David Heinemeier Hansson (DHH) created a blog post (October 2026), encouraging men to embrace their 'tech bro' identity.
David, you write:
We should all strive to be our brother’s keeper: to look after each other,
inspire each other, and simply enjoy each other’s company. For men this
usually requires a shared mission or interest. Mine has always been
computers, so I happily consider myself a tech bro.
The message is clear: you consider tech a topic for men to shared between men and the choice of words is clearly and deliberately exclusionary to women.
I know the term has been used to denigrate anyone who has done
well with computers or who dares to be excited about them in ways
that rub some people the wrong way. But who cares? There is no reason
to surrender a perfectly pleasant term of endearment just because
small-minded people deploy it to discredit opinions they dislike.
David, being exited about technology - maybe even in a socially awkward way - makes you a nerd and that's actually a real term of endearment.
Their interest in computers, or their skill with them, is not the problem.
True, but we never said it was a problem. You know full well why 'tech bro' is a pejorative. Because the 'bro' part is the problem. It's about the gendered part.
Neither is their gender. Yes, men dominate computing. There are many reasons
for that; none of them justifies collective guilt. The fact that women are a
minority does not diminish the many who work in the industry, and it is more
than fine to celebrate their achievements with gusto. Turning the percentages
into a struggle session is nonsense.
Look at how fast you pass over the 'many reasons' why women are a minority in tech. Because you know full well a huge reason is gatekeeping in the form of sexism.
The 'struggle session' you dismiss is actually the point. It shows it's not a merit-based environment as you claim it to be. Whatever you may think of as the 'achievements' you talk about, these achievements are tarnished1, in part because of discrimination against women.
I think that's the criticism that triggerd you to write your blog post. It's so typical to double down when faced with criticism. It's not a merit, unfortunately, it's more a possible sign of emotional disregulation.
So if you are a tech bro committed to advancing technology, celebrating
progress, and rejecting managed decline, you are indeed my brother. I will
always want to shake your hand and cheer you on.
You are not subtle David. You consider allowing more women in tech as 'managed decline'. We understand your point. What I don't understand is: why make it in the first place?
David, are you OK?
David, you are a multi-millionaire. You won the game of capitalism, you don't have to prove anything to anyone anymore. You built Ruby on Rails. You should be secure in your identity.
So why do you need to embrace the tarnished 'tech bro' identity? Why do you need to be validated in your masculinity, and dismiss women? And why do you need to dismiss minorities so much? Why are you so focused on identity politics?
First the racism, now the sexism. Ideas not supported by science. Ideas not based in any merit.
Frankly speaking, I think that people who express racism and sexism, are not secure in their own identity, and only feel secure if they diminish and discard the identity of others. David, please consider exploring your unhappiness/frustration with a professional, in private. Don't espress it in a blog post.
At this point, I think you are a liability for 37signals and their customers, the Ruby (on rails) community and tech at large. Your blog post is yet another piece of evidence people critical of 'tech bros' and 'tech bro' culture can point at, to convice others. You are making it really easy, saying the quiet part out loud.
-
and the sexism is only one part of the overall criticism of the whole tech industry and the negative impact on our society as caused by tech bros. ↩
