Jeffrey Veen

No, please write that rant. We need people of your stature (no pun intended) to speak out.

That's funny. The male, white geek in me immediately said "Hey, there's a choice missing! All of those URLs have completely unnecessary redudancy!".

But yeah. Those other things, no doubt... And I agree with Heather...

Great observation, Jeffrey. And right you are. Here's my take on Web 2.0:
http://www.37signals.com/svn/archives/000881.php

At least the panels are racially diverse. Right?

Where were the women?

Kim was there - I posted a picture of her.

Amy Lewis was schmoozing deals for Laszlo, The PR ladies are back - but you're right there wrren't many women there - at the top. Besides Kim.

Even if I had written the whole rant, I couldn't have done so as elegantly as this:

http://www.misbehaving.net/2004/10/even_the_men_ar.html

I think the question is: Why aren't the women leadership at these companies somewhere in the space inbetween "PR ladies" and (mostly male) coders on stage too.

51% of Internet users are women now (according to the Web 2.0 stat book.)

Those companies not taking seriously the contribution of women's leadership in the evolution of the internet reduce their odds of sucess.

If women's voices and leadership continue to be marginalized and ignored in these "Web 2.0" companies their will be a repeat of what has happened in conventional corporate America - an exodous of women starting their own small and medium sized firms.

A few of us Women Innovators in Technolgoy (those of us who's jobs are neither bing 'PR ladies' and Coders) are thinking about getting together in the Bay Area some time soon.

Quote: A few of us Women Innovators in Technolgoy (those of us who's jobs are neither bing 'PR ladies' and Coders) are thinking about getting together in the Bay Area some time soon.

Awesome idea. But why exclude the PR ladies and coders?

Might I point out that it looks like everyone in those photos is also white?

Yes, I was about to note the whiteness..

This could be some rant, how far are you going to go? Years and years if you want to point fingers, and even then I'm not sure WHO you'd be ranting at.

Agreed not enough women there, but I'm intrigued as to WHY. Ditto for the race thing as well.

I actually did write a rant about it here: http://www.girlwonder.com/archives/001010.html#001010

Very interesting: for the 10 years of the Internet 1.0, I've worked with many women, some in executive positions, even. I find it even more interesting that Internet 2.0 has no women, except for Kim Polese. Of course.

dont "ladies" who are reporters get any props? well, i'm only half kidding, since i was iming my best friend during the danger mouse panel that "danger" and two unidentified men in the audience were the only there black(?) men there. not a one black woman -- and me, i'm only half jewish, and the wrong half at that!

Our marketing director (male) is often heard complaining to our online director (male) about how hard it is to "manage all these women with their problems."

I have little hope of moving up to any sort of executive level at this company.

A general condescending attitude toward women from the executives in my company seem to be the problem here. I wonder what the reason is in other companies.

Our marketing director (male) is often heard complaining to our online director (male) about how hard it is to "manage all these women with their problems."

Maybe the guy has a point. I've worked with a few competent women but most of them are more interested in practically anything but the goals of the enterprise.

Whining about unfair rather than sucking it up and doing what is required of you is one of the primary reasons women aren't taken seriously in the workplace.

The web has lots of room for individual achievement in a venue where a person's gender or skin color can easily be concealed. Stop waiting for someone to promote you. There is nothing preventing you from going out and doing it on your own.

i'm a woman -- why didn't they ask me to speak.
:)

"There is nothing preventing you from going out and doing it on your own."

Clearly it has nothing to do with people like 'bill.'

We have a problem here, and it's directly due to the problems, errors, and outright lies that the others have told you.

Let me tell you, I have a plan. Other people may not have a plan, but I have a plan.

I'll even tell you what the plan is!

First, we'll make the audience more like the types of panels we want. We'll remove the current surcharges on women and minorities on entrance.

Once there's a level playing field in attending the conferences, without special privileges for people who look like me, then we'll naturally start to see more similar representation on the panels. Or else we'll have a summit. Or another plan. Or something.

By the way, I'm assuming everyone at that conference will be voting for me, or else we'll have to do more peer pressure against diversity in the workplace.

The posts from both "bill" and "john" make it so tempting to switch on TypeKey authentication.

But I suppose it wouldn't be "fair" to "discriminate" against "ignorance", now would it?

Back when I was an employee, I didn't think I was getting properly compensated for my contribution so I quit. Now I run my own little web business. Prior to that, I had 15 years in the publishing/advertsing. I have worked very closely with women not just worked in the same office space, but collabrating under a variety of circumstances. In one case, a small publisher where I was AD/production mgr - she was the editor. Our boss ran the business enterprise, but the two of us acted as partners and were jointly responsible for the quality of the weekly/monthly output. She kicked ass and I would love, love, love to find another professional partner who was all she was. Other times women have been bosses, or equal collaborators as copywriters, sales people or clients. A significant number of them sucked to work with. I believe it is possible for a woman to succeed and be respected in the workplace. I also have some ideas on why most off them don't and aren't.

1st prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. 2nd prize is a set of steak knives. 3rd prize is you're fired.
Historically, business is a male dominated area. There is a male hierarchy and women have very little interest in men who don't produce. Do you think Rodney Dangerfield left a hot young widow because he was so terribly good looking? Not. It was because he produced. He got out there and he slugged it out and clawed his way to the top of his heap. That's how guys are measured.

On a regular guy scale, check out the salary requirements from the women on match.com and compare them with a guy's salary requirements. Last I looked, women all thought they should be dating someone making $50k and up, guys rarely bothered to even set a baseline. They apparently had other priorities. Unfair? Arguably, but a reality nonetheless.

Hierarchies are relative. There is only room at the top for the few who want that position badly enough to achieve it. Where is the motivation for females to make the sacrifices in other aspects of their lives in order to achieve those heights?

Ladies, just showing up ain't enough. I shouldn't even have to say that, but so many women I have worked with didn't seem to understand this. Their priorities were with their kids, their cramps, their inter-office chick politics, thermostat settings. Pretty much every issue starts with how they personally felt about it and radiated outward from there rather than starting with the company's priorities. There is a ton of chick behavior that makes no sense to guys, but your boyfriend/husband gives you a pass because he loves you. How you feel about stuff doesn't count for much among guys who don't get to share a bed with you. I'm not saying that female sense of entitlement is wrong or evil, just that it doesn't get you anywhere professionally. In business you are soldier and your job is to suck it up and focus on achieving the larger objective, that's what we pay you for.

Showing up and being cute isn't enough. I can only assume some women don't seem to know any other way of interacting with men. Flirting and flattering male egos might gain you social capital and might even get you promoted the same way brown nosing does, but sooner or later, the boss needs to see results. Along the same line, a complaint I've heard from a number of professional women is that when she is demanding, she gets labeled a bitch. The rank and file thinks their demanding male boss is a asshole for the same reason. It doesn't prevent him from doing what is necessary to get things done. His identity is directly tied to his professional success so the question never even enters into consideration.

Showing up and doing what's asked of you isn't enough. What are you doing to help your immediate boss/the company/the industry advance? It's not that the guys on top are oppressing and exploiting women specifically, they are oppressing and exploiting everybody. That's capitalism baby, The less they are forced to give you, the more they get to keep for themselves. Figure out a way to leverage your value and then go in and present a compelling case for your reward - or find a way to assume power and grant yourself all the rewards you can afford.

Where were the women at the conference? Where are the women who have made a notable contribution? Sure I can name a few and will later, but most of the hyperachievers out there are guys. I recognized many of the names of those who were asked to sit on panels as people who had accomplished something noteworthy. I wasn't consulted when speakers were picked, so I have no idea why the ratio skewed as it did, but I certainly don't believe there is some conscious effort to push women aside and I haven't heard any arguments that justify gender demographics alone determining who gets up on stage. Nobody asked me to come speak either. It wasn't because of my gender, it was because I haven't said or done anything that would lead the promoters to believe I would draw a crowd.

I notice at Adaptive Path the men outnumber the women nearly 2 to 1. Is that because your decision makers made some effort to screen out females or because in your quest for the highest quality staff, it just turned out that on an individual basis, guys have a greater motivation to be the best and be sure you know it. If women are regularly under compensated for equal work, wouldn't business as a whole hire more of them just because mgmt would be getting more bang for their buck?

Raena, I'm not holding you back from anything and would have no interest in doing so. I prefer to work with women as long as they are actually focused the goals at hand. If you or Helenjane work for an organization that doesn't appreciate your value, what prevents you from taking that value somewhere where is is appreciated? If your (rhetorical) position is justified, march in and ask for that raise or promotion and your boss won't be able to afford to tell you no. Maybe moving ahead for you means having to leave Tasmania the same way I got the hell out of the little country backwater I was born in. Even if you choose not to leave, there's nothing stopping any of you from putting up a website or presenting a new technique that blows us all away. Do something significant and the world will take notice, I promise.

Jeff, rather than just tsk tsking, me, maybe you could address what exactly it is that you think keeps women down in an industry where a person's work can literally stand alone and can be judged on it merits. Maybe you could leverage the respect you've earned to encourage more women to be as productive and innovative as their male counterparts or point out outstanding female achievement when you see it. Hell, I'll even help you get the ball rolling by mentioning a few women who's work and opinions I have taken note of - (not exhaustive and in no particular order)

Molly Holzschlag - http://www.molly.com
Anne Van Kestern - http://annevankesteren.nl
Jen Funk Segrest - http://www.verybigdesign.com
Virginia Postral - http://www.dynamist.com
Susan Mernit - http://susanmernit.blogspot.com
Jennifer @ scriptygoddess - http://www.scriptygoddess.com
Julie Albertson - http://www.juliealbertson.com
Lynda Weinman - http://www.lynda.com
madamjujujive - http://blort.meepzorp.com :)

Why should I be required to register somewhere in order to voice a dissenting opinion? Aren't you interested in other perspectives? Why should I be labeled a troglodyte for suggesting that it's not always "the Man" that's keeping women from achieving a statistical equality that I doubt will ever exist?

bill posits a level playing field for women; ok, fine, but that absolutely requires him to answer this question:

what is it about the female's character that makes them largely incapable of achievement, and there does it come from?

>bill posits a level playing field for women; ok, fine, but that absolutely requires him to answer this question:

Actually, no I didn't. I said the field is tilted against most all of us. Women just get to whine about it and guys aren't allowed to. Imagine some guy going to a construction company president and complaining that he felt sexually harassed because someone hung a beefcake poster in the port-a-john or demanding equal pay because he and one other white dude were hired the same day and the other guy had gotten a raise. He'd be laughed off the job site. Even if he were legally in the right, he'd be considered a disruptive pussy and never taken seriously again.

Unless your dad was a former president and your last name is a brand, you have to accomplish something in order to be granted attention and accolades. If women want to play on the men's field, that's fine, but they have to be prepared to play by the same rules most men do.

>what is it about the female's character that makes them largely incapable of achievement, and there does it come from?

I don't think they are incapable of achievement and even cited examples of women I feel have accomplished stuff. (again not exhaustive). My point is, they don't get to show up just because they are women and demand equal time or representation or special treatment.

Women's web browsers have access to the very same resources men do. An excellent webpage or an elegant hack has nothing going on that would betray gender bias. Business ostensibly
requires the best talent they can afford in order to compete.

The question isn't "what keeps women from succeeding?", it's "what drives men to accomplish stuff against the odds of an unlevel playing field?"

I also thought I outlined pretty well why I thought women don't succeed more often. They are playing the same game they play in gender roles. Those tactics only work because they are sitting on a commodity/trump card. The work world doesn't reward that strategy because the commodity they trade on doesn't have value under work world circumstances. If they step up, bite the bullet and start earning it (something I doubt they will collectively ever do on because they don't really have to) they will be just as accomplished as men are. Women are just as capable of achievement as men, but for the most part they just aren't driven to it. Given that, men collectively will always out compete them for top positions.

bill: do you believe the same is true of blacks, or are they a different case?

What perplexes me about people like bill is how they can acknowledge that "the field is tilted against most all of us" and still support it instead of resisting or trying to change it.

A subtle but sure sign of the continuing power of patriarchal values is that even some men passively accept that they should just shut up and put out.

I get the put up or shut up part.

The big boss is a jerk to women so I should leave.
I get that. Point taken.

But dismissing a significant chunk of the workforce because of "their kids, their cramps, their inter-office chick politics, thermostat settings," and reducing your female colleagues to flirting, flattering heaps of feelings,

That won't help any organization move ahead.

First of all, I thought Anne Van Kestersen was a man (http://annevankesteren.nl/about/ ).

Secondly, bill, wow. I don't completely disagree with you (only about 95% disagree), but your tone is downright insulting. Don't fear what you don't understand; learn about it -- be open to the fact that things may not be as cut and dry as they seem on the surface.

Finally, this past July I was fortunate enough to attend OSCON '04 in Portland, OR. This conference was attended by roughly two thousand or so people. I counted probably 20 or so women, myself included, who were attending the conference and not working for venders. Now, I didn't feel intimated, but I did feel sort of lonely. I ended up being in this sort of self isolation that was mostly due to my own lack of social skills and partly to the lack of social skills in others.

Which is not to say that the IT culture isn't sometimes overwhelmingly macho, it can be, I've seen it -- hell, I've played into it. We all make mistakes and as the misbehaving.net link so eloquently points out (comment #6): we all have a responsibility in correcting the situation. It's not just that women aren't being asked to participate in these panels, it's also the fact that women aren't taking more active steps in the tech/web community as a whole.

I have said previously that I go by my initials to remain gender ambiguous (http://www.molly.com/2004/07/07/where-are-the-women-of-css/#comment-1898 ) in an attempt to bring neither unwarranted praise nor criticism. That, it would seem, accomplishes nothing and ultimately shirks my responsibility; something I will no longer do.

Quoth the still-anonymous Bill:

"Raena, I'm not holding you back from anything and would have no interest in doing so."

Oh no? By making comments like your chick-politics-and-cramps wisecrack, surely you're not trying to tell us that you're just stirring the pot as much as anyone else?

If I were inclined to stoop to your level I'd be pointing out any number of examples of the time men have come in whinging about their girlfriends, or skiting out early to go see the doc cause they screwed their ankle jogging, or having a little crank-and-moan about the boss/coworker/new guy. I'd be finding some cleverly snarky way to say 'Tee hee, men and their silly little problems, pot kettle black.'

Good thing I'm not playing THAT little game with you, huh Bill?

"I prefer to work with women as long as they are actually focused the goals at hand. If you or Helenjane work for an organization that doesn't appreciate your value, what prevents you from taking that value somewhere where is is appreciated?"

Nothing, actually; I'm self employed. Certainly those who contract me have their own issues and requirements and I do my best to fulfill those, but the goals at hand are mine and mine alone.

But stepping aside from practical reasons: you tell us to go 'march in and ask the boss' on the one hand, and on the other you're telling me to go take my business elsewhere. You even suggest leaving my friends and family and a place I adore to go chase better opportunities.

So: which is it, Bill? Do I stand up, complain about it, ask for something better, and just wear it when people like you tell me I'm just a typical whining female? Or do I just scuttle away, looking for someplace where the whining's already been done, and let them keep on getting away with it?

"1st prize is a Cadillac Eldorado. 2nd prize is a set of steak knives. 3rd prize is you're fired."

Thanks for the shout out, Bill. I didn't realize that the IT community was so coversant in American theater that you would quote me without attribution. Or perhaps that speaks to the degredation of cultural consumption that they've all just seen the movie. That's why I direct more for the screen now. But, for the record, my work is not licensed under the Creative Commons. But you were an ad guy, so you know the value of theft and unoriginal thinking.

quinn asks
>bill: do you believe the same is true of blacks, or are they a different case?

I have a much more mixed bag of experiences here. I don't think I can say much about the situation that would really shed any new light. The only thing I could add is this - I can't I think of any cutting edge IT projects where I know the principal creative force is black. Maybe they exist but their content is so far outside my areas of interest that I'm not visiting. Maybe they some are black and I'm making the same oversight that I made about Mr. Kestersen. Personally, I haven't worked with anyone who was black and such a valuable member of the team that they couldn't have been just about anybody with a similar work experience, but the same could be said for most of the white people I've worked with too. I attribute that more to randomness than as a judgment on the black/white social construct as a whole. Speaking of (U.S.) minorities more generally, I have also worked with a Sikh and a first generation Chinese immigrant. Both in a large corporate IT environments, both dependable and by-and-large respected by their co-workers for their contributions. My impression was their upper management potential was more limited by their communications problems (thick difficult to parse accents) than by kneejerk "minorities=bad" discrimination.

helenjane said
>First of all, I thought Anne Van Kestersen was
>a man (http://annevankesteren.nl/about/ ).

I'll be damned. He is a man. I guess I was too busy appreciating his contributions to notice his gender. Nothing that I had read before clued me one way or the other and I was giving him the 'benefit of the doubt' base on the name. Consider it a small bit of evidence that I really do believe that women have the potential.

>Secondly, bill, wow. I don't completely disagree with you (only
>about 95% disagree), but your tone is downright insulting.
>Don't fear what you don't understand; learn about it -- be
>open to the fact that things may not be as cut and dry as
>they seem on the surface.

Excuse me? How do you have any idea what the facts were? What I feared was my ass hanging out because my female co-workers and/or subordinates wouldn't carry their share of the load. I wasn't born with my views, they are a product of several similar experiences. What I learned was that women generally can't be counted on in the workplace because it's not their 1st, 2nd & 3rd priority the way it is for most men. That might not be any fault of their own, but their problems are not mine. Mine was getting the work out the door.

>Which is not to say that the IT culture isn't sometimes
>overwhelmingly macho, it can be,

Your kidding right? Macho relative to what? Floral arrangers and hair stylists? *sigh* yes, yes I know, another totally unwarranted stereotype.

>I've seen it -- hell,
>I've played into it. We all make mistakes and as the
>misbehaving.net link so eloquently points out (comment #6):
>we all have a responsibility in correcting the situation.

I gotta disagree with misbehaving.net. How is it that women being asked to participate is everyone's responsibility? Why should the conference guys make a larger effort? They get paid regardless. If employer's aren't covering travel expenses, how did all those guys get there? Did they take the initiative to find a away to make it happen rather than pout about how they were being left behind then demand an equal playing field? You know, the one where someone has make an extra effort on your behalf, assuming you actually did something that warrants an audience showing up to hear you speak.

>I have said previously that I go by my initials... [snip]... something I will no longer do.

Good on you. Go out there and make a name for yourself. I look forward to visitng your site to learn and adapt new coding or design techniques rather than just read about how you felt about what went on that day.

Raena said
>Oh no? By making comments like your chick-politics-and-
>cramps wisecrack, surely you're not trying to tell us that
>you're just stirring the pot as much as anyone else?

>If I were inclined to stoop to your level I'd be pointing out any number of examples...

Are those guys running the place? If you are their boss or coworker, are you frustrated with their lack of productivity? I'm not saying guys are incapable of being frivolous and unfocused. Those types probably weren't invited to speak at the conference either. My 'chick politic' comment wasn't a crack, it was reporting the overwhelming majority of my experiences, which to reiterate, was that on the whole, women were consistently more focused on themselves and their immediate needs than they were on the work at hand. Again, if women are as productive as men at 76% of the cost, why aren't savvy businessmen everywhere taking advantage of this bargain? Talk about low hanging fruit, a 24% profit is substantially higher profit margin than the stock market produces. Who's going to pass that up? Seriously, have any of the guys following this thread ever attended a meeting where some cabal got together and said "here's what we're going to do to keep the women in the company/industry down"?

>But stepping aside from practical reasons: you tell us to go
>'march in and ask the boss' on the one hand, and on the other
>you're telling me to go take my business elsewhere. [snip] ...
>So: which is it, Bill? Do I stand up, complain about it, ask for
>something better, and just wear it when people like you tell
>me I'm just a typical whining female?

That's not what I'm saying at all. I'm saying that if professional success and accolades are what your primary goals are, you can go out there and find a way to make it happen. If you are standing up for a legit principal and not just arging about where the thermostat is set, it's not whinging. If you made a substantial contribution and the powers that be won't adequately reward you, move on, go make it happen on your own.

>You even suggest leaving my friends and family and a place I adore to go chase better opportunities.

Everything in life comes at a price. How badly do you want that success? Being at the top of the heap isn't that important to you. That's fine, but don't expect to be called and asked to speak at the conference because you haven't done anything to justify it.

Nobody is holding you back any more than any other anonymous schmuck out there is held back, especially if you are self-employed and you can put up website that showcases your work to the world without 3rd party interference.

Go back and look at the list of speakers and their creditials. Gender wasn't the issue. The reason more women weren't invited to come speak is because they didn't invent the browser, HTML or Amazon. There were women there and they were invited because they did something worth taking note of. The argument could be made that Brazilians and Chinese were underrepresented too. Demographics alone does not cut it.

Now then, rather than rebutting my personal experiences, I look forward to one of you ladies explaining to me why you should have been asked to speak at the conference, or suggesting some mid-tier women who should have been there and what they did to justify that appearance. My only request is that you not make "because I as a woman have a unique perspective" or "because women are under represented" part of your answer.

david mamet said...
>Thanks for the shout out, Bill. I didn't realize that the IT
>community was so coversant in American theater that
>you would quote me without attribution.

I didn't realize that you were so interested in web design either. Just because we spend the majority of our work day wrangling technology doesn't mean we are ignorant of the larger culture. I actually caught what might have been the original production with my parents shortly after moving to Chicago in the mid 80's. But you're right, I didn't bring up the line because I assumed everyone else had seen the play.

>Or perhaps that speaks to the degredation of cultural
>consumption that they've all just seen the movie. ... [snip] ...
>But you were an ad guy, so you know the value of theft
>and unoriginal thinking.

Wait, that line came from a major motion picture!? Did you get paid in a big way when you sold the rights to that line and it was used? You're very right. That is degrading! In the end, we're all whores, you just get paid better for it than I do.

By the way, I'm curious, Specifically, what parts of my admittly dull campaign for aerosol nozzles and molded plastic industrial packaging do you feel were stolen?

>But, for the record, my work is not licensed under the Creative Commons.

Your snark might have been relevant if I had quoted a page of your material instead of what is likely the best known 19 words of your career, or if I had made some attempt to publish the phrase as my own work rather than focusing on a point I was making. When I am having a conversation, I don't the need to stop and properly attribute something that has become popular cultural catch phrase anymore than everybody running around saying "Doh!" feels the need to stop and tip their hat in Matt Groening's direction.

But for the record, here's another David Mamet quote for you:

"Fuck you."

One final note for the rest of you. I'm done with my end of this discussion. I'll read your replies with interest, but I don't see the point in responding further.

Tough act to follow, that.

'Bout all I can say on this is that (a) I've long believed the gender imbalance of the field is a serious problem, (b) my favorite men in the field are those that get this in their bones and (c) I have no use for the rest.

Which is to say: I don't care how "innovative" and "productive" you are if you aren't also making good-faith attempts to be a good human being. Period, full stop. (There's fodder galore for a fullscale rant on this very topic, but I'll take it to my own site instead of spooring things up here.)

Finally, we've made *very* careful attempts to seed the initial Marginwalker.org cohort with members of all genders, so you may want to swing by there and see what, if any, effect that has on the quality fo discourse there. [/plug] I'm tired of seeing so many "community" sites and "discussions" lurch so precipitously into sausage-party territory. It's a flattening, a monoculture, and even above and beyond the genderpolitique specifics it doesn't speak particularly well for those of us ostensibly interested in sociality online.

my last little word on the subject... i baited bill into sexism and racism, which he kinda took, but not as completely as if he'd answered my questions.

i just wanted to say he and his ilk are just factually wrong. usually if one meets heavy gender or race based resistance to doing something one bows to it. it has nothing to do with talent and ability, and everything to do with being a social creature. you have to revel in abuse to escape tradition, hence the lack of white rappers. but it's late, and the thread is dead. long live the thread.