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

Shedding Light on the “Black Box of Inappropriateness”

cherylyeoh.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 416 posts

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

#281

Post by shapingfun »

emmab wrote: post #223
throwaway055 wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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?" Sorry but this is just absurd. Courtship doesn't (and will never) work that way. Proposing that standard for human contact implies a lot of negative things about how all of us have conducted our relationships, about how all of our families and parents m…

> Sorry but this is just absurd. Courtship doesn't (and will never) work that way. Im a woman and it works well for me. Do you have a specific technical reason for thinking it wont work? > Proposing that standard for human contact implies a lot of negative things about how all of us have conducted our relationships Saying explicit communication is useful and best-practice is not saying that everyone who doesn't do it…

> Do you have a specific technical reason for thinking it wont work?

Yeah, it's robotic and, in most courtship contexts, weird. If a woman said "hey, I want you to ask permission before making any physical contact", I would certainly respect that, but I would find it odd and would probably be looking for a way out. Simply because "odd" means "red flag." Though I suppose it depends on the girl and how it's presented. I've never experienced that though, and my impression is that most girls I was dating wanting me to make the first move and read their nonverbal signals. That was certainly a learning process.

Now maybe it does work for you. But I think what people are saying (and I agree with them) is that it is very unusual for that expectation to exist in the context of courting. Thinking back to all my past relationships (including the one that led to my marriage), I can't think of a single one who wouldn't have been weirded out if I asked permission to put an arm around her, touch her neck, or go in for a kiss (in a setting that most people might find those actions to be an option). Everyone sitting here with me agrees (3 guys including me, 3 women, all early 30's).

Maybe my circle of friends is just different then yours in some fundamental way (we're all physicians, who maybe tend to be a bit more direct). But I think you'll find that most people think your position on this issue is too rigid and mechanical.

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

#282

Post by monfrere »

pvg wrote: post #276
monfrere wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

With complete sincerity and honesty, I think either sequence of events I described could match what Yeoh wrote. If I said to someone, "You really gotta go, sorry", I might well describe that later to a friend using the words Yeoh used: "I told him he needs to leave." If a guy took two steps right into my personal space as I was up against a sofa and a wall, I might well describe that as "he pushed himself onto me to…

You keep repeating 'sincerity and honesty' but keep mis-describing what actually happened. This was not 'lean in for a kiss'. He (rather awkwardly) stayed behind after everyone had left. She went out of her way to be a generous host - offering him a place to stay for the night. He immediately abused that offer by propositioning her. When she asked him to leave, he tried to force himself on her. That's what her story…

I believe what she wrote, and I believe you do too, which is why we both keep quoting her. I disagree that either of my imagined scenarios are inconsistent with what she wrote. But thanks anyway for trying to answer my questions.

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

#283

Post by 1123581321 »

novia wrote: post #195
emmab wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?"

Often the counter-argument to this is that it feels artificial, unnatural, and it will definitely kill the mood. So I want to preemptively address it. When a guy asks before touching me, and of course I'm already interested, it makes me melt. It is so sexy and it definitely improves the mood. I just want to point to myself as one data-point. If you're having trouble believing it, imagine that a hot swimsuit model wal…

Sorry, but this doesn't address a valid subjective feeling that many people have. Nonverbal communication can certainly be more exciting than verbal for people. But in a workplace setting, it's worth giving that up in order to avoid problems. I think it's better to explicitly acknowledge that is a trade-off for many people than to brush legitimate preferences and feelings aside.

(Writing this as someone who is happily married due to a series of verbal checks and confirmations. :) )

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

#284

Post by whiddershins »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #275
whiddershins wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I feel that my two comments, although tone deaf, possibly misguided, and certainly not well worded, were good faith comments that did not overtly violate guidelines. I've never had my comments on hn flagged before and can't help but think I wandered into a minefield. Nearly half of the top level comments on this thread are flagged. If you include the ones that are downvoted into oblivion it is fully half at the time…

I think you're referring to https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14692957 . This was a tough one. I ultimately decided not to vouch it, and I'd like to try to explain why. It doesn't have anything to do with the content or my own feelings on the matter, but rather the way in which the idea was presented. I agree that it was in good faith, and it was also substantive. But it's not really neutral: "But seriously? Do I…

I think your feedback is great.

Also, I wasn't meaning to imply anyone should cut someone slack for behaving poorly while drunk. I was saying drunk people can be a menace, kinda like muggers. But although I've been mugged it doesn't exactly haunt me so much as make me cautious in certain situations. But whatever maybe my whole idea was stupid.

But why was my subsequent comment also flagged. And now I'm getting downvoted for pointing out that the user first flagging, and then commenting violates HN guidelines which clearly state not to do that. This feels completely out of control.

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

#285

Post by morgante »

emmab wrote: post #188
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?"

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

Honestly, that's just not realistic. Subtle touching is a key part of rapport and bonding (even in a platonic setting between men). It would be extremely bizarre if after a woman laughs at a joke I stopped and said "is it okay if I gently touch you on the elbow for a second as you laugh?"

I'm a huge fan of consent (ex. I almost always ask before kissing anyone) but that doesn't mean we need to extend it to absolutely everything. Humans are set up to be able to send touch-based signals which can escalate while allowing plenty of exit points.

We don't need hard rules like asking before ever touching another person (what if I accidentally brush against someone walking through a bar?). We need better training on reading social cues and a culture which calls people out when those cues are ignored.

A key part of healthy, mature flirting is leaving plenty of exit points and respecting them. Ex. it's normally fine to brush your leg against someone's leg. If they're not interested, they'll quickly pull away and it shouldn't cause too much discomfort. If they are, they'll maintain the contact.

TL;DR bodies can communicate. The problem isn't with these communications being non-verbal, but with people willfully ignoring those communications.

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

#286

Post by morgante »

novia wrote: post #195
emmab wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?"

Often the counter-argument to this is that it feels artificial, unnatural, and it will definitely kill the mood. So I want to preemptively address it. When a guy asks before touching me, and of course I'm already interested, it makes me melt. It is so sexy and it definitely improves the mood. I just want to point to myself as one data-point. If you're having trouble believing it, imagine that a hot swimsuit model wal…

> Would you be like, "Uh, no, by communicating with me you have completely killed my interest"?

It's not about completely killing my interest, but my mood would be slightly lessened.

Also, there are some things where consent works better than others. Asking if you can give a back rub, that works pretty find. Asking if you can lightly brush their elbow, not so much.

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

#287

Post by morgante »

novia wrote: post #195
emmab wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?"

Often the counter-argument to this is that it feels artificial, unnatural, and it will definitely kill the mood. So I want to preemptively address it. When a guy asks before touching me, and of course I'm already interested, it makes me melt. It is so sexy and it definitely improves the mood. I just want to point to myself as one data-point. If you're having trouble believing it, imagine that a hot swimsuit model wal…

> Would you be like, "Uh, no, by communicating with me you have completely killed my interest"?

It's not about completely killing my interest, but my mood would be slightly lessened.

Also, there are some things where consent works better than others. Asking if you can give a back rub, that works pretty find. Asking if you can lightly brush their elbow, not so much.

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

#288

Post by Zikes »

Every time I get flagged for saying something reasonable but unpopular, I get so frustrated I just put my HN account away for weeks or months.

I want to participate in tolerant, reasoned, actionable, fair discussions, especially when they're regarding the industry I'm trying to make a career in. HN is not the place for that discussion. Sure, the discussion will happen here. Things will happen. But it won't be tolerant, reasonable, or fair. That scares me. It scares me to think that the people in this thread are the ones that will be leading those discussions.

Just ban me now. This is my third request, and I'm 100% certain. Until the knee-jerk flag censoring feature is removed, I never want to participate in a discussion on this site again, and I want to remove any further temptation to think that fact will change.

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

#289

Post by dang »

beedogs wrote: post #278
dang wrote: post #259

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's legitimate criticism to be made of that comment but taking the worst part of it, exaggerating that uncharitably, then doubling that and flinging it in outrage is the kind of cheap trick users need to avoid here, regardless of how righteous their cause. The blood sport of the internet is not welcome on HN; there are other places to play it. You have a long history of posting abrasively and indeed abusively to…

My comment was hardly "abusive". And this is probably the second time in ten years that I've been called out for a comment I've made here, which is hardly a "ton of slack" or "more warnings than most." Not that it surprises me. I'll never forget this is the site that shadow-banned me for saying the world "needs more Snowdens".

It's at least the fourth. But why did you need more than one?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=13568283

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12216126

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10309353

> I'll never forget this is the site that shadow-banned me for saying the world "needs more Snowdens".

I call this kind of comment the "linkless martyr": the romantic tale of a noble freethinker cruelly repressed by the mods, supplying full interpretation for the reader yet mysteriously omitting any link that people could make up their own minds about. The idea that we ever banned an HN user for Snowden advocacy is silly.

More seriously, you've posted so many genuinely nasty comments to this site, and we'd really appreciate it if you'd stop. It's doable. Other people have done it before you (I'm one).

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

#290

Post by dang »

Zikes wrote: post #288

Every time I get flagged for saying something reasonable but unpopular, I get so frustrated I just put my HN account away for weeks or months. I want to participate in tolerant, reasoned, actionable, fair discussions, especially when they're regarding the industry I'm trying to make a career in. HN is not the place for that discussion. Sure, the discussion will happen here. Things will happen. But it won't be toleran…

This is like the sixth thing you've posted about this. At this point you're going on tilt. I'm happy to respond to you as soon as there's time.

We detached this comment from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14693838 and marked it off-topic.

Post reply on HN