Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness” • Hacker News Board

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#181

Post by ryandrake » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:29 AM UTC

Zikes wrote: post #158

dang wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Censorship' has become more pejorative than informative, but you're right that users are downvoting and flagging comments; I think pretty fairly. Wherever moderators have intervened (in any way that affects comment visibility), we've posted comments saying so. That goes for the previous threads too. Not every kind of comment is welcome here. HN is trying for higher-quality discussion. (Trying and failing, of course.…

Please review my recent comments on this post, which have been flag killed. If you believe they were fairly downvoted and deserve to be flagged, then please delete or permanently ban my account.

Out of all the topics that come up from time to time on HN, this one is pretty much unique in that there is strictly one point of view acceptable to put forward, and every other one is guaranteed to get you instantly flag-killed under the guise of "wanting high quality discussion". If I valued my Internet Points, I'd just steer clear of these altogether and go click through to a React vs. Angular discussion instead.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#182

Post by brighteyes » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:29 AM UTC

rectang wrote: post #83

Insanity wrote: post #4

It is unfortunate that these kind of things happen. They shed a bad light on our industry as a whole due to (hopefully a few) rotten apples. Thanks for writing this, takes courage!

It is not just a handful of rotten apples. The enablers are right there in the Twitter quotes. It isn't enough for the assholes to stop assholin'. We all have the opportunity to contribute positively by moving the norms, and we will all be better for it.

The people that have the ability to fix it are the incredibly brave women coming forward. That's what's changing things.

Otherwise, most of us have already been doing all we can. We don't do bad things, and we don't enable people doing bad things. It's ok to admit that we didn't cause this nor have the ability to fix it.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#183

Post by whiddershins » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:30 AM UTC

I am seeing an enormous percentage of comments here flagged, including one of mine which is a first for me on this site, or any site.

Upon trying to figure out what's going on I think we need a meta-instruction for comments here?

Like, perhaps the intention is to keep comments focused more on the general problem of sexual harassment in the industry and to not start making a bunch of assertions regarding the specifics of the author's story?

Although I personally think khazhoux's comment pointing to alcohol being a common factor is a pretty good one.

I'm actually having trouble understanding where the line is here so personally going to run away from the thread, but I think a better indication of the ground rules might be helpful to everyone.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#184

Post by novia » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:33 AM UTC

panic wrote: post #169

khazhoux wrote: post #155

(flagged, whatever0

Do you think Dave kept pouring scotch into her glass on accident? He knows society has a tendency to excuse behavior from a drunk person that they'd never accept from someone sober. You're not excusing his behavior directly, but by suggesting that alcohol is relevant to this situation, you're promoting a narrative that abusers love to exploit.

Excellent point. I opened up the book "Why Does He Do That?" about abusers to find a relevant quote, but when I got back to the thread you had beat me to the punch. Here's what I was going to post:

Alcohol does not a change a person’s fundamental value system. People’s personalities when intoxicated, even though somewhat altered, still bear some relationship to who they are when sober. When you are drunk you may behave in ways that are silly or embarrassing; you might be overly familiar or tactlessly honest, or perhaps careless or forgetful. But do you knock over little old ladies for a laugh? Probably not. Do you sexually assault the clerk at the convenience store? Unlikely. People’s conduct while intoxicated continues to be governed by their core foundation of beliefs and attitudes, even though there is some loosening of the structure. Alcohol encourages people to let loose what they have simmering below the surface.

The book argues that the common thread among all abusive people is a sense of entitlement.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#185

Post by Banthum » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:35 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #145

al_chemist wrote: post #141

This thread look heavily censored. That doesn't encourage to speak up.

'Censorship' has become more pejorative than informative, but you're right that users are downvoting and flagging comments; I think pretty fairly. Wherever moderators have intervened (in any way that affects comment visibility), we've posted comments saying so. That goes for the previous threads too. Not every kind of comment is welcome here. HN is trying for higher-quality discussion. (Trying and failing, of course.…

Every comment I've seen so far that has been dead or flagged down had these two properties:

1. Honestly attempting to contribute new information and views to the conversation, or asking new questions. 2. Opinion or assumptions would be considered immoral from a certain (currently dominant) point of view.

It seems pretty clear to me that "high-quality" is being conflated with "reinforces my moral convictions" or "upholds my tribal sacred values".

There should be an effort to push back against this (though it'd take a really deep commitment to free speech and against moral/tribal orthodoxy as a general principle). It seems unlikely but one can hope.

EDIT: Hilariously, I'm getting downvotes for this. There's an Inception joke in here somewhere.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#186

Post by tybit » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:35 AM UTC

ChuckMcM wrote: post #94

As the father of three daughters I always cringe a bit when I read things like this. Thanks Cheryl for sharing your story, and men please remember it isn't how you feel about whether or not an action was appropriate or inappropriate, it is how they feel about it.

It's not really about how either party feels, it's about what is professionally/socially and legally acceptable. What he did was wrong, regardless of whether either of them thought it was.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#187

Post by Zikes » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:37 AM UTC

thaumaturgy wrote: post #180

Zikes wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please review my recent comments on this post, which have been flag killed. If you believe they were fairly downvoted and deserve to be flagged, then please delete or permanently ban my account.

Trying to re-frame a discussion about the victimization of women to include offhand comments about men is not just off-topic but insensitive too. In the general case, you can't do that in any discussion where tensions are high without either doing it deftly and articulately or being quickly shouted down.

The author's article ended with concrete suggestions for improving the industry. The people going into those suggestions are emotionally charged, and more willing to accept them blindly.

I do not think that is appropriate, and I think a mild suggestion to change the wording so as not to be sexist while not denying the author's experiences is perfectly acceptable.

I have respect and sympathy for the author, and I believe that she offers a valid yet one-sided perspective on the situation in the industry. All I ask is that as we learn from her experience and move towards resolving it for all such victims, we do not do so in a manner that would unfairly disadvantage or place undue burden or harm on innocent men, just for lack of sufficiently scoped wording.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#188

Post by emmab » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:39 AM UTC

orthoganol wrote: post #171

I like it - the all or nothing approach is terrifying as a guy, and defining levels of inappropriateness with exact descriptions of actions is very helpful for those who are freaked out they are going to unwittingly harass someone they are attracted to even just acting naturally. I'm hopefully not belittling the recipients of undesired advances of VC assholes like McClure, but I hope it's also not wrong to say these…

Asking permission before touching people, and not arguing when they say no goes a long way.

Want to be able to touch someone without asking every time? Ask them permission for that! "Hey is it ok if I touch your arms and back without asking in the future?"

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#189

Post by rectang » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:40 AM UTC

brighteyes wrote: post #182

rectang wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is not just a handful of rotten apples. The enablers are right there in the Twitter quotes. It isn't enough for the assholes to stop assholin'. We all have the opportunity to contribute positively by moving the norms, and we will all be better for it.

The people that have the ability to fix it are the incredibly brave women coming forward. That's what's changing things. Otherwise, most of us have already been doing all we can. We don't do bad things, and we don't enable people doing bad things. It's ok to admit that we didn't cause this nor have the ability to fix it.

We're all in this together, and even when it falls to others to lead, we can all contribute in a supporting role.

For example, there's lots of victim-blaming in these threads. We have an opportunity to speak up and counter it. In so doing, we support the brave women on the front lines.

Re: Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

#190

Post by Banthum » Tue, Jul 04, 2017, 2:47 AM UTC

novia wrote: post #69

nnfy wrote: post #7

>Non-consensual, sexual advances are not the same as flirtatious comments from a creepy dude It is refreshing to see this much needed distinction; I think many people in modern society have been conflating flirtation with harassment for the past few years. Still, not to speak against the author or victimized women, but I cannot understand why sexual harassment takes such a toll on women. I've been sexually harassed b…

Edit: For clarification, the (now flagged) parent commenter was expressing that he did not understand why women are so affected by unwanted sexual advances. He mentioned that men have come onto him without his consent, and he was (on a separate occasion) beaten up bad enough to end up in the hospital, but his quality of life did not decrease to the same degree that he sees in women who are kissed against their will.…

In America, men are far more likely to be murdered than women. Men are far more likely to be victims of public-sphere violence than women. Private violence is hard to quantify, but what evidence there is suggests that women enact is roughly in equal proportion to men (though of course women are weaker, but they can use weapons and men who are domestically abused are typically ignored or laughed at).

Given these data, portraying interpersonal violence as a special thing that women have to deal with is pretty absurd.

The reality is that women are the far more protected gender. Nobody cares when men are victims of violence. People have always cared greatly when women are victims of violence.

It reminds me of the great amount of political noise in Canada around "missing and murdered Aboriginal women". Meanwhile nobody ever mentions missing and murdered Aboriginal men, even though Aboriginal men are more than twice as likely to be missing or murdered than Aboriginal women! So politically a man's death is far less than half as important as a woman's death. It took years for the MMIW inquiry to even start considering men as a side-detail. [1]

I mean heck, your first anecdote. Picture a man running from his house today screaming his wife is trying to kill him. He could be laughed at. He could be arrested for abuse if she simply accuses him. These things happen all the time. The horror stories are everywhere.

So, stepping outside the sexist "society must protect women, men must protect themselves" double standard, the case just doesn't add up. There must be another answer to parent's question.

[1] http://www.cbc.ca/news/indigenous/mmiw-inquiry-could-include...