content: 3-D computer systems used cues that were inherently sexist.  I hate SJWs' guts, but this argument fascinated me, so I briefly skimmed her paper on this and I am attempting to summarize it objectively as best as I quickly can. http://www.danah.org/papers/sexvision.pdf  (note that this computer expert doesn't have a secure website in CURRENT_YEAR) I think the Wikipedia 1-sentence summary (figuring out who wrote it would be interesting) isn't really descriptive. The actual experiment sounds pretty reasonable even for red-pilled folks, and seems pretty advanced for an undergraduate paper, especially in 2000. Basically in the real world as well as virtual world, humans use lots of different attributes to figure out depth and spatial position such as motion/parallax, shading, luminance, knowledge of the object's size, and others to try and figure out where you are and where objects are in relation to others. Her experiment attempted to test 2 of these attributes, motion and shading, in an attempt to figure out which of these were more important for users to figure out spacial orientation. She did a few experiments to isolate for these variables and see if this led to differences between men and women and to see which ones they preferred. She saw some difference in reported gender preference for shading, but the performance times between genders wasn't statistically significant in her setup. If men and women do indeed have different depth perception capabilities based on biology, then these systems do in effect use cues that are inherently biased. But the gripe should be against God/Mother Nature that gave women different biological advantages. I think it's not reasonable to label biology as sexism. Calling it sexism would be the same thing as labeling mining equipment sexist because it requires more strength to operate or labeling a breast milk pump sexist against men because they can't make babby milkies. Despite its lack of conclusions, this paper seems fairly impressive for undergraduate work in 2000. As a plus, her paper noted the literature on gender differences between men and women in visual/spacial recognition and highlighted the role of testosterone (interesting that James Damore gets drummed out of society for attempting to cite literature on gender differences but she gets labeled a hero). As a minus, she made the muh women and niggers have less access to computers kind of implication as a reason for why performance might typically be different. It's a shame, because it seems like she has some intellect and ability, but her focus seems to be on SJW style activism rather than creating. You want to empower women to code and be in technology luv? Dedicate your time to creating badass things rather than bitching. Just my $0.02.