"The PyCon Code of Conduct was tested twice that I know of, and it worked well."
No.
Imagine if PyCon had a reasonable code of conduct instead of this "Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue, including talks...In particular, exhibitors should not use sexualized images, activities, or other material. Booth staff (including volunteers) should not use sexualized clothing/uniforms/costumes, or otherwise create a sexualized environment."
Which I suspect was designed because a bunch of sex-negative feminists like those at the Ada Initiative just don't like booth babes. They have an obsession with marginal things that they believe might lead to sexism.
When I was more involved with Drupal, I wrote a letter against adding this kind of language to DrupalCon's code of conduct, because I felt it should focus on dealing with actual harassment instead of things some people don't like. I think because I am a woman, people listened to me. Working in tech can be dehumanizing enough as it is without having codes against an entire aspect of humanity- sex, because it might make some people uncomfortable. It's also vague enough that it could turn into a witch hunt pretty quickly.
I started out in Python but it's been like six years since I used it seriously, but if I were still involved I would try to get that removed from the Code of Conduct.
I think you're conflating purposeful use of sex as a selling point with being sex positive.
These are vastly not the same thing.
One of them gets in the way of the message, gets in the way of discussion, and furthermore DOES make some people highly uncomfortable. Sure, some of those people may be sex negative. But many, many more are probably just rather annoyed at being treated like they're some buffoon who is going to flock to any booth with some tits on it.
Furthermore, not everyone wants to live quite so loudly. When you're standing at a booth with booth babes at it, you can't help but feel the eyes on you of other, nearby attendees. What if they're genuinely interested in what the product at the booth is- but suddenly they're put into the uncomfortable position of feeling like people might mistake what they're doing for something less seemly?
Perhaps it's a bit much to keep those kinds of jokes out of the talks, for the sake of culture. Then again? If it gets in more programmers, to not have that kind of content there, then they should stand by it.
(And one thing I might add: It's possible to be sex positive without wanting to be so public about it, and still being annoyed with its use, sometimes.)
As the Amanda Blum piece pointed out, jokes like that are common among women as well.
I would encourage people who are offended by booth babes to contact that company that hired them, rather than lobby for highly subjective code of conduct regulations.
I find it difficult to accept that Adria Richards would have acted differently depending on the PyCon code of conduct. She had her own agenda, and it had nothing to do with sexism, decency, or respecting PyCon's rules.
But yeah, to the extent that various written and unwritten codes of conduct would try to have us pretend to be perpetually "nice" and asexual to each other in nearly all public contexts, this broadness is is utterly depraved.
A professional tech conference shouldn't have a code of conduct banning sex talk which, by the way, is completely irrelevant to technology? Just because you, as a woman, don't have a problem with it then no other woman is allowed to have a problem with it? Nice. Hey ladies, mamoswined ain't faded. Sexism is OVER.
Comments
"The PyCon Code of Conduct was tested twice that I know of, and it worked well."
No.
Imagine if PyCon had a reasonable code of conduct instead of this "Sexual language and imagery is not appropriate for any conference venue, including talks...In particular, exhibitors should not use sexualized images, activities, or other material. Booth staff (including volunteers) should not use sexualized clothing/uniforms/costumes, or otherwise create a sexualized environment."
Which I suspect was designed because a bunch of sex-negative feminists like those at the Ada Initiative just don't like booth babes. They have an obsession with marginal things that they believe might lead to sexism.
When I was more involved with Drupal, I wrote a letter against adding this kind of language to DrupalCon's code of conduct, because I felt it should focus on dealing with actual harassment instead of things some people don't like. I think because I am a woman, people listened to me. Working in tech can be dehumanizing enough as it is without having codes against an entire aspect of humanity- sex, because it might make some people uncomfortable. It's also vague enough that it could turn into a witch hunt pretty quickly.
I started out in Python but it's been like six years since I used it seriously, but if I were still involved I would try to get that removed from the Code of Conduct.
I think you're conflating purposeful use of sex as a selling point with being sex positive.
These are vastly not the same thing.
One of them gets in the way of the message, gets in the way of discussion, and furthermore DOES make some people highly uncomfortable. Sure, some of those people may be sex negative. But many, many more are probably just rather annoyed at being treated like they're some buffoon who is going to flock to any booth with some tits on it.
Furthermore, not everyone wants to live quite so loudly. When you're standing at a booth with booth babes at it, you can't help but feel the eyes on you of other, nearby attendees. What if they're genuinely interested in what the product at the booth is- but suddenly they're put into the uncomfortable position of feeling like people might mistake what they're doing for something less seemly?
Perhaps it's a bit much to keep those kinds of jokes out of the talks, for the sake of culture. Then again? If it gets in more programmers, to not have that kind of content there, then they should stand by it.
(And one thing I might add: It's possible to be sex positive without wanting to be so public about it, and still being annoyed with its use, sometimes.)
As the Amanda Blum piece pointed out, jokes like that are common among women as well.
I would encourage people who are offended by booth babes to contact that company that hired them, rather than lobby for highly subjective code of conduct regulations.
I find it difficult to accept that Adria Richards would have acted differently depending on the PyCon code of conduct. She had her own agenda, and it had nothing to do with sexism, decency, or respecting PyCon's rules.
I agree with what you're getting at: sex is part of life, and being so broad about it depraves the language.
I think you meant to say "deprived."
But yeah, to the extent that various written and unwritten codes of conduct would try to have us pretend to be perpetually "nice" and asexual to each other in nearly all public contexts, this broadness is is utterly depraved.
A professional tech conference shouldn't have a code of conduct banning sex talk which, by the way, is completely irrelevant to technology? Just because you, as a woman, don't have a problem with it then no other woman is allowed to have a problem with it? Nice. Hey ladies, mamoswined ain't faded. Sexism is OVER.
Irrelevant to technology? I don't think so. Let's ban everything some people think is irrelevant to technology that might offend someone.
Surely there are porn sites written in Python.