Log in

No account? Create an account
18 May 2016 @ 06:09 am
Important question  
Thinking about inclusion

Thanx to [personal profile] arlie
eub on May 19th, 2016 07:56 am (UTC)
Yeah, I'm not sure if the author has literally not met e.g. female nerds, or is defining them differently in some way, but there sure seemed to be a disjunction set up there. In general I was unclear on what "nerd" meant to the writer. I mean, I'm a geek/nerd/whatever, but the essay was about rather different experience than mine.

Possibly the writer was making/assuming the point Mark says, that the female geek experience has significant non-overlap with the male geek experience -- but expressed that as 'the (male) geek experience' and 'something else'.

I would really encourage exploration of what the mechanism of incompatibility might be between an environment that's friendly to nerds-like-the-author and one that's friendly to women or to non-white people. It's worth some effort to be compatible. I think we'll all be much happier around here if we never have to even take a ten-foot pole to the ethical status of "If so, people who care are welcome to form organizations that will be more successful at recruiting these people. But I'm not going to participate, either as an organizer or (if I can help it) as a fellow employee."
Arlie Stephensertla on May 24th, 2016 06:29 pm (UTC)
I was in part using "nerd" as a disability neutral term for "noticeably on the autistic spectrum", but mostly for the kind of child who is introverted, enjoys reading and schoolwork, and is a complete fail at popularity contests and similar. An "engineering geek" is one of the more successful adult forms of such a child, and can be found focussed on code, disliking meetings, possibly vaguely contemptuous of managers, and uncertain whether salespeople, politicians, etc. are even members of the same species as them. Their idea of a fun social event probably involves a tech museum, or a hackathon, or maybe a science fiction convention.