Fair warning: This is an opinion piece. I was one of the background people arguing on Twitter over the weekend.
Last Friday I had the distinct privilege of engaging with a legend in the computer science world. Saying Im a fan of their work is a massive understatement. In fact, if you were to Google this persons name and then select the news tab, you wouldnt have to scroll far to come across several articles Ive written with reverent references to them.
You know what they say: Never meet your heroes.
Heres the story:
Theres an annual event in the STEM community called the Conference on Neural Information Processing Systems. The official acronym for this conference used to be NIPs. It was recently changed to NeurIPS.
Heres what Wikipedia has to say about that:
Conference organizers considered abandoning the conference name because of a slang connotation of its abbreviation, NIPS, with the word nipples and as a slur against Japanese. After a comment period and survey of 2,270 conference participants, conference organizers decided to keep the name and instead considered changing the acronym, since that was the main concern.
This name change sparked widespread outrage in the STEM community.
Some people believe that NIPs is an innocuous acronym. There are cookies and crackers named Nips after all. Jack Frost nips at your nose doesnt he? As best I can tell, these people believe that we should address bad behavior, not change the world around it.
It seems like what theyre saying is that if a horny dev, for example, walks around saying NICE NIPS! to every woman he sees, at a conference, while pointing at their boobs, we should all collectively rebuke that person and tell them, in no uncertain terms: No! That is not appropriate!
The good-faith idea here is that, if we keep rubbing their noses in it when they do it, these people will eventually stop doing it.
That idea stinks so bad it smells like shit. For the same reason that its animal abuse to rub a dogs nose in shit: because the person making the joke has no way of knowing why its wrong when weve created an environment that encourages it.
Ultimately, the people who dont want the name to be changed dont think anyone should be bothered by it, thus anyone who is bothered by it doesnt matter to them. They submit that if someone steps out of line it should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis.
Thats called policing. And its not any womans job to do that unless shes wearing a badge. Its a system set up to purposely harm women, and it goes like this:
Guy: Nice nips lady!
Woman: Excuse me?
Guy: I said its nice to be at NIPs. Haha.
The problem is that, more often than not, if that woman goes and complains shes being hysterical or deranged. If she doesnt then shes asking for it.
For as long as theres been a NIPs conference, there have been women and allies asking for the acronym to be changed. I cant speak for anyone else, but its been my experience in engaging with these people that none of these women and their allies are offended by the term NIPs. The people Ive spoken to say it makes them uncomfortable.
Heres what I mean: Calling me a faggot is offensive (for reasons Ill get into soon). Walking up to me at work and telling me I have nice eyes makes me uncomfortable. The first is always wrong, the second is wrong the moment I make it known Im uncomfortable with it.
By US Federal law, an action doesnt have to be inherently offensive to be considered harassment if it produces a quid pro quo environment or makes someone uncomfortable. But this isnt about the law or even about ethics or morality. Its about teamwork.
Thats why, two years ago, the name was changed.
The current kerfuffle centers on Anima Anandkumar, the Bren Professor of Computing at California Institute of Technology and Director of Machine Learning research at NVIDIA and Pedro Domingos, a tenured professor at the Paul G. Allen School of Computer Science & Engineering at the University of Washington and the author of the book The Master Algorithm.
While numerous other people have been involved, the main disagreement between those two stemmed from discourse over the firing of AI scientist and ethicist Timnit Gebru. Heres more on that.
As best I can tell, heres what Domingos and his supporters are, as of this morning, trying to convey:
- Theyd prefer a workplace where people can actually take a joke
- The real world isnt always perfect
- NIPs isnt offensive unless you choose to see it that way
- We could be focused on real problems that effect women instead of an acronym
- Most women surveyed didnt want the name changed
- The people speaking out against NIPs/Gebrus firing are just crisis actors
- The people speaking out against NIPs/Gebrus firing have weaponized outrage to punish their enemies
- The people speaking out against NIPs/Gebrus firing suddenly started attacking Domingos and anyone who agreed with them
So, heres the thing. The rhetoric coming from Domingos and those supporting him seems like it can be summed as Domingos was trying to engage in civil debate when he was suddenly called names, bullied, and attacked by Anandkumar and her friends.
A few points: there was nothing sudden about it. This debate has been going on for years and the two of them engaged in civil back-and-forth for days before it careened into name-calling.
The fact of the matter is that good faith arguments such as its a racist slur against the Japanese and Im a woman that was made uncomfortable by it, fell on deaf ears. Anandkumar explained her case and her agency was disregarded that is, her right to say I was uncomfortable and be taken seriously.
Heres the rub:
One side apparently thinks the other side is lying. They seemingly think were manufacturing outrage because, as theyve said time and time again: its just a word. They appear to believe that if you cant get over yourself and a simple word, you wont be able to do science in a world where things dont always go your way. (Oh, the irony).
They see Occams Razor as shaving away all the bullshit until what you have left is a shrieking woman going Im upset! Pay more attention to me than science because a tech bro giggled at my breasts.
Theyre the ones who think theyre being mature when they imagine themselves standing up and saying something like Sit down lady, everybody has nipples. Were trying to learn.
And they cannot fathom how anyone else could see things differently.
Here are some links to some articles about professional environments with a long-standing tradition of sexual harassment and assault:
Report: As sexual assault reports increase at Naval Academy, prevention efforts may not be effective
Exclusive: Border Patrol Knew About Harrowing Game Of Smiles Sexual Assault Claims, But Did Not Take Action, Former Official Says
And heres some about the STEM industry:
Tech conferences have a sexual harassment problem
Study: 4 in 10 women keynote speakers cite sexual harassment at tech events
We Need Less Ally Theater: Little Has Changed for Women in Tech Since the #MeToo Movement
The status quo says: if you see a problem, report it. We may as well be telling women We know there are people making these jokes, but its up to you to report them. This is a broken system. Its a system that says If you got a problem with the way we do business here, feel free to go tattle about it. Lets see who they believe.
For decades now women, POCs, and queers have been told that we work in equal opportunity workplaces, yet STEM is still a field dominated by straight white men. Were still harassed and excluded. The same people whove always hired and promoted the ones making the jokes are still there to decide whos a good team player and whos disruptive.
And its all because disruption is a greater sin in STEM than harassment. And thats as ironic as it is stupid.
Anima Anandkumar is a disruptive woman. That may just be my opinion, but I stand by it. When she and others felt uncomfortable over the rampant jokes, Reddit groups, and internal emails every year about how people hope its cold at NIPs this year, and what-not, she and others stood up to do something about it.
STEM is disruption. When you see something that needs to be changed, you do the work.
Now, with the background out of the way, heres the stupid questions you were promised answers to.
Why are you so scared of NIPs, its just a word?
Nobodys scared of words.
But words have power. I know that gay men are called faggots and fags because thats what was used to light the fire when bigots and zealots burned us at the stake. If someone calls me a faggot the threat of violence is inseparable from the insult.
The word nip is an offensive slur against Japanese people that carries the same threat of violence due to its relation to WWII and internment camps. Full stop.
The continued use of this acronym is counter-productive. NIPs, as an acronym or word, isnt offensive on its own, but neither is faggot or bitch.
We arent children. If you walked up to me and yelled Bitch ass faggot and I called you an asshole bigot, it wouldnt make you the victim. Not even if you then said I was saying female dog, donkey, and bundle of sticks. You owe me an apology. Again, because were not children.
Next question. Why are (insert minority) always so easily offended.
Were not. I laugh at this all the time. Dudes cant imagine how thick womens skin needs to be just to walk down the street.
The same people who are afraid to be in a locker room with me just because they know Im queer have no problem with women being catcalled and harassed.
Itd be funny were it not for the statistics such as In 2019, 406,970 women were raped or sexually assaulted while the corresponding number for men was 52,336, and thats just those that were actually reported in the US.
The NIPs argument has nothing to do with taking offense. Im not offended. And as far as I can tell Anandkumar (whom I dont know) and her supporters dont appear to be offended either.
Im disappointed. Rather than simply say Im not uncomfortable with NIPs, but a rational person could see how a woman, person from Japan, or an ally could be. I support you and this change, the majority of our peers said no, I dont think youre right about being uncomfortable.
It takes courage to know thats how so many people in STEM feel about you and still want to work in this industry.
Im also upset that Anandkumar was framed as deranged, hysterical, and a bully. Her crime is that she refused to accept bigotry and misogyny as something that belonged in a so-called civil debate.
That brings us to the next question:
All I did was tell this woman she was being deranged and hysterical and that I didnt believe her. Then she called me a misogynist and used mean words. Why am I being victimized?
Answer: Youre not. Worst case scenario, someones being mean to you online. Have you considered logging off and refilling your butthurt-cream prescription? Most likely scenario: Youve expressed a shitty opinion and are under the illusion that all opinions should be respected.
We dont respect the opinions of flat-Earthers, anti-vaxxers, bigots, racists, and pedophiles for a very good reason: they arent compatible with civilized society.
For example, if you say women should learn to take a joke and I call you a misogynist, you arent being victimized. Not even if I call you a stupid fucking misogynist.
The difference is that Im being an asshole because youre being a misogynist. Thats the proper response to bigotry. Bigotry and misogyny are incompatible with civil discourse no matter how polite the person spewing them are.
Serving a turd on a silver platter doesnt make it tastier.
If you politely inform me of your opinion that astrology or ghosts are real, Ill respectfully disagree with you. If you politely inform me of your opinion that white people are the master race or that women arent good at tech, Ill call you a fucking asshole or worse. In this scenario the bigot is always the one being uncivil.
Next question. Why do you have to be an asshole? Why cant you engage in civil discourse?
Answer: I dont have to be an asshole, I just choose to. One of the most-used tactics to shut women, POCs, and queers up is to tell us were hysterical, deranged, and incapable of civil discourse. Bigotry and misogyny arent civil. If you engage in either, you dont deserve civility. Full stop.
If the tone of our complaints bother you its because you werent paying attention when we were being nicer.
Its been said a thousand times: There is no acceptable way in which Colin Kaepernick, nasty women, uppity queers, and allies can disagree with those in power.
Next stupid question: Why cant we just punish people for being bad when they do bad things?
Because that aint my job. It aint Anandkumars either. Im not the dont be mean to queers police and she doesnt appear to be the woman who has to police all men police. Police your own horny men. Horny men arent my problem. My problem is that NIPs made me uncomfortable because of the horny men and the fact its also a racist slur. Its easier to change the acronym than it is to make men less horny and racist.
Next: Why do wokes want to cancel everyone who doesnt agree with them?
So its hilariously ironic that Pedro Domingos is currently engaged in a campaign to get Anandkumar fired for being mean to him on Twitter.
But the answer to this question is: theres no such thing as canceling, being canceled, or cancel culture.
Lets say that again: canceling doesnt exist. If you do or say something so bad that nobody wants to work with you, thats something youve done to yourself.
Bottom line, while canceling doesnt actually exist (hell still be a rich, famous, tenured professor when the dust settles again), he certainly has no problem trying to get a woman fired over her Free Speech.
Last question: Why do you hate white men and think gays and POCs and women should be in every work place?
Lol. Statistically speaking, nobody hates white men. Otherwise they wouldnt own the vast majority of wealth, businesses, and political positions in the world. But I want women, queers, and POCs in every work place because we make every work place better. Its going to be too expensive for any big tech business or academic institution to do business without us in the hyper-personalized near future.
Because, just like the current occupants of the White House, the status quo in STEM is a lame duck regime. The worlds moved on past boys clubs and unchallenged male authority.
And, since all of this is about being able to take a joke, heres one I just made up:
Why didnt the bigot/misogynist chicken cross the road? Because there was no place in this world for it over there either.
Published December 15, 2020 — 03:13 UTC