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

How to Apologize

philomousos.blogspot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 179 posts

Re: How to Apologize

#151

Post by rsynnott »

losvedir wrote: post #46

What if there had been a line immediately following with the genders reversed, with attractive serving men as a perk? Are people upset with the objectification of women, or the assumption that women wouldn't be participants and aren't the audience of that flyer? You need to know what the offensive issue is before you can apologize and correct it. Does the apology go more "We're sorry we contributed to the objectifica…

> Are people upset with the objectification of women, or the assumption that women wouldn't be participants and aren't the audience of that flyer?

I'd imagine a little from column A, a little from column B. Both are offensive, especially in the context of the ongoing issues with sexism in tech.

Re: How to Apologize

#152

Post by rsynnott »

deanproxy wrote: post #61
hythloday wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, that quote is out-of-context to the point of disingenuousness. Women are listed as one of the "great perks" that (male?) attendees can enjoy: https://img.skitch.com/20120320-fmsc5mciy8e7n3nxhakmegxxg9.p...

Ah, Thank you! That definitely brings a lot more context into it and I can see how some may get offended by it. I still question whether this is offensive to myself. Compared to the ads I hear on the radio and TV for local clubs and bars and how they're touting their female attendance or "hot bar tenders" as a reason to come, this seems relatively tame to that...

Well, for a start, these clubs and bars are presumably targeted at men. I personally, and I believe many people, find that sort of advertising distasteful, but their client base presumably puts up with it.

However, this event was targeted at the tech community. You know, the scary wimminz can program too. The implication of it being an all-male event is perhaps more worrying than the objectification.

Re: How to Apologize

#153

Post by rsynnott »

rbarooah wrote: post #2

This a good analysis. I wonder though whether over time this kind of understanding is just going to become a formula or best practice that ends up being handled by a PR department. If it does, then how will we detect an authentic apology from a formulaic one?

It already more or less is; the idea is not new, and decent PR people will already do something very similar (if they are allowed to do so; some companies will be unwilling to admit guilt, whether through fear of liability or pride).

Re: How to Apologize

#154

Post by rsynnott »

copious wrote: post #48

Perhaps the most unfortunate outcome of this whole incident is that Squoot--a heretofore completely unknown startup--has gotten a substantial amount of exposure. Thanks to their bigotry, the percentage of the tech world that knows of them has gone up dramatically. What a shame.

Well, yes, but "oh, those are the sexists who can't spell and are bad at admitting responsibility" is not necessarily the reputation they'd like.

Re: How to Apologize

#155

Post by georgeorwell »

protomyth wrote: post #142
georgeorwell wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Their crime is thinking..." Can somebody help me to issue a DMCA notice?

There are crimes of state and of the heart and mind. Some require paperwork and lawyers. Others result in groups of people expressing their disapproval in various ways. Both can be very serious and poor times for levity.

This was obviously a throwaway account, but nevertheless I just thought I would say that if you want to find out where your ego is too strongly invested, you need only look as far as those areas of your life where you are unable to laugh at yourself. I mean come on, man. I actually agreed with the rest of what you wrote...

Re: How to Apologize

#156

Post by orblivion »

parfe wrote: post #133
orblivion wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not a matter of bringing in the "PC police". It's about respect. The distinction between these points is important to me, I'm glad you bring it up. I know I've been somewhat contradictory on this, but I'll say I agree that the given joke, as it stands, is not respectful. If it were a guy's gathering, I think it would be ok, but it's an open invitation. Since I've been saying that the problem is about bad taste…

I don't understand why you think there is some sweet spot for a professional event where a sexist joke can be appropriate. Problems with your rewrite: Women: Yes, we aim to make a welcoming atmosphere for women who want to participate in our hackathon. (And for those men still afraid of getting out-programmed by a girl, we've hired an all-female event staff to serve you cold beer.) 1. Boys and Girls are children. Men…

This reaction seems to be the result of some combination of my own social ineptitude, and your being sensitive about the issue. Either way I can see why it's not going to be that easy.

> 2. You imply that being out-programmed by a woman will hurt a man's ego. This is outright sexist and perpetuates the idea that men should be better than women.

The point was to make fun of sexism, really. It makes fun of the side of us that is intimidated by smart women, and encourages the more adult behavior of not being afraid of smart "girls".

> 4. Pointing out you hired an all female staff makes explicit you cater to straight men.

Well sure, I don't want to make a purely PC joke either, sortof defeats my point. Sexism mixed in with anti-sexism, I would hope, sortof diffuses things with some absurdity. If done right. Which I still have to figure out I guess.

> 5. By prefacing it with "Women:"

I guess a play on the fact that in the first version, women was a perk. Here it's directly about encouraging women to show up. I guess it doesn't work out of context. How about pretend that I didn't put it in the perks section.

> You keep trying to force the idea but it won't ever work in an inclusive way.

I don't know what you mean by keep, this was my first attempt. Any case, I think that with your attitude taken to its extreme, you take away all possibility of fun. It may seem forced because there's no hope for turning this particular "joke" into something viable. I wouldn't have tried it in real life. I'm remain unconvinced that there's zero room for humor related to gender, maybe it has to be made very carefully and mildly. A female friend of mine pointed out that it's going to be a bad idea altogether while women are still less than 5% of the scene. The idea of waiting until things are less tense, I can get behind, I just would hate for this whole thing to result in a permanent taboo.

Re: How to Apologize

#157

Post by cheez »

mikeash wrote: post #88
cheez wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This, I agree with. My job is not to change society though. My job is to enjoy my life and guide my kids. That's it. And I'll enjoy it more with some nice women around.

Who said anything about changing society? There are ways to attract more women to your conference, and hiring beer ladies and playing them up as a perk is almost the exact opposite of that.

I'm saying as an attendee. If the organizers can't do it otherwise, I'll take the servers. Nothing like idle flirting with someone you'll never talk to again.

Re: How to Apologize

#159

Post by cheez »

mistercow wrote: post #89
cheez wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why? I enjoy women.

Here's a trick for finding out if something is sexist, which can also help you understand why it's sexist. Replace "women" (and "female" etc.) with "black people" and see if it suddenly sounds incredibly racist.

Haha, having black people serve beer would be incredibly racist.

Alright, fine.

Re: How to Apologize

#160

Post by protomyth »

georgeorwell wrote: post #155
protomyth wrote: post #142

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are crimes of state and of the heart and mind. Some require paperwork and lawyers. Others result in groups of people expressing their disapproval in various ways. Both can be very serious and poor times for levity.

This was obviously a throwaway account, but nevertheless I just thought I would say that if you want to find out where your ego is too strongly invested, you need only look as far as those areas of your life where you are unable to laugh at yourself. I mean come on, man. I actually agreed with the rest of what you wrote...

It just struct me as a snippy reply and someone trying to laugh off a subject that keeps coming up in our industry. I hate when people laugh off this type of stuff. I figured I'd try (not much of a writer really) to give a less snippy answer. I didn't really succeed. I apologize if that wasn't your intent for the reply and thought behind it.

I can laugh at myself (and I do quite often). If I didn't I think I would have gone insane by now. I don't even have a problem with Hooters, Playboy / Playgirl, or any of the thousands of other places sex is used to sell things. Like I said, hormones and money.

I'm just a little sick of the lack of empathy in this situation. The "midwestern" discussion had the same vibe (obviously not as damaging). Maybe I'm just sick of TV Shows showing a buffalo every damn time they talks about ND, or (much, much more importantly) I'm just sick of thinking about how many developers we have lost because of stuff like this. Can't really be a Meritocracy if stuff isn't based on merit.

Post reply on HN