"Lighten up" • Hacker News Board

Re: "Lighten up"

#651

Post by MPSimmons » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:17 PM UTC

mistermann wrote: post #602

MPSimmons wrote: post #553

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here is a picture of.... Alright, look...those are pictures of people who are topless and are taken in non-sexual environments. Biologically speaking, there is nothing more sexual about those photographs than photographs of the same people wearing shirts. Physiologically speaking, though, there is a difference. For most of us, chemicals in our brain respond instantaneously to those pictures, virtually shouting, "th…

Sexism is one of those topics that invokes a lot of disingenuous statements. If the article being discussed was about human sexuality, people here would discuss in great detail how evolution has hard wired our brains for certain reactions, behaviors, etc, discuss documentaries they've seen, post links to articles, etc. But if the article being posted is about the sexist treatment of a woman in the workplace, eventual…

>Other more serious injustices in life never invoke this much passioned discussion

I don't know if it's the case, but I imagine the more serious injustices are more black and white, where as sexism is almost all gray. One person's "I can't believe he said that" is another person's "You should have heard my daddy talk to my momma".

Re: "Lighten up"

#652

Post by MPSimmons » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:22 PM UTC

Cushman wrote: post #495

drumdance wrote: post #475

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pedantic. There is such a thing as sex appeal and dressing sexily. The entire fashion industry is built on it. I bet some of the people in those last pictures have been called "sexy" and liked it. As a man I dress well because I want to be attractive. No, it doesn't mean women should feel free to whistle at me at work, but it's not outrageous to explore the boundaries and decision making process on this forum.

There is also such a thing as dressing well because it is comfortable, or makes one feel better about oneself, without the intention of attracting sexual attention, and the distinction between the two is not pedantic. It is at the core of the disagreement here. Look at the original quote: "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" A clear statement of sexual interest, which Katie clearly…

I have a question, and this is a real question, I'm not trying to be a dick here.

Suppose that Katie is a very large, very unattractive woman, and the meaning behind the statement isn't, "I'm going to sit where I can take advantage of the low cut dress", but "I'm going to sit as far away from her as possible", is it still sexist?

Re: "Lighten up"

#653

Post by rmc » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:27 PM UTC

Anderkent wrote: post #640

rmc wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"girls"?! Do you know many female children that wear low cut tops? Or do you mean adult women?

Via google: Girl: A young or relatively young woman A young woman of a specified kind or having a specified job - a career girl Women who mix socially or belong to a particular group, team, or profession - I look forward to having lunch with the girls Perhaps this is a language issue, but it's just as common for me to call my male friends 'boys' as my female friends 'girls', even though all are adults. Not sure what…

There can be a lot of hang overs in languages that aim to demean and diminish people. Calling a black man "boy", or a woman "girl" is a way to belittle them.

"Boy" vs "Girl" is an interesting one. It's not uncommon, as you pointed out, to call adult women "girl". However you rarely in the straight male world do people refer to adult men as "boy". However in the gay male world, sometimes "boy" is used (e.g. this collection of gay short films 'Boys on Film': http://www.amazon.co.uk/Boys-Film-Hard-Love-DVD/dp/B001L5JMQ... ). This shows that "boy" (and hence "girl") is a slightly sexualised way to talk about someone. Should you be using sexualised terms in a professional environment? No, so say "women".

(BTW: Just because your google search found some results that back up what you say, but might be a bit misogynistic doesn't mean google is right. "Jew Watch" still shows up above the fold if I search for "Jew", but it would be wrong of me to excuse anti-Semitism based on that reasoning)

Re: "Lighten up"

#654

Post by MPSimmons » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:30 PM UTC

eric-hu wrote: post #564

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure? Of course I'm not sure . But when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. Why do all the waitresses in Hooters wear low-cut tops? Is it for comfort? Is it because they couldn't afford the other 30% of the shirt? Or is it because that's proven to be very effective at gaining male attention? I wore them for me, not for anyone else. This makes no sense. In a post-apocolyptic world where you're the on…

> This makes no sense. From the post: > ... Start wearing sweaters, even though my breasts feel like they're boiling in there (yup, that's one reason women like low tops, guys)? ... Comfort is her reason for wearing low cut tops. No need to speculate further than that. To flip this around to me, I know that at times, I've done the bare minimum in the clothing department. Sometimes this means getting into my clubbing…

Do you see it as unreasonable that people in both situations pay you more attention?

Re: "Lighten up"

#655

Post by Steuard » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:33 PM UTC

Anderkent wrote: post #640

rmc wrote: post #637

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"girls"?! Do you know many female children that wear low cut tops? Or do you mean adult women?

Via google: Girl: A young or relatively young woman A young woman of a specified kind or having a specified job - a career girl Women who mix socially or belong to a particular group, team, or profession - I look forward to having lunch with the girls Perhaps this is a language issue, but it's just as common for me to call my male friends 'boys' as my female friends 'girls', even though all are adults. Not sure what…

If you're calling any female co-workers "girls" in conversations at or about the workplace, you're doing it wrong.

There is a long history of society downplaying women's contributions in the workforce by using cutesy terms like "girls", and some of the definitions you've cited here reflect that. But just because a term like "career girl" was once in wide use doesn't mean that it's still appropriate today. (Or for that matter that it ever was: can you imagine anyone ever having used the term "career boy"?) Much like the ridiculous term "co-ed" for "woman who we decided to allow into college", its time has thankfully come and gone.

Re: "Lighten up"

#656

Post by ErrantX » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:35 PM UTC

heliostatic wrote: post #335

bh42222 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

job interviews in which she was shown pictures of her interviewer's bare ass; Holly horror story! Sadly I am not surprised to hear this, because I've heard many similar stories. And yet out of the very large number of male friends in the industry I have, including myself, none of us have ever or would ever do anything like that. The paradox here is answered by the fact that a tiny share of creeps will always be found…

I think you're correct that the best solution is to increase the number of women in technology. However, as members of that community today, you and I and our male friends can call out the creepy dudes making inappropriate remarks 100% of the time we hear them. Creating an environment where people feel comfortable doesn't have to mean getting rid of all bad actors; it can be enough to make it clear that bad actors ar…

Creeps are a part of every industry; they are more aptly described as "Bullies" - and can be both male and female (though I admit the male, sexist, bully is very prevalent in our industry).

These people tend not to just be sexist; they bully their male workers as well - crude remarks for example, put downs, superior attitudes.

I once had a female (client) lean over the desk to me, with a low cut blouse, and say "My cleavage intimidates you doesn't it".

I suggest that, as this blogger noted, the minority of creeps & bullies aren't really the problem. You can deal with them a lot more easily by moving on, firing them, refusing their custom - etc.

The issue is the sort of subtle remarks that the people making them don't realise are upsetting. They are not unlike-able, unlike bullies, just a bit clueless.

And fixing this is not easy, because you might really get on with the guys in your office, just wish they'd stop commenting on your ass!

Re: "Lighten up"

#657

Post by DanBC » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:40 PM UTC

MPSimmons wrote: post #652

Cushman wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is also such a thing as dressing well because it is comfortable, or makes one feel better about oneself, without the intention of attracting sexual attention, and the distinction between the two is not pedantic. It is at the core of the disagreement here. Look at the original quote: "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" A clear statement of sexual interest, which Katie clearly…

I have a question, and this is a real question, I'm not trying to be a dick here. Suppose that Katie is a very large, very unattractive woman, and the meaning behind the statement isn't, "I'm going to sit where I can take advantage of the low cut dress", but "I'm going to sit as far away from her as possible", is it still sexist?

It's bullying and harassment and would be covered in UK employment laws.

One can imagine such comments causing Katie distress or stress. Employers have a legal duty (which has been tested in courts many times) to protect their employees from harm (and that includes stress) in the workplace.

It is quite possibly sexist; there's not enough information to say.

Re: "Lighten up"

#658

Post by MPSimmons » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:40 PM UTC

tomp wrote: post #394

Swizec wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public perception (as judged by art, which usually represents a slightly caricatured version of reality) seems to imply that your attractiveness and the appropriateness of your comments are inversely correlated. That is to say, if you tell a woman she looks good, it will be a compliment if she likes you, a sexist remark if she doesn't.

There's much more to this... A totally attractive guy (model-like) that emanates low self-confidence (shyness, bad posture, ...) could still have his comments perceived in a negative way (i.e. as being sexist, not compliments). So, I believe that we tend to judge this from the perspective of the perceived intent of the person making the comments. A self confident gut -> he's probably just being sincere -> cure. A not…

...because there are no examples of overconfident sexist assholes?

Re: "Lighten up"

#659

Post by MPSimmons » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 12:45 PM UTC

mkramlich wrote: post #548

georgieporgie wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? So, I'm not going to agree or disagree with you, since I don't really know exactly what you're saying. I will say this, though: there is professional attire for women. Generally speaking, this doesn't involve form-hugging clothing. A fitted women's dress shirt is not form-hugging, by the way. Personally, I recognize that I…

> Personally, I recognize that I have an unfortunate automatic physiological response to breasts. You've been programmed to think this is bad, unhealthy or unnatural by people with an agenda. There's another school of thought that says it's ok, normal, natural, and healthy. Humans are hard-wired for sex and we've been having sex like rabbits for millions of years otherwise we wouldn't be here. There are many situatio…

Absolutely. But as ReneHurse above said, this type of automatic response can be controlled with age and practice. God knows it took me a long time to figure it out.

Now, if anything, I over-correct when I'm talking to someone who I find attractive and is wearing a very low cut shirt. Eyes. glued. to. eyes.

Re: "Lighten up"

#660

Post by JulianMorrison » Thu, Mar 22, 2012, 1:03 PM UTC

chunkybacon wrote: post #474

ajross wrote: post #221

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is always where geeks run off the rails in discussions like this. We want to come up with rules for things: either this statement is "sexist" or it is not, and here is the objective reason for that decision. But it misses the point. Context matters. In a utopian environment where women felt equally respected, sure, a sideways/slightly-inappropriate comment would be fine. In some workplaces today that might even…

The rule is: some girls like it, some girls don't. You have to know what they will like before you open your mouth.

The rule is: don't assert your situational power. A woman alone or outnumbered among men is going to feel pressured. Comments you make won't be well received even if she is worried enough by the pressure to smile and hide her discomfort. She'll just curse your name to her friends after work.

Contrast: if you're the only man in a room of women, and the boss is a woman, would you dare speak up with your "nice dress" type comment? That's what it feels like to be on the downside of a power gap.