Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Don't Touch My Dongle?"
She wants the D:/
"Your dongle: Do Not Want!"
Probably more realistic. Probably covers a larger % of cases.
Fork My Dongle
221–230 of 254 posts
Re: Fork My Dongle
#222Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If inflammatory comments are even possibly leading to death threats (and it seemed to me like they might be), it's probably a good idea to not post inflammatory comments. That's 'victim blaming' and fairly inflammatory. That's not your intent. It's no different then telling women not to wear provocative clothing if they don't want to be raped (And before people suggest it, I'm not equating rape to anything here). B…
> That's 'victim blaming' and fairly inflammatory. That's ridiculous. If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. There are actions that victims take that increase or decrease their chances of being victimized. > it's no different then telling women not to wear provocative clothing if they don't want to be rape…
Dude, relax. Have a discussion. =)
> If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control.
Context. You are supposed to comment on HN. You are not supposed to play in the street. If you played in a park, I'd expect you not to get hit by a car. If someone does get hit by a car while playing in a park, you don't suggest to that person they should avoid playing in the park.
> What about if it is telling women to go out with their friends and look after each other when they are at bars? To be aware of their surroundings? Is that victim blaming to prepare your daughter for the realities of the world?
No, that's good advice! And there is a distinct difference.
Yes, I know, the reality is that wearing provocative clothes can entice men, and some men will get the wrong idea, and might do bad things. But it's a bad solution to adopt the "change what you wear" approach. It doesn't solve the problem.
Basically, it's the same as this type of advice: If you don't want to get into an accident, don't use a car. Of if you dont' want to get into an plane crash, don't fly a plane. If you don't want to drown, stay out of water.
Or, if you don't want to get raped, look ugly.
But telling you daughter to go with friends, to be aware, to check in? These don't change her behavior. It minimizes risk. Indeed, if you think about it, the advice you give up there is much better than not wearing provocative clothing. Mostly because wearing provocative clothing has little to do with getting raped.
Anyways, I hope you understand better what I was trying to say. Again, it's not some new concept that I'm spouting. Spend some time reading up on it. Others do a better job at explaining it then I do.
Re: Fork My Dongle
#223Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. Confusion's statement contradicts all my own reading, as well as comments from rape victims[1]/friends of rape victims. Rapists are usually not strangers looking to score. It's almost always someone the victim knows, and it's usually about power, not looks. [1] Survivor is a better word, but it was a clunky read when I tried it. I won't be bothered if you use it instead if you reply.
I actually just thought it was a given[1], but it isn't relevant to my argument. Consider it replaced by "Telling women that not getting drunk will lower their chance of being raped" or "Telling women that not rejecting advances will lower their chance of being raped" or something else that you know is unfortunately true. [1] Even among 'friends' (acquaintances?), chances you will be hit on are higher when wearing 'l…
[deleted]
Re: Fork My Dongle
#224Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. Confusion's statement contradicts all my own reading, as well as comments from rape victims[1]/friends of rape victims. Rapists are usually not strangers looking to score. It's almost always someone the victim knows, and it's usually about power, not looks. [1] Survivor is a better word, but it was a clunky read when I tried it. I won't be bothered if you use it instead if you reply.
I actually just thought it was a given[1], but it isn't relevant to my argument. Consider it replaced by "Telling women that not getting drunk will lower their chance of being raped" or "Telling women that not rejecting advances will lower their chance of being raped" or something else that you know is unfortunately true. [1] Even among 'friends' (acquaintances?), chances you will be hit on are higher when wearing 'l…
[deleted]
Re: Fork My Dongle
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously. Confusion's statement contradicts all my own reading, as well as comments from rape victims[1]/friends of rape victims. Rapists are usually not strangers looking to score. It's almost always someone the victim knows, and it's usually about power, not looks. [1] Survivor is a better word, but it was a clunky read when I tried it. I won't be bothered if you use it instead if you reply.
I actually just thought it was a given[1], but it isn't relevant to my argument. Consider it replaced by "Telling women that not getting drunk will lower their chance of being raped" or "Telling women that not rejecting advances will lower their chance of being raped" or something else that you know is unfortunately true. [1] Even among 'friends' (acquaintances?), chances you will be hit on are higher when wearing 'l…
I honestly don't think those conclusions are accurate (factually). At least, I've not read anything that supports those conclusions.
Anyways, I tried to address another commenters questions about my post, and address it here:
Re: Fork My Dongle
#226Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hi rmrfrmrf. I went through your recent comments. By and large, they're highly inflammatory. Ease off on the vitriol and your life might get a bit easier. To be precise, these are the comments that I find inflammatory: > Because anti-woman and anti-black hate groups are trying to game HN with mass account creation and upvote spam. > SendGrid would have come out stronger from weathering the storm as a defender and pro…
I initially wrote a snarky comment along the lines of "that you disagree with a comment does not make it inflammatory", but looking at your comment history, it appears that you've actually tried to play the voice of reason for the whole forky-dongly "scandal". So good for you. You seem to be alone (if you ignore all the cowards - like me - who just decided to be quiet). I don't find the above comments to be very infl…
I'll give you another example.
I don't find the dongle jokes offensive, but obviously Adria did. My advice to guys at conferences would probably be, don't make dick jokes in public, because it seems somebody might overreact and you might get hurt. That has nothing to do with whether or not I think the dongle jokes are appropriate or inherently offensive. Similarly, I don't find rmrfrmrf's comments to be super inflammatory, probably because I don't feel like my position, if any, is being attacked, but if I was way polarized on the antagonist's side of things I almost certainly would.
Do we want to encourage crazy volatile feminism at conferences? Obviously no. Do we want to encourage even crazier volatile misogyny on the internet? Obviously no. Is it unreasonable, or unkind even, to encourage someone who is complaining about the negative attention they are receiving, who I perceive to be actively encouraging that negative attention without realizing it, to tone it down a little? Personally, I don't believe so, but if it falls on deaf ears, it falls on deaf ears. I just don't think that the anxiety of receiving death threats is good for anyone, and that level of anxiety can cause people to make choices that have big long term consequences. Adria has already demonstrated a predisposition to overreaction that has already led to long term consequences, and death threats are significantly more serious than whatever happened at the conference. It is not unreasonable to assume that someone actively defending her position might also overreact.
There are lots of things that I do everyday that I wouldn't do in an ideal world, but that nevertheless make existence tolerable, good even. I was simply trying to share that experience.
Re: Fork My Dongle
#227Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's 'victim blaming' and fairly inflammatory. That's ridiculous. If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. There are actions that victims take that increase or decrease their chances of being victimized. > it's no different then telling women not to wear provocative clothing if they don't want to be rape…
Dude, relax. Have a discussion. =) > If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. Context. You are supposed to comment on HN. You are not supposed to play in the street. If you played in a park, I'd expect you not to get hit by a car. If someone does get hit by a car while playing in a park, you don't suggest to…
I get the point. My point is that reaction to "victim blaming" has swung way too far.
Kids don't deserve to get hit even if they play in the street -- even if it is expected to eventually happen. I just think there is a cognitive break in responsibility (don't blame the victim -- they have 0 responsibility for their actions) to taking some responsibility for limiting your risk.
I'm not touching the provocative clothes argument, because it's extreme and might not be backed up by the statistics. I'm just saying there are some careless actions by victims (like flashing money around in really really bad areas by yourself) that means the victims while completely undeserving of being victimized realistically need to shoulder some of the responsibility.
The poster above suggested, that if an action a poster is doing is causing death threats, it might be prudent to tone it down. I don't see that as blaming the victim.
Re: Fork My Dongle
#228Earlier quoted context omitted.
> That's 'victim blaming' and fairly inflammatory. That's ridiculous. If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. There are actions that victims take that increase or decrease their chances of being victimized. > it's no different then telling women not to wear provocative clothing if they don't want to be rape…
Dude, relax. Have a discussion. =) > If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. Context. You are supposed to comment on HN. You are not supposed to play in the street. If you played in a park, I'd expect you not to get hit by a car. If someone does get hit by a car while playing in a park, you don't suggest to…
For what it's worth, I didn't tell her to shut up. (I'm assuming it's a woman.) I just said I don't think it's such a good idea to write such inflammatory messages if you're concerned about the death threats you're receiving. This includes things like using curse words (e.g. HN is a shithole), and insulting people in other ways.
And I'm sorry, but if you know that a park is dangerous because a bunch of drunken teenagers are driving around doing donuts in it, you absolutely don't send your kid to play in it, no matter how safe it's supposed to be. And in particular, if they are, you tell your kid to stop yelling at the kids in the cars. (I realize this isn't what you suggested, but it makes your analogy less of a straw man.)
So, this isn't "don't play in traffic", this is "don't actively provoke known-to-be-crazy drivers while running around in oncoming traffic". It's just a bad idea. Especially if you're complaining about getting hurt.
Yes, all of these examples are hyperbole, but then again we have no idea about the seriousness of the threats.
Re: Fork My Dongle
#229Earlier quoted context omitted.
Funny is relevant. As you say, sexist, racist and homo jokes are sometimes witty too - so unless they are explicitly used to demean and hurt someone, people should be free to joke about all such things. Including jokes about a gay jewish pope eating dead babies, or whatever combination of things offensive to racial/religious/gender/ethnical/etc groups people may think of. In the Pycon case, my greatest surprise when…
> people should be free to joke about all such things. Agreed. But let me disagree about your first sentence. Actually, I think you just showed that funny is orthogonal . The salient point, as you pointed out, is for people to mind their own business about other people's business. This would have applied if the comments between those men were a silly joke or more of a bitter complaint. There would've been far less fu…
OK. Yes. Funny is orthogonal to "should X be permitted" or "should X be left alone".
My intent with that sentence was "funny has importance to people". I.e., crass jokes aren't simply empty words or accidents or mistakes, but that they were somewhat important to these who told the jokes and listened to them. Being able to tell a crude joke to a friend without worrying is a kind of freedom that (some?) people value and prohibiting that has a non-zero cost to society.
Re: Fork My Dongle
#230Earlier quoted context omitted.
Dude, relax. Have a discussion. =) > If I play in a busy street everyday, you'd blame me when I eventually got hit by a car even though cars are always supposed to be driven under control. Context. You are supposed to comment on HN. You are not supposed to play in the street. If you played in a park, I'd expect you not to get hit by a car. If someone does get hit by a car while playing in a park, you don't suggest to…
For what it's worth, I didn't tell her to shut up. (I'm assuming it's a woman.) I just said I don't think it's such a good idea to write such inflammatory messages if you're concerned about the death threats you're receiving. This includes things like using curse words (e.g. HN is a shithole), and insulting people in other ways. And I'm sorry, but if you know that a park is dangerous because a bunch of drunken teenag…
> For what it's worth, I didn't tell her to shut up.
I realize you did. And I'm not suggesting you are a bad person or anything. =)
> And I'm sorry, but if you know that a park is dangerous because a bunch of drunken teenagers
I'm sorry, but hyperbole can be too ridiculous. Tossing in additional conditions to suit your point is silly, and is really not worth my time.