sufficient in force to cause pain and irritation but not enough to exacerbate health issues. I'm really not sure what the flu has to do with anything, facial contusions are quite a different thing than a systemic infection. The point still stands, that small issues matter even when there are bigger issues. You have given nothing to support the argument that treating someone as subservient based on gender 'ultimately does us good.' Toughening (or lightening) up is a good thing. I was bullied in school to a distressing degree. Later in my life, I went through training where I learned to shrug off hits far worse than any bully had given me. Sometimes they were accidental and I laughed about it. However, that doesn't mean it's ok for someone to just walk up to me and sock me in the face. It doesn't mean that it's ok to attack people and just demand that they toughen up and deal with it. By your argument we should all treat each other like complete crap at home and at work, because it will build character like a lifelong boot camp. Heck, maybe we should treat women specifically like crap so they can get more resilient and perform better than men. Of course, another poster claims that computer programmers are awkward around women and have such bad self-esteem they should be forgiven. I wonder how well they would fare if the tables were turned. Honestly, it sounds like an argument born out of the desire to not give up being a jerk to women. It sounds like "lighten up," for no real reason. And, whatever the development potential, it's pushing women away from the field.
  - javascriptlol 15y ago