> "Wanna bro down and crush some code?"<p>What? Who would say that, ever?<p>> San Francisco-based Klout<p>Oh. Carry on then.<p>"Brogrammers" are pretty hilarious though. I mean, aside from the utility of being a "warning, we're a company of homophobes and sexists" alert, I think that it started as a joke? Then, there were people that didn't realize it was a joke and started <i>actually</i> using it. I think that's pretty funny.
I think I'm reaching the end of my tolerance for the word "brogrammer"<p>I don't tolerate sexism, racism, or bigotry. Period. Whether it has a catchy name or not.<p>I have noticed that many of the attributes associated to "brogrammer" are attributes I associate with immature males.<p>Here's the thing: I do not believe that shaming immature males is going to make them more mature. In fact, I think it's going to drive the entire subculture underground and make it much, much worse. The stories we read about "brogrammers" in 10-years time will truly be horrific, instead of just frat-house idiocy.<p>I have no problem at all with making workplaces more women-friendly, or in having a zero-tolerance policy. I also expect employees to have natural personality flaws, like most humans. As long as I don't see it in the workplace I think accepting people for who they are is a much better life strategy than giving them labels and sticking them in little boxes for us to assault en masse. And don't even get me started in the "business of outrage" where a new syndrome is kicked up and dozens of writers generate millions of pageviews all clamoring over each other to tell us how bad it is.<p>To put this in a direct business context, I desperately want diversity in tech teams. That's diversity in <i>thinking</i>, not in external attributes. That means the more eccentric the wordviews of those present, as long as they can get along? It's better for everybody. I'd take violent anarchists, Buddhists, and Nazis in a team if I could make it work. Just keep the bad behavior offsite. I do not want to live in your homogenized world.
When I see "brogrammer" used I have to fight to not flip the bozo bit for that person.<p>It's a bizarre reversal of high school, where people want to be mad at "bros" for invading the sanctity of the programming world. It's now cool to be un-cool.<p>Creating groups to direct your ire towards for the imagined problems of the tech industry isn't going to help anyone. Solving problems is about being inclusive, not exclusive.<p>On a similar note the lynch mob mentality when somebody steps over the line just means that everyone is going to be scared of going anywhere near that line. In the long term just this trends towards a boring politically correct future.
> "Companies that are inclusive, like Facebook, have an advantage in recruiting talents, says Gina Trapani"<p>Didn't the whole brogrammer thing start at Facebook? (hint: yes).
<i>That's one small way brogrammer culture is actually useful. It's a red flag for women...</i><p>The problem with the brogrammer caricature, is that it exaggerates a few overt features of regular geek culture in a way that overshadows underlying pathologies in programming shops.<p>There are forms of intolerance and aggression that have nothing to do with homophobia or sexism (or any other readily vilifying -ism) but which are still capable of interfering with vital flows of information. Brogrammers are nothing more than guys who program and are still operating with much of the same belief structure they had in high school. They've failed to "make their beliefs pay rent" with ideas like "hot chicks in bikinis make the world a better place," "boys will be boys," and the idea that offensive language "keeps it real."<p>However there's plenty of that sort of failure to go around in the mainstream of programmer culture at large, in groups that look nothing like brogrammers -- in ways that even affect technical decisions.<p><a href="http://lesswrong.com/lw/i3/making_beliefs_pay_rent_in_anticipated_experiences/" rel="nofollow">http://lesswrong.com/lw/i3/making_beliefs_pay_rent_in_antici...</a>
<p><pre><code> Tech start-ups founded by women are few and far between,
but they're highly attractive to female and male
candidates who don't want to join a boys' club.
</code></pre>
My best experiences have been working with, or for, women.<p>I stumbled on these companies purely accidentally tho. I wish there was a list of companies that have a better-than-SV-average rate of women.
Do brogrammers really exist, or at least exist in any number great enough to worry? I've been to many software engineering meetups and whatnot and I have yet to meet anyone I would call a brogrammer. This stereotype feels more like a joke that has taken on a life of its own and the media likes to write about it like it is a legitimate widespread phenomenon, kind of like they like to portray climate change deniers as an equally large contingent within the scientific community as those scientists who support climate change theories based on human impact.
From the article: "Tech start-ups founded by women are few and far between, but they're highly attractive to female and male candidates who don't want to join a boys' club."<p>I could see how this could be true for female candidates (since gender is a focal point for them in a male-dominated industry), but as I guy I'm not sure the CEO's gender is going to make their company a "highly attractive" workplace to me - I'd be a lot more concerned about their track record and experience.
It's sad to read the comments on the article and here on HN from people who don't get it. It's not just about the brogrammer joke or bro stereotype. Gina is embracing it to highlight the problems we have with gender discrimination in the industry.<p>My feeling is that much of it is unintentional from men who haven't thought very deeply about the impact their actions have on women. The negative comments highlight the cognitive dissonance people go through when they're presented with facts that conflict with their beliefs or actions.
The article makes no sense: You may as well say "Racist cultures are useful because they show us who's racist." If the racism isn't there, neither are the racists*.
Are there really that many of these "brogrammer" start ups around? I find it hard to believe that they plague the culture as much as some articles have you believe. At least, it's nothing compared to actual college, where bros own the social scene and are extraordinarily exclusive towards others (other males that is).<p>I do not live in Silicon valley, and have not actually seen of these "brogrammer" startups, but I imagine it more as a fun joke than a serious, misogynistic club.
Nobody is turning down skilled engineers because they don't shotgun a beer at the interview.<p>All of this outrage over a joke is ridiculous. Yes, some people have made some stupid flyers (saying girls are going to serve you beer as you code? dumb) but most of the time it's just a joke poking fun at the stereotype that programmers are lame awkward nerds.
"Male software engineers don't actually pop their collars, wear sunglasses and lift weights while writing code and share hot tubs with bikini-clad women"<p>Says who?
This article is fluff, and this is a made-up controversy. Worse things have been said during presentations, and more objectifying advertisements have aired. I'm sure Gina boycotts GoDaddy because, based on their advertising campaigns that contain scantily-clad women, they <i>must</i> be a company full of misogynists.<p>This article would have had a larger impact had she instead focused on what DOES make a tech team work well; if she had focused on the qualities that make a tech team thrive, and how "brogrammer" culture cuts into that advantage. By writing a piece on a made-up controversy, she just loses credibility.
Calling yourself a brogrammer is the geek equivalent of yelling 'hey baby' out the car window. These people aren't getting any girls, for obvious reasons.