Insights from geekdom’s meritocracy melee
Joseph Reagle, Northeastern University
leaders advanced by their technical merit rather than telegenic appeal (Reagle (1999))
The belief that openness and freedom necessarily rule out discriminatory behavior may be a consequence of androcentrism in the free culture movement. (Reagle (2013))
Success in Silicon Valley, most would agree, is more merit driven than almost any other place in the world. It doesn’t matter how old you are, what sex you are, what politics you support or what color you are. (Arrington (2010))
saying high-tech is a meritocracy doesn’t make it so (Simard (2010))
To be geek is to be engaged, to be enthralled in a topic, and then to act on that engagement. (McArthur (2009))
Hackers are enthused about systems; nerds about learning.
hackers consider themselves something of an elite (a meritocracy based on ability), though one to which new members are gladly welcome. (Raymond (1991))
By 1990 or thereabouts all adults with IQs of more than 125 belonged to the meritocracy (Young (1958/2002), p. 166)
The book was a satire meant to be a warning. (Young (2001))
privilege is like an invisible weightless knapsack of special provisions, maps, passports, codebooks, visas, clothes, tools, and blank checks. (McIntosh (1988/1990), sec. 1)
Merit and privilege are both relative, leading to unfruitful comparisons of individuals’ worth and disadvantage.
Inevitably, those with more privilege would develop new heretofore unknown forms of oppression from which they suffered… Consequently, the goal became not to actually end oppression but to be as oppressed as possible. (Smith (2013), p. 265)
This can be called “Oppression Olympics” (Feminism (2015)).
reference to my “male privilege”—my privilege!—is … alien to my actual lived experience…
nerdy males [who] pull themselves out of the ditch the world has tossed them into, while still maintaining enlightened liberal beliefs, … don’t deserve blame for whatever feminist shortcomings they might still have. They deserve medals… (Aaronson (2014))
<suit> n. 1. Ugly and uncomfortable “business clothing” often worn by non-hackers. Invariably worn with a “tie”, a strangulation device which partially cuts off the blood supply to the brain. It is thought that this explains much about the behavior of suit-wearers. 2. A person who habitually wears suits, as distinct from a techie or hacker. See <loser>, <burble> and <brain-damaged>. (Raymond (1991))
Both groups [“brogrammers” and “geek feminists”] are latecomers barging in on a cultural space that was once a respite for us… (Patterson (2014))
… or as close to a geek meritocracy as ever happened…. Is there any point that you think you would rather like—would just change your life today for—would you be back in 1992, would you go back to the ’70s, would you go back to the 1500s like when, when was there ever a better time? (Libin (2011))
Libin’s question reveals another privilege:
the relative frame of comparison.
Even if we agreed that the present is preferable to the past,
everything is not awesome for everyone.
For many, geekdom is meritocratic relative to their experiences,
but that does not make it universally meritocratic;
it is naive to think so.