How could you conclude that "default deny" has anything at all to do with a persons's sex? People aren't being denied/excluded because of their gender they're being denied/excluded because enterprise IT culture sucks.

It is the opposite of an "inclusive" culture but it should be noted how it became that way: Through decades of non-technical people interfering with technical decision making and a political culture that measures success--and power--by the amount of people who work for you. Eventually you get to the point where someone--an outsider--contributing work to your project feels like a threat to your very existence.

> However, when the hierarchy is dominated by one gender, there is an additional hurdle that the privileged gender will not encounter.

What hurdle would that be? In addition to not being on the right team or having the right job title you need the right sex? I don't think so. Silos, NIH syndrome, and similar don't take sex into account. They impact all genders, races, and whatnot equally.

I'm sure sexism exists in IT as it does in all industries and careers (especially the subconscious kind) but the worker-hostile situations that are all-too-common in IT are not sexism. They may drive out or scare off women--I don't know--but they're not inherently sexist.

You misunderstood me. I specifically said all genders have to face that behavior and that "default deny" likely has no unique impact on women. So I don't understand why you think I'm arguing for the opposite case. Still, you seem pretty confident that sexism exists somewhere at the same time you can't point to it. Is it possible you're excluding possibilities to create a more comfortable problem?

Sexism is pervasive. It's everywhere and it impacts both sexes (and especially those who don't easily fit into typical sex stereotypes). When it happens at a conscious or institutional level we can step in and correct it. When it happens at a subconscious level we don't (usually) notice.

For example, if I say, "A schoolteacher friend of mine" in conversation what do you think the odds are that people will assume I'm talking about a woman? What about if I said, "my mechanic"?

They're stereotypes and they're pervasive, unavoidable, and can be quite sexist. Whenever you look at someone or even hear their voice--even someone you know very well--you will make assumptions about that person whether you want to or not. There's probably nothing we can do about it.

What we can do something about is institutionalized sexism. I don't think IT has that. Instead what we have is institutionalized enterprise politics and sociopath CEOs[1].

1. http://www.patheos.com/blogs/drishtikone/2013/10/are-ceos-an...