that’s my stapler

Biella,

The article is so drastically tilted, I almost have to believe it’s a joke; seriously, is this copied from The Onion?

I tend to think that treating anyone as a member of a protected class in order to ensure their participation is more divisive than any difference a few members of the group might perceive.  In this case, the article’s overt treatment of women as “the fair sex” implies both diminished mental capacity and an overly “warm and fuzzy” approach to working with others.  As long as we’re going this route, why don’t we insist on “more fair” treatment for people with different skin color than the majority?  You only have to take these kind of practices a step or two further for them to become truly repugnant.

If there are behaviors in a male dominated sphere that drive off women, they’re driving off other men too.  The issue is the behaviors, not what gender is perpetrating them.  There are some good articles about excising poisonous people from your group, be it an OSS project, the workplace or what have you.  This is a big step for some communities who have come to rely on individuals who bring the notion “antisocial” to dire levels.  Look closely at some of the OSS projects that are very small and seem unable to gain contributors, and I bet you’ll find these poison pills.  Some of them are so abrasive they simply work completely alone.  I submit that the main reason this is less prevalent in proprietary software is that companies have HR departments with rules and processes designed both to prevent adding these people to the team, and to get rid of them if necessary.

Lastly, I think if you believe in gaining equality the first step is to truly believe that you are equal and insist on treatment as such.  Accommodating mental and emotional handicaps, as the article seems to suggest, isn’t the way to get there.