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

191–200 of 225 posts

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#191

Post by DanBC »

boboblong wrote: post #168
DanBC wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on the touch. No one has suggested this warrants jail time. People are saying, and quite reasonably I think, that you should keep your hands to yourself. Shaking hands = fine. Tapping shoulder or top outside of arm = less fine, but acceptable in a narrow range of situations. Placing cupped hand on shoulder of a stranger, with squeezing or stroking, with "friendly banter" = really not okay.

"Placing cupped hand on shoulder of a stranger, with squeezing or stroking, with "friendly banter" = really not okay." Nope, still not worth jail time. Move away from the person or grab their hand and remove it from your shoulder. I'm sorry, but you do not get to have people arrested for giving you an unwanted shoulder rub. If they persist, then yeah, they're assaulting (and harassing) you. Again, let's have some per…

Why do you keep mentioning jail time? Especially when I specifically said that no-one is claiming jail time is warranted.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#192

Post by stevewillows »

I think it's great to recognize when someone is inappropriate -- but I can only imagine pervy young boys seeing these as another collectable item from DefCon.

My concern is that the cards put a humour or reduced weight to something that is extremely serious.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#193

Post by sangfroid »

readme wrote: post #138

I tend to believe that women initiate encounters with men with unconscious non-verbal signals. A man who is able to read these signals will have a good success rate in meeting new women. A man who cannot will be pegged as a "creeper". I think it's not only true in real life, but on dating sites as well. Women receive so many messages from men that you are probably just going to get buried in all the noise if you send…

Yeah...the problem with this is that Defcon is not a dating event and women should not have to navigate it as though it were. Eye contact and not having a boyfriend perched on my arm more likely indicate that I'm there because I'm interested in the subject matter of the conference, not that I'm waiting for someone to put the moves on me. Seriously. Grow up.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#194

Post by btilly »

quadhome wrote: post #128
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…

Is this anecdotal or can you link to numbers? It's been many years since I worked in undergraduate recruiting, but last I heard this was less and less true every year. (Economics, astronomy and biology related fields like biophys and biochem having already inflected.)

These are remembered figures from the 1990s.

If astronomy has inflected I would be shocked. Because that was a pretty extreme field back then. Biology related fields were mostly women.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#195

Post by btilly »

boboblong wrote: post #150
readme wrote: post #138

I tend to believe that women initiate encounters with men with unconscious non-verbal signals. A man who is able to read these signals will have a good success rate in meeting new women. A man who cannot will be pegged as a "creeper". I think it's not only true in real life, but on dating sites as well. Women receive so many messages from men that you are probably just going to get buried in all the noise if you send…

"Did you open by sexually assaulting this woman, such as by unwanted touching?" Touching someone on the shoulder is not sexual assault. Let's try to keep things in perspective, please--if simply touching a member of a particular group warrants jail time, that group is an overclass.

Touching someone on the shoulder is not sexual assault.

How about, as described in the original post, licking someone's shoulder tattoo?

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#196

Post by jack-r-abbit »

mkaltenecker wrote: post #190
gavanwoolery wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My gay friends prefer "gay" or "queer" over homosexual. My black friends prefer "black" over African American. I could very well be wrong about the word retarded though. :)

You did not understand me. Using “gay” as a positive term isn’t a problem. “He came out first as a gay footballer” is a perfectly alright sentence. Using ”gay” (or “retarded”) as an insult is where the problem lies (with “retarded” the additional problem is that no one uses it as a positive term – and since it’s so overwhelmingly used negatively, using it neutrally isn’t really possible). When someone tells you he li…

> with “retarded” the additional problem is that no one uses it as a positive term

Not true. In the automotive world "retarded" is used quite often in regards to your distributor, vacuum and timing. By adjusting things, your timing can be advanced or retarded. It is not a negative thing. It is simply how engines are tuned.

http://georgiajag.com/Documents/Vacuum%20Advance%20versus%20...

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#197

Post by jack-r-abbit »

swa14 wrote: post #161
gavanwoolery wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The foremost cause of sexism is the fact that many males (consciously or subconsciously) perceive women as mentally and physically weaker (and indeed the average woman is physically weaker than the average male, that's just the way nature played the cards for the human species). Sex-drive is not really as much of a problem with regards to sexism. Sex-drive causes sexual harassment, which is not sexism. If a male were…

>If a male were to sexually harass a female, it would not be sexism because he is not giving males special preference over females Well, seeing how he's not sexually harassing the males I'd say there's a noted difference in "special preference". Anyway, I'd argue that sexism is almost inherent to any sexual harassment, as the male put himself in a position of power/dominance based on little more than gender differenc…

Not that I agree with the other person but by your logic everyone (who is not bi-sexual) practices sexism because they have a "special preference" to relationships with one gender over another.

If the OP of the article had all those same things done to her (ass grabbing, pillow fight invitations, etc) by gay women, would that still be considered "sexism" or just sexual harassment? People sometimes forget that sexual harassment is not always a "Man on Woman" action. There is a 2x2 matrix of how that can go down.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#198

Post by jack-r-abbit »

DanBC wrote: post #191
boboblong wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Placing cupped hand on shoulder of a stranger, with squeezing or stroking, with "friendly banter" = really not okay." Nope, still not worth jail time. Move away from the person or grab their hand and remove it from your shoulder. I'm sorry, but you do not get to have people arrested for giving you an unwanted shoulder rub. If they persist, then yeah, they're assaulting (and harassing) you. Again, let's have some per…

Why do you keep mentioning jail time? Especially when I specifically said that no-one is claiming jail time is warranted.

I think they were getting confused. It was the Flowchart Guy that said it: -------------YES---> GO TO JAIL

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#199

Post by masry »

Jach wrote: post #99
token_female wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I fucking hate how openly misogynistic HN is. I don't even want to bother sifting through this shit anymore. s/women/black people/g s/attending/going to elite, white-only colleges/g

I'm not a fan of "what did you expect?" as an argument either, but such an argument isn't misogynistic. Perhaps ignorant. If you're sick of HN, have some fun and waste some time here: http://unqualified-reservations.blogspot.com/2008/04/open-le...

Well if I am ignorant, educate me.

Here's my take: I am a straight male and I go to a gay bar for a friends birthday. Guy there thinks I am hot, so after a few minutes of conversation he starts rubbing my chest. I politely apologize for leading him on and tell him I am straight. He understands and goes away.

In my mind that's an exact analogy to what happened there. Sure a tech conference isn't a bar, but according to the OP the "frat environment" was there. What I did was realize that I am out of place. What she did is the equivalent of me calling the guy a creep, handing gay people red/yellow cards for creepiness, posting it on Hacker news and getting lots of sympathy from self incriminating gay people.

Again, if you disagree. Educate me. Help me understand.

Re: Sexism red/yellow cards at Defcon

#200

Post by token_female »

gavanwoolery wrote: post #169
token_female wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[citation needed] I would love to see the study that demonstrates this, controlling for all societal factors.

Do you need a citation if I tell you the sky is blue? What would you argue love is based on? Magical unicorns?

For the claim that all forms of love, respect etc. Boil down to sexual attraction? Yes. I don't know where you've been for the past 40 years, but Freud's theories on sexuality had no basis in empiricism and are no longer accepted among modern psychologists.
Post reply on HN