There was a post on HN jobs a little while back about a startup looking for a "front end guy" which reiterated several times throughout the post that they "need a guy" and if "you're the guy" to contact them.<p>The job sounded great otherwise, and was definitely one I would have been interested in, but I felt immediately disqualified and annoyed.<p>Normally these types of things don't bother me and I often think people read too much into things, but for some reason, that one did. Maybe it was the casual nature of the writing. It made it seem more personal, which, in turn, made it seem like the author was making it clear that they actually weren't interested in hiring women, that they legitimately felt as if a man was needed to fill the role properly, or that the idea of hiring a woman was so foreign to them that it hadn't even crossed their minds.<p>It was very off-putting.
I cant see anyone letting something like this hit the public on purpose, big HR slip, but its certainly interesting insight to the hiring manager / person who wrote the job description.<p>If i were to go into that interview as not a man, i would feel disadvantaged.
This is dumb. It's merely pointing out pronouns. Should it be he/she everywhere or it? Gender neutral is often 'he'. Should we now say that 'all men are created equal'? Is it splitting hairs yet? Nobody is telling women not to get into tech things. I don't know whether it is general interest or what, but it should not engender such divisive hate.<p>I think we need more positive role models. Less of this pointless vitriol.
Sorry, they are using correct English. The male gender is used for the gender neutral case. We need something that is truly gender neutral, but all attempts sound wrong to anyone who made it through high school English. S/he is unpronounceable. They sounds strange when talking about a single individual, but kind of works. You works somewhat, but in an employment ad sounds like something out of "Mission Impossible".