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

511–520 of 723 posts

Re: “Let her speak please”

#511

Post by luord »

jansho wrote: post #439
luord wrote: post #405

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If you allow yourself to enjoy the beautiful things that really matter, if you don’t let social or peer pressure dissuade you from pursuing a field which appeals to you, then no pettiness or childishness or boorishness that you encounter can harm you so much. I like this and also like how it's phrased. Yes, sexism, racism and other forms of bigotry are real; the way they'll truly be beat is if more and more ostraci…

> If you allow yourself to enjoy the beautiful things that really matter, if you don’t let social or peer pressure dissuade you from pursuing a field which appeals to you I'm amazed at some of the comments here who seem to say "If you just ignore it, it will get better." I highlighted the ifs above because NOT everyone has the strength to overcome what they perceive as discrimination. Sure we can debate as much as we…

I'm not sure if this was meant as a reply to me or to any other comment. I wasn't debating that these problems didn't exist, I literally stated the opposite, nor the intention of the moderator.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#512

Post by turc1656 »

fatbird wrote: post #484
turc1656 wrote: post #476

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pulled a quick definition of sexism from the web (they all seems more or less the same - " prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex. " And the commenter said - " women often have difficulty interrupting in the way that the men here did " At minimum, that fits at least the stereotyping requirement of the definition.

"pulled a quick definition from the web" is virtually never a useful way to engage something like this. It's like quoting a statute from the law books and ignoring a long history of case law that defines how that law actually works in practice.

That's a fair enough point.

I'll strengthen my position this way instead. Let's assume the definition is garbage and ignore it. Are stereotyping examples things that fall into the category of sexism? I think they absolutely are. And I think most people would agree.

"Women aren't as good as men at [whatever]" - sexist? Yep "Women often have difficulty interrupting in the way that the men here did" - sexist? Sure sounds like it to me.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#513

Post by Klockan »

I'm not sure that this has to do with her being a woman, everyone else on the panel have wikipedia pages while she doesn't. In such a scenario there will obviously be a power differential irrespective of the genders involved.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Albert

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_F._R._Ellis

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Guth

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Linde

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barry_Loewer

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Search?search=Veronika...

Re: “Let her speak please”

#514

Post by braveo »

hillarysanders wrote: post #413
_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…

Yes. I'm a female engineer, and fairly successful one. And I do think that I have on rose colored glasses, so to speak, when it comes to workplace sexism. Often my friends or colleagues come to the conclusion that something sexist happened far before I do. I virtually always assume little actions, slights, etc. are innocent and not rooted in sexism. Because I think that usually, they are innocent. But that means I al…

I think the important point is that everyone has to deal with bullshit, and it's generally better to assume it's not meant to intentionally hurt.

I've had many occasions where someone has said something that caught me a little and offended me and I ultimately just decided they didn't mean it that way (even if they did). I do this because I know I'm not the smoothest individual out there and I have no doubt I've said some things that may have causes someone else doubt or offense when it was just me saying things in a bad manner.

When you enter the work force there's a certain amount of bullshit you have to put up with. I once had the CEO of a company roll his eyes at me in the middle of a meeting and say roughly "you IT people are all the same" in front of everyone there.

Sometimes it's just a part of being it the work force and you have to deal with bullshit in your day to day. It doesn't mean it's sexist, racist, or whathaveyou, it just means you're dealing with people who are oblivious or assholes.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#515

Post by dragonwriter »

t_brah wrote: post #501
dragonwriter wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By your statement, the reason it disproportionately impacts women is not because of some rudimentary, fundamental reason but rather because they fail to react the same way the men did and speak up. That lies 100% on the women. No, the effects of deliberate, targeted differences in socialization by gender aren't the fault of the people experiencing adverse impacts because of the intersection of those with social str…

>No, the effects of deliberate, targeted differences in socialization by gender aren't the fault of the people experiencing adverse impacts because of the intersection of those with social structures that respond better to people socialized in the manner which is targeted at the other gender. I've heard this argument before - that women are deliberately socialized to be subordinate. Personally, I believe in the stren…

> I've heard this argument before - that women are deliberately socialized to be subordinate.

That's because it's a fairly well established fact.

> Personally, I believe in the strength & agency of women.

Yeah, so do I. That doesn't negate the effects of differential socialization; objective external circumstances have real impacts.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#516

Post by turc1656 »

t_brah wrote: post #501
dragonwriter wrote: post #461

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> By your statement, the reason it disproportionately impacts women is not because of some rudimentary, fundamental reason but rather because they fail to react the same way the men did and speak up. That lies 100% on the women. No, the effects of deliberate, targeted differences in socialization by gender aren't the fault of the people experiencing adverse impacts because of the intersection of those with social str…

>No, the effects of deliberate, targeted differences in socialization by gender aren't the fault of the people experiencing adverse impacts because of the intersection of those with social structures that respond better to people socialized in the manner which is targeted at the other gender. I've heard this argument before - that women are deliberately socialized to be subordinate. Personally, I believe in the stren…

"I don't understand how using a persons gender for gauging ability to cope with forceful men isn't sexist. "

Yes! That's the entire point I am trying to make. You just said it in far less words.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#517

Post by Cyphase »

suby wrote: post #240
funnyfacts365 wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

TFA

I read the facebook post and did not see a video link anywhere. I came to the comments to find the video. You could have actually been helpful and linked to the video. For anyone interested, the link is here. http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/programs/big-universe-bi... edit: The moment happens at roughly 1 hour 7 minutes in.

It's at 1:07:41 in the video linked in the parent[1], but start at 1:03:50 to get the full context (short of watching the whole video).

Also, in case someone does a Ctrl+F for "timestamp", there you go.

[1] http://www.worldsciencefestival.com/programs/big-universe-bi...

Re: “Let her speak please”

#518

Post by devnonymous »

complexmango wrote: post #503
devnonymous wrote: post #487

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Reading the comments here I am surprised at all the people who are claiming that people get talked over by other people all the time and it has nothing to do with sex. I mean, yeah there's no denying that there exist pushy jerks who are jerks to everyone but guess what? those kinds are more likely to be even greater jerks with women. So either this guy was a regular jerk talking over her because she was a woman or be…

That precludes the breed of jerks who will talk over anybody that will tolerate it. What makes you think there aren't women who also like to claim the center of attention, regardless of other men OR women around them? I don't understand this need to idolize one sex over the other, when the issue is that some people (like this moderator) are just more tone deaf or inconsiderate than others. Equality between sexes impl…

> That precludes the breed of jerks who will talk over anybody that will tolerate it

So are you claiming that those sort of jerks are not going to be extra nasty to women that will tolerate it? That they are going to be equally nasty to people of both sexes? If that's what you're claiming, I'll humbly disagree but won't engage any further.

> What makes you think there aren't women who also like to claim the center of attention, regardless of other men OR women around them?

I never claimed that there aren't such women. Indeed there exist women who behave worse with other women than they do with men. But then what's your point? Women being sexist doesn't make it okay for men to continue to be so now, does it?

Re: “Let her speak please”

#520

Post by braveo »

cmiles74 wrote: post #276
trendia wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think he was doing that because he was sexist, I think he was doing that because he was really excited about the duality. The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent and when they're the result of: geeking out + bad social skills

Many things that hurt people are done without ill intent. They are often done out of fear, or laziness, or ignorance. The people that do them often do them thoughtlessly or out of a belief that the reasons they do them are so self-evident that they don't deserve much thought. In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the lo…

> In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the long run.

OTOH, maybe you should man the fuck up and move on with your life. I know that seems blunt and assholeish, but that's sort of the point.

I've been offended plenty of times and talked myself down because I knew ultimately it was my emotions misinterpreting the intent.

There is nothing that says just offense can't be mistaken.

edit: watch someone call the phrase 'man the fuck up' sexist.

Post reply on HN