Speaking for myself, if Gayle was a man, I would doubt he as a programmer as well. It's overall image, not gender. In fact, one of the posters highlighted in the blog post said just that, even though the author chose to take it as sexist anyway.
Um, actually, this is what the highlighted post said:
"when you 'talk about' code for an hour and still ppl think you're a recruiter, that's not about gender - that's about your tech skill: people don't think you are a good coder. You looked like a saleman in that case if you are a guy or a recruiter if you are a girl. The key thing here is not your gender. You were looked down upon not because you are a female engineer, it's solely because you are an incapable coder thus don't deserve the certain level of respect you expected."
So, first of all, the person is denying that it was about gender while basically saying that it is.
If man -> sales
If woman -> recruiter
That... sounds like gender to me.
Moreover, this person was suggesting that "incapable coder" -> not a coder. Which is sort of weird.
> So, first of all, the person is denying that it was about gender while basically saying that it is. If man -> sales If woman -> recruiter
Thus, the gender bias is as to which non-technical role the poster puts you in, not whether they think you are non-technical.
Yes, I was wrong to indicate there was nothing sexist at all about the post. I was thinking primarily of the non-technical part.
> Moreover, this person was suggesting that "incapable coder" -> not a coder. Which is sort of weird.
I see that sentiment expressed about programmers of all types. It's the idea that if you are not at a certain level you are a faker, and thus not really a "coder". I see such accusations leveled at people constantly, without regard to gender.
The core point I was making is that you are not being typecast as non-technical for being a woman. You are being typecast for the writings for which you are best known, not for being a woman.
EDIT: So, I posted this reply from my comments view four hours after my GP post. Then I went back and read your other comments. In that context, I change my opinion. The submitted blog post needs the details you posted in this thread, and on it's own does present a very strong argument.
