Tag: tech

  • After the Toxicity the Toxicity Remains

    After the Toxicity the Toxicity Remains

    danbo_group.jpg
    Credit: MaxPixel

    Every so often, the conversation about leaving tech resurfaces, and things I wrote in ~2014 get referenced.

    I wrote a lot about leaving tech around then.

    I thought a lot about leaving in tech in 2014. And 2013. And in 2015, I thought a lot about what it had meant to be willing to leave, and whether I had really left. When those posts resurface I feel like I should have some kind of follow up, some way to tie it all together, some list of lessons learned to pass on, but I don’t.

    I thought – and wrote – a lot about leaving because I worked in a toxic environment that did some truly terrifying things to my mental health that I prefer not to think too much about. I thought a lot about leaving, because how do you not think about leaving when some dude bullies you for a year and then calls you a “c***” and nothing happens and oh yeah he still works there even now, and when HR use the fact that you were sexually assaulted to gaslight you.

    My initial reaction was not to leave. My initial reaction was to internalise it and believe I had “deserved” it in some way. Because I wasn’t perfect, and being continually undermined and second guessed only made me less so. I laughed about how complaints about my code reviews made the first page of the orange website, but the truth is, my code reviews were pretty harsh – after all, I gave the kind of code reviews that had been given to me. I honed my ability to tear apart the ideas of others because that’s what was done to mine. Being continually told that whatever I was doing was somehow less impactful than whatever the dude next to me was doing left me hyper aware of “impact” and liable to make a case that the dude was doing something “not impactful” too.

    Being called a “c***” was far less damaging than everything else. Because I knew that was inappropriate. Everything else was was much easier to internalise.

    It’s weird to see that writing from 2014 surface – as I write this, five of the most popular posts on my blog are from that period – because I remember (how would one forget?), but I don’t connect with it anymore. It’s weird, because I see the ways in which I believed – and believe – that the industry needs to change, but know, now, the work I had to do to change myself, too.

    Toxic work environments do something to us, and in healthy environments coping mechanisms become harmful. If we don’t know what has been done to us, we can’t fix it. If we don’t know what our coping mechanisms are, we can’t unlearn them. It is truly unfair that we have to cope not just with systematic inequity and abuse, but then deconstruct all of it and heal ourselves, too… but no-one else will do this work for us. They can’t.

    The first shift is the actual job, for which white women make ~78c on the dollar (WoC, of course, even less). The second shift is the emotional labour to “improve diversity”. The third shift, then, is to heal and tend to ourselves. Because otherwise, we will let the bullshit that gets pushed on us in the first shift, become true.

    We’ll take less impactful projects because our confidence is ground down by being told our work is not impactful. We will be kind of a jerk because people continually being jerks to us will normalise that behaviour. We will “focus too much on diversity” because it’s the only time we feel not threatened but actually – maybe, momentarily – appreciated. We will become paranoid and on-edge, because the one recourse we have – HR – will tell us that we are not safe, and actually, we never were.

    Increasingly, I see the second shift as a distraction and displacement activity. A “feel good” offering that promises little more than one day, maybe, cis-white-women will be able to fail up the way cis-white-men do. I’m not here for that. I’m here for creating environments where broader spectrums of people can be successful – but the hard conversations that might lead to that remain unsaid and the hard work required goes undone.

    It’s hard for me, four years on, to come back to this, because the truth is very little has changed. I’m still here not because things are different, but because I was financially privileged enough to step away and because I reached a point where I was more afraid of what staying might do to me than figuring out what it meant to leave. I’m still here because I was willing and able to leave and that gave me space to figure out the way back. It’s hard, because I still hear the same stories everywhere, including similar ones from the same company and because I am both sympathetic to other women making the same mistakes and irritated by their surprise.

    Nothing changes if we prioritise the second shift over the third. But maybe nothing changes even if we don’t.

    After I had untangled what that environment had done to me, after I had learned to value myself and my expertise, and remembered what it’s like not to feel continually on edge… I took another job in tech, this time on the management track. I started with a team of 6, and within a year (and a job hop) it was a team of 24.

    This is in some ways a happy story, right? But the highlights reel of my career would obscure the fact that becoming a manager was not a free choice for me – because I never got to be part of an inclusive environment until I ran one.

    Perhaps it’s hard for people who know me now to realise the kind of person I became in that environment, but I know it wasn’t a good one. And I’m reminded of what that environment did to me every time I handle some situation or give a damn in the way I wish anyone had ever given a damn about me. I am reminded in my attitude to D&I, where inclusion is a core part of my job but “diversity” work still feels like a tightrope across a minefield I don’t want to walk at work. I am reminded when certain things trigger existential threat reactions that aren’t relevant now.

    And I am reminded, when the things I wrote four years ago get shared again, and other women talk about leaving… and I still don’t know what to say.

  • Inclusion is a Hack

    Inclusion is a Hack

    danbo-friends.jpg
    Credit: Flickr / Marek Kubica

    I wish more people understood that (in tech) inclusion – as we talk about it – is a hack. Firstly, “inclusion” is a shorthand for “inclusion of the historically under-represented”. The “historically under-represented” piece is the reason why we need the hack. What started with the deliberate exclusion of people of color and white women from a high paying field (see: Hidden Figures, and this extract from Brotopia for examples), has become – if we’re generous and believe people generally know better than that now – an unthinking perpetuation of an environment designed without diverse input.

    Children used to be excluded from public life. To let them in, hacks were required – like adding changing tables. Initially these were just in the women’s bathrooms, because people couldn’t contemplate children without a woman to take care of them. If we designed a public space in a world where children are part of public life, and childcare is evenly distributed between people of all genders, things would look very different.

    The thing is: it’s hard to contemplate that world, because we bring so much baggage from this one and all the ones that preceded it. So we keep trying. We keep hacking.

    Perhaps because we keep missing the end of “inclusion of those historically under-represented” we fall into these holes of “inclusion is including everybody” which is the thinking that Lambda Conf started on which led them to make a case for… including Nazis. Now it’s the programming conference for White Extremists, with all the strong currents of misogyny that generally implies. Which brought them full circle and back to an environment that – guess what? – people of color and white women are not part of.

    The truth that we don’t acknowledge is that inclusion is not just who you let in, but who you push out. When Google allowed Damore to circulate and refine his memo for months – including him – they allowed him to raise questions about women’s fitness and ability to do their jobs. I know at least one women who cited that memo in her decision to leave, and I doubt she was the only one. It’s important to mention here the coded racial language of the memo would not have fostered a good environment for people of color.

    When we’re not specific about what we’re doing and why, it allows people to claim “not included” when what they truly mean is “I am uncomfortable with this hack that now makes this environment feel less designed by and for me“. It starts us down a path where we start equating everyone’s feelings and trying to decide by popular vote. If we have a team of 25% women, and we have a vote to ask if people feel included when the team is address as “hey guys”, we might call 75% a success and keep saying it. (This is to say nothing of making comparable the need to make a small adjustment to your language with being reminded that you weren’t expected to be here 10+ times a day.)

    This is why allyship and intersectionality is so important. When white people speak up against structural effects of racism. When men speak up about the structural effects of sexism. Because the other truth we must acknowledge to ourselves is this: when we don’t speak up for others, we too perpetuate the structurally racist and misogynistic status quo.

  • The #NotAllMen Project

    The #NotAllMen Project

    Danbo meets Domo
    Credit: Flickr / Guillermo Viciano

    Last week featured two milestones. I closed the first day of JSConfEU with a talk called “Some Things I’ve Learned about Color”, which is the story of how I left tech (not why). It’s about burnout, and how aside from overwork, there are 5 other things that cause it: lack of control, lack of reward, lack of community, unfairness, and mismatched values. It’s about how I used side projects to give me those things. This is how I built something to walk towards, which is what gave me the strength to walk away.

    The other milestone was that I completed my list of 10 men in tech I don’t hate. A project that lasted nine months, and spanned three continents.

    It started with a joke, and it didn’t make sense to everyone. But it came from a real conversation: I didn’t leave because I don’t love to code (I do!) or lead teams (I do!), because I don’t want to make things (I love making things). But once I was free, I realised that I was no longer constantly on edge, waiting for some new horrible thing to happen. It’s hard being surrounded by dudes, and when you’ve got to a point where the distinction you make between them is their calculated threat vector, well…

    All year I have asked myself the question “what would I need to go back?” and 9 months ago when this project started it was because one thing was the ability to walk into a place of 70-90% dudes and not panic. It was to expect more than I had become accustomed to from the men I had worked with.

    And obviously #notallmen but #somemen and frankly #enoughmenforittobeaproblem.

    But how does a technical woman meet men in tech? Because as I had become more and more jaded I had retreated more and more to a network of women (although many women’s groups are also problematic, particularly from an intersectional point of view).

    Of course there are meetups, but let me tell you some of my experiences from the last few months at tech events. I have been drunkenly hugged. Had a man following me around. Nervously avoided someone I had blocked on Twitter (for a reason). Had someone tell me that looking up android documentation was “cute”.

    As far as things go, these are mild. But they are enough that I prefer to go to events only with friends, and enough to make my anxiety about large groups of mainly men seem rational.

    The answer: introductions. I travel a lot, and but mostly people would introduce me to other women, so clearly I needed to ask to be introduced to men. And clearly I wanted to be introduced to decent men. Hence: the project. Because skepticism aside, people introduced me. And it gave me a reason to say, “hey, I’m working on this list, will you have coffee with me?” in a way where it was clear that a) there were no potential romantic undertones, and b) I wasn’t asking for anything other than an hour of their time. This wasn’t an informational interview, I didn’t want anything, other than hope.

    The process evolved, and eventually I distilled it to: we spend time 1:1 and talk about work-things. Development. Process. Culture. And I would ask myself, “what if this person was my peer? Would I feel comfortable around them? Would they listen to me?” or “what if this person was my boss? Would I trust them?” I asked these questions not because I was auditioning people to potentially work with/for, but because I was trying to conceive of a male-dominated environment that was less scary than what I had previously experienced.

    I was introduced to (or took an online connection offline) with a variety of men, a number of whom have significant career achievements. So one side effect that the economic power of my network has gone up. In retrospect, this seems obvious: men dominate the tech industry in numbers, and their power is even more disproportionate. A network dominated by women has less power, and any steps towards redressing that balance will increase it. Add to that phenomena like the glass cliff, because even when women do have power, they are often constrained in other ways.

    One of the things I mentioned in “Some Things I Learned About Color” was working on a project that was failing and having this terrible manager who believed that by never giving me positive feedback he was training me not to need it (spoiler: this didn’t work). A guy who had always looked out for me helped me get out of there, and off a work permit. Of three contracts I’ve worked on this year, one guy saw my work, and appreciated it, and I started working with him, and he advocated me for a second contract too. The third, I know a powerful man saying that I was a good person for it made a big difference.

    There was all this stuff last year about male allies and how we “need to involve men” and I was pretty vocal about a lot of it being a bad idea. I don’t think we need to put men on stage, especially not at women’s conferences. What we do need men to do, is engage themselves in the careers of their women peers. In fact we all need to do that for the people who don’t look like us, and as a result have less economic opportunity.

    A third milestone last week was that I moderated my first panel. Marco (aka #10), was on it, and made the observation that network effects were huge, and a significant impediment to hiring a diverse team, because it’s so much easier (and faster) to hire white dudes. How do we improve our networks for this? We meet people who don’t look like us.

    The thing I’m taking from this project is hope (and some awesome new friends). The thing I think you should take from it is: Make a list. Don’t make a list. Whatever. But go and meet some people who don’t look like you… and start by talking about all the things you have in common.

  • Book: Making a World of Difference

    Book: Making a World of Difference

    kaifuHaving been a foreigner in both China and the US, I found the cultural observations of this book (Amazon, which is only letting me link the Chinese version – the English version is here though), and the insights into the tech industry interesting. Particularly his time at Apple, and the need to create products out of research.

    But, I didn’t really enjoy it. I found it far too self-aggrandizing. Which of course people say about Sheryl Sandberg’s Lean In (Amazon) but that book is a million miles away from this one. The only negative part was the lawsuit from Microsoft after he took a job at Google, and it read as though he was trying to settle the score there somewhat.

    The guy is incredibly smart, works really hard, and has a stay at home wife. I’m sure there’s more to it, but in the end I found nothing to relate to, and nothing that inspired me.

  • Book: Unlocking the Clubhouse

    Book: Unlocking the Clubhouse

    unlocking the cloubhouseI’d heard about this book (Amazon) for a long time, but especially since I arrived here – the other women in the office are huge fans, and talked about it a lot. And I kept thinking I would get around to reading it, but no hurry, I’ve read a lot of the research, I think I get what the issues are.

    But we were running these events in New Zealand – discussion groups about the book. So it became pressing and there was a deadline! So I finally got around to reading it.

    I was right. I didn’t get much new information out of it – but wow, how I wish I had read it when I was 18. It’s full of information and data about things that I learned the hard way. How you don’t need to be one-dimensional to be a good engineer, how women are less likely to only code – “dream in code” – in their spare time, and that is OK. The kind of things – poor teaching, for example – that disproportionately affect women.

    That was just the book. The discussion groups were amazing, the best events I have done for university students. We just had these amazing and open conversations about what we find hard, and ways that we find to cope. Especially afterwards, when we could go around and chat to the girls in smaller groups, and they would really open up. I’ve been getting amazing, lovely emails in response to the events, and hopefully more events will follow.

    Seriously, if you have any interest in female engineers, read this bookIf you can, get a or some copies for female university students near you. I wonder how much would change if every first year girl in (or near) CS got a copy! And if you want to run a discussion group, hit me up, I’d be happy to help.