zlacker

>>_yfoe+(OP)
Is the "bro" intended to be ironic, or are the creators actually not aware that the term is used to represent the worst (most misogynistic, most crass, least mature, least dependable) people currently flocking to the industry? It is by its very definition exclusionary.

I suppose "brogrammers" might be a target audience, but the concept of the tool itself is pretty good for just about anyone. Shame about the name.

>>dewitt+72
Brogrammer is just a stereotype, brah.

Not everybody that wears shades, doesn't take life seriously and speaks with an accent is misogynistic, crass, less mature than you and difficult to depend on.

That's not really fair. To a bro the word just means 'friend' - somebody that's dependable, fun to hang out with and that won't over complicate things.

Those descriptions seem more in line with the tool.

>>lhnz+X2
I have found out in life that women can also be dependable, fun to hang out with, and not "complicate things."

Using "bro" is offensive because it excludes others by their gender. It's an awful exclusionary term and you shouldn't think it funny or ironic. You're not taking this serious. I'm guessing because you haven't any idea of how soul crushing it can be to see this kind of behavior in the workplace when you're at the other end. It fucking sucks.

>>belluc+q3
Are you winding me up?

Was man also misogynistic?

Besides:

    curl --header "X-GirlsAreBrosToo: 1" www.bropages.org

>>lhnz+D3
You're shitting us right? Manpages referred to manuals, not men.

But given that I'm obviously swimming against the tide here at HN I'll just cave .....

Word, brah! Like, totally right on! We should be making like 'sispages' next with like only explanations and shit. Get it? For like the sissy-grammers! Awesome dude. You da bomb!

>>mtrimp+f4
Yes, I was kidding about 'man', but my point is that 'bro' isn't that exclusionary.

In fact, I think the problem here is that a lot of geeks don't like 'bros' and I am doubting that they're hated by women as much. Personal opinion here, but: a lot of women have friends that are bros; a lot fewer geeks have friends that are bros.

>>lhnz+25
Curious that you seem to think that women and geeks are mutually exclusive groups...

>>coucha+07
No I didn't say that. I think that is completely false.

>> A lot of geeks don't like 'bros' and I am doubting that they're hated by women as much. Personal opinion here, but: a lot of women have friends that are bros; a lot fewer geeks have friends that are bros.

I think women that are geeks also have fewer 'bro' friends.

Geek is a property of men and women, it is not a mutually-exclusive group.

Nice try, trying to implicate me in sexism but I do not like it when people try to read things into what I say that I've never implied. I intended one thing, stop trying to use it against me...

What I am saying is that I think a group of non-genderised geeks define the label 'bro' by its negative connotations more so than the greater super set of non-geeks (even those which are of the female gender.) It's a case of a new set of people 'bros' joining another set of people 'geeks'; it's exactly the same group behaviour as you see when people from different cultures immigrate into a country; same us-vs-them group behaviour; same magnification and amplification of negative connotations.

A bro is just a stereotype. People are people and you should get to know them first before rejecting them (and especially if there are negative behaviours that you want to treat.)

>>lhnz+A7
If people are often reading sexist intent into your words maybe you ought to consider the possibility that the things you are writing are, in fact, sexist. Or be more careful.

>>GFK_of+m9
It rarely happens.

And in this case I think it was blatant and aggressive straw-manning.

I simply have no patience for people being exclusionary that accuse me of being exclusionary.