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

It's Different for Girls

heidiroizen.tumblr.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 400 posts

Re: It's Different for Girls

#81

Post by joelrunyon »

jordo37 wrote: post #28
joelrunyon wrote: post #10

> That is why I encourage my fellow female trailblazers to look for the intent behind the words. Offensive language is often unintentional, and sometimes you can turn an awkward situation into a bonding experience. This is probably the most common-sense, insightful piece of advice that our news cycle does its best to make people forget.

I agree that this is balanced advice, but I worry that it is actually another way of masking the problem. In the example she gave with Brad Feld, his response to her critique wasn't really LESS sexist, just more absurd. That may just be an issue with the the example though. In a broader sense, intent is nearly impossible to determine, and it's dangerous to put the responsibility for understanding intent on the party…

> to look for the intent behind the words

It's just giving the benefit of the doubt - not attributing malice to what might be just ignorance.

I think it was a refreshingly balanced perspective.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#82

Post by [deleted] »

taiki wrote: post #47
jawns wrote: post #6

I think the big takeaway here, not just for women but for anyone in the workplace who feels uncomfortable with or offended by something someone else has said, is to consider the intent. Sometimes somebody says something offensive, and they don't even know they're being offensive. And in those cases, you can take them aside, explain to them why it's offended you, and hopefully they'll say, "Oh, dreadfully sorry, I did…

I really REALLY hope that no one is ignorant to the fact that tricking people to touching their penis is wrong. I'm REALLY really REALLY hoping.

[deleted]

Re: It's Different for Girls

#83

Post by DatBear »

aasarava wrote: post #30

She makes a really good point about pausing to evaluate the intent behind the words -- and even using the opportunity to educate -- rather than always assuming the worst. But did anyone else feel that Brad Feld was very, very lucky that it was Heidi Roizen in the room and not someone less forgiving when he said, "well if you need a dick to hold you can borrow mine anytime"? What Brad did in that one comment was under…

Why read into it this far, and just completely ignore what she said of the incident, "I took it for the joke it was intended to be..."

I don't think it was meant to be taken the way you portrayed it at all.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#84

Post by jdp23 »

abracar wrote: post #72
jdp23 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

britt's post is a substantive answer to 'news_to_me's question, with links off to useful resources. What does it say about the HN community that it was downvoted? [And by the way, this is an example of the 'speaking up' that britta mentioned. Guys, when you see this kind of hostile-to-women behavior on HN, call it out.]

That some of us don't find these resources that useful or relevant?

Thanks for the response. If you don't find the resources useful or relevant, it seems to me that it would be better to reply with your reasoning and links to other resources. Or are you using "downvote" to mean "I disagree"?

Re: It's Different for Girls

#85

Post by aaronem »

rosser wrote: post #68
aaronem wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not, actually, but that rarely seems to make a difference to how much weight my opinion carries with people who don't share that opinion. If nothing else, the facts that I only tick one, maybe two, of the boxes you listed, and that I loathe identity politics games in general, almost always outweigh the substance of what I actually happen to be saying.

Your distaste for identity politics doesn't obviate other people's legitimate concerns about them.

That's probably the single thing about identity politics that crosses me the worst: there are actually legitimate points in there, but they're so deeply buried under assertions like "you can't say X around me because I'm Y" and "P's have mistreated Q's for so long that Q's deserve special treatment from P's in recompense", which may not be contested in any fashion but must be taken as axiomatic, that ordinary people of all stripes, who would otherwise be quite sympathetic, instead flee screaming into the night.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#86

Post by aroch »

webmaven wrote: post #52
aaronem wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Are you a person of color? Are you a woman? Are you gay? Are you trans? Are you disabled? Does it matter?

Yes. If you're speaking from able-bodied, neurotypical, straight, cis, white, male privilege, your opinion on how hurtful 'trolling' is to people who don't share your privilege carries no weight.

When did HN devolve into the insipid land of Tumblr SJW? It takes some mighty mental gymnastics to convince yourself that only a black, trans, gay, crippled, ADHD person is allowed to offer opinions

Re: It's Different for Girls

#87

Post by huu »

abracar wrote: post #72
jdp23 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

britt's post is a substantive answer to 'news_to_me's question, with links off to useful resources. What does it say about the HN community that it was downvoted? [And by the way, this is an example of the 'speaking up' that britta mentioned. Guys, when you see this kind of hostile-to-women behavior on HN, call it out.]

That some of us don't find these resources that useful or relevant?

Then perhaps it would be helpful to point out why you don't find the resources useful or relevant. Downvoting should be reserved for low-substance comments, not for hiding (it literally has the effect of hiding things from other people) information which you think is useless to you.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#88

Post by zaroth »

aasarava wrote: post #30

She makes a really good point about pausing to evaluate the intent behind the words -- and even using the opportunity to educate -- rather than always assuming the worst. But did anyone else feel that Brad Feld was very, very lucky that it was Heidi Roizen in the room and not someone less forgiving when he said, "well if you need a dick to hold you can borrow mine anytime"? What Brad did in that one comment was under…

  “This is bullshit.  Each one of us is just sitting here with
  his dick in his hand asking for more money without truly
  justifying it.”

  Jason looked nervously at me, wondering how I was going to react. 

  “This is making me very uncomfortable,” I said. “Because I don’t
  even have a dick to hold.”

  Without skipping a beat, Brad replied “well if you need a dick to
  hold you can borrow mine anytime.”
What I think Brad did in that comment is express his frustration at the vanishingly small pot of money they were trying to divvy up, and the way everyone was going about it. From the extremely narrow context, I definitely do not get the impression Brad was saying anything even remotely like "you're here to service the males."

I also think you have it wrong that "any respectful male" would feel uncomfortable from that comment. From that one comment I can relate to exactly what Brad is describing, and I assure you it has nothing to do with actual dicks.

Who in this industry cannot identify with the feeling that everyone in some meeting is 'sitting here with his dick in his hand, asking _______'? I could never feel uncomfortable with someone making that comment, because I would understand exactly what they were saying.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#89

Post by vezzy-fnord »

calibraxis wrote: post #70
gfodor wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but I find Shanley's approach to framing this issue completely the opposite of the OP here. The OP sees the good in good men and lifts them up. The closing point about the joke she shared with her colleagues underlines it: there are people who are unable to laugh off a "dick in your hand" joke regardless of context and who it comes from. Not because of a lack of sense of humor, but because any such joke will b…

I use Shanley's work, and it's effective as hell. As a man, "What about the menz!?" is of zero interest to me. I can buy all the kleenexes to wipe my tears with the money boost I get from male supremacy. Obviously Shanley is unpopular among dudebros. If she weren't (and god forbid hit the top of HN) it's a sign she's doing something wrong.

Your last sentence seems to imply HN is full of "dudebros," when this thread largely shows quite the opposite.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#90

Post by jdp23 »

thenmar wrote: post #63
thenmar wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious about how controversial this post seems. It has been bouncing back and forth from light gray to black. Is it that people disagree with educating others? That they have a knee-jerk reaction to the word "patriarchy" and dismiss anyone who uses it? That they idea of "allies training" is somehow repulsive and unfair?

I'm replying to this because I can't reply to ForHackernews's comment, but this really needs to be said: "patriarchy" is most certainly NOT "vague and ill-defined to the point of meaninglessness". To say that is to dismiss decades of feminist work. If you are genuinely curious about this, the book Feminism is for Everybody (by bell hooks) is a great, accessible introduction to feminism and the (admittedly esoteric an…

Well said. Just like "dynamic typing" and "object-oriented" these are terms of art. And great suggestion on Feminism is for Everybody.
Post reply on HN