Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

AMD Offers Women Geek Dating Advice

samzenpus posted more than 3 years ago | from the power-of-love dept.

AMD 269

Blacklaw writes "It appears AMD has decided to branch out from integrated circuits and enter the romance market with a handy guide for girls to land themselves a geeky guy. From the article: 'In a blog post written by Leslie Sobon, the company's vice president of marketing, Sobon describes her life in the largely male-dominated world of technology as being "mostly surrounded by guys all day," but says: "I can tell you that — in general — technical guys are pretty cool," and offers advice on how girls can land a geek guy. Although clearly meant in a lighthearted way, Sobon's missive serves to patronize both her company's customers — who, we learn, are socially inept and bad dressers — and women, who apparently can't understand technology and need to find a nice man who can "fix the TV, your PC, and the sprinkler system" along with other magical item s far too complex for the poor female brain to comprehend.'"

cancel ×

269 comments

It's funny - laugh (5, Insightful)

Lord Byron II (671689) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689410)

Dear everyone,

Please stop taking every so damned seriously.

Thank you,
Byron

Re:It's funny - laugh (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689558)

You're right. Stereotypes are pretty funny. I often joke with my black co-workers about how if valuable stuff is left out they'll probably steal it!

Re:It's funny - laugh (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689944)

They get in on the fun by joking about how poorly your pasty white face serves as a punching bag... Amiright!!!

Re:It's funny - laugh (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689958)

Your black co-workers come to work?

Re:It's funny - laugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690160)

In soviet russia work comes to black co-workers!

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

ooshna (1654125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690244)

My best friend is half black half spanish and gay. I bust his balls just as bad as any of my white friends. He on more than one occasion has thanked me for treating him like a regular old jackoff. My black friends laugh hard at n****r jokes I usually hear a lot of Daaaaamn and that's fucked up. But it all depends on the people. I wouldn't go up to a guy I didn't know b/c he might think I'm just a racist honky blue-eyed devil.

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

0racle (667029) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689568)

If it is supposed to be funny, they failed miserably.

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689764)

Exactly. I read it and was wondering when the funny was supposed to start. The outrage of this shouldn't be over any feminist issues the outrage should be over this person being terminally unfunny.

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

gorzek (647352) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689810)

Are marketing people usually known for being funny? Inspired and genuinely humorous marketing material seems to be rather rare.

You guys just don't get it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689968)

I used to be a geek. I didn't wear "pants," as she defined them. Then years later I met a non-geek girl that showed me the world outside of computers. The blog made me laugh about my past.

The problem is that you guys are still stuck inside the bubble. Try seeing yourselves from a different perspective.

Re:You guys just don't get it. (1)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690114)

So what you're saying is you left the geek bubble for another bubble. The "pants" bubble, if you will.

Do you really wear khaki pants when you go out? I can see doing that for fancy-pants restaurants, but anything else, I don't really see the point. I have a circle of non-geek friends, and nobody wears "pants".

Then again, this is San Francisco, where everybody wears designer jeans.

Re:You guys just don't get it. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690378)

The "pants" is just one example of geeks vs. non-geeks.
I do wear khakis occasionally for business casual, but I wear pants for work most of the time. Grooming was another part. And I also stopped wearing those free computer shirts and started wearing button down shirts.

But I'd like to believe I'm just a step below a full-blown "suit." I'll save those for the winter.

My changes could also be because of my job. But my gf def. helped me polish my wardrobe, and I do notice a difference on how my superiors see me. More importantly, I don't scare off women, which is the point of this article.

Generally speaking, girls like a guy who's polished. Geeks tend to think that's a waste of time - that the content is what matters. I have female co-workers who find her post cute and funny. Slashdot users (who are mostly male and geek) don't, which is fine to disagree, but the comments here are beyond defensive with snarky comments towards the author.

Anyways, I don't want to show up to work looking like I just graduated from college when I'm 40.

Re:You guys just don't get it. (0, Flamebait)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690230)

The problem is that you guys are still stuck inside the bubble. Try seeing yourselves from a different perspective.

I'm not a social retard like you. That must be the problem.

Re:You guys just don't get it. (1)

Bill, Shooter of Bul (629286) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690448)

Who are "you guys" and what does this have to do with it not being funny? Its not "not funny" because its offensive, its "not funny" because its "not funny" like a show on CBS.

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

Thyamine (531612) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689594)

Thank you. I was thinking the same thing. My wife always gets a laugh when some TV show makes some terrible geek stereotype (especially roleplaying games), and I just shake my head and think it's funny how much she gets a kick out of teasing me.

We make stereotyped jokes about rednecks and users and outsourced tech support and whatever the enemy du jour is of the day. It's ok to laugh at ourselves, and realize that people are making the same jokes about geeks that we are about everyone else.

Nouns! (5, Funny)

Reilaos (1544173) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689658)

I know. I accidentally the whole thing, and yet I can still it lightheartedly.

Re:It's funny - laugh (4, Funny)

tool462 (677306) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689668)

Seriously. I wanted to be offended when I read her list of questions girls can ask geeky guys. But then I realized I had had conversations at work regarding all three within just the past week.

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

tian2992 (1690038) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689690)

you can say that because Ada Lovelace did got her geek

Re:It's funny - laugh (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689718)

I wonder, does she have a little geek in her?

If not, would she like to?

Re:It's funny - laugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690168)

How about no. that "oh can't you take a joke" crap is a common and despicable silencing tactic.

Re:It's funny - laugh (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690334)

I don't think it was very funny (nor do I think it was intended to be), but I think it was a hell of a lot closer to being funny than it was to being insulting, patronizing, or anything else like that. I tend to find that they type of people getting offended by this type of thing are also the type that are hypercritical of everything. Always analyzing every word of everything they hear/read in an attempt to find the most minor thing they can bend to their will so they can get offended and go off on some tirade about how offended they are. Doesn't matter if the concocted offense is about sex, race, age, political viewpoint, career, handicap, nationality, etc. The only thing that matters is that you can find some way to be offended.

She tries too hard (5, Insightful)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689442)

Seriously, if a nice girl's just willing to strike up a conversation with us, she's already miles ahead in my book without having to learn how to parrot stupid lines about x86 vs. ARM.

Re:She tries too hard (1)

Kepesk (1093871) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689678)

All a woman needs to do to land a geeky guy is to quote a line from Star Wars. That is super hot to us.

Re:She tries too hard (5, Funny)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689918)

All a woman needs to do to land a geeky guy is to quote a line from Star Wars. That is super hot to us.

Indeed. Make it so.

Re:She tries too hard (4, Insightful)

Rydian (29123) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690044)

Star Wars quotes?

I think a simple:

"Hi!" *genuine smile*

Would land most any geek... Star Wars quotes would be a bonus.

Re:She tries too hard (4, Insightful)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689966)

having to learn how to parrot stupid lines about x86 vs. ARM

Seriously. I'd be very weirded out if a girl used a line like that during a conversation, only to later find out that she had no clue what she was talking about. If she needs to resort to being fake to make people think she's interesting, well, I'll take my chances elsewhere.

Re:She tries too hard (1)

ooshna (1654125) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690280)

If she needed to be fake to get the interest of a geek.... that is a shame.

Double standard sucks (4, Insightful)

h890231398021 (948231) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689478)

If a male wrote this drivel, he'd at the minimum. be fired, and there's a good chance he'd be sued for sexual harrasment as well. But if a woman writes it? No penalties at all.

Re:Double standard sucks (1)

Sonny Yatsen (603655) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689498)

Well, we are publicly mocking her. That's some sort of penalty, right?

Re:Double standard sucks (3, Insightful)

Abstrackt (609015) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689532)

Well, we are publicly mocking her. That's some sort of penalty, right?

Given that we're publicly mocking her on the Internet I'd say it's just business as usual.

Re:Double standard sucks (1)

thedonger (1317951) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690006)

If her article results in only one geek who otherwise would be terminally basement bound getting laid by a former cheerleader then I say kudos to her.

Re:Double standard sucks (1)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689632)

You use the term "sexual harassment", but I don't think you actually know what it means.

use is appropriate (1)

ChipMonk (711367) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690036)

It all comes down to the perception of a "hostile work environment". Notice I used the term perception, because it isn't about what someone actually does, it's about how it makes someone else feel.

So if some women's studies minor takes offense at a memo a guy wrote about how to date a geek-grrl, that guy had better be prepared with a swift, logical, and pointed defense. Otherwise, he's guilty until proven innocent.

Re:use is appropriate (0)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690110)

Like I said, plenty of people here talking who don't know what is really required to win a lawsuit. As usual.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostile_environment_sexual_harassment [wikipedia.org]

Nothing here fits any of the criteria. My original comment to GP stands.

Re:use is appropriate (1)

hardburn (141468) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690232)

There's what's required to win a lawsuit, and then there's what's required to get someone fired or win an out-of-court settlement.

Re:use is appropriate (2, Insightful)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690302)

Yes, but that's not what this topic was about. The original poster whined that if a guy did this, there'd be a sexual harassment lawsuit. No, there wouldn't. Any lawyer worth his salt would tell his client they have no case.

Re:use is appropriate (1)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690376)

Any lawyer worth his salt would tell his client they have no case.

And a really good lawyer would say that in a way that absolutely convinced their client that for just a little more money they could undoubtedly win the case.

Re:use is appropriate (1)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690434)

That's what a really bad lawyer would do. A really good lawyer doesn't need to take cases he knows he'll lose. A good lawyer doesn't need business that badly. :) I've spoken to lawyers on multiple times and had them convince me NOT to sue -- after all, I'd only been screwed out of $12,000, which was not enough, according to them, to be worth suing over.

Re:use is appropriate (1)

ihatejobs (1765190) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690360)

No one said anything about a lawsuit, but you decided to take it out of context. As usual.

It doesn't take much to get yourself fired, and if a man had written that blog post there's a pretty good chance he would be out of a job.

Re:use is appropriate (0, Flamebait)

ClintJCL (264898) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690424)

Yes, a lawsuit was specifically mentioned in the comment that started this all. Your claim of "no one said anything about a lawsuit" is completely false. Read the original comment and weep. [slashdot.org] Specifically, the part where he says "he'd be sued for sexual harrasment as well". I suggest you read more carefully before commenting -- this is just embarrassing to have to read the comment to you.

Re:Double standard sucks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690318)

False. Do you know how much of this stuff gets published by cismen and it passes by unoticed? You don't understand the world at all do you? Of course not, you have the privelege to ignore it.

Re:Double standard sucks (3, Informative)

ribuck (943217) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690440)

Here's a corresponding piece by a male: "Sex Tips For Geeks: How To Be Sexy [catb.org] " written by none other than "Mr Cathedral and Bazaar" Eric Raymond.

Women can land any man they want (3, Informative)

commodore64_love (1445365) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689520)

As long as they are not butt ugly (or fat) (or both) a teen o 20-something woman can pretty mcuh get any kind of man they desire.

Lucky beeotches.

Us men on the other hand have to work at it, and hear the word "no" or simply derisive laughter about 9 times out of 10 attempts.

Re:Women can land any man they want (5, Insightful)

nixNscratches (957550) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689620)

Not really true. They can always find *someone* who is ready and willing, but that is a far cry from having any man they desire. Once you get to know a girl or two, you'll probably realize they have to work at it a bit too, and it all evens out in the end.

Re:Women can land any man they want (4, Funny)

imamac (1083405) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689682)

Once you get to know a girl or two...

TWO girls??? Did you forget this is slashdot?

Re:Women can land any man they want (2, Funny)

operagost (62405) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689704)

He has a sister.

Re:Women can land any man they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689822)

And a mom.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

Lunix Nutcase (1092239) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689778)

Yes, but if there is also a cup involved that might help to sweeten the deal.

Re:Women can land any man they want (4, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689892)

There are downsides to both gender roles.

One workshop that tried to help genders understand each other better did these exercises:
- First, they got all the men in the room to line up and had the women rate them on their appearance, to teach guys that women feel constantly judged by how they look no matter what the context and give them a chance to see what that feels like.
- Second, they got the women in the room to go up to a stranger and ask them out, to get a feeling for what men go through every time they initiate a relationship.

What's particularly sad is the number of women who've been taught by their moms or Cosmopolitan and the like that when they like a man they shouldn't ask him out, but should somehow signal to him that they want him to ask her out. This leaves the women frustrated because the men didn't pick up their signals, and leaves the men frustrated because they can't figure out when a woman wants to make something happen.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1, Insightful)

Charliemopps (1157495) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690188)

Yea.. no. You're wrong.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

LanMan04 (790429) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690406)

Not really true. They can always find *someone* who is ready and willing, but that is a far cry from having any man they desire. Once you get to know a girl or two, you'll probably realize they have to work at it a bit too, and it all evens out in the end.

I'm 30+ and married with kids, and this is 100% untrue. During my dating years, ALL effort was put forward by the males. ALL.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

Sax Maniac (88550) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690430)

They can always find someone that they desire.

There is a huge difference between "having any man they desire" versus "having some man that they desire, anytime".

Re:Women can land any man they want (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689744)

They don't have to work at getting someone to have sex with them or hang out briefly with the hope of sex; true. If a woman wants someone to hang around and care for her (hey, it may be sexist, but screw you, there's still a ton of women that want just this) then they have to work pretty darned hard at it, especially as they get to 30 and beyond. Incidentally there would be more divorced women who quit working at this in the US if the divorce laws were even between the sexes (they aren't, which is the primary reason 70% of all divorces are initiated by women; purely statistically they have less to lose).

Even if a woman just wants a guy to forgo the stuff he cares about for some time caring about her thing, this is as non-trivial for them as for guys.

Re:Women can land any man they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689766)

You get derisive laughter or the word "no"? Lucky bastard. I get a slap on the face at the minimum! I have been hit in the sack so many times I am sterile. I have also been pepper sprayed so often I have built up an immunity (and started using it in my chili...mmm jalapeño!) I have been tazed four times and arrested once for being "creepy".

Quit bitching. At least you seem have a 10% success rate. I am at about 1 out of 400-some and that was a pity screw at a petting zoo (which, as it turn out, gets you on a special registry).

Re:Women can land any man they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690078)

Brian Peppers, is that you? I thought you already had a /. UID.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

couchslug (175151) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689818)

"Us men on the other hand have to work at it, and hear the word "no" or simply derisive laughter about 9 times out of 10 attempts."

I find a ball gag takes care of that right smartly.

Re:Women can land any man they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690120)

hear the word "no" or simply derisive laughter [...] I find a ball gag takes care of that right smartly.

Great job jumping right into creepy sociopath mode, and digging into the deep end of the negative stereotypes!

Seriously, the best you can hope for such a joke is that it will fall flat and do nothing, as opposed to blowing up in your face; it's a no-win sort of joke. If you're trying to get a girl by using your witty sense of humor, stop. She won't like it, and any friends of hers (male or female) probably also won't like it.

Re:Women can land any man they want (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689932)

As long as they are not butt ugly (or fat) (or both) a teen o 20-something woman can pretty mcuh get any kind of man they desire.

Lucky beeotches.

Us men on the other hand have to work at it, and hear the word "no" or simply derisive laughter about 9 times out of 10 attempts.

And the hilarious part is that us men let women paint us into this false corner. Naturally, us men are the more attractive of the two sexes. This is factual, and my evidence is nothing more than nature itself. Look around. See any pretty plants or animals? Guess what? They are male.

Perhaps it's time to flip the feminazi sexism on it's ugly head, and right the horrible wrong they've committed on human society.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

realsilly (186931) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689962)

Nice stereo type there. Butt Ugly or fat.... um girls have to work at it to. Women are constantly scrutinized with the way they look or their weight, but are expected to just take a man as is. Shenannigans! It's equal work on both sides of the fence, you just see a false perception that women don't have to work at it. Go beyond the looks of the exterior and you'll be able to find someone with a great heart, spirit, and energy. Men would be amazed by the power of looking beyond the exterior of a woman's body. You compliment a women on the whole person, she'll naturally feel better abour herself and will likely eat better and find ways to live up to those compliments bestowed upon her. Try it sometime.

Re:Women can land any man they want (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690490)

Make the women want you!

Girls work on their appearance. They work on their relationship skills. The ones that don't aren't the ones I like. Or that you would like.. really.

The men that are the most eager to please and that think they NEED a woman and are therefore desperate are the least desirable to women.

These guys that fall over women, get nervous, worry about every little emotional thing.. they get insecure jealous and needy and it's all down hill from there.

The guys that are more selective about their women (not just on looks), that take things slow and don't just jump into bed, those guys are the ones any sane woman would want.

It's really about being yourself and being confident about that self and not compromising yourself so that you are unhappy.That's how to get women. Being nicely groomed helps. Being funny and non-intimidated helps.. but deep down that all stems from confidence. I don't care if you're super geek. I am and I do fine.

Re:Women can land any man they want (1)

Gaygirlie (1657131) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690498)

I was just about to say something but then I realized I match all those criteria: 20-something, fat and butt ugly. Nevermind then!

x86 vs ARM? (1)

tian2992 (1690038) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689534)

Pfft. she'd have to at least talk about a worthy RISC architecture, Power PC or SPARC, too bad those ones don't have a chance

Patronize? Really? (2, Insightful)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689540)

Although clearly meant in a lighthearted way, Sobon's missive serves to patronize both her company's customers...

No, no it doesn't....It's only offensive if you're a soulless, insecure, sensitive little bitch. Get over it.

Follow Up (1)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689602)

Apparently that quip about patronization was written by a fella named Gareth Halfacree, the author of the linked article. Gareth, since you're writing for a tech oriented website (at least I think that's what it is) here's some news for you. Geeks tend to have pretty crude, politically incorrect senses of humor, that include discriminatory jokes and a lot of self-deprecation. You might want to learn this soon. Otherwise I fear that writing articles about this world will bring you a DDOS attack, or tears for your fellow men.

Re:Patronize? Really? (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689652)

Finally, Sobon suggests that you ignore his clothes - apparently "most geeks don't wear pants,"

Ummm ... those aren't geeks - that's just guys sitting around looking at porn. Do NOTtouch their mouse or keyboard - you KNOW where their hands have been.

and women should "get over it and wait for the ring to diversify his wardrobe."

Like that's ever worked for anyone of either sex in a relationship - "Oh, they'll change when they're married." Not!

geeks don't wear pants, they wear jeans and shorts (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689716)

I was confused about the pants thing as well. If you read the actual blog post she says that geeks don't wear pants, they wear jeans and shorts.

Re:geeks don't wear pants, they wear jeans and sho (1)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689888)

I don't really get this either. Plenty of geeks I know where khakis ALL the time.

Not to mention, if you're wearing "pants" rather than jeans when you go out on the weekend (excluding to fancy-pants restaurants) you're probably kind of a douche.

Re:geeks don't wear pants, they wear jeans and sho (1)

tomhudson (43916) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690328)

I actually did read the blog post - my way is funnier :-)

Also, let's face it ... it's easy to get a geek.

  1. show up naked
  2. bring beer

Or if you're esthetically challenged -

  1. bring beer
  2. get naked

Re:geeks don't wear pants, they wear jeans and sho (1)

clone53421 (1310749) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690390)

I’d be happy with either one alone, although just bringing beer might be too subtle.

One Last Thing.... (4, Interesting)

BJ_Covert_Action (1499847) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689698)

Well, if you read the actual blog post [amd.com] instead of that jackass written article, you will find the blog is actually pretty light and makes little, if any offensive comments or insinuations. Really, it's pretty cut and dry and somewhat silly. So, after three posts, I've decided Gareth Halfacree [thinq.co.uk] is a total douchebag, and the author of the blog itself, Leslie Sobon [amd.com] comes off as pretty date-able. Also, I posted three separate times because everything is better in triplicates, and work is extremely slow today.

BFD (1)

rot26 (240034) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689584)

Nothing to see here. Please move along.

Jeans aren't pants? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33689592)

When did this happen? Was it at the same time that Pluto was demoted, but Pluto hogged all the press time, or what?

No, mam, no pants here (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689636)

Finally, Sobon suggests that you ignore his clothes - apparently "most geeks don't wear pants," and women should "get over it and wait for the ring to diversify his wardrobe."

- that's right, depending on how I feel I have no pants on, and/or no underwear. Is it a blessing in disguise or is it your worst nightmare? Nobody knows.

Re:No, mam, no pants here (1)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689796)

I generally wear skirts. People give you funny looks - at first - but they quickly get used to it and just accept that they should just close their eyes when I bend over to pick something up.

Re:No, mam, no pants here (1)

roman_mir (125474) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689826)

what a great idea! When I don't feel like putting on pants and underwear at all, those I find to be the quietest days in the office, so few people are around, I wonder why?

How I wooed by nerdy wife (3, Interesting)

Pojut (1027544) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689684)

We are both into the same nerdy things (comics, video games, movies, etc) but we are into different TYPES of comics, video games, movies, etc. This allowed us to expand each other's exposure to our favorites, while still the same things. It gave us a lot to bond over during the early part of our relationship, and that helped us reach the point where we got married.

The overlap in the details of our common interests got the ball rolling, and the differences in the details of our common interests kept it rolling.

Silly AMD... (5, Funny)

jpapon (1877296) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689720)

Talk about a bad business strategy.

Don't they realize that if all their smart geeky employees start getting laid regularly they'll quickly lose motivation to work ridiculous hours for less pay than their superiors who don't do anything?

If geeks start getting laid, the American economy will collapse, since geeks is all we really have left. I, for one, think that the sexual activities of geeks should be heavily monitored and controlled by the government to ensure their continued general dissatisfaction with human relations. It must be done; for the sake of our children, for the sake of American prosperity.

p.s. I'm moving to Germany (Gottingen) next week.

Why women "in tech" don't trust each other... (2, Insightful)

wagadog (545179) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689734)

Because if she ain't an engineer, she's just coming to work to try to meet one. Kinds sad, if you ask me.

And how do you tell the difference? Between an actual female engineer and gals like this who can't even play one on TV?

  Well, there's those degrees and certs to start with, not to mention the actual knowledge and actual accomplishments.

Unfortunately, there are so few of us that organizations have given up on discerning the difference.

I am very wary of women "in tech" who simply don't know anything except how to pander to *male* geeks.

Re:Why women "in tech" don't trust each other... (1)

molesdad (1003858) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689904)

I think the salient point is your getting laid ... motives are irevelent are they not. Or have I missed the whole basis of life on earth?

Re:Why women "in tech" don't trust each other... (2, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690090)

I for one am wary of any coworker, regardless of gender, who has not demonstrated an ability to do their job. Male or female or something else doesn't matter: that person's failings can and will screw up my life by either forcing me to take up the slack or pinning the blame on me for their problems. And as a male geek, pandering to me doesn't get you off the hook.

And you're right that a fair number of companies are fine with people who are incompetent at their jobs. Read The Peter Principle, which has a lot on the subject of why they tolerate stupidity and failure.

I see where this is going... (2, Funny)

durrr (1316311) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689788)

Having had decent sucess in the multi core race, AMD decides to innovate the field first with dating advice and the subsequent release of their hardcore line of processors, running at a comfortable 37c, G-hardened and fluid proofed. The first being the classic dual-hardcore version, but more adventuros users may be interested in the hexa-hardcore model of the magny-coques lineup.

Wow, I am offended (1)

tekrat (242117) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689842)

I read TFA and the Blog Post. I am a male geek and I am 45 years old, and have had only one sexual partner in all that time.

Even I am offended by this blog post. Not for what she says about geeks, but for how she treats other women, as brainless fashionistas.

If this is how women speak to other women, no wonder women seek out even the jerkiest of jocks -- even they will treat them better than other women!

Admittedly, I am cynical. I say things often that could be considered offensive or sarcastic, such as my view that "love is only for pretty people". But I assume that anyone reading or listening to me isn't braindead. Even blondes (I kid, I kid!).

Secondly, she assumes the reliationship is one-way. She never assumes that the "geek" might be interested in what music styles, hobbies, interests and worldview the lady brings to the relationship. Believe it or not geeks can have conversations about more than just tech.

I agree with another poster about this: If a man had written and posted this blog on AMD's site, he's have been fired in 2 seconds flat for sexism.

Way to go double standard.

Re:Wow, I am offended (1)

fiannaFailMan (702447) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690326)

I agree with another poster about this: If a man had written and posted this blog on AMD's site, he's have been fired in 2 seconds flat for sexism.

Way to go double standard.

It is odd that they allow personal blogs hosted on the corporate site complete with the logo and everything, although there is a disclaimer at the bottom:

"Leslie Sobon is corporate vice president, product marketing at AMD. Her postings are her own opinions and may not represent AMD’s positions, strategies or opinions. Links to third party sites are provided for convenience and unless explicitly stated, AMD is not responsible for the contents of such links and no endorsement is implied"

To me, that kind of mixing business with pleasure is a little disconcerting.

Nerdy women don't want kids (1)

BroomSweep (1897498) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689860)

From personal experience, well personal experience of friends, don't marry a nerdy girl if you want kids. More often or not they are too guyish to have any such desire.

Would the real Leslie Sobon please stand up (1)

iamhassi (659463) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689894)

This is a photo of Leslie Sobon [amd.com]

Alright, that's pretty good, but then these are also photos of Leslie:
one [digitalhollywood.com]
two [youtube.com]
three [gstatic.com]
four [mycom.co.jp]

That's quite a range there, never know what you're going to get.

Re:Would the real Leslie Sobon please stand up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690130)

wow, she looks like she could play Julia Stiles' mom!

Re:Would the real Leslie Sobon please stand up (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690414)

Or even Stifler's mom.

People who believe in dating strategies (3, Insightful)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689912)

wind up with people who believe in dating strategies: shallow reptilian posers who look at other people like predators do.

But people who act like themselves, meet people who are actually interested in them. When you act like yourself, and follow no strategy at all, you form genuine lasting bonds based on your actual real personality and character.

Strategy, when it comes to meeting someone of the opposite sex you are interested in forming a lasting meaningful bond with, is failure. Because strategy is about conquest when relationships are about humanity. So the best strategy when it comes to forming a human bond with other human beings is absence of strategy. The less you try, the better you do, because without the sword and armor people see you for what you really are. Not everyone will like the real you, but its better to lead without the sword and armor, because if you build a relationship based on the sword and armor, you eventually have to take those things off, they cost too much to maintain, and the person you wooed with the sword and armor won't like what they see, and feel betrayed, since they were sold on the sword and armor.

Unless you are just looking to get laid. In which case, you should be concerned with nothing more than tactical warfare.

Re:People who believe in dating strategies (1)

JackOfAllGeeks (1034454) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690108)

A strange game. The only winning move is not to play. How about a nice game of chess?

LOL (1)

circletimessquare (444983) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690316)

Just think: if WOPR from "Wargames" had met Skynet from "The Terminator", these computers wouldn't be trying to throw us poor humans into dystopian alternative reality nightmares, they would just be playing nice computer games in private.

So yes, meeting the right mate matters in avoiding genocidal thermonuclear war, or uh, something.

Sprinkler system (1)

LoudMusic (199347) | more than 3 years ago | (#33689986)

My wife runs the automatic sprinkler system. I don't go near that damn thing. It's worse than setting up Lexmark printers.

It's very simple... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690042)

Have tits and a pulse. We geeky guys aren't exactly known for being particularly choosy when a live girl actually shows some interest.

Re:It's very simple... (1)

molesdad (1003858) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690148)

Yeah thats being male and it dosn't have to be a real girl or .. you watched last nights premire of the big bang theory right?

Disagree (5, Insightful)

bmajik (96670) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690170)

I'm not sure my wife could name any of the programming languages that I have used in my career. And that doesn't bother me.

I don't need my partner to be interested in the specifics of my work. When I am upset or frustrated about work, or want to talk about what I did that day, generalities are fine, because honestly, unless you were on the same project I was on, it wouldn't make much sense no matter what level of vocabulary you had.

I've had the experience of dating a girl very seriously who was beautiful, highly intelligent, and an excellent system administrator. And our shared language and work/hobby interests did nothing to smooth over the rocky spots in our relationship, and while initially it made me much more attracted to her, in retrospect it was perhaps novelty more than anything else. IOW, her qualities as a person were considerably more important than her "job" as a sysadmin or her interests as "a geek", and our ideology and personality clashes eventually overshadowed our mutual geekyness.

_My_ advice to women who are interested in geeky guys is

1) be accessible. Women _baffle_ men, and geeks are used to being able to come up with valid mental models to predict the behavior of complex things. But this is regularly less successful than we would like when applied to girls. (See xkcd: http://xkcd.com/55/ [xkcd.com] )

This means, when we work up the nerve to ask questions or chat, use accomodating body language. Listen, and ask clarifying questions to help draw us out more. Don't act like we have the plague -- we probably don't.

2) Expect to be challenged. Challenge back. Most geeks will want to have an authentic relationship. We will, like all asshole men, project our values, expectations, and ideas about women on to you, but we're better off if you challenge us when we do that. Not like "STFU you patriarch bastard", but actually engage us in a discussion about why we are wrong. You don't have to care about what we do, but you do need to demonstrate critical thinking skills. We, by and large, do not have serious relationships with people who are very beautiful but very dim and self centered. They are eye and arm candy, but not for serious relationships.

3) We are usually not eye and arm candy.

(To be fair, we're not asking you to be either -- very often :))

If we need to shave more or dress better or whatever to meet your expectations regarding house-broken mammals, we will probably not understand, and we will probably resist any attempts by you to guilt us or shame us into complying. Explain why it is important to you _personally_, and work things from that angle. There will be some amount of ideological opposition, but usually you'll luck out by appealing to the pragmatist within us.

4) Don't be ashamed of who you are or what your interests are. The AMD lady's advice is pretty bad I think -- if you're not interested in CPU types, don't pretend to be. Some of us love explaining that stuff to anyone who will listen, and others would rather not tell you if you cannot be bothered to find out for yourself. But don't patronize us and imply that you are interested when you really aren't.

5) Many of the same problems between men and women apply to geek men and women. We have pride, we desperately want your respect, it is important (to varying degrees) to us to be approved of by you. Often, we are better at expressing our anger and frustration in words, but not always. Some of us are alcoholics, quick to anger, and some of us will hurt you, because after all, we're still men, even when we're not tan and not rippling with muscle mass.

(PS: many of us are still confused about how we fit into a world that has a traditional yet evolving idea of what a "man" is. Yes, our grandpas fought wars, our dads worked in factories and enjoyed a stiff drink. Yet some of us don't like going outside. Somewhere inside all of us is the need to be a bit macho at times, but we're not always sure how. Please don't try and make that worse for us. It can be a touchy issue.)

6) This is something that is true of most men, but I'll repeat it here. Many of us need time to ourselves, especially when we get angry. For the geek who was mostly alone (ideologically, if not physically) growing up, solitude is comfortable, compansionship is new and challenging. We have to straddle the line of wanting compansionship, yet also needing solitude to recharge and work things out. We will want to spend time alone, and it isn't because we disapprove of or find any particular fault with you. That's just how many of us are. Trust us to come back out of the cave; we don't like being in there for too long. But please leave us alone until we're ready.

Easy (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 3 years ago | (#33690274)

How to land a geeky guy? Easy.

Step 1. Be female.

Done.

I love the shameless advertising at the end! (2, Funny)

default luser (529332) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690412)

In her blog post, she recommends three things at the end of the article:

Buy your geek a Radeon graphics card.

Buy your geek a triple-monitor setup so he can run Eyefinity.

Buy your geek an unlocked Phenom II Black.

Quite the savvy saleswoman, this one.
.

Hm (1)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690444)

This post is not intended to be insightful or anything. It's just a rant about myself.

I'm starting to question my geekiness. I've always considered myself a geek (well, more of a nerd according to my definition of those two words), but I don't fit into any of the stereotypes listed in that blog post. I'm not a gamer. I'm not an overclocker (I do like good hardware, but I don't obsess over it). I'm not obsessed with any geek movies/series (star wars, etc. I enjoy some of them, but am in no way obsessed). It advises to ask geeky questions... but to me that would be an immediate dealbreaker. I don't want a girl who knows anything about CPU architecture or programming languages. I wouldn't mind someone with knowledge of some sort of science or technology, but *not* computer science or computer/electrical engineering. Not sure why that's a turnoff for me. Maybe it's just experience with the type of girls in those fields.

In regards to some of the posts in this /. thread, I am *very* picky about girls that I would be interested in having a relationship with. A lot of girls like geeks. I think I can do better than a girl with a pulse. I hope...

"MS Office 2010 is sexy" (?) (1)

slshwtw (1903272) | more than 3 years ago | (#33690458)

Just check out the titles of her other blog posts [amd.com] , including:
  • My 3D Love Affair
  • Microsoft Office 2010 is Sexy
  • What Women Want

It seems like she would rather be a VP of Marketing at a tabloid than a technology company.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...