The Grace Hopper Celebration is meant to unite women in tech. This year droves of men came looking for jobs.

    • sudneo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      1 year ago

      This is pure rhetoric, I can flip the argument:

      “You care more about the gender than about my material condition.”

      Also, the moment I need to let prevail abstract concepts over my material condition (i.e., caring about “my group” being over represented while I am out of a job) is the moment in which the class unity is broken. Me and those women who are out of a job have so much in common that there is no reason for me to consider us part of two separate groups. That’s the whole point of my argument, I advocate for worker solidarity and I absolutely feel that this attitude is overall harmful for it.

        • sudneo@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          1 year ago

          Let me say this: to me this seems the completed detached thought of someone who never faced material difficulties.

          I can only think this if I am in a position of privilege where I can choose. I absolutely can’t relate with any of this, I completely agree to disagree.

            • sudneo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              1 year ago

              people have no sense of integrity.

              I genuinely think this has nothing to do with integrity.

              First issue is assuming your material difficulties is some how superior to others.

              This is not an issue, it’s absolutely normal, because I am aware of my material difficulties, while I am not aware of other people’s one to the same extent. I can’t decide not to buy a house because by doing so I increase the demand, which increases prices and makes it harder for poor people to afford housing. You are putting the burden to address a systemic issue on another victim.

              Second assuming the only thing that matters when facing material difficulties is how to advantage only yourself.

              I am not saying this is the only thing that matters, but I am saying it matters, and I think it’s completely unfair to think that people shouldn’t take care of themselves. I turn my eye to the mechanisms that create the scarcity that put me and a woman to fight for resources, not on either one of them.

              Lots of people in life are capable of enduring difficult times while also sacrificing or placing themselves behind others. I don’t see how you don’t understand that.

              Again, I think we have simply too different of a perception of what means a difficult time. Sorry, but this argument to me sounds as complete madness.

              One of the most important lessons is that overcoming those times by hurting others is not a position I enjoy.

              So not only I am forced to sell my labor to survive, which is the only chance I have, but when I do I am anyway hurting others. So what are my options? Suicide? Any job I am going to take, whether it comes though this fair or not, I am taking it potentially from an under represented category, be it a woman, an old person, black folks, LGBTQ+ community, etc. So I should just stop working?

              I will say more, if you carry on your line of reasoning further, any of the people working in tech is US are participating in a system that in a bigger scale hurts people from third world countries (thinking for example of labor exploitation) and pollutes the planet. So what should people do?

              The working class should build solidarity, should develop a consciousness that allow them to fight united against the system that creates arbitrary scarcity of resources, not self-police and create a hierarchy to split the crumbles among themselves.

                • sudneo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  But people do that everyday.

                  Come on, this is a huge stretch. I want to meet one person who decided not to buy a house to facilitate housing for others. This has nothing to do with choosing to have kids or not, that is a choice that is not determined by your material necessities.

                  Use a job board or fair that is for you.

                  You deliberately ignored the premises of that reasoning. Following your logic, any job I take, by default, is a job potentially taken away from someone who needs it the most. ANY. I don’t belong to that vulnerable category, therefore me taking any job will reinforce the current inbalance. So what should I do?

                  This is taking it to absurd lengths. Its a balancing act.

                  Oh, perfect. According to my sensibility, people in need (emphasis on need) of a job would make the right call if they would attempt to candidate for any job they can possibly get. The scarcity of jobs available is not their fault, nor is the discrimination of women in the workplace. They also by definition do not hold any position of power and as such I can’t in good faith categorize them as oppressors.

                  job fairs for veterans. Should you also be invited to those?

                  No, but I don’t care for men to be invited to this particular fair either. I am discussing the analysis the followed the fact that some men decided to show up (i.e., the article and the way it describes the fact) anyway.

                  Entering a space we weren’t invited to take away their opportunity would not be solidarity.

                  Also excluding and blaming fellow proletarians because they are the wrong gender doesn’t.

          • ZombieTheZombieCat@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            1 year ago

            this seems the completed detached thought of someone who never faced material difficulties.

            Yes, all of your comments do.

            • sudneo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              9
              ·
              1 year ago

              Any specific part? Or you just wanted to do the snarky comment without committing to an actual discussion?

            • sudneo@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Women are in the exact same position you are in, with the added disadvantage of being women

              This is your assumption. You are assuming that the men going to the event are average men, which on average are more likely to be employed in tech. I don’t think that’s true in this case, I think it’s mostly desperate people, possibly also from marginalized groups. Looking at the video I see mostly foreigners, possibly in need of a visa to not be kicked out of the country. Keep in mind they paid 600 bucks for a super tiny chance (imagine what are the chances that recruiters at that event will not ignore them because they went there to recruit women).

              Also, reading a bit online it seems that there is always been a percentage of men attending that event.

              I will not address the last paragraph, your suggestion of what “this proves” is completely arbitrary and prejudicial, I won’t say what that proves, instead.

                • sudneo@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Because women never need visas? Are never foreign or desperate?

                  Of course, but how is this relevant. The argument there is that we are not talking about the tech-bros dominating the tech field, we are talking about a specific subgroup of the male population, the outliers, which means using the average male statistics to deliberate on this specific people misses at least partially the point.

                  They are free to make their own spaces

                  This is what really puzzles me. This kind of argument is unacceptable in any other context, because it completely ignores the necessary conditions and balance of power needed to “create your own space”. It’s like saying “women can create their own tech companies and hire only women there”. It doesn’t make sense because it would be ignoring the fact that to create a company you need network, you need resources, capital, and if you are already marginalized, you can’t just do that. I would suggest that foreigners out of a job are not in the material condition to organize a hundreds of thousands-people fair with huge sponsors.

                  so they can feel safe.

                  So that they can find a job*

                  The fact that they spent $600 when they are theoretically desperate just makes them foolish as well as entitled.

                  I am not sure how you are not seeing the foolish attempt exactly as an expression of that desperation, but as an expression of entitlement.

                  But I really don’t expect you to understand any of that.

                  Why do you need to assume that it’s a matter of understanding and not a matter of simply having different opinions and views?