To be fair, immigration policies have been more or less the same since the early 2000 in Italy. Some different flavour and different shows between Salvini, Meloni and the rest, but Minniti (from PD) was probably even worse (Libyan concentration camps anybody?).
They are not common everywhere in Europe sadly! But they are not just for protection, they are also used instead of thick curtains for darkening the room (my gut feeling tells me that they are more common in the southern European countries).
on someone else’s experience in life based on a single forum comment
You keep insisting on this point. I am not doing any of that. I am challenging the generalization of the analysis of those episodes to the whole sector. I am not interested in discussing or disputing your personal experience.
You don’t work for my company so I’m not sure why you are acting like the culture at your company where you can’t get promoted contradicts anything.
From how you wrote it, I did not understand it was specifically a statement regarding your company. In general I think that’s not the experience of most people especially in the last 2 years (given the layoffs), but obviously, if that’s what happens in your particular company, I have no way to dispute it. It is not representative of the general environment though, I hope we can agree that people are not thrown promotions generally out of nothing, and that employers try to squeeze employees as much as possible, even if men.
You are free to discuss your grievances, but for some reason these things only come up when women start talking about their experience…
I speak about these topics almost everyday, with colleagues and people in general. Not sure what are you trying to imply.
It’s just another “what about the men” comment that always comes up when women try to have a discussion. It’s a pattern of behavior that actually backs up my experience rather than refutes it.
My comment has nothing to do with this argument. This is just a strawman that you are using to win internet points, falling back on cliches. My argument is “the workplace is a warzone, full of conflict and discrimination. Certain behaviors that you describe can be sexist bu can also not be, and instead be classist, ageist, racist and also the result of distorted incentives for workers that end up fighting each other”. In fact, I would argue that ageism in tech is a problem as big as sexism, but apparently you are not interested in having this kind of conversation.
It contradicts a ton of research
Research shows a lot of ageism in tech. So actually refusing to acknowledge that certain behavior can be the result of other form of discrimination as well or even not a result of discrimination at all, but the result of the way power structure is, seems to be contradicting research. My statement is far from being absolute. I am not saying that sexism does not exist in tech, I am not blind, I am saying that those two very specific common patterns that you described (and that I challenged) are not inherently sexist (but can be). My overall intention is to expand the critique to the toxic working culture in tech looking at it from multiple angles, but again, it seems you are not interested and you really want to only look at this through the lens of gender discrimination.
To me, this seems shortsighted, partial and, if I may, also oppressive towards the many who are discriminated in the very same way but from different reasons. It is detrimental to the overall effort that us -workers- should do to shape the culture in tech in another way, that should push for structural change that would drastically modify the incentives people have and so on.
Sexism isn’t sexism because it only happens to women.
I mean, if a behavior is not related to being discriminated based on gender, it’s not sexism. It can be mobbing, it can be simply a toxic competitive environment, but that doesn’t make it sexism, that is my point. “IF” being the keyword.
Implicit bias is a thing
I totally agree, and this is why I do think that for someone shutting down a woman, because implicitly there is the though “this is a woman and therefore doesn’t know what she is talking about”, can be sexist, but that behavior is not inherently sexist. There are multiple (bad) reasons why people might do that. People might assume I am not competent, too young/too old to know better, too recent in the company, I went to the wrong university, and many other reason. This is not inherently linked to gender discrimination, that is my point. It can be ageism, hazing (hopefully the translation is accurate), classism or even racism, if not just the behavior of people who just want to gain advantages at expense of others (which is not a form of discrimination per se). All these exist in the workplace, and that’s why I was challenging your conclusion that this is sexism by definition. Now if in your experience you think sexism was the root cause, sure, whatever. But if we want to move the conversation to a more generic “tech” environment, I think it’s worth to expand the analysis.
Thanks for writing an entire essay trying to disprove my experiences though.
Well, with this I guess I understand you are in bad faith. I did not try to disprove your experiences (in fact, I explicitly wrote that for one specific instance), I challenged some of the arguments you made. Trying to imply that I tried to disprove your experiences is extremely dishonest.
Why is it so hard to just listen to women?
Are we not allowed to have different opinion? Do I exist in the workplace as well? Also, expressions such as “And men are just blessed with raises and promotions they didn’t even ask for” are hard to relate for me and for any other working class man who struggle in the workplace I know. I understand you were trying to get your point across, but if that’s your perspective, then we simply live in two different worlds (which is totally possible, given that we probably live in very different places and companies).
I listened (well…read), and I questioned some of your conclusions. If this for you means “not listening to women”, then I suppose we have different perspectives.
I agree with what you said for the most part, except the fact that I wouldn’t define sexism in the majority of cases having people “stealing” your ideas, nor shooting down ideas.
In the first case it seems a common practice in competitive environments, where workers have no incentive at all to cooperate and all the incentive to screw each other to look better and chase promotions. I think people who do that regularly do that with everyone. Appropriating ideas and work of others is how middle managers in many cases got there and how they climb the ladder, even though everyone knows what they are worth.
The second is an extremely common occurrence in tech, ideas are shot down all the time. I have seen it occurring countless of times, I don’t think is a sexist practice inherently, although still something extremely annoying within tech. It is sexism when ideas are shot down “because a woman is saying it”, though.
My final remark is about the part about “males getting raises without even asking” (paraphrasing). Now, this may have been true in your context, I have no way to dispute it. However, I just want to reinforce that the narrative of “males being somewhat on the same side” disregarding the conflict within workers and owners (I.e. those who get the raises and those who give them) seems to be completely fabricated (based on my experience) and also extremely damaging to workers solidarity. The narrative that somehow gender prevails over class as a factor of unification is very dangerous and plays right in the hand of those who benefit from gender conflict as an obstacle for class unity.
Not really, and I would deserve issues, as I usually randomly update apps from whatever store I happen to open.
Same phone, same OS. For me NFC works fine, I routinely use it for yubikeys.I also use Aurora store, in addition to f-droid and the app lounge.
I don’t generally agree with the idea because I believe it doesn’t incentivize (actually, it goes in the very opposite direction) the cultural shift which is needed. That is, you are the platform, you are not buying anything, you are simply supporting the platform(s) you care about unconditionally.
My very Italian answer is “pizza bianca” . I guess “healthy” depends, but it’s generally OK carbs, it’s delicious and with few Euros you can buy quite a lot (enough for a lunch).
They can contribute to the same communities, but communities live on specific instances.
The main difference between instances is the moderation policy and who runs it really, but nobody is generally missing out anything depending on the instance they choose.
There is one exception to the above, which is when instances defederate each other. Imagine that instance A is full of content that is not accepted on B and C, B and C can defederate A to stop “talking to it”. Currently beehaw has defederated Lemmy.world because of the amount of users and moderation capabilities, for example.
I assumed the “story” was the personal one of Messina-Denaro.