The rockstar shit is a filter for me. If a company advertises itself as wanting rockstars, ninjas, "hardcore" people, or whatever brogrammer bullshit of the week is, I put that job advert to the bottom of my list. The thought of working around the sort of people who would apply because they consider themselves a hardcore ninja rockstar puts me off. (I spent more than enough time with homophobic macho fuckwits when I was at school, I'd rather not have to deal with them at work.)
There are gendered problems in tech: social bugs, really.
There's the putting-yourself-forward problem. I was at an event a while back and ran a birds-of-a-feather session on open source geo stuff (I'm an OpenStreetMap editor). At the session was a woman who is involved with a startup in the same area, but she didn't seem to have the confidence to run the session, even though her involvement in open source geo is much higher than mine (I just piss around editing maps). Ensuring that our community institutions invite women in is a good step: they don't have to accept the invitation, but many will. And that's good.
Another problem some women I know face: social expectations. They have to dress more masculine in order to be taken seriously at real-life gatherings. We as hackers like to say we don't judge people based on their appearances but based on their code. Then at the same time, we like to judge the "suits". I know women who have said they have to go home and change out of feminine wear (of all levels of formality) into jeans and a t-shirt in order for the hacker crowd to take them seriously. If a guy turns up to an event in a suit, people will just naturally assume he needs to wear it because he's doing coding in some kind of corporate environment. But if women turn up in a dress, they just get the presumption that they are in sales or PR or something. That's bullshit. (This stems from the geeky hackery idea that dressing nice makes someone untrustworthy. Sorry, no, I've worked with utter assholes who come to work in jeans every day, and I've worked with people who are awesome, ethical and never fuck people over who–gasp!–wear formal or dressy clothing.)
Is there an endemic problem of malicious deliberate sexism? No. That exists in some companies, sure, but I don't think that's the primary problem. Instead, there's lots of little nagging bugs, some of which stem from unconscious attitudes perpetuated by geek culture. The sexism problems such as they are consist of lots of little nagging bugs that taken together exclude women. Unless you are some kind of hardcore misogynist, fixing them will have generally positive side effects for everybody.
These nagging bugs pay back dividends in the long term if you are on the right side of them though, which was my point. Let's say that I get a 6% raise every year because I ask for it (either directly, or through promotion), while people who don't get a 4% raise. If someone starts out making $80k a year, after 10 years, the person not asking is making $118k per year, while the person asking for it is making $143k/year. Over the 10 years, that means that the first person makes about $1.078 million, while the second makes $1.198 million - a difference of $120k before taxes. After 5 more years of this, that difference turns into over $300k.
If I see a guy in a suit I think he is probably a recruiter or a PHB.
I wonder how much of the macho stuff you point out is unique to tech. I see way more aggressive posturing in sales for example, and all the sales departments I've seen are very well balanced gender-wise
Ah, it depends on context: in my mind, I was thinking about some of the user groups I go to where there's often a fair few enterprise devs who turn up in suits.
But the point stands: for a group of people who take pride in judging people on their code and skills, we seem to quite like judging people on their appearance.
We judge people who dress to manipulate, whether it's "trust me" or "pay attention to me". The fact that a cheap costume might influence others' decisions is a social bug, and I kind of resent anyone knowingly exploiting it.
A male friend of mine recently testified before a parliamentary committee on computer security. He wore a suit, as one might expect. If he hadn't dressed formally, the committee wouldn't have trusted him, even if he'd said exactly the same things (which consisted of being highly critical of a proposed government technology policy).
A female software developer friend of mine has gone home after work and changed into a less formal outfit before going to a developer event in order so that people don't assume that she is a marketing or sales person or just there to accompany her boyfriend.
Both of these are uses of dress to influence other people's decisions and attitudes. Are either one, or both of them, worthy of the resentment you describe? And why do we pick, say, dress out as something where manipulation for social ends is bad but, say, typography isn't? If someone is preparing a resume for a job and uses an inappropriate font (Comic Sans, maybe), I'll tell him not to do so. But if he wears a tie during the interview, is he trying to emotionally manipulate people?
> If he hadn't dressed formally, the committee wouldn't have trusted him
I can't blame your friend for accommodating their foolish demands. He treated them no worse than they deserved for it, and refusing would have made it a waste of everyone's time.
> gone home after work and changed
I guess I'm wondering whether she thinks her coworkers are incapable of judging her genuine merit, or something else is going on.
> I guess I'm wondering whether she thinks her coworkers are incapable of judging her genuine merit
Numerous female friends have had the same experience. I don't think it's about coworkers. I think it's more to do with idiotic dudes thinking that pretty woman in a dress just a priori cannot be a software developer.
Every form of dress is a form of communication, and has the potential for influence.
Even taking no thought and wearing the simplest possible thing communicates "I invested no effort in putting my outfit on today". Which can itself be a status play - the person doing this is saying, I don't have to dress to impress others.
I think that there is an important difference between suits and dresses. Suits are purely formal attire whereas dresses are formal, but are also designed to present the wearer as sexy. I don't think that there is any mens attire that is analogous to a dress. Anything that a man can wear that is revealing or sexually suggestive is really casual (eg. shorts and no shirt on a beach) or really cheesy/sleazy (eg. deep v-cut t-shirt and super tight pants).
There are gendered problems in tech: social bugs, really.
There's the putting-yourself-forward problem. I was at an event a while back and ran a birds-of-a-feather session on open source geo stuff (I'm an OpenStreetMap editor). At the session was a woman who is involved with a startup in the same area, but she didn't seem to have the confidence to run the session, even though her involvement in open source geo is much higher than mine (I just piss around editing maps). Ensuring that our community institutions invite women in is a good step: they don't have to accept the invitation, but many will. And that's good.
Another problem some women I know face: social expectations. They have to dress more masculine in order to be taken seriously at real-life gatherings. We as hackers like to say we don't judge people based on their appearances but based on their code. Then at the same time, we like to judge the "suits". I know women who have said they have to go home and change out of feminine wear (of all levels of formality) into jeans and a t-shirt in order for the hacker crowd to take them seriously. If a guy turns up to an event in a suit, people will just naturally assume he needs to wear it because he's doing coding in some kind of corporate environment. But if women turn up in a dress, they just get the presumption that they are in sales or PR or something. That's bullshit. (This stems from the geeky hackery idea that dressing nice makes someone untrustworthy. Sorry, no, I've worked with utter assholes who come to work in jeans every day, and I've worked with people who are awesome, ethical and never fuck people over who–gasp!–wear formal or dressy clothing.)
Is there an endemic problem of malicious deliberate sexism? No. That exists in some companies, sure, but I don't think that's the primary problem. Instead, there's lots of little nagging bugs, some of which stem from unconscious attitudes perpetuated by geek culture. The sexism problems such as they are consist of lots of little nagging bugs that taken together exclude women. Unless you are some kind of hardcore misogynist, fixing them will have generally positive side effects for everybody.