White Women Need Not Apply • Hacker News Board

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#111

Post by adjkant » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 1:42 AM UTC

spuz wrote: post #20

I don't really feel like this article explores the situation fully. Why are there no quotes from either Roost or Sojwal or their respective supporters? For an article that talks about the concept of keeping an open mind to the other side of a story I feel like we really only hear one side. Maybe one needs to be actively following everything that happens on Twitter in order to get the necessary context before reading…

If you look at the previous pieces of the author, it becomes clear that this is not about the people involved here but the larger narrative the author wants to write about, with is cancel culture. You can see this with another piece, asking basically if the Amy Barrett case went too far.

https://arcdigital.media/karens-all-the-way-down-cd530b0c0a0...

This is more or less in line with HN's general "slippery slope" sentiment, and is likely why the piece was originally submitted. It doesn't seem like many here care about the particulars, and the affected community appears to be small. So the article as posted is just rehashing a macro debate with no contextual add or news.

This thread gives actual perspective from a coworker of Roost's, the aforementioned cancelled podcast. A lot more nuance there. I made a post from what I could glean from the actual situation as an outsider here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24832827

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#112

Post by kelnos » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 1:52 AM UTC

aaomidi wrote: post #36

peteypao wrote: post #19

I am so sick of cancel culture. Roost did not deserve this.

Please get some context on why she was "cancelled". https://twitter.com/amywestervelt/status/1316923479011303424

After reading those four email screenshots, my conclusions are:

1. Roost should probably do a better job in the future figuring out who she's trying to send her work to.

2. Sojwal's reaction was way out of proportion to any slight or offense, real or otherwise.

3. Roost's further reaction was foolish and condescending; taking Sojwal to task for her response was never going to be well received.

4. Sojwal's further escalation was ridiculous; equating "sending an essay that doesn't meet the submission requirements" with "racism" is just bonkers.

Beyond that, Roost should have just left well enough alone; it likely could have ended with that email exchange. Whining about the interaction on Facebook and threatening to report Twitter posts would have been a bad look even if she had been completely in the right.

I don't think Sojwal looks great here, but Roost had plenty of opportunities to put down her shovel and climb out of the hole she'd dug for herself, but instead chose to keep digging.

It's just disappointing that public discourse around race has devolved so far that this sort of thing happens at all. The excesses of cancel culture are a symptom, not the cause.

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#113

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 2:00 AM UTC

aaomidi wrote: post #36

peteypao wrote: post #19

I am so sick of cancel culture. Roost did not deserve this.

Please get some context on why she was "cancelled". https://twitter.com/amywestervelt/status/1316923479011303424

[deleted]

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#114

Post by echelon » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 2:04 AM UTC

novia wrote: post #110

echelon wrote: post #43

Honestly, I think the furries have it right, at least in concept. (I know a surprising many of them.) They've solved racism and sexism by abandoning the vestiges of these notions altogether. I wish the real world was just as blind. Why do people have to behave like the tribalistic great apes we descended from? It's 2020 and we have rockets that travel to Mars and beyond. So many people love to bully...

Explain Nazi Furs.

I have no idea what that is, and I don't think I want to.

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#115

Post by notsuoh » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 2:08 AM UTC

dang wrote: post #106

BryceOnRice wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Now make a "White Writers Workshop" and see how long that lasts. The issue isn't this workshop being anti-White, it's the entirety of Western culture.

We've banned this account. Everybody else: could you please follow the site guidelines and flag egregious comments rather than feeding the trolls? https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Thanks, sorry to feed the troll. Would you delete my comment to the troll below please.

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#116

Post by emmelaich » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 2:11 AM UTC

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #29

There is a name for this: Oppression Olympics [1]. For almost any group you can think of, there's a more oppressed group that feels entitled to rave against the former group. Fortunately most people are not that bitter, I certainly hope so at least. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oppression_Olympics

As a card game .... (comedy sketch)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p2X-qQ-uMW8

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#117

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 2:14 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #104

User23 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One might argue that pragmatically being a member of a group that it's unacceptable to punch is superior to being a member of one that it is. For example historically in pretty much every culture the persons of civil and religious officials have been inviolate. The modern USA culture of contempt for leadership is clearly unsustainable and thus it will end. A Chinese colleague told me a joke a few years ago. "An Ameri…

> A Chinese colleague told me a joke a few years ago. "An American asked a Chinese, 'how does it feel to not be able to publicly criticize your President?' And the Chinese replied, 'How does it feel to not be able to publicly support yours?'" Gonna put on my pedantic buzzkill hat for a second. I do actually find that joke to be funny, but it hides potential discussion of real differences behind a pithy comment. Being…

[deleted]

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#118

Post by foogazi » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 3:44 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #112

aaomidi wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please get some context on why she was "cancelled". https://twitter.com/amywestervelt/status/1316923479011303424

After reading those four email screenshots, my conclusions are: 1. Roost should probably do a better job in the future figuring out who she's trying to send her work to. 2. Sojwal's reaction was way out of proportion to any slight or offense, real or otherwise. 3. Roost's further reaction was foolish and condescending; taking Sojwal to task for her response was never going to be well received. 4. Sojwal's further esc…

See it in the context of a job application

What are the race/age/gender expectations of the hiring manager?

Would an applicant ever have to apologize for applying to the wrong job or having the wrong qualifications?

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#119

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 4:07 AM UTC

kelnos wrote: post #104

User23 wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One might argue that pragmatically being a member of a group that it's unacceptable to punch is superior to being a member of one that it is. For example historically in pretty much every culture the persons of civil and religious officials have been inviolate. The modern USA culture of contempt for leadership is clearly unsustainable and thus it will end. A Chinese colleague told me a joke a few years ago. "An Ameri…

> A Chinese colleague told me a joke a few years ago. "An American asked a Chinese, 'how does it feel to not be able to publicly criticize your President?' And the Chinese replied, 'How does it feel to not be able to publicly support yours?'" Gonna put on my pedantic buzzkill hat for a second. I do actually find that joke to be funny, but it hides potential discussion of real differences behind a pithy comment. Being…

[deleted]

Re: White Women Need Not Apply

#120

Post by jerry1979 » Tue, Oct 20, 2020, 4:29 AM UTC

reaperducer wrote: post #21

Yetanfou wrote: post #13

Well, I'm not. This is nothing but a load of racist and intersectionalist tripe uttered by a brainwashed zealot who starts her twitter bio with a preferred pronoun. It represents a lot of what went wrong between the 90's and now. The solution to these problems might just be to a) totally ignore these self-proclaimed representatives of 'oppressed' groups and b) do exactly those things which they don't want you to do.…

intersectionalist This is a new word for me. I Googled a bit, but didn't find anything helpful to fit it into the context of your comment. Can you explain it a bit?

My sibling commenter provided some good info on intersectionality, but in fairness it is worth pointing out some of the rumblings against intersectionality. Here is one from an author who I would describe as a radical leftist:

"By avoiding the morbid libidinal core of white supremacy, identity politics, intersectionality, and social privilege discourse comprise the most sophisticated sector of this police apparatus."

https://illwilleditions.com/how-it-might-should-be-done/