We shouldn't accept it though and there is a massive double-standard in the treatment of the merit of women who are also sexy and men who are also sexy. We don’t question the merit of Ronaldo as a footballer because he also uses his body in a sexy way to advertise for example.

Another aspect as well is homogenising around the social mores of America by default which particularly in the aspects of sex and sexuality are deeply troubled.

> We shouldn't accept it though and there is a massive double-standard in the treatment of the merit of women who are also sexy and men who are also sexy. We don’t question the merit of Ronaldo as a footballer because he also uses his body in a sexy way to advertise for example.

Of course we do! I'm not into football, but several of my friends who are dislike him explicitly because of this.

Dislike isn't the same thing as questioning his merit as a footballer though. Especially as he is widely heralded as the being one of the best players of all time. I'd also suggest that disliking Ronaldo because he poses in sexy adverts is also pretty closely aligned with the same cultural issues that lead to dismissing women. And whilst I can definitely agree there will be some men who dismiss Ronaldo's merit as a footballer for being too sexy there is a massive difference in degree when compared to the general treatment of women for the same.

But Ronaldo became famous for his football, not his sexy body.

Everyone knows sex sells, but some people (not only men) get upset when they see people promoting themselves with their own sexuality, especially when it's in an unrelated field.

I think Naomi is great, but I can see why some people get upset by the way she presents. I wonder how less attractive maker women feel about her, for example?

People weren’t just upset at how she looks they outright questioned her technical merit because of how she looks. And yes women can have misogynistic views as well which are just as unacceptable.

I mean, if you look at the base rates of how makers and engineers dress, she's about as far as it can get from the mean. However, if you were at burning man or the DNA lounge, she'd fit right in with a bunch of other hackers and attendees.

I think they essentially questioned why is she 'famous'; is it because of outstanding technical ability, or because of the way she presents, and unwisely chose to try and disprove her technical ability.

The question still stands to some extent though I think. Using 'sex' to sell yourself is accepted in music, film, fashion and so on, but perhaps not in technical fields, and, actually, as I think about it more, I'm starting to agree a little bit.

Clearly not nearly to the same level since not only Ronaldo's videos are not demonetized, he's in the actual ads !

We shouldn't accept youtube regulating their own content? You're free to protest them but many many creators have had problems with them to no response. I find people in this thread are turning a YouTube issue into a social issue. However you feel about it, it's within the purview of advertisers to not fund content they dislike. Artists have been complaining about that for eternity

This seems like a failure of imagination. Or maybe an expectation of seriousness which can only be associated with certain kinds of people who dress and speak a certain way.

The reality is that anyone can be really smart and make “serious” contributions and they deserve to be taken seriously regardless of how they choose to dress or present themselves. We have chosen a certain definition of normality and we can choose to expand that to be more inclusive.

From what I’ve read about Naomi, she is interested in both the engineering and the social justice aspects of her work. She deserves to be taken seriously and not dismissed simply because of the way she looks.

I think she is a smart woman and that she intentionally uses sex appeal. I actually don't condemn her for that, but to suggest the animosity exists "because of her looks" is dishonest. It is because she uses sex appeal for marketing herself. I am fine with that, but it is what it is. Some people have a problem with that and I doubt that will ever change and there are also good arguments that it is or should be irrelevant to the topic.

Some people do have a problem with that, and they are telling on themselves when YouTube demonetizes Wu but no one will ever touch Kyle Hill's videos in spite of the fact that he teaches science while looking like the love child of mid-90s Arnold Schwarzenegger and Madonna.

(... And nobody should, his videos are great. Seriously if you haven't seen his stuff go check it out. But there's an obvious double standard if he's in and Wu is out).

An alternate perspective is that she dresses how she wishes, and other people ascribe that sex appeal regardless. The most outrageously attired of a group of similarly skilled people is likely to draw the most fans and detractors, whether that was their intention or not.

I'm guessing it's a bit of both, and I don't think there's anything wrong with that.

I'm a white male, so it's relatively easy to convince people to take me seriously. That isn't a great situation, but noone expects me to downplay that to make things more fair.

She has a harder time being taken seriously (as evidenced by the MAKE story), but she's attractive which makes her videos more interesting. I don't think you can blame her for using advantages.

From what I've seen of her, she does seem to enjoy being dressed nicely, so I don't think she's only doing it to get views.

I tend to hold the opinion that a person who doesnt look like "they belong" is among the most likely to have actually earned the right to be there.

Of course appeal is subjective, but I believe she calls herself sexy cyborg. Denying intent is almost as offensive as a denial of existence I believe. Although there can be cases like that.

Because if there's anything to judge a person on the basis of, it's Reddit logins they chose when they were 20 and stuck with as they grew in popularity

I don’t know why Naomi’s comment is being downvoted. Another young (at that time) woman, Amanda Knox learned the hard way about being judged on the basis of her online account name: When the tabloid media learned that her Myspace nickname was “Foxy Knoxy”, they spun salacious stories, making her out to be some sort of “femme fatale” who would be capable of murdering her flat-mate, Meredith Kercher.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Meredith_Kercher

At least you didn't use your old [email protected] address, you'd break the prude sensors.

/s for anyone wondering, I can only hope someone is still using some dumb Lycos e-mail today.

Quoting her: "I look the way I do for myself, and I don't object to any one else's polite enjoyment of that."

Considering something like body dysmorphia (as an example) might help give someone benefit of doubt. I'm not going to pretend to understand exactly why someone feels that way.

>Considering something like body dysmorphia (as an example) might help give someone benefit of doubt. I'm not going to pretend to understand exactly why someone feels that way.

Yes, it is something like that. But it's bullshit for me to dance around it and expect some sort of grace. I will say something.

I don't think you owe justifications for your body modifications or wardrobe to anybody: not to the police, not to the CPC, not to your parents, not to Google, and certainly not to random people on Twitter competing to see who can be the cruelest.

>But the engineering feats alone will never be the focus as a consequence.

There's a line between "never be the focus" and "we will erase you". This sort of thing is constant- but I'll give you a recent example-

NPR recently ran this story: https://www.npr.org/2021/10/25/1047691984/decades-after-poli...

About an American lady who needed some parts for her iron lung and how no one would help her. Only the thing is, they knew I already had: https://youtu.be/4VKZTmTP7oY

I'd fabricated the collars in Shenzhen, mailed the first batch, revised them and needed someone on the US side to to the final fitting. Martha told them this, a quick search told them this, hundreds of people told them this- did NPR revise the story to correct the omission of "oh by the way this problem we were talking about was solved by this female engineer". No of course not. I mean, it's NPR, you think they are going to get smut on their fingers writing about someone who looks like me? Never going to happen.

Then the Razer mask story, I was central to it and some outlets gave me credit: https://www.pcgamer.com/razer-rows-back-after-zephyr-face-ma...

Others like the Verge flatly refused to mention my involvement- even jumping through some pretty crazy hoops to avoid it: https://www.theverge.com/2022/1/10/22876303/razer-zephyr-mas...

Again, hundreds of people called them out. But they did the math and decided that the stigma of mentioning someone who looked like me was worse.

That's just the last few months- this has been a constant for years. I fully Open Sourced the best selling 3D printer on the planet, have the first five Open Source Hardware Association certifications granted in China- which people said would never happen, have brought multiple Chinese companies into GPL compliance, I'm the only women to have brought a 3D printer to mass-market- a game changing design for small scale manufacturing- the list is long, but somehow, none of it is "appropriate" to cover- just because of how I look.

We're well beyond- "does my appearance detract from my work". Of course it does. We're at "does my appearance justify not just complete erasure of my work but constant attempts to deplatform and defund me" I don't think it does.

I have never heard of you before (which I guess is just more evidence) but the way you make your point is absolutely brilliant. I will definitely be checking out your channel.

I hope you don’t get worn down by the bullshit, we need more people like you in the world.

Thank you!

It's certainly a shtick that is offputting to some and challenging to others. It also should have zero bearing on whether your work and contributions are valid. There is definitely a double standard, just look at how some celebrities dress and act and are praised for it.

As I see it, you "cannot do it right". Here is what I mean by this:

Some people in the comments here have noted, that wearing anything that is more revealing than people are used to, might be seen as "fighting for the right to display yourself in whatever way you want" for women in general and see it as a positive thing. Whether that is interpreting too much into the action, I cannot say. On the other hand there are other people, who interpret it as means to attract more viewers, and does not add to the technical content.

So there are at least 2 contrary interpretations. Perhaps it could be named "polarizing". I would not say that this is "your fault" in any way. It is simply the state of our society currently and how we are being socialized. It can be improved. The human body is in itself nothing criminal. It is our interpretations of expression, that gives meaning. There will always be critics, who see it one way or another.

I did not know your channel before. I congratulate you for making some GPL happen. Good job on that! One thing I personally would value is, if you put emphasis on free (libre) software, when doing GPL and not name it merely open source. I think your content is interesting. I also like to see how it looks in Shenzhen, besides the technical aspects of the channel.

Well said. Also fair play to you for being prepared to openly identify as who you are, in a part of the world where it's not necessarily as easy to do so as it is for many of us.

I just want to say that your work and determination in the face of adversity is inspiring. Thank you!

I admire the strength, conviction, humility and technical skills you are constantly showing. Please keep doing what you are doing. Some people can’t handle a beautiful woman who is smart, skilled, and choose her own way in life. That’s their problem. Not yours. Remember that for every low self-esteem hater out there, there are many others who support what you are doing and disagree with the haters. Years ago woman were not allowed to show their ankles in public. We have come a long way since then. But there will always be a small group of people who can’t handle independent woman who doesn’t conform to their ideas. Just ignore them. They are dinosaurs and will eventually die out.

Man, you're sooooo well spoken! I'm loving your responses up and down this thread.

Thank you! I'm an English major and have worked very hard at it- still love to hear it though!

> We're well beyond- "does my appearance detract from my work". Of course it does. We're at "does my appearance justify not just complete erasure of my work but constant attempts to deplatform and defund me" I don't think it does.

It’s not you, it’s not the advertisers, it’s them. It’s not fair play. The fair play aspect is particularly infuriating. So what if it’s their platform - just because they can set the standards as they please doesn’t make it right.

YouTube is a US corporation, and this action is un-American.

I believe you might not fit into the story they want to paint onto the tech industry in general.

You think your successes would have been harder to achieve if you didn't advertise with sex appeal? You don't need to justify yourself for anything but you still sound like you feel the need to do so.

I don't even know their exact angle to be honest, they probably don't want to make the impression that sex appeal is a necessity for success in tech. But that is speculation. I understand the want to keep it "clean" but I hope you can appeal the demonetization.

>You think your successes would have been harder to achieve if you didn't advertise with sex appeal? You don't need to justify yourself for anything but you still sound like you feel the need to do so.

Oh, not at all. It's a gender expression issue, some dysphoria problems, I will try to go into once I muster up the courage. I'm cis but have an...odd backstory. It's definitely counter productive to success in tech after a certain point.

>they probably don't want to make the impression that sex appeal is a necessity for success in tech.

It could be, but at the same time, many young women like being flamboyant, most unlike me outgrow it, but few 17 year olds aspire to the pant-suit. A passable IG "thot" doing tech isn't necessarily the bad influence people think it is. I think a healthy balance of role models will attract a healthy balance of candidates. I think saying "you have to be gender conforming within this narrow spectrum or look like this" is an absolute nightmare for, well basically everyone- men included.

> It's definitely counter productive to success in tech after a certain point.

I believe this too, although the currency on social media might be different. In a work environment many actually do it as a courtesy to people that do not sexualize themselves. There is an attention economy in the workplace too. Looks do give you a bonus in many cases until you leverage it. Then it is suddenly the worst sin. A bit hypocritical perhaps, but it might level the playing field a bit and it lets people keep focus.

There are probably few people that honestly condemn you if you forget your pants when coming into work, but it is still generally expected that you at least try to put them on. Not sure if there are any barriers yet to be broken down.

> A passable IG "thot" doing tech isn't necessarily the bad influence people think it is

I generally agree, although I would lie that I would not be disappointed if people rely on whatever "thots" do. Perhaps I am too conservative, but Instagram is a great argument for catholic girls boarding schools, even if everyone know they are the worst. I think there is a difference if you get recognition for your looks or for your skills and mixing can lead to trouble.

> aspire to the pant-suit

It changed a bit in recent years, but often it is pretty relaxed. I regard it as a boon that you often can immediately separate the engineer from the salesman. But the former has the choice at least.

Never change. What you do is wonderful.

> some people will always judge you on that

Guess what - some people will judge, or even attack, just because she was a woman. Another example is Australia's political climate the past two days.

Naomi is a cool person, and she should be celebrated for doing cool things regardless of how she looks.

>but if you put it out, some people will always judge you on that merit. It will also net you attention and can overshadow your other feats.

This is actually a common apologetic in defense of Burqas and similar objects of "modesty" for women.

Of course, once you are at the stage of Burqas, any feats that women may achieve will be strictly limited to their household...