It's Different for Girls • Hacker News Board

Re: It's Different for Girls

#221

Post by tks2103 » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:20 AM UTC

selmnoo wrote: post #142

evilduck wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think another important thing to consider is that not everyone who takes offense to another's use of language is always a victim, but they'll gladly play the role of victim if we allow it. Sometimes people are actively looking to be offended. Take this one for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1zGRUPztc

> Sometimes people are actively looking to be offended. Take this one for example: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc1zGRUPztc That reminds me of a conversation I had nearly a decade ago with a black (African immigrant) friend. I don't remember the details, but basically he said that he was annoyed that the words "dark" and "black" had negative connotations. I knew him well enough to know that he wasn't trolling, and…

Here is a clip for a classic hip hop song by 3rd Bass that is relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QYp28tEAVvs&t=1m58s.

The verse starts: "Black cat is bad luck, bad guys wear black. Musta been a white guy who started all that."

Interestingly, the MC in question here is white-skinned. I think he's Jewish, but I might be wrong.

From the perspective of an African immigrant, I would imagine that it is easy to see discrimination everywhere. I think your friend is annoyed that the idea of "blackness being inferior" is omnipresent (from his perspective). It's even built in to the very way we speak.

I think that what your immigrant friend really wants is just to feel like he has the same shot a person with white skin does. He's kvetching about words because racism is on his mind a lot, but he's not expecting you or anyone to rewrite the English language. He probably just gets treated poorly on a regular basis because of his race, and he wants that to stop.

You (We) could likely cure his annoyances while stopping short of major linguistic changes.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#222

Post by patcon » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:26 AM UTC

Mz wrote: post #176

stormbrew wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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,…

I'm sorry for derailing, but I read your HN bio and have to suggest this: Join Gittip. Also, you should come to Nicaragua. It's nice, and stupid-cheap if you have a way to be of service to others remotely :)

http://bit.ly/patcon-budget

Re: It's Different for Girls

#223

Post by stcredzero » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:26 AM UTC

pekk wrote: post #180

poolpool wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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."

It is far more common than I'd like to think. Facts aren't racist. It's the particular spin placed on those facts which is or isn't racist.

Some difficulties with discussing this sort of misbehavior are the different contextual meanings of "often." Even if a bad behavior is rare, it can still cast a constant shadow, especially when it can happen without warning, and especially when it comes disguised as something else. Even more so when it's attached to highly personal subjects, and even more so when the circumstance is something one has been born into and experienced ones whole life. I'm not sure there is any effective way to understand such an experience without living it.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#224

Post by mindslight » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:28 AM UTC

joe_the_user wrote: post #213

cinquemb wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The really sad thing about is that the vast majority of guys I talk to about this topic are simply not aware that women, especially attractive women, go through stuff like this all the time. So when they hear women complaining about discrimination, harassment, glass ceilings, and so on, they think those women are simply "being bitchy." Which simply perpetuates and intensifies the status quo. Assuming not all (attra…

It could be Martian's propositioning some being from Alpha Centauri system. I didn't downvote you, though I was tempted. I think what's happening people are taking offense at exactly your detached tone, where what they're looking for is a human response. Involved Person: Oh my god, did you see that guy who was just shot. Disengaged person: Yeah, the way the blood spurted out of his head was fascinating, I've cut up w…

Not just a human response, but one that matches theirs. Attempting rational analysis in the presence of an angry mob is not a good idea - your only real options are to actively join in the fun, or stay at home with the lights off.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#225

Post by ElComradio » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:29 AM UTC

zachwooddoughty wrote: post #175

ElComradio wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 "j…

I appreciate your views and believe they are sincere but when considering "the big picture", I don't think anyone can actually prove anything except there are fewer women in tech. In the big picture how can you show women as a group have it harder? I am a man. It is true I have not been asked to fondle someone under a table to close a deal. It is also true I have never been favored by a boss because he found me attractive. I am not claiming it's easier to be a woman, just that it cannot really be shown which group has it easier. Individual experience can get us closer to certainties but not all the way even then.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#226

Post by cinquemb » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:34 AM UTC

joe_the_user wrote: post #213

cinquemb wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The really sad thing about is that the vast majority of guys I talk to about this topic are simply not aware that women, especially attractive women, go through stuff like this all the time. So when they hear women complaining about discrimination, harassment, glass ceilings, and so on, they think those women are simply "being bitchy." Which simply perpetuates and intensifies the status quo. Assuming not all (attra…

It could be Martian's propositioning some being from Alpha Centauri system. I didn't downvote you, though I was tempted. I think what's happening people are taking offense at exactly your detached tone, where what they're looking for is a human response. Involved Person: Oh my god, did you see that guy who was just shot. Disengaged person: Yeah, the way the blood spurted out of his head was fascinating, I've cut up w…

> […]what they're looking for is a human response.

Well, considering that most people aren't willing to admit that words emanating from this account is the work of some amazing AI platform straight from DARPA, or a being not of this world that is traditionally accepted by the masses, what you really mean is that I didn't illicit a k̶n̶e̶e̶ ̶j̶e̶r̶k̶ reaction (human response: I was tempted) or provide more anecdota to illicit more k̶n̶e̶e̶ ̶j̶e̶r̶k̶ traditional socially accepted reactions?

Meta: But doesn't socially accepted reactions change over time? I wonder how that happened? Did no one try to study human behaviors and some how try to influence such, and we just magically change to the present?

If I took to the forums for all the ways people treated me for the color tint of my skin or other groups I may be subscribed to (black, male, college dropout [some of the things some people would describe me as], etc…), will I learn that all these people behind the their internet connections really give a fuck about me (and vise versa) and that will some how magically change the world now that my ego would have been pandered too? Sure, maybe more people would know that such things happen, but then what? We just keep on keeping on after we log off? Shame on me to even suggest that is/will take the form of actively maintaining the status quo?

Was that human response enough? Now what did we learn that could forward our understanding of such dynamics that take place in a society and change the way people interact for the "better"?

Re: It's Different for Girls

#227

Post by zorpner » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:36 AM UTC

teacup50 wrote: post #209

grlhgr420 wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

racism requires the assumption of a power dynamic that subjugates the recipient. eg a white guy being called a cracker doesn't resonate with the kinds of cultural practices of oppression that that using racial slurs against a minority carries. it's disingenuous and completely misses the point to equate racism with any time the concept of race is brought up

Tell me how it's not racist to think that all "white guys" are sitting in the better end of a power dynamic when called "a cracker"? Subsets of academia focused on "critical race theory" might try to redefine "racism" to suite their specific agenda, but I'm content with the dictionary definition: "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to…

Retreating to a dictionary definition doesn't argue against the point of the GP comment, namely: a white guy being called a cracker doesn't resonate with the kinds of cultural practices of oppression that that using racial slurs against a minority carries

If you're interested in arguing against that, do so. Posting definitions of words from dictionaries is the height of pedantic laziness in non sequitur form (unless the argument is actually about what the dictionary definition of a word is, of course).

Re: It's Different for Girls

#228

Post by msandford » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:38 AM UTC

sliverstorm wrote: post #178

timsally wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

I tend to agree but not completely. Someone mentioned further up that there are multiple categories of murder and also manslaughter, the conviction of which depends on intent.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#229

Post by mehwoot » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:42 AM UTC

grlhgr420 wrote: post #205

teacup50 wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I hope you can see the racism inherent in your "confident guess". "yea, but it did say she was dealing with [community organizers] 10 years ago, so an educated person can make a pretty confident guess." "yea, but it did say she was dealing with [an H1B immigrant] 10 years ago, so an educated person can make a pretty confident guess."

racism requires the assumption of a power dynamic that subjugates the recipient. eg a white guy being called a cracker doesn't resonate with the kinds of cultural practices of oppression that that using racial slurs against a minority carries. it's disingenuous and completely misses the point to equate racism with any time the concept of race is brought up

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism

Some definitions consider that any assumption that a person's behavior would be influenced by their racial categorization is inherently racist, regardless of whether the action is intentionally harmful or pejorative, because stereotyping necessarily subordinates individual identity to group identity.

Some people disagree with you.

Re: It's Different for Girls

#230

Post by cinquemb » Sat, May 03, 2014, 12:43 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #224

joe_the_user wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It could be Martian's propositioning some being from Alpha Centauri system. I didn't downvote you, though I was tempted. I think what's happening people are taking offense at exactly your detached tone, where what they're looking for is a human response. Involved Person: Oh my god, did you see that guy who was just shot. Disengaged person: Yeah, the way the blood spurted out of his head was fascinating, I've cut up w…

Not just a human response, but one that matches theirs. Attempting rational analysis in the presence of an angry mob is not a good idea - your only real options are to actively join in the fun, or stay at home with the lights off.

> Attempting rational analysis in the presence of an angry mob is not a good idea - your only real options are to actively join in the fun, or stay at home with the lights off.

Probably great advice for the meatspace, but I question if such needs to be the lowest common denominator for online interactions. But I guess some people must be thinking: "How could this person not derive any pleasure/fun from deriding another human being (or in this case, anonymous men who abuse their position in power or in society for a variety of reasons not made apparent but must be inferred by the audience, but human being nonetheless), especially when its socially accepted to do so?!?! How dare he (go figure, but he's admitted to being black [gasp!] so now I'm confused!?!?!) not partake in a sadomasochistic expression of the human condition!?!?!"