![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rmdVia the geek feminism blog, I found this paper with lots of data about gender and free/open source software. interesting.
1.2 Key Findings
Listed below are the factors significant in excluding women from F/LOSS communities. These factors are nearly all underwritten by a central cultural dynamic within F/LOSS. F/LOSS participants, as in most scientific cultures, view technology as an autonomous field, separate from people. This means that anything they interpret as ‘social’ is easily dismissed as ‘artificial’ social conditioning. Because this ‘conditioning’ is considered more or less arbitrary, in their view it is supposed to be easily cast aside by individuals choosing to ignore it. F/LOSS also has a deeply voluntarist ethos which values notions of individual autonomy and volition. As a result participants largely do not believe that gender has anything to do with their own individual actions. The situation is thereby perpetuated in spite of the expressed desire for change.
1.2.1 Women are actively (if unconsciously) excluded rather than passively disinterested. The effect lies within F/LOSS cultural and social arrangements. The exclusion happens among people who often do not mean to appear, and who do not interpret their own actions, as hostile to women. The effect is an outcome of the importance given to the individual as the sole carrier of agency.
1.2.2 F/LOSS communities actively perpetuate a ‘hacker’ ethic, which situates itself outside the ‘mainstream’ sociality, but equates women with that mainstream. Women are treated as either alien Other or (in online contexts) are assumed to be male and thus made invisible. Women are seen as innately more able to organise, communicate and negotiate among F/LOSS projects as well as with the outside world. Thereby they become carriers of sociality that is seen in a contrast to the 'technical' realm ascribed to men. Additionally F/LOSS women receive a high level of attention due to their gender which decreases their feeling of acceptance as community members as well as their willingness to further engage with the community.
1.2.3 F/LOSS rewards the producing code rather than the producing software. It thereby puts most emphasis on a particular skill set. Other activities such as interface design or documentation are understood as less 'technical' and therefore less prestigious. This has consequences both for the lower valuation of activities in which F/LOSS women often engage as well as for the software itself which often is still oriented more towards the developer rather than the user.
1.2.4 F/LOSS production and infrastructure is designed and built assuming contributors have a long history with computers, but women tend to engage later in their lives with computers. In order to join women have a larger amount of catching up work to do, which they must do in an environment that almost exclusively values independent discovery.
1.2.5 Inflammatory talk and aggressive posturing (‘flaming’) is accepted within many F/LOSS projects as a key means of developing reputation. Whereas more established F/LOSS members engage less in ‘flame wars’, people still establishing their reputation often use them as a platform to make themselves visible. This is often off-putting for newcomers and less experienced contributors who are not yet familiar with the community, its norms, or its real hierarchy. The effect is particularly pronounced in the case of women, who in most cases have a shorter history in computing and therefore less confidence in defending themselves on technical grounds. ‘Flaming’ thus exacerbates the confidence difficulties women tend to have as a result of lower levels of previous computing experiences.
1.2.6 The reliance on long hours of intensive computing in writing successful code means that men, who in general assume that time outside of waged labour is ‘theirs’, are freer to participate than women, who normally still assume a disproportionate amount of domestic responsibilities. Female F/LOSS participants, however, seem to be able to allocate a disproportionate larger share of their leisure time for their F/LOSS activities. This gives an indication that women who are not able to spend as much time on voluntary activities have difficulties to integrate into the community.
1.2 Key Findings
Listed below are the factors significant in excluding women from F/LOSS communities. These factors are nearly all underwritten by a central cultural dynamic within F/LOSS. F/LOSS participants, as in most scientific cultures, view technology as an autonomous field, separate from people. This means that anything they interpret as ‘social’ is easily dismissed as ‘artificial’ social conditioning. Because this ‘conditioning’ is considered more or less arbitrary, in their view it is supposed to be easily cast aside by individuals choosing to ignore it. F/LOSS also has a deeply voluntarist ethos which values notions of individual autonomy and volition. As a result participants largely do not believe that gender has anything to do with their own individual actions. The situation is thereby perpetuated in spite of the expressed desire for change.
1.2.1 Women are actively (if unconsciously) excluded rather than passively disinterested. The effect lies within F/LOSS cultural and social arrangements. The exclusion happens among people who often do not mean to appear, and who do not interpret their own actions, as hostile to women. The effect is an outcome of the importance given to the individual as the sole carrier of agency.
1.2.2 F/LOSS communities actively perpetuate a ‘hacker’ ethic, which situates itself outside the ‘mainstream’ sociality, but equates women with that mainstream. Women are treated as either alien Other or (in online contexts) are assumed to be male and thus made invisible. Women are seen as innately more able to organise, communicate and negotiate among F/LOSS projects as well as with the outside world. Thereby they become carriers of sociality that is seen in a contrast to the 'technical' realm ascribed to men. Additionally F/LOSS women receive a high level of attention due to their gender which decreases their feeling of acceptance as community members as well as their willingness to further engage with the community.
1.2.3 F/LOSS rewards the producing code rather than the producing software. It thereby puts most emphasis on a particular skill set. Other activities such as interface design or documentation are understood as less 'technical' and therefore less prestigious. This has consequences both for the lower valuation of activities in which F/LOSS women often engage as well as for the software itself which often is still oriented more towards the developer rather than the user.
1.2.4 F/LOSS production and infrastructure is designed and built assuming contributors have a long history with computers, but women tend to engage later in their lives with computers. In order to join women have a larger amount of catching up work to do, which they must do in an environment that almost exclusively values independent discovery.
1.2.5 Inflammatory talk and aggressive posturing (‘flaming’) is accepted within many F/LOSS projects as a key means of developing reputation. Whereas more established F/LOSS members engage less in ‘flame wars’, people still establishing their reputation often use them as a platform to make themselves visible. This is often off-putting for newcomers and less experienced contributors who are not yet familiar with the community, its norms, or its real hierarchy. The effect is particularly pronounced in the case of women, who in most cases have a shorter history in computing and therefore less confidence in defending themselves on technical grounds. ‘Flaming’ thus exacerbates the confidence difficulties women tend to have as a result of lower levels of previous computing experiences.
1.2.6 The reliance on long hours of intensive computing in writing successful code means that men, who in general assume that time outside of waged labour is ‘theirs’, are freer to participate than women, who normally still assume a disproportionate amount of domestic responsibilities. Female F/LOSS participants, however, seem to be able to allocate a disproportionate larger share of their leisure time for their F/LOSS activities. This gives an indication that women who are not able to spend as much time on voluntary activities have difficulties to integrate into the community.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2010-07-11 06:20 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-11 07:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-12 02:55 pm (UTC)Today's even more hostile atmosphere strikes me as desperate wagon-circling by those who have not yet figured out that they're obsolete and irrelevant, but "wait it out" is not a useful perspective for people currently targeted by the vileness. I wish I had a better idea.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-11 10:59 pm (UTC)There was a spectacular case of a manager who would reject any suggestion that I presented. One of my male co-workers tested this by then presenting the identical suggestion five minutes later and getting praised for it. Hilariously, he then called him right then and there on having shot me down five minutes earlier.
And this was all in a *professional* environment. I've been interested in getting involved in F/LOSS if I get well enough to work again, because it's a source of technical work I can ease into, but I have to admit that some of the barriers are daunting. I've mounted them before but it gets old and I start to wonder why I am working for jerks... for free.
I have noticed some of this
Date: 2010-07-12 04:02 pm (UTC)Re: I have noticed some of this
Date: 2010-07-15 01:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-12 09:28 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-13 03:13 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-13 04:27 am (UTC)The assumption I'm hearing in your statement is that they are not interested which has some value. I would offer this article. The NSF identified a key obstacle preventing girls from selecting engineering careers in a qualitative consumer research study which states, “Current engineering messages portray engineering as challenging and stress the importance of superior math and science abilities … . Professional interests for high school girls hinge upon relevance. Relevance incorporates that a job is rewarding, and it suggests that the profession is for someone ‘like me.’”
A bit of a horse and cart issue, to be sure. But when given the right opportunity, like at Dreamwidth the statistics show large numbers of women engaged and participating.
When the culture is welcoming, the number of females interested in participating seems to increase dramatically. I'm guessing it's not due to lack of interest.
no subject
Date: 2010-07-13 01:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-13 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-07-13 04:09 am (UTC)