On 12/01/12 22:48, Bianca Gibson wrote:

Hi all, I came across something while researching for Adacamp about how to encourage women in linux <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 :).

I'll have a chat to Bianca about the details to see what areas can be improved on. Will let you all know what we come up with. Ben

Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> writes:

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.)

This is a humility that I hope more men can learn: that we often enable sexism, not through malice or laziness, but simple blinkered lack of awareness. I have learned over time, and thanks to outspoken women, that many practices I took for granted are harmful by tacitly permitting an exclusive environment. Hopefully I will continue to learn and improve.

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.

Yes, that's what I used to think of that section also. 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.

"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.""

That was actually one of the examples that made sense to me the first time I read it. It's a fine example that a compliment doesn't need to reference appearance or sex or anything but the merit of the effort.

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?

I think the way we treat fellow hackers is quite shitty, quite regularly, and I wish more of us would refuse to put up with it. If improving that means we give more compliments to everyone, so be it. It's also very common for we men to fall into the “just world fallacy”: because we don't experience sexism very much if ever, we tend to assume the world is already balanced in that regard, and efforts to improve women's lot in our community are framed as disproportionate. The truth, of course, is that women are *presently* disproportionately the victim of long-term institutionalised sexist attitudes (whether those attitudes arose in the past by malice or neglect or ignorance or all three). So any work to improve that is necessarily going to focus more on the needs of women than of men, and it will hit men's awareness in that light.

(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.")

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. The brains of men and women are different; the sex of a person is expressed throughout the structures of the body, and the brain is no exception. It's a fact that, if we value the principle of sexual equality, we do need to alter practices that may be less off-putting for men than for women. But there are also a great many things that we can improve to make an environment safer and more pleasant for *every* member, regardless of sex. I see complimenting any person on their achievement, without referencing their sex or discriminating on that basis, to be one improvement of many. -- \ “[F]reedom of speech does not entail freedom to have your ideas | `\ accepted by governments and incorporated into law and policy.” | _o__) —Russell Blackford, 2010-03-06 | Ben Finney

"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." 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.

Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> writes:

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).

What if that turns out to be true though? That, because of many pressures and influences in specific groups and society broadly, some people need a higher level of recognition and support if they are not to feel excluded from a community? If that turns out to be true, I think it is significant for those of us who want to level the field. And there are women, such as the author of the document Bianca directs us toward, who are telling us that *is* the case to some extent. It behooves us all to listen carefully when women tell us about the experience of being a woman in our community, especially so because the nature of what they're describing makes it difficult for me to perceive directly.

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.

Yes. That respect, though, must include respect for the qualitatively different upbringing of the sexes in our society, and acknowledging the effects those have on what people need from each other.

I would find it humiliating and excluding if I was a woman

Be very, very careful about starting any sentence this way. The nature of what's being described – a woman's experience as a newcomer in a particular primarily-male community – is not something you nor I, as men raised in this society, can expect to thought-experiment ourselves into with “if I were a woman”. -- \ “The right to search for truth implies also a duty; one must | `\ not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true.” | _o__) —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney

Bianca Gibson <bianca.rachel.gibson@gmail.com> writes:

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.

Here is a relevant article, on the experiences of women and the sexism they encounter in what may be today's most-respected scientific project <URL:http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cocktail-party-physics/2011/07/20/is-it-cold-in-here/>. 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.

If I'm complemented like the example I don't take it in a bad way, to me it's just a complement.

Thanks for that perspective. I must make conscious effort to give that account more weight than my internal imaginings of “how would I feel if everything else was the same but I was a woman”. That can't apply: if I were a woman, *huge swaths* of my upbringing would have been quite different, and “if everything else was the same” would not be the case. So, as is the case far more often than we might like to admit: it's not about me. I have to listen to others describe their experiences, and suspend my own bafflement at not being able to empathise completely. -- \ “Our task must be to free ourselves from our prison by widening | `\ our circle of compassion to embrace all humanity and the whole | _o__) of nature in its beauty.” —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney

On 01/13/2012 01:23 PM, Ben Finney wrote:

Bianca Gibson <bianca.rachel.gibson@gmail.com> writes:

...

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.

Here is a relevant article, on the experiences of women and the sexism they encounter in what may be today's most-respected scientific project <URL:http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cocktail-party-physics/2011/07/20/is-it-cold-in-here/>.

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.

...

If I'm complemented like the example I don't take it in a bad way, to me it's just a complement.

Thanks for that perspective.

I must make conscious effort to give that account more weight than my internal imaginings of “how would I feel if everything else was the same but I was a woman”. That can't apply: if I were a woman, *huge swaths* of my upbringing would have been quite different, and “if everything else was the same” would not be the case.

So, as is the case far more often than we might like to admit: it's not about me. I have to listen to others describe their experiences, and suspend my own bafflement at not being able to empathise completely.

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.

On 01/14/2012 12:20 PM, Matt Giuca 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.

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.

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

I'm saying that there is money and recognition to be made through this sort of activism, and that people who may write for scientific American along these lines know that. Certainly there are people who DO make a living pushing social issues, and others who make an academic career from it. I've had experience in community politics and there is usually a larger number of men. The difference gets more pronounced the more political the movement. That is, a local community group trying to save a particular park will be roughly equal, but when it gets more ideological, the split widens. All you can do, is make sure there are no barriers, but I think sometimes efforts to equalise things tend to start treating women as a resource to be acquired, as if they serve as examples as to how 'correct' a group is. A bit like how some companies 'advertise' their diversity, this objectifies people all the same.

From my experience in politics, there will always be something which could be construed as sexism in terms of representation during activism. The feeling of need to get more women to join is fairly common amongst

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. political activists. However, you can fall into the trap of 'trying too hard', which is in itself, sexist (or racist), and often, the worst examples of it. On 01/15/2012 10:49 AM, Brianna Laugher wrote:

On 14 January 2012 11:27, Dennis K <dennisk@netspace.net.au> 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

I'm going to bring my Wife, who has used a lot of free software as a user, just because it was provided… She's also quite opinionated, so hopefully will help. Creativity in print, digital print, web, multimedia, craft and the environment. PO Box 119, Brunswick, Vic, 3056 (03) 83000 233 | 04 3325 5721 On 15/01/2012, at 1:15 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

Hi all, I think that Dennis K raised a good point, which I'd like to clarify. As far as we know, the gap between women in open source development and closed-source development is something like 1.5% (some estimate 5%) versus 28%, which everyone would agree is concerningly low. Even if it were 10% versus 28% it would still be huge gap. Whatever they're doing in the proprietary software development, we can't deny that it's working for them. 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. 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. 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. Alex Garber On Sun, Jan 15, 2012 at 14:02, Dennis K <dennisk@netspace.net.au> wrote:

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<Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au> http://lists.softwarefreedom.**com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-** software-melb<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.

______________________________**_________________ Free-software-melb mailing list Free-software-melb@lists.**softwarefreedom.com.au<Free-software-melb@lists.softwarefreedom.com.au> http://lists.softwarefreedom.**com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-** software-melb<http://lists.softwarefreedom.com.au/mailman/listinfo/free-software-melb>

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

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

On Sun, 15 Jan 2012, Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> 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.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. 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/

Clockwork PC <clockworkpc@gmail.com> writes:

There are at least two discussions in this thread:

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

I don't see that any number is going to be objectively useful as an answer, so I don't think pursuing that line of enquiry is helpful. You've already encountered – and separately expressed – a much better goal: that no member, of any sex, should feel uncomfortable in our community because of their sex. That has some amount to do with ratios, and much more to do with attitudes perceived and expressed.

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?

I'd rather continue with the earlier focus: What practices do we as a community presently have that treat women as otherly, strange, and less than full members? What can we, as a community and as individuals, do to recognise and minimise those practices? -- \ “The World is not dangerous because of those who do harm but | `\ because of those who look at it without doing anything.” | _o__) —Albert Einstein | Ben Finney

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-<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

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

On Mon, 16 Jan 2012, Alexander <alex@clockworkpc.com.au> wrote:

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.

The fair thing to do would be to not have every discussion about topics such as "encouraging women" end up being about basically everything else. Such constant derailing of discussions is often perceived as a hostile act. So far there has been no evidence presented to show that even having the same male:female ratio as proprietary software development is something that's achievable in the near future. So we should concentrate on just making things better instead of debating future issues. http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/08/terrible-bargain-we-have- regretfully.html 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. # There are the occasions that men—intellectual men, clever men, engaged men— # insist on playing devil's advocate, desirous of a debate on some aspect of # feminist theory or reproductive rights or some other subject generally filed # under the heading: Women's Issues. These intellectual, clever, engaged men # want to endlessly probe my argument for weaknesses, want to wrestle over # details, want to argue just for fun—and they wonder, these intellectual, # clever, engaged men, why my voice keeps raising and why my face is flushed # and why, after an hour of fighting my corner, hot tears burn the corners of # my eyes. Why do you have to take this stuff so personally? ask the # intellectual, clever, and engaged men, who have never considered that the # content of the abstract exercise that's so much fun for them is the stuff of # my life. # # There is the perplexity at my fury that my life experience is not considered # more relevant than the opinionated pronouncements of men who make a pastime # of informal observation, like womanhood is an exotic locale which provides # magnificent fodder for the amateur ethnographer. And there is the haughty # dismissal of my assertion that being on the outside looking in doesn't make # one more objective; it merely provides a different perspective. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/

http://politicalirony.com/2009/12/10/what-if-2/ 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?" Ben Finney pointed out that the way hackers treat each other is often shitty. I feel like we almost need a geek version of this comic. "What if it's not sexism [keeping women out] and we create a more welcoming community for nothing?" 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. :)) Basically, traits associated with men tend to be lauded, and traits associated with women tend to be trivialised and dismissed. So, why is that? Masculine traits are inherently or objectively better in some way, more meaningful, useful? Or is it that society values men and the masculine above women and the feminine? The judgement of the traits reflect the worth (to society) of the people who practice them, not vice versa. i.e. women's activities are silly because women practice them, not: women are silly because their activities are silly. 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. 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. This thread started because Bianca posted the HOWTO as a gentle reminder of some good things to keep in mind. So also keep in mind that when you are thinking or asking "where's the evidence that women are kept out/turned away from FLOSS by the behaviour of men?", there are women in your group who are speaking to you (collectively). 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. One final point. It makes sense to think that everyone experiences our community in roughly the same way as we ourselves do, as broadly welcoming and friendly. It can be confronting when we are told otherwise. How could we not have noticed? I think a useful concept here is that of privilege, which describes a set of advantages that a majority group receives, that they are usually unaware of. http://geekfeminism.wikia.com/wiki/Privilege As one blogger puts it, "Privilege is driving on a smooth road and not even knowing it." http://www.amptoons.com/blog/2005/12/02/privilege-is-driving-a-smooth-road-a... "Imagine two roads: one smooth, well-paved, well-maintained, the other lumpy and full of cracks and pits. Most people will drive over the smooth road without even noticing it – but that doesn’t mean that the smooth road hasn’t facilitated their driving. Nor does it mean that the person driving on the smooth road has more merit, as a driver, than someone stuck on pothole avenue." In many different ways that society divides people, it is hard or near impossible to switch from one road to the other. Acknowledging that is not to blame everyone on the smooth road for the potholes. Feeling guilty about privilege isn't helpful, but there are things that people with privilege can do to share it and support those without it. This post has some great advice: "'Check my what?' On privilege and what we can do about it" http://blog.shrub.com/archives/tekanji/2006-03-08_146 like "Call Others of Your Group on their Crap", which relates to something Bianca said earlier. "Privilege is perpetuated in part by the silence of people when one of their own group does something questionable." 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 :) regards, Brianna

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

Brianna Laugher <brianna.laugher@gmail.com> 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.

Adrian Colomitchi <acolomitchi@gmail.com> writes:

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

It's a coincidence, but not merely that. AdaCamp in Melbourne <URL:http://adainitiative.org/what-we-do/events/adacamp-mel-2012/> and Haecksen <URL:http://haecksen.net/> and other events have free software communities worldwide discussing this topic lately, for which I'm very glad. Also relevant: Karen Sandler speaks in the latest Free As In Freedom oggcast <URL:http://faif.us/cast/2012/jan/17/0x20/> about the sexism and discrimination women face in technical fields, and mentions that she is speaking at LinuxConf.AU tomorrow 2012-01-19 as the keynote speaker <URL:http://linux.conf.au/media/news/51>. -- \ “True greatness is measured by how much freedom you give to | `\ others, not by how much you can coerce others to do what you | _o__) want.” —Larry Wall | Ben Finney

Hi all, I also read Val Henson's HOWTO on encouraging women to be part of the FLOSS community, and agree with the main thrust of her message. However, I share Matt's ambivalence about the advice to liberally dispense compliments. If a guy only gives a compliment when he really means it, or does so in his own subtle way, how can we implore him to assuage women's "much lower self-confidence" [Val's words] without making him feel dishonest? Having grown up on four continents, I don't take any social conventions for granted. I maintain that a newcomer has no right to demand that a group treat him/her according to alien social conventions: that's something that group members have a right to decide for themselves. However, I posit that attracting and retaining more women (technical and non-technical) and non-technical men is more important than keeping the FLOSS community the way we're used to it, which means the onus is on us to accommodate newcomers. If you agree with that premise, then there are a couple of ways of looking at this: 1. Give compliments even though you don't like it. 2. Conceive of a broader context that elevates the importance of giving compliments in a way that doesn't come naturally to you. [image: exercise.png] So, to Matt and others, whose reticence I completely respect and honour and empathise with: Don't cheapen your integrity by giving compliments that you feel are dishonest, but see if you can conceive of this social convention in a way that really speaks to you. No-one has the right to tell you "You MUST" simply to pander to someone else's potential sensibilities, but consider the usefulness of bridging this communication gap. Anyway, that's just my two-pence worth. Alex On Fri, Jan 13, 2012 at 09:36, Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> wrote:

Hi all,

...

I came across something while researching for Adacamp about how to encourage women in linux<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 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

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

On Fri, 13 Jan 2012, Matt Giuca <matt.giuca@gmail.com> wrote:

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?

The way parents treat young children is that they offer praise that is relevant to the skill level. For an 8yo it's an achievement to make their own breakfast and eat it without making a mess, so they would be praised for that. But the example given is quite different. Complimenting someone for doing something better than you is quite reasonable, especially if they may have a secret concern that everyone else is doing better than them. Often people have a self-appraisal that is a poor match for reality. Accurate feedback can help correct that.

(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.")

There are two errors in that. Firstly there is no logical reason to feel bad about complimenting someone who has done a genuinely good job. Secondly you have to understand that 99% of the general population and about 60% of geeks have different ideas about socialising to us. For example when someone asks for your opinion about their new car/house/haircut you are expected to tell them how great it is regardless of the truth. So in addition to the fact that in the example cited the women would actually deserve a compliment there is also the fact that we are just expected to compliment people regardless. -- My Main Blog http://etbe.coker.com.au/ My Documents Blog http://doc.coker.com.au/