Sexism in the Ruby community: how does the Python community manage it?

[Joshua Landau]

On 17 October 2013 04:13, Owen Jacobson <owen.jacobson at grimoire.ca> wrote:
> Last week, Elad Maidar wrote a fairly short but readable opinion piece[0]
> illustrating some long-standing social problems in the Ruby community,
> ending with a very specific call to action around naming conventions for
> Ruby projects and gems. To save you the trouble of scrolling to the bottom
> of this post and clicking, here's the relevant bit:
...
> There are a few examples of the same sort of bad decision-making that are, I
> think, worth discussing:
>
> * SexMachine (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/SexMachine/0.1.1 - an attempt to
> detect the gender of names, which… well, ask the nearest boy named Sue - or
> girl named Leslie)
> * sexytime (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/sexytime/0.1.0)
> * pep8nazi (https://pypi.python.org/pypi/pep8nazi/0.1 - do we shove
> non-PEP8-compliant authors into "showers" now?)

Personally I find it very hard to consider those "disallowed" terms.
"Sex" isn't some abhorrent concept, and using "nazi" in colloquial
informal usage is hardly in any way being disrespectful to victims of
actual Nazism.

We're not the moral police and we shouldn't act like it. Obviously
names appropriate for formal usage are more convenient, but that's a
different matter. It's not oppressing anyone.

> So, two questions:
>
> 1. What social biases and problems *do* we unwittingly encourage by way of
> community-tolerated behaviour? Where, if not through the conventions for
> naming, do we encourage sexism, racism, and other mindlessly exclusionary
> behaviour?

It's not our job to do anything. We can't "clean" the internet, so
there's no point trying. Personally I think the common digressions
into attacks on intellect and professionalism are much more socially
regressed than the minute levels of sexism we have.

As long as we take an appropriate stance on discovery, I'd say we're doing fine.

> 2. What kind of social pressure can we bring to bear to _keep_ Python's
> package naming conventions as socially neutral as they are,

We just make sure that hurtful statements are frowned upon and
potentially disallowed.

Note that "gay" is not offensive (in fact, being offended by it would
itself be socially regressive) whereas "gays_are_worse_people" would
be.

Also note that context applies: if the module generates gradients
(remember that the rainbow is "approved" amongst the gay community)
then it's just a bad name. If the module is itself offensive
commentary or satire, that's a different story.

> if and when some high-profile dirtbag decides this language is the best language?

Oi, oi, oi. Calm down. The guy who made "SexMachine", I bet, had the
least intention to hurt anyone's feelings. You need to be careful not
to imply such terms on these people.

Also note that although you were talking about potential further "bad
names", you used "SexMachine" as one example.

> 3. How can we reach out to the Ruby community and help *them* get past the
> current crop of gender issues, and help them as a group to do better next
> time?

No. You're not the police.

If they're concerned and need help removing this stuff, lend support.
But don't go forcing your more conservative views down their throats.

> it's hugely important and hugely beneficial that we welcome as many folks
> into the Python community as possible, and do our best to foster an
> environment where people can succeed regardless of who or what they are, and
> recent evidence suggests that that requires ongoing conversation and
> engagement, not just passive acceptance.
>
> So, how should we be more awesome?

As long as we raise issues as they become apparent, and when concerns
are raised, I think we are acting appropriately.

I'm not saying we should ignore transgressions, but as long as that
vast non-sexist majority challenge sexism on sight, most sexism will
be challenged and the social pressures will improve.