On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 16:43:53 -0400 Steven Rostedt <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Fri, 2013-07-19 at 13:33 -0700, James Bottomley wrote: > > > If you're basing your entire theory on male/female interaction on > > teenagers, then I'm afraid your wife might be on to something ... > > No, it's also based on interaction with my Wife and her sister too ;-) > I genuinely think the gender difference is a distraction. The simple fact is that people are different. Wildly amazingly beautifully different. Certainly some metrics have starkly different averages for men than women, and there can be biological and social drivers of that. But those metrics very often vary greatly among men and among women. But it's really people that are different. Some people are very perceptive of, and responsive to, those differences. They are able and willing to listen and understand and adjust. They try to fit in with others. I know a few people like that and I am staggered by how effectively they bond with other people. Other people are blind to the differences. They expect everyone to be just like themselves. When the reality shows that isn't true they create coarse stereotypes to allow them to pigeon hole others. This naturally leads to prejudice and sometimes to hate. And I know a few people like that too - maybe not quite the extreme, but certainly closer to that extreme than me. I believe that the abstract/mathematical/literal abilities that allow someone to be good at software development is inversely correlated with the holistic/forgiving/flexible abilities that allow someone to be good at understanding others. One needs to care deeply about small details. The other needs to work with hints and suggestions and accept that precision is simply not available. I know for myself that such understanding of people as I have has developed slowly due to hard work, patience from a loving wife and others, and from me stepping well outside my comfort zone - where as the mathematical ability was obvious in kindergarten and never needed any encouragement. And the people I know who are very good with other people are about as comfortable with technology as I am with strangers (i.e. not very). If this negative correlation is true, then it says something very important about our community. I don't think there is any need for me to spell it out. I think the recent discussion demonstrates this quite clearly. Lots of beating on chests, very little meeting of minds. Lots of talk about technical solutions (or non-solutions), very little suggestion of acknowledgement, accommodation or compromise. [some - yes. But not much] Maybe that is just who we are. Yes, we are sometimes blind to differences in others and can lead us to hurt and repel them. But that blindness allows us to focus on excellence in technology and so it is worth it. Or maybe that is only who were were. Maybe we've got the technology pretty much under control and we (individuals) can choose to put more effort into listening to people who are very different to us. Stop accepting the fact that we "just don't understand some people" and use our not inconsiderable intellect find some understanding. (and no, I don't completely understand my wife either, but I'm sure I understand her better now than I once did). NeilBrown
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature