Sexism in technical literature

[Zero999]

Try looking at the animal kingdom if you want an unbiased perspective, and yes I'm aware that male lions look after cubs while mothers go hunting but I'm guessing that is once cubs reach a certain age which is the parallel rational people on this thread have been drawing all along.....

The animal kingdom is the result of millions of years of evolution, and frankly I think we should have moved past mere animal instincts by now. In any case, there are plenty of examples of male animals taking on a primary care role, or the female being physically stronger or the main hunter. It just depends on the particular circumstances of the animal, and fortunately I think humans have moved a bit beyond just going by what we happened to evolve now.

We may be able to fight our instincts but we still have them and they are as strong as ever. The human body has changed very little since the stone age. Generally men are physically stronger than women, who still have to carry a baby for nine months and are able to breastfeed it.

Give one example of a society where women make most of the wealth and men have the main role in childcare? You won't find one because it isn't natural in the human species. When a women is carrying/nursing a child, she's in a position where she needs more calories, yet is less physically able to get food and has less time available to do so. Therefore it makes sense for her to rely on her mate to help her provide for her child.

In the animal kingdom, only a small proportion of species have the male as the main care provider for the young and they evolved that way, most of the time the females devote more time to raising the young and the human species is no different.

Problems occur when society tries to medal with the natural order of things.

[dannyf]

Think of this from the evolution point of view.

The reason we don't see wide spread occurrence of the male gender taking care of domestic things and the female gender taking care of hard labor, etc. is that if such a society were to exist, it would be less efficient, more prone to adverse shocks and thus less likely to survive over the long term. Darwin would argue that what we observe today the bifurcation is the result of evolution through millions of years as human and billions of years as other animals. So that extent, Mother Nature has solved the division of labor issue and found the optimal solution.

That does not, however mean two things:

1) such an arrangement is optimal for a particular male or female. He or she may prefer different arrangements. I think it is an interesting question as to how a society should approach that kind of desire. On one hand, we are equal so everyone should be given the right to do what s/he so pleases; On the other hand, if sufficient number of us prefer the less efficient solution, it could be detrimental to us and our future collectively.

A bioethics expert may be able to provide some insight on that but I think it is a politically dangerous discussion in today's "civilized" societies.

2) such an arrangement is optimal in the future. It is uncertain how we will evolve in the future. There was a period of time where women were the primary decision makers in our history. There are areas where women are superior to man (and vice versa): endurance, survival, longevity, natural immunity to certain defects, reproduction, .... So it is possible that our evolution could lead us to a point where one gender is more favored against another and you could see our societies evolve quite differently.

Take higher ed for example. More and more women are graduating vs. men. It isn't far fetched to see a future society where more women are educated vs. men and a breakdown of families and more political / economic power shifting to women as we compete more on intelligence / education vs. brutal force.

How we solve issues like that is unknowably unknown at present time.

[miguelvp]

I'm just glad our kids have no intentions to stay home until their 30s, actually in Europe it's common for not moving out until married and one child staying at home to take care of their parents later on, therefore inheriting the house.

In the US it's kind of weird, usually they sell the house to pay for the retirement home. Not always but often. Then again Europe is more sedentary than the US in general again.

Kick them out (not literally)  when they go to college/trade school at around 18-19 and hope they do good.

[Richard Crowley]

In 2003, the County of Los Angeles in California asked that manufacturers, suppliers and contractors to stop using "master" and "slave" terminology on its products [i.e. hard drives, etc.]. The controversial decision is taken by the county "based on the cultural diversity and sensitivity of Los Angeles County". Following outcries about the decision, the County of Los Angeles issued a statement saying that the decision was "nothing more than a request". Due to the controversy, the term was selected as the most politically incorrect word in 2004 by Global Language Monitor.

And, of course we now have "child boards" to replace that Politically-Incorrect term "daughter board". 
And presumably, "main board" replaces "mother board" to maintain Political Correctness and gender equality for all.  Huzzah!

[Ed.Kloonk]

..Funny. 

The boys at work still call me a mother. 

[miguelvp]

My only "harassment" experience was on my first job where the boss of my boss did get mad if I didn't get to work before him because that meant he had to do coffee by himself. Well not really harassment, but just entitlement, I was hired as a junior programmer/sys admin not coffee maker.

My boss (a her) told me about it and I pretty much just laugh it off, and of course made sure that I would be there about the same time not 15 minutes earlier like i used to (being my first real job and all).

Well actually there was another incident at that job:

Later on it became even more weird when they (my boss and her boss) actually were dating. So one day I was just hanging over the doorway talking to my bosses boss by his doorstep, well she confused me with him and slapped my ass. Later on I found out that he just thought we had something going on and went through all my e-mails, as in breaking into my account since he had system admin privileges as well. Weird thing is at the beginning I didn't have a car and my boss (her) will drive me home every evening to my apartment (where my first wife was waiting for me) a very jealous first wife at that.

Of course he hated my guts from there on even if nothing ever happened, it was just that I was facing towards the door and she confused my build with his from behind I guess. Even if he is way taller by over half a foot.

I had other occasions but they were just passing remarks like this girl that was on marketing that she always wore very provocative clothes (like if you try to board an airplane dress like that they wont let you) but she only said to me that our company had really good looking employees. I don't think it was a pass on me but I wasn't interested anyways.

One thing if for sure with her and she was proud of it, she will close deals like nothing making the guys she dealt with melt at her feet. And since she relied on her hotness I can say that she really was hot. That was her angle and worked very well for her. That said, she wasn't stupid at all, very smart but she didn't mind using her "tramp" card to get ahead.

Do not underestimate females playing their sex card either, not saying it's the norm either, mostly it's not, but it does happen.

So one thing I've heard lately and not sure if it's true, there are a lot of applications on the Microsoft Campus looking for vested Microsoft employees to marry.

It's a very complicated world out there.

[Rigby]

Give one example of a society where women make most of the wealth and men have the main role in childcare? You won't find one because it isn't natural in the human species.

Problems occur when society tries to medal with the natural order of things.

That is one of the most unreal things I've read in a while.

People confuse the "natural order of things" and "my preferred order of things" all the time.  Once a social species achieves the ability to do what it wants (as soon as things like recreation become common; there's enough communal safety and time) the society is no longer a slave to natural processes, and a society that uses nature or tradition to excuse modern dumb-ass behavior and thinking isn't really a society with a defensible position.  I'm looking at you, middle-eastern cultures.

I was in jury duty once over a rape case.  The rapist felt it was his right to rape anyone anywhere at any time because that's what cavemen did.  We don't know how "cavemen" behaved sexually, for one thing.  We don't even know what human sleep patterns were like 200 years ago*, so forget prehistoric humans and their gender roles.

The practices and beliefs of the past carried forth to today because "it's natural," or because of tradition, shows a complete lack of understanding in the progress made between the past and the present.

* there is evidence that all across the world, sleep patterns were very different just 2-3 centuries ago.  Naps during the day were common enough that some businesses closed for 2-3 hours after lunch, and stayed open later.  Also, there is evidence that people has "second sleeps" where they woke up after a few hours of sleep, for 1-2 hours, around midnight, then went back to sleep in early morning.  There's evidence of that, but no proof. Folks just wrote about their days as if it were common knowledge, and they never seem to go into detail about it.  Thus, we, just 200-300 years later, have very little idea how people slept, woke, and went their lives on a day to day basis. 

So, when talking about human behavior, sexual orientation, or gender roles, saying that something is the natural order of things means that it's really just what you believe in, and you should just say that, instead.

[miguelvp]

* there is evidence that all across the world, sleep patterns were very different just 2-3 centuries ago.  Naps during the day were common enough that some businesses closed for 2-3 hours after lunch, and stayed open later.  Also, there is evidence that people has "second sleeps" where they woke up after a few hours of sleep, for 1-2 hours, around midnight, then went back to sleep in early morning.  There's evidence of that, but no proof. Folks just wrote about their days as if it were common knowledge, and they never seem to go into detail about it.  Thus, we, just 200-300 years later, have very little idea how people slept, woke, and went their lives on a day to day basis. 

In Spain, store hours are still 9am-12pm, go out have some pintxos (tapas) wine/beer with friends, lunch at around 1:30 or 2, and a short nap, then back to work from 3pm-8pm. Dinner around 9 or 10, go out for a bit, bed around midnight or 1am.

Factories schedules are different and you pretty much work your whole shift taking a snack on your 30 minutes break, depending on what shift you work, but then you are home by 3:30pm or 4pm and have the rest of the day for yourself.

I'm pretty sure it's been this way for many hundreds of years. Not the factory schedules just the standard one.
Although banks did the whole 8am to 3pm shifts and where open from 10am till 3pm. Not sure if that is still the case but I wouldn't doubt it.

[Ed.Kloonk]

I often take a nap during the day. Don't tell my boss, for Christ sakes!

[zapta]

GK: I'm guessing that's not a photo of yourself in the avatar...?

Correct.

It's Freema Agyeman.

[Zero999]

That is one of the most unreal things I've read in a while.

People confuse the "natural order of things" and "my preferred order of things" all the time.  Once a social species achieves the ability to do what it wants (as soon as things like recreation become common; there's enough communal safety and time) the society is no longer a slave to natural processes, and a society that uses nature or tradition to excuse modern dumb-ass behavior and thinking isn't really a society with a defensible position.  I'm looking at you, middle-eastern cultures.

I was in jury duty once over a rape case.  The rapist felt it was his right to rape anyone anywhere at any time because that's what cavemen did.  We don't know how "cavemen" behaved sexually, for one thing.  We don't even know what human sleep patterns were like 200 years ago*, so forget prehistoric humans and their gender roles.

The practices and beliefs of the past carried forth to today because "it's natural," or because of tradition, shows a complete lack of understanding in the progress made between the past and the present.

* there is evidence that all across the world, sleep patterns were very different just 2-3 centuries ago.  Naps during the day were common enough that some businesses closed for 2-3 hours after lunch, and stayed open later.  Also, there is evidence that people has "second sleeps" where they woke up after a few hours of sleep, for 1-2 hours, around midnight, then went back to sleep in early morning.  There's evidence of that, but no proof. Folks just wrote about their days as if it were common knowledge, and they never seem to go into detail about it.  Thus, we, just 200-300 years later, have very little idea how people slept, woke, and went their lives on a day to day basis. 

So, when talking about human behavior, sexual orientation, or gender roles, saying that something is the natural order of things means that it's really just what you believe in, and you should just say that, instead.

For goodness sake. No one here is justifying rape, which I doubt would've been tolerated by cavemen anyway: you rape my sister and my whole family will beat you to a pulp.

This isn't about belief or religion but common sense.

I agree with free choice but nature only allows so much of that and if you actively go against nature there will be consequences. If a woman chooses to have children, then she has to carry them for nine months and it's also in the baby's best interests to be beast fed: because it's the way nature made her. If she doesn't do this, then the viability of her offspring is reduced.

As far as sleep patterns are concerned: it's just as obvious that humans are designed to be awake during the day and sleep at night. Notice how there's no culture where everyone is awake for the whole night, then sleeps during the day? People who go against this, for whatever reason, are more likely to suffer from health problems. The same goes for children who've been dumped in a nursery as soon as they were born so the mother can go back to work. This is exactly why it's very important for women to be allowed maternity leave and not feel discriminated against so they're allowed plenty of time off.

[retrolefty]

I still refer to my first wife as my 'starter wife'. Does that make me a sexist?
 
I do believe men came from Mars and women came from Venus, and there will never be a way to have total piece or agreement between them. 

[zapta]

I still refer to my first wife as my 'starter wife'. Does that make me a sexist?

A starter husband marries a starter wife. Nothing wrong with that ;-)