Is Software Craftsmanship too gender specific?

December 1st, 2009

The term Software Craftsmanship has really gotten a lot of attention lately; the majority of this attention was from people promoting the believes behind it. Pushing to make our industry more mature; in my opinion a push that is long overdue.

But there is an objection to the gender specific nature of the word “Craftsman” or “Craftsmanship”, personally I am not bothered with it, perhaps this is because I am a man or because I am not a native English speaker? When I hear the word Craftsman I think about the discipline and not whether we speak about a man or a woman. But because some people don’t appreciate the wording we should put some more thoughts into finding an alternative.

Victoria suggests using the word “Codesmith” instead, I looked up the definition of “Smith” and found one that made me laugh; “To beat into shape, to forge (3)” this would actually apply to many practicing our trade, but surely it is not the same meaning that stands behind craftsmanship: “Skill in an occupation or trade”. I found one other definition of Smith: “One who makes or works at something specified (3)”. It is often used in combination; a locksmith, a wordsmith. So in that light Codesmith would work. But as Dave Hoover says as well code is to limiting in the world of software development. Software Craftsmanship is much more then just code. Also Codesmith basically only tells something about the type of work the person does, nothing about the disipline and skills of the person.

Loosing the gender in Craftsmanship might actually be quit easy we could just use “Craftship” instead, but this will not work for Craftsman. An other alternative I found was “Mastery” and this might actually work in both cases; Software Mastery and Software Master. It does get a bit confusing when we are talking about the different levels within Craftsmanship; Apprentice, Journeyman and Master.

The problem with creating new words is that in the beginning they will almost always sounds funny or weird, think for example of “Googling”. But I do think that if we would try to find a new word for Craftsman and Craftsmanship that we should do so outside the software industry so that it will be recognized by any trade.

And this for me personally could mean that I have to think about the title of the book that I am working on “The Software Craftsman”. 

Mark Nijhof

  • http://www.developerdame.com sara stephens

    Hi Mark, nice post. As a developer I myself am not too phased by the word ‘craftsman’ although I’m not entirely sure if there may be subtle connections we make with role and gender due to vocation naming that is unknown to the conscious mind, it would be interesting to see know if there if there was a link.

    With regards to a new name, maybe you just replace man with person, i know it doesn’t have that ring to it but i’m stuck for anything else. I’ll do a bit more research and have a think and see what else I can come it with. :)

    Sara

  • Perry Neal

    How about “artisan” ? According to dictionary.com it’s “a person skilled in an applied art; a craftsperson.”

  • http://bob-the-janitor.blogspot.com/ Richard

    I feel this is anther case of someone trying to make something out of nothing. According to the dictionary “An artisan, also called a craftsman,[1] is a skilled manual worker who uses tools and machinery in a particular craft.” Gender isn’t even mentioned.

    Instead of looking for things to separate ourselves we should be looking for common ground, let’s face it the tech world probably places the highest value on aristocracy of talent far more then anything else. We as a sub-culture care more about how good your skill set is then race, gender, religion, nationality, etc. and I think it cheapens us as a group to bicker over something as unimportant as this.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @sara stephens
    I thought of mentioning Craftsperson and Craftspersonship but they really don’t seem to roll of the tong nicely :)

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Perry Neal
    Even do programming takes a lot of creativity and resembles the artistic trade very much, one thing really differs is that developers need much structure, and it should not be seen as art. Sometime you just need to make something ugly :)

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Richard
    If people are being offended by it then it is not something unimportant, at least it can be discussed?

  • http://simpleprogrammer.com John Sonmez

    When is doubt always replace a noun with “Ninja”.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @John Sonmez
    Hehe and you will not be taken seriously by anybody anymore :)

  • Amy

    As a woman in the field I think that “Craftsmanship” is just fine. I know that I work in a male dominated industry and have adjusted my thinking appropriately. If my boss says “Hey guys.” it doesn’t even occur to me that it might be inappropriate.

    In this case I think that the appropriate definition of “man” is “a member of the species Homo sapiens or all the members of this species collectively, without regard to sex: prehistoric man.”

    I think it sounds good as is.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Amy
    Yeah I agree, it is a way of expressing the believes that the person stands for. I am not bothered by it myself, but then again how could I :) There are not many people that are offended by it, but it does pop-up now and then where the last post I read was from Veronica so there are people that would rather see it changed.

    One thing that I think is that it is an established word with an established meaning. Changing the word would perhaps only cause confusion?

  • http://ktaylor.name Kevin Taylor

    Whatever we have to call it to get more women involved, and frankly more humans, I am all for. We need the concept of craftsmanship, professionalism, in software. It is time.

    The name is not as important as the concepts it represents. I don’t get any personal strokes by calling myself a craftsman over a professional or a codesmith. I don’t hold an image of myself as a medieval artisan toiling away in my violin shop. That is not what the craftsmanship movement is about.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Kevin Taylor
    Very true, and I hope that you didn’t get that impression from my post.

  • Perry Neal

    @Mark Nijhof
    “Ugly” is in the eye of the beholder. Looking at a lot of modern “art” you can see that “art” isn’t necessarily attractive.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Perry Neal
    I more or less meant, you are not always trying to make a piece of art (independently of your taste) sometimes as a software craftsman you have to take certain shortcuts in order to achieve a higher goal. (how you go about these things and how you communicate these things is part of what makes you a software craftsman).

    An artist (or the ones I know) will _not_ make compromises, period.

  • http://blog.8thlight.com/doug Doug Bradbury

    There was quite an extensive discussion on the topic early this year on the Software Craftsmanship Google group. Here is a link to the thread: http://bit.ly/5HIqEf

    -Doug

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Doug Bradbury
    Yeah as you could see atm I didn’t agree on changing the name :) personally I believe the name represents what I think it means without being gender specific. It’s just something that keeps coming up so I thought about what would perhaps also work. It is important to me as I am writing about the subject and I don’t want half the population to be insulted by my writing :)

  • Rodrigo Figueiredo

    Why this discussion, really?
    I cant believe is about gender… will women not use it if the name stays the same ? :P
    They don’t like the name or they just want something to make a buzz and have something to sell ?

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Rodrigo Figueiredo
    I guess that comments from man are not as valuable as comments from women in this particular case :) ans so far I have only seen positive comments so?

  • http://kg2v.blogspot.com kg2v

    Gah, reminds me of the 70s – we have to rename Manhole Covers to Personhole covers, they aren’t waiters and waitresses, but waitrons, and we have to study “Herstory” along with History (never maind that Woman is sexist – so it’s Woperson or Wymin)

    Frankly – it’s PC BS
    (BTW, the best team lead I ever worked for was a woman, and so was one of the worst)

  • Rodrigo Figueiredo

    @Mark Nijhof My comment is as valuable as any other person (women or not) I think :) .
    Don’t get me wrong, I’m just saying the name is not important !

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Rodrigo Figueiredo
    Hehe No I believe the name is correct as well, I just wanted to hear some more opinions about the topic. The whole topic interests me a lot so some time on this is good as well.

    Thanks for the feedback!

  • Steve Py

    “P”C = Political = Politics = Bureaucratic jibberish. Politics’ purpose is to serve as a self-imposed leash to prove that we’ve somehow domesticated ourselves into something more than a common animal. Race, gender, language, belief, and possessions have been used to justify every evil we’ve committed on this world. It would be a grand day if we ever learn to see beyond that & cooperate without laws of words and paper and guns.

    No one should ever feel excluded from something solely on the basis of what it has been named. In the greater scheme of things, crap like this simply doesn’t matter and just distracts and detracts from what does. It’s one thing if someone tries to impede a woman from calling herself a “craftsman”, or anything else simply because she’s a woman. It’s lunacy to believe that anyone would be so weak as to be deterred or somehow demeaned simply by a name. The universe gave everyone an equal voice. Unless they truly cannot communicate for themselves, they don’t need others to assume to do it for them.

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Steve Py
    And as you could have read someone actually communicated about it and I replied to that. Perhaps a little less coffee?

  • http://twitter.com/omichaelsen Øyvind Michaelsen

    Wouldn’t craftswoman / craftswomanship be sufficient?

    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/craftswomanship
    http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/craftswoman

  • http://elegantcode.com/about/mark.nijhof/ Mark Nijhof

    @Øyvind Michaelsen
    So how would you address the group? And this is way to much emphasis on the gender and not on what it stands for. I believe this would be a bad way to go.

  • Øyvind Michaelsen

    The group: Craftspeople or -persons.

    I’d say gender in this context is just positive – a female developer calling herself or wants to be called a “software craftswoman” indicates both pride in the profession and gender.

    “Craftswomanship”, however, doesn’t work when I think about it.

    At its core, software craftsmanship is just analogy to show the importance of being professional and taking your profession seriously. Maybe “software professional[s] / professionalism” are more useful terms than the handicraft analogy.

  • Steve Py

    I never touch the stuff. :P

    Craftsmanship is not, and should not be gender specific. It is a term, just as the term “man” is used to represent Homo Sapiens regardless of gender.

    Leave P.C. concerns for the Froot Loops of the world to put in their debates about whether teachers should use the terms “Mom & Dad” in schools, and whether Santa Clause should say “Ho Ho Ho.”. Nonsense like this holds us back, it doesn’t move us forward.

  • http://kwawatu.blogspot.com/ Mjumbe Poe

    @Øyvind Michaelsen
    i happen to like the craftsperson suggestion, and think “craftswomanship” works just fine. you make a good point, after all, in ‘pride’ in both profession and gender. i don’t think it’d be fair for women to put aside one while being the other, particularly as men have no such burden.

    but yes, it is all just about professionalism — UncleBob had a pretty good post about that recently[1]. however, i think because of the historically cultural significance of crafspersons, “software professional” doesn’t evoke quite the same emotional imperatives and expectations as “software craftsperson”.

  • http://kwawatu.blogspot.com/ Mjumbe Poe

    i forgot to post the UncleBob post:
    [1] http://blog.objectmentor.com/articles/2009/12/04/saying-no

  • http://elegantcode.com/2009/12/11/tekpub-annual-subscription-giveaway/ Elegant Code » TekPub annual subscription giveaway

    [...] What is the current name for the book that I am writing? [...]

  • Simon

    I like ‘codesmith’, but yeah, maybe the associations are wrong. ‘Smith’ has come to include the more delicate work of a gold or silversmith, but the original meaning of someone ‘smiting’ metal with a big hammer is a little close for comfort… :)

  • http://elegantcode.com David Starr

    I have used the term “Artison”.

  • Antonios

    I believe a much simpler solution would be to gradually change the meaning of the word ‘man’ (in our heads) to mean ‘people’, much like ‘guy’ has lost its gender (and its original meaning) and is now used for girls too (especially in its plural form). Really, when one says craftsman, he doesn’t necessarily think of a guy with a beard and big muscles. He (or she) focuses on the crafts- part, with -man indicating a person, rather than a crafts-dog or crafts-plant. If there’s no intention on specifying gender, then no harm is done and correction is not needed.

    Maybe kids should be taught to use he/man/etc when either referring to males or persons of unspecified gender. And use feminine versions of the words (she/woman/etc) when specifically indicating a female person.

    If the change becomes official then there will be no ground for anyone to get offended. “No offense woman. I was using it in a genderless fashion”. ;-)

  • Jim Busto

    Antonios, we can also use thesaurus in case of women. Genderless fashion will be one of my favorite jokes. ;)

  • Jasmine Hegman

     What an interesting idea! I am a woman and am not bothered by the term craftsman, although until now I’ve never heard of “Software Craftsmanship”. What about simply crafter to go with craftship?

    But also, I read once that there was a time when man referred to both men and women, and the genders were not differentiated as we know them today. If you doubt this, at least consider how less than 100 years ago, pink was for boys and blue was for girls, and how less than 200 years ago the idea that one color fit one better than the other was unheard of.

    Just food for thought,
    -Fellow coder…or coderess!  I like the sound of that! :P

blog comments powered by Disqus