Chris Ball: On keynotes and apologies

On keynotes and apologies

Chris Ball — Fri, 25 Sep 2009 22:35:00 +0100

I wasn't going to blog about this, but I'm becoming pretty angry about it now, and I think I might actually have something constructive to say.

Here's the story: Mark Shuttleworth gave a keynote at LinuxCon, which I attended, in which he said lots of reasonable things and one very unfortunate thing. Paraphrased, he said that if we did a better job at considering our non-technical users and accepting help from expert UI designers, we'd have an easier time "explaining to girls what we actually do". (By girls, he meant women, not female children.) I'd like to be able to provide a direct transcript when critiquing his words, but the LinuxCon organizers don't seem to be willing to make the video available for free, so I can't do that yet. I'll link to it as soon as it's available.

Before I get started properly, I want to make it clear that I like and respect Mark Shuttleworth. I regularly use and recommend Ubuntu to other people, and am very glad that he's doing what he's doing in the world. There's no personal animosity or ill will behind this post at all.

It's actually not just the Ubuntu distribution that I recommend: I'm also hugely impressed by the Ubuntu Code of Conduct, which was a groundbreaking document at the time it was adopted, and made it clear — for the first time — that there is a free software community that is willing to put a stake in the ground and say that it's not a place for people who want to communicate by disrespecting someone else, or another group. I think the Ubuntu community is one of the most tolerant, welcoming and diverse free software communities we have, and I'm sure that this is a reflection of Mark's own thoughts on the matter.

So, back to the keynote. Kirrily Robert heard about this statement of Mark's from Emma Jane Hogbin's transcript in a conversation on identi.ca, and wrote an e-mail and blog post asking Mark to apologize and clear this up. Sam Varghese now has a blog post attacking Kirrily Robert, because Kirrily based her objection on someone else's transcript of what was said rather than being there herself.

Well, I was at the keynote too, and was paying attention, and it turns out that even with context applied, someone who talks about "explaining to girls what we actually do" when talking about free software really is saying something sexist, and buying into the noxious stereotype that women can't be developers or tech-savvy; that they'll never be a real part of our group, even if a few of them are brave enough to try in the face of other people dismissing their efforts (and Mark certainly isn't the first to have done that).

This statement actually wasn't the first exclusionary thing Mark had said in the talk, in my opinion. Earlier he attempted another joke about how when he talks about "releases", he doesn't mean "release" as in "happy ending". The joke didn't go over very well, and he made a comment about how it must be because we were tired and not listening properly. Actually, I was confused because I already felt pretty sure that he was talking about software, rather than male orgasms and hookers, because that's supposed to be a safe assumption to make during a technical conference keynote.

So, Sam Varghese can stop claiming that Mark's statement wasn't sexist because no-one in the room found it sexist: there's no doubt in my mind that it was a sexist thing to say, and I was there.

Varghese tries to paint himself as a martyr, saying that he's "sure he'll be shouted down too" for denying sexism, but it's actually extremely, overwhelmingly common to attack the person who points out sexism in free software communities — common enough that Matt Zimmerman, Canonical's CTO, has an excellent blog post on the subject: Backlash: feminism considered harmful. The backlash is so strong that if Kirrily were just an occasional contributor, I'd be thoroughly unsurprised if the kind of attacks she's receiving drove her away from free software completely. She's been in the community for long enough, though, that she's willing to put effort into calling out sexism even though she'll be attacked and ridiculed for it by people who think that there's nothing wrong with the situation. Thanks for not giving up in disgust and leaving us alone to enjoy our 1% participation by women, Kirrily.

Varghese finishes his post with:

"Shuttleworth has many faults, I'm sure, but one has to always assume that a person is innocent until proven guilty. If someone violates that basic rule, which should extend to every human on the planet, then that person is in the wrong."

Look, we're not talking about a trial that attempts to judge whether Mark is a good or bad person; we need to move past the idea that someone who said something sexist is "guilty" or deserving of punishment. Kirrily's letter, after all, didn't ask Mark to apologize for being a sexist person (which I don't think that anyone involved actually thinks is true), it just asked for an apology for one sexist thing he said. I don't know anyone who doesn't behave in sexist ways sometimes, because it turns out that discarding privilege is really goddamn hard, even when you're consciously trying to. We need to make it clear that someone who accidentally said something sexist is not "a sexist", or a bad person, or worthy of our contempt, or deserving of a ruling of innocence or guilt. I do respect Mark, and I still think he said something sexist, and if he apologizes for accidentally saying something sexist and says he'll try to make amends, that makes everything totally okay with me. We need to be able to admit when we say/do something sexist without it turning into something huge and unmanagable, because it's something that's probably going to happen quite a lot.

Matthew Jones also made a post defending Mark and I'd like to reply to that too:

"When Mark said try to explain to girls, he was not talking about women not understanding technology. He was talking about how hard the design work is to do, and that if things were designed poorly or had low usability, he would not know how to explain them to girls (my translation). The tone of his voice suggested sarcastic embarrassment, which implies he would prefer to impress girls."

I totally agree with the context of Mark's statement provided, although I don't at all see how that's "not talking about women not understanding technology". The statement is still as exclusionary a statement given this context — the fact that Mark may like to impress women doesn't excuse that his statement thinks of women as a synonym for "people who don't understand how software works"! That's a really destructive phrasing that we should all reject. It's not hard to substitute "the average person" or just "people who aren't as interested in computers as we are" and turn the statement from exclusionary-to-women to gender-neutral.

Here are some of the arguments made against asking Mark for an apology in the comments on Kirrily's blog post:

Mark is a nice guy. I agree! However, when someone (metaphorically, perhaps) steps on someone else's feet accidentally, you expect them to say "Oops, sorry." regardless of how nice a person they are; that's just not relevant to the fact that someone else is hurt and it's their fault. If they refused to apologize for it, that might change your idea of how nice a person they are, but the fact that they hurt someone unintentionally doesn't have any bearing on whether they're a good or bad person in the past or in the future. It's just a thing they did that they should apologize for.

Mark wasn't trying to offend people, he was just making a joke. I agree with this too, but making a joke doesn't stop the words we choose to tell the joke with from having power.

And, perhaps one that I'm expecting to see in the comments on this post:

Hey, you're not a woman, so you can't be upset about this. I think that actually helps, in this case. Sam Varghese used a lot of very loaded words like "emotional" and "irrational" in his rejection of Kirrily's post that I think were an idea of his that she shouldn't be able to complain about this because she's a woman. I don't agree with that restriction, of course, but I'm happy to help remove it from the discussion.

Finally, I want to repeat that for me the real shame here isn't that Mark said something unfortunate — we can all say something unfortunate when we're speaking in front of a large crowd for a long time, myself certainly included. What's a shame is that it doesn't take a superhuman dose of empathy to give a short and sincere apology for an obviously harmful joke afterwards, yet we don't have one yet. To make matters worse, it's the second time in a few months that someone's implied that women are people who lack technical knowledge during a conference keynote, and it seems to be the second time we aren't getting any kind of apology for it. We're left to conclude that the biggest heroes in free software — the people who speak for and about us to the world — don't care much about whether women feel invited to or excluded from free software, or how they could use their power to affect that.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Jeff Bailey

Thu, 15 Oct 2009 05:29:21 +0100

Funny, I just came across this YouTube video (targetted at racism) that applies nicely:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b0Ti-gkJiXc "How to tell people they sound racist"

Which reminds us to focus on what people did rather than what they are. Because you can't tell from the outside what people are. It's what they did that's clear and requires the apology.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Meg

Wed, 14 Oct 2009 06:15:51 +0100

'One guy unsuccessfully tried to rape my mum. She do not get pushed around so knocked him out. Women are able to do more or less anything, but do they feel like it?'

Man, I hope you didn't think about this before you posted, but your post is giving off some pretty strong victim-blaming vibes here. If women can do "more or less anything", including stopping rape in its tracks, but choose not to because they don't "feel like it", then one of the logical conclusions of that argument is that rape victims get raped because they don't try hard enough to prevent it. I really, really hope you didn't mean that.

I'm a woman, so obviously I don't have male privilege, but I also happen to be white, mostly-heterosexual, and cisgendered. So I say my share of stupid, insensitive things. The other day, when I was introducing myself to a Chinese classmate, he gave me his full name. I asked if his first name was his "last name" (I meant family name). It wasn't malicious, it wasn't on purpose, it wasn't the end of the world, but it was stupid and Eurocentric. So I apologized and corrected myself. Then he laughed, and I made a mental note not to do it again. The end. It isn't nearly as hard as people are making it out to be.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Sumana Harihareswara

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 11:55:28 +0100

Chris, thanks for posting this. Lord God, I don't have the stamina to deal with this crap alone, and it's good to have you in my corner.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Ben

Tue, 13 Oct 2009 07:36:06 +0100

The statement is sexist only if you deliberately choose to ignore the context.

He's a heterosexual male, that implies a drive at the core level to impress the ladies by telling them about all the wonderful things he can do. Men, not so much... As a general rule, this includes all women, the great deal of which who are not in IT professions. For these women, yes, the subject of what we do in the Linux world can be hard to explain.

Thus, the comment seems to be a lamentation of the difficulty of explaining Linux to non technical people in general and not a slur against women in IT.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Matt

Mon, 05 Oct 2009 14:07:03 +0100

I for one, find this hilarious.

Not so in an uncaring, arrogant sense, but rather that this clearly has been swept up into a storm under what was clearly a simple misunderstanding of true intentions in its initial outlay, and that alone is enough to make me chuckle.

I suppose it's simply a shame that what was publically said this time around just so happened to offend person "B" of important-and-in-the-foreground group "C".

To elaborate; Anything publically spoken is likely to offend someone, somewhere...

However, I do not believe this man should feel any need to apologise (because he can say what he wants with every right to say it), but rather to simply clear up the haze around the true intentions of his statements.

I'd understand this rash response to his speakings more if he made a "go back to the kitchen" joke or deliberately went out of his way to pinpoint and defame women, however, he did not... and that much is definately clear.

Good day, Sir.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Philip

Sat, 03 Oct 2009 19:18:43 +0100

@Chris - are you trying to prove your politically correct credentials? Do you have a SO or someone else you are trying to impress?

Grow a pair! it is about time.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Philip

Sat, 03 Oct 2009 19:15:47 +0100

I am sick of this politically correct bullshit. Mark Shuttleworth didn't say anything that can be construed as sexist. Those who think he did are the hypersensitive types quick to get their panties in a knot over anything and everything.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Chris

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 05:19:18 +0100

@Ian:

Nothing has power over you except that power that you give it.

It's very easy to say that everyone should gain power for themselves when you're the person who has the power, and there are other people complaining that they don't have power and need your help in order to gain it. I think that this attitude acknowledges that someone else is being treated worse than you are, but then evades your responsibility to care about that by blaming the victims for exposing the power discrepancy in the first place.

I don't want to refuse to care about it. I don't want people to make jokes that are only supposed to be funny to me because I'm heterosexual and male, at the expense of people who aren't. I don't want us to talk about how awesome the "guys" who make software are and how "girls" don't yet understand what we do but maybe one day the guys will be able to simplify it enough for them to understand it.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Ian MacGregor

Fri, 02 Oct 2009 02:10:05 +0100

Too many people are wasting energy on something that shouldn't have any power in their lives in the first place. Nothing has power over you except that power that you give it.

"No one can offend you without your permission." - Eleanor Roosevelt

"On keynotes and apologies" by Anonymous

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:23:15 +0100

"If you think open source and linux are the domain of badly socialized geek men, you are wrong."

I demand an apology for this extremely sexist kind of speech!

"On keynotes and apologies" by tretle

Thu, 01 Oct 2009 06:17:35 +0100

@Random Guy -> Stop pointing out sexist remarks towards men, you are sidestepping the issue :D

"On keynotes and apologies" by Random Guy

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 23:43:19 +0100

"I'm female and I've been active in the open source community as a contributor for over 5 years now, and it's really time to drop the boys' club. Seriously. If you think open source and linux are the domain of badly socialized geek men, you are wrong. So stop continuing to treat it as such."

As a badly socialized geek man, I take exception to that statement!!

Seriously, though, why is it OK to imply that males in IT in general lack social skills? (Many do, IMO. But so do many females in IT, if this thread is any indication.)

"On keynotes and apologies" by Dag Wieers

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:42:16 +0100

@Chris: You can also forgive someone who does not acknowledge or even does not agree that he did something wrong (publicly or privately)

People might be hurt about what I just said, that does not mean I am wrong. Even when I acknowledge that someone is hurt because of what I said.

I also take issue of the fact that Mark has to publicly apologize for something he said to a limited audience. Of which maybe no one complained to him. Should the video be edited for future people ? Maybe censored ? Isn't Mark being targeted because he is in the spotlights ? Or is it because he generally does good and now makes a single snafu ? Is this why he has to apologize publicly, and for instance Berlusconi gets away with much more ?

Example: Apparently it is rude in Japan to blow your nose in public. Unfortunately I happen to be very sensitive to things that makes me sneeze quickly, or forces me to blow my nose. Akin to upset people in the act. Should I apologize every time I blow my nose when in Japan ? Even when I do not acknowledge any wrong-doing ? (read: cultural difference) I'd like to know because I'll be in that situation soon, doing a presentation :-)

Another question I am asking myself, would it make a difference to you that someone apologizes publicly because he is forced to, rather than that he wants to ? For me it would make a difference. And I would probably less inclined to apologize in public than I would be in person, especially when there was no ill-intent and there is room for interpretation.

Anyway, political correctness always gives me the shivers. It is like that Microsoft Windows 7 party video where everything is fake and clean and you have the mandatory African-American (or Asian) guy. I prefer real life, real emotions and the occasional public incorrectness or profanity.

(Next you know I'd be thanking Mark, but I guess I might be hurting someone in the act ? ;-))

Maybe I need a general disclaimer: I apologize in advance for any emotion this comment may cause to the reader.

Let's keep things in proportion and let Mark decides what he wants to do, rather than what he should do according to some believe. It'll make it much more honest too.

"On keynotes and apologies" by LinuxCanuck

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 18:37:59 +0100

The problem is that people went too far in judging and jumping to conclusions without an explanation or even the full transcript. The open letter quoted just five words taken out of context by someone not even there. The follow up was that one site (Tuxmachines) was calling for an Ubuntu boycott the same day based on the open letter which is now third hand information. This is all total lunacy. Ubuntu is not Mark Shuttleworth. It is a community and the distribution is the work of many people. To blame them for Mark's unfortunate choice of words is just stupid. I think that many people are looking for opportunities to make some noise for their own political reasons. It isn't about Ubuntu or Shuttleworth. In the end it is about their cause. Mark just conveniently played into their hands. Chances are none of them cares about Ubuntu, Canonical and Shuttleworth or want the situation cleared up. These same people are just sharpening their knives for the next unfortunate person to walk into their trap. I hope Mark has learned that people are watching and waiting for a misstep. Unfortunately many of these are open source people with an axe to grind. The Tuxmachines writer as much as said that he hates Ubuntu.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Chris

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 16:39:37 +0100

Hi,

Everyone can make a mistake like that when talking, because when you talk you say things without reflection.

Yes, I said that in my post.

So should I drop jokes because I could say something that (if you break it down) offends or stereotypes someone or something ?

No. You should apologize when your jokes unintentionally hurt someone.

(To err is human, to forgive divine.)

The common definition of forgiveness requires acknowledgement by the person being forgiven that they've done something wrong. That isn't present here. When it becomes present, I promise to try to be first in the forgiveness line. ;-)

"On keynotes and apologies" by Dag Wieers

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 11:34:32 +0100

Despite all the well-intent of the debate, I feel sorry for Mark though. Everyone can make a mistake like that when talking, because when you talk you say things without reflection. Sure most what you present is prepared, but not into detail. Otherwise you might read out a written statement. And then people wouldn't go to keynotes, unless they wanted a good sleep.

Often when I joke during a presentation it comes naturally, a prepared joke never works for me. So should I drop jokes because I could say something that (if you break it down) offends or stereotypes someone or something ?

Is Mark a sexist ? Of course not. Did Mark say something sexist ? Maybe, but very likely not with intent. Does Mark believe 'girls' don't get technology like 'boys' ? Of course not.

So where do we want to take this ? Should we fight every mischaracterization from the brain ? Every slip of the tongue until people are afraid to take freely ? Should we start forbidding people to stereotype (which is a natural and unconscious way the brain works to be able to manage information) ?

Or can we just accept that people can make mistakes, just like the brain does ?

To be honest, if this is taken to the extreme, I fear that the same thing will happen with the word sexist, as happened with the word racist (around here), though. People start using it as a defense or attack strategy, and overusing the word, hollows its meaning.

So I don't think Mark should apologize for making a mistake like that. Errare humanum est, ignoscere divinum. (To err is human, to forgive divine.)

"On keynotes and apologies" by Karsten Wade

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 08:09:41 +0100

Kudos, Chris.

It turns out that it's pretty important that men also stand up and recognize when privilege, entitlement, and sexism collide in the mouths of our friends and colleagues.

What I have noticed the most in all of these type of discussions I've read recently is how often they follow the same pattern. A bunch of men and a few women descend and entirely repeat every single mistake that all of the well-written online content (e.g. http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com) points out. Ironically, it's clear to me that this pattern goes back many, many years, and I'm only just noticing it.

Tone argument? Check.

I'm a man and I'm oppressed too? Check.

Men who explain and don't listen? Check.

I sat in a very interesting session on women in FLOSS at the Community Leadership Summit before this year's OSCON. It was an hour-long discussion where (essentially) one man managed to hit every single classic argument as to why these women should just go find something truly important to care about. It wasn't until afterward that I gained enough clue to recognize the irony of that moment, and the reason I did that is because women in that moment were saying, "I'm sorry, you are doing exactly what many men do in this situation; we really do have many years of experience here; your jumping in with shallow understanding making the same arguments that are clearly debunked is just making you look a bit silly; please close mouth and open ears." Instead of talking, I listened. Then I read.

It's actually rather embarrassing. I long considered myself a male feminist, and I didn't realize how totally backwards many of my male and female peers were thinking and acting.

So I resolved to read, learn, speak up, and support men and women who are making clear and important feminist arguments. Thanks again, Chris.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Chris

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 04:56:18 +0100

Sam,

You're right, I should say "because Kirrily based her objection on someone else's transcript of what was said rather than hearing the keynote herself". The difference between the two sentences hadn't occured to me as being significant.

In any case, I'm afraid I consider it a moot point -- both my post, and much more notably Matt Zimmerman's, make it clear that Mark's words were unacceptable regardless of whether you were reading after the fact (as Kirrily was), listening (as you were), or in the room (as Matt and I were).

I have a much stronger objection to your post, though. Your claim that "I'm sure I'll be shouted down too - but it doesn't bother me one whit simply because this whole argument is never rational, it's overly emotional" argues that the debate on sexism in free software can never be rational -- no matter whether it is conducted by Kirrily, by me, or by Mark's own CTO. This is a far bolder claim than "Kirrily should have listened to the whole thing"; so if we're going to argue about something, it should certainly be about that.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Sam Varghese

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 03:50:12 +0100

Your reading of what I wrote is wrong. I have criticised Robert for leaping to a conclusion without having seen Shuttleworth's entire keynote. She did not have to be there, she could have watched it anywhere (as I did).

"On keynotes and apologies" by Brian Jordan

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 02:06:17 +0100

Also appreciated your responses to the ad hominem attacks and "look at this instead!" arguments.

Encore?

"On keynotes and apologies" by Brian Jordan

Wed, 30 Sep 2009 01:56:01 +0100

Thanks for this post, Chris. I really enjoy reading posts featuring your acute critical thinking!

Also, http://amptoons.com is great!

"On keynotes and apologies" by Chris

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 17:42:52 +0100

The video has been posted publicly now. The relevant sections:

The “girls” quote is at 35:55.
“Your printer, and your mom’s printer, and your grandma’s printer”: 35:30.
“A release is an amazing thing; I’m not talking about the happy ending..”: 3:02

"On keynotes and apologies" by tretle

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 09:52:39 +0100

@Martin - they don't care they pointed it out earlier with this link ->

http://finallyfeminism101.wordpress.com/2007/04/12/faq-why-are-you-concentrating-on-x-when-y-is-so-much-more-important/

Note that I never asked to concentrate on one genders rights I asked that we consider both genders rights so the is x more important than y argument doesn't really count.

And with relation to the equal rights subjects I brought up earlier, Chris responded by saying that feminism is not about equal rights while comparing maternity rights to male and female bathrooms(really?).

Feminism is about trying to get women treated with the same respect and dignity as men.

The problem I seem to have is I don't tend to treat people(male or female) with respect if they don't share the same aspirations for true equality for women and men.

Organizations and groups that only fight for some parts of gender equality are in my view just as damaging.

Without opposition they end up becoming the things they say they are fighting. And with opposition they end up shouting and fighting with each other rather than progressing towards a shared goal.

I wonder how equal rights would have worked if homosexual males said screw homosexual females I only want equal rights for my gender.

Or if black people said screw anyone from any other race, I am only fighting racism towards black people.

Chris, feminism is about equal rights. If you cant see the link between respect and dignity for two groups and equal rights than I don't know what more I can say.

The whole philosophy of feminism is flawed, same goes for male equal rights activists.

Both groups are self centered in nature and feel that if the other genders rights need upholding then its up to the other gender to start a shouting match to try and get things done rather than work co-operatively to achieve the same goal.

This creates extremists on both sides which inevitably leads to lack of progression as each side feel the other does not care or take them seriously.

The fact of the matter is that because of these two flawed ideologies sexism will likely persist in society.

Its a shame that this is the case but I think this blog post has been the perfect example at showing how trying to separate movements for equality only leads to pissed off people who feel as though they are being ignored.

"On keynotes and apologies" by Martin

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:29:50 +0100

@Máirín - I'm female and I've been active in the open source community as a contributor for over 5 years now, and it's really time to drop the boys' club.

My wife have a master of science in a highly mathematical field of science. She is working in one of the largest and most well known engineering companies in the world.

I have held several seminars for women about Linux. One of them with IBM. Did it do a lot of good? Not sure. I did understand it was a need and I did my bit to help.

I am a stand at home spouse taking care of our baby while my wife is having a career in the global oil business.

It would be great to meet more dads and be more social with other males, but I am not stop taking care of our baby because of that.

What I could do about my current situation is to help encourage more males to open their mind to my kind of tasks. You hardly find a more sexist field of work than caring for a baby.

"On keynotes and apologies" by tretle

Tue, 29 Sep 2009 02:27:41 +0100

@Ellyn -> Still unable to quote him word for word but more than happy to assume you are right. Big surprise there. Hey, I heard he is also a racist, communist and nazi.. I am going to demand an apology from him, who's with me?

@Sassinak -> Whats wrong with you. People that try and figure it out are threatened while people who ignore, bash and name call are some sort of revolution. Not everyone that disagrees here is a sexist.

Count yourselves ignored now. There is no rationalizing with people like you.

Thanks to Chris, Leigh and others who did try and explain as rationally as they could. I don't want to comment anymore until I hear exactly what Mark said.