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

Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

kapwing.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

601–610 of 666 posts

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#601

Post by alkonaut »

curiousgeorgio wrote: post #408
alkonaut wrote: post #191

Kids who grew up in an environment where anonymous interaction is the norm (such as kids who have anonymous social chats at school, or do in-game chats etc) have grown so accustomed to it that I don't think they even see it as sexist, racist, bullying etc. Most would probably never say any of this to someones' face, not out of fear of consequences but simply because they know better. Yet in anonymous contact they don…

Agreed. This problem is closer to "online graffiti" (every text box is the canvas) than sexism, racism, etc. The assumption that a bot may be on the receiving end further encourages the behavior. These kids know better, though I do think a healthy "fear of consequences" or reality check can help. I'd expect the rate of abuse to decline fairly significantly with the simple addition of the text "This conversation is be…

That isn't my point - I wasn't trying to be dismissive. My point is that anonymity amplifies and reveals genuine beliefs.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#602

Post by draugadrotten »

hycaria wrote: post #190
draugadrotten wrote: post #134

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am male and used to work in a call centre. I apparently have a good voice, and I was repeatedly asked out by random women calling the service desk. I even got a virtual stalker who kept inventing issues and calling daily just to speak with me. Since I am male, I was not threatened but amused, but I can see how a woman would feel vulnerable in the same situation.

>Since I am male, I was not threatened but amused, but I can see how a woman would feel vulnerable in the same situation. Why ?

Why. Like several of you have discussed in the thread: I was a young male at the time, filled with testosterone, 6'5" in good shape and recently having my compulsory military service... it's difficult to intimidate me physically. As you said, this was phone calls, but the location was well known and at least the stalker was both aware and nearby so the possibility of real confrontation was possible. I did not think the stalker or anyone else would bring a gun or anything, she was not talking that way. I think the possibility of a physical confrontation generally is more intimidating to a woman due to physical differences such as size and muscle mass, yet I know of female soldiers who would not be scared for anyone. (Generalisations aren't wrong just because there are exceptions, one just have to understand the difference between the two.)

Considering the examples in the thread's article, I am appalled but not really surprised. I think the "beautiful" woman also serves as an example of a woman who would get many favours from her beauty. Both beautiful women and men gets benefits in work from their looks and the lewd comments could be the other side of the coin. (quick google result: https://businessinsider.com/studies-show-the-advantages-of-b...) I appreciated the article writers diligent comparisons of faces and loved the use of the cat.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#603

Post by s73v3r_ »

AnimalMuppet wrote: post #524
scott_s wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These vocal trolls are being sexist. A society that tolerates sexist trolls tolerates sexism. A society that tolerates sexism is a sexist society.

A society that tolerates sexist trolls because it values free speech is not being sexist, it's being pro-free-speech.

It is being sexist, and it's being rather absurdist with it's definition of "free speech".

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#604

Post by eevilspock »

alkonaut wrote: post #600
eevilspock wrote: post #544

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was as amazed as Jakob[1] how much the overwhelming HN response to this story is self-serving defensiveness and rationalization, and very little acknowledgement. But I took solace in the fact that his comment was voted to the top. When I came back 20 minutes later it had dropped to #3. Three hours later it is #4, with the top-two trivializing this as just trolls not misogyny, and the third in support of women but i…

Man having a comment upvoted and scrutinized really makes me wish I had written a more thought out post. Sometimes you write something in 2 minutes, in a language that isn't your first language, and only later come back to realize it was voted up and now had an expectation of actually being insightful. > expresses the belief that what someone does anonymously does not reflect their character or their underlying attit…

Thanks for following up. I had to reply to your words, because of all the votes it was given and all the replies conforming my interpretation of your words as true for many and the effective burying of the real problem, even if you didn’t intend it. I’m VERY happy to know my criticism doesn’t apply to you, but it still applies to the thread.

> Where were you earlier?

Finding time to write a thorough and thoughtful reply to such an important subject. ;)

> But the fact that even a few behave like this is of course a problem that not only lies with a few. All of us creates a culture which in turn creates these assholes. So even if we think we aren't assholes ourselves, we more than likely are part of making a culture of assholes.

Well said.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#605

Post by rectang »

naikrovek wrote: post #599
rectang wrote: post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> A single demand for quid pro quo sexual favors in exchange for professional rewards is a sexual offence, a bad one, and alone it is not harassment. That's simply wrong -- a single egregious instance can certainly constitute harassment, both in terms of common sense and in terms of legal consequences. What matters is severity -- and though repeating the behavior makes it more likely to be judged as severe, one bad i…

But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment. Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...

Harassment does not require "multiple". That's just wrong.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#606

Post by alkonaut »

eevilspock wrote: post #604
alkonaut wrote: post #600

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Man having a comment upvoted and scrutinized really makes me wish I had written a more thought out post. Sometimes you write something in 2 minutes, in a language that isn't your first language, and only later come back to realize it was voted up and now had an expectation of actually being insightful. > expresses the belief that what someone does anonymously does not reflect their character or their underlying attit…

Thanks for following up. I had to reply to your words, because of all the votes it was given and all the replies conforming my interpretation of your words as true for many and the effective burying of the real problem, even if you didn’t intend it. I’m VERY happy to know my criticism doesn’t apply to you, but it still applies to the thread. > Where were you earlier? Finding time to write a thorough and thoughtful re…

I didn't realize until you had posted that a large fraction of the upvotes were probably because my post had a dismissive tone. And I was feeling good about the upvotes until you pointed that out D:

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#607

Post by TomMarius »

Wehrdo wrote: post #371
TomMarius wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you remember how sexist were the 70's and the 80's? People who were 12 back then turned out just fine, considering that we're even discussing this, didn't they?

What makes you think they turned out fine? Considering all the high-profile sexual harassment issues over the past few weeks, I get the feeling that many of them did not "grow out of it".

That's a very, very small portion of the population. It's also the part of population known for its crazy parties, abundance of money, drugs and alcohol.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#608

Post by TomMarius »

ams6110 wrote: post #351
TomMarius wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you remember how sexist were the 70's and the 80's? People who were 12 back then turned out just fine, considering that we're even discussing this, didn't they?

I was 12 in the 70s, and don't remember any boys talking to girls like this. If they did, they'd probably get a slap in the face, if not by the girl then by the teacher if overheard. One big difference is that there was no access to the sort of degrading pornography that is just freely available today. A 12 year old boy in the 70s might be able to get his hands on a Playboy or maybe even a Hustler but it took some re…

Sure, but there were sexist ads everywhere including the TV; every pub, car repair shop etc. had at least one erotic calendar hanging in the public and so on. There's way more, please don't try to say that there is more sexism today than there was in the 70's.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#609

Post by HedgeSparrow »

coryfklein wrote: post #432
notyourday wrote: post #295

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It used to be said that a drunk person would tell you exactly what he or she thinks about you or about any topic. Internet anonymity ( or semi-anonymity ) does not affect the character. It exposes the character.

I don't think that changing the environment inherently reveals someone's "true" character. You're just revealing how they behave in that environment. We are just too complex to be reduced to such a simple experiment as "anonymity" to discover our true nature.

A facet of their character, expressed in a specific environment, is still a part of their character. Your behavior, wherever you are, is who you are.

Re: Why I don't use my real photo when messaging with customers on my website

#610

Post by naikrovek »

rectang wrote: post #605
naikrovek wrote: post #599

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But that's just a single instance, and by definition not harassment. Unless my understanding of the word "multiple" (and "persistently" and "continually") is completely wrong...

Harassment does not require "multiple". That's just wrong.

The dictionary of definition DEFINITELY does. (Caps for emphasis, not yelling.)
Post reply on HN