Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower • Hacker News Board

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#261

Post by joe_the_user » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:42 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #212

yason wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite different. She had an option to decline. Maybe it would've a very hard choice indeed, both socially and career-wise but she did have that choice. It might be convenient in some cases to broaden the definition of rape gradually but the bottom line is you can not be raped if you are simply able to walk away. It might be harassment. It might be blackmailing. It might be a lot of nasty, disgusting, and even…

If you threaten to punch someone in the face if she doesn't sleep with you, that's clearly rape. If you threaten to fire someone if she doesn't sleep with you, some people wouldn't call that rape (and the law wouldn't either). But I'd rather get punched in the face then lose a job I worked really hard to get. So why do we consider the latter not as bad? The belief that physical coercion is worse than economic coercio…

But I'd rather get punched in the face then lose a job I worked really hard to get. So why do we consider the latter not as bad?

-- I have no objections to saying "his sexual harassment and manipulation was worse than physical rape". I'm wholly on the side of using every means possible to stop both rape and sexual harassment in the workplace and punishing people severely for both. I'm even all in favor of punishing the wealthy for using their wealth in abusive and manipulative ways, sure.

But I think the "it was as bad as rape so we should call it rape" argument really loses potential supporters.

The problem is that redefining the term creates a situation where the outside observer will feel that they can't really verify the truth or even the substance of the claim.

I know the argument that it is wholly unfair to demand that someone who has already been victimized also speak in an exact and clinical fashion about how they have victimized. Yes, it's unfair but is still the only a believable (by an outside observer) argument is going to happen. And there really isn't any alternative to that.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#262

Post by pekk » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:42 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #227

rayiner wrote: post #212

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you threaten to punch someone in the face if she doesn't sleep with you, that's clearly rape. If you threaten to fire someone if she doesn't sleep with you, some people wouldn't call that rape (and the law wouldn't either). But I'd rather get punched in the face then lose a job I worked really hard to get. So why do we consider the latter not as bad? The belief that physical coercion is worse than economic coercio…

This is why the term "slippery slope" is so common in the legal profession. If financial consequences = coercion = rape then there is a huge range of situations that can now be cast under the cloud of rape, such as relationships where one person is financially dependent on the other. Fortunately some states have laws that specifically define and criminalize sexual extortion. It's distinct from rape / sexual assault b…

"relationships where one person is financially dependent on the other."

Suppose a couple lives together, and one tells the other: "let me sodomize you right now or I kick you out of the house and you can live on the street."

What in the world would be the point of arguing that this is not rape?

On the other hand, if there is no threat accompanying a demand for sexual access, it is obviously not rape and nobody is saying it is.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#263

Post by jrochkind1 » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:43 AM UTC

abalone wrote: post #256

rayiner wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Story from a friend of a friend's law firm. Young associate worked for this partner. Over the course of months, he coerced her into giving him blowjobs. Eventually she quit. 1) Why is this rape? Because coercion doesn't just take the form of physical violence. 2) Why not report to the police? Because it's mutually assured destruction. Even if you bring the guy down, you'll be known as the woman who called the police…

I don't mean to split hairs but legally it looks like many or most states draw a distinction between sexual extortion and rape.[1] The difference being that sextortion is a lesser felony. I wonder if that is the case here. Certainly sextortion among engineers/scientists would be an extraordinarily troubling state of affairs. But based on the OP's comments here[2] she is referring to rape and that the enabling factor…

I mean, well, you do mean to split legal hairs, clearly. Why are they relevant to the discussion? What do you think it is we're discussing?

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#264

Post by donw » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:44 AM UTC

Thriptic wrote: post #152

donw wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Massively offtopic, but powerlifting records ( http://www.usapowerlifting.com/records/national-championship... ) support that yes, elite female powerlifters top out at what would be considered a rep weight for a male lifter in the same weight class.

I'm not arguing that males aren't stronger than females in the same weight class. I'm saying an untrained male can't receive moderate training and suddenly massively out lift elite female powerlifers in the same weight class.

Oh, certainly. To address the original post, though, the numbers that the top-tier gals are putting up are in the same league as male lifters with 2-3 years of training, which sounds fairly moderate to me.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#265

Post by Claudus » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:49 AM UTC

snowwrestler wrote: post #216

yason wrote: post #173

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's quite different. She had an option to decline. Maybe it would've a very hard choice indeed, both socially and career-wise but she did have that choice. It might be convenient in some cases to broaden the definition of rape gradually but the bottom line is you can not be raped if you are simply able to walk away. It might be harassment. It might be blackmailing. It might be a lot of nasty, disgusting, and even…

The parent's description above is rape. See for example the Wikipedia page: > Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration perpetrated against a person without that person's consent. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or against a person who is incapable of valid consent... See: ... coercion, abuse of authority ... Y…

Referencing Wikipedia in specific technical instances like this is ill advised. Wikipedia is good for summarizing sources, but if you actually read the sources, I don't think you'll find any of them [1][2][3][4] make any mention of "abuse of authority" pertaining to rape.

Rather than reflecting "the lowest common denominator of what most people agree on", it seems more likely this is what one specific individual with a less accepted definition of rape who cares enough to edit the wiki and fight off all dissenters wants you to believe is the default definition of rape.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#266

Post by jrochkind1 » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 5:51 AM UTC

lettergram wrote: post #67

I don't want to openly doubt rape, but jesus, several times over several months? Call the police, or at least avoid a situation if possible. Clearly she is willing to talk about it, so where's the police report? Also, every time I read one of these articles I cringe. There's a big movement to "include women in tech", but it's interesting to note that (in my experience) there is a large group (bordering on majority) o…

"These articles"? I'm not sure I've ever seen an article quite like this before. It's a pretty amazing essay, pretty different from almost any I've seen before in it's approach.

What kinds of articles is it you don't like? Any article about sexual coercion and gendered harrasment in the tech world?

You seem to be suggesting that any woman writing such an article is somehow not "acting like equals"... huh? What is it about this article that, as you say, disgusts you?

I truly don't understand what you're talking about.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#267

Post by jrochkind1 » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 6:06 AM UTC

xtrumanx wrote: post #190

pron wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think that it would be much easier to fight with such behaviour by calling it by actual names. No, it won't, and let me explain why. One of the well known forms of sexism is what I like to call (I wonder if there's an academic name for this) "everyone's a lawyer". You'll find that often when men report wrongdoings, there's a simple expression of outrage, but when women do, everyone's a lawyer who says "of course…

Are you saying even if it wasn't a rape by whatever your very own definition of rape, you would rather call it rape to express outrage? Of course those "everyone's a lawyer's" types are going to crawl out of the woodwork. Why not call it what it is and not give them any ammo to justify a disgusting action? This isn't the first time I've seen people on the moral highground undermine their own position by giving their…

Are you saying that it's important to argue about whether the word 'rape' is the right word or not? (For a specific occurence we have virtually no details about, what do we even have to argue about?)

Why does this matter for the topic matter of the essay? For real.

Why is the most important thing to discuss, in response to the issues raised in the essay, technical or legal definitions of the word 'rape'? Apparently most important thing to a great many HN commenters as it's incredibly well-represented this unusually enormous comments thread.

Seriously, I'm asking, why is this such an important or interesting point to so many here, the legal definition or rape?

I thought one of the most interesting and important points in the OP was about moving away from concerns about legal liability and towards concerns about keeping people safe and treated with dignity -- because the former has not accomplished the latter.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#268

Post by exodust » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 6:14 AM UTC

"I have had interviewers attempt to solicit sexual favors from me mid-interview and discuss in significant detail precisely what they would like to do"

Bullshit.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#269

Post by brazzledazzle » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 6:17 AM UTC

pekk wrote: post #260

randyrand wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1) Why is this rape? Because coercion doesn't just take the form of physical violence I was curious if this is technically rape in my home state (Illinois) so I looked it up... edit: Already downvoted? C'mon this is relevant! (720 ILCS 5/11-1.20) (was 720 ILCS 5/12-13) Sec. 11-1.20. Criminal Sexual Assault. (a) A person commits criminal sexual assault if that person commits an act of sexual penetration and: (1) uses…

Are you arguing that blackmailing someone into having sex with you, or threatening them with consequences like having your career ended, isn't rape in the state of Illinois? Why?

If I were a woman I'd want to know where this was illegal or not. I want to know for my daughters when they grow up.

Re: Sexism in Tech: Don’t Ask Me Unless You’re Ready to Call Someone a Whistleblower

#270

Post by jrochkind1 » Mon, Mar 09, 2015, 6:21 AM UTC

AnkhMorporkian wrote: post #139

bluehat wrote: post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would that make it OK here? If it happened any less anywhere else? Would that make you want to fight against a thing that was wrong any less? I feel like we all joined this community because we thought we could change stuff.

If it happens at an equal rate, then that means perhaps we shouldn't be focusing on tech companies specifically but in the legal framework that allows this to slip through the cracks. Morality can be on our side all we like, but companies of any decent size are way more interested in the law than morality.

One of the things I found most useful and insightful in the OP is a focus on things we can do to change our organizational and personal behaviors to actually keep people safe and treated with dignity, as opposed to just avoiding legal liability, since that has not succeeded in making people safe and treated with dignity.

A "focus on the legal frameworks" is not the only avenue for action, and may not be the most effective -- whether in the tech industry or elsewhere.

We're talking about the tech industry because it's HN and we're all in the talk industry, that's the one we know.

If we started the conversation with the tech industry -- which we know best -- but used what we learned to expand to look at other industries and environments too, talking to people in them too, that sounds like it could be useful. Instead, somehow here we are bizarrely motivated to expand the focus from the tech industry to 'everywhere' as a means to avoid talking about it at all?