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

Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

america.aljazeera.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#81

Post by tptacek »

Confusion wrote: post #78
tptacek wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I love that this sentiment is voiced by an anonymous HN resident.

I'm not yet living in the world I'm advocating. If I were an anti-Putin Russian advocating a world in which everyone could safely use real-name accounts for their anti-Putin propaganda, you wouldn't argue that my advocacy was false or insincere, just because I was using an anonymous account, now would you?

Ahh, the old "my comment would make perfect sense if only we weren't talking about Earth" gambit.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#82

Post by tptacek »

michaelochurch wrote: post #63
amirmc wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "But that's not the world we live in, now is it?" Neither is it the world we aspire to. Taking an attitude of 'Well, what did you expect?' Is never going to improve anything.

Ok, on that I can agree. Here's the issue. Kathy Sierra was attacked without provocation. Lena Chen used her sexuality in the public to gain attention (and, to a degree, social power). My levels of sympathy are different. Kathy Sierra was the lawful driver hit by a drunk. Lena Chen was the 120-mph speeder who ended up in a crash. Everyone speeds, and no one "deserves" to be in a crash for driving 120mph, but the laws…

Where I see mental illness is in the use of the word "power" (here "social power") to confer adversarial standing to anything that makes you uncomfortable, Michael. You do that a lot. It is extremely worrisome.

In actual fact, writing a sex blog did not harm you or anyone else one iota. It was not in fact a provocation to harm the author. Rational adults can see this. You seem not to be able to. Your posts often seem like a cry for help. Please find some.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#83

Post by vidarh »

EliRivers wrote: post #23
betterunix wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Well that's not feminism" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_scotsman

What can I say. All I have is a stack of dictionaries to check. Your beloved Wikipedia itself begins its feminism article "Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights" which agrees with the dictionaries I have and also with the simple definition I used above. If you think that using that definition means I'm guilty of…

Arguing this angle is pointless. I'm a marxist, and so face the same battle of the tons of people who use the term in a completely different way to myself. Including people who self-identify as marxists.

I've had conversations with people who also considered themselves marxists where our only point of agreement was that in "their" ideal society I'd probably be considered a criminal dissident, and would probably be involved in armed uprisings, and that they'd very much enjoy to see me locked up.

For a while I tried to fight the "wrong" usage of the term and related terms. Then I thought about picking other terms myself.

But eventually I realized that what worked best was simply to acknowledge the "wrong" usage, and distance myself in suitable way depending on what I write. E.g. by also using a more descriptive term, such as liberal socialist or left-communist, that most people either know or have to look up, that does not have the same immediate connotations.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#84

Post by tptacek »

RexRollman wrote: post #67
sneak wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Lena Chen didn't deserve what happened to her, but she courted the attention in a way that a mature and psychologically sound woman wouldn't. She ran a blog called Sex and the Ivy. I'm sorry, but if you write a blog whose title says, "I'm in the most privileged 2% of the population, I have lots of sex", you're putting a target on yourself. Please don't be an asshole to people on HN.

I strongly disagree with the OP but if that is how they feel, they have a right to state it.

That's what the people that harassed Lena Chen said!

He had a "right" to say how he felt, and, as an adult, the responsibility to deal with the consequences of saying it.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#85

Post by nhaehnle »

EliRivers wrote: post #3
mschuster91 wrote: post #2

As much as I can't stand a lot of the ultra-extremist feminists out there in the internet, this kind of behaviour (doxxing, cyberhunting) is beyond unacceptable, it's dangerous to society. Anyone who ever has engaged in "slut shaming" or whatever the current term is for hunting down/doxxing activists, please go, take a 9mm and shoot yourself. And to Google/FB: please, make it possible for victims of doxxing/cyberhunt…

What is an ultra-extreme feminist? Given that feminism is the advocation of social and political equality twixt genders, what is extreme feminism? What's the difference between social and political equality, and extreme social and political equality? How can two things that are equal be even more equal?

It starts out that way. But then it turns out that to achieve equality, you mostly need to improve women's position in society. And then people only remember the second part and forget about the equality thing.

And finally, this happens: http://www.smbc-comics.com/?id=2939

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#86

Post by nate_meurer »

Daniel_Newby wrote: post #74
mschuster91 wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The internet is relentless, and as soon as you hit foreign jurisdictions, you're bound to fail. Governments, the MAFIAA and dozens other organizations have tried and failed for over a decade to shut down TPB - do you really think a mere human stands the chance to ever stop the Internet from trolling her?!

This is not a well-funded industry with an engineering staff, it is a single lunatic. Subpoena a list of IP addresses from hosting companies, then subpoena the ISPs responsible for those addresses, then have the local police put the kibosh on the lunatics. Yes, it is possible that the lunatic uses a cloaked Internet connection and has flawless op-sec, but the odds are that he is just another raving schizo who can bar…

Yes, thank you. The lunatics of whom you speak utterly rely on the shadows in which they hide. The article makes it seem as though minimal effort has been put into pursuing the attacker, which is maddening if true. Libel and defamation are very much actionable in the U.S., especially as civil matters.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#87

Post by Confusion »

nate_meurer wrote: post #79
Confusion wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, primarily the people around the victim need to change. Which means beliefs in general, of everyone, need to change. That the victim would then also change is a bonus, which wouldn't even be needed anymore.

Your points in the post above are clearly, unambiguously directed at the victim. It's bizarre for you to claim otherwise. >" you should internalize the fact that it shouldn't matter one bit what a few random internet commentators say or think about you ." Emphasis mine, words yours. >"These are pictures of you naked. Why is that a problem?" What the fuck? That's really the cogent response I can muster to this.

It's bizarre for you to claim my points are directed at the victim, when I'm arguing that isn't my intention.

My point is: if someone would have internalized that, what happened would be less of a problem. However, internalizing such things is more likely if everyone around you has internalized those things, which would already go a much longer way towards making what happened less of a problem.

The train of thought starts at the first point, suggests a solution, but doesn't say that only that single point is the solution. The entirety of the post suggests a solution, in which most people would not consider what happened a problem anymore. And only the entirety is the message. That single point out of context isn't.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#88

Post by Confusion »

tptacek wrote: post #81
Confusion wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not yet living in the world I'm advocating. If I were an anti-Putin Russian advocating a world in which everyone could safely use real-name accounts for their anti-Putin propaganda, you wouldn't argue that my advocacy was false or insincere, just because I was using an anonymous account, now would you?

Ahh, the old "my comment would make perfect sense if only we weren't talking about Earth" gambit.

My comment only makes sense in this world, since it advocates a combination of changes that would lead to a different world.

If I wanted to retract what I wrote or backpedal on it, I would edit or delete it. I would not need to play any 'gambit' nor would there by any point. What's the point of that if I leave the post up?

I'm explaining that I intended something different from your interpretation and all you're doing is keeping hammering that your initial reading must necessarily be right. Why would I bother?

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#89

Post by vidarh »

michaelochurch wrote: post #34

Lena Chen and Kathy Sierra shouldn't be mentioned in the same article. Kathy Sierra was attacked for being female . She did nothing that would cause people to attack her, except for being a successful woman. It was disgusting, unprovoked, and utterly wrong. Lena Chen didn't deserve what happened to her, but she courted the attention in a way that a mature and psychologically sound woman wouldn't. She ran a blog calle…

> I don't think she deserves "slut-shaming" at this point

At what point does it become ok? I hope this is just careless wording.

> the mess she made of her college years

Really? She made the mess?

> a person with an obvious biological mental illness

Obvious to whom? Are you a trained psychologist? It is certainly not obvious to me.

Re: Sex, lies and the Internet: The tale of Lena Chen

#90

Post by napoleond »

tptacek wrote: post #66
michaelochurch wrote: post #34

Lena Chen and Kathy Sierra shouldn't be mentioned in the same article. Kathy Sierra was attacked for being female . She did nothing that would cause people to attack her, except for being a successful woman. It was disgusting, unprovoked, and utterly wrong. Lena Chen didn't deserve what happened to her, but she courted the attention in a way that a mature and psychologically sound woman wouldn't. She ran a blog calle…

It leads naturally to pre-monogamous, primitive, dysgenic, and in practice anti-feminist social patterns and has divided men between an "alpha" contingent who objectify and degrade women, and an "omega" contingent (cyberstalkers, doxxers) who hate them. Lots of big words, but always the same adolescent logic: "the culture" somehow prevents male nerds from dating. So it's no surprise that they abuse women. How is it t…

I didn't read that the same way you did. I don't think GP was using "culture" as an excuse for anyone's behaviour; rather I read it as a suggestion that maybe in addition to personal culpability, there are cultural problems in place which perpetuate/encourage/condone bad behaviour. Doesn't sound like horseshit to me, at least not in the obvious sense which you seem to suggest. (FWIW, I might also forego the "alpha/omega" labels, but that's a small nit to pick.)

The last part of your comment almost seems orthogonal to that; "whether or not there is a problematic culture in place, there are also crazy people alive, and the internet gives them a platform".

Post reply on HN