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

341–350 of 416 posts

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

#341

Post by have_faith »

ToadLegs wrote: post #191
thaumaturgy wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to recall the character of someone who doesn't get accused of assaulting or abusing other people, or making them feel uncomfortable -- someone who is respected by people of all creeds and demographics -- and then behave like that. It's not that hard, really. Just be a grown-up. Put away the childish fantasies of finding self-worth by bedding lots of women and flaunting wealth and power, and treat everyone you int…

It's interesting that you construct a whole evil persona for someone, just for asking a few logical questions on the web. I don't come at this as the pushy sexual conqueror you seem to assume. My perspective is from social anxiety. I already am very hesitant to approach women, because everything seems forbidden and inappropriate. What I hear OP saying is that there is nothing I can do to be sure some woman doesn't fi…

It sounds like you've spent more time online reading about this subject than you have offline learning about what it's really like, I don't mean that as an insult.

In the same way that it is easy to conclude that there is a mass war between social justice warriors and the alt-right if you hang out in the right circles online, despite in real life it being a very minor fringe issue that the vast majority of people have no knowledge of.

You shouldn't be hesitant to approach anyone as long as you feel you are being respectful.

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

#342

Post by jancsika »

ToadLegs wrote: post #191
thaumaturgy wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Try to recall the character of someone who doesn't get accused of assaulting or abusing other people, or making them feel uncomfortable -- someone who is respected by people of all creeds and demographics -- and then behave like that. It's not that hard, really. Just be a grown-up. Put away the childish fantasies of finding self-worth by bedding lots of women and flaunting wealth and power, and treat everyone you int…

It's interesting that you construct a whole evil persona for someone, just for asking a few logical questions on the web. I don't come at this as the pushy sexual conqueror you seem to assume. My perspective is from social anxiety. I already am very hesitant to approach women, because everything seems forbidden and inappropriate. What I hear OP saying is that there is nothing I can do to be sure some woman doesn't fi…

> I don't come at this as the pushy sexual conqueror you seem to assume. My perspective is from social anxiety. I already am very hesitant to approach women, because everything seems forbidden and inappropriate.

This social anxiety is not in the same category as the behavior of the perpetrator of sexual assault in this blog post.

There are plenty of sites that will pair you up with someone for a date. You can meet someone from such a site and easily judge whether they are interested in pursuing a relationship further. Once they know you have social anxiety, they will probably even give you some leeway about being awkward and uncomfortable as you try to gauge where the relationship is going. That is certainly not a guarantee against you doing something out of line. And it is still certainly helpful to get advice from someone you trust who is obviously more comfortable and intuitive with the less "logical" aspects of human interaction.

Completely unrelated to all of that-- this blog post was about a person who held a position of power over another in a professional business venture, tried to get the less powerful person in the venture drunk at a social gathering, then attempted to use that person's inebriation in order to increase the likelihood of sexual advances. Then, the victim of this unwanted and already inappropriate proposition explicitly said "no" and explicitly asked him to leave. Instead, he physically assaulted her.

Please tell me you understand the difference between that and your own potential to have an awkward encounter with a woman due to social anxiety.

edit: clarification

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

#343

Post by TeMPOraL »

jellicle wrote: post #205
dang wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The overwhelming majority of HN votes don't come from "the valley". And to the extent we have data on this the geographical trend is probably opposite to what you're suggesting.

There's really been a considerable change in HN in the past few years. A couple of years ago, a thread like this would have been 100% apologists and victim-blaming, laced with a heavy dose of outright misogyny. It would have been flagged off the the front page in minutes. Today, the threads are much better with only a small amount of that. I'm unclear whether this is because a) Silicon Valley is changing b) the user…

> There's really been a considerable change in HN in the past few years. A couple of years ago, a thread like this would have been 100% apologists and victim-blaming, laced with a heavy dose of outright misogyny.

I wonder how far back you mean; I haven't noticed that in past two or three years.

> It would have been flagged off the the front page in minutes.

Sometimes those topics get flagged simply because people might be getting tired of the pervasive guilty-until-proven-innocent attitude that's frequent with these stories, especially that they often turn out to be overblown, more complex than presented, or outright false.

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

#344

Post by ebfd »

>Level B. Direct Sexual Propositions or Seductive Behavior

>Sexual invitations like “would you consider sleeping with me or come to my hotel room, etc”

I was under the impression that men need to obtain explicit, clear consent before trying to initiate a romantic interaction. "Would you consider sleeping with me" is what I was taught that I need to say.

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

#345

Post by TuringTest »

Chris2048 wrote: post #330
pjc50 wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Role models are probably a bad idea; often we find out later that they've been going about it all wrong as well. > nothing I can do to be sure some woman doesn't find my sexual or romantic propositions inappropriate You can never be sure of anything in human relations. But I think the shorthand approach is to see it from her point of view. Basically, does she have a safe exit? In the situation described there are two…

> Role models are probably a bad idea I tried suggesting exactly this - not only down-voted, but then flagged!: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14668197 Seems whatever use "role models" have, they certainly have ideological buy-in..

>> Role models are probably a bad idea

>I tried suggesting exactly this - not only down-voted, but then flagged!

I think that's because your post is of less quality than the one you're responding to, not because of the merits of the idea itself. pjc50 said "probably" instead of asserting an absolute, and provided a reason why that might be the case, instead of dismissing the concept with a snarky remark.

In other words, pjc50 provided an argument to support the idea in a neutral tone. That can be respected even by people who don't agree with the argument.

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

#346

Post by [deleted] »

ForrestN wrote: post #88
ithinkinstereo wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At least 12 women according to the update in Cheryl's post. Most, if not all of these women, are also people of color according to Sarah Kunst. > I just spoke to Sarah Kunst and learned from her that at least 12 other women including me, have faced sexual harassment or advances from Dave of various degrees. Some of them are portfolio company CEOs like myself. They’re afraid to come out, but some eventually will. I ha…

Why was this downvoted? Asking sincerely in an effort to understand and learn.

[deleted]

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

#347

Post by skc »

I'm male and I find it so bizarre that men behave in this manner. But it happens so often that I wonder sometimes if I'm the one who is not normal.

I love women. I am attracted to them constantly. But the thought of making sexual advances towards them when I have not received any sign of interest beyond friendship or business etc, repulses me.

How hard can it be to just be nice.

As men we really need to do better.

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

#348

Post by pvg »

whiddershins wrote: post #305
sillysaurus3 wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't read too much into it. When users see a flagged comment, they're more inclined to flag subsequent comments of the same tone. Saying that you didn't read half the reply didn't really help matters, plus it was very energetic overall. Energy tends to be met with energy in the opposite direction, which tends to spark flamewars. In general though, it's better to email hn@ycombinator.com with concerns about the…

I did email them, and I do appreciate your feedback. At this point my concern is understanding flagging criteria and your analysis of my tone was helpful. This comment: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14693085 Was not in the same tone and was flagged. It was an overtly conciliatory comment. When that comment was flagged, followed by the flagging user ignoring guidelines, I stopped debating. There's a problem her…

That comment was eminently flaggable for being unrelated meta-discussion - it's mostly about you, has nothing to do with the post and is bound to generate a pointless meta-thread. The guidelines and endless moderation comments specifically ask you not to do this.

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

#349

Post by tnone »

sillysaurus3 wrote: post #194
Banthum wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 "upho…

HN isn't an ideological battleground. In general, it's for whatever gratifies intellectual curiosity. The flagged comments may have contributed information, but most of them share a common trait: they're incendiary. The way to introduce a controversial idea on HN is to be substantive and neutral. It's not easy to do. People are generally passionate about their points of view, and I've been guilty of this myself. But…

On this topic, it absolutely is. Whenever these threads happen, they go one way or the other.

If the all-genders-equal, non-feminist side swings the discussion, the entire thread disappears off the front page, inexplicably sitting at position 500+ with no flagged indicator. The lambdaconf debacle comes to mind, but it's hardly the only example.

If the feminist, women-are-victims-side swings the discussion, the thread is left up, full of moral chastising, with a graveyard of flagged comments serving as a warning to the evil dissenters.

On this topic, HN is unquestionably biased from the top, and the pretense otherwise is laughably non-credible and deluded.

Furthermore, while meta-complaining is against the rules, this rule is again only enforced against those who question the party line, not those lamenting the amount of immoral thought on display.

The bigger message being sent is obvious though: men, don't bother apologizing for your missteps or character flaws. Forgiveness is not coming.

If a woman got drunk at a guy's house, and was being insistent upon being shown the door, throwing it in her face would be considered cold and insensitive.

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

#350

Post by hn_throwaway_99 »

morgante wrote: post #277

This is a really great post, both in the courage it took to write and the logical analysis it provides. I have to provide a bit of mea culpa here. When this issue first surfaced, I thought it was much more towards the line of flirting which went overboard (to an unacceptable but understandable level). It's much worse than that. This is undoubtably sexual harassment and those differences/nuances matter. All I can say…

> When this issue first surfaced, I thought it was much more towards the line of flirting which went overboard.

"Flirting which goes overboard" is perhaps understandable from a co-worker or peer. It is absolutely, 100% an abuse of power when a VC does it to a potential investee. Imagine it from the woman's point of view. Suppose you had an idea you worked long and hard on, and then when you present it to a VC, he starts flirting with you? What do you do? Are you worried that spurning his advances will jeopardize your potential funding? Worse, it has to be incredibly demoralizing to want to be treated in the basis of your accomplishments but then know the VC is judging you through the primary lens of sex.

Post reply on HN