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

America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

tabletmag.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 387 posts

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#321

Post by jeffdavis »

pjc50 wrote: post #224
jeffdavis wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

True in the sense that it creates a "floor" for the depths to which people might sink. But this process can still sink pretty low. Consider how women couldn't vote in the US until 1919 -- a half century after blacks. And a more modern example that was on display for all to see: the confirmation hearings of Brett Kavanaugh. There were not a lot of facts available -- no date, no place, no witness that could remember. Y…

A number of witnesses came forwards?

The evidence that any particular accusation was accurate was very thin.

Perhaps more importantly, the accusations were impossible to defend against.

None of this means the events didn't happen. They might have. But the process was fundamentally unfair, and we need a better way to deal with uncertainty.

Lining up on party lines -- a kind of "vote for the truth" -- is ridiculously unfair to the accused. We need to agree on a process, including standards of evidence. When that process plays out, we should be able to basically come together on the outcome.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#322

Post by icu »

It is a sad thing to say, but the simple solution to this alarming trend of rescinding consent after having consensual sex is to record the audio of your interactions with the opposite sex. A voice-activated recorder that can store months worth of conversations can be purchased on Amazon quite cheaply.

I've even heard of work situations where male managers refuse one-on-one meetings with female employees due to fear of being falsely accused of sexual impropriety. Again, in these work-related situations, recording the interaction may save your career.

I realise the questionable ethics of recording someone when they don't know they are being recorded. I also understand that there may be legal ramifications for doing this depending on where you live.

However, if you are falsely accused of sexual assault, with an audio recording proving consent, you can avoid the complete destruction of your life. You still may have to face the legal repercussions of recording the conversation, but this will be much smaller than the consequences of not being able to prove consent.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#323

Post by BurningFrog »

icebraining wrote: post #236
BurningFrog wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"No one will ever win the battle of the sexes; there's too much fraternizing with the enemy." --- Henry Kissinger

(Not actually by Henry Kissinger)

The great quotes rarely are said by the right person :)

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#324

Post by NateEag »

DoreenMichele wrote: post #211
jamesrcole wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I made the leader board. That accomplishment doesn't get credited to me. How should such an accomplishment be credited?

I'm trying to step away from what feels like an ugly pile on. But for the record: it's not uncommon for men on HN to say things to other men like "You've got a lot of karma on HN. You must be smart." No one says that about me. When I comment on it, I am invariably dismissed and attacked, told I'm bragging about and obsessed with meaningless internet points, etc. That's the essence of sexism right there: When a man do…

> But for the record: it's not uncommon for men on HN to say things to other men like "You've got a lot of karma on HN. You must be smart."

I've never seen that on the site personally.

How often would you say this happens? Can you offer links to it occurring?

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#325

Post by abvdasker »

lidHanteyk wrote: post #175
dragonsngoblins wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Most accusations are real See, I want to believe that, but I'm not sure there is a way to know whether or not that is actually true. In much the same way that there is rarely evidence of guilt when an accusation is true there isn't likely to be evidence when an accusation is false. I keep seeing people say some variant of "X% of rape accusations are false" but none of the sources I have ever seen have had a particu…

You may borrow priors that are personal but calibrated based on reading statistics: accusations are real at a 3/4 rate, about 1/3 of people have been sexually assaulted ever, and in 9/10 of sexual assaults it is not the assaulter's first time. I personally would not say that 3/4 is "most", but I don't think any kind of blanket statement can occur below 7/8, and usually I prefer to think in nines or other logarithmic…

Do you have sources for those numbers?

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#326

Post by NateEag »

pjc50 wrote: post #259
NateEag wrote: post #255

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> For a closer example, there are plenty of married Republican politicians who are willing to make statements on abortion that imply they have no idea how the reproductive system works. Such as?

The "way to shut that down" comment was the one that I was thinking of: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Todd_Akin#Controversial_commen... , but I'm sure people can find others.

That's definitely one, for sure.

One is not plenty, last time I checked.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#327

Post by pharke »

blotter_paper wrote: post #99
tzs wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How would bias toward gay people fit in with that? A lot of people don't know (or at least aren't aware that they know) anyone gay, but bias toward gay people has dramatically fallen over the last couple of decades. There was a recent episode of "Hidden Brain" on NPR that talked about this [1]. This part is particularly interesting: > In a thought experiment, Mahzarin and her colleagues have extended the trend lines…

>Most families include the elderly and the overweight, so the idea that familiarity breeds acceptance would predict that those biases should be going away quicker than biases against gays. What I'm about to say is not meant to provide a justification for discriminatory behavior, it's just an armchair-anthropologist's attempt at explaining this discrepancy. We might have a very deep bias against old people; if a group…

The counter to that is that the elderly and the overweight haven't always been the subjects of negative bias. There are plenty of inversions of that bias throughout history and across cultures. It's honestly just fashionable to be young and skinny at this point in history and this part of the world, hence the bias against the opposites.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#328

Post by lidHanteyk »

abvdasker wrote: post #325
lidHanteyk wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You may borrow priors that are personal but calibrated based on reading statistics: accusations are real at a 3/4 rate, about 1/3 of people have been sexually assaulted ever, and in 9/10 of sexual assaults it is not the assaulter's first time. I personally would not say that 3/4 is "most", but I don't think any kind of blanket statement can occur below 7/8, and usually I prefer to think in nines or other logarithmic…

Do you have sources for those numbers?

Thanks to Aumann's Agreement, I cannot convince you that the priors are well-calibrated priors without infinite regress. Do you have sources for other numbers that you would prefer be used instead?

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#329

Post by dclusin »

icu wrote: post #322

It is a sad thing to say, but the simple solution to this alarming trend of rescinding consent after having consensual sex is to record the audio of your interactions with the opposite sex. A voice-activated recorder that can store months worth of conversations can be purchased on Amazon quite cheaply. I've even heard of work situations where male managers refuse one-on-one meetings with female employees due to fear…

This is Richard Nixon level paranoia. I think that your second point is probably occurring quite a lot, especially in tech, where empathy & people skills aren't always high up on the list of priorities. But to walk around with suspicion to the point of carrying around a microphone is just lunacy. It's also an overreaction to such an unlikely outcome of being accused of misconduct with a female employee. It affects such a small segment of the population that your suggestion to walk around wired seems vastly excessive. There's probably something more reasonable that can be done.

Re: America’s New Sex Bureaucracy

#330

Post by jeffdavis »

justinjlynn wrote: post #281
mschuster91 wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As a reaction to a system where literally thousands of women's rape kits are not tested for years due to a combination of mismanagement, underfunding and understaffing, as well to structural issues such as male police officers not taking sexual assault accusations seriously or subjecting victims of assault to traumatizing questioning with no care about their mental well-being. Back then, the status quo was "if you're…

It's still that way, no matter how you present. If you're a woman, good luck getting justice after going through the horror of an exam and a police report in which you have to relive that same experience and a trial in which you often have to face your assailant directly, reliving it yet again. If you're a man, good luck even having your initial report recorded in the official record and then receiving no support in…

How to deal with uncertainty:

If you are not in a position of judgement or power, give all parties the benefit of the doubt -- accuser and accused -- and show compassion. Especially if they are personally right in front of you.

If you are in a position of judgement or power, like a reporter, a judge, a prosecutor, or a juror; then use a fair and impartial process.

Post reply on HN