Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

“Let her speak please”

facebook.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 723 posts

Re: “Let her speak please”

#281

Post by Jemmeh »

neolefty wrote: post #212
novia wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you look at the full response though.. She is supportive of the woman in the audience who spoke up. Veronika Hubeny: I applaud your heroism in standing up for what you believe in! I know well the shaky feeling and subsequent exhilarated and heartwarmed contentment in the knowledge of having done the right thing, and I think that doing so has become more crucial than ever. Your behavior was inspiring and I’m glad…

The feeling was rather one of camaraderie: the challenges to unravel the deepest mysteries of the universe, the thrill in understanding another tiny bit of this grand puzzle, and the sheer wonder at how beautifully the physics hangs together, put us all in the same boat, so to speak. This is what will end discrimination based on superficial differences: I think our mental reality is so much more interesting than our…

I think that accepting who we are and embracing diversity is more important than trying to wash it all out and pretend it doesn't exist. Some people are men, some people are women, some people are black, some are white, etc, etc. Pretending that you can't see physical traits is also ignoring the fact that some people with certain traits are discriminated against. And that yes, some people are different from you.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#282

Post by kefka »

andai wrote: post #86

> You may be amazed to hear it, but during this panel session I genuinely did not feel affronted or discriminated by the moderator’s behavior. It seemed more amusing to see him try posing a question in a way that at the same time tried answering it. It’s true that this made the question a bit of a moving target for me (and therefore harder to address coherently), but I don’t a-priori assume that the incident was root…

Indeed, a level-headed comment is what is required in this situation. This is her livelihood, her career.. Pretty much everything for her.

If she was to attack her colleagues, it would spell certain doom for her career. Her opinions and proofs would be dismissed and denigrated. And the specter of "Will I be accused of sexism if I pan this paper?" will rear its ugly head anywhere she would turn.

Think of this as an analogy to badmouthing your previous employer in an interview. You just don't do it. Except, now exchange interview for world-wide public debate/discussion. Nobody in the world, in that field, would consider her.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#283

Post by chowells »

golemotron wrote: post #256
mixologic wrote: post #235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Impact' is far more important than 'intent'. People do racist/sexist/less than ideal things all the time, without even meaning to, because many of those behaviors are ingrained/systemic. Not meaning to be sexist doesn't excuse sexism. I agree that call out culture sometimes doesn't leave room for nuance and sometimes unnecessarily shoves people into defensive spaces - i.e. telling people they 'are sexist' vs telling…

There can not be any sexism without the behavior being based on sex, and it in this case it isn't clear that it was. That's an assumption people are making.

That's not true at all. Sexism comes from the conclusions others draw, not the intentions of the participants.

If this makes you uncomfortable, embrace that discomfort. It's the first step to understanding this.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#284

Post by ohyes »

randomguy23 wrote: post #221
_lex wrote: post #180

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's worth considering that we're seeing some survivorship bias here - it's possible that she's the only woman on the panel because she thinks this way. In other words, it's possible that other women who would have seen this event as being rooted in sexism may eventually be a part of so many similar events during their career that they effectively burn out and switch to more female friendly fields. This has b…

If you wear sexism-colored glasses, don't be surprised if everything looks like sexism. That, I think, is what she's getting at. If you're always looking for a slight, always looking for a snide remark, you'll find it. Perception shapes reality.

That is almost certainly not what she was getting at.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#285

Post by Chris2048 »

jccalhoun wrote: post #229
randomguy23 wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you wear sexism-colored glasses, don't be surprised if everything looks like sexism. That, I think, is what she's getting at. If you're always looking for a slight, always looking for a snide remark, you'll find it. Perception shapes reality.

"If you wear sexism-colored glasses, don't be surprised if everything looks like sexism." and if you wear glasses that block out sexism, don't be surprised if nothing looks like sexism.

The "glasses" in this case is the mind looking for threats. The mind can filter (find) threats of a certain type, but can it exclude them in the same way?

There is a framing issue here, and mental "highlighting" seems to be an entirely different kind of bias (wrt the actual mental mechanism) than "ignorance".

Re: “Let her speak please”

#286

Post by BearGoesChirp »

jancsika wrote: post #167

I remember a sociologist once remarking that prejudice (racism in the case we were discussing) exists quite apart from an individual's intentions. Most of the comments here appear to assume that prejudice is determined solely (or mainly) by the moderator's intentions-- hence the endless quests to somehow prove what is or isn't lurking in the moderator's soul. That seems irrelevant in this case, but I haven't read the…

>sociologist

You mean those who have redefined words to push certain agendas that have cost their entire field a great deal of credibility in the minds of many?

Re: “Let her speak please”

#287

Post by Chris2048 »

zzzeek wrote: post #273
weberc2 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds like you're (inadvertantly?) making the argument that sexism is purely subjective.

to a non-victim, perhaps.

In the same sense there either is a victim, or not a victim; then it either is subjective, or isn't.

There isn't "subjective for some" - there is just differing, and mutually exclusive opinion - a situation in which one party must be wrong.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#289

Post by DanBC »

jotadambalakiri wrote: post #278

How is this sexism? As a quiet man that happens to me a lot too and I hate these kind of people.

Yes, it does also affect men and it always sucks when it happens and it's not acceptable behaviour.

But it happens more often to women. Also, if the person being interrupted asserts themselves they're seen in a positive light if they're male but a negative light if they're female.

And in this case there's a video, and he interrupts her far more often than he interrupts the other male guests.

Post reply on HN