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

171–180 of 400 posts

Re: It's Different for Girls

#171

Post by stormbrew »

wpietri wrote: post #137
enraged_camel wrote: post #117

I have an ex-coworker who is a really attractive girl, and she used to tell me lots of stories like this about places she had worked at previously. Vice presidents calling her to their room and offering her promotions if only she would give them weekly blowjobs, prospective customers turning away from million-dollar deals at the last minute after she refused to sleep with them, etc. The really sad thing about is that…

Yeah. Street harassment is another thing like that. E.g., I naively assumed that my girlfriend's experience going out and running alone was exactly like my experience when I was with her. Until she started telling me about the frequent whistles, comments, and sexual propositions she would receive. It just didn't happen when I'm around, because people who are jerks and abusers are, unsurprisingly, very crafty in doing…

I think it's even worse than being 'crafty', they're actually trying to show you respect under the idea that because you're with her you have a claim on her and they're deferring to that. Which is incredibly creepy and offensive.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#172

Post by sliverstorm »

stormbrew wrote: post #171
wpietri wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. Street harassment is another thing like that. E.g., I naively assumed that my girlfriend's experience going out and running alone was exactly like my experience when I was with her. Until she started telling me about the frequent whistles, comments, and sexual propositions she would receive. It just didn't happen when I'm around, because people who are jerks and abusers are, unsurprisingly, very crafty in doing…

I think it's even worse than being 'crafty', they're actually trying to show you respect under the idea that because you're with her you have a claim on her and they're deferring to that. Which is incredibly creepy and offensive.

Well, or they just feel that they will be much less successful hitting on a girl who is accompanied by a guy, platonic or otherwise.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#174

Post by mkempe »

Walking away silently is not the appropriate response. Tolerating a colleague's obscene language isn't either.

In both cases, the outcome is that the perpetrator is going to repeat the same offensive behaviour. People who are offensive should be shunned and told why they are shunned. If they are borderline criminal, others should be told about them. If they are criminal, government should be involved.

Being afraid of what others will think, or of them potentially closing their doors (why?), is a sanction of evil and encourages further victimization.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#175

Post by zachwooddoughty »

ElComradio wrote: post #113
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…

Where is it writ that a person's right to not endure offensive speech trumps another person's right to express themselves? Of course I would opine that a person being needlessly offensive is a jerk but where would I get off insisting she has to change her behavior to suit my tastes?

I think it's important to look at this as part of a more widespread issue than a few individuals expressing themselves inappropriately. When women are so ridiculously under-represented in the tech industry and are facing both explicit and structural discrimination, it's important to speak out against this behavior.

Put another way: women's "jerkiness" does not make it harder for men in the tech industry, but men's "jerkiness" does make it harder for women in the tech industry.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#176

Post by Mz »

stormbrew wrote: post #171
wpietri wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah. Street harassment is another thing like that. E.g., I naively assumed that my girlfriend's experience going out and running alone was exactly like my experience when I was with her. Until she started telling me about the frequent whistles, comments, and sexual propositions she would receive. It just didn't happen when I'm around, because people who are jerks and abusers are, unsurprisingly, very crafty in doing…

I think it's even worse than being 'crafty', they're actually trying to show you respect under the idea that because you're with her you have a claim on her and they're deferring to that. Which is incredibly creepy and offensive.

Men are dramatically less likely to hit on me when I am with either or both of my adult sons. Many people realize they are relatives (though some think they are my brothers, not my sons) so, no, they don't think I am the sexual property of these two males. I have only been bothered by a guy when my sons are around when the guy was drinking alcohol. So I think the parent comment is more accurate than your assumption, though, yes, your observation is a social reality in some situations and it is a problem for women -- that "respect" is sometimes given for a man's property rights over a woman, not really given to her per se.

I am upvoting both of you.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#177

Post by poolpool »

pekk wrote: post #158
enraged_camel wrote: post #117

I have an ex-coworker who is a really attractive girl, and she used to tell me lots of stories like this about places she had worked at previously. Vice presidents calling her to their room and offering her promotions if only she would give them weekly blowjobs, prospective customers turning away from million-dollar deals at the last minute after she refused to sleep with them, etc. The really sad thing about is that…

What sorts of guys do you hang out with? I'm not sure how you know that the vast majority of men think that women complaining about being solicited for blowjobs are "being bitchy." That seems like a really jaundiced generalization of men.

Or maybe this is far, far more common than many people would like to think.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#178

Post by sliverstorm »

timsally wrote: post #43
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…

> But I think there's something fundamentally different about someone saying or doing something in ignorance -- especially if they appear contrite once they realize how it's made others feel -- and someone doing it purposefully, like the creep in the restaurant in Heidi's story. Sure, agreed, and this is explicitly recognized by the US legal system (i.e. involuntary manslaughter vs. voluntary manslaughter/murder). Th…

Intent is huge. If my friend says something incredibly aggressive, but I know they are being facetious or sarcastic or humorous, I will find it amusing. If I know they are being serious, I will not find it amusing.

Actions are generally equal regardless intent, but IMO words depend immensely on intent.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#179

Post by ForHackernews »

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…

I apologize if I wasn't clear, I think the issue is that "patriarchy" means many things to many people. Maybe you have some clear definition in mind, but that may or may not be what anyone else is talking about when they say "patriarchy"

I've read bell hooks, and I consider myself a feminist. But the problem is that there's no universally agreed-upon definition. How will we know when patriarchy is dead? What metrics are we judging this by?

Re: It's Different for Girls

#180

Post by pekk »

poolpool wrote: post #177
pekk wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What sorts of guys do you hang out with? I'm not sure how you know that the vast majority of men think that women complaining about being solicited for blowjobs are "being bitchy." That seems like a really jaundiced generalization of men.

Or maybe this is far, far more common than many people would like to think.

Or maybe you are prejudiced. There are also people who think black men are all criminals; they'd also say "maybe this is far, far more common than many people would like to think."
Post reply on HN