X.Org Is Looking For Some Female Help

[blackiwid]

and another point that less woman work in this field could maybe have something to do, that there are less woman applying for it. At least that is also no messurepoint to proofe that they get discreminated.

[BlackStar]

Nope. There's some real problems where men are discriminated against, which are largely caused by the same sexist attitudes which cause discrimination against women. But this isn't one of them. This is a male-dominated field, where lots of people are openly hostile towards women, and the people who actually do things (developers) are trying to counter this with an outreach towards a group to make them feel more welcome, and some of those manchildren are getting upset because so far they've been able to get away with their no-girls-allowed little sausagefest.

You pretend to be for equality, you pretend like you'd be totally fine with getting women into FOSS development, but for some reason you cry out at any measures taken towards making that happen...

Pretty much this.

The excuses are getting more and more convoluted... now we can't make an outreach to women because some trash magazines write badly about male sex problems? Yeah, that makes all kinds of sense...

I think this topic is emotional for many people, which explains why they cannot think logically. It's part loss aversion of the worst kind (feminists are going to steal all our privileges), part insecurity and part rationalization / victim blaming (women get paid less, so they must have done something to deserve that. Otherwise they would have been paid the same.)

It's like schoolyard bulling just in an institutionalized manner. Sad and sickening.

Edit: see above post for a perfect example of victim blaming.

[jadrian]

This is a male-dominated field, where lots of people are openly hostile towards women

No. Where lots of people are openly hostile.

Plenty of guys are often openly hostile. Linus responses are a good example of this attitude even at the higher levels of the hierarchy. Plenty of guys will say all sorts of hostile dumb shit to other guys. Somehow when they do get treated equally (badly), it often becomes sexual discrimination.

The donglegate saga, by feminist Adria Richards, is a perfect example. It had absolutely nothing to do with women. It was a couple of men, talking to each other, making a joke with the word dongle. But a woman overheard it and it became about women.

[robclark]

We don't know, but statistics don't lie. It is highly improbable that so few women would be interested in this project. Why are you aggressive?

Why are you making a distinction for people who have coding skills or not? Everyone should have a happy time! They may not get funded if they don't fill the requirements but that doesn't mean we don't have to be friendly with everyone.

The amount of bullshit in such a small argument is astonishing.

Statistics don't lie, but you're speaking for them. One could also argue, well statistics don't lie, therefore there must be few women interested in this project. But you don't like that interpretation, so dismiss it, come up with another one of your own, and back it up it's validity with "statistics not lying". It's mind boggling.

What mupuf is saying is that statistics don't lie about the objective measurement that there are relatively fewer women contributers to xorg. There is nothing mind boggling about that statement.

Just for the sake of argument, let's say you are right that this is simply a result that fewer women are intrested in this project. (And, to be clear, I think *starting* with this *assumption* about the reason behind the statistics, in the lack of any sort of proof, is sexist. But just for the sake of argument..) What is the worst that happens? We get no applicants? Where is the problem in that. We are not exactly turning away qualified EVoC applicants due to lack of funds. This new program is *not* taking away anything from anyone.

The only thing mind boggling here is the knee-jerk reaction from many of the posters on this thread.

[BlackStar]

@blackiwid: you asked for proof. Here is a recent study published on this subject:

"Instructors at 259 US institutions were, on average, more likely to respond to fake email requests for mentoring if the senders' names sound white and male."

Read the whole blog post and then move to the study. It's quite interesting in that it also covers the name issue you brought up, as well the way to gather unbiased proof (send an email and measure the chance of getting a reply.) According to the study, applicants in the field of engineering and computer science were 11% less likely to get a reply if they were a female or non-white.

"[...] the compound effect of many situations like it could well help explain why we find so few women and people from minority backgrounds at professor level. Milkman agrees: 'This is a small moment — it’s one time someone’s reaching out and looking for guidance and encouragement. But if every time you do this happens to you, that’s going to add up.' "

[BlackStar]

And more proof:

Researchers from three of the nation’s top business schools examined why women make up such a small portion of those studying or working in math and science, even though they outnumber men in overall undergraduate enrollment, according to a new study published this week.

To examine how this trend may stem from stereotypes, the researchers conducted an experiment asking 191 volunteers to “hire” someone to complete a math-related task.

Their findings? When presented with no information other than the applicant’s appearance, both men and women were twice as likely to hire a male applicant over a female applicant. What’s more, this discrimination persisted even after the applicants reported how well they’d done on the math task.

This reveals a deeply ingrained discrimination against women.

Please do not try to argue that there is no proof of discrimination. The real question is what are we doing to combat this discrimination. Many kudos to X.org for taking steps in the right direction.

[MarcosFA]

And more proof how feminists are dishonest and how they can make statistics lie:

Fist, the study compares white males against the rest, i.e. "women and black, Hispanic, Indian or Chinese". They inflate the numbers with wherever they can and ban! machism!
One cannot conclude that women are being discriminates as the women information it is diluted within the ethnics ones. How it's possible affirm that white women don't get the same numbers of response than the white male counterpart? How can one assert that it's not because of race?
In this scenario if the study was, instead, made white women x males and black, Hispanic, Indian or Chinese, it's perfectly possible reach the same result! So it do not proofs discrimination against women.

Second, the "study has suggested that these groups may be at a disadvantage" and "A study published on 22 April (and currently under review)".
If you don't know, suggestion is different from proof. A suggestion cannot assert a thing. Worst, it's still under review so no conclusion can be taken of it.

So, it's more a case of a ideology trying to grab on anything to support it's false views.

[MarcosFA]

Open letter to Jillian Berman

By Ellen A. Fishbein

This is an open letter to Jillian Berman on her article ?It?s a Fact that Women Get Paid Less Than Men. Stop Debating.?

Typical feminist science: I told it is this way, so STFU.

(...)

Before I go on, Jillian, I acknowledge that you asked everyone to ?stop debating.? But I (helped by some of the world?s preeminent gender and economics scholars) am not going to stop debating.
The points you made in your article portray American women as whiny at best and completely incompetent at worst. For me, that?s worth fighting against.

See this white knights? it's a women lecturing another women, so don't come with that "you are in no position to be lecturing women on what should and should not be offending them" like TheBlackCat did. A very strange thing to say as feminist tell how men how they should and shout not feel all the time.
Now, let me stick only in the article.

(...)

In the opening of your piece, you struggled for a good argument against Christina Hoff Sommers?s piece ?No, Women Don?t Make Less Money Than Men,? so you decided to attack her ?self-awareness? instead. The offending sentence ?with no self-awareness? was: ?No one knows if the five cents is a result of discrimination or some other subtle hard-to-measure difference between male and female workers.?

You wondered what that ?subtle hard-to-measure difference? might be if not institutional sexism. It?s a good question?one that Harvard economist Claudia Goldin discusses. (...)
?A better answer [than sexism],? Claudia Goldin writes, ?is [that] firms reward individuals who differ in their desire for various amenities.? Workplace flexibility is a complicated, multidimensional concept,? and ?a flexible schedule often comes at a high price.? She concludes. (...)

(...)

But let?s talk about the reality that?s keeping that 77-cent figure alive: for some reason, women end up in lower-paid college majors, professions, and career paths. Is it because of sexism? I?ll go through the points you made one at a time.

1. ?High paying, traditionally male-dominated fields, like engineering and computer science, tend to be hostile places for women.?

The sources you cited are based on anecdotes from individuals who have left STEM. What about the STEM women who are still going strong? I?d reckon they?re not complaining about sexism because when you look at the facts, there?s no sexism: there is no difference between male and female engineers? paychecks. That?s a fact. (see the full article for the link, link to full article at the bottom)

2. ?The path away from those high-paying fields starts in school.?
(...)
You also wrote that it?s ?hard? for girls to pick STEM careers when ?there are few female computer scientists and engineers for them to look up to.? If women are truly equal to men, we can man up and claim what we have an uncontested legal right to. Why do girls need women to ?look up to? in order to succeed? Why can?t a girl ?look up to? Google CEO Larry Page? Are you suggesting that we are so handicapped that we can?t imagine ourselves doing well without a specifically female role model to point to?

I wholeheartedly agree with the idea of focusing on STEM in schools and portraying those fields as interesting, socially relevant, and productive. But that positive image should be targeted to all students, not just girls, because all students should be equal.

Isn't it someone propose here a few post ago? Let's keeping on...

3. Fields that tend to be more attractive to women, like teaching, social work and other ?caretaking? professions are typically lower paying?in part because they?re considered ?women?s work.?

(...) Nurses, who are generally female ?caretakers? and whom you neglected to list, earn nearly double the average American income.

Read the full article here: http://www.avoiceformen.com/feminism...illian-berman/

It's accusation of IT career as a place full of male afraid(????) of female is being debate for a long time and debunked over and over again, and is a very bad stereotype. But feminists liars gonna lie.

[dee.]

its funny I refered to your statement, now u refer to my post and the article, if you would have read my other post u would have read that, I have nothing against such a programm, if there are similiar programms in other fields and especialy on colleges for helping man because they loose the education fight against woman, less are succesful in schools.

Listen kid, I don't have the patience for your bullshit.

So you think there needs to be equivalent "outreach for white heterosexual males" programs to make the outreach for women programs "fair"? Wow. Like, white heterosexual males aren't getting enough privileges in this world, we have to pamper them so that they both get to keep their existing privileges, but they also need to be able to call themselves oppressed and discriminated... and get the same "benefits" as any actually oppressed group?

What the holy fucking fuck? Are you for real? I mean, seriously? Grow the fuck up, plz.

And I dont belive in your sausage theory, I am a man I did not get a job with a degree in computer science. So like u have a dick and u automaticly have a good job does not work.

No, to get a job in computer science, you obviously have to have at least some understanding of logic...

[blackiwid]

@blackiwid: you asked for proof. Here is a recent study published on this subject:
"

thx for the effort to search something, but like somebody else said it only not even prooves but suggest that female foreign people get less job invites.

I see here big problems in the study, who would make themselfs results so invalid by design. Nobody can say is it the race or is it the sex.

Then this:

Meanwhile in the natural and physical sciences and maths there was a small, though not statistically significant, bias in favour of Hispanic women.

If I would take this study serious I must conclude sex does not matter much if not there is or can be a small positive effect if u are female.

But again who does such stuff, because they tried to mix 2 totaly unrelated things together this study says nothing. at best they could show some correlations, but a correlation is no causation, and the quote I picked even suggest a counter-correlation.