Bianca Gibson writes:

http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/- it would also apply to FLOSS in general. As some of the people in Melbourne Free Software have accidentally (all with good intent) done some things that are advised against I thought it would be good to post here, just some stuff to bear in mind :).

Thanks, Bianca. It is worth pointing those guidelines out. Have they been violated in this thread? I'm not sure why you're replying on the “Cory Doctorow talk on 'Free Computing'”, thread, rather than starting a new one. -- \ “If you do not trust the source do not use this program.” | `\ —Microsoft Vista security dialogue | _o__) | Ben Finney

Hi all, I came across something while researching for Adacamp about how to encourage women in linuxhttp://tldp.org/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/- it would also apply to FLOSS in general. As some of the people in Melbourne Free Software have accidentally (all with good intent) done some things that are advised against I thought it would be good to post here, just some stuff to bear in mind :).

Thanks for posting. I had a quick look through it. While a lot of it is common sense, it sounds like common sense that some people need to hear. (I hope I'm not among them.) Though I must say, I find some of those points fairly demeaning towards women, actually. In particular, the "Do compliment" section seems to be suggesting that, unlike men, women need an extra special amount of coddling or they will give up. It reads a bit like a "woman manual", talking about "her" in the third person. "If she learned bash scripting more quickly than you did, tell her so. Say, "Wow, you learned bash scripting after X months. It took me 2*X months to learn that."" It seems to be suggesting that men should treat women the way loving parents might treat an eight-year-old, shying away from criticism, and taking great pains to give self-deprecating compliments. Can't we just treat women as fellow hackers? (Perhaps I'm just sensitive to that specific style of compliment, as if I catch myself using it, I feel dirty afterwards. It seems to implicitly be suggesting: "Even I, with my vastly superior knowledge of computing, took 2*X months to learn that particular thing. Well done on having bested me in this one specific area.") Back on the Cory Doctorow topic: That was a great video, Ben, and I re-shared it earlier this week. Matt

Thanks Ben, I think I forked this into two issues: gender equality, and the specifics of that compliment without regard to gender. Now, though, I see it more that these compliments are good for everyone,

and women are *right* to expect them and to be put off by how unsupportive the community seems in the absence of that. So I try to make an effort to compliment more anyway, without regard to gender.

Right. What you seem to be saying, in most of your reply, is "compliments are good, regardless of whether it is directed at a man or a woman." I agree with that, and I think our community needs to get better at compliments (as well as acknowledgements in general). What I took as particularly demeaning was the notion that women, in particular, need more of this style of compliment (which I took as condescending). Perhaps I'm going about it the wrong way, but I feel that the best way to make women feel more included is to treat all people, male or female, with the same respect. I would find it humiliating and excluding if I was a woman and I found out that men were specifically giving me compliments because their "woman manual" told them that women need more compliments than men. Huh? Where do you get the implication of condescension? It sounds

exactly the opposite to me: speaking to another person as an equal. “You did that in half the time I did it, well done.”

If achievement-based compliments sound automatically condescending to you in that way, then yes, I'd say you may be over-sensitive.

It's not achievement-based compliments, it is the comparison with yourself that I find vaguely condescending. Because, as I said, there's this hidden "even", as in "you did that in half the time that it took even me!" But in any case, I was making a minor point and it was about that style of compliment in general, not about gender issues. Matt

On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 12:50 PM, Bianca Gibson < bianca.rachel.gibson@gmail.com> wrote:

Mm, otherwise it seems like you are complementing just because they are female, which has a chance of looking like ulterior motives. I think more complementing of everyone would be a good thing in our community.

Exactly.

" I see complimenting any person on their achievement, without referencing their sex or discriminating on that basis, to be one improvement of many." I agree there. To me, were a lot of groups tend to fall short is including women or other minorities in the group without making us feel like the odd one out. Very similar stuff can be said for age, someone I know that is male and went to his first LUG at 15 felt like the odd one out, the next youngest person was 21 and he found it daunting. If I'm complemented like the example I don't take it in a bad way, to me it's just a complement. It's not rare for someone to comment around the same time that they meet you about there not being many women in FOSS. If you are a young woman it takes a pretty tough skin to show up and keep coming, partially due to pressures completely external from the group. I'm not particularly good at judging how daunted people feel because I'm so used to gaming culture. I've found FOSS groups more inclusive mainly because I've received very little unwanted attention, whereas in gaming culture I saw and sometimes was the target of much worse. That could just be because in this case I'm significantly younger than most people. I'll try to find out more at Adacamp. I think people need to bear in mind that when a woman takes an interest in computing, at least in my experience, you have to put up with a lot of stigma around your interest and being discluded from a young age. Right from primary school I was discluded largely for my interest in computing and games over things like sparkly gel pens. High School was better because I attended a partially selective school, but a girl I knew that was years younger than me ended up not going on the school camp she wanted to (games camp) because of the stigma around going to the nerd camp. For her it would have been hard to go completely against her existing social group and she would have been teased by them. The point of that is, that women coming to things like this have probably had to take a lot in their pursuit of that interest. Probably been actively discouraged along the way, and may well still be getting actively discouraged. The complementing stuff isn't about coddling women, it's about being nice to people in general and taking specific care to be nice to people that may feel excluded, or have forces pushing them away from the group in order to make them more likely to stay. Bianca

As that article explores, sexism in such environments is less often overt harrassment, and much more often an atmosphere of being treated as strange and otherly, in somewhat contradictory juxtaposition with a plaintive why-can't-we-treat-them-like-the-boys attitude.

The overt harassment - which is obviously a minority-is unfortunately what

stands out in people's memories, and it only takes one person to really push someone away, and in extreme cases make someone unsafe. In some cases where I've been primarily treated like 'just one of the guys' you get one or two people in the group that don't treat me like that and regularly make inappropriate comments, but no one other than me protests that or cares. It just takes one to make you uncomfortable, and I think it's important for men to make it clear that kind of behaviour is not at all acceptable. I think Melbourne Free Software has been overall good with treatment of women in my experience, but being more aware of your own and others actions and making sure you point out if someone else is doing something they shouldn't will always help.

With all due respect, I think these articles which talk about sexism and racism still existing in some 'underlying' manner are nothing more than puff pieces designed to justify the livelihoods of people who making a living combating this.

By maintaining there is a problem, you can then still rely on money coming in to 'fight it'. I will bet London to a brick on the fact that as long as someone will get published, paid or recognised for this sort of thing, there will be people writing about how we still got a bit of a way to go.

There may be some truth to that, but there is no doubt that racism and sexism are still problems, at least in some (I would suggest, many) communities. You seem to be implying that someone got paid to write that article. I had assumed it was just a disgruntled member of the free software community who spent some time writing down their thoughts. There doesn't have to be an ulterior motive to everything.

On 14 January 2012 11:27, Dennis K wrote:

With all due respect, I think these articles which talk about sexism and racism still existing in some 'underlying' manner are nothing more than puff pieces designed to justify the livelihoods of people who making a living combating this.

By maintaining there is a problem, you can then still rely on money coming in to 'fight it'.  I will bet London to a brick on the fact that as long as someone will get published, paid or recognised for this sort of thing, there will be people writing about how we still got a bit of a way to go.

With all due respect, women all over free software communities have recounted their experiences of sexism for years and years, and for you to treat it as an academic construct or a thought experiment perpetuated by academics merely to uphold their livelihood is.........not respectful at all. This is also covered by section 1.2 "What problem? Sexism is dead!" in the HOWTO initially posted. http://tldp.org/HOWTO/Encourage-Women-Linux-HOWTO/x28.html#AEN41 If it was written today it would undoubtedly contain a link to http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents . regards Brianna -- They've just been waiting in a mountain for the right moment: http://modernthings.org/

On 15/01/12 12:42, Dennis K wrote:

I never said there was no sexism at all. Obviously, such things like sexism and racism, do exist. I did say however, that even if they didn't really exist in certain areas, there is a vested interest in combating it, as some people professionally do this. No one will act in a manner which renders their profession, or field of study obsolete or unneeded. People will also construct problems in a way which makes them the arbitrators of solutions. Everyone does this.

Dennis, I have no doubt your comments are well intentioned. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, but please tread carefully. Regardless of what you mean, generalisations can easily derail the discussion. Especially over email where we lack tone of voice and body language. Regards, Ben

On 01/15/2012 01:15 PM, Ben Sturmfels wrote:

On 15/01/12 12:42, Dennis K wrote:

...

I never said there was no sexism at all. Obviously, such things like sexism and racism, do exist. I did say however, that even if they didn't really exist in certain areas, there is a vested interest in combating it, as some people professionally do this. No one will act in a manner which renders their profession, or field of study obsolete or unneeded. People will also construct problems in a way which makes them the arbitrators of solutions. Everyone does this.

Dennis, I have no doubt your comments are well intentioned. Thanks for sharing your thoughts, but please tread carefully.

Regardless of what you mean, generalisations can easily derail the discussion. Especially over email where we lack tone of voice and body language.

Regards, Ben

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

I understand it's a sensitive issue. In a nutshell, I'm saying that individuals who themselves aren't discriminatory fall into the trap of acting in a discriminatory manner when they define correct behaviour and correct outcomes by another's standard other than their own. This can undermine their efforts to encourage certain people to participate.

On 15 January 2012 17:44, Clockwork PC wrote:

But 28% is nowhere near parity, and it raises the question of whether 50/50 is a realistic goal.  There are huge differences in participation rates in other professions -- teaching, nursing, engineering, mathematics.  Even if this difference *is* due to culturally embedded attitudes, well, we live in this culture and that's our reality.  We can't change society at large.

Your argument here is a bit confused. You acknowledge that women's participation in free software is less than a tenth of the rate of women participating in IT professionally. Then you raise the 50/50 goal, which no one else has done and I have never seen women in free software put this forward as the aim. Finally you admit defeat that society sadly can't be changed. The drastically lower rate of participation in free software suggests that the free software community is worse behaving than society at large. So what we could do, at least, is figure out how to at least raise ourselves to the level of society at large! Society is changed by individuals changing. Charity begins at home, etc.

However, we can effect change in our own movement, and as Dennis K is right to point out, focusing on the number of women in our movement can itself be sexist.  As Val Henson rightly says, "Do treat women as normal people." Well, normal people are not recruited to make up the numbers.

They aren't? Are we not trying to evangelise free software? It really depends on the aims of the group. If the group is just a club for people who like each other's company and incidentally also free software, then sure, don't be concerned about the skewed gender ratio, don't be concerned about newcomers at all. But if the aim is to change the world, to improve people's lives by introducing them to free software and to support that community by expanding it and introducing new members to it, then maybe it makes sense to give a damn about why half the population seems to be alienated from the cause.

Far more importantly than how many women there are in open source is how happy the women in open source are.  Even if 28% women is the very highest participation rate we can get, given the society we live, our goal should be that the women in open source get to feel safe and included in our movement.

Let me tell you entirely sincerely, what makes me feel included is feeling that it's not unusual for me, a woman, to be part of a group. That is, enough other women around that I never go to a meeting > 10 people and find myself the only woman. It's hard to feel you belong when there is little visible evidence that you do. Taking the rate of women's participation as a proxy for the happiness of the ones there seems reasonable to me. So I don't think they are such different questions. Because if you are unhappy, you leave. We're all volunteers after all. Feeling like an extreme minority makes me unhappy. So I don't go back to those events. Rule of two feet type thing. I realise the fact that few women participate is part of a vicious circle and I don't think for a minute it is an easy or simple problem to solve. regards Brianna

Hi Brianna, Thanks for responding to my comment. I have a few follow-up questions: *QUESTION ONE: Is the 50/50 goal realistic?* I raised the 50/50 goal because of comments such as this, which I've come across in many discussions: *"...then maybe it makes sense to give a damn about why half the populationseems to be alienated from the cause." *

From which I infer that the ultimate goal is to have equal numbers of men and women in our movement. If we're not aiming at 50/50, then the phrase "half the population" is confusing.

So, do you mean that we should aim at 50/50 or not?* QUESTION TWO: What is a comfortable ratio for you?* You gave this example: *Let me tell you entirely sincerely, what makes me feel included is feeling that it's not unusual for me, a woman, to be part of a group. That is, enough other women around that I never go to a meeting > 10 people and find myself the only woman. It's hard to feel you belong when there is little visible evidence that you do. * I'm going to express my understanding of this example to the best of my abilities, so please correct me if I get it wrong. If we have a group of 11, I'll assume the following: 1 woman, 10 men >> uncomfortable 2 women, 9 men >> uncomfortable 3 women. 8 men >> uncomfortable 4 women, 7 men >> comfortable Does that look right to you? My gut feeling is that when more than a third of participants in a small group are women, the sense of being in a small minority is diminished. But I really don't know, and I'd very much like to know what you think. However, let's say we have a conference of 100. Would you feel uncomfortable in the following circumstances: 10 women, 90 men? 20 women, 80 men? 30 women, 70 men? My guess (it's only a guess!), from thinking through these numbers, is that many women in FOSS would like the ratio to be around 2:3, if 1:1 is not our aim. Thanks again for contributing to this discussion. Alex Garber On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 19:12, Matt Giuca wrote:

The drastically lower rate of participation in free software suggests

...

that the free software community is worse behaving than society at large.

Wait. You're operating under an unstated assumption that the only factor influencing the percentage of women in a particular community is how well the males in the community behaves towards women. That's a GIANT unproven assumption. This is a complex problem and there are undoubtedly many factors.

For example, maybe it is the case that women are naturally inclined, to some degree, towards a professional career in computing, but are much less inclined to pursue computing as a hobby. I'm not trying to put a case for that, but just suggest one possible explanation for this apparent gap between women in free software versus women in the software industry -- one that doesn't have anything to do with behaviour of the other people in the community.

Taking the rate of women's participation as a proxy for the happiness

...

of the ones there seems reasonable to me. So I don't think they are such different questions.

That is, again, not a very good proxy. If we take a hypothetical example in a school where Grade 6P spontaneously starts a finger-knitting craze. It spreads within the class, but not so much outside the class. Now a couple of students from Grade 6S hear about it and also start finger-knitting. But it never really catches on in Grade 6S, because there isn't an "everyone else is doing it" mentality. Basically, finger-knitting is in the culture of Grade 6P but not in the culture of Grade 6S. However, there are still 3 or 4 students in Grade 6S that are doing it. They occasionally hang with the 6Pers at lunch time and they knit together. You could look at this situation and say "well only 5% of finger-knitters are from Grade 6S -- therefore, we must assume that Grade 6S people are generally unhappy with finger-knitting." But that's not true at all. The 3 or 4 Grade 6S students who are in the community are very happy indeed. They just haven't been able to convince many of their fellow 6Sers to join them, because it is not in the Grade 6S culture.

By way of analogy, I am trying to say that just because only a small percentage of a particular group is participating in some activity does not mean that the ones that are participating are unhappy. It also doesn't mean that, were that percentage to increase, that the ones already participating would become happier.

You seem to be unhappy that there aren't enough women in free software. If you are being genuinely offended because people are treating you differently as a woman, then that is a legitimate problem which should be addressed. But if you are merely unhappy because of the low numbers, then what I think some of us are trying to say is that it shouldn't matter: we're not here in our capacity as men and women, we're here to discuss and appreciate free software, and we should be able to do that without consideration of gender.

Matt

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

Just want to clarify below, I'm not suggesting there ARE too many women, or too few men, only that there is an assumption about what participation rates should be. On 01/15/2012 09:16 PM, Dennis K wrote:

On 01/15/2012 07:12 PM, Matt Giuca wrote:

...

The drastically lower rate of participation in free software suggests that the free software community is worse behaving than society at large.

Wait. You're operating under an unstated assumption that the only factor influencing the percentage of women in a particular community is how well the males in the community behaves towards women. That's a GIANT unproven assumption. This is a complex problem and there are undoubtedly many factors.

For example, maybe it is the case that women are naturally inclined, to some degree, towards a professional career in computing, but are much less inclined to pursue computing as a hobby. I'm not trying to put a case for that, but just suggest one possible explanation for this apparent gap between women in free software versus women in the software industry -- one that doesn't have anything to do with behaviour of the other people in the community.

Taking the rate of women's participation as a proxy for the happiness of the ones there seems reasonable to me. So I don't think they are such different questions.

I think Alex got the point I was making. I think one possible explanation is that closed source computing is far less political that open source. The Free Software cause is political in nature in a way that a closed source job isn't. It's not just about developing software, it's about ideology and how intellectual property is handled in society. You'll find in other political organisations along similar lines but not software related, the same issue. It is harder to recruit women. My experience with them, is they ask the exact same questions, how to encourage women and they try the same things, with little success.

Why? I would just say that those who analyse this phenomenon and comment on it for society, are biased towards finding sociological causes that they can also be employed to solve. So you are much more likely to have someone say that the problem is some latent cultural bias, where they can position themselves as being the ones to solve it for us.

I've discussed this phenomenon with others quite a bit and all I can say, is that perhaps there is an inherit difference which means men are more likely to get involved with a particular style of organisation. The problem is when you say it's a problem, which is what I think people should avoid. I think the issue is more to do with the fact that society doesn't seem to value women until they fill traditionally /male/ roles. There is also an issue where any difference or inequality is seen or assumed to be a female inadequacy.

Who's to say there aren't /too many/ men in Free Software? Why assume the problem is lack of women? We base the standard on male behaviour, because that's what progressivism has defined as the goal. But to do this, is to assume that the men know better. It is to assume that if women behave differently, then it is the woman's behaviour we need to alter.

Yes, we should eschew behaviour which places barriers and difficulties to women getting involved, and it can, from ones point of view seem that women are 'under represented'. But that only from your point of view, and that's something we need to keep in mind.

Our culture doesn't deal with this well, which is ultimately what the problem is.

...

That is, again, not a very good proxy. If we take a hypothetical example in a school where Grade 6P spontaneously starts a finger-knitting craze. It spreads within the class, but not so much outside the class. Now a couple of students from Grade 6S hear about it and also start finger-knitting. But it never really catches on in Grade 6S, because there isn't an "everyone else is doing it" mentality. Basically, finger-knitting is in the culture of Grade 6P but not in the culture of Grade 6S. However, there are still 3 or 4 students in Grade 6S that are doing it. They occasionally hang with the 6Pers at lunch time and they knit together. You could look at this situation and say "well only 5% of finger-knitters are from Grade 6S -- therefore, we must assume that Grade 6S people are generally unhappy with finger-knitting." But that's not true at all. The 3 or 4 Grade 6S students who are in the community are very happy indeed. They just haven't been able to convince many of their fellow 6Sers to join them, because it is not in the Grade 6S culture.

By way of analogy, I am trying to say that just because only a small percentage of a particular group is participating in some activity does not mean that the ones that are participating are unhappy. It also doesn't mean that, were that percentage to increase, that the ones already participating would become happier.

You seem to be unhappy that there aren't enough women in free software. If you are being genuinely offended because people are treating you differently as a woman, then that is a legitimate problem which should be addressed. But if you are merely unhappy because of the low numbers, then what I think some of us are trying to say is that it shouldn't matter: we're not here in our capacity as men and women, we're here to discuss and appreciate free software, and we should be able to do that without consideration of gender.

Matt

...

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

Hi Russell, Thanks for these links. They make for sobering reading. There are at least two discussions in this thread: 1. What ratio of men and women should we consider both desirable and realistic? 2. Is the current extremely small number of women in Free Software due to the behaviour of men in Free Software to its current and past women members? Might I suggest that we split this discussion into separate threads? -- Alex Garber On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 22:58, Russell Coker wrote:

On Sun, 15 Jan 2012, Matt Giuca wrote:

...

Wait. You're operating under an unstated assumption that the only factor influencing the percentage of women in a particular community is how well the males in the community behaves towards women. That's a GIANT unproven assumption. This is a complex problem and there are undoubtedly many factors.

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/terrible-bargain-we-have- regretfully.htmlhttp://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/terrible-bargain-we-have-%0Ar...

Could ALL the men on this list please read the above blog post, particularly paragraph 11 onwards. If you start reading the post and think for a moment that it doesn't mean you then IT REALLY MEANS YOU.

There are some men who have been saying sensible things which indicate that they have actually considered the issues. They should read that post too. It's something that we should all read periodically to keep things in the correct perspective.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

The above URL has already been cited. I think that if this discussion continues in the current form then it will justify another entry there.

-- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

On Sun, 15 Jan 2012, Clockwork PC wrote:

There are at least two discussions in this thread:

1. What ratio of men and women should we consider both desirable and realistic?

That is the wrong question. We should concentrate on making the FOSS community a safe and fun environment for everyone who wants to join, where anyone can safely recommend it to women and girls. Then we should let the ratio be whatever it ends up as. The ratio at the moment is only relevant for discussion when comparing it to other related fields such as commercial software development. The fact that women choose not to join our community but instead join other similar communities is a strong indication that our community sucks in some ways. Also let's stop assuming that it's an issue of whether there will be 50% females or something less. Let's keep an open mind to the possibility that if there were no disincentives then it could end up that women outnumber men.

2. Is the current extremely small number of women in Free Software due to the behaviour of men in Free Software to its current and past women members?

There are women who have directly and clearly stated that they reduced their involvement in our community or left it entirely because of the way that they were treated. There are also women who have documented all manner of mistreatment up to an including what can be well described as attempted rape. http://etbe.coker.com.au/2011/02/10/lca2011-harassment/ When such incidents are documented there is always a significant number of men (including men in positions of power) who argue that nothing bad happened. The above URL has a blog post I wrote rebutting some of the stupidity in a discussion of the LCA 2011 porny presentation. Such discussions give women good reason to fear for their safety. http://kateharding.net/2010/01/27/me-a-mansplainer-let-me-mansplain/ Above is another URL that I think everyone here should read. There has been a lot of mansplaining in this discussion. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/

Hi Matt, Thanks for setting the record straight, at least amongst those who are willing to give you a fair hearing. It's pretty sad that in a space where our motto is "Free as in speech", you can be denounced for making fair comments and asking legitimate questions. Maybe, in the interest of clarity, we should adopt a policy of starting a new thread if we have a different line of inquiry from the original posts. That seems pretty fair. If my question is the wrong one (presumably for this specific line of inquiry), then I think a civil response would be, "Start a new thread, please: we're trying to focus on the question at hand." However, Russell, your responses give me the distinct feeling that my questioning is not so much out of place but is rather dangerous, or dare I say it, heretical. The silly thing is that we're in perfect agreement that sexism is to be repudiated, and we should do our best to ensure that all members feel welcome and respected. Unfortunately, your responses to my posts make me feel particularly unwelcome and disrespected even though I have shown nothing but respect and goodwill to everyone else on the thread, including you. My disgruntlement is as legitimate as anyone else's. I haven't got anything further to add to the discussion itself, so thanks to everyone who has followed this thread and responded to my posts. I'll leave you guys to it. Alex Garber On Mon, Jan 16, 2012 at 10:12, Matt Giuca wrote:

The tone of this thread is becoming very accusatory towards men. As I've stated repeatedly, I'm all for treating women (and all people) with respect. But that respect has to go both ways, and a lot of the opinions I'm reading (including the shakespearessister link that Russell keeps bringing up) are making some pretty nasty generalisations of men. Of course they carry the obligatory "not all men, of course". But I'm starting to feel like I'm being accused of misogyny on behalf of my gender. And because I'm with the majority gender, apparently I'm not allowed to feel victimised by this.

The gist of the shakespearessister article was: "men in general are misogynistic -- not *all* men, of course, but that's generally how they behave unless they control themselves." Now a sentence like that tends to garner nods of approval and women saying "yeah, that happens to me" and men saying "mm yes, I had better watch myself." But I think I would be smacked down very hard if I wrote any sentence of the form: "women in general are _____ -- not *all* women, of course, but that's generally how they behave unless they control themselves."

On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 10:58 PM, Russell Coker < russell+lists@coker.com.au> wrote:

...

http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/terrible-bargain-we-have-http://goog_7461340 regretfully.html

Could ALL the men on this list please read the above blog post, particularly paragraph 11 onwards. If you start reading the post and think for a moment that it doesn't mean you then IT REALLY MEANS YOU.

So this REALLY APPLIES to all males then? If you think you aren't misogynistic, then you're wrong: all males are.

http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Timeline_of_incidents

...

The above URL has already been cited. I think that if this discussion continues in the current form then it will justify another entry there.

So unless everybody agrees with your point of view, this measured discussion on gender issues in computing will warrant a sexual harassment incident? You're turning this into a very hostile discussion indeed.

Such discussions give women good reason to fear for their safety.

...

And blowing it way out of proportion. Again: I'm not saying it wasn't inappropriate (and I don't know all the details of this incident), but are you suggesting that episodes like a presentation featuring a pornographic image might actually cause women to fear they might be raped if they attend a Linux conference?

As you apparently didn't read the above the first time I cited it I've

...

pasted in paragraphs 11 and 12 to make it even easier for you to read it.

Don't assume that people didn't read your links just because they didn't respond to every point. You're posting a lot of links.

I'm not sure what the point of paragraphs 11 and 12 are. Yes, we should expect women to take it personally when we are debating about women's rights. But is this a call to arms against any intellectual debate on the matter? It seems to be saying that it's insulting to try and use logic in such a discussion, because the topic is inherently emotional, and that a man's opinion is not relevant to the discussion (the sarcastic "it merely provides a different perspective" implies that actually, being a man isn't just a different perspective, it's a *much less valid* one). At that point, I feel explicitly excluded from the debate, because I apparently can't understand the issue.

So far, I have seen a bunch of anecdotes about women being abused in free software discussions -- which is bad, and should be discouraged. But I still think it's unfair to a) blame these episodes (which are bound to happen in any large community) on the attitudes of "all men", and b) start talking about ratios and blame the low female:male ratio on this general widespread mistreatment of women. I'm just trying to avoid having this discussion be about vilification of men in general because of how we apparently treat women.

If women aren't coming along to specific free software events because of the way specific men in those groups treat them, then that is a problem where the behaviour of certain men can and needs to be rectified. If women aren't coming along to specific free software events simply because there aren't enough other women at those events, then that's also a problem, but it isn't a behavioural problem or a problem with men or a problem that is easy to fix. That isn't a problem that can be "blamed" on any particular group, it's just what's happening.

If I've done, or do, any specific thing that is considered inappropriate behaviour, then please let me know. But otherwise, I do not want to be vilified on behalf of my gender.

Matt

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

Sorry about the confusion with my headers. In Val Henson's HOWTO, Section 2 she insists that the women are socialised to be less inclined towards computer science: "If you are unwilling to accept that women's lack of interest in computing is genetically predetermined (and I hope you aren't willing to accept it), you need to start exploring what environmental causes are involved." If we accept the premise that women would be equally interested in Free Software in a society that did not discourage them from doing so or render them less inclined to do so, then an ultimate goal of 50:50 seems pretty fair. IF men and women are equal in aptitude for working in computers AND are equally inclined to participate in Free Software activism THEN men and women should participate in FS activism in equal numbers. Ergo 50:50. But given that our reality is not so egalitarian, I proposed that the ratio of men and women should be at least what it is in proprietary software. (About 1:2) It's a tangible point of reference if nothing else. None of this excuses the lamentable behaviour of some guys in FOSS, of course. - Alex Sent from my toaster On Jan 16, 2012 12:27 AM, "Ben Finney" wrote:

(Alex, can you please fix your ‘From’ field so that, like your signature, it gives your proper name.)

Clockwork PC writes:

...

But 28% is nowhere near parity, and it raises the question of whether 50/50 is a realistic goal.

I don't know who is promoting parity, or 50/50. I would appreciate a Message-Id to whatever message you're getting that idea from.

Who is proposing that goal? If no-one, why are you criticising it?

...

Far more importantly than how many women there are in open source is *how happy the women in open source are*. Even if 28% women is the very highest participation rate we can get, given the society we live, our goal should be that the women in open source get to feel safe and included in our movement.

Right. Given the apparent fact that free-software participation from women is at single-digit percentages, I'd say that supports the idea we are a long way from this laudable goal.

-- \ “I don't want to live peacefully with difficult realities, and | `\ I see no virtue in savoring excuses for avoiding a search for | _o__) real answers.” —Paul Z. Myers, 2009-09-12 | Ben Finney

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

On 01/16/2012 01:08 AM, Alexander wrote:

Sorry about the confusion with my headers.

In Val Henson's HOWTO, Section 2 she insists that the women are socialised to be less inclined towards computer science:

"If you are unwilling to accept that women's lack of interest in computing is genetically predetermined (and I hope you aren't willing to accept it), you need to start exploring what environmental causes are involved."

If we accept the premise that women would be equally interested in Free Software in a society that did not discourage them from doing so or render them less inclined to do so, then an ultimate goal of 50:50 seems pretty fair.

IF men and women are equal in aptitude for working in computers AND are equally inclined to participate in Free Software activism THEN men and women should participate in FS activism in equal numbers. Ergo 50:50.

But given that our reality is not so egalitarian, I proposed that the ratio of men and women should be at least what it is in proprietary software. (About 1:2) It's a tangible point of reference if nothing else.

None of this excuses the lamentable behaviour of some guys in FOSS, of course.

- Alex Sent from my toaster

On Jan 16, 2012 12:27 AM, "Ben Finney" mailto:ben%2Bfreesoftware@benfinney.id.au> wrote:

(Alex, can you please fix your ‘From’ field so that, like your signature, it gives your proper name.)

Clockwork PC mailto:clockworkpc@gmail.com> writes:

> But 28% is nowhere near parity, and it raises the question of whether > 50/50 is a realistic goal.

I don't know who is promoting parity, or 50/50. I would appreciate a Message-Id to whatever message you're getting that idea from.

Who is proposing that goal? If no-one, why are you criticising it?

> Far more importantly than how many women there are in open source is > *how happy the women in open source are*. Even if 28% women is the > very highest participation rate we can get, given the society we live, > our goal should be that the women in open source get to feel safe and > included in our movement.

Right. Given the apparent fact that free-software participation from women is at single-digit percentages, I'd say that supports the idea we are a long way from this laudable goal.

-- \ “I don't want to live peacefully with difficult realities, and | `\ I see no virtue in savoring excuses for avoiding a search for | _o__) real answers.” —Paul Z. Myers, 2009-09-12 | Ben Finney

The idea that it is 'wrong' to even consider there might be genetic differences went out ages ago. This was based on the notion of 'tabula rasa', that people are completely blank slates. That idea doesn't have any place in science or biology any more, in the same manner that geo-centrism doesn't really feature in astronomy as an absolute truth. Besides, if you go to local politics and activism, ie, against a particular development, a toxic waste dump in a suburb or education cuts, just to name a few examples I've been involved in, you'll see many women there, perhaps even outnumbering men. These issues are just as vital too. People here choose Free Software as their cause, others might choose something else. The point is that woman are choosing to be involved in causes, and if they are doing this freely, they perhaps for whatever reason are biased towards different types of causes. But all this still needs to be done anyway. Fighting against a culturally insensitive development or a toxic waste dump nearby is just as valid, and as relevant, as fighting to be able to edit source code and distribute it for software you use.

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au mailto:Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

Brianna Laugher writes:

This comic about global warming has a person presenting at a 'Climate Summit' conference with a list of all the benefits to the earth and society of moving to green energy. A person in the audience stands up and says, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

Yes. The blank slate is (as Stephen Pinker details in his excellent book of that name) a myth long discredited. But the motivation for making our community more welcoming of valuable members is not undermined by that.

Dennis made a very interesting point:

"We base the standard on male behaviour, because that's what progressivism has defined as the goal. But to do this, is to assume that the men know better. It is to assume that if women behave differently, then it is the woman's behaviour we need to alter."

(I don't know what you exactly mean by progressivism, but with s/progressivism/patriarchy I agree. :))

That surprised me, too. I don't know whose definition of “progressivism” Dennis has accepted, but it isn't one I subscribe to.

Basically, traits associated with men tend to be lauded, and traits associated with women tend to be trivialised and dismissed.

This is true even when men are genuinely well-intentioned and supportive of the ideals of sexual equality. Matt Guica has perceived an accusatory tone; I want to be clear that these phenomena are going on *even though* most men don't want it to happen. No accusation of deliberate malice is necessary to these arguments, and I hope you can see that is not occurring in this thread, Matt. It can be very difficult for men to even acknowledge that this sexism happens in our own communities. Even once acknowledged, men can have difficulty from our position to perceive it as it happens. So even a well-intentioned man can face an uncomfortable ongoing situation when he realises the sexist practices that he tacitly supports, and even participates in, through not perceiving them as sexist or through ignorance of their effects. I count myself among that number. It's still difficult to perceive the background sexism, difficult to change habits, difficult not to feel ham-fisted when doing so, and difficult to resist the strong urge to self-justify my way to the path of least resistance. It's natural to feel defensive and to hear an accusatory tone in descriptions of this. Natural, and regrettable: please try to see past that.

Feminism acknowledges that this bind is bad for both men and women. The restrictive sterotypes harm both men and women. Men face a huge amount of social pressure not to embrace things associated with women.

Men and women also are fully equipped with a broad array of justification and minimisation tactics when the subject is raised for examination.

I agree that the focus on 50/50 or any other particular ratio is not super helpful. We will know when it is enough when women in X groups fall apart due to lack of interest.

That took me a few read-throughs to parse. I think you mean “We will know we have succeeded when groups named “Women in X” fall apart due to lack of interest”.

Please don't interpret this as a suggestion to quiz her about specifics of precisely what she had in mind. Being expected to be a bearer of all wisdom on the problem of women in free software is, well, yet another reminder that there are few others to ask! Many points in the HOWTO point this out.

Those of us advocating software freedom should empathise with that position more, since we are frequently in an analogous position: We are frequently in the position of pointing out the injustice of non-free software to those who have never even considered the issue. The person we speak to has so long been immersed in a culture that accepts the injustice of vendor lock-in and user helplessness that they have trouble even perceiving that it occurs, or have trouble acknowledging the problem, or have trouble seeing the hollowness of justifications for the status quo. When those people trot out the same old discredited arguments – “you just want to avoid paying for anything”, “if it were really a problem why is it so popular”, “but I just want to get things done, why are you hassling me”, and hundreds of others – we can see that they are being defensive, even though they may not see that (and likely won't react well if we point it out). It's unreasonable to expect the messenger – the person pointing out the injustice – to be a one-person repository of all information and perfect rhetorical rebuttal to all attacks on the position. We know that for software freedom; please, let's be aware of it for feminism in our community.

I'm at LCA this week and if you would like to discuss this in person please feel free to approach me and say hi. Ben Sturmfels knows who I am so ask him if you're not sure :)

I'll re-iterate my plea: find women willing to join us at our meeting on Thursday 2012-02-16 to discuss this. It would be wonderful for women to outnumber men, and for us to be awash in testimony that yes, this is really a problem in our community even though we men might have trouble seeing it. -- \ “It is far better to grasp the universe as it really is than to | `\ persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring.” —Carl | _o__) Sagan | Ben Finney

Coincidence?http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/01/17/1910204/tackling-open-sources-gender... On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 7:02 PM, Dennis K wrote:

On 01/17/2012 10:20 AM, Ben Finney wrote:

...

Brianna Laugher writes:

...

This comic about global warming has a person presenting at a 'Climate Summit' conference with a list of all the benefits to the earth and society of moving to green energy. A person in the audience stands up and says, "What if it's a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

Yes. The blank slate is (as Stephen Pinker details in his excellent book of that name) a myth long discredited. But the motivation for making our community more welcoming of valuable members is not undermined by that.

It doesn't change anything, though it does mean that we don't have to beat ourselves up if the free decisions that other people make don't meet the expectations that the 'blank slate' hypothesis would predict.

It's interesting to note how a book like Pinkers doesn't raise an eyebrow now. 40 years ago, he would have been hauled over the coals for that.

...

...

Dennis made a very interesting point:

"We base the standard on male behaviour, because that's what progressivism has defined as the goal. But to do this, is to assume that the men know better. It is to assume that if women behave differently, then it is the woman's behaviour we need to alter."

(I don't know what you exactly mean by progressivism, but with s/progressivism/patriarchy I agree. :))

That surprised me, too. I don't know whose definition of “progressivism” Dennis has accepted, but it isn't one I subscribe to.

...

...

Basically, traits associated with men tend to be lauded, and traits associated with women tend to be trivialised and dismissed.

This is true even when men are genuinely well-intentioned and supportive of the ideals of sexual equality. Matt Guica has perceived an accusatory tone; I want to be clear that these phenomena are going on *even though* most men don't want it to happen.

No accusation of deliberate malice is necessary to these arguments, and I hope you can see that is not occurring in this thread, Matt.

It can be very difficult for men to even acknowledge that this sexism happens in our own communities. Even once acknowledged, men can have difficulty from our position to perceive it as it happens.

So even a well-intentioned man can face an uncomfortable ongoing situation when he realises the sexist practices that he tacitly supports, and even participates in, through not perceiving them as sexist or through ignorance of their effects.

I count myself among that number. It's still difficult to perceive the background sexism, difficult to change habits, difficult not to feel ham-fisted when doing so, and difficult to resist the strong urge to self-justify my way to the path of least resistance.

It's natural to feel defensive and to hear an accusatory tone in descriptions of this. Natural, and regrettable: please try to see past that.

...

Feminism acknowledges that this bind is bad for both men and women. The restrictive sterotypes harm both men and women. Men face a huge amount of social pressure not to embrace things associated with women.

Men and women also are fully equipped with a broad array of justification and minimisation tactics when the subject is raised for examination.

...

I agree that the focus on 50/50 or any other particular ratio is not super helpful. We will know when it is enough when women in X groups fall apart due to lack of interest.

That took me a few read-throughs to parse. I think you mean “We will know we have succeeded when groups named “Women in X” fall apart due to lack of interest”.

...

Please don't interpret this as a suggestion to quiz her about specifics of precisely what she had in mind. Being expected to be a bearer of all wisdom on the problem of women in free software is, well, yet another reminder that there are few others to ask! Many points in the HOWTO point this out.

Those of us advocating software freedom should empathise with that position more, since we are frequently in an analogous position:

We are frequently in the position of pointing out the injustice of non-free software to those who have never even considered the issue. The person we speak to has so long been immersed in a culture that accepts the injustice of vendor lock-in and user helplessness that they have trouble even perceiving that it occurs, or have trouble acknowledging the problem, or have trouble seeing the hollowness of justifications for the status quo.

When those people trot out the same old discredited arguments – “you just want to avoid paying for anything”, “if it were really a problem why is it so popular”, “but I just want to get things done, why are you hassling me”, and hundreds of others – we can see that they are being defensive, even though they may not see that (and likely won't react well if we point it out).

It's unreasonable to expect the messenger – the person pointing out the injustice – to be a one-person repository of all information and perfect rhetorical rebuttal to all attacks on the position. We know that for software freedom; please, let's be aware of it for feminism in our community.

...

I'm at LCA this week and if you would like to discuss this in person please feel free to approach me and say hi. Ben Sturmfels knows who I am so ask him if you're not sure :)

I'll re-iterate my plea: find women willing to join us at our meeting on Thursday 2012-02-16 to discuss this. It would be wonderful for women to outnumber men, and for us to be awash in testimony that yes, this is really a problem in our community even though we men might have trouble seeing it.

_______________________________________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb

On Wed, Jan 18, 2012 at 10:41 AM, Ben Finney < ben+freesoftware@benfinney.id.au> wrote:

Adrian Colomitchi writes:

...

Coincidence? < http://news.slashdot.org/story/12/01/17/1910204/tackling-open-sources-gender...

It's a coincidence, but not merely that.

That explains. Thanks. Adrian

That's well said, Alex.