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

Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

geekchick77.dreamwidth.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 392 posts

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#231

Post by batista »

batista wrote: post #222
unalone wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> don't worry about minor things when there are important things that mess with your life and your society Important things like women making less money than men, being more subjected to media objectification, being the target of laws that want to deny them rights because we still have a problem accepting that women are exactly equal to us? Important things like us dismissing their complaints about this shit without…

(Yes, quick quick, down-vote the heretic -- we haven't progressed much from Salem, have we?) >Important things like women making less money than men, being more subjected to media objectification, being the target of laws that want to deny them rights because we still have a problem accepting that women are exactly equal to us? Funny how you seem to have the missed the part where I SPECIFICALLY write: " It's not like…

>Your deciding what is and isn't important for women to care about is a perfect example of privilege.

What privilege exactly? The privilege of sharing my opinion on HN and getting down-voted for it? I thought "privilege" was a concept related to power, what happened to that notion?

Women, like men, also care about BS. Non-issues, stupid issues, moral non-issues, religious hard-lines, the latest celeb gossip, some fad, etc.

One can decide for himself what he considers important for other people to care about, like I did, and tell those other people his opinion. Like I did. And apparently, like you did.

Free speech, is a bitch. You don't only get people complaining about sexism in "that's what she said jokes". You also get people complaining about meta-sexism, ie, whether the first kind of complaining is important or stupid.

>When somebody says they care about something, the right response is to take note of why they care, and try not to repeat the mistakes on display here. Responding with arguments about why we shouldn't care about this is furthering the problem.

If there IS a problem in the first place.

Because, sometimes the problem is "caring about something", itself. For example, when you are a hypochondriac, the problem is not the diseases, rather the problem is that you consider them a problem in the first place.

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#232

Post by batista »

scott_s wrote: post #212
batista wrote: post #190

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yet another common trope in gender discussions is this idea that people shouldn't complain about sexism because there are more important things to worry about. Haven't thought of it that way, but sounds like a reasonable general guideline: don't worry about minor things when there are important things that mess with your life and your society. Oh, and I see what you did there --by adding "sexism"--, whereas my comme…

It seems minor to you .

You don't say?!

Isn't this true for any statement one makes, that it seems that way to him? Isn't it also obvious that for other people, it might not seem so?

What you say is essentially: "other people disagree with that assertion". Well, you can find people that disagree with any assertion. That's not an argument pro or against the assertion.

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#233

Post by schmichael »

tomjen3 wrote: post #224
wpietri wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not quite getting your point. As you acknowledge, there's peril in being impolite. It's the peril of getting called out or shunned. The only thing that's different now from 30 years ago is that things have shifted enough that saying something sexist is rude. Also, we may disagree on what's rude. If I throw a party and somebody is sufficiently offensive, I'll show them the door. If they see that as rude, then it's onl…

My point is this: It was the company culture to have fun with a joke aimed at nobody in particular (sex is not sexistic). A bad, unfunny joke but a joke nontheless. One person decieded she did like it and ruined it for everybody. If you show up to a frat house party and don't like it, do you demand that the others change their behavior to something that isn't rude or do you leave? She essentially demanded that everyb…

Did you just compare a workplace to a frat house party? Unreal...

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#234

Post by ElliotMingee »

unalone wrote: post #127
ElliotMingee wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While I wholly agree with 95% of your post, especially your liberal use of comedians as references, I think the whole basis of this "that's what she said" is grossly misunderstood by those opposing it. It's a phrase that highlights innocent phrases that could have a sexual meaning. Generally, they would be something a woman could say, however I've heard many a "that's what he said" as well. It's a stupid, immature jo…

Oh definitely! It's a silly grade-school joke. Which is one of the reasons, I think, why this conversation is so difficult: nobody's thinking "Let me go out and reinforce the patriarchy", twirling their evil mustaches, they're just making a silly joke that incidentally revolves around treating women like objects, TOTALLY UNINTENTIONALLY. But that doesn't mean it doesn't have an effect on society. Part of my undergrad…

Ah I wasn't aware the effect was so pronounced, although I can definitely see how that would happen. Out of curiosity, what's the consensus on how an overtly sexist or racist joke told among friends in a non-serious way affects social dynamics? I'm sure we're all familiar with this type of humor and I would hope that the joke would serve to make fun of the stereotype and not reinforce it but I'm not sure.

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#235

Post by lotharbot »

wpietri wrote: post #192
unalone wrote: post #187

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's brown and sticky? A stick! What's green, four-legged, and would kill you if it hit you falling out of a tree? A pool table! Where does a general keep his armies? Up his sleevies!

Why do programmers confuse Halloween and Christmas? Because Oct 31 = Dec 25! Q: What's sour, yellow, and equivalent to the axiom of choice? A: Zorn's lemon Do you know any good jokes about sodium? Na!

what's yellow and infinitely differentiable? A bananalytic function!

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#236

Post by [deleted] »

raganwald wrote: post #75
CompiledCode wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example? In almost all states, if the wife gets pregnant by another man, the man is still on the hook for child support for the next 18+ years... even if she divorces him and marries her lover. I can't think of an equivalent anti-female law with such devastating long-term impact on the woman. I know this message might be off tangent for the HN board. But if we're discussing anti-female sexist culture…

Your argument says "since (unfair child support laws) then (men treated unfairly) thus not(sexist anti-women culture)" The problem with your argument is that you are not espousing a widely held belief about child support laws being "unfair to men." Thus, a discussion about your argument is likely to devolve into long exchanges about children's rights and anecdotes about ridiculous edge case judgments on both sides. W…

[deleted]

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#237

Post by Aloisius »

raganwald wrote: post #75
CompiledCode wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example? In almost all states, if the wife gets pregnant by another man, the man is still on the hook for child support for the next 18+ years... even if she divorces him and marries her lover. I can't think of an equivalent anti-female law with such devastating long-term impact on the woman. I know this message might be off tangent for the HN board. But if we're discussing anti-female sexist culture…

Your argument says "since (unfair child support laws) then (men treated unfairly) thus not(sexist anti-women culture)" The problem with your argument is that you are not espousing a widely held belief about child support laws being "unfair to men." Thus, a discussion about your argument is likely to devolve into long exchanges about children's rights and anecdotes about ridiculous edge case judgments on both sides. W…

Well the other side of the argument is: since (sexist anti-women culture) then not(sexist anti-men culture).

Clearly you can have a society where both sides discriminate against each other (see a certain country in the Middle East).

That said, bringing up anti-male sexism doesn't minimize anti-female sexism. The fight isn't over who is the bigger victim, but over ending both sides victimhood.

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#238

Post by [deleted] »

raganwald wrote: post #75
CompiledCode wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example? In almost all states, if the wife gets pregnant by another man, the man is still on the hook for child support for the next 18+ years... even if she divorces him and marries her lover. I can't think of an equivalent anti-female law with such devastating long-term impact on the woman. I know this message might be off tangent for the HN board. But if we're discussing anti-female sexist culture…

Your argument says "since (unfair child support laws) then (men treated unfairly) thus not(sexist anti-women culture)" The problem with your argument is that you are not espousing a widely held belief about child support laws being "unfair to men." Thus, a discussion about your argument is likely to devolve into long exchanges about children's rights and anecdotes about ridiculous edge case judgments on both sides. W…

[deleted]

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#239

Post by prodigal_erik »

wpietri wrote: post #168
tomjen3 wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a difference -- you can ignore miss manners if you want (at your peril) in this case you have the room equivalent of a screaming maniac yell at you (politely) each time you do something wrong. And yes if you had that in real life, it would be considered rude.

Not quite getting your point. As you acknowledge, there's peril in being impolite. It's the peril of getting called out or shunned. The only thing that's different now from 30 years ago is that things have shifted enough that saying something sexist is rude. Also, we may disagree on what's rude. If I throw a party and somebody is sufficiently offensive, I'll show them the door. If they see that as rude, then it's onl…

Thirty years ago all nerds were shunned and nobody cared, so we formed a kind of semi-aspie ghetto. What we're seeing now is an influx of ordinary people chasing paychecks who brought very different expectations about interpersonal tact and its relevance.

Re: Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot

#240

Post by georgieporgie »

There have been complaints about it spamming the channel

I have to point out the obvious: the example quote was 34 words long, and presumably it's of unpredictable length and content. TWSS is four words, repeated, and easily filtered out mentally. I don't like TWSS, but I don't think it's fair to call others' reactions irrational.

Post reply on HN