- From: Michael Holt <holtmichael@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 27 Apr 2015 14:58:27 -0500
- To: Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com>
- Cc: Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca>, Web Payments CG <public-webpayments@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAFjk9+XVN3b8SU79vBg4A4C9EhRBeQiqV+Sn7dnzG-LXQ+HaOg@mail.gmail.com>
If this isn't the right medium for such discourse, I would subscribe to the list that is. Arianna seems to be committing -post hoc ergo propter hoc - the zeitgeist fallacy of gender roles in tech. Thanks for sharing Greg On Monday, April 27, 2015, Tao Effect <contact@taoeffect.com <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','contact@taoeffect.com');>> wrote: > I have no idea whether that link is on topic for this list. Maybe a mod > could provide some guidance here? > > In the meantime, I’ll point out that Arianna Simpson (subject of the > article) took issue with it: > > https://twitter.com/AriannaSimpson/status/591406001674321921 > > Re: > > The lack of women in Bitcoin isn't just an issue of equality. It's a > fundamental weakness of the currency itself. As long as the Bitcoin > community is dominated by men geeking out about the blockchain, it's never > going to be able to make the human connections that are required for > widespread adoption. > > > The word “fundamental” should be reserved for things that are fundamental, > not “possibly associated with”. > > The “lack of women in Bitcoin” is not an issue of equality any more that > the lack of men in nursing is an issue of equality. Nor does it really have > anything to do with Bitcoin, but is more likely simply reflective of the > gender gap in tech. > > The title of the article also seems to be nonsensical clickbait. > > The word “Bitcoin” could refer to a piece of software, a currency, a > network, or a community. None of those, except for the community, are > capable of expressing feelings toward women (or anything else). > > As far as the community goes, I have seen no evidence that the Bitcoin > community has any “problem” with women, at least in the Bay Area. To the > contrary, in the many meetups that I’ve attended, it’s been entirely > supportive. > > The only exception to that which I can think of was a single instance of a > poorly worded comment by a presenter at a Bitcoin meetup group. I don’t > think it was reflective of the “Bitcoin community”, however. It might have > been reflective of poor social skills, a different cultural background, the > speaker’s honest real-world experience, the fact that English was not his > native language, or any number of other possibilities related to him as an > individual. > > The Bitcoin community (in the Bay Area at least) seems to have a healthy > relationship with women (to my male eyes and ears, at least). The largest > Bitcoin meetup group in SF (and probably the entire Bay Area) is organized > by two wonderful ladies who’ve been doing a fantastic job of running the > meetup. > > Yes, there are few women in tech. In most of my CS classes, there were two > or fewer women. It may therefore be surprising to some when a technically > sophisticated female enters the room, because in some circles it is simply > a rare event, and expressing reaction to rare events is pretty much the > definition of surprise. > > That said, it’s worth reading the source material, Arianna’s post, to > understand what it’s like to be in her shoes (or similar shoes), and how *not > *to behave: > > > https://medium.com/@ariannasimpson/this-is-what-its-like-to-be-a-woman-at-a-bitcoin-meetup-b07f3bb6ab5b > > - Greg > > -- > Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with > the NSA. > > On Apr 26, 2015, at 6:40 PM, Joseph Potvin <jpotvin@opman.ca> wrote: > > Bitcoin's Problem With Women > http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2015/04/bitcoin-women-problem > > -- > Joseph Potvin > > >
Received on Monday, 27 April 2015 19:58:55 UTC