California Surveyors Forums

A pretty nice article appeared in the latest issue of California Surveyor, which deals with Women in Surveying.

In the early 2000's My company employed more women than men. My female only crew was very efficient at topography's and note keeping. I purchased smaller/ lighter GPS equipment for them just simply because the old style back packs were designed for a certain size individal.

My "gals" always showed up on time each day ready to work (except the ONE day per month) (dark chocolate day)

Inspite of their success and drive, I found it unnerving when clients would specifically request a "Male" survey crew be sent to their jobs.
Some clients actually quit using my companies services stating "because my insistent use of a qualified female survey crew" demonstrated poor judgement on my part.

As time has passed my "gals" have moved on but I am very blessed to currently have a wonderful staff of both men and women.

I have but one word of advice/observation for gals and new guys entering the Survey profession. Sometimes a crew has to do, what a crew has to do, to get the job done. Road kill has to be scraped off the monument well for access, barb wire must be crossed yellow jackets dealt with etc, etc.

Sucessful surveying requires bravery and determination,
My "gals could do that better than some guys.


Happy surveying to all ;^)

"good"

Your post sounds like:

"I even have friends that are......black, brown, asian, women, green, purple, whatever - fill in the blank........."


Over my many years in surveying, I have worked with numerous surveyors that happen to be women, and the subject of "dark chocolate day" never came up.


As a Professional land Surveyor that happens to be male, I'm actually embarassed by your entire condesending post.

I am reading it as a compliment to females in Surveying.

It is a compliment to the Women in surveying
Particularly My former and current employees.

Just to clear the record for Mr Coast . . . My Eldest son is 50% native american Blackfeet tribe. My other three children are 50% Mexican American.

There is much more, but in short, I never would be condesending.

Sorry you took it that way,

Ruel: I understand your point of view. It is unfortunate that we even distinguish between the races, sexes, etc.

When i run into this, I am reminded of a comment from my oldest son in discussing a situatin at kindergarten. He eplained the problem he was having and mentioned the name. When asked for details about who the other kid was, Nick elaorated on the description. Unfortunately, we still didn't know who he meant. Finally, he said "You know! The brown kid!", refering to the one African-American student in the class. Although it would have been easy to assume that Nick's intention was otherwise, all he implied was a distinguishing characeristic rather low on his list of distinguishing characteristics.

If you knew "Good", you'd realize that his post was lauditory in nature and not in anyway concilliatory or derogatory. "Good" is...well...good!

Ian

Oh I get it . . . .Sorry coast !!!!
The term "Dark Chocolate day" has nothing to do with race. . .silly

I actually learned that term from the Women themselves.

My company is based upon an understanding of the Clients, the public agency and each other.
My young parents (male and female) may take leave at anytime to tend to family issues. We help each other with health concerns and nutrition.
I support the employees off work activities such as softball and a candle party etc. These people are not just pawns to be scattered at will and dispensed as seen, they are a family of choice.

I so upset that I upset somebody, I am gonna eat some chocolate right now.

Thanks Ian for placing up those magnificant words.

"good"

You are correct, Ian. I do not know Good but from his comments he came off as very condescending and misogynistic.
The women profiled in the articles are all very accomplished and talented women. Our defining characteristic is not that we menstruate. Those comments diminish and marginalize us as surveyors and women.

It's a shame that people have to walk around with a chip on their shoulder based upon identity politics to the point that they are deeply offended by a mere lack of eloquence.

It's so bad that a man can't even repeat a term comedically used by women themselves.

I agree with Good, among the best and hardest working surveyor's I've met are a few women.

Hello GoodGPS. This is my first post to the forum, I occasionally "lurk" and enjoy reading your (collectively) spirited discussions, but have never posted. I tried to post this yesterday morning but there was a delay in activating my account.

Thank you for your positive comments on the "Women in Surveying" issue (I am one of the authors). And for your mostly positive comments on women in our profession.

I am horrified but not surprised that you have had clients complain about using women crews, and am glad that you hung in there and continued to employ women. That says a lot to me.

I'm writing in a feeble attempt to shatter the stereotype of women "not working one day a month". Even though I know the men are probably chuckling and high-fiving each other as they read that, it certainly isn't true for all women. I can only speak for myself and will do so. To wit:

1. I hate dark choclolate. YUCK!

2. For the entire time I worked in private practice and for government, I never called in sick. Not once (time period of over 10 years). It was very important to me to be there, at work, every day, and on time. "Dark chocolate day" or not. Of course there are men who can make the same claim but I don't think that anyone is stereotyping them. Anyway, I did what was right for me. And I think part of my motivation for having a perfect work record was to help dispel that very stereotype. (Now I work for myself and don't get paid sick days, so it isn't an issue anymore.)

And Evan, I don't think that women who react the way Gwen did necessarily have a chip on their shoulder. Think of it this way. What if someone posted "We have several African American employees. They're great workers except for...(insert unfair stereotype here)" Or "We have several Jewish employees. They're great workers except for...(insert unfair religious stereotype here.)". I don't think that people in those ethnic/religious groups would have a "chip on their shoulder" by objecting to those posts. Again, only speaking for myself.

I want to echo the latest poster's thanks to John W. for having us write and for putting the magazine together!!!

squid

I can attest to Squid's dislike for Dark Chocolate...but I didn't care, it only meant that was one less person to share with during those meetings.

Ric

Hey, hey, hey, Squid, what have you got against "Jewish employees"?

I am SOOOO offended!!!

So I guess my point was lost on you, Ian. Well at least I tried. All we can do is try.

Ric, I'll try to bring some (real) dark chocolate for you to the next meeting.....and you don't have to share. :-)

First, I'd like to say the whole magazine issue was excellent. I noticed that most, if not all, of the women commented on the fact that they never really had a problem with discrimination anywhere, and that most everybody they met in the business helped them to get where they wanted to go.
Now Dave,
I showed your post to a few women, some in the business and some not. All of them were offended by your comments and tone. In particular they did not like the word "gals" for women and they thought your comments on "that one day of the month" were totally out of line. Your inference that women are somewhat less than willing to do what it takes (Road kill has to be scraped off the monument well for access, barb wire must be crossed yellow jackets dealt with etc, etc.) also struck a nerve with the women. I thought you might want to know how you are being interpreted by some people (except for Ian).
Ian, show the post to your wife and ask her opinion.

Squid,

I understand your point. My point was that even though the vast majority of Good's post was to make the points that his "gals" were excellent employees, he had a great working relationship with them, and that he was "blessed" to have been able to work with them, the first response was to look past all that and find an unintended insult to get indignant about.

Among the praise was a comment about women being, on average, smaller and less muscular than men, and the "dark chocolate" comment, which was how one or more of his "gals" referred to their down days.

Why do some folks, when presented with a diamond, need to ignore the sparkle and focus immediately on the inclusions? We've turned into a society where one is not only free to be offended based upon gender, color, age, or ethnicity, but it's practically expected if a comment, or in this case, a compliment is not filtered through the seive of political correctness. In this case, some dude felt that he needed to be the first to be offended for someone else.

Sheesh!

Good's post, while lacking in tact, was one intended to be high praise. That should have been obvious to anyone who read it. Were some of the comments offensive? No doubt. When put in the context of the whole message, could their be any intent to offend discerned? Not by a reasonable person.

So to those whose first reaction is get all ticked off, why not take the praise, roll your eyes at the rest, and just figure that Good is a product of another era who just hasn't kept up with the pace of political correctness?

How much goodwill or benefit is thrown away by people because they would rather be offended by comments, perhaps said in ignorance, that were not intended to offend?

Ian wrote:

Hey, hey, hey, Squid, what have you got against "Jewish employees"?

I am SOOOO offended!!!


Squid replied:
So I guess my point was lost on you, Ian. Well at least I tried. All we can do is try.



Actually, Squid, I got your point, liked it, thought it was a good one and replied back with my tongue firmly planted in my cheek.

I cringe when I hear colleagues talking about being "jewed" out of a portion of their fee, but I understand that they mean me no harm. I don't get offended when someone wishes me Merry Christmas. It's not a comment filled with hate. It's not Kristal Nacht we're talking about.

Ric will attest to the above...

Oh bother...I'm going home for some Milk Chocolate...to heck with the dark stuff...of all kinds...

Evan,

I'm thinking you weren't just responding to my post, but to some of the others as well. No problem.

You might notice that I did comment on, and thank "Good" for, his positive comments, of which there more than there were of negative. (apologies for the poor sentence structure there). I didn't feel like I was throwing away his goodwill. And I don't see this as a "politically correct" issue, but of course you are free to think of it that way. I'm not trying to change your mind.

I was pointing out what I saw (and still see) as an offensive stereotype in his post. You can say that "no reasonable person" would be offended but you are really speaking for yourself, as I was speaking for myself, and I felt like I presented a 'reasonable' explanation of why that "chocolate" comment was offensive. What's "obvious" to you, isn't necessarily "obvious" to another person. We all come at these things from different places. And interpret things differently. We're in a good profession for that!! Lots of surveyors consider themselves "reasonable" yet disagree on things. Vive la difference.

Scott, I appreciate your post. And Ian, I could tell your tongue was in your cheek......I was "playing it cool". (LOL) Those Jewish stereotypes bother the heck out of me as well.

Hoping this will be my last post on this topic, and happy election night everyone! (go vote if you haven't yet!)

squid

Squid,
thankyou for the wonderful response to very personal experienced post.

The dark chocolate was the "ladies" Idea. they actually told me jokingly "Boss, just get us some dark chocolate and we'll be fine"
incedentially these "ladies/gals" missed far less work days than the "men/ guys"
When the crews were to be dispatched, the "ladies" wrote a note on the older GPS unit "guys" and another one "gals" on the lighter one. These people were a TEAM
all of them . . . AS of this Very day, each of them teach me something,... then so often "thank me for teaching them" Truely I'm the one learning.

I've got a dozen donuts says these complainers (except the Coastals) don't employ a "Female/ ladies/ whatever . . . Crew", and maybe never had.

Squid, as far as clients etc. . . .the local reaction was mixed. I did hang in there and DID lose some very good clients. :-( Some of you local norcal "cats" are the recipients. . . Your Welcome.

We as surveyors are taught to "call it as we see it" Such as a 3/4" iron pipe.
Now shouldn't this Iron pipe be offended because actually it is a "Steel" pipe.
A "pin" .. offended because it is a "Rod"

Squid and some of the others "got the point" Hiring Women at My company has proved to be a very rewarding experience. . . . I was also first in this area to use GPS. . . . .you follow yet you criticize. . .. .yet you follow.

I don't have a cabin, a motor home or a new car. my employees didn't "earn" them for me. I stand behind my employees whatever origin they are. The ones that are gone, had a reason but I still like them as human beings.
"good"

Ian,
Now I realize my problem. Chocolate is Jewish. . . Fudge is Goyish. (Lenny Bruce)

Squid,

No, my comments weren't an observation of your reaction. Specifically, I was responding mostly to the indignant Coastals. Sorry for the confusion.

There are many who seem so ready to be offended that they can't recognize good intent, or discern unintended offensive but unharmful commentary from meanness and intended harm.

Hey DEW, thanks for the "spelling and grammar" comments. Always appreciated. As on backing me up on my insane work record. :-)

Evan, again, I believe that Gwen and Ruel ARE reasonable people (I know them quite well) and shouldn't be categorized as "not reasonable" because they read/interpreted that post differently than you did. (Maybe you didn't mean it that way.) And refer to the women to whom Scott (above) showed the post. Are they all unreasonable also, because of how they felt about the post? Anyway, that's just my opinion.

And Greg, if you read what I wrote I said "last post ON THIS TOPIC", not "last post". And I couldn't even make THAT stick, could I? Here I am writing again.

And one (hopefully last on this topic from me, but you never know) more thing from me. As I'm sure most of you would agree, sometimes when you're writing, as opposed to talking, it is more difficult to get the "tone" right. I really didn't appreciate the "tone" of the original post when I first read it but when I read the comments about "good"'s character I wanted to give him the benefit of the doubt, hopefully that showed through in what I wrote. "Good" seemed to appreciate it anyway.

Again, we're in a profession where there are lots of disagreements! Let the fun continue!

squid

All I know is I feeled honored that I have had the chance to meet with 3 of these professionals. But Ric has to share.

I have nice things to say but I'm afraid to post!

-- mi•sog•y•nis•tic-------------
--Function: adjective--------------
--: having or showing a hatred and distrust of women----------

It seems to me calling "goodgps" misogynistic is wholly unfounded based solely on his comments. Nowhere does he demonstrate hatred or distrust of women. I find it offensive when people take careless or distasteful comments and start name throwing themselves without really thinking about the what they are really saying!

--male chauvinist
--n. A man whose behavior and attitude toward women indicate a belief --that they are innately inferior to men.
--male chauvinism n

Nope, doesn't apply either, although I could see why someone might read between the lines (filling in meaning or thoughts that are not actually expressed but believed to be the real meaning behind what is being said). His words are arguably offensive but don't start building a court case on it.

I'd think before typing on this forum or any other. That includes "Coast Engineering".

--Libel
--1. Law.
--a. defamation by written or printed words, pictures, or in any form other --than by spoken words or gestures.

I'd say "goodgps" words were offensive but certainly not "misogynistic" or "chauvinistic" ..... if you're tying to actually use words with their accepted definitions.

---of⋅fen⋅sive
--–adjective
---3. repugnant to the moral sense, good taste, or the like; insulting: an ---offensive remark; an offensive joke.

Just something to think about. "As a professional" I don't think we should be lashing out at people who say offensive things by accusing them of being things that we cannot possibly know they are by the evidence we are given. It would have been better to tell him that you found it offensive and see what he had to say about it.