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

An Apology From TechCrunch

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 186 posts

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#111

Post by rfnslyr »

jessedhillon wrote: post #80
rfnslyr wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes because tit is exactly like saying "nigger".

I'd love to hear what you think are the salient differences between getting up and presenting Titstare, and showing something fictitious like "N-watcher" Evidently your reaction if someone got up to present the latter would not be "LOL guys loosen up!" -- even though you are not someone at whom the humor/offense is targeted. Why the difference in attitude?

Not going to bother continuing a conversation with someone who gets as offended by tits as they do the word "nigger".

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#112

Post by metaphorm »

Nutella4 wrote: post #110
metaphorm wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

there's a difference between appropriate consideration of minorities and over-the-top political correctness. simply put, intent matters and people need to accept that a reflexive hostility towards puerile male humor does not advance the cause of women.

Nope, intent isn't magic. http://genderbitch.wordpress.com/2010/01/23/intent-its-fucki... And puerile male humor is often intended to drive women away from the boys' club.

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

intent isn't magical but it is legally meaningful. if our laws recognize that intent matters maybe you ought to also.

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#113

Post by rfnslyr »

jessedhillon wrote: post #100
e40 wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your reply would be entire spot on if the word "tit" and the n-word were equivalent. One is a body part that both men and women share. The other is a racially charged word that has more than a century of really bad history behind it. And, see how both you and I couldn't say the n-word? That's a tip off that it's not the same. I have tits. Yes, they are man-tits but they are tits nonetheless. The n-word, however, isn'…

The point is not "N-word == Tits" The point is that, you, the reader, obviously understand that a word, concept or type of behavior can offend others and would therefore abstain from employing it. Or at least exercise judgment in doing so, because you understand that you have a measure of responsibility when speaking publicly. The inanity of GP's comments is staggering. He is literally saying that because he, himself…

The point is that, you, the reader, obviously understand that a word, concept or type of behavior can offend others and would therefore abstain from employing it.

What this really means is that it's not you who should take responsibility for your emotions, it's everyone else that should watch out for you.

What exactly did you get offended by? If you claim that prank was sexist in any way, you clearly lack the ability to judge a situation and its context.

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#114

Post by metaphorm »

oneeyedpigeon wrote: post #98
metaphorm wrote: post #55

file this under the ever growing file of evidence that the tech industry has lost its sense of humor.

Exactly. Those two guys up on stage really did seem to think they were being funny - where has all the genuine humour in tech presentations gone?

its ok to try to be funny and fail at it.

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#115

Post by parennoob »

educating wrote: post #83
ScottBurson wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's another one: that this kind of thing might be crude and distasteful, but it isn't specifically sexist. The sexism is in knowing that it will make most women somewhat uncomfortable, and some women very uncomfortable, and not caring.

> The sexism is in knowing that it will make most women somewhat uncomfortable, and some women very uncomfortable, and not caring. I'd go so far as to say that how is an app that is all about exploiting women NOT sexist? It is more than just making them uncomfortable. Some pics are taken of women that are drug addicted or white slaves or both. For most that do it on their own initiative, it is a decision they will re…

How is staring at breasts supposed to 'exploit' women? You have an extremely puritanical attitude when it comes to this. I wonder what you think of nude photo models.

Go back to the 17th century.

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#116

Post by jessedhillon »

rfnslyr wrote: post #111
jessedhillon wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd love to hear what you think are the salient differences between getting up and presenting Titstare, and showing something fictitious like "N-watcher" Evidently your reaction if someone got up to present the latter would not be "LOL guys loosen up!" -- even though you are not someone at whom the humor/offense is targeted. Why the difference in attitude?

Not going to bother continuing a conversation with someone who gets as offended by tits as they do the word "nigger".

Such a noble stand!

You're not stupid, you get the point no matter how obtuse you're pretending to be. You know that I'm not saying that "tits == N-word" and you know that such an equivalency is not central to or required for my example.

You simply don't want to admit that the only explanation of your position is to say "well black people have a right to get offended by the N-word, but women aren't allowed to object to breasts being objectified."

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#117

Post by metaphorm »

theorique wrote: post #96
mhurron wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> app called TitStare, which allows you to view, upload, and share softcore photos of.. use your imagination I don't see the problem. Pornography is perfectly legal and big business.

Well, yeah, but at TechCrunch Disrupt? There's a time and a place for this kind of thing and it's not at a generalist startups and software industry conference.

why not? The porn industry has been responsible for a lot of technological innovation on the internet. They were pioneers for electronic billing, for streaming video, for high scalability websites, and for user-uploaded content.

Should we exclude all content with a sexual nature, even if there is good technology behind it?

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#118

Post by [deleted] »

parennoob wrote: post #93
Amadou wrote: post #63

I watched the two presentations via the valleywag page others have cited. The problem I see with TechCrunch's apology is that they are mixing up terminology. I don't think either presentation was sexist and especially not misogynstic - what they were was sexual. Modern society has a similar problem distinguishing between racist humor and racial humor. While there certainly can be overlap between -ist and -ual humor,…

This. Ted Dziuba has mentioned the tech industry being extremely sex negative, and him being almost afraid to criticize it because of the inevitable massive backlash he would face. And this is being reinforced by the increasing "don't even mention anything related to sex in a prrrrrofesional setting" approach being taken by a lot of popular organizations these days. For example, just look at github's repository forki…

[deleted]

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#119

Post by metaphorm »

jessedhillon wrote: post #80
rfnslyr wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes because tit is exactly like saying "nigger".

I'd love to hear what you think are the salient differences between getting up and presenting Titstare, and showing something fictitious like "N-watcher" Evidently your reaction if someone got up to present the latter would not be "LOL guys loosen up!" -- even though you are not someone at whom the humor/offense is targeted. Why the difference in attitude?

I bet you go from 0 to Hitler in under 6 seconds.

Re: An Apology From TechCrunch

#120

Post by jessedhillon »

rfnslyr wrote: post #113
jessedhillon wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point is not "N-word == Tits" The point is that, you, the reader, obviously understand that a word, concept or type of behavior can offend others and would therefore abstain from employing it. Or at least exercise judgment in doing so, because you understand that you have a measure of responsibility when speaking publicly. The inanity of GP's comments is staggering. He is literally saying that because he, himself…

The point is that, you, the reader, obviously understand that a word, concept or type of behavior can offend others and would therefore abstain from employing it. What this really means is that it's not you who should take responsibility for your emotions, it's everyone else that should watch out for you. What exactly did you get offended by? If you claim that prank was sexist in any way, you clearly lack the ability…

Totally agree dude. That's my stand when I drop racial slurs ("slurs" am I right?)

It's not my job to know which words are going to upset another person's emotional state! I'm not a mind reader! My responsibility is only to say what I want.

Seriously though -- it's absolutely-fucking-hilarious that you think I'm the one lacking situational awareness. The guys who got up and made boob jokes? Total awareness, perhaps even masters of humor.

People who are offended, or can see why it would be particularly offensive to some women -- no awareness. Amazing.

Post reply on HN