Startups and diversity

July 3rd, 2009

I just watched a fun interview with some of the folks from Heroku. The interviewer at one point casually gendered all Heroku users as “he”. These things stick out to me these days. It makes me think about how it must feel to be a woman and constantly be reminded that few people imagine anyone like you when they think of developers. Which got me thinking a little about gender and race and tech startups.

Now I want to say… I like Heroku. Heroku, The Technology is an amazing piece of architecture. I think it’s a gift to developers, and I think Adam and the other folks who work there are good people. I’m using it for SproutRobot. I know Adam is committed to Free Software, and he was super nice to respond to an email I once sent him about Heroku and F/OSS.

But there’s something that sketches me out a little about Heroku, The Company, and it’s the same thing that sketches me out about AppJet, The Company, and most of the tech startups I see.

It’s pretty much all white dudes.

Now, I haven’t seen Heroku do anything as blatantly sexist as making the only woman on your About page be a sexy mannequin whose lack of development and business skills you mock. But the Heroku founders are all white men, and the only other employee I’ve seen photos of is a white man. It seems uncontroversial for me to say that they’re hiring people for specific attributes that are predominantly found only in white men… if they weren’t, they’d be more diverse*.

Which makes me wonder: what human attributes and skills and ideas are their organization lacking? What kinds of knowledge and experience are they completely blind to because whoever is making the hiring choices thinks that these specific white dude attributes are the Most Important Attributes For Our Organization To Have?

And truthfully, I don’t know the answer. I’m sure their company will succeed. Like I said, the Heroku folks are brilliant, good people, who are doing great work. Lots of companies have made fistfulls of money employing the “let’s look for attributes that predominantly only white dudes have” methodology. But what is lost?

The thing is, it’s hard to know. As white males, we have come to see certain things as “relevant” and “important”, and those values are partly formed by our whiteness and our maleness. Certainly there are values that extend across color and gender lines, but there are plenty of things that women and people of color are more likely to find important than I would.

And this is the hard part. These values that vary across color and gender lines, and I have a hard time seeing and understanding them precisely because they vary across color and gender lines. The things I undervalue because I am white and male are necessarily invisible to me because I undervalue them.

This is why I’m reticent to rely completely on my personal values to do hiring. My values are skewed because of who I am.

So my only choice is to put a premium on diversity. To put trust in people and say “I don’t fully understand all of the value in this person, or everything they can contribute to this organization, but I am going to choose them over someone whose value I can see more clearly because I know there is invisible value in diversity.”

I just have this hunch that what will come out of that will be totally freaking rad. We’ll see, I guess.

______
* I wish this would go without saying, but I know I have to say it or people will get Very Upset: obviously they’re not doing this on purpose. They didn’t sit down and think “what qualities can we look for that only white dudes will have.” They just decided that Ruby prowess, or scaling experience, and the ability to speak in a language they understand… that these are what matters to them. The fact that these are predominantly attributes of white men is a consequence of that decision that I’m sure they didn’t choose deliberately.  In a lot of ways, we’ve moved beyond what I think most people would call “deliberate” racism and sexism (although even the deliberate stuff is still sadly common).  Instead, what most of us are faced with is a more insidious, despite-our-best-intentions kind of racism and sexism.  Whether that kind of stuff is “deliberate”, and whether it’s ethically bankrupt is a very abstract, philosophical question that is, generally speaking, an inappropriate diversion for most discussions about specific race- and gender-related phenomena.  We’re biased.  It hurts people.  Let’s focus on fixing it, not on discussing endlessly whether it makes us bad people.

Forward

June 21st, 2009

Had a very productive week. SproutRobot is coming along great. We did our first bit of usability testing today, which felt just fantastic. We got a lot of good info about what needs fixing, but I think we also got a glimpse of how great this product will be. Very excited.

A little scared about how all of this is going to work out, but feeling blessed and stoked.

Marginal voices

June 20th, 2009

So, another tech conference presenter has taken it upon himself to include a pornified image of a woman in a talk. Fighting ensued.

Hoss, the dude who gave the talk, says:

“I would like to point out that, at the time of writing this, I have received considerably more positive feedback on my Flashbelt presentation than negative. This affirmation includes female attendees going out their way to stop me at the conference and thank me openly for my presentation.”

and

“I can be crude and my presentations can be risqué but I am neither sexist nor a misogynist. I am concerned that my presentation is being described as being loaded with both. Not guilty. I have a strong willed wife and two young daughters - I wouldn’t last two minutes with the merest hint of misogyny.”

Here’s the thing.

Tech is a community where women are marginalized. There can be as few as 1 woman out of 100 at a talk. This means that the audiences are predominantly men, and the women present are, generally speaking, women who have acclimated to men’s bullshit. You simply won’t last in most of these communities unless you have pretty well-honed defense mechanisms for dealing with crap. Generally the only women left in the room are pretty battle-hardened ladies, or they’ve adopted a pretty male gaze, or whatever. They’ve got a way to get by in a harsh environment.

Given that, the fact that most of the men and women at your talk think it is great and not at all offensive doesn’t mean much. It doesn’t mean your talk isn’t extremely alienating to a large portion of the population. It means the women who would be alienated are already alienated from the community.

You’re not pushing them out, you’re just keeping them out.

And that’s where it gets weird. If you want a marginalized group to grow, you have to start listening very carefully to marginal opinions. You can’t sit on your ass, satisfied with your 99% approval rating. You have to lose sleep about the 1%. You have to worry about the one person who had to close their browser when they read about your talk because they got flashbacks. You need to worry about that 1% because in that 1% is where you’ll find the clues to why 49% of the population didn’t come to your talk in the first place.

Or you don’t. But don’t pretend you give a shit about gender issues if you’re going to marginalize those voices.

Album is finished!

June 8th, 2009

Listen to it here, or download the whole thing!

Recording

June 8th, 2009

Here’s a preview!

mp3

Open Source Bridge

June 5th, 2009

I am so excited about the Open Source Bridge conference!  Here’s the first bits of their introduction:

Open Source Citizenship

What are the rights and responsibilities of an open source citizen? We’re exploring what open source means to us, what it offers, where we struggle, and why we do this day in and day out, even when we’re not paid for it.

Innovative Track Structure

Our session tracks are technology agnostic, based around shared community experiences and focus on the similarities between projects, not the differences. View the tracks.

All-Hours Hacker Lounge

The geekery doesn’t end when the sessions do. We’re also running a 24-hour hacker lounge for code sprints, bug bashes, bouncing ideas, starting new projects or just mingling and taking in the vibe.

100% Volunteer-Run

Your software is peer-produced. Why not your conference? Open Source Bridge is pioneered and planned by a team of open source developers and technologists. What’s more, we’re building an open source application to manage talk proposals.

Here’s the letter I just wrote them:

Dear Open Source Bridge,

Let’s see, skills… I have a computer science degree, a masters degree in Human-Computer Interaction Design, and I’ve been doing professional web development part or full time for the last 10 years or so.  I’m very proficient with both PHP and Ruby, (pretty good with Java, C, and C#, and okay with Objective-J and Mac App development) and I’m a fast learner.  I can do graphic design, ui design, software engineering, and coding.

I’m also happy to do whatever… food stuff, greeting, etc, etc.  I’ve volunteered at a couple of conferences… a Boston GNOME Summit a number of years ago, and the SIGCHI Conference in ‘05 or so.

I’m very commited to openness… to Software Freedom as well as challenging power structures.  I am pro-feminist and anti-racist and excited about checking my privilege and doing other things to make computing spaces more open.  I just gave a talk tonight at my local Ruby Users Group (SDRuby) called “Just a Joke? Sexism and the Ruby Community”.

I saw the announcement for this conference a while ago when reading about the whole Matt Aimionetti GoGaRuCo debacle, and forgot about it, and then realized this week while preparing for my talk that I’d really like to be there.  I live in San Diego and don’t have much money, but I figure I’ll find a way up there somehow, if I can get a volunteer position and not have to pay the registration fee.

My timing is flexible… I could come up a couple days before the conference!  Or whatever!  Just say what would be helpful for you!

Love,
Erik Pukinskis

Things I Didn’t Realize Were Real Options Until Now

June 5th, 2009
  1. Going off into the woods with a few other people and raising kids in the woods in a commune.
  2. Going to a few different countries to live, each for a few years or whatever.  To really get the sense of what all the different ways to be around are.  Different job in each place.
  3. Bring my social network out more and make friends with other social networks, and people in my network will randomly connect with the other social networks.
  4. Finding someone who is game to do these things with.  Or some other random set of things.  They see the fun in things, and are game for whatever!

Check out the ad I drew for our house!

May 27th, 2009

roost-adWe are looking for new family members.

Addiction and moderation

May 26th, 2009

With addictive behavior, I usually have one chance where I feel like I have a genuine choice between giving in to compulsion and listening to my body and taking care of it.  If I choose the compulsive behavior, those decision points get more and more difficult.  Often that first choice is my only real shot at staying clean.  This is why moderation doesn’t work for addicts.  Because you feel like you have a choice that first time, but once the drug is in your veins, you lose control.

There is sometimes one final emergency exit, however.  Sometimes after that first “hit” I can realize that I haven’t strayed into “binge” territory yet, that I’m still within the realm of moderation and “normal” behaviors, and I can stop at that point.

But the odds go way down.

C’mon Reuters

May 20th, 2009

The word is roundly, not soundly.