Most of the things you listed are places where women's rights are well behind those of men.
I think those are all places that need to be fixed.
But at the same time it's possible to think of the front line as being the place where the battle to move forward is being fought now, instead of places where little progress has been made.
From that perspective talking of SV as a front line isn't wrong: if women can't be treated equally in the supposedly progressive environment of SV, then other places will be even further behind.
But at the same time it's possible to think of the
front line as being the place where the battle to move
forward is being fought now, instead of places where
little progress has been made.
How is that line of thinking, rational?
So you want people who are already putting up with plenty of progressive dogma to put up with more progressivism, when the rest of those areas that raldi [1] mentioned haven't seen a lick of the same progressivism, impacting their lives in decades?[2]
Dont you think that such unfair pressure solely on the tech world, will only serve to alienate them?
Won't it cause them to dig their heels in?
Is that kind of retrenchment desirable?
In what way does that make any sense?
This is isn't even the first time I've heard this line of fuzzy thought-leadership.
I find it grating when people offer such silly twisted logic to prop up their premises.
When any form of change is imposed on any section of society, at too fast a rate, there will be resistance.
When any form of change is unfairly imposed on ONLY one section of society or in ONLY one geographic region, within the same country, there is bound to be a even greater degree of resistance.
[1]
The construction industry, The Bible Belt, The restaurant industry, West Africa, The movie industry, The Vatican, The sportswriting industry, The people who make Superbowl ads, Japan, The adult entertainment industry, The Middle East, Wall Street, Nepal, The upper echelons of American politics
[2] I'm by no means advocating less than progressive conditions to prevail in
any industry or any geographic region.
This could be just as well, said of the conservative end of the spectrum. In
other words, there are conservative pockets, hell bent on turning their already
conservative professions even more rigid and unyielding.
I'm a little unclear if you are arguing that the terminology of it "being the front line" is irrational, or if equality is irrational.
If the first then I agree that it's an odd way to describe it, but I'm not sure I could explain their thinking any better than above.
If you are arguing that equality is irrational then I have to say I disagree quite strongly.
When any form of change is unfairly imposed on ONLY one section of society or in ONLY one geographic region, within the same country, there is bound to be a even greater degree of resistance.
I agree that there is resistance to seeing changes only occur in some areas. I agree it is unfair that equality isn't equally distributed.
I think those are all places that need to be fixed.
But at the same time it's possible to think of the front line as being the place where the battle to move forward is being fought now, instead of places where little progress has been made.
From that perspective talking of SV as a front line isn't wrong: if women can't be treated equally in the supposedly progressive environment of SV, then other places will be even further behind.