- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Mark Shuttleworth's Community Has No Women
|
|
|
Comments (131)
Is tuxchick serious?
97 earlier comments in the full thread.
Quoting:First, that is not offensive, and it's not even a "cultural" issue
I find it to be very offensive. I take offence, when someone insists on spelling words that should have an Ess with a Zed. I feel insulted when the person refuses to use those words correctly after I've pointed it out to them, and I'm not the only Australian to feel that way.
Quoting:Just for future reference, I am absolutely indifferent to your opinion of me as a person.
No problem. At least i now know what you wont take offence at. It's a pity you insist on being offended by that which is not offensive.
Quoting:Read your posts (and most of the others) in this thread to see the definition of making mountains out of flat plains.
I'm not the person who accused Mark Shuttleworth of sexism, when he used the language he grew up with.
Look I don't disagree about there being sexism in FOSS, what I disagree with is those that are being targeted as sexist. The problem here is they are not sexist. The wrong people are being attacked, This has the opposite affect from that intended, rather than getting people on side, it polarises the community (and it detracts from the purpose of the community), and instead of a solution being worked on everyone is taking sides, and no good purpose is served - unless the purpose is to polarise the community.
Anyone who disagrees with Carla, and her supporters becomes, by definition, a sexist or a fool. If a male speaks up and states that this ain't sexism, he is howled down and cited as yet another example of a sexist male. If a woman stands up and says this ain't sexist, then she being foolish, she's uninformed, she's wilfully blind.
Sexism is no worse in the FOSS community than it is in any other part of our lives, and attacking people like Mark Shuttleworth is not going to fix the problem.
Quoting:Anyone who disagrees with Carla, and her supporters becomes, by definition, a sexist or a fool. If a male speaks up and states that this ain't sexism, he is howled down and cited as yet another example of a sexist male. If a woman stands up and says this ain't sexist, then she being foolish, she's uninformed, she's wilfully blind.
That sounds exactly like what you're doing, just from the opposite side of the issue.
> One common mistake made by individuals coming to the US from Latin America is to address letters to persons of authority "Dear Sir". It doesn't matter if that is their "culture", it's not what we do around here,
Uhmm, bigg, Dear Sir is still a perfectly legitimate and acceptable way to address a letter to an unknown person, and the way I was taught to do so both in high school and college (though that was more than a few years ago now). English does not have a specific form for the situation where a person may be either male or female, so the male form is always assumed to include both.
> The key point, that you seem to have missed, is that they are going to another culture and breaking the rules.
Rules which they have no way of knowing, and which have no greater or lesser validity than those of their own culture. What gives us the right to demand he meet our standards rather than we meeting his?
> Why? It was explained why that was "the" inference and has nothing to do with subjectivity.
Because inferences are by definition subjective. Otherwise they wouldn't have to be inferred.
> Again why?
Because it's impossible to know what will offend any given person. And in any large audience, anything you say is almost certain to offend someone.
> At least I know that he refused to apologize when made aware of the situation, which is worse.
Perhaps he feels he doesn't have anything to apologize for.
If he never intended to offend women, then why should he apologize for them? And would a "I'm sorry you took my speech in a way I never intended" apology actually be any better?
> What do you think I should do?
See my earlier post in the other thread, Scott.
> I take offence, when someone insists on spelling words that should have an Ess with a Zed.
Perhaps you should do more to "advertize" that fact, TA. :)
> The problem here is they are not sexist. The wrong people are being attacked,
I suspect you are correct in this specific case.
> Anyone who disagrees with Carla, and her supporters becomes, by definition, a sexist or a fool.
I don't believe that's true. In my experience, Carla has always been willing to listen to a reasoned disagreeing viewpoint. However, it is true in the generic case. I think that's also theBeez's central point.
> Sexism is no worse in the FOSS community than it is in any other part of our lives...
I don't believe that's true either. The under-representation of women in FOSS lends itself to a sexist culture, which then drives women away, creating a vicious circle. Thus, I think it is more of a problem in FOSS.
We've seen this same pattern in other technical fields. The solution here is the same as it was there: Point out the problem, deal with the individual outbreaks, and make a greater effort to welcome women to the field. As the number of women in the field increases, the outbreaks initially become worse, but as they are dealt with the problem starts to resolve itself, and eventually the sexist culture breaks down. Pointing out the problem is always the first step, and that's what Carla is doing. The fact that she may be wrong in this exact case doesn't change that.
> That sounds exactly like what you're doing, just from the opposite side of the issue.
Tracyanne is in a better position than either of us to know what Mark intended by his comments, bigg. If she doesn't think he intended to be offensive, then I'm willing to accept her word for it. If she's correct, what we have in this specific case is a culture conflict, not sexism, and there's no reason we should expect Mark to change to fit our culture.
Uhmm, bigg, Dear Sir is still a perfectly legitimate and acceptable way to address a letter to an unknown person, and the way I was taught to do so both in high school and college (though that was more than a few years ago now). English does not have a specific form for the situation where a person may be either male or female, so the male form is always assumed to include both.
> The key point, that you seem to have missed, is that they are going to another culture and breaking the rules.
Rules which they have no way of knowing, and which have no greater or lesser validity than those of their own culture. What gives us the right to demand he meet our standards rather than we meeting his?
> Why? It was explained why that was "the" inference and has nothing to do with subjectivity.
Because inferences are by definition subjective. Otherwise they wouldn't have to be inferred.
> Again why?
Because it's impossible to know what will offend any given person. And in any large audience, anything you say is almost certain to offend someone.
> At least I know that he refused to apologize when made aware of the situation, which is worse.
Perhaps he feels he doesn't have anything to apologize for.
If he never intended to offend women, then why should he apologize for them? And would a "I'm sorry you took my speech in a way I never intended" apology actually be any better?
> What do you think I should do?
See my earlier post in the other thread, Scott.
> I take offence, when someone insists on spelling words that should have an Ess with a Zed.
Perhaps you should do more to "advertize" that fact, TA. :)
> The problem here is they are not sexist. The wrong people are being attacked,
I suspect you are correct in this specific case.
> Anyone who disagrees with Carla, and her supporters becomes, by definition, a sexist or a fool.
I don't believe that's true. In my experience, Carla has always been willing to listen to a reasoned disagreeing viewpoint. However, it is true in the generic case. I think that's also theBeez's central point.
> Sexism is no worse in the FOSS community than it is in any other part of our lives...
I don't believe that's true either. The under-representation of women in FOSS lends itself to a sexist culture, which then drives women away, creating a vicious circle. Thus, I think it is more of a problem in FOSS.
We've seen this same pattern in other technical fields. The solution here is the same as it was there: Point out the problem, deal with the individual outbreaks, and make a greater effort to welcome women to the field. As the number of women in the field increases, the outbreaks initially become worse, but as they are dealt with the problem starts to resolve itself, and eventually the sexist culture breaks down. Pointing out the problem is always the first step, and that's what Carla is doing. The fact that she may be wrong in this exact case doesn't change that.
> That sounds exactly like what you're doing, just from the opposite side of the issue.
Tracyanne is in a better position than either of us to know what Mark intended by his comments, bigg. If she doesn't think he intended to be offensive, then I'm willing to accept her word for it. If she's correct, what we have in this specific case is a culture conflict, not sexism, and there's no reason we should expect Mark to change to fit our culture.
> Dear Sir is still a perfectly legitimate and acceptable way to address a letter to an unknown person
I'm not an English professor, and this is hardly something interesting to me, but if at all possible you should use the person's name. The use of "Dear Sir" depends on where you live, which is why I specified "it's not what we do around here" because I have no idea whether that's what is done in all of the US.
> there's no reason we should expect Mark to change to fit our culture
The point I have made repeatedly is that he is not speaking to a group of Australians. He is promoting Linux, Ubuntu, and Canonical in other cultures, in which case he definitely does need to be sensitive to those cultures.
Suppose a middle eastern company decides to enter the US market. They put an advertisement/advertizement on television showing women with covered heads, US flags burning, and signs saying "Death to America". It certainly is the case that there are places where those things represent the culture. If you want to do business in the US, it's the US culture that matters.
If it's not clear, I'm not saying his words offended me. I'm not saying he needs to change to my culture. I'm saying that if he wants to represent Linux to the world, he has to be sensitive to issues of culture.
I'm not an English professor, and this is hardly something interesting to me, but if at all possible you should use the person's name. The use of "Dear Sir" depends on where you live, which is why I specified "it's not what we do around here" because I have no idea whether that's what is done in all of the US.
> there's no reason we should expect Mark to change to fit our culture
The point I have made repeatedly is that he is not speaking to a group of Australians. He is promoting Linux, Ubuntu, and Canonical in other cultures, in which case he definitely does need to be sensitive to those cultures.
Suppose a middle eastern company decides to enter the US market. They put an advertisement/advertizement on television showing women with covered heads, US flags burning, and signs saying "Death to America". It certainly is the case that there are places where those things represent the culture. If you want to do business in the US, it's the US culture that matters.
If it's not clear, I'm not saying his words offended me. I'm not saying he needs to change to my culture. I'm saying that if he wants to represent Linux to the world, he has to be sensitive to issues of culture.
@jdixon
> Because inferences are by definition subjective. Otherwise they wouldn't have to be inferred.
Hmm, even though I do not know of any definition of inference that says it has to be subjective, since your problem is with terminology maybe "deduction" will do better for you, so read "deduction" instead of "inference".
> Because it's impossible to know what will offend any given person. And in any large audience, anything you say is almost certain to offend someone.
Possibly, but as I said being sensitive towards participation of women in FOSS when talking of all-inclusiveness would hardly take a huge effort.
> If he never intended to offend women, then why should he apologize for them? And would a "I'm sorry you took my speech in a way I never intended" apology actually be any better?
Because he should understand that there are many who have differing perceptions. This kind of thing is nothing unique or hard -- if one is lecturing in a different country then the speaker would be expected to not use humour which would be considered offensive in that country, for example. Of course, if Mark's only explanation of this is with regards to his good intentions, many others will consider his all-inclusive talk to be an empty one. What a proper apology would look like has been noted in great detail elsewhere so I will pass that.
> Because inferences are by definition subjective. Otherwise they wouldn't have to be inferred.
Hmm, even though I do not know of any definition of inference that says it has to be subjective, since your problem is with terminology maybe "deduction" will do better for you, so read "deduction" instead of "inference".
> Because it's impossible to know what will offend any given person. And in any large audience, anything you say is almost certain to offend someone.
Possibly, but as I said being sensitive towards participation of women in FOSS when talking of all-inclusiveness would hardly take a huge effort.
> If he never intended to offend women, then why should he apologize for them? And would a "I'm sorry you took my speech in a way I never intended" apology actually be any better?
Because he should understand that there are many who have differing perceptions. This kind of thing is nothing unique or hard -- if one is lecturing in a different country then the speaker would be expected to not use humour which would be considered offensive in that country, for example. Of course, if Mark's only explanation of this is with regards to his good intentions, many others will consider his all-inclusive talk to be an empty one. What a proper apology would look like has been noted in great detail elsewhere so I will pass that.
@Scott, looks like they have the bit in their teeth. They are only listening to other people to come up with point to refute or debate.
> ...but if at all possible you should use the person's name.
If you check, I believe you will find that historically, the use of Sir or Madam has been considered more polite than the use of a personal name. The use of a personal name is normally reserved for friends and acquaintances. And many times you have no way of knowing the name or gender of the person who will receive a letter. Especially in such a case, Dear Sir is perfectly appropriate.
> He is promoting Linux, Ubuntu, and Canonical in other cultures, in which case he definitely does need to be sensitive to those cultures.
Why? Why can't "those cultures" be sensitive to his?
Unless you arguing that his promotion won't be effective unless he does, there's no reason he should. And while that may be true, he may not consider that a good enough reason. Lord knows RMS doesn't.
> If you want to do business in the US, it's the US culture that matters ... I'm saying that if he wants to represent Linux to the world, he has to be sensitive to issues of culture.
OK, so you are arguing for effectiveness. That's a valid argument, but not the way most people are framing the discussion. And again, Mark may not consider effectiveness in the US a good enough reason to change. That's his call to make, not ours. Our decision is whether or not to invite him to speak.
If you check, I believe you will find that historically, the use of Sir or Madam has been considered more polite than the use of a personal name. The use of a personal name is normally reserved for friends and acquaintances. And many times you have no way of knowing the name or gender of the person who will receive a letter. Especially in such a case, Dear Sir is perfectly appropriate.
> He is promoting Linux, Ubuntu, and Canonical in other cultures, in which case he definitely does need to be sensitive to those cultures.
Why? Why can't "those cultures" be sensitive to his?
Unless you arguing that his promotion won't be effective unless he does, there's no reason he should. And while that may be true, he may not consider that a good enough reason. Lord knows RMS doesn't.
> If you want to do business in the US, it's the US culture that matters ... I'm saying that if he wants to represent Linux to the world, he has to be sensitive to issues of culture.
OK, so you are arguing for effectiveness. That's a valid argument, but not the way most people are framing the discussion. And again, Mark may not consider effectiveness in the US a good enough reason to change. That's his call to make, not ours. Our decision is whether or not to invite him to speak.
Quoting: Tracyanne is in a better position than either of us to know what Mark intended by his comments, bigg. If she doesn't think he intended to be offensive, then I'm willing to accept her word for it. If she's correct, what we have in this specific case is a culture conflict, not sexism, and there's no reason we should expect Mark to change to fit our culture.
TA is Australian, Mark is from South Africa and now lives in London. He is a media-savvy world traveler and businessman who knows plenty about navigating various cultures.
One thing is evident-- hardly anyone in this whole discussion actually watched Mark's keynote. Because if they had they would have caught the dissonance between his message, which emphasized collaboration, community, and removing the barriers to new contributors, and his actual word choices and dumb jokes. Remember, this is the 'humanity to others' guy, the guy who enters discussions to tell people to mind their manners. He knows better.
It shouldn't have been any big deal. Some people spoke to him privately about it, such as Matt Zimmerman, and he blew them off. (Mark is Matt's boss.) Some people emailed him privately, and he blew them off. It leaked out into the internets; some of the people attending his keynote in person tweeted and IRCed and whatever it is people do these days, right there during his talk. A simple "You're right, I'm sorry, I'll fix it for next time' would have settled everything.
But he chose not to do that. So OK, still not a big deal, just another sad entry in the 'same stuff different day' category. So who blew this up into a full-scale war? The same old FOSS mentality of circling the wagons against any criticism, shout down anyone who says things you don't want to hear, and never mess with the Gods of Linux. The same old worn-out denials. And the same old irritating habit of not even bothering to present informed opinions; I bet money that hardly any of his 'defenders' even watched the keynote, or have any idea of what he stands for, all the things he's been doing and talking about since he founded Canonical.
It is truly amazing the contortions these stout defenders engage in to explain away everything. This one is my favorite:
Quoting: I saw it live and it was nothing. Just an honest experience every guy in FOSS has had. It really is hard explaining FOSS work to females you meet and want to impress.
I got a boatload of comments just like this. Like...ow. (Do I really need to explain this one? And I always wonder- females of what species?)
So in a way, Mark's message did come through: FOSS is a man's world and this is good. No women, but admiring tech-dim girlfriends are welcome. Ok I guess that leaves the door open for lesbians.
My other favorite is "He was talking to the guys in the room!" Well yeah, that's the whole point. He had a mixed audience in both his physical and worldwide virtual rooms.
It’s too bad that none of the top FOSS leaders have the courage to confront this issue. Just imagine if Linus, RMS, or Mark said “This is not acceptable. Women deserve respect and courtesy, and everyone should be courteous and respectful to each other. A community where people feel uncomfortable or threatened is not a productive one.” (That last line is from the Ubuntu Code of Conduct.)
I about died laughing imagining that happening, it is so improbable. What a sad commentary on FOSS.
> ...even though I do not know of any definition of inference that says it has to be subjective...
Why would they? Since it's an individual who must do the inferring, each individual will do so in a slightly different manner. That's the nature of subjectivity.
> since your problem is with terminology maybe "deduction" will do better for you, so read "deduction" instead of "inference".
It's still a personal deduction, which others may not share or agree with. Thus, subjective.
> Because he should understand that there are many who have differing perceptions
And they shouldn't understand his?
> ...if one is lecturing in a different country then the speaker would be expected to not use humour which would be considered offensive in that country,
If I'm invited to speak somewhere, I'd expect it to be because they consider my viewpoint of interest to them, not theirs to me. If they then find my viewpoint of way of expressing it offensive, then perhaps they shouldn't have invited me to speak.
I'm not going to change just because any specific person finds my speech or mannerisms offensive. Mark may feel the same way.
Now, as already noted, effectiveness is another matter, but that's Mark's call to make, not ours.
I see TC still disagrees that it was a cultural matter rather than a sexist one. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this particular case TC. I'm willing to accept Tracyanne's call on the matter. If you're right and I'm wrong, then your points are valid, and I'm wrong. It's not like it'll be the first or last time. :)
Why would they? Since it's an individual who must do the inferring, each individual will do so in a slightly different manner. That's the nature of subjectivity.
> since your problem is with terminology maybe "deduction" will do better for you, so read "deduction" instead of "inference".
It's still a personal deduction, which others may not share or agree with. Thus, subjective.
> Because he should understand that there are many who have differing perceptions
And they shouldn't understand his?
> ...if one is lecturing in a different country then the speaker would be expected to not use humour which would be considered offensive in that country,
If I'm invited to speak somewhere, I'd expect it to be because they consider my viewpoint of interest to them, not theirs to me. If they then find my viewpoint of way of expressing it offensive, then perhaps they shouldn't have invited me to speak.
I'm not going to change just because any specific person finds my speech or mannerisms offensive. Mark may feel the same way.
Now, as already noted, effectiveness is another matter, but that's Mark's call to make, not ours.
I see TC still disagrees that it was a cultural matter rather than a sexist one. We'll just have to agree to disagree on this particular case TC. I'm willing to accept Tracyanne's call on the matter. If you're right and I'm wrong, then your points are valid, and I'm wrong. It's not like it'll be the first or last time. :)
> One thing is evident-- hardly anyone in this whole discussion actually watched Mark's keynote.
I agree. There are a lot of emotional posts in this thread, but most of the knee-jerk, it's just a whiny girl variety. As I said above, I watched the video, and didn't see anything wrong with what you wrote.
I agree. There are a lot of emotional posts in this thread, but most of the knee-jerk, it's just a whiny girl variety. As I said above, I watched the video, and didn't see anything wrong with what you wrote.
Quoting:So my question is, is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads? And my challenge to all of you is, is there something worth keeping? There needs to be a real dialogue begun on this and I am not sure if this is it or not.
Scott, I think the thread should remain. This is an important topic.
There are without doubt many instances of sexism, racism and other derogatory actions in many parts of the tech world, not just FOSS.
But in the FOSS world, we expect things to be better, more enlightened and more inclusive. And they should be.
Yes, this is about attitude and perception. But it's also about hero worship, putting FOSS "rock stars" on a pedestal and thinking they can do no wrong, especially since what they're supposed to be doing — coding and supporting and promoting free, open-source software and liberating the world from dependence on a few companies and those companies' expensive, closed and proprietary offerings — is so important to this community and its members.
I guess I'll have to watch this Shuttleworth keynote, at which time I'll probably have more to say, but from the tenor of the discussion above, I'll just say that if people are offended by what a particular person says, attention must be paid.
Just because the speaker doesn't think he's out of line doesn't mean said speaker and the community around him shouldn't listen to and acknowledge the thoughts, feelings and perceptions of others.
If Shuttleworth is belittling woman with his words, tone or context, or is perceived as such, he should clarify his remarks and issue an apology to those offended by those words.
But the fact that he's Mark Shuttleworth, space traveler and richest man in FOSS, creator of the one distro to unite them all, is buying him a whole lot of defenders when, as I say here, he should be addressing this all too large elephant in the room.
From what I see, and I could be way off the mark, one of the problems with the FOSS community is that it's extremely developer-centric. Yeah, there are those of us who don't code, who do everything from work on documentation, create and maintain packages (and Ubuntu is very big on packaging, which is still development, though not C and C++ hacking), to helping users who have questions and problems in forums, blogs and elsewhere, and work on the all-important but often ignored marketing and promotion of FOSS solutions.
But it's still all about developers, most male by a very long, long shot. Not that there aren't female developers involved in FOSS, because there are, and there should be more.
I'll talk about a project I know: OpenBSD. It's extremely developer-centric, and those who get involved in the community and are not developers pretty much know that they're along for the ride and won't have much say in anything. That's the way the project works, and nobody involved in it is trying to hide anything. The attitude is that if you don't like it, you're free to go elsewhere. And yes, everything Theo says is pretty much gospel and is taken as such.
But in Linux in general and Ubuntu in particular, inclusion and promotion are key to c continued growth and adoption of the project.
FOSS is very comfortable in the international arena. Just about all of the "big" projects have a community all around the world, in dozens of countries.
And as a potentially inclusive force, FOSS should be reaching out and encouraging everybody to participate. And there should be major initiatives to bring in those who are under-represented in the FOSS world, and that includes women.
So even if Mark Shuttleworth thinks he said nothing wrong, for the good of Ubuntu and FOSS he needs to get out there and lay down his cards.
Here's the deal: While developers on all software might be overwhelmingly male, users of computers in general are not. Just about everybody uses a computer, and hence everybody can and should benefit from (and contribute to, if they can) free, open-source software.
And we need to be better than the rest. In all ways.
If FOSS were a true Shangri-La and absolutely nothing was wrong, this discussion wouldn't have hit the 100-post mark.
Mark Shuttleworth is clearly a leader in this game. Time to do that.
Steven, Mark's keynote talks about the developer-centrism a lot. I think you will find it interesting and far-sighted.
@Steven_Rosenberg
"I guess I'll have to watch this Shuttleworth keynote, at which time I'll probably have more to say, but from the tenor of the discussion above, I'll just say that if people are offended by what a particular person says, attention must be paid."
I call in the ayatollah principle which says: "There's always someone that will be offended". If it's a minority: don't care. What everyone always seems to forget is that 98% of the audience IS male and anyone who has given a presentation knows you will always go for that audience.
I happen to be lost in a convention of little people, a convention of feminists or anything else, I will find that speakers will not take any notice of me.
Some women understand this, I even quoted them. They don't find it offensive for the simple reasons I just quoted. Note that most women there (when I'm correctly informed Carla included) never wrote a line for any project. So, they're out of the equation.
If women want to change things they have to do what FOSS does best: code. No one is gonna change that but women themselves. The (unproved) reason they give for NOT coding is: there is sexism. Unfortunately, it will be very unlikely that solving this issue will solve the ratio issue. So we're back to square one.
In the meanwhile we've given FOSS a bad name, tarnished all our community leaders, fired a few good developers and FOR WHAT??
I call in the ayatollah principle which says: "There's always someone that will be offended". If it's a minority: don't care. What everyone always seems to forget is that 98% of the audience IS male and anyone who has given a presentation knows you will always go for that audience.
I happen to be lost in a convention of little people, a convention of feminists or anything else, I will find that speakers will not take any notice of me.
Some women understand this, I even quoted them. They don't find it offensive for the simple reasons I just quoted. Note that most women there (when I'm correctly informed Carla included) never wrote a line for any project. So, they're out of the equation.
If women want to change things they have to do what FOSS does best: code. No one is gonna change that but women themselves. The (unproved) reason they give for NOT coding is: there is sexism. Unfortunately, it will be very unlikely that solving this issue will solve the ratio issue. So we're back to square one.
In the meanwhile we've given FOSS a bad name, tarnished all our community leaders, fired a few good developers and FOR WHAT??
For some reason, when I keep seeing accusations here about "Just what exactly DID Mark Shuttleworth say and mean?", I keep thinking about the "He-said-she-said" talk among African American children. There was even a book written about this kind of talk written by an M.H. Godwin (think that's her name) about twenty years ago entitled _He-said-she-said : talk as social organization among Black children_
Forget any racism-in-FOSS accusations in metioning this -- although as Steven_Rosenber mentioned, racism could ALSO really exist in the FOSS world.
This "He-said-she-said" talk -- after factoring out all the street-level slang and jargon -- mostly seems to be jabbing back-and-forth, accusations and counteraccusations, blowing things way up and then tryin to settle things down. One of my main points here is that "He-said-she-said" talk is done face-to-face, though, not slung from afar by IM'ing or on an online forum like this.
@tuxchick, I strongly doubt that you'll go out of your way anytime soon to meet directly face-to-face with Mark Shuttleworth and accost him with your and others' interpretations of his remarks... so we'll have to settle with this indirect "He-said-she-said" talk. (and FWIW, my 2c is that I think wolfen69's starting this whole thread was ENTIRELY called-for) fb
Forget any racism-in-FOSS accusations in metioning this -- although as Steven_Rosenber mentioned, racism could ALSO really exist in the FOSS world.
This "He-said-she-said" talk -- after factoring out all the street-level slang and jargon -- mostly seems to be jabbing back-and-forth, accusations and counteraccusations, blowing things way up and then tryin to settle things down. One of my main points here is that "He-said-she-said" talk is done face-to-face, though, not slung from afar by IM'ing or on an online forum like this.
@tuxchick, I strongly doubt that you'll go out of your way anytime soon to meet directly face-to-face with Mark Shuttleworth and accost him with your and others' interpretations of his remarks... so we'll have to settle with this indirect "He-said-she-said" talk. (and FWIW, my 2c is that I think wolfen69's starting this whole thread was ENTIRELY called-for) fb
dood this thread is beastly! look how long it is man...
@jdixon
> It's still a personal deduction, which others may not share or agree with. Thus, subjective.
That only holds *if* you can show there was an element of subjectivity in the deduction/inference -- the many streams of logic are mostly based on objective deductions.
> And they shouldn't understand his?
That's an interesting thing to say. A speaker is normally the one who would be expected to understand the sensitivities of the audience and not the other way for the simple reason that the speaker is the one who is conveying a message.
> I'm not going to change just because any specific person finds my speech or mannerisms offensive. Mark may feel the same way. > Now, as already noted, effectiveness is another matter, but that's Mark's call to make, not ours.
Fine, if you want to put it that way. In either case one would have hoped that Mark would have liked to be effective (and thus not make significant sections left out or apologize if such has happened).
> It's still a personal deduction, which others may not share or agree with. Thus, subjective.
That only holds *if* you can show there was an element of subjectivity in the deduction/inference -- the many streams of logic are mostly based on objective deductions.
> And they shouldn't understand his?
That's an interesting thing to say. A speaker is normally the one who would be expected to understand the sensitivities of the audience and not the other way for the simple reason that the speaker is the one who is conveying a message.
> I'm not going to change just because any specific person finds my speech or mannerisms offensive. Mark may feel the same way. > Now, as already noted, effectiveness is another matter, but that's Mark's call to make, not ours.
Fine, if you want to put it that way. In either case one would have hoped that Mark would have liked to be effective (and thus not make significant sections left out or apologize if such has happened).
OK people, I watched the speech here http://techcast.com/events/linuxcon/shuttleworth/
I'm an American, and yes, in this country a group of people is often referred to as "guys," as in "you guys," when it includes both men and women.
And yes, he was going for the laugh at a conference with a lot of hard-core geeks, mostly men, with the "explaining to girls" comment/joke.
I think all of us who use FOSS know that it's not "girls" who don't know what Linux and other free software is all about. It's pretty much everybody — men and women of all backgrounds, in all countries — who haven't a clue about what we're doing.
He did say "people" instead of "guys" at one point, and he used "guy or girl" at another (albeit in a slightly negative context about "trampling on" one's project).
And in the speech it's always a grandma who needs her geeky grandchild to set up a PC for her that just works. Presumably all grandfathers know how to maintain their own Unix boxes.
I see an unfortunate choice of words here. A change in attitude and language would only help Shuttleworth further his cause.
Yeah, I get that he feels he has to win over a predominantly male group of developers, but there's the rest of us out there who aren't comfortable with this sort of thing.
And the way he says design and usability are so important (and I wholeheartedly agree), he should also acknowledge that perception in the overall community — as well as outside the community to potential users and participants — is equally important, especially on a project with the ambitions and resources of Ubuntu.
I've seen Canonical's Jono Bacon speak a few times, and there's nothing belittling or derogatory in what he's said.
And since I've been looking at the latest blog posts on this controversy, I've seen more than a few individuals and groups that are very supportive of women working on and with FOSS. We need more of that.
I haven't seen any reaction from Shuttleworth (his blog http://www.markshuttleworth.com/ has been dead since April).
Saying "somebody's always offended" is no cover here, in my opinion.
As the face of what is probably the biggest Linux distribution at this time, the community deserves better from Shuttleworth.
I'm an American, and yes, in this country a group of people is often referred to as "guys," as in "you guys," when it includes both men and women.
And yes, he was going for the laugh at a conference with a lot of hard-core geeks, mostly men, with the "explaining to girls" comment/joke.
I think all of us who use FOSS know that it's not "girls" who don't know what Linux and other free software is all about. It's pretty much everybody — men and women of all backgrounds, in all countries — who haven't a clue about what we're doing.
He did say "people" instead of "guys" at one point, and he used "guy or girl" at another (albeit in a slightly negative context about "trampling on" one's project).
And in the speech it's always a grandma who needs her geeky grandchild to set up a PC for her that just works. Presumably all grandfathers know how to maintain their own Unix boxes.
I see an unfortunate choice of words here. A change in attitude and language would only help Shuttleworth further his cause.
Yeah, I get that he feels he has to win over a predominantly male group of developers, but there's the rest of us out there who aren't comfortable with this sort of thing.
And the way he says design and usability are so important (and I wholeheartedly agree), he should also acknowledge that perception in the overall community — as well as outside the community to potential users and participants — is equally important, especially on a project with the ambitions and resources of Ubuntu.
I've seen Canonical's Jono Bacon speak a few times, and there's nothing belittling or derogatory in what he's said.
And since I've been looking at the latest blog posts on this controversy, I've seen more than a few individuals and groups that are very supportive of women working on and with FOSS. We need more of that.
I haven't seen any reaction from Shuttleworth (his blog http://www.markshuttleworth.com/ has been dead since April).
Saying "somebody's always offended" is no cover here, in my opinion.
As the face of what is probably the biggest Linux distribution at this time, the community deserves better from Shuttleworth.
@Steve_Rosenberg
Well-said, Steve. Thanks for a thoughtful post on this hot-button (sadly) issue.
Being polite, respectful, and helpful is all it takes to make the FOSS community welcoming and inclusive. Simple isn't it?
Barbara
Well-said, Steve. Thanks for a thoughtful post on this hot-button (sadly) issue.
Being polite, respectful, and helpful is all it takes to make the FOSS community welcoming and inclusive. Simple isn't it?
Barbara
Just in case I missed something, I sat down with my partner, and went through the video again. Keeping her awake was a bit of a problem. At the end she asked me "Is this what all this arguing is about?" "Yes", I said. "How childish, don't they have anything better to do with their time." was her response, with that she got up and went out to feed the chooks.
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen is my lat word on the subject. Personally I'm thoroughly disgusted with the whole ravenous pack of you.
And that, Ladies and Gentlemen is my lat word on the subject. Personally I'm thoroughly disgusted with the whole ravenous pack of you.
tuxchick is sensationalist
Now that the video is out, you can prove tuxchick is wrong (who said that Mark only mentions women to insult them, and that FOSS development is without women). At roughly 20 minutes and 20 seconds in, he mentions guys AND girls contributing code. Therefor FOSS isnt void of women in his world. I watched the whole thing and I didn't find it to be that offensive compared to stuff from other sources (ie, Microsoft). Unless you want to copy insane conspiracy theorists by taking one sentance completely out of context.
The terms mom and grandmother are often used by Microsoft as examples when talking about making things easier. Bill Gates had told Steve Jobs back in the 80's that the only computer he would buy his mother is a Macintosh.
There is nothing sexist about pointing out the fact that there is a larger number of geeky men than geeky women. I would love for there to be more geeky women. I've only met a few geeky women in my life.
The problem isn't the FOSS people being sexist. It's society that's sexist. Cultural programming (and peer pressure) often try to tell women how to act, what to wear, what hobbies to enjoy, how to smell, what guys they should date, how their men are supposed to act, etc. Just open a magazine tailored towards women such as Cosmo. Then television is there and takes the cultural programming further through stereotyping.
The terms mom and grandmother are often used by Microsoft as examples when talking about making things easier. Bill Gates had told Steve Jobs back in the 80's that the only computer he would buy his mother is a Macintosh.
There is nothing sexist about pointing out the fact that there is a larger number of geeky men than geeky women. I would love for there to be more geeky women. I've only met a few geeky women in my life.
The problem isn't the FOSS people being sexist. It's society that's sexist. Cultural programming (and peer pressure) often try to tell women how to act, what to wear, what hobbies to enjoy, how to smell, what guys they should date, how their men are supposed to act, etc. Just open a magazine tailored towards women such as Cosmo. Then television is there and takes the cultural programming further through stereotyping.
Argh.
Saying "others are more so" is just a tu quoque argument.
"One sentence"? She quotes several sentences.
Blaming society won't get you very far, when you remember that Mark S. isn't from the society you epitomize in your comments.
Saying "others are more so" is just a tu quoque argument.
"One sentence"? She quotes several sentences.
Blaming society won't get you very far, when you remember that Mark S. isn't from the society you epitomize in your comments.
> At roughly 20 minutes and 20 seconds in, he mentions guys AND girls contributing code.
I haven't had a chance to watch the video, so I can't comment on it, but I find your argument to be pretty weak. You found a single sentence in which he refers to guys and girls and that is proof that everything in her post is wrong? Come on.
Funny thing is that in the other thread, the criticism is that "guys" always refers to everyone, it's not exclusionary in any way, and everyone knows that. So you have proven that line of reasoning to be wrong.
I haven't had a chance to watch the video, so I can't comment on it, but I find your argument to be pretty weak. You found a single sentence in which he refers to guys and girls and that is proof that everything in her post is wrong? Come on.
Funny thing is that in the other thread, the criticism is that "guys" always refers to everyone, it's not exclusionary in any way, and everyone knows that. So you have proven that line of reasoning to be wrong.
Tuxchick is just creating an issue where none existed before. Run along, nothing to see here.
Quoting:Now that the video is out, you can prove tuxchick is wrong (who said that Mark only mentions women to insult them, and that FOSS development is without women). At roughly 20 minutes and 20 seconds in, he mentions guys AND girls contributing code. Therefor FOSS isnt void of women in his world. I watched the whole thing and I didn't find it to be that offensive compared to stuff from other sources (ie, Microsoft). Unless you want to copy insane conspiracy theorists by taking one sentance completely out of context.Readers on both sides of this issue may also wish to view the complete "Cry Wolf" comment from the thread at http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/29754/ , contributed on Sep 30, 2009 1:49 PM EDT.
> I've only met a few geeky women in my life.
That's true for me also. Fortunately, I married one of them. :)
That's true for me also. Fortunately, I married one of them. :)
Quoting: I've only met a few geeky women in my life.
Me too.
And I'm divorced from one of them.
Ok, I have to do something about this, I have too. I have let these conversations go on too long and I have to do something about it. Should I close it? Should I just delete it and be done with it? I do enough of that. But I am uncomfortable with how these threads are going..
So my question is, is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads? And my challenge to all of you is, is there something worth keeping? There needs to be a real dialogue begun on this and I am not sure if this is it or not.
What do you think I should do?
So my question is, is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads? And my challenge to all of you is, is there something worth keeping? There needs to be a real dialogue begun on this and I am not sure if this is it or not.
What do you think I should do?
I make a motion that you close them. There's no useful discussion, and they are showing the nasty side of LXer. These threads are on a similar level with the comments section at DistroWatch.
> Should I close it?
Personally, I wouldn't, but if the discussion isn't going anywhere, closing it is always an option.
> ....is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads?
Except for highlighting the fact that there is a problem and why it's so hard to deal with, not really. No one is offering any solutions that can be easily applied, except for the conduct standards suggestion, and I'm not really sure how well that would work.
> What do you think I should do?
Unless the discussion devolves into personal attacks or a full flamefest, I don't see any need to do anything Scott. This is a problem in FOSS which will have to be dealt with. Discussions such as this are the initial stages of dealing with it. I'd rather see LXer as part of the discussion than removed from it.
As I noted in one of the other threads FOSS is currently where the rest of the technical fields were around 20 years ago. It will take a lot of time and a lot of highlighting of the issue before it's even remotely resolved, and it will never go away completely. It's to TC's credit that she's trying to highlight the issue, even if she overdoes it sometimes (I'm as guilty of that as anyone. None of us are perfect).
> There's no useful discussion, and they are showing the nasty side of LXer.
I'd say there's little useful discussion, not none. And it seems to me that most of the nastiness doesn't come from the LXer regulars (though we appear to be able to dish it out as well as anyone else when called on, I'll admit), but rather from non-regulars showing up to comment on the specific issue. That's an Internet at large issue, not an LXer specific one.
Yes, the discussion are, hmmm..., lively. But with such a contentious subject, that's largely unavoidable. I don't think that reflects badly on LXer.
Personally, I wouldn't, but if the discussion isn't going anywhere, closing it is always an option.
> ....is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads?
Except for highlighting the fact that there is a problem and why it's so hard to deal with, not really. No one is offering any solutions that can be easily applied, except for the conduct standards suggestion, and I'm not really sure how well that would work.
> What do you think I should do?
Unless the discussion devolves into personal attacks or a full flamefest, I don't see any need to do anything Scott. This is a problem in FOSS which will have to be dealt with. Discussions such as this are the initial stages of dealing with it. I'd rather see LXer as part of the discussion than removed from it.
As I noted in one of the other threads FOSS is currently where the rest of the technical fields were around 20 years ago. It will take a lot of time and a lot of highlighting of the issue before it's even remotely resolved, and it will never go away completely. It's to TC's credit that she's trying to highlight the issue, even if she overdoes it sometimes (I'm as guilty of that as anyone. None of us are perfect).
> There's no useful discussion, and they are showing the nasty side of LXer.
I'd say there's little useful discussion, not none. And it seems to me that most of the nastiness doesn't come from the LXer regulars (though we appear to be able to dish it out as well as anyone else when called on, I'll admit), but rather from non-regulars showing up to comment on the specific issue. That's an Internet at large issue, not an LXer specific one.
Yes, the discussion are, hmmm..., lively. But with such a contentious subject, that's largely unavoidable. I don't think that reflects badly on LXer.
Quoting:Ok, I have to do something about this, I have too. I have let these conversations go on too long and I have to do something about it. Should I close it? Should I just delete it and be done with it? I do enough of that. But I am uncomfortable with how these threads are going..Yes, the other, parallel "conversation" at http://lxer.com/module/forums/t/29754/ seems to be stretching out quite far. Uncertain whether that parallel conversation should be closed, or deleted, or neither. One can easily gather that those who so adamantly AGREE and those who so adamantly DISAGREE with this piece's author remain unconvinced of the opinions of the opposite camp. In other words, the author's original piece and the LXer comments following this have incorporated an easily discernible POLARIZING effect throughout the conversation.
This particular one here seems to be particularly even-keeled so far, though, so it would probably be best to avoid closing or deleting this at this time.
Quoting:So my question is, is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads? And my challenge to all of you is, is there something worth keeping? There needs to be a real dialogue begun on this and I am not sure if this is it or not.Again, the author's original piece and the LXer comments following this in the other parallel conversation have incorporated an easily discernible polarizing effect as this conversation has progressed. Uncertain whether there is definitely for the most part "something worth keeping" specifically within the other parallel conversation.
Quoting:What do you think I should do?As another commentator already pointed out above, one good option amidst this indecision is to simply just let the conversations go on, as follows
Quoting:Unless the discussion devolves into personal attacks or a full flamefest, I don't see any need to do anything Scott. This is a problem in FOSS which will have to be dealt with. Discussions such as this are the initial stages of dealing with it. I'd rather see LXer as part of the discussion than removed from it.One of the likelier scenarios here is that the discussions arising from this particular author's piece will just simply die out due to attrition once there remains no further "useful discussion". Also, it is likely that this or another author will contribute similar LXer pieces such as this one in question, and such pieces will likewise result in separate and distinct LXer discussion-threads -- such threads hopefully containing very "useful" discussion! OTOH, should this or any other related discussion actually devolve into continued "personal attacks", a full flamewar, or blatantly obvious TOS violations, then certainly such a discussion should be seriously considered for termination or deletion.
I'd say close the threads. It has been discussed to death and the discussion has polarised and gotten more... nasty.
But please close them *properly* this time. That is: leave the threads and posts up for future reference. Just don't allow new comments to be added. Don't delete them!
But please close them *properly* this time. That is: leave the threads and posts up for future reference. Just don't allow new comments to be added. Don't delete them!
At first glance the words that came immediately to my mind were: hypocrisy and chutzpah.........however Carla has just posted an article lauding Mark Shuttleworth's address...with reservations about sexism of course. ender2070's posting now has increasing relevance I think........
Comments on this story are closed.
So my question is, is there anything positive that can be taken from these threads? And my challenge to all of you is, is there something worth keeping? There needs to be a real dialogue begun on this and I am not sure if this is it or not.
What do you think I should do?