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

Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

singlevoice.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 225 posts

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#61

Post by codehotter »

Does this happen at non-IT parties where a lot of men gather to get drunk and to try and socialize? I admit I'm not much of a party person, but from what I have seen, the answer is yes.

I do not believe this has got anything to do with IT nor with sexism. If you are an attractive woman (relative to the attending male population), you are going to attract attention. That is how men are wired. That is our culture. Men have to approach women, or they don't laid.

Pure speculation, but the man who grabbed the woman's ass probably did it because he was in a mischievous mood, and to express his sexuality, and he probably needed to do something like that and get away with it to be happy. In other contexts, the victim might even have smiled at him (or punched him with a smile on her face). That might be what he needed. I grab my girlfriend's ass sometimes and it feels good to be allowed to do that.

The problem is probably that these are men that don't get out much, have low social skills, don't have experience with how to express their sexuality in an appropriate way, and things go wrong. And things go wrong in ways that make women very uncomfortable.

The problem is probably not that women are not being respected or valued. To me, sexism would be like automatically assuming a woman is not going to be able to perform some task, because she is a woman. Grabbing someone's ass is not sexism, it's inappropriate sexuality.

What can we do about it? Teach men how to express their sexuality in a way that works. Teach men that there are places women go to when they want to receive that kind of attention, teach them to recognize the signals, and teach them that IT conferences are not one of those places.

The cards are a really good idea just because it makes men aware that they are making her uncomfortable. Believe it or not, most do not realize.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#62

Post by bnr »

anigbrowl wrote: post #37
gavanwoolery wrote: post #30

Maybe the title is link bait, but I don't think this is "sexism" by definition. Sexism: "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." A bunch of males were hitting on the author, crassly or awkwardly, but they were not denying the author equal rights. If a female asked a male to show their privates, no one would call it "sexism"; it might be rude, uncalled for, or strange…

Oh for heaven's sake. It is not acceptable to ask strangers to display their bodies, no matter how rarely you get out. If you want to see somebody with their clothes off, go to a fucking strip club. Stop making excuses for this bullshit behavior. If you can't understand this, visit a therapist who can help you to navigate social situations.

Of course it's not acceptable. But the victim being female does not automatically make the act sexism.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#63

Post by btilly »

DeepDuh wrote: post #47
btilly wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here is an interesting data point. When you look across the sciences, there is an interesting correlation. The more mathematical a subject is, the higher the portion of people in it who are men. With a glaring exception. Pure math is about 40% women. And based on the ones that I've known, many would be competent at, and happy in, other mathematically inclined areas but they gravitate towards math because mathematicia…

"With a glaring exception. Pure math is about 40% women. And based on the ones that I've known, many would be competent at, and happy in, other mathematically inclined areas but they gravitate towards math..." Yes, I've noticed that too. "because mathematicians tend to be clueless enough to avoid being offensive." Are you sure about that reasoning? Are mathematicians really that different from from scientists? I'd li…

I can't prove that that reasoning is correct, but it certainly fit the people that I saw around me in grad school.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#64

Post by mootothemax »

gavanwoolery wrote: post #56
bkrausz wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Long story short, if you step into a bar full of males who normally have few opportunities to make contact with women in a social context...yes, you are stepping into the lion's den. Males are sexual, but not necessarily "sexist" -- don't confuse the two. On the one hand, I believe you are technically correct (the best kind of correct). On the other, you seem to be implying that this kind of behavior is somehow ok…

I agree - I do not think this type of behavior should be condoned or justified, but I do believe it should be expected. I have seen the same behavior in many bars/clubs. Deep down, every man want two things: food and sex (akin to Freud's "id"). When you have enough drinks in you, your control/moral mechanisms get toned down (your ego and super ego). So, yes, in any bar full of drunk males, any female should expect to…

Deep down, every man want two things: food and sex (akin to Freud's "id"). When you have enough drinks in you, your control/moral mechanisms get toned down (your ego and super ego)

This is terrible and a disgusting position to take. I am quite capable of going to a bar, drinking like a teenager, and managing to go home, all without sexually harassing or assaulting anyone.

You're attempting to justify awful behaviour by saying that it should expected.

If you, or any of your friends, are incapable of appearing in public without harassing or assaulting another person, the problem very much does not lie with the person on the receiving end.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#65

Post by mkramlich »

gavanwoolery wrote: post #30

Maybe the title is link bait, but I don't think this is "sexism" by definition. Sexism: "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." A bunch of males were hitting on the author, crassly or awkwardly, but they were not denying the author equal rights. If a female asked a male to show their privates, no one would call it "sexism"; it might be rude, uncalled for, or strange…

and in Las Vegas of all places! agreed, sexual != sexist

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#66

Post by cperciva »

DanBC wrote: post #39
gavanwoolery wrote: post #30

Maybe the title is link bait, but I don't think this is "sexism" by definition. Sexism: "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." A bunch of males were hitting on the author, crassly or awkwardly, but they were not denying the author equal rights. If a female asked a male to show their privates, no one would call it "sexism"; it might be rude, uncalled for, or strange…

> stereotyping, [...] women, on the basis of sex." Licking a woman's shoulder, because she is a woman, is clearly a sexist act. It's also a criminal offence in several countries. I cannot believe that we still need to have this discussion. I have every sympathy for lonely, isolated, people; especially if they're on the ASD spectrum. I'd welcome any sensible effort to help those people develop some social skills or ge…

Licking a woman's shoulder, because she is a woman, is clearly a sexist act.

No; it's sexual harassment and assault, but it's not sexist. Sexism would be if someone said "you're female, therefore you want to have your shoulder licked".

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#67

Post by lflux »

swa14 wrote: post #59

It's not that I disagree with the general sentiment, but there's an undertone of self-righteousness there. " I was already thinking about what clothes I would avoid taking to Las Vegas for Defcon. Short skirts, low cut tops, tight dresses, and anything that might be overtly attention-grabbing have been bumped to second priority on that packing list. Why?" Maybe because it's a good idea to dress as part of the busines…

Defcon and Blackhat are two different animals. Blackhat is the "business" conference, whereas Defcon is where mohawks and whacky t-shirts are the norm. Dressing as "business" at Defcon will get you accused of being a Fed.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#68

Post by enqk »

bkrausz wrote: post #36
gavanwoolery wrote: post #30

Maybe the title is link bait, but I don't think this is "sexism" by definition. Sexism: "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." A bunch of males were hitting on the author, crassly or awkwardly, but they were not denying the author equal rights. If a female asked a male to show their privates, no one would call it "sexism"; it might be rude, uncalled for, or strange…

> Long story short, if you step into a bar full of males who normally have few opportunities to make contact with women in a social context...yes, you are stepping into the lion's den. Males are sexual, but not necessarily "sexist" -- don't confuse the two. On the one hand, I believe you are technically correct (the best kind of correct). On the other, you seem to be implying that this kind of behavior is somehow ok…

I think the onus is on those damn men to get the fuck out and interact with women normally in the course of their lives, so as not to educate themselves about what it is to interact respectfully with other human beings.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#69

Post by mkramlich »

DanBC wrote: post #39
gavanwoolery wrote: post #30

Maybe the title is link bait, but I don't think this is "sexism" by definition. Sexism: "Prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex." A bunch of males were hitting on the author, crassly or awkwardly, but they were not denying the author equal rights. If a female asked a male to show their privates, no one would call it "sexism"; it might be rude, uncalled for, or strange…

> stereotyping, [...] women, on the basis of sex." Licking a woman's shoulder, because she is a woman, is clearly a sexist act. It's also a criminal offence in several countries. I cannot believe that we still need to have this discussion. I have every sympathy for lonely, isolated, people; especially if they're on the ASD spectrum. I'd welcome any sensible effort to help those people develop some social skills or ge…

sexual != sexist

hitting on != harassment

touching != assault (protip: it's just touching; bashing their fist into your face, for example, would be assault by a more common sense person's definition; but touching is just touching, regardless of what some arbitrary legal verbage says somewhere; a document could say "a horse is a squid" but if that horse doesn't look or act anything at all like a squid then a reasonable person would say it's not a squid, it's a fucking horse)

The problem is that some folks (both male and female) don't always perceive things the same way. Indeed, when someone (anyone, whether male or female) is "in the mood" they often interpret events and other people much differently than if they aren't. Add alcohol, add social inexperience, and these differences can magnify or become more frequent.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#70

Post by token_female »

mistermann wrote: post #18

Prediction: The sexism in IT problem will never end. Here's my hypothesis: 1. Women and men are different. We see this played out all around us, all the time, both sides happily make and laugh at jokes about it, and no one has a problem acknowledging this fact during discussion of other topics, but when certain subjects are being discussed, these very same people will assure you, with total sincerity, that there is n…

> There is something about IT that either appeals especially to males, or males are particularly skilled at. I have no idea why.

Really? You have no idea? You don't think it might possibly have something to do with sexism in society and in IT culture?

From early childhood, girls are taught that the ought to be interested in princesses, dolls, and playing house, while boys are taught that they ought to be interested in LEGOs, trains, cars, building things, computers, math, science, sports, etc. When you go to McDonalds, they ask if you are a boy or a girl, and if you are a girl, they give you a Barbie, while if you are a boy, they give you a car. If for some reason you are a girl and would prefer to play with LEGOs, your peers make fun of you relentlessly. Boys get to play with LEGOs without the stigma. And don't start telling me about reverse sexism and how hard it is for boys who want to play with dolls - the media doesn't portray the gendered interests as separate but equal. It portrays the boys' activities as "cool" and the girls' activities as domestic. The grown-up version of playing with LEGOs has much higher social standing in society than the grown-up version of playing with dolls. It is not a valid comparison.

It continues from there. Teachers tend to call on boys more often than they call on girls. Boys are taught to be aggressive while girls are taught to be submissive. This leads to aggressive girls being called "bitches" while boys who behave the same way are praised for being "assertive". The list goes on and on and on, and the only way you could not notice it is if you have the privilege of not having to pay attention because it doesn't detrimentally affect you.

And then we have articles like this. Say you're a smart, college-age woman. You are really good at computer science, and you are also really good at, say, writing/things that might be pre-law. You know that if you pursue computer science, you will be one of the only women and will have to put up with the kind of behavior the article talks about, potentially for your entire career, whereas if you pursue law, you will be surrounded by a somewhat even mix of men and women, and that kind of behavior will be much less tolerated. Tell me which field it makes sense to choose, and then tell me again that sexism doesn't play a role.

Post reply on HN