"Lighten up" - <AUTHOR> http://therealkatie.net/blog/2012/mar/21/lighten-up/ <comment><USER3> You see, I have problem with posts like this.

First I'm like - "Woah, I can't imagine someone would be so insensitive to make joke like this!" and get all fed up and upset.

But then... then I freeze, because next example is something that I can imagine myself saying.

        "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"

I... I'm at loss of words. I was trained during my teenage years, that it's _cool_ to say things like that. As I'm getting older, I see how sexist and demeaning this is. But it's really hard to break this habit, and this "Hey, it's just meaningless joke, right?!" line of thought. I try, I really try, but sometimes I forget myself.

On a similar note - I have exact same problem with how I perceive woman and man having multiple sexual partners. "Good key opens many locks, but good lock is opened by only one key" and all that bullshit - I _know_ that it's ridiculous to hold woman and men to different standard in this regard, and I mostly learned to don't do that, but my... _instinct_ that was ingrained in me by society tells me otherwise.

I find myself struggling to suppress my subconscious mind in this regard, and frankly, I don't know how I can help it.

Edit for clarity: I don't have problem with such posts being written and upvoted, quite opposite actually, I'm glad they are written and read. I have problem with how posts like this make me feel.

<comment><USER4> _"Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"...As I'm getting older, I see how sexist and demeaning this is._

At the risk of revealing myself to be a chauvinistic jerk, _is_ this kind of response sexist and demeaning, or just inappropriate for the workplace? Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? Would it be sexist and demeaning for me to notice and comment on a low-cut dress in another context (like a bar)? What about with my wife? Is it sexist and demeaning to find her sexually attractive?

I'm not disagreeing that the statement is offensive and inappropriate, but I'm not sure it's _sexist_.

<comment><USER5> Public perception (as judged by art, which usually represents a slightly caricatured version of reality) seems to imply that your attractiveness and the appropriateness of your comments are inversely correlated.

That is to say, if you tell a woman she looks good, it will be a compliment if she likes you, a sexist remark if she doesn't.

<comment><USER6> There's much more to this... A totally attractive guy (model-like) that emanates low self-confidence (shyness, bad posture, ...) could still have his comments perceived in a negative way (i.e. as being sexist, not compliments). So, I believe that we tend to judge this from the perspective of the _perceived_ intent of the person making the comments. A self confident gut -> he's probably just being sincere -> cure. A not-self-confident guy -> he's trying to get something from her -> looser. (Probably applies with the sex roles reversed, but I have no actual experience to lean on).

At the workplace, the label _looser_ is just switched for the label _creepy/sexist_.

<comment><USER7> I have always believed that confidence has a huge effect on what a person looks like. The most beautiful person can look like a mess if they do not believe in themselves.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER8> It's a big deal. Not "lightening up" is a service to the company (and, I guess, the whole industry). I'm married to a woman who has put up with a lot of shit in this field (for instance: job interviews in which she was shown pictures of her interviewer's bare ass; I was, fortunately for all involved, in a different state when that happened) and am the father of an absurdly intelligent 10 year old girl who will, with enough not- taking- one- iota- of- shit for the next 10 years, not have to suffer any of this.

So I guess what I'm saying is thanks.

<comment><USER9> _job interviews in which she was shown pictures of her interviewer's bare ass;_

Holly horror story!

Sadly I am not surprised to hear this, because I've heard many similar stories. And yet out of the very large number of male friends in the industry I have, including myself, none of us have ever or would ever do anything like that. The paradox here is answered by the fact that a tiny share of creeps will always be found in any sufficiently large set of humans. And the larger the set, the bigger the number of creeps.

Thus I think the only way to guarantee this kind of thing becomes part of the past is to radically increase the share of women in the industry.

Now, that doesn't prevent creeps from being creepy, but it does guarantee that the small number that they must be, can never be creepy to a large number of women.

This is kind of depressing as it basically assumes we can never completely get rid of creeps. But does anyone believe 100% proper behavior, from 100% of the people, 100% of the time is possible?

<comment><USER10> I think you're correct that the best solution is to increase the number of women in technology.

However, as members of that community today, you and I and our male friends can call out the creepy dudes making inappropriate remarks 100% of the time we hear them. Creating an environment where people feel comfortable doesn't have to mean getting rid of all bad actors; it can be enough to make it clear that bad actors are found universally unacceptable.

<comment><USER11> Creeps are a part of every industry; they are more aptly described as "Bullies" - and can be both male and female (though I admit the male, sexist, bully is very prevalent in our industry).

These people tend not to just be sexist; they bully their male workers as well - crude remarks for example, put downs, superior attitudes.

I once had a female (client) lean over the desk to me, with a low cut blouse, and say "My cleavage intimidates you doesn't it".

I suggest that, as this blogger noted, the minority of creeps & bullies aren't really the problem. You can deal with them a lot more easily by moving on, firing them, refusing their custom - etc.

The issue is the sort of subtle remarks that _the people making them don't realise are upsetting_. They are not unlike-able, unlike bullies, just a bit clueless.

And fixing this is not easy, because you might really get on with the guys in your office, just wish they'd stop commenting on your ass!

<comment><USER12> I completely agree, such behavior is not gender related. But males are trending higher, usually because the percentage of male bosses is higher. Social status and power tend to release some inner devils.

Also agree about side comments - it is not easy to stop those. That's why it is important to understand each of those individuals and find a way to deal with each one. No need to be a hardass to the person, just need to punish specific actions.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER13> _As the woman, I've been the only person in the group asked to put together a pot luck (presumably, this work is beneath the males). I've been the only one asked to take notes in a meeting... even if I'm the one who's presenting (because my title really should be 'secretary who we let on the servers')._

This, more than the jokes and comments, is the meat of the problem. Inappropriate jokes can be much more easily addressed as soon as they happen - if you're in a meeting and your boss asks you to 'please pull up your blouse because your wonderful breasts are distracting everyone' you can much more easily address it right then and there.

But if your boss asks you to take notes, the first couple of times it happens, it could just as well be random (though it isn't, really). It is much harder to say 'no, not taking notes, you only want me to do that because I'm a woman' even when it's true. What's worse is that even when you do notice a pattern, it's harder to address than a rude remark. It's (a) hard to prove it was because of your sex as opposed to some other aspect of your personality ('maybe he thinks you're just good at organizing potlucks, sheesh' - 'you took notes that first time so well!') and (b) behavior is much harder to correct when you have to point out things that happened in the past. 'I take notes 50% of the time, in a group of 5' just doesn't seem to have the same effect on humans, especially in a society where intent is often judged above effect.

I'm not a woman, but this is what it seems to me, from what I've observed.

edit: I can't find the study I was looking for, but they had a group of people evaluate two sets of identical resumes, with female and male names, for 'competence' and 'likeability'. For males, competence was correlated with likeability, but for females it was anticorrelated, even though the resumes were identical. Less people will think you an 'ice queen' if you call out an inappropriate remark, but countering the above form of sexism seems far more difficult to do while preserving 'likeability' -- 'what's the big deal, I just asked her to take notes!' If anyone else knows where the study is, I would be grateful.

<comment><USER14> In my mind, an important point here is that NO ONE should be asked to put together a pot luck. Why does anyone think this kind of thing is appropriate in the workplace? It makes me want to vomit when workplace boss becomes social boss. If anyone ever told me to put together a pot luck my immediate response would be "go fuck yourself."

<comment><USER15> If you worked with me, I would tell the entire office that everyone is welcome to the 24-pack of beer I brought from home ... except _you_.

<comment><USER16> I believe that would make you a petty asshole. There's a huge difference between offering to organize something social and being told to do so.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER14> I find posts like this extremely frustrating.

Yes, I feel sorry for this woman.

However, I also feel sorry for all male programmers. A lot of male programmers I've met have extremely pent-up sexual drives. A lot of them do not feel comfortable with women or society.

The prototypical male programmer was extremely nerdy in adolescence, had minimal interaction with women, and sex life - forget it. Now they are working in a job where they can just do what they like - program - and a woman comes along with all those pheremones and everything. And yes he acts awkward and crazy because holy shit there is a WOMAN who does what he does.

I fucking hate all of this talk about "manchildren" and "brogrammers" and whatever else. Stop essentializing the problem. Stop the man hate. Fucking hell.

Do you really think the man who said:

"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"

is a happy, mentally-healthy, well-adjusted human being? Hmmm? Where's the compassion for him?

Why is our reaction to superficial wrongdoing so fucking immediate and moralistic? As if he's not a person with his own problems?

I'm at a loss for words, this whole clusterfuck makes me so angry.

<comment><USER17> What makes you think Jeffrey Dahmer was a happy, mentally-healthy, well- adjusted human being? Where's the compassion for him?

<comment><USER14> I have great compassion for Jeffrey Dahmer.

And do you realize that you just compared making an awkward joke to killing loads of people?

<comment><USER17> I made no such comparison. It's called Reductio ad absurdum: <http://www.iep.utm.edu/reductio/>

My point was that if we accept your argument, we must also accept the patently absurd (at least to me) argument that one must have compassion for Jeffrey Dahmer, and it doesn't sound as though you disagree.

<comment><USER14> Why is it abdurd to have compassion for jeffrey dahmer?

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER18> This just makes me sad for the industry as a whole. Unbelievable that in today's world women have to put up with this.

Guys, want to know how you can help change these kinds of attitudes? When you see/hear another guy make these kinds of comments, pull them aside and have a talk. Maybe it's a gentle reminder of how hurtful and counterproductive these kinds of attitudes are, or maybe it's a forceful "I never want to hear that shit again" - depends on the type of personality you're dealing with. Regardless, you need to have the difficult conversations with friends or colleagues who act this way, because turning a blind eye and ignoring the problem doesn't help anyone.

<comment><USER19> I think it has to be immediate and public. That doesn't mean severe or disrespectful. Everyone has to do it, but it certainly should be set up from the top down that this is unacceptable and will stop.

I take a page from the Results Only Work Environment: <http://www.rowe.iambestbuy.com/sludge_busting.html>

<comment><USER20> Maukdaddy says that "it depends on the type of personality you're dealing with," and I think that's very true with regards to immediate-and-public versus later-and-in-private. With many people, an embarrassing confrontation in front of the whole team will cause them to dig deeper, because their pride is on the line. The same person might respond more thoughtfully to a private expression of disapproval.

<comment><USER21> An advantage of doing it in public is that others can see that it's been done. This could include victims of the oppressive joke who will now see justice previal and might stand a smidge taller, and possible future (or past) 'offendors' who will see that that they should be more professional and not make the same mistake as the other person.

<comment><USER22> It's appropriate to take someone to task privately, while still making public statements of principles and expectations, even alluding to "the tenor of conversational has been unprofessional a few times recently, and it's not healthy, it's not productive, and it's not acceptable. If you hear something that's not right, talk to the speaker, or your manager, or HR, or the CEO. If someone tells you that you've crossed a line, make an adjustment and let's keep working as a team. ".

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER23> I applaud the author for sharing her feelings. I also note that she does not speak for all women. All we can do is share our own experiences.

I've been through many of these discussions: sexism, racism, ageism, and so on. After receiving many a rhetorical punch in the nose, I have a simple rule: I don't do it, I don't approve of it being done, if I am in management I stop it. I also don't let people yank me around by the emotional heartstrings. I reserve moral outrage for things like millions of people starving around the world, or slavery, or hundreds of millions dying of disease. Others are certainly capable of being moved by whatever they desire, but I find more harm being done by actual people dying than by the compound personality flaws of millions of my fellow citizens.

I don't mean that to be insensitive. Like I said, I am in complete agreement that this goes on and it must stop. Immediately. I'm just saying from prior experience I find that discussions like this never tend to go anywhere productive.

<comment><USER24> I'm one of the women who don't share her feelings. Maybe it's the word sexism that I have a problem with.

I'm not a programmer and I don't know the specific environment that she described, but I'm a female motorcyclist and I've worked in lots of kitchens and a couple in molecular biology labs. I know the behavior and I've dealt with it. Men behave in curious ways when there's a low female/male ratio, but in my experience, half of it comes out of awkwardness or plain old stupidity on the other side. Some of the more honest comments on this thread testify to that.

The other half is intended to belittle. But seriously, this isn't just at work. This is walking down the street in the city. This is buying something in the store. This is sitting on the bus. And as much as it sucks, getting offended doesn't help.

If this sounds like a long winded "lighten up," please think of it more as a friendly "toughen up." It's the only way to signal the change that you want.

<comment><USER25> As an armchair behavorial therapist, I think this is the only attitude that will end up having a positive benefit (the author also does the right thing by speaking up). There is no use in playing victim; when someone does something to you that you don't want, you have to push back.

For reasons cultural or otherwise, men have a tendency to attempt to subtly dominate people they perceive as weaker. To some people, this seems almost like an instinct, and it's really fascinating how just subtly pushing back or ignoring it seems to stop people from doing it with you.

I don't know a lot about how this manifests itself towards women, but if you are a guy, the best solution is to just push back and perhaps actively study and notice the tricks guys use to achieve social dominance. As a formerly shy guy who was often at the receiving end of this kind of behavior, I think that a lot of these gender problems would even out if _all_ women managed to subtly assert themselves a bit more. It would surprise me greatly if women were exempt from this stereotypical male behavior.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER26> I hate those "lighten up" comments. Bullies just love that phrase. Put someone down and when they push back, "ah gee, lighten up, it was just a joke". It's extremely cowardly and disgusting and reminiscent of prepubescent school yard antics. Many women have to put up with such shit on a regular basis.

</comment><comment><USER27> As an employee of the University of California, I'm compelled to take annual sexual harassment training, that is, how to identify situations and behaviors that constitute sexual harassment as it has been legally defined. A lot of what was mentioned in the post and in the comments here would be regarded as reportable offenses, if not prosecutable offenses. People should know the law - this stuff can get you in real trouble. If you're in California, this might apply [pdf]:

[http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/policies_employee_la...](http://atyourservice.ucop.edu/employees/policies_employee_labor_relations/sexual_harassment_policies/sh_policy.pdf)

If you're not in California, but you're running a business you may find it quite interesting, eg:

 _Sexual harassment is unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical conduct of a sexual nature, when submission to or rejection of this conduct explicitly or implicitly affects a person's employment or education, unreasonably interferes with a person's work or educational performance, or creates an intimidating, hostile or offensive working or learning environment. ... This policy covers unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature._

<comment><USER28> All the above is true.

Incidentally, according to interpretations of US and CA law, it is OK to do things like (politely) ask a co-worker out on a date. But, if they say no, you are supposed to get the hint, and if you continue to ask, you're opening yourself up to charges of harassment.

From the training I took, my understanding is that if the low-cut dress comment or comments like it was repeated in the presence of a manager, the manager would _have_ to act in some way. (A manager has a duty to not allow a "hostile work environment".)

Depending on the specifics of who was at the meeting, _it does not matter that the person in the dress didn't mind_ , because it's not just about conduct a specific person finds unwelcome, it's about a hostile work environment.

Some people up-thread are more in the wrong about this than they seem to realize.

</comment></comment><comment><USER29> "What do you say to the guy who sits across from you when you dress up and makes a comment to everyone about it? "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"

Yikes! What sort of a place was this, what sort of people was she working with? I've never seen/heard anything _remotely_ like this.

It is sort of hard to generalize from such morons to the whole tech field.

<comment><USER19> Yeah, this shocks me because I've never worked in an organization where that would be tolerated, and I don't tolerate it in my team either. But then again, I'd never really hire people that would think that's OK, so...

Since managers tend to hire folks like themselves, it's really a symptom of dysfunctional management and an organization.

Thankfully there are absolutely places where this insanity doesn't occur. I don't know how to find that out prior to working there, however. :(

</comment></comment><comment><USER9> I can't seem to find a study which showed that while only %3 of men ever make such comments, women involved in our community experience this a steady stream of subtle harassment. And the sad fact is that this is due to the lopsided share of men to women.

If we had a 50/50 split some women would never hear such comments, some would hear then extremely rarely, while the percentage of men making them would stay the same.

And can we ever hope to get 100% of any large group anywhere, to _never_ make occasionally offensive remarks? The crux here really is that this type of offensive remarks have only one target - women, and that combined with the lop-sided sex ratio results in harassment.

<comment><USER30> Sorry, but if one person in 30 is being a jerk, _that is_ a steady stream of subtle harassment. Most professionals deal with what, 60 people on a weekly basis? That's two jerks every week.

And your math is off. Even if there was only one woman in tech anywhere, reducing 100% male interaction to 50% male interaction would only decrease the jerk count by a factor of two.

<comment><USER9> I don't know about you, but I deal with jerks all of the damn time. But luckily no more or less than all of my peers. This would be very different if I was a woman.

And we wouldn't reduce male interaction by 50%, we would increase female participation by hundreds of percents.

That way if someone is being a jerk, many people can all confirm he's being a jerk.

<comment><USER31> _...I deal with jerks all of the damn time. But luckily no more or less than all of my peers. This would be very different if I was a woman._

Indeed. Jerks like this often associate in groups. As a result, women sometimes find themselves in a bizarro social context where their inferiority is just a good joke and the resulting humiliation is considered something like a blow for truth and "good clean fun."

 _That way if someone is being a jerk, many people can all confirm he's being a jerk._

Since women are such a minority in tech, they are sometimes subject to this sort of mob scene. Unless you've been in those shoes, it would be difficult to understand.

<comment><USER9> I like the bizarro social context expression. It's a great way to describe how I work with female programmers and both my project managers are female and nothing like the described behavior would ever be tolerated for a second, and yet each female programmer I know has such horror stories.

I guess the best advice is when you find yourself in a situation like that, get the hell out. But even I as a top notch experienced white male coder can't change jobs at the drop of a hat.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER32> Dunno. I'm a woman, and I think that blog poster needs to lighten up.

I've worked in IT for years - usually as the only woman on the team - and I've never felt degraded or discriminated against for being female. Maybe slight prejudices in the beginning when the guys think I'm not as good as them, but I enjoy proving them wrong. There is banter, and sometimes it's not 100% HR approved, but I've never felt that it was mean spirited or intended to put me down. I've found that by and large, computer engineers are super-nice, funny, and respectful towards women.

The comment about the guy noticing her low-cut dress and wanting to sit near her... not entirely appropriate, but is this really bad enough to run to HR and complain? That said, I wouldn't feel comfortable drawing attention with my clothes, so I would never wear something low-cut. I find that a lightweight cotton dress shirt is more comfortable than a tight, low-cut top anyway. If someone asked me to arrange a pot-luck or bring them coffee, it would simply not be happening.

I'm on the East Coast though. Maybe all the disrespectful frat boy "brogrammers" are working on the West Coast?

<comment><USER33> You think she needs to lighten up because you haven't had the same experiences and you have different ideas of comfortable clothing?

<comment><USER32> I mean "lighten up" as in, she perceives "a million little barbs" around her and sees herself as the victim of sexism lurking everywhere. She didn't just criticize one company or co-worker, but the whole industry. Her post is a torrent of rhetorical questions, exclamation points, hyperbole, and quotes she ascribes to her co-workers that likely never happened. Do you really think someone responded to her concerns with "if you are not in the middle of being raped or beaten or threatened or fired, lighten up"?

To make such sweeping statements about the industry, I presume she was not happy at her job, changed jobs, and the same thing happened again, and again, to the point where she left the industry altogether, discouraged. Which is weird, given that I changed jobs often myself and never had such experiences.

Two sentences gave me the most pause. One being, "Which label do I want to be stuck with today? Ice Queen or Slut?" It makes me think this is more about herself than the people around her.

The other weird comment was that she loves coding and "spent thousands of dollars to go to conferences so I can learn more about it." All excellent IT people I know learn stuff hands-on by playing around with technologies and studying on their own. Maybe there are other reasons why she felt stuck doing inferior tasks. If you are crucial to the team's success, nobody treats you like the "secretary who we let on the server" or a personal assistant, regardless of your gender.

I hope that the discussion of this topic doesn't make men paranoid about saying anything around women, because the fun and banter is one of the things that makes working in IT so enjoyable.

<comment><USER34> This.

I work on a small team - just over 20 people - with only four women.

Every single one is a hilarious, self-possessed, confident individual. All the men, myself included, treat them with respect... meaning, we tease the shit out of them.

To do otherwise would exclude them from the team. Have you ever seen a cohesive group that didn't joke around? A tiny fraction of the jabs traded by men are HR-approved... if we filtered that for the women who work with us, we would be treating them as if they're too weak or too sensitive to be a part of the group.

So instead, we treat them no differently than any other team member. If one of the other coders were to arrive unusually dressed up, I would absolutely comment on it, regardless of whether it's a suit or a dress, but one of the ladies would probably beat me to it. Frankly, the women push the HR line harder than any of us guys, and we love them for it.

If you find that people are constantly telling you to "lighten up," whether you're male or female, you shouldn't assume that the world is conspiring to put you down. You're probably just no fun to work with.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER35> My wife puts up with this all the time. She is an assertive and decisive businessperson, but is labelled "abrasive" and "a bitch" because she isn't meek, submissive and soft-spoken. The same behavior in males is encouraged and rewarded.

My parent's generation moved us past overt sexism; our generation needs to move us past subtle sexism. Otherwise, we are still wasting a large part of our human potential.

<comment><USER36> My wife deals with this too. I think, if I were ever a woman, I'd have to go with "being a bitch" because it is often the only way not to get walked over and keep your self respect.

</comment></comment><comment><USER5> Honest question: Why is it so bad when guys treat gals like they're just one of the guys?

Guys give each other small disparaging jabs all the time, be it the workplace or a party between friends, it's what we do to fit in; it's how our social groups work and what keeps them together.

I've never been female, so I don't know what it looks like from their perspective, but to me telling a lass to go back to the kitchen is on the same level as telling a guy he should stick to computers because he sure as hell sucks at talking to girls.

<comment><USER37> I answered this on the blog comment you made too, hopefully it will get readership in both places:

This is not a bad question. I would like to make several points here, and hope a woman commenter chimes in with first-hand perspective too.

First of all, the "guys joking and jabbing each other" thing is true. But it really isn't that simple of a social interaction. At the early "getting to know each other" stages, the punches are pulled a LOT, and the pairwise bits of acceptable jokes are slowly teased out. Each member of the group must be felt out for OK and Bad joke topics etc. Think about every male bonding comedy (or drama with comic relief) you've ever seen. The new guy is paling around with the group, and suddenly he makes fun of the dog, or the tattoo or someone's mom, suddenly the whole group is quiet and serious, and "oh you just don't go there, never make fun of gary's poodle". There are rules and boundaries to it, even in "everything goes" atmospheres. (exceptions being douche-fests like Jersey Shore... and look how those turn out)

Second, there is a lot of difference commonly found between the jokes towards majority "one of the guys" and women or minority "one of the guys". Sure, its funny for a core group member to yet again make a joke about how Isaac can't be trusted because he's a mexican thief, if a new person said that, s/he would be reamed for making that comment -- the trust of "just a joke" is an earned one. Same goes for "katie is just looking for a guy with that top" jokes. And sometimes, they would never ever be allowed, because the person joking is NOT cool with it, and that is OK. _addition from original comment: And the only way the jokes are ever ok, is if the target owns that joke as a funny, not hurtful statement. Some people see humor in situations where they are fitting some mockable stereotype, or where they are see themselves in such contrast with the stereotype (and know the mocker also sees this and doesn't buy the stereotype anyway). If the target doesn't see it as humorous, it stops being a bonding jab, and starts being hurtful_

Third, the contents of the jokes should mostly be neutral. I'm pretty sure Katie would be ok if you poked about the time she brought the server down. But, if you follow it with "thats why girls should stay off servers" it changes it, because you would never poke al with "thats why boys should not code". Again, it is the subtlety of bringing the extra factor into play that wouldn't otherwise be noted in "one of the guys" (e.g. gender, race, sexuality etc). _I don't know katie, but my workplace jokes follow this pattern_

<comment><USER38>
        its funny for a core group member to yet again make a
        joke about how Isaac can't be trusted because he's a
        mexican thief

Over the line, dude. Not cool.

<comment><USER37> It started because Isaac would always say this stuff like "you know i can't do that, im a lazy mexican" or "you sure you want to leave me alone with your stuff, im a mexican" and so on. At first it was just awkward and kind of "wtf", but after a while it became a thing with that group, we would say that stuff too. But that sort of illustrates the point -- the things that are funny with a core group that knows the back story and the actual intent and meaning of a running gag is different than with strangers.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER39> Thanks for this. I'm going to be more aware of these kind of things and more watchful to make sure I don't contribute to this myself and more observant of those around me.

Now, I have a question for the women here — sometimes I'll hear a _woman_ make the joke about belonging in the kitchen. Do you have insight into why that might happen sometimes and what the best sort of response would be?

<comment><USER40> Heh. I have a blog post about that as well! Basically, some women do really believe in 'traditional' roles for women. Maybe they've benefited from the current situation. Maybe it's part of their upbringing. If that's why they're making the comment, feel free to call them out on it.

If they're doing it to be ironic (I know I have), then you can probably shrug it off. Many of us have learned to be subversively snarky to put off the ones above.

<comment><USER41> I like to non-verbally snark, by breaking people's brains.

I wear long skirts all the time, and sometimes I cover my hair. So I must be traditionalist/conservative, right? No, I just don't like how jeans are all about objectifying my butt and also never fit right. Some of my coverings keep my hair nicely off the back of my neck in the summer, others let me have pretty flowy fabric (I like textiles). I'm pretty clearly not a booth babe with that skirt though, so maybe I'm a girlfriend? Oh wait, the shirt I'm wearing is from an Ubuntu Developer Summit. Hmm... Wait, but I'm knitting, back to the girlfriend idea, maybe? Oh nevermind, this is too confusing, how about talking instead of trying to guess?

I have noticed, btw, that a large portion of female developers knit or crochet. Maybe it's because knitting & crochet patterns look a lot like code, complete with for-loops and while-loops. Also, ya know, make a scarf, make a website, make a pie...make stuff!

<comment><USER42> a lot of female sf fandom is into knitting, crochet and the like too. i wouldn't even blink if i saw you at an sf con, and by extension i probably wouldn't be surprised at a dev event either (rightly or wrongly i tend to assume a fair amount of overlap among the two groups)

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER43> While I sympathize for the person, I can't help but wonder if it was the right decision. She's going to be facing the same problems in every male-dominated industry; is it worth giving up the thing you love? I can't answer, obviously, because I'm male, and in a different position besides that.

Thankfully, I've never run into this in real life. I've always worked with coworkers respectful of each other, and I can't imagine tolerating that kind of sexism without any confrontation. One would think people would learn to interact—or rather, which interactions are harmful—with people of different genders at a younger age.

<comment><USER40> I think I left that a little vague (the original title was clearer about me staying in IT). I'm still a developer.

It may exist in every industry, but this is the one I've chosen, and this is where I can start to make a change.

<comment><USER43> > It may exist in every industry, but this is the one I've chosen, and this is > where I can start to make a change.

Good! I think that's the right decision. I can't imagine what would cause the world to get better about this aside from women, on a global scale, making it very clear that it's not OK.

<comment><USER44> How about men, on a global scale, making it very clear that it's not OK?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER45> Kind of meta, but I've noticed two things from this thread

1) I think I always imagine everyone here as a man, unless they identify themselves otherwise or I notice their username suggests they're female, and

2) reading the female voices here really gave me the sense of HN as a much richer, more interesting community

<comment><USER41> I do #1 backwards because LinuxChix was my introduction to the world of online tech communities.

</comment></comment><comment><USER46> Being an ex-queer (bi ;) I've had to put up with my fair share of subtle jabs and general discomfort with my presence. After a long time I figured out that the only thing that worked for me was to be more dominant than 'them.'

The thing is, women (and queers) are fucking powerful, they're just powerful in a different way. Ironically, but not unsurprisingly, women are taught not to use this power as it's 'inappropriate.'

You see, men don't have a clue as to how group dynamics work. Women do and have been trained in this from childhood on as it is their 'arena' just as much as the sports field is ours.

When we enter the workforce however, suddenly 'fair' means fighting like it happens on the sports field, 'fair' means fighting the boys' fight.

In the workplace, open competitiveness and overt displays of hierarchical dominance (boy's game) are perfectly acceptable, but figuring out the motives of your enemy's friends, observing when he breaks them and subtly informing those friends about that in order to weaken his support base (girl's game) is considered 'nasty.'

When I finally accepted that this was bullshit, everything turned around for me.

Whenever someone did something like this to me, over the next few days several of his allies would get a quick visit from me with some nice small-talk and a little one-liner thrown in about how X hurt me by doing Y. Within days X would find himself somewhat more alienated, perhaps reprimanded slightly by one of his peers about Y, left to wonder what he did wrong.

Over time it was as if a subconscious message spread across the workfloor: "You'd better respect me. If you don't your life will become a lot harder and you'll have no idea how the fuck it happened."

Now for everyone who reads this and thinks my description of this is disgusting, please understand that I'm merely able to describe it this way as I've had the fairly unique perspective of having been a part of both 'worlds.' From a woman's perspective an in-depth analysis of mens' quest for dominance would sound equally messed up.

Just like very few men understand a woman's world, very few women understand a man's world.

TL;DR; Men and women establish hierarchies in different ways. Women have been taught their way is inappropriate in business. They should do it anyhow.

P.S. Funnily enough, after I started dating a girl and 'became straight,' the women on the floor suddenly started calling me out on this behavior and nudged me back into the 'male hierarchy.'

<comment><USER47> "In the workplace, open competitiveness and overt displays of hierarchical dominance (boy's game) are perfectly acceptable, but figuring out the motives of your enemy's friends, observing when he breaks them and subtly informing those friends about that in order to weaken his support base (girl's game) is considered 'nasty.'"

It is nasty. It's called passive-aggressiveness and it undermines honest communication in the workplace. It will make people unwilling to treat with you honestly. The fact that you think this form of behavior is more natural to women than men is actually quite sexist.

<comment><USER48> > The fact that you think this form of behavior is more natural to women than > men is actually quite sexist.

All gender generalizations are sexist? That doesn't make sense; there are generalizations that are true even if that population doesn't like those generalizations (ie: women are physically less capable than men) and in some situations it may be important to have them in mind.

What could be sexist is to speak out those generalizations in an environment where it could blur the qualities that are actually needed for the context (in this case her performance as a programmer) but not in places such as an open forum like this comment section.

<comment><USER46> Thanks for the backup. People around here tend not to realize that sharing something like this leaves you feeling pretty darn vulnerable.

<comment><USER47> Not to put too fine a point on it but, forthrightness always makes one vulnerable. I'd say that's part of the reason it's valuable and part of the reason people are sometimes afraid to be so. When you openly (and kindly) share your grievances with someone, you give them a chance to respond, either with understanding or retaliation. It's entirely reasonable to fear retaliation because people often feel attacked as well when accused of something, but if we don't give people the chance to behave rightly, how can we blame them when they behave wrongly? People deserve the chance to be good and if they don't know they've wronged you, they haven't had that chance.

Let me give you an example of what I mean. When Charles Dickens originally wrote Oliver Twist he included the character of Fagin, who a stereotypical 'evil Jew.' Many Jewish people were rightly offended and later when Dickens made some Jewish friends they explained to him why they found the character so offensive. Dickens took what they said to heart and removed direct reference to the character's Jewishness in later reprints. Imagine if Dicken's friends, instead of reasoning with him, spread rumors about him and turned the world against him. Instead of making him less of an anti-Semite it would have merely made him more paranoid, and more afraid of Jews than ever.

People who are forthright and reasonable gain respect, people who aggressive, either sneakily or openly, gain fear, but not respect. I respect you for being honest here and I hope you continue to be so, but understand that I could not possibly trust someone who behaved in the manner you describe.

<comment><USER46> Yes; you probably also wouldn't trust the asshole-quarterback that's at the top of the 'male hierarchy' so that you don't trust the description of a bitch-queen at the top of the 'female hierarchy' is not that surprising ;)

I never consciously did something like the former although I knew I would have been able to do so and come out victorious in the same way some people know they can win a fist fight.

I did do the second example though and what's important to realize is that I can only say it in this way when looking back on it.

In the moment I just felt the need to share how Y hurt me with the people who for some inexplicable reason still supported X.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER49> My non-programmer friends and family are always bewildered when I tell them that I hope my daughter doesn't grow up to be a programmer. The reason why is because I'm afraid her life would be like the OP's. There is indeed a subtle sexism in our industry. That's why things like yesterday's Sqoot screwup happen so frequently.

Of course, every workplace is different and I'm sure there are plenty of places where women don't have to deal with the bullshit described in this article. However, they are far from the norm. I can see why the OP would want to leave the industry rather than be the person constantly reporting people to HR and lecturing them about proper behavior. It may be the right thing to do, but it's also extremely uncomfortable and just as likely to create an even more hostile working environment than before.

</comment><comment><USER34> Would you enjoy working with this author, regardless of gender?

I work on a small team - just over 20 people - with only four women.

Every single one is a hilarious, self-possessed, confident individual. All the men, myself included, treat them with respect... meaning, we tease the shit out of them.

To do otherwise would exclude them from the team. Have you ever seen a cohesive group that didn't joke around? A tiny fraction of the jabs traded by men are HR-approved... if we filtered that for the women who work with us, we would be treating them as if they're too weak or too sensitive to be a part of the group.

So instead, we treat them no differently than any other team member. If one of the other coders were to arrive unusually dressed up, I would absolutely comment on it, regardless of whether it's a suit or a dress, but one of the ladies would probably beat me to it. Frankly, the women push the HR line harder than any of us guys, and we love them for it.

If you find that people are consistently telling you to "lighten up," whether you're male or female, you shouldn't assume that the world is conspiring to put you down. You're probably just no fun to work with.

</comment><comment><USER50> Sounds like another argument for more people to read ___"How to Win Friends and Influence People"_ __[1]:

For the people making sexist comments, there are lots of interesting stories and points in there. But obviously you can't force people to read the book, and expect any difference!

However, it is very applicable for the OP also. Take for example this overview of one chapter:

        How to Change People Without Giving Offense or Arousing Resentment:

        Begin with praise and honest appreciation.
        Call attention to people's mistakes indirectly.
        Talk about your own mistakes before criticizing the other person.
        Ask questions instead of giving direct orders.
        Let the other person save face.
        Praise every improvement.
        Give the other person a fine reputation to live up to.
        Use encouragement. Make the fault seem easy to correct.
        Make the other person happy about doing what you suggest.

[1] - [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influenc...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People)

</comment><comment><USER51> Silicon Valley investors (PG included) prefer to invest in young rockstarish startups, so why are we surprised when we see these high profile startups do immature and sexist things?

If maturity and manners were important to investors, they would be screening for it. As far as I know, they are not.

<comment><USER9> Because being young does not mean you have to be immature, and sexism should have nothing do with either immaturity and youth.

<comment><USER52> And indeed - by declaring yourself mature enough to handle a startup at a young age, you're also declaring yourself mature enough to act like a human being. Young people in prominent settings shouldn't get a free pass - if you want to be in the "big leagues", you've got to act like you belong there.

<comment><USER22> OK, but millionaire CEOs and invented the Old Boys Club, so what does success in business have to do with egalitarian respectful behavior toward all?

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER53> This post raises two issues which everyone keeps conflating. I don't think we can have a productive discussion unless they're kept separate.

The first issue is the "you should take notes" mindset. This one is unequivocally wrong. The second issue is the "low cut blouse" remark, which I feel is wrong only by social convention.

Here's why the first issue is wrong: It implies that women don't belong in this line of work, that they can't do it effectively, and that they should get out. Factually wrong.

The second issue is wrong largely by social convention, I think. It's natural for men and women to be attracted to others in the work place. It's hard to avoid. That said, by social convention we're not supposed to talk about it. Talking about it makes you seem creepy since you're flouting social convention and if you're willing to do that, what else are you willing to do....?

However, if the underlying physiological response is not inappropriate (and I don't think it's fair to suggest that it's inappropriate -- it's how we're wired), then how could it be logically inappropriate to mention your feelings? I think our society has found that business proceeds best if we don't mention them and pretend we're not feeling them, but I could envision a culture along the lines of Radical Honesty where just bringing up how you feel isn't wrong.

So, keep the issues separate and treat each appropriately. Implying women aren't able to do tech work? Absolutely wrong. Stop it. Indicating that a woman is attractive? Realize it's inappropriate because of how our society determined we should interact at work, not because it's inherently immoral, but still don't do it because it might make her feel uncomfortable.

</comment><comment><USER54> I'm a bit loath to add to the already long discussion, and most of what I might address has already been thoroughly hashed out. However, as a bisexual male, perhaps I have a different perspective than most people here.

Fact is, I've experienced sexual harassment _just as much_ from women as from men. Who does it, in a given situation, depends only on who's in power. In the male-dominated tech industry, that means men. But most people like to make sexual comments and advances sometimes, when we feel we can. And, unfortunately, that often make others feel rightly uncomfortable.

It's a sad paradox—one of the best ways to make the industry less hostile to women is to attract more women, to even the power balance. But women aren't attracted to the industry because it's so hostile in the first place.

</comment><comment><USER55> Outside of IT, nobody ever comments on low cut dresses?

I am glad I don't have to deal with things like the ones mentioned in the article, just wanted to chime in and say that most programming jobs suck anyway. So it seems possible to me that the expression of the suckiness apparently took on some sexist form, that is not to say that the male colleagues don't suffer through crap in the same job. It is definitely possible for male people to be in crappy jobs and having to look for something better.

So is the corollary of the article that all possible jobs for female programmers suck?

<comment><USER56> > Outside of IT, nobody ever comments on low cut dresses?

In the workplace? Not if they want to keep their job.

Seriously, in most industries nobody would blink twice if someone was fired on the spot for saying that they were going to sit across from a woman wearing a low-cut dress so that they could ogle her breasts.

IT has, comparatively, _incredibly low_ standards of professional behaviour.

<comment><USER26> I have to disagree. This shit happens everywhere. My mother was a kindergarten teacher, this was normal stuff when dealing with school officials. Same thing with my gf who works in advertisement. Or many of my friends who work in the fashion industry. It also happens in restaurants, kitchens, normal office environments, lawyer partnerships (!) and so on.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER57> @kcunning - How do you contrast your desire to have a perfectly professional relationship with everyone you work with vs a desire to enjoy an office environment where you can joke around and have fun?

While I understand your answer may well be, "Leave the jokes at home, Mr. Colbert. I'm here to code and make a paycheck." I would be sad if my relationship with my coworkers couldn't handle, let alone thrive upon, humorous interactions.

While there are always those who don't know how to avoid crossing the lines of appropriateness; do you feel that most of your coworkers are doing so?

<comment><USER58> Do you think there's a conflict between sexism and fun? As in, "Well, I'd like to stop making sexist jokes, but then it would be so boring here."

I would rather work in an office where the jokes are of the funny sort, rather than the makes-one-person-feel-miserable sort. I really don't think there's any overlap between funny jokes and sexist jokes.

<comment> guard-of-terra Well, male coworkers pick on each other all the time. Even when they have absolutely no incentive to hurt, once there's an awkward situation and they can say something smart - they'll fire.

Most if nor all of humor revolves around something bad happening to someone. That's what funny.

(In normal workplace setting women are actually shielded from that friendly fire because men don't feel as comfortable/can't predict what's OK and what's not)

You want jokes, you have to acquire certain skin thickness. If you don't, then I don't want to work with you. Fun is fun.

<comment><USER58> I agree with your description of how humor typically happens, and because of that, I don't enjoy working in most places. While it seems "fun is fun" for you, the same fun sucks for me.

But I'd suggest that an alternative exists-- you can actually be hilarious without knocking other people down. I think that's a worthy goal.

<comment> guard-of-terra Well, neither am I comfortable working with people as fragile as Ming vases.

Received autism is not a virtue. Some people seem to be honing their internal conflict and blaming it on people whose jokes (or anything, really) touched it accidentally.

A person without serious internal conflict would not be hurt by a mild nerd humor. Hate there isn't, just some reflection on the awkwardness of human existence.

<comment><USER58> Agreed that we should strive to be less fragile. I think Jon Postel put it well in RFC 793:

"TCP implementations will follow a general principle of robustness: be conservative in what you do, be liberal in what you accept from others."

<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc793#page-13>

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER59> _"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" ... Go to HR and get stuck with his work when they move or can him?_

The thing is, we live in a legal environment where she probably _could_ go to HR and get him moved or fired for saying this. And yet, some men are still sexist jerks to women in the workplace. This suggests that all the blog- posting and HN-comment-hand-wringing in the world won't make a bit of difference.

Don't lighten up—accept. When being able to fire a guy for commenting on a woman's dress doesn't even do the job, no amount of complaining will stop the behavior you deplore.

N.B. I expect this comment to be unpopular, which underscores my point. We (a) live in an environment where an essay like the OP gets upvoted and elicits sympathy from a bunch of mostly technical guys, (b) where women endure sexist comments from a bunch of mostly technical guys, and (c) a comment noting the contradiction inherent in (a) and (b) gets downvoted by a bunch of mostly technical guys. The problem is basically unfixable, at least by the suggested means; shooting the messenger won't help.

<comment><USER60> _Don't lighten up—accept_

You're asking someone to learn to live with being bullied and to accept discrimination. And through this endorsement of their behaviour you contribute to the problem.

You are a horrible person.

<comment><USER59> Counseling someone to accept a situation is not the same as endorsing it. And acceptance is the only rational response when you lack sufficient power to effect change. Indeed, the OP's decision to leave the tech industry is an implicit acknowledgment of her acceptance. That's a rational decision. Posting a whiny (albeit well-written) essay about it isn't—at least, it's irrational if she wrote it to help solve the problem. If she was simply venting, and attempting to garner attention and sympathy, then the post served its purpose well.

<comment><USER61> That's all well and good but we're a far cry away from concluding there's a lack of sufficient power to effect change. We're not counseling someone who's just become paraplegic about their hopes of running a triathlon, this is a situation with room to improve. And just because we may not be able to improve it 100% doesn't mean we don't try. Criminal behavior will always exist as long as society exists but that doesn't mean you disband the police.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER62> I consider the phrase "lighten up" patronizing and would avoid it altogether. I was once told to "lighten up" by an interviewer at a bank and immediately knew that I did not want to work there. It's insulting to suggest that a person ought to have feelings other than the ones they have. In my view, feelings (not behavior) are generally involuntary, largely beyond conscious control and lie outside the moral sphere.

I'm in academia, where the use-mention distinction isn't recognized where sexual innuendo is concerned. To be on the safe side, I take the attitude that even non-interacting, space-like separated particles at opposite ends of the universe could be accused of sexually harassing each other--and probably are.

</comment><comment><USER59> It appears that virtually all comments expressing even mild criticism of the OP are being downvoted with a vengeance. _Groupthink_ is alive and well here on HN. If you want to know what a member of the Thought Police looks like, find a mirror.

<comment><USER63> Sure, it could be group-think and thought police, or it could be _reasonable people finding a consensus_.

In media studies there's the idea of the circle of consensus (everyone agrees with the notion that slavery and rape and child abuse are bad) and outside of that is the area of legitimate controversy. ("Does Keynesian economics actually work?" "should states mandate that people wear motorcycle helmets?" whatever). Outside of that is the lunatic fringe ("Show me the birth certificate!" or "Dick Cheney was a Hitler Youth")

It seems that in this community, the statement "yeah, maybe these chicks really should just lighten up" is outside the area of legitimate controversy. As it should be.

<comment><USER59> _"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" ... [Should I] go to HR and get stuck with his work when they move or can him?_

Do you think that potentially firing someone for making such a comment is part of a reasonable consensus? Or is it something about which reasonable people can disagree?

<comment><USER63> I think the consensus is that the comment is not appropriate for a professional context.

As far as firing goes? I personally wouldn't fire someone for the first bullshit sexist remark, but I would make it perfectly clear that the next bullshit sexist comment would be the last one. I am not sure where the reasonable consensus is around that issue. I personally care more about the victim than the perpetrator.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER64> The guy sees the "one joke." He doesn't see that to _her_ it's the billionth- and-one "joke."

Bukowski put it best: "The Shoelace" [http://allisonlanda.blogspot.com/2009/02/bukowski- shoelace.h...](http://allisonlanda.blogspot.com/2009/02/bukowski- shoelace.html)

Attention my fellow men: Just STFU unless you are reading stupid jokes from a bad sitcom script before a camera for TV.

</comment><comment><USER65> Hang in there. The norms are always transitioning, so someone is always getting "the shaft" (hopefully that won't come across as sexist :) And unfortunately, when you can't change everyone's "natural" behavior, the next healthiest choice is to grow thicker skin.

EDIT>> I'm not saying that it's ok she's treated like this, but you can't change everyones behavior. It takes lifetimes. In the meantime, if you want to have a healthy mind and continue to be around that kind of behavior, you have to grow a thicker skin.

<comment><USER8> You're right. That is the healthiest approach for her. Which makes dealing with the bullshit that people fling at her for not having thicker skin all the more valuable. She could go along to get along, but hasn't, so everyone else won't have to go along with this crap too.

Your "hopefully that won't come across as sexist" bit, by the way, belittles the concern. It's not just her concern; it's my concern too, and you've belittled it. Thanks, internet message board guy.

<comment><USER65> > You're right. That is the healthiest approach for her. Which makes dealing > with the bullshit that people fling at her for not having thicker skin all > the more valuable. She could go along to get along, but hasn't, so everyone > else won't have to go along with this crap too.

Sorry, I'm a little tired today, could you rephrase this so it's easier to tell if you're being sarcastic? (serious question)

<comment><USER8> I am literally saying that you are right. The easiest thing for her to do, the thing with the best personal outcome, is to lighten up and get on with her life.

The problem is that is also the response with the worst outcome for the field in general.

So, what I'm saying is, she's taking a hit (for instance, by being told to "stop victimizing herself" and to just work harder) in order to stand up against this stuff.

And I'm also saying that as a husband and the father of a little girl who could god-help-me end up in this field, she's standing up for my family too. And so I personally have an issue with belittling her for doing that.

You put a little smiley face after your comment because you thought it was amusing. It's not funny.

<comment><USER65> > You put a little smiley face after your comment because you thought it was > amusing. It's not funny.

That's the beauty of humor: different things are funny to different people. I'll send you an email when I'm going to start catering my comments to you and your sensibilities :)

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER66> To be fair though, I've worked in places that were 70/80% female before and I was usually the first person they asked when they needed something heavy moved.

Perhaps it's just that many guys are so disorganized that it really makes sense for the woman in the group to take notes etc.

<comment><USER56> > Perhaps it's just that many guys are so disorganized that it really makes > sense for the woman in the group to take notes etc.

Assuming that, because she's a woman, she'd be better suited to note-taking _is the definition of sexism_.

<comment><USER66> except in this instance it wasn't an assumption , it was a fairly obvious fact.

<comment><USER67> There is nothing fairly obvious (or, probably, factual) about women being better note-takers than men. Certainly not to the extent that it's better for someone to automatically ask the woman to take notes, rather than say 'who here is good at taking notes?' and if nobody responds, cycling through everyone, and then having the group decide whose notes are best (or something like that).

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER68> I just want to say a sincere thank you for writing this. I hope the whole community will read this with an open mind and understand how important it is to be conscious of these subtleties.

<comment><USER69> Hear hear.

</comment></comment><comment><USER70> I agree this is a problem. But it's not one-sided.

I work (part time, not IT) in an environment where it's perfectly OK to generalize and joke about how men are assholes or idiots. I'm no writer, and I'm not about to attempt writing a post about the situation. I've been around enough that I can shrug it off at the end of the day, but in the moment it's beyond annoying and approaching degrading.

<comment><USER62> I haven't found this in academia as much as in bureaucratic office culture. At one bank where I once had the displeasure of working, one woman manager liked to make disparaging remarks about the physiques of her male subordinates. She was an acquaintance of a well-known action star and used him as the basis for her invidious comparisons. I thought this treatment was completely unnecessary.

Joking about men being idiots is sexist (or misandrist), but I'm beginning to wonder whether the unfairness consists in excluding one half of the population of the working environments in which this assessment is commonly made. OK just kidding, "lighten up." (I hate that phrase.)

</comment></comment><comment><USER71> Do you think reaching some critical mass of female developers (say 20%) will help prevent the problem? Perhaps an industry goal of reaching 20% female developers would be worthwhile (who would set such a goal?)

These problems also exist in the boardroom and some have pointed out that it takes 3 women at the table in order for the rest of the room to treat them fairly. If it's just one, she's sidelined. If it's two, then they're seen as just teaming up with each other, but three makes them legitimate in the eyes of the rest of the group. Perhaps larger groups of developers can make sure to have at least 3 women on the team to help eliminate issues.

<comment><USER72> The other factor is the stereotype in our media culture, look how Hollywood still pictures Nerds and technically versatile Women. A women who is good with computers and not a confident sexy goddess is automatically a looser.

<comment><USER22> In pop media, everyone not a confident sexy god/goddess is a loser.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER73> My £0.02: having worked in a few teams in the UK, France and Sweden over the course of the last decade, I'd say this is a cultural effect that can be won over locally by a certain company or social group, but would require a coordinated and concerted effort on behalf of men and women to stamp this kind of stealth-bullying out of social acceptability. I fully support the men who will help call out this kind of behaviour, and am also fully satisfied that this issue has front-paged HN for as long as it has.

From my own experience of work, cultural norms and popular issues, although only the smallest of samples, I'd say that (younger) Swedes have a much better handle on the balance of respect and gender roles than their peers in FR or the UK (England, specifically). Even the most subtle attempt at sexism is picked up on to a degree where it is unacceptable to at least publicly chance a remark of this kind in the workplace or in the media. Why this is I can only guess.

Prevalent (older) attitudes may account for the continued pay discrepancy between men and women and all that this reflects, but I'd say the Swedes have a very much less subtly-offensive 'working atmosphere' than those I've been part of elsewhere.

Also troubling is the question of 'women/babies/employment', but that's a whole other can of worms; just as a parting shot - men also leave poorly managed jobs when something better in life is offered to them, at least you get up to 9 months warning with women.

</comment><comment><USER74> It's all down to ignorance really isn't it. Isolated incidents by themselves aren't really a big deal. Idiots are everywhere. Sometimes people just don't think before speaking.

Sometimes the odd jibe is actually amusing. Of course when the jibe has been heard a hundred times before it never is.

I have a stutter and the amount of crap I have had over the years is rediculous. It isn't people taking the piss, I am used to that. Its people being 'kind'. People assuming I cannot do something or wouldn't want to do something on account of my speech. People being 'protective' or finishing sentences...

The outride rudeness of people is easy to confront and challenge. It is the subtle stuff which is very difficult to deal with. Often people genuinely do not understand that they have done something wrong. They were just asking someone to take notes and you have become the defacto note taker... whats wrong with that?

I have always thought the best thing to do is stand your ground but if you do that every time you get a reputation of being a stickler and being less approachable. The trouble is finding the right balance between letting the odd thing slide without just leaving yourself open to taking crap.

I feel for Katie and think it is a shame that she has been effectively forced out doing she something she enjoys by the ignorance of others.

</comment><comment><USER75> I can't stand it when people use the "Lighten up" line.

What it really means is that they can't empathise.

For _them_ it's no big deal... so therefore, as far as they see it, it _is_ no big deal.

.

If someone truly thinks another person is taking something too seriously, and really feels that something should be said about it, then the non-patronising thing to do would be to try and explain it to the other person.

</comment><comment><USER76> Katie, don't leave the field -- just find the right group to work with. It's the company you keep.

Don't let everyone else dictate your life.

</comment><comment><USER77> I'm a woman, this happens to me (not very often but that might be because I've worked in this industry only for two years) and whenever it does, I just say something horribly cold.

One day I had a pretty watch on, and a male coworker said "That's such a come- hither watch". He was one of the most intelligent people I'd met, and it was painful to hear that come from him. I made an exception and tried to tell him that one might wear something pretty simply because they _liked_ wearing it but I don't believe I got my point across.

I don't think it's a reason to quit though. Everyone suffers from several disadvantages that others might not know about. For example, the guy above once complained that some american universities (like purdue university) prefer women candidates to improve their sex ratio, and that it's unfair.

I don't want to tell you to stoically put up with this problem, but that's what I try to do.

<comment><USER78> "That's such a come-hither watch".

Making objectifying comments in the workplace is wrong, no two ways about it. But because I don't have your context, this one jumped out at me as "could be interpreted in many ways". I'm curious if I can cajole a bit more context out of you? (because I've made my share of innocently-intended comments resulting in a situation going horribly awry, so I'm always looking to improve my appropriateness radar).

Specifically, do you think it was A) an innocent/clueless comment, B) a "testing the waters" comment as a prelude to hitting on you, or C) outright hitting on you?

A) Do you think he was just complimenting you on the watch? Particularly, I wonder because he made the comment about a thing, not about you. I.e., consider the difference between "that's a sexy skirt" and "you have a sexy ass". The later is clearly objectifying, but the former could be interpreted innocently or offensively, because its a comment about an object (although even the former is pretty risky -- you'd have to be very close friends with the person and be sure they'd understand your intent to feel safe making such a remark).

B) Or perhaps he was "testing the waters"? I've notice that being labelled a "creep" actually has more to do with whether your attraction is unrequited, than whether the action was objectively creepy, and a "testing the waters" approach is one way to try and avoid being the office creepster. Unless of course even testing the waters is creepster material (I hope not...).

C) or was he just flat-out being a slime ball?

</comment></comment><comment><USER79> Talking of sexism.

Dear Y-combinator community, you have been caught red-handed @ 17:50 in this video at Startup School [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9m9vPAlb_0&t=17m50s](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K9m9vPAlb_0&t=17m50s)

Would you laugh if it were a male speaking? I kind of wish people would, then men might know the feeling of what it's like. Can you imagine if this happened to you?

This isn't PG's fault. It's the idiots in the audience. You can have a high- IQ, make brilliant stuff and still be a sexist asshole.

I'm a male, and I hate this stuff, because my it's my friends that are the ones that are affected by this behaviour.

</comment><comment><USER80> While subtle discrimination is really bad, how does she get from low cut dress to slut? That's surely something she came up with herself and nothing like that the guy intended. The guy certainly doesn't want her to wrap herself up in sweaters, why does she feel like that's how she should respond?

I feel like there's a huge gulf between second and third wave feminists. Modern ones would find the above comment empowering, you only react in this way if you've been brought up in a society and culture that demeans female sexuality and teaches you that low cut dresses implies slutiness and so on.

<comment><USER67> My interpretation is that she felt the low cut dress comment was derogatory (like the term slut), and that the man, by sitting across from her in order to sexualize her, thought he was doing what she (the slut) wanted ("why else do women dress nice?"). If she weren't a slut, then her dress would be a dress, and there would be no reason to call attention to it, especially not in that way.

The guy doesn't want her to wrap herself in sweaters only because he wants to continue to objectify her, not because he sees her as a person that has the right to dress comfortably (as long as it's still appropriate).

What's empowering about being a sexual object if you want to be a programmer?

</comment></comment><comment><USER81> I can't up this enough. My wife is a Java dev (I am a .Net dev), and I hear about the crap she has to endure almost weekly. It truly makes me want to walk into her client site and smack some faces. It is so hard to believe that this can be so common, especially since the field is made up mostly of younger "enlightened and tolerant" guys. This speaks so badly for our field (and society in general). (Now we are both in the early stages of "age-ism", but hey, we can fight that with talent, right?!?)

</comment><comment><USER82> When I managed my team, I bought gallons of beers for everyone. With my own money, and handing the beers myself to my peers (In this example I'm using beer-time as substitute for potluck).

Of course I did ask for reimbursement through the company and the company did approve, but that's not the point.

The act of doing potluck is supposed to raise morale. Whoever manager in charge should organize the potluck him/herself for maximum boost of morale. Telling others to do potluck is so lame. Telling someone else to take note is equally lame.

</comment><comment><USER83> What happened to the "OH HAI SEXISM" thread, previously at (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3739913>)?

</comment><comment><USER84> Will Schumpter win out here?

Presumably in a perfect labour market competant women will leave companies like this and go work for the non sexist competition

I believe that will be true for companies that do not embrace for example lean product discovery or software as transformative. But I just don't think the labour Market is really perfect enough to make this kind of difference

but even so, start looking at jobsites. You won't change them, and if you leave for good reasons, good employers will understand.

<comment><USER85> Cass R. Sunstein in _Free Markets and Social Justice_ offers a chapter with an interesting perspective called "Why Markets Don't Stop Discrimination." The book is actually one of the more readable economics works I've seen, and the author gives a more in-depth account of why competitive markets would normally be believed to work the way you're saying you expect them to work.

The basic idea is that even if you operate in a competitive market, your customers and associates may not: and due to this, competitive markets can sometimes only float the ball to some socially-appropriate level. So, let's talk about someone who stops doing business with you because they know your programmers are female and they hold some subconscious belief that female code is of lower quality. (I mean, if you called them on it they would say "no, of course not!" but somewhere deep inside they'd prefer the familiar and they discriminate institutionally rather than individually.) Now your incentives to discriminate are bound up in a complex: that complex contains _their tastes_ , and what they're willing to pay to get a product which tastes right to them. If they're in a very competitive market they might not be able to afford _any_ overhead, but if they're a personal user, or they are turning a profit, they get to choose based on their tastes alone and then your financial incentive is to also institutionally discriminate. The whole point is that discrimination might be "economically rational" while nondiscrimination might be "social justice" and therefore they can come at odds -- which is more or less the topic of the book.

I found it an interesting idea.

</comment></comment><comment><USER86> If you walk around alone in an unsafe neighborhood at night, you're asking for trouble. If you don't have a choice but to be in an unsafe neighborhood, hunker down and get to a point in your life when you can afford a safe neighborhood.

In the programming world, this translates to : become a great programmer, and you will find yourself in a great programming environment (birds of a feather...). If you really love programming, you will get to that point eventually.

Great programmers love programming, and love learning from other great programmers even more. That's why they'll never offend another great programmer or risk it all by indulging in bad behavior. (You can actually substitute "great programmer" here with "great any-profession". There might be exceptions, but in 15 years of programming, I haven't met any.)

When you don't have these types of programmers around you, whats left is the (sub-)average programmer, and the concomitant sexist environment.

Also, by wearing a low-cut blouse to a professional environment, you drive away those people who actually contribute to a good environment, leaving behind those that don't.

Biologically, men's brains light up when they see a woman's cleavage. The people who value you as a programmer will avoid you, because they recognize what's going on in their heads, avoid the distraction, and the risk of offending you. Heck, some of them might not even look in your direction. My advice is the same one I give my daughters: wear a scarf - it prevents the over-heating problem you mentioned. Its the same reason I wear boxers, rather than walk around in shorts.

You don't need to lighten up, just hunker down.

<comment><USER67> I think that solving the problem of an unsafe neighborhood is much more intractable than solving sexism in the workplace. Mostly, this is because 'we' are not part of the culture in those unsafe neighborhoods. We are part of the tech culture. If we, as a culture/society/whatever can agree that this kind of behavior is unethical, unprofessional, and not welcome, then we can and should express our disapproval towards those who are sexist, or allow for sexism to be the problem it is.

So, to me, you're saying that because we can't solve unsafe neighborhoods by calling out that undesirable behavior when we see it (which we can't), we shouldn't call out undesirable behavior in an unsafe work environment.

Biologically, human minds do or want to do lots of things when presented with various stimuli. That doesn't mean it's OK for them to do it. I wonder if we're biologically inclined to victim-blame the way you just did...

</comment></comment><comment><USER87> I have to wonder if I'm just hanging out in the wrong circles or working at the wrong companies, because I've never seen anything even approaching some of the appalling examples in the article. Am I in the minority here? Note that I'm not denying that it happens; I've just never seen it personally.

Disclaimer: I work for a midwestern branch of a major company based in California, and I've never worked in any of the major tech hubs.

</comment><comment><USER88> There's a real problem here that comes down to the status-quo of the office. Imagine your office of 100 people is 50% male/female, and a nice sampling of racial groups, sexualities and ages (I've had the fortune to work in such a place). What happens is that there is sufficient diversity _and_ commonality between enough people of their varying interests, looks and views, that you find it completely unnecessary to make comments about what someone is wearing, or whether their gender deems them capable. I say again, the problem with the high-tech industry is there is simply not enough diversity. Now we can't fix this today or tomorrow, maybe not in 10 years, but you can certainly imagine that it's there. With any comment, consider what is appropriate given a hypothetical situation where there is a good balance of whatever-stereotype- you-are-addressing and go from there.

</comment><comment><USER89> So hey HN, if we really are gonna go on a crusade against objectification and gender roles, why does it almost always have to be about women playing victim?

Any guy could whip up blog posts about daily situations where specific (not necessarily superior) roles are imposed upon them by society simply because they are men.

I get told all the time by the ladies (even if jokingly) that I should put on some weight so I am more of a man.

I get asked all the time and it is assumed of me even more times to carry the bags because I am the man in the situation.

Aren't there centuries old idea about being a "gentleman"? Where you are expected to hold the door for the woman, buy her stuff etc.

Aren't there studies that men are much less likely to report rape than women? Shouldn't that be much more appalling to all than some of the pettier examples posted on HN recently?

</comment><comment><USER90> I like to joke around and have a good time while doing serious work. This isnt some profound optimization technique, just something that makes my day happier and usually that of those around me. However, my general rule of thumb is to never directly engage a female at the workplace outside of a purely professional, subdued necessity. They are too sensitive. While I know I have good intentions and care for their happiness, not everyone has the same level of empathy. So I simply avoid getting grouped into the fratboy category even when I really do want them to just lighten up a bit. I personally find blanket invitations to after-work drinks to be a better environment to get more friendly with the ladies on the team, most will drop their shields a few notches.

<comment><USER91> I can tell you from experience that women in the workplace are fine with joking around and having a laugh. The folks in my office have very casual and friendly relationships and we often find ourselves discussing, and joking about, very sensitive topics, the women included.

The issue is not that women are too sensitive to joke with or talk with about these things. The issue is when those jokes are made at the expense of women, targeted at women, or degrading to women. And that's going to be true for most women both in and out of the workplace.

</comment></comment><comment><USER92> I think both behaviors provide continuation to the problem. On one side, the people who is actually sexist, or racist, or just believe in stereotypes. In the another, the people who also believes that the rest of the people are biased towards their sex, skin color or condition. Ignoring information that is not interesting or useful for us is the best tool we have to not be hurt by other people so easily, get stronger and prepared to survive in an unfair society and preserve freedom of speech. Nobody wants to be negatively discriminated, but does somebody think positive discrimination is the solution? I believe is the same social problem after all.

</comment><comment><USER93> You know, I come to HN mostly for the enlightened commentary on the news articles that are posted. Yet anytime something related to sexism in the industry comes up, I am stunned at some of the comments.

Yes. It is hard being a woman in the industry. It is hard being a woman in general. But the worst part is seeing how many men think we act like an entirely different species, and its disheartening. Sometimes, comments speak of women as if we don't even read this site.

Obviously there are many cultural and sociological norms at play here, but I expect more from this community. I guess thats my fault.

<comment><USER94> The same story when anything involving race comes up.

</comment></comment><comment><USER95> > All I did was make a joke about you needing to be in the kitchen!

I'm a fellow programmer, and a guy (if it matters), but whenever I hear this exact comment (luckily for me I didn't hear it from any of my present or past co-workers, only distant acquaintances) I almost literally start to boil. Are some of us men really, I mean really that stupid?!

Again, luckily for me most of my career as a programmer has been spent in small non-software specific firms (5 to 20 people) where the female to male ratio was in most cases higher than 50%, so that I didn't have to hear this misogynistic and stupid crap.

</comment><comment><USER96> I'm a bit late to the party here but isn't she being sexist too?

For example, with the notes issue - how does she know that she is being chosen because she's female. She probably doesn't. She's probably assuming that's the reason, because men are misogynist pigs, right?

It's one of those situations where we can't tell at all. The _mens rea_ , if there is one, is hidden.

Why doesn't she assume that she takes the best notes or that the boss thinks that because of her CV [made up example:] having documentation experience or the best English pass scores of the group that she'll be the best note taker.

</comment><comment><USER97> Reading through the article and the comments here it seems to me that there is a tremendous unresolved tension. There seems to be an idea that we just 'fix the sexism' and that's that. However, stepping back and asking harder questions makes me think the problems are fundamental to highly developed capitalist economies. Before you mod me down, at least read the rest of what I have to say.

Everything we do-- what we wear, how we walk, the way we talk, sends subtle social signals, and these impact all areas of life. Two fundamental (and increasingly entwined) areas of life are sexuality (without which our race dies out) and economic (without which, each of us dies individually). These are tremendously entertwined, with over half of Americans having dated co- workers (see: [http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2012/02/10/the- state-...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/susanadams/2012/02/10/the-state-of-the- office-romance-2012/)).

So it seems to me that, particularly single, women navigating the modern workplace are trying to navigate two fundamentally conflicting desires. The first is to be professional and not be open to the problem of being offered promotions for sexual favors, or retaliation for declining such offers, and the second is to find romance, companionship, love, etc. The fact that workplace romances are so common cannot be discounted in this area.

And so you have two key questions:

1) How do you define appropriate boundaries? This is a hellishly difficult problem in the context of the workplace.

2) If boundaries aren't bright but involve a lot of give and take, then doesn't that fundamentally mean that there will be a lot of behavior that will fall outside of that which is desirable?

I honestly don't see how you solve that problem.

On the gender role issue, I am a firm believer that one is generally better off making such tasks as taking notes or arranging potlucks things which are volunteer, and then if that fails, rotated, eliminating those who can't do it reasonably well.

But beyond that........ As long as so much of our social spheres surround work, and that's where a lot of opportunity for dating (both for men and women) lies, I just don't buy that you can wish away unwanted attention.

<comment><USER67> I think another commenter in this thread had a good answer (it was his understanding of California law). You can politely ask a coworker on a date, but if that person declines, then you drop it.

<comment><USER97> And if that co-worker says, "I can't. I am busy tonight"

Does that mean you can't ever ask again?

Or if you ask five times and are politely but not definitively turned down can you ask five more times? 25 more times? Is there no limit?

Now we might say there is an obligation to say something definitive. But then you get into a problem. What if there is a power difference? What if you are a general manager of one business unit asking a floor worker in a different business unit out on a date? Maybe the floor worker is afraid if she hurts your feelings, there will be career consequences? So does that change things?

I don't think sexuality (and that includes romance if we are honest) admits of really simple rules except maybe magic safe words. These things also thrive on mixed messages. Magic safe words ("no" and "stop") protect against the worst problems (sexual assault) but not unwanted attention (how am I supposed to definitively know whether the attention is wanted or not? I can't read minds....), and they don't address the areas where people may want to try to get out of something letting the other person down gently.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER98> "When asked, most men will gallantly express their admiration for women in general and profess a profuse love for their mates in particular. Despite these touching personal testimonials, society is rife with misogyny and patriarchy. A cursory glance at the current newspapers or television news reveals a global society in which the majority of men disdain women. While some cultures are more egalitarian than others, men's actions suggest that they believe firmly in their superiority over women.

-Leonard Schlain (Sex, Time, and Power)

</comment><comment><USER99> What a trainwreck of a comments section.

If your immediate knee-jerk response is to try to point out why it's her fault without reflecting on her points, you're part of the problem.

</comment><comment><USER100> I hope one day we can all work in environments that are completely non- hostile. Some jobs seem to be a lot more rough than others, in my experience. I've never had to deal with sexism or prejudice but i've had my share of crap to take from coworkers. I've also worked with highly professional, straight- laced people who know not to be asshats and treat people fairly.

I really hope you don't stop doing what you love because of where you work.

</comment><comment><USER101> I am very glad this subject is being discussed here. The subtle sexism in the tech industry has always been disturbing to me as a man and I can only imagine how women must feel about it. Sexism in our industry is not only offensive it is counterproductive. It saddens me to think of the great female innovators that may be turned off from entering the industry because it is seen as unwelcoming to them.

</comment><comment><USER102> "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"

Anyone says that at my workplace and they will be shown the door in less than 120 seconds.

<comment><USER103> Honestly, I'm OK with the first part of the comment. It's the latter part which irks (most) people.

Had it been "Katie's got the low cut dress on today! Going out tonight?" then I think it's acceptable.

</comment></comment><comment><USER104> It's bizarre, I'm sure if I made any of those comments to women at university I would quickly become pretty unpopular.

So is this just a problem of the previous generation or a problem specific to the workplace?

I really do _feel_ for the author, I can't imagine how awful it must be to put up with that kind of thing everyday.

</comment><comment><USER105> My wife is a programmer. I hear you!

</comment><comment><USER106> Is anyone else bothered by the fact that of the 752 comments on this thread at the moment probably >700 were written by men? Isn't it potentially sexist in and of itself to have a large discussion about this subject exclusively between men?

<comment><USER107> AFAIK, ycombinator forum software does not make a sex/gender distinction. I don't see how it could be sexist.

Being labeled a sexist is a terrible thing. Saying that a discussion by man on the subject is sexist seems potentially sexist because it implies that man should not discuss because they are man.

</comment></comment><comment><USER108> in no way a contradiction of anything, or a statement of what is _correct_ in the workplace just an observation on human relations as it relates to this topic:

A.) Women would not like to be treated by men as men treat other men in the workplace. You might think so, but I think you'd find it is also inappropriate, just in different ways.

B.) Men would not like to be treated as women often treat other women in the workplace. You might think so, but I think you'd find it is also inappropriate, just in different ways.

which leads me to:

C.) It is difficult for either gender to rigorously define appropriate asexual behavior towards one another, as their behavior is (generally) genuinely sex- aware.

</comment><comment><USER109> I just can't relate to this post. I can't say you are inventing things, but maybe change companies a little, discover something different, don't just complain. As consultant I see quite a lot of different companies and believe I have good idea what can be seen.

I am annoyed by childish behavior of my colleagues, this has nothing to do with me being able to handle it, just I would like to work somewhere where I don't have to deal with it all the time. Also, some female colleagues left field because constant learning was just too much for them and they wanted someplace where they don't have to invest so much of them. Totally reasonable.

Again, can't relate to what you are describing and your description is in no way characteristic for IT, it might be corporate lack of culture in your workplace.

<comment><USER44> Sorry to play the HN etiquette bot, but you're being downvoted because you basically replied to a post saying, "don't dismiss my concerns when you don't share them" by dismissing her concerns because you don't share them.

<comment><USER109> No, I said that as consultant who was in a number of companies, I didn't see behavior she describes. It is not the rule, but exception and not characteristic for IT, which is pretty much what she is implying.

And you are being a jerk :) for downvoting, thank you very much.

<comment><USER67> Exactly. You don't share her concerns (or experiences). Your nonrandom sample of companies has yielded different results than her nonrandom sample. How about that. Have a cookie.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER110> Damn, I'm glad I don't have to work with such a prickly person. Men have to deal with minor sleights and annoyances, too. That's why they tell you to "lighten up". Because you're not special.

</comment><comment><USER111> _"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!"_

-> "Oop, looks like Bob's wearing the same thing as yesterday."

-> "Kinda desperate there, eh?"

</comment><comment><USER112> > I once had a boss who wanted to turn me into a personal assistant so badly, > it ended up in a meeting with HR (he, as white and male, should be allowed > to rein in the only female on the team!).

Actually, he should. It has nothing to do with his sex and race though--it has to do with him being THE BOSS.

</comment><comment><USER113> You just made me speachless. One of the best comments I ever read on that issue (or any other resembling it)!

<comment><USER113> Question out of curiosity: I've been down voted why exactly here? :-)

<comment><USER114> I was actually wondering the same.

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER12> Honestly speaking I am surprised by the quantity of comments, especially the ones on sexism and similar stuff (how to dress, what to cook, etc). Usually, this is an indicator of one big underlying problem, therefore I assume that it is a problem in the US.

At least, this is how the author positions the situation and her individual case.

But..... in reality, at least based on what I observed in the multinational companies, where I worked, such behavior usually surfaces in three cases.

(1) The person does not understand how organizational dynamics and people/power play works, i.e. does not know the rules of the game.

(2) The person is not a good performer, or at least this is how colleagues perceive her or (for god sake) him.

(3) The corporate environment and culture OR the boss are negative - in this case most employees are treated like that.

Based on my personal experience:-

In case of (3) the best advice is to run - find another company that would value this particular individual strengths. There are plenty of companies out there. The life is not worth it to spend it on converting jerks to mother Theresa.

In case of (2) the best advice is to "make yourself so good, that they can't ignore you" [I do not recall that exact wording]. I seriously doubt that a valuable employee [i.e. she/he is the only one who can fix things with positive/negative impact on P&L] would be mistreated. In case she would be, than probably this is the case (3) - the company/boss does not understand the employee's value ---> same advice as above - run. I recall two cases - <USER2> HR assistant and male Director of Strategy. The former was just dumb, and the latter was bullshitting his way around. In both cases gender had nothing to do with the fact that both had nothing to bring to the table. So the consensus of high-producing crowd (both female and male) was unanimous.

Usually, if a person is an excellent performer, these things (negative comments, stupid microtasks, etc) just do not appear or do not stick.

In case of (1) the best advice is to find a mentor (gender not relevant), who could teach or coach on how to behave oneself in a group or organization, so called organizational behavior or simply politics. It is difficult to summarize it, but the goal is to learn how to diffuse negative behavior towards you with humor, words or actions immediately at the point of action in such a way that everybody present would think that the one who initiated negative behavior is a jerk (or dumb, or idiot, or an asshole) without you calling names.

For example a comment from colleague

<"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!">

can be rubuffed with

"Oop, John's got his socks smelling today! I know where I shall not be sitting" or smth similar with a big smile.

The simple view and approach is to perceive such people as programs with bugs. To resolve the bug you need to understand how the whole piece is working and what's inside. Therefore, you need to understand each individual, what's inside, what are the bugs and how to approach/address them. Each one is unique and shall be dealt with as such.

Another approach is to start with yourself - how you perceive yourself and own self-confidence.

I agree with OneBytePerGreen that the author shall "lighten up". I do not recall the exact term, but the author perceives that the external environment is what controls her behavior and outcomes. Such view does not faciliate personal growth, or any growth per se. The only way to change is to understand simple fact that behavior of others is defined by your own behavior and start with yourself, because that's the only one a human being can change.

On a side note I especially disagree with one of the comments: <"Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" Anyone says that at my workplace and they will be shown the door in less than 120 seconds.>

Acting like that is keeping the real issue under the table and unresolved. The real issue is the person's view of the world and lack of knowledge and understanding of how things work in life. A good boss or co-worker would teach or coach the person how to to deal with that.

Apologies for my English and, possibly, tone. My first real post on NH, so I might have missed some 'untold' rules.

</comment><comment><USER115> Have you ever worked in an office with all women? I did and the sexism and comments are worse because they know they can get away with it.

Our world has become too politically correct. At one of my jobs, they brought all of the developers into a room and said that "something somebody said was offensive and we needed to watch our language".

We're adults, not kids at school..but it sure doesn't feel like it because people seem to want to get another person fired if they are offended in any way. The result is that we can't be honest.

<comment><USER63> It's really easy to say that the world has become too politically correct when you're not the one offended. It's easy not to be offended when you're not in an isolated or alienated group.

What's not too PC for you? Blackface minstrel shows? Cross burning? Swastikas? Effigy burnings?

Many developers find stereotypes of "tech nerds" offensive. If the women in your office showed up with plaid shirts, pocket protectors, slide rules, and mocked your condescending whiny voice, would that not be offensive?

<comment><USER115> "It's really easy to say that the world has become too politically correct when you're not the one offended. It's easy not to be offended when you're not in an isolated or alienated group."

This isn't true. When my co-workers have gotten into political discussions that were completely against my beliefs, I could have easily gotten offended.

But you know what? I don't, because I'm an adult. Some people are going to say things you may not like. Just ignore them.

"It's easy not to be offended when you're not in an isolated or alienated group."

Women mostly work in Nursing and as teachers. If I were to go into either of these fields, I still wouldn't whine to my superiors about something my co- worker said or how they made me feel bad.

"If the women in your office showed up with plaid shirts, pocket protectors, slide rules, and mocked your condescending whiny voice, would that not be offensive?"

No, I would laugh. You need to be proud of what you are. I'm confident enough to know that a little mockery won't hurt me.

Every company I have ever worked for has been so paranoid about sexual harassment and offending people I seriously doubt it happens as much as people would like us to believe.

"What's not too PC for you? Blackface minstrel shows? Cross burning? Swastikas? Effigy burnings?"

Why is it that in any conversation, the people that claim to be against discrimination bring up things like this?

I don't agree with what you posted, but we should have the freedom to express our opinions. I'm tired of people trying to legislate personal opinions away.

It's opinions like yours that allow special interest groups to get power in this country.

<comment><USER63> Also, the reason "people like me" bring up the minstrel shows, swastikas, and burning crosses is to try to give context that there are a handful of things that many people, not just "thin-skinned women" or "overly-sensitive PC whiners" find offensive.

I believe in your right to express yourself, but _harassment in the workspace_ is not protected speech. be as un-PC as you want on your own time.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER116> Well said.

I'm seriously considering leaving the field of software because I'm tired of working with 25 - 35 year old manchildren.

<comment><USER117> Wait till you come across the thumpers, we have one, his only saving grace from being shown the door is that he falls into a different category.

Still, why would you want someone as a manager who would keep his own wife's car locked up at work because she failed to be properly respectful?

<comment><USER39> Curious here: I assume a "thumper" is short for a "Bible thumper"?

And what do you mean by "his only saving grace from being shown the door is that he falls into a different category"?

<comment><USER118> I thought it was a reference to domestic violence, but I suppose it could be a reference to religiously "justified" domestic violence.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER119> _As the woman, I've been the only person in the group asked to put together a pot luck (presumably, this work is beneath the males). I've been the only one asked to take notes in a meeting... even if I'm the one who's presenting (because my title really should be 'secretary who we let on the servers')._

Not saying this is what's happening in these cases, but I've often seen this happen to women not because they're women, but because they create the situation by training people to rely on them to do these things. Women who will take on the tasks nobody else wants to do, who will always do whatever others leave undone, who offers to bring other people food when she goes out, etc. In the spirit of helpfulness or whatever.

This happens to men, too, but more women on the whole seem to be the "step in and get it done" type (for whatever reason). The kind you can rely on to bend over backwards to do something when asked, even if it's ridiculous. You see it in families and it's natural that people behave the same at work as they do at home, when it comes to _this_ kind of behavior.

I'm not like this at all, though. Not at all. Nobody says "Oh, Amy will get it all done." And this never happens to me.

<comment><USER103> When I was in my early 20's, I (the lone female developer) was once asked by my manager to put together a gift for the only other female team member, a tester, who had just given birth. I don't know why I was picked, because I was

(1) very new to the team, (2) didn't knew the other person well, and (3) generally ill-equipped at that stage of my life (really, just entering the "adult world") to anticipate what was an appropriate gift for a new mother.

There were other team members who were already parents (of multiple children, even), thus probably knew better. But I was picked.

I think I just got a Toys'R'Us gift card as cop out.

</comment></comment><comment><USER120> The problem with these posts is that we only hear the horror stories. We get a sensational picture of constant harassment from one unlucky person. Most of what was written here was outright harassment. In many places it would be seen as outright illegal for the company to allow this to continue.

I take issue with complaining about "subtle" sexism, however. Life is not fair for men either. In fact, unfairness is universal in life for reasons that are out of anybody's control. By pushing for unobtainable fairness, you are training people to expect fairness, which is disabling. Boys are attacked by other boys in school. You are constantly tested by other males for signs of fear. Big deal. It toughens you up for later life. Gender "equality" in many ways has become just another production output to be maximised without regard to secondary costs.

<comment><USER121> We're not talking about "life" in any sort of universal context. Whatever 'female privilege' you can try to conjure up in general is largely irrelevant to this very specific setting: a technology profession. Is it really unobtainable to not tend towards choosing the woman to be the head of the potluck or to take notes just because she's a woman? Is it really that unobtainable to not make jokes about PMS or breasts? We're in a really sad state if it's impossible to go to work and not do those things, and a sadder one if those things are so important people will fight for the ability to do them.

<comment><USER120> You are painting these things as universal. If there were some rule about women and potlucks I'd care. As it is, there is not. I have never even seen a potluck in the workplace! There are much bigger, structural problems to worry about right now. It's like we're on a boat with a hole in the bottom and every interest group is complaining that their feet are getting wetter than all the others. We wouldn't have this problem if the environment were more conducive to smaller businesses - women could avoid these problems by becoming their own bosses. Instead of escaping our entrapments we are arguing for better conditions in the prison.

<comment><USER121> It seems you're suggesting that working for a company in the technology industry is being imprisoned or that it's prohibitively (and increasingly?) difficult to start a small technology business. As far as I can tell, tech is still a growth industry, and the boats are floating higher, not sinking.

Even if so, why is it irrelevant to bring up a specific reason that women might leave a company? If I was my own boss and had female employees that I wished to retain, I'd consider OP's article to contain a very important lesson.

Also, just because someone has a serious case of cancer doesn't mean it's a waste of their time to complain about someone punching them in the face. Yes, they have a 'much bigger' problem to worry about, but that doesn't mean everything else goes out the window.

<comment><USER120> You use sophistry. Punches to the face face will make a cancer patient worse. In fact, getting the flu may kill them. The poster is not a cancer patient; presumably, they are a reasonable independent person with some self esteem. So they are capable of learning resilience. We need to distinguish between small harms that ultimately do us good and large harms that are sending society on a destructive course.

<comment><USER121> Because of your plea for civil discussion, I mistakenly assumed that you would interpret my words in good faith (and, for the record, I _can't_ downvote.) Instead, I suppose I should have qualified the hypothetical punches as just sufficient in force to cause pain and irritation but not enough to exacerbate health issues. I'm really not sure what the flu has to do with anything, facial contusions are quite a different thing than a systemic infection.

The point still stands, that small issues matter even when there are bigger issues.

You have given nothing to support the argument that treating someone as subservient based on gender 'ultimately does us good.'

Toughening (or lightening) up is a good thing. I was bullied in school to a distressing degree. Later in my life, I went through training where I learned to shrug off hits far worse than any bully had given me. Sometimes they were accidental and I laughed about it.

However, that doesn't mean it's ok for someone to just walk up to me and sock me in the face. It doesn't mean that it's ok to attack people and just demand that they toughen up and deal with it.

By your argument we should all treat each other like complete crap at home and at work, because it will build character like a lifelong boot camp. Heck, maybe we should treat women _specifically_ like crap so they can get more resilient and perform better than men.

Of course, another poster claims that computer programmers are awkward around women and have such bad self-esteem they should be forgiven. I wonder how well _they_ would fare if the tables were turned.

Honestly, it sounds like an argument born out of the desire to not give up being a jerk to women. It sounds like "lighten up," for no real reason. And, whatever the development potential, it's pushing women away from the field.

<comment><USER120> >You have given nothing to support the argument that treating someone as subservient based on gender 'ultimately does us good.'

I never said this. Quote me where I said this, or I will be forced to regard you as a liar.

And I never said "small issues don't matter". Why make things up? I am saying that I am bored with endless complaints that exist around noise level. Since I posted a few times and I may not have been redundant enough, I'll be explicit in that I think taunting women about their breasts in the workplace is despicable and anyone who witnessed such a thing should immediately speak up. Anything less is cowardice.

My beef with this post is the complaints about "subtle" sexism. People don't seem to understand that people are unfair to others all the time. There is nothing but a kind of blind secular faith that eliminating these micro- injustices is going to help anybody. So you show me someone who refuses to hire women or abuses them and I will tell them where to stick it. I stand up to people who promote ideas I think are harmful. But I don't want to hear about "perceived" problems that are indistinguishable from the noise-level unfairness that nobody can stop ("boohoo I got asked to take some notes and I think it _might_ have been because I am a woman"). If you don't want to take notes say "no". Better yet do a shitty job. Instead we have people arguing about how one type of slave gets whipped on the buttocks and the other gets it on the thigh, missing the point that if we set the slaves free they wouldn't be getting whipped at all. But don't let me stop you opining about the decor while the house burns down.

And the people down-voting me are just PC thugs with no ability to confront an alternate point of view.

</comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER122> Attack sexism, not humour! Please stop killing humour

</comment><comment><USER123> Overly Sensitive.

</comment><comment><USER124> To every person going through a similar situation, I apologize on behalf of Men, and I guarantee you not all of us are like such.

<comment><USER112> You do not speak for me.

<comment><USER124> I apologize for thinking we share the same values.

<comment><USER112> I apologize for your mistake also.

</comment></comment></comment></comment><comment><USER112> If you turn innocent (or even well-intentioned) comments into an HR case, I'm guessing your co-workers are not sad to see you gone.

</comment><comment><USER125> How about .. embrace your femininity. The bigger the chip on our shoulder about being a chick in the workplace, the more we're told to "lighten up."

Plan the potluck - isn't it fun to plan things? Take the notes - aren't you super organized and taking notes anyway? If given a demeaning comment - sincerely and gracefully refute it the first time, replacing it with a comment about the quality of your work. And, seriously, stop wearing revealing clothes to work - have some respect and save that for your spouse!

This is not to diminish therealkatie's complaints, nor to say that every woman actually enjoys baking cookies, planning potlucks, or taking notes. I do, though, and I've never had a problem with respect.

<comment><USER126> I don't think you can diminish somebody's complaints and then follow up with "this is not to diminish your complaints".

<comment><USER127> "I am sorry that you felt offended"

</comment></comment></comment><comment><USER128> Dear Katie,

Welcome to business, now grow up. I agree that the "lighten up" strategy is tiresome and ineffective. I don't know you, but it seems you need to grow some thicker skin and learn to hit back.

Do you think Meg Whitman, Carly Fiorna, or Arianna Huffington take shit from people? Hello no! It is called assertiveness and standing your ground.

Grow up, Katie. The real world has all kinds of people. People who grew up believing in gender roles. People who grew up thinking homosexuality is bad. People who grew up with no discipline from hippie parents. Putting all those personalities in the room can be chaotic. There are two lessons you need to learn:

1\. assert yourself, and do it in a way that the offending party understands. HR and all these laws are crutches for solving the actual problems.

2\. stop worrying about what others think about you.

</comment><comment><USER129> I'm willing to bet that this type of behavior is a lot less likely in a start up. Something about assholes and corporate jobs. I'd like to think nothing like that would ever happen where I work. Does any women on hear have any first hand experience?

One thing that did bother me about the article though. She complained about being asked to cook, but on her about page it says she loves to cook and looks for any excuse. I'm sure she has a better idea of what her boss meant when he asked, but it makes me wonder if she has become oversensitive after so many bad experiences. I hope not.

<comment><USER8> Are we talking about the same startup field that puts people on stages at conferences with slide decks full of half naked women?

In any case: she's not asking for a holy jihad. She's not claiming to be the victim of a violent crime. All that needs to happen is for people to stop telling her to "lighten up".

</comment></comment><comment><USER130> At my work place we throw around homoerotic jokes and comments all the time and no one is offended. I guess it is only if you're comfortable enough with a group that you can ask them to do ridiculous things, kind of funny way. In rework it mentions that you should hire friends, sounds like that girl is the stranger wether it is because she is a girl or wether the men are disgusting pigs - whatever the case.

She can adapt the group become a leader, I've seen it happen with girls or she can cry about being an abused minority. Such is a difference between strong and weak people. Granted we don't come to work to be leaders some of us enjoy just writing code and doodling up layouts and logos in photoshop. In this case a compromise should be found - offsite work on the project. From a coffee shop or otherwise. You know there are other companies to work with as well, maybe with better female/male ratio.

In the end this is a battle of sexes, the chemistry is wrong - men want to have sex with women and when you add in the mix work and being close, you can either make so that you are not attractive to any of the male members of the work force or do something else. Asking men not to be men is just as cruel as asking a woman to be a man. One way to augment this issue is to hire a ton of girls to work in the team to maybe dilute the male collective. But in every case this may lead to different and unpredictable results. You can't just board a pirate ship and expect sailors to behave all gentlemanly at once - maybe pirate ship full of amazons? at any rate this is hugely complicated because people are. Complaining about it won't get you anywhere, acting does.

Most of us want to see more females in the force. Most of the time nerds I know work harder, because they want to strut their awesome code and how well it works before female member of the team.</comment>