Being a woman in geek culture

[BiBunny]

Actually, sometimes they don't. And sometimes it stops being adorable and is indeed creepy.

I should've said they usually do.

Don't you get tired of being life support for a pair of tits?

HAHAHAHAHAHA! Are you seriously asking me that, knowing the kind of bullshit I have to put up with from men every single day of my life because it's my job?

 

[Recidiva]

Gay men get a pass. I'm not sure why, but their obsession with boobs is adorable, rather than obnoxious and/or creepy.

And if you get a compliment on your outfit, or criticism, it is heartfelt and not a lead in to something else except probably a spirited debate on fashion.

I really wish straight guys would get this. I know there is a segment of the population that interact with each other that way, "Want sex?" "Sure." *sex ensues* But that's usually at a bar. Go there!

If you want to have sex with a smart person and have an actual conversation, don't cloak it in sexy time syntax. We can see through it and we experience it a ridiculous number of times.

Women aren't rejecting just one guy when they give an emphatic no with each conversation starter, they're rejecting the hundreds of times they've been given an effusive greeting and a cold dismissal based on the conclusion that sex won't happen. I'm not in the habit of being rude or obnoxious in dismissal, and I'm not out to crush egos, but I'm not into extending a stereotypically idiotic trawl.

Find out who you're talking to first.

 

[Recidiva]

Actually, sometimes they don't. And sometimes it stops being adorable and is indeed creepy.

Don't you get tired of being life support for a pair of tits?

*grabs boobs* Don't listen. Don't listen. She doesn't mean it. Mommy loves you.

Not in front of them!

 

[Keroin]

I am beginning to think that many men don't understand that their behaviour and words are creepy to women simply because of a lack of empathy/experience. Of course men will experience fear in their lives but the majority won't ever equate "fear" with "female". Specific female, perhaps, but general female? Rarely.

I don't see all men as a threat but I have been aware for most of my life that men (general "men") can be a threat and that this is something I have to store in my memory banks. I think most women have this to varying degrees. If you travel and/or live in places where people are not so enlightened about gender equality, awareness of men as a threat is survival. Hell, I was once groped by a 10-year-old boy in Mexico.

This doesn't mean I paint all men as potential rapists or as violent. It does mean that I adjust my radar depending on my location and that I have learned to read into posts like the one being discussed here. Survival and self-protection. Men may also do this but I'm guessing much more infrequently and probably for different reasons.

So men like that poster make those statements and probably don't see anything wrong with it, even if they know, deep down inside (or on the surface), that they're really trolling for sex. The gender-based creep/threat factor is completely foreign to them.

 

[BiBunny]

I am beginning to think that many men don't understand that their behaviour and words are creepy to women simply because of a lack of empathy/experience. Of course men will experience fear in their lives but the majority won't ever equate "fear" with "female". Specific female, perhaps, but general female? Rarely.

I don't see all men as a threat but I have been aware for most of my life that men (general "men") can be a threat and that this is something I have to store in my memory banks. I think most women have this to varying degrees. If you travel and/or live in places where people are not so enlightened about gender equality, awareness of men as a threat is survival. Hell, I was once groped by a 10-year-old boy in Mexico.

This doesn't mean I paint all men as potential rapists or as violent. It does mean that I adjust my radar depending on my location and that I have learned to read into posts like the one being discussed here. Survival and self-protection. Men may also do this but I'm guessing much more infrequently and probably for different reasons.

So men like that poster make those statements and probably don't see anything wrong with it, even if they know, deep down inside (or on the surface), that they're really trolling for sex. The gender-based creep/threat factor is completely foreign to them.

I think they do know. They just don't care.

Ok, no, that's not exactly it. If they sit back and objectively look at it, they can see how such approaches would be creepy to women...if it's coming from another man. It doesn't apply to them, though, because they are so special/amazing/awesome/overwhelmed-with-narcissism that there's NO WAY what they say could possibly not be taken well, even if it'd be creepy coming from some "other dude."

Men have been deified by others to the point that they buy into their own bullshit, in my opinion.

 

[Recidiva]

I am beginning to think that many men don't understand that their behaviour and words are creepy to women simply because of a lack of empathy/experience. Of course men will experience fear in their lives but the majority won't ever equate "fear" with "female". Specific female, perhaps, but general female? Rarely.

I don't see all men as a threat but I have been aware for most of my life that men (general "men") can be a threat and that this is something I have to store in my memory banks. I think most women have this to varying degrees. If you travel and/or live in places where people are not so enlightened about gender equality, awareness of men as a threat is survival. Hell, I was once groped by a 10-year-old boy in Mexico.

This doesn't mean I paint all men as potential rapists or as violent. It does mean that I adjust my radar depending on my location and that I have learned to read into posts like the one being discussed here. Survival and self-protection. Men may also do this but I'm guessing much more infrequently and probably for different reasons.

So men like that poster make those statements and probably don't see anything wrong with it, even if they know, deep down inside (or on the surface), that they're really trolling for sex. The gender-based creep/threat factor is completely foreign to them.

Right. Some of them learn, and for that I'm grateful. I've also enjoyed speaking "guy" and getting lessons, so I can interpret. But there's a lot of stuff I just can't share and don't agree with at all. I don't hate it, I just can't go there.

I have to say there was a huge geek moment in that "Dragon Age" game I played where the male lead wouldn't allow the female lead to sacrifice herself for the team. In speaking to the game writer, and in speaking to my husband, although I might think we're "equal partners" there is a part of the male brain that can't articulate that protective instinct, and it's considered, to them, sacred and inviolate. Although it's awesome to be protected, it's very touchy and emotional territory between the genders. There's no "talking" I can do that can change that part of the male soul in my experience. So I actually feel a deep compassion for the vulnerability of men and all the issues involving feeling they need to protect women (or the strength of defying that impulse, to destroy women and therefore destroy that vulnerability.) I don't think it's something that can be "thought" about and changed without a huge act of will and constant vigilance, if at all.

I also think we are in an age where people who behave badly justify it by calling it "adaptive" behavior to be aggressive and overtly sexualized. (Our ancestors fucked anything that breathed, I should to!) But I think that's just an excuse. We're not chemicals only, we have frontal cortices and we should use them.

A lot of smart people have fallen for the "unintelligent design" argument and I think it's done social harm by providing a science-sounding excuse for being a douche.

 

[Stella_Omega]

In speaking to the game writer, and in speaking to my husband, although I might think we're "equal partners" there is a part of the male brain that can't articulate that protective instinct, and it's considered, to them, sacred and inviolate.

Yeah, I get that. And tough noogies. Xtians consider bibles to be holy and inviolate, but they are just a chunk of paper and ink to me. My female body might be something holy and inviolate to some guys, (and a possession for use to some others) but they can keep that regard where regard belongs, which is to themselves.

Also, those portions of the brain can damn well learn to articulate. And Evo psyche is just a lot of bullshit invented to excuse problematic behavior.

 

[KoPilot]

Yeah, I get that. And tough noogies. Xtians consider bibles to be holy and inviolate, but they are just a chunk of paper and ink to me. My female body might be something holy and inviolate to some guys, (and a possession for use to some others) but they can keep that regard where regard belongs, which is to themselves.

Also, those portions of the brain can damn well learn to articulate. And Evo psyche is just a lot of bullshit invented to excuse problematic behavior.

Yeah, it's unsettling. I don't think I'd be with my husband if he wouldn't let me take a bullet for him in just the same way he would for me.

Again, it really just comes down to my right to ego overrides your right to agency. Big woop.

 

[Recidiva]

Yeah, I get that. And tough noogies. Xtians consider bibles to be holy and inviolate, but they are just a chunk of paper and ink to me. My female body might be something holy and inviolate to some guys, (and a possession for use to some others) but they can keep that regard where regard belongs, which is to themselves.

Also, those portions of the brain can damn well learn to articulate.

In my experience, I can't articulate (fully) lots of things. I can try to explain the brain chemistry that happened when I became a mom, transformation from "Eh, I don't really care, I could live or I could die..." to "Mama bear attack mode, survive at all costs, protect the young'un" but it doesn't mean that I can express it properly or change it in any way.

 

[Recidiva]

Yeah, it's unsettling. I don't think I'd be with my husband if he wouldn't let me take a bullet for him in just the same way he would for me.

Again, it really just comes down to my right to ego overrides your right to agency. Big woop.

Have you had that conversation with him? I'd lived with my husband for about 12 years before I did. I was surprised.

 

[KoPilot]

Have you had that conversation with him? I'd lived with my husband for about 12 years before I did. I was surprised.

Just had it:

me: Hey
him: ya?
me: Would you let me take a bullet for you
me: I mean not "let" but yannow
him: nope xB
me: ok but I mean is your heroism worth more than mine
him: what do you mean?
me: Would me dying for you be more unacceptable than you dying for me, all else being equal
me: Sorry, it came up in a thread and someone was like "but wait did you actually have that convo with him"
him: nah, i dont see that being the deal
me: if the situation arose, and your sacrifice was not a result of a choice i could have made/not made, then i dont see it as unacceptable at all
me: ok thx

Easy peasy!

 

[Recidiva]

Just had it:

me: Hey
him: ya?
me: Would you let me take a bullet for you
me: I mean not "let" but yannow
him: nope xB
me: ok but I mean is your heroism worth more than mine
him: what do you mean?
me: Would me dying for you be more unacceptable than you dying for me, all else being equal
me: Sorry, it came up in a thread and someone was like "but wait did you actually have that convo with him"
him: nah, i dont see that being the deal
me: if the situation arose, and your sacrifice was not a result of a choice i could have made/not made, then i dont see it as unacceptable at all
me: ok thx

Easy peasy!

Oh! Yeah, that I get. It's that first "nope" that to me was surprising and that comes up. It's not a fair conversation, I get that, because his first answer shouldn't be "Sure, why not, that way I can use your skin as a coat." We are talking love and not "random chick at my side."

I've always loved my husband due to the fact that he'd hit a girl. Which is ironic. But it means he thinks women can be threatening and he doesn't have a rule saying he can't hit or kill them versus hitting or killing a man who is threatening.

Playing games together is training for any upcoming zombie apocalypse and when we go to the shooting range we use zombie targets. I'd turn vampire with him, if necessary. Need to determine tactics ahead of time.

 

[satindesire]

I don't really think the whole point of this thread is to out-geek anyone or even talk geek cred, because honestly, that whole thing is a slippery slope down to the pit of Arbitrarily Denying Geek Cred to anyone who Doesn't Have XYZ knowledge.

The fact that we're looked at as women FIRST and geeks NEXT is part of the problem. I'm not a geek, I'm a "female geek", but if a guy is a geek, he's not a "male geek", he's just a geek, because male is the -default setting- to the world.

FireMAN
MailMAN
PoliceMAN

Even some words are gendered way beyond that. Doctor, for instance. Geek culture won't evolve or get better cred from the outside world (and become a more acceptable thing to go into and enjoy) until the sexism stops. The cultural norm of the geek being looked at like a bepimpled overweight douchebro that spouts homophobic slurs into his xbox mic is so ingrained into our psyche that I seriously doubt I'll live to see the day when that stereotype doesn't exist anymore.

 

[Keroin]

Curious what everyone has to say about this...

Fashion, Fake Geek Girls, and Worldcon

 

[Recidiva]

Curious what everyone has to say about this...

Fashion, Fake Geek Girls, and Worldcon

Huh. I suppose through my filters I'd think that this is a person that worries about being liked according to her appearance, if not as a central issue, then as an intellectual exercise in doing it thoughtfully.

I am not terribly concerned about being judged by my physical appearance and in my filter, I like to weed out the people who judge by appearance by not being terribly...anything in particular except for clean and reasonably well groomed, without being obsessive. I'd probably just do my best to wear organic cotton and something comfortable because that's what I do in most situations. If someone insults me or passes me over and I'm not up to snuff fashion wise, I don't think "Oh no, they don't like me" I think "Good, now I know not to waste my time on that person."

This is thoughtful, and I don't want to peg her as obsessive, just concerned, and for good reason. The way she is physically perceived is a bigger deal for her than it is for me, or she's just more willing to share her process and I think that's cool.

All in all, good conversation for those who are concerned about over or underdressing or dressing inappropriately for an event. There's clearly fashion, why not isolate or embody a trend.

She thinks of fashion as a way to influence people's opinions of you. I think of fashion avoidance in the sense that if I'm doing my own thing, people who are not likely to share my opinions about things will avoid me and I'm grateful for the fashion as a way to signal my personality to others, I just use it differently.

Fashion and what you choose to wear does say a lot about you, whether it should or not. It means different things to different people, so why not explore the issue.

The trap's the same for everyone. I know my system works for me and I use it to create opportunities and filter reactions. I think she's doing the same thing from a different direction. Although isolating what works for you is great, I know to be careful not to judge by appearance...but I know I will be judged by it.

 

[Keroin]

In speaking to the game writer, and in speaking to my husband, although I might think we're "equal partners" there is a part of the male brain that can't articulate that protective instinct, and it's considered, to them, sacred and inviolate. Although it's awesome to be protected, it's very touchy and emotional territory between the genders. There's no "talking" I can do that can change that part of the male soul in my experience. So I actually feel a deep compassion for the vulnerability of men and all the issues involving feeling they need to protect women (or the strength of defying that impulse, to destroy women and therefore destroy that vulnerability.) I don't think it's something that can be "thought" about and changed without a huge act of will and constant vigilance, if at all.

I agree. L and I have shared all kinds of so-super-dangerous-you-could-die activities together and he was always pushing me to go further, to push the envelope so to speak. I'm usually the one who has to say, "These are my boundaries, I am not comfortable past this point." In general, he's very safety oriented, but also highly risk-friendly--a weird but good combo.

And yet.

When we walk down the street together, he will always place himself on the side with the traffic.

He brags to people, loud and long, about how tough and gutsy I am.

And yet.

He worries like an old woman if I'm late coming home from somewhere he considers even slightly unsafe.

I could go on. Somewhere deep inside he's driven by an urge to protect me, his mate. Is this a male thing? Yes. And no. I am fiercely protective of him in other ways. Part of me worries about him every day he heads offshore to fish. He would die for me. No question. But I would do the same. Would he let me make the sacrifice if he could stop me? No. I don't even have to ask on that one. Would I let him? I don't know. That's my honest answer. Hopefully we never have to find out.

Yeah, I get that. And tough noogies. Xtians consider bibles to be holy and inviolate, but they are just a chunk of paper and ink to me. My female body might be something holy and inviolate to some guys, (and a possession for use to some others) but they can keep that regard where regard belongs, which is to themselves.

Also, those portions of the brain can damn well learn to articulate. And Evo psyche is just a lot of bullshit invented to excuse problematic behavior.

Agreed. Sort of. I don't think feelings that powerful can just be instantly "willed away". I see more of a long, slow change over time. Which is why we need feminism, because it ain't going to just "happen".

 

[Recidiva]

I agree. L and I have shared all kinds of so-super-dangerous-you-could-die activities together and he was always pushing me to go further, to push the envelope so to speak. I'm usually the one who has to say, "These are my boundaries, I am not comfortable past this point." In general, he's very safety oriented, but also highly risk-friendly--a weird but good combo.

And yet.

When we walk down the street together, he will always place himself on the side with the traffic.

He brags to people, loud and long, about how tough and gutsy I am.

And yet.

He worries like an old woman if I'm late coming home from somewhere he considers even slightly unsafe.

I could go on. Somewhere deep inside he's driven by an urge to protect me, his mate. Is this a male thing? Yes. And no. I am fiercely protective of him in other ways. Part of me worries about him every day he heads offshore to fish. He would die for me. No question. But I would do the same. Would he let me make the sacrifice if he could stop me? No. I don't even have to ask on that one. Would I let him? I don't know. That's my honest answer. Hopefully we never have to find out.

Agreed. Sort of. I don't think feelings that powerful can just be instantly "willed away". I see more of a long, slow change over time. Which is why we need feminism, because it ain't going to just "happen".

That's my observation. Of course mileage may vary. It may be completely different if I weren't attracted to someone who was genuinely bigger, stronger, faster reflexes, better perception of the physical world and with a strategic instinct such that I know I could only kill him in his sleep and only if it were heavy sleep. I (and he) have seen us in crisis situations at least, real or simulated and his protectiveness could have a huge element of the reality that I'm not as good at it as he is. In simple player versus player terms, even in a game I'd have to be very lucky on even terms to beat him with a simulation.

It's a deeply weighted and fraught with peril question, but I find the more I explore it, the scarier it gets when it's dysfunctional and the more endearing it gets when it's functional. It's comparable to the hormonal imperative in women to the nesting instinct. The kind that when dysfunctional has women steal another woman's child, or when functional makes a kick-ass mom.

However, if the dude had to pay bills on his own, all bets are off. I handle the money. His way of paying the electricity bill was "Hey, the lights are off, I'm going to bike down to the utility office and pay it."

To his credit, he knows I worry and I know he worries. He always lets me know and never has considered it that he's "whipped" if he has to let me know he's going to be five minutes late because otherwise I'll chew out the inside of my cheek. We don't ask each other for permission to do something, but we are polite about informing each other and he's the first person in my experience who treats me as a partner and not a competitor in a relationship.

Another time to notice something like this is when I cook. When I handle knives or chop or handle heavy machinery, he'd like to lift it or chop it for me. When I wanted to buy a rotary meat slicer he was deeply concerned because he didn't want me being injured using it. So I thought about it for a while and I really wanted a slicer. "Will it work if only you are the one who can slice things?" "Sure." Problem solved. He's gotten better about this over the years but he is hypervigilant about my safety and cavalier about his own and that comes from somewhere.

 

[Netzach]

I started going to SM conventions, which are basically sci fi conventions with different panels - in the first outfit. Didn't hurt from that perspective. She's overrating non verbal communication in my experience, I've never felt much difference in red lipstick half rubbed off by the end of the day anyway versus some other color reactions.

There's nothing wrong with positioning yourself a little tiny bit "outside" - it actually shields well from bullshit. But I see the number 1 thing as "really me" and not some kind of drag act, it's just me on a good day, me trying.

But I think a person needs to kind of decide if they're at this thing to get their fan on, learn stuff, promote self, etc.

 

[Netzach]

The whole "taking a bullet for" thing is really interesting in my context, and sadly, the stats place us closer to having to think about this with any realism in it.

We're an everyone for herself kind of couple now, no fancy high heels when we have to walk to the car after going out. Yes it's a male thing. Less evo-psyche, more garden variety brainwashing. It's not like M wasn't a gent and wasn't the bringer-out-of-trash and the brandisher-of-antique-bayonnets-at-things-that-go-bump.

If it was evo psyche it would have been a lot harder to let go of. Trust me - these feelings *can* and *will* be "willed away" given enough disruption to your training in gender.

If anything, I am now the protective party. I am now that pair of eyes scanning for trouble. I'm less vulnerable socially. I have good "get the fuck out of here" radar. I'm liable to put myself between her and the world automatically. She's got the secret weapon of upper body whoop ass, but I think is more vulnerable.

 

[KoPilot]

Even some words are gendered way beyond that. Doctor, for instance. Geek culture won't evolve or get better cred from the outside world (and become a more acceptable thing to go into and enjoy) until the sexism stops. The cultural norm of the geek being looked at like a bepimpled overweight douchebro that spouts homophobic slurs into his xbox mic is so ingrained into our psyche that I seriously doubt I'll live to see the day when that stereotype doesn't exist anymore.

Oh and they pretty much love that stereotype, too. It's being inconsequential to the rest of society (which arguably many geeks never quite fit in with to begin with) while getting to make and influence your own society. If that world suddenly starts letting in just anybody, then it just becomes another extension of the other stuff that they don't like.

So, yeah. I know people who would rather be purposefully ugly and maladjusted to separate themselves from the "sheeple". You know, and it's one thing to take pride in who you are, but it's another thing to take pride in how you contrast yourself with some kind of mainstream Other.

 

[KoPilot]

The whole "taking a bullet for" thing is really interesting in my context, and sadly, the stats place us closer to having to think about this with any realism in it.

We're an everyone for herself kind of couple now, no fancy high heels when we have to walk to the car after going out. Yes it's a male thing. Less evo-psyche, more garden variety brainwashing. It's not like M wasn't a gent and wasn't the bringer-out-of-trash and the brandisher-of-antique-bayonnets-at-things-that-go-bump.

If it was evo psyche it would have been a lot harder to let go of. Trust me - these feelings *can* and *will* be "willed away" given enough disruption to your training in gender.

If anything, I am now the protective party. I am now that pair of eyes scanning for trouble. I'm less vulnerable socially. I have good "get the fuck out of here" radar. I'm liable to put myself between her and the world automatically. She's got the secret weapon of upper body whoop ass, but I think is more vulnerable.

I've always been the protective one out of most any group of people I'm with. In a group of girls, I'm the bruiser.

With S and I, we're really just two sides to that same coin. He's the muscle, but I'm the one that can hear a pin drop on the sidewalk, I'm the one that instinctively keeps track of every body in my field of view. Sometimes I have to shut that hypervigilance off, though, and then I'm completely useless. But most other times, I'm the first one to perceive the threat and he's the one that gets sicced.

 

[Recidiva]

I've always been the protective one out of most any group of people I'm with. In a group of girls, I'm the bruiser.

With S and I, we're really just two sides to that same coin. He's the muscle, but I'm the one that can hear a pin drop on the sidewalk, I'm the one that instinctively keeps track of every body in my field of view. Sometimes I have to shut that hypervigilance off, though, and then I'm completely useless. But most other times, I'm the first one to perceive the threat and he's the one that gets sicced.

I have really good reflexes and that's one of my talents. I'll usually be the first to grab something that falls out of a cabinet before it hit the floor, and once our dog got out and he was okay with him running and I dove on the dog and got dragged a little bit. (Rottweiler) I make choices and I commit physically very quickly, without routing it through thought.

We've both noticed that we are uncomfortable sitting with our backs to a door, having unblinded windows when it's dark, aware of security threats in new situations.

I think he's really good at tactical choices during a siege, but I'm more observant in a day to day sense of being to hear (his ears were damaged on the firing range in the army with no ear protection) I am the first alert system, and I get this role. I'm almost never closed off from the world and I'm always listening for kids or animals or doorbells or phones...and if he's got his earphones on, the world could explode behind him and he would just fall in the big hole.

 

[Netzach]

I'm not just talking about being the antenna, though. I'm talking about being the one more liable to jump in front of the situation and try to gauge or block it. That's changed for me.

 

[Recidiva]

I'm not just talking about being the antenna, though. I'm talking about being the one more liable to jump in front of the situation and try to gauge or block it. That's changed for me.

Was it a conscious thing, a role you like, or the one you're best suited to between you? (or any other process of getting there)

For instance, I don't love paying bills, I'm just the best at it.

I can't change my instincts to Captain Kirk my way into something dangerous. I tend to run straight at, instead of away from, danger. This may or may not be a reflection on my intelligence, but I've always had it.

 

[Netzach]

Was it a conscious thing, a role you like, or the one you're best suited to between you? (or any other process of getting there)

For instance, I don't love paying bills, I'm just the best at it.

I can't change my instincts to Captain Kirk my way into something dangerous. I tend to run straight at, instead of away from, danger. This may or may not be a reflection on my intelligence, but I've always had it.

No it's new. It's like, ok, I was the less suited one, and now I'm the more suited one. Click. I went from "with man" mode into my usual "with woman" mode, plus some extra anxiety.