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

Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 357 posts

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#101

Post by lsy »

nailer wrote: post #61
dmansen wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

you should try reading about feminism sometime

Maybe they just read, say, Dworkin, on how all heterosexual sex is rape? Pretending people who disagree with political movements just need to understand those movements more is presumptuous.

Michael Moorcock: Several reviewers accused you of saying that all intercourse was rape. I haven't found a hint of that anywhere in the book. Is that what you are saying?

Dworkin: No, I wasn't saying that and I didn't say that, then or ever.… My point was that as long as the law allows statutory exemption for a husband from rape charges, no married woman has legal protection from rape. I also argued, based on a reading of our laws, that marriage mandated intercourse — it was compulsory, part of the marriage contract. Under the circumstances, I said, it was impossible to view sexual intercourse in marriage as the free act of a free woman.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#102

Post by savanaly »

kohanz wrote: post #6

> There had been interest, but one of the committers had dismissed the idea out of hand because a woman had proposed it. It blows my mind that this stuff still happens. In the OSS world of all places. I can't even compute how someone can apply such "logic".

> There had been interest, but one of the committers had dismissed the idea out of hand because a woman had proposed it.

This also blows my mind. 100% of my colleagues and friends who work in programming would suffer severe whiplash from the double take they would take after reading a statement like that from someone we were working with. How would someone who says something like that in a non-joking way not be immediately ostracized? They would be in any programmer community I've ever been a part of (besides maybe /g/? though even there I think people would just roll their eyes and assume you were trolling.)

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#103

Post by geofft »

psycr wrote: post #64
geofft wrote: post #7

This is from 2013. It seems like a response to something, possibly one of Shanley's essays that's now no longer on Medium; I can't help but feel that I'm missing context as I get towards the end. This also seems like a straightforward example of how mainstream feminism is bad at intersectionality. Arguably both sides in this discussion are not great at it: I feel like there's probably a good answer that involves neit…

I don't know what this means: > This also seems like a straightforward example of how mainstream feminism is bad at intersectionality. Can you explain? What are they bad at?

I'm not sure I'll do it justice, but briefly, intersectionality is the viewpoint that systems of oppression affect people qualitatively differently when they're on the wrong side of two systems instead of one. From Wikipedia's lede: "An example is black feminism, which argues that the experience of being a black woman cannot be understood in terms of being black, and of being a woman, considered independently, but must include the interactions, which frequently reinforce each other."

In particular, it seems to me like the author is part of a group of people for whom certain social cues fall on dry ground, and her critics are part of a group of people for whom those social cues take root and flower like a weed. By themselves, there are advantages and disadvantages to participating in tech communities as a member of either of these communities. But they also influence how the experience of other systems of oppression affect them -- like the sexist reviewer mentioned in the article -- and it's not very helpful to think of a one-size-fits-all "feminism".

For instance, I don't think it's the author's intention and certainly not her fault if she reinforces a belief that certain behaviors are okay, simply because those behaviors don't register to her. But yet people use her as evidence that the behaviors are fine, and there ought to be room for identifying that as a problem -- not as criticism of her, but as awareness of a problem with a system. At the same time, any solution to that problem must not shut people like her out by weaving subtle social cues into the fabric of the system, or else one system of oppression is just replaced with another one.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#104

Post by ericmo »

et1337 wrote: post #20

The only problem I have with feminism is that it's often a movement against men, and not for women. I think they would be a lot more successful doing things to encourage women rather than disparage men. Meredith would not have had to write this article. Of course, it's a lot harder to be positive rather than negative.

Feminism isn't a monolith, there are lots of flavors in feminism. Only the most radical feminists are "against" men, but they are far from being a majority.

Many feminists actually do talk about "sorority" in that sense of women helping each other, however, many other feminists don't agree with that. First reason is that this would block criticism within feminism, such as the one made in the post.

Second reason is that women aren't all equal, women don't all have the same problems, so if feminism embraces the sorority concept, it would lead to minorities' issues just getting ignored, i.e. no one would care about autistic women. So, it's not that feminism isn't for women, but women do have their differences and they need to deal with that.

Lastly, feminism isn't about being against men. Sure, some radical feminists are against men, but I don't think they're taken seriously. Actually, there is a debate among feminists about whether men should or not be allowed to engage in feminism, and there are plenty who think they should. How can you expect men to help in feminism if feminism is against them? You can't, so that's not the case.

[Edit: removed a line I thought it wasn't polite 10 minutes after posting.]

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#105

Post by joe5150 »

yummyfajitas wrote: post #99
rayiner wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The "shut up and build things" position embodies the tacit assumption that the world naturally pushes itself to an equillibrium that is fair and just. The assumption that racism and sexism result in elastic deformation of society that will go away as soon as you remove whatever force is warping it. I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. You have to hamm…

The assumption that racism and sexism result in elastic deformation of society that will go away as soon as you remove whatever force is warping it. Yes, this is the economic assumption - folks are greedy and will exploit undervalued resources. I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. This ignores the history of various oppressed groups who unbent themsel…

it's hard to argue that any of those groups are truly "unbent" outside of very narrow, precarious and conditional contexts.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#106

Post by pdabbadabba »

traverseda wrote: post #97
pdabbadabba wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it is refreshing to hear someone talking about how they just want both sides to shut up so they can get back to building and hacking. I think this is an unfortunate (though entirely relatable!) attitude because it ignores the fact that there are groups whose needs for a comfortable, collegial hacking environment are poorly met by many communities today. For people in these groups, and end to the ongoing inclusivene…

>it ignores the fact that there are groups whose needs for a comfortable, collegial hacking environment are poorly met by many communities today. Most notably, poor people. As a hackery type who came from poverty, these seem a lot like silly problems. I've hung out in some pretty hostile places to get time with a soldering iron or a computer. If you have access to any "hacking environment" or even just tools, you're…

Right on. The big debates today are about inclusion of women and racial minorities, but it's always valuable to be reminded that there are other populations out there too who we should work harder to welcome.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#107

Post by droopyEyelids »

rayiner wrote: post #90
vonklaus wrote: post #21

This was awesome. Not because it dispels a meme that is negative in the industry, not because it is some sort of proof a woman can succeed in tech, or any other of this tropic nonsense. It was such an amazing message that was totally gender neutral: "I like building things because I am curious and I pursue knowledge for its own sake" With all the confirmation bias and name calling (which I am certainly guilty of from…

The "shut up and build things" position embodies the tacit assumption that the world naturally pushes itself to an equillibrium that is fair and just. The assumption that racism and sexism result in elastic deformation of society that will go away as soon as you remove whatever force is warping it. I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. You have to hamm…

I think you're right about the ductile nature of society, but at the same time I think you're on a fine line about how to change it.

I really believe that only love can overcome hate- you can't fight personal negativity with more negativity or disparagement. It only makes people dig their heels in deeper. I know this is a controversial and probably offensive opinion, but it's a core part of who I am so I feel I should say it and take whatever comes.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#108

Post by ObviousScience »

rayiner wrote: post #90
vonklaus wrote: post #21

This was awesome. Not because it dispels a meme that is negative in the industry, not because it is some sort of proof a woman can succeed in tech, or any other of this tropic nonsense. It was such an amazing message that was totally gender neutral: "I like building things because I am curious and I pursue knowledge for its own sake" With all the confirmation bias and name calling (which I am certainly guilty of from…

The "shut up and build things" position embodies the tacit assumption that the world naturally pushes itself to an equillibrium that is fair and just. The assumption that racism and sexism result in elastic deformation of society that will go away as soon as you remove whatever force is warping it. I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. You have to hamm…

> I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. You have to hammer it back into straightness. Talking (and browbeating and prosecuting when necessary) is how you do that.

Society is constantly in flux: it's not like a metal in any way. Rather, it's like a fluid (or a particulate flow, such as a sand pile).

If you change things about the underlying flow dynamics -- viscosity, particle size, pressure, channels, etc -- you get significant effects on the structure of the society, or in analogy, the dynamics of the flow.

You're mistaking the foam for the wave, and the tsunami as being a crashing wave. Really tunamis are just little disturbances over a wide area, and they're best addressed at that stage, not when they're a crashing wave.

However, if you adjust something about the mechanics, it will settle in to a new flow, and remove the crufty parts on top naturally as those pieces of the flow dissipate.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#109

Post by debacle »

The victim mentality is the basis of all of the problems in modern -isms. People who (perhaps rightly) feel maligned by the world congregate, become an echo chamber, and then build in intensity. In effect, their altered perception of reality becomes their coping mechanism for something painful or traumatic that may have happened in their lives. Throw in a few drama addicts or discordians, and you have a recipe for zero discussion, and zero progress.

Is there sexism in tech? Yes. Is it condoned by the majority? No. Is it generally called out when it happens? Yes.

These people don't need to be derided, ignored, or educated. It wont work. They need healing.

Re: Okay, Feminism, It’s Time We Had a Talk About Empathy (2013)

#110

Post by [deleted] »

rayiner wrote: post #90
vonklaus wrote: post #21

This was awesome. Not because it dispels a meme that is negative in the industry, not because it is some sort of proof a woman can succeed in tech, or any other of this tropic nonsense. It was such an amazing message that was totally gender neutral: "I like building things because I am curious and I pursue knowledge for its own sake" With all the confirmation bias and name calling (which I am certainly guilty of from…

The "shut up and build things" position embodies the tacit assumption that the world naturally pushes itself to an equillibrium that is fair and just. The assumption that racism and sexism result in elastic deformation of society that will go away as soon as you remove whatever force is warping it. I don't think history bears that out. Society is a soft ductile metal. If you bend it, it'll stay bent. You have to hamm…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN