Live data from Hacker News

“Let her speak please”

facebook.com

101–110 of 723 posts

Re: “Let her speak please”

#101
post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course I don't. Still it's sad to see that you are OK with sexist behaviour.

I'm not ok with sexist behavior, which is why I think "mansplaining" is such a useful term.

I fail to see how a term attributing a person's bad behaviour to their sex is a useful one and not, say, a sexist one.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#104

This thread is basically people stumbling over themselves trying to defend how this is NOT sexist or justify the varying degrees of sexism. Some of the fun examples: - men get talked over too! (doesn't mean this isn't sexist) - he's just an asshole (doesn't mean he's not a sexist asshole) - that woman is just looking for a social justice moment (how about the rest of the audience?)

There's no evidence of sexism though. You've been swept up by the tide of Facebook outrage and that's good enough for you to settle on your verdict.

I watched the video and found evidence of him treating her equally....try 27:05 for starters.

The actual incident was just a moderator being clumsy. You've taken that and thrown sexism in there because, why... you need a victim to cheer for and an industry to scorn? I don't get your motivation when there is clearly no evidence of sexism.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#105

Edit: I watched the video. The moderator goes on and on and the "let her speak please" sounds very polite. This is a painfully frustrating reminder that women get talked over by men. It's one thing to have one panelist talk over another, but to have the moderator, who is explicitly in charge of facilitating a panel discussion, be the one to drown out a panelist is just unacceptable. Yes, "not all men" do this, but th…

> This is a painfully frustrating reminder that women get talked over by men

men get talked over as well

some people just talk over other people

nothing new

Re: “Let her speak please”

#106
If you see this kind of behavior in the workplace, I highly recommend the technique of "echoing" as a means of overcoming it. In meetings I've seen it happen many times where an introvert makes a brilliant point, which gets completely lost when some manager who likes to hear themselves talk follows them. When this happens, I find it incredibly powerful to raise my hand and say, "I'd like to bring us back to [introvert's] point that..." The women in the Obama White House made this techique popular [1], and it's extremely effective in getting quieter more thoughtful ideas the attention they deserve.

As an introvert myself, I support a workplace that is encouraging and respectful of women because that is a workplace respectful of introverts as well.

[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2016/10/25/...

Re: “Let her speak please”

#107
post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or, as it was already called, "being condescending." I don't get why EVERYTHING is shoehorned into being some gender-related thing these days.

Because that's how the younger generation of feminists was taught to look at the world. It's why most of the time I find myself gravitating to many of the older, more balanced, feminists. Mansplaining is the classic problem looking for a solution.

Did you mean "solution looking for a problem"? I didn't understand what you said.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#108

ITT: Sexism _must_ be intentional to be true! If someone's implicit biases (or given the circumstances, like having ten or hundred men in the room versus one woman) cause them to act differently toward women than men, it's still sexism - intentional or not. I'd encourage the men in this thread to exercise a bit of empathy and imagine what it'd be like to be the only man in a room full of 100 women (eg. Miley Cyrus co…

There's a further characteristic to consider when thinking about intent.

I'm often the only man in a room of 10-40 women, eg "Mums & Toddlers" groups and at work. There's usually a degree of overt sexism and exclusion; however acting differently toward me is human nature, we have two different sexes.

Sexism that's not negative discrimination seems like something we should just live with. Some intentional (or at least easily avoided) sexism falls in that class IMO.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#109
post #21

Edit: I watched the video. The moderator goes on and on and the "let her speak please" sounds very polite. This is a painfully frustrating reminder that women get talked over by men. It's one thing to have one panelist talk over another, but to have the moderator, who is explicitly in charge of facilitating a panel discussion, be the one to drown out a panelist is just unacceptable. Yes, "not all men" do this, but th…

Journalists definitely like to hear themselves talk, even when formulating questions while moderating a discussion. But if he, as a relative layperson in science, felt that comfortable interrupting Dr. Hubeny and riffing off of her area of expertise, imagine what he's like in a topic in which he doesn't think himself a relative amateur.

Today I met a journalist who gave up on his job because it was all about his interpretations of other people. He instead started projects to empower others to speak.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#110

What's really interesting is that the author only became 'boiling' with rage when this socially-unaware moderator talked over the woman on the panel, not when he talked over the other men. This kind of behavior is extremely common in STEM, and happens to everyone. If you don't talk with confidence, purpose, and animation, you're going to get talked over by the alpha nerd of the group. Man, woman, or purple elephant.…

What's really interesting is that every time sexism comes up there are volunteers eager to show it isn't sexism.

Sure it's interesting in a certain sense, but is it problematic? The whole point of these sorts of incidents being publicised is to make an argument that men in STEM as a group treat women in STEM as a group unfairly and therefore intervention to improve the lot of the latter at the expense of the former is an ethical necessity. To insinuate, as you seem to be doing, that members of the former group stepping up to contest the case against them is further evidence of its validity is downright kafkaesque.
Post reply on HN