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

What I Didn't Say

paulgraham.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 601 posts

Re: What I Didn't Say

#261

Post by crassus »

smtddr wrote: post #183
Perihelion wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're exactly the sort of person I'm talking about. People like you are afraid to be comfortable in a work environment for fear that they'll be fired for saying or doing the wrong thing. Provided you aren't a sexist/rapist, I see no reason why you need to be walking on eggshells all the time at a place where you spend a large percentage of your day. It makes me sad that my presence would make you uncomfortable when…

>>Provided you aren't a sexist/rapist, I see no reason why you need to be walking on eggshells all the time at a place where you spend a large percentage of your day. It's been my experience that when men feel like they're walking on eggshells around women in the workplace it's because they're normally comfortable making sexists/rape jokes and/or have sexist beliefs. The feeling of eggshell walking is them trying to…

> "It's been my experience that when men feel like they're walking on eggshells around women in the workplace it's because they're normally comfortable making sexists/rape jokes and/or have sexist beliefs."

translated - "If you're afraid of being labeled a witch, you're probably a witch."

Re: What I Didn't Say

#262

Post by jsmthrowaway »

aaronem wrote: post #255
jsmthrowaway wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'd prefer if you noticed that you pointed your vitriol cannon at a third party to your conversation who was simply remarking upon your comment. Suggest you check usernames before replying.

You seem perfectly willing to stand in loco auctoris for the poster to whom I replied in such fashion as to draw your ire, so I don't really find your latest plaint particularly compelling; given your clear failure to recognize the problem with "-- prove me wrong!", I can't see how you could possibly wriggle out of more than one of those four paragraphs. (But don't let me stop you from trying.)

Actually, I didn't even read the comment to which you left "[citation needed]", and I'm not interested in trying to wriggle out of anything. Thanks, though, and I wish you best of luck finding someone to fight with over your perspective.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#263

Post by RivieraKid »

xs_kid wrote: post #228
yawn wrote: post #26

Jakob Kaplan Moss owes PG a public apology for his behavior. The witch hunt tweets that were coming out of him without getting the facts straight are downright disheartening.

You don't have idea about what is a "witch hunt" and using that metaphor to describe some tweets is very insensitive and softens the absolute horror of people killed in real witch hunting. Do you know that witch hunt still being a thing in some countries of the world?: http://www.eltiempo.com/colombia/medellin/ARTICULO-WEB-NEW_N... (title translated: Woman accused of being a witch in a town in Antioquia was burned) T…

> using that metaphor to describe some tweets is very insensitive and softens the absolute horror of people killed in real witch hunting

I'll start using this metaphor from now on, just to annoy PC-nazis like you.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#264

Post by Perihelion »

smtddr wrote: post #245
Perihelion wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see a LOT more drama surrounding the things that men have said/done. If I were a man I would absolutely be more concerned about my interactions with female coworkers over male ones. Don't take this to mean that I think I can say/do whatever I want in this industry on account of being female -- no one is bulletproof. It just seems men are vilified more than women when it comes to these sorts of things. Maybe that's…

Hmm, so let's see. If this kind of stuff is going on with gender relations, does it exist with race too? Orientation? For the tech-world, I guess a black lesbian would be a triple-concern? I would say that is a problem. Not sure how to fix it, but that's a problem. I personally don't have to change my behavior or speech when a lady is in the room. But then again, I'm probably unique in that... I never, ever use profa…

I'll agree with you partially. This sort of thing is definitely going down based on race/orientation as well, but I see less of that and more men vs women sorts of discussions.

It's not just a tech problem either. This stuff is going on all around the world. I don't claim to have solutions to these problems, but I would appreciate it if the public shaming and witch hunts would stop. I'm tired, SV. So very tired.

I've never worked at AT&T but I'd wager the same stuff went on. Perhaps you experienced the same sort of thing I did where people assumed you wouldn't appreciate their words/actions and elected to avoid you?

Re: What I Didn't Say

#265

Post by kstenerud »

jug6ernaut wrote: post #75
kstenerud wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"the audience for an interview will include people who for various reasons want to misinterpret what you say, so you have to be careful not to leave them any room to."

What I quoted was not from the "interview"

Technically, you are correct. But you're missing the underlying comment that anyone can find fault with what you say if they use sufficient semantic boxing rather than granting a bit of slack.

What's amazing is how many people continue to do this, even though they have many times felt the aggravation of others doing it to their public posts.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#266

Post by minimaxir »

robg wrote: post #111
minimaxir wrote: post #18

For those curious, here's a chart of the proportion of female founders funded by Y Combinator in the last 4 years, which correlates with YC's intention to add more female founders: http://i.imgur.com/MCLqUm3.jpg Data source: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AjPFdCURhZvddHJ...

Is this a stated intention? [ref?] It seems more to be a nice consequence of their approach - to attract great talent.

pg mentioned in the article that he wants to increase the number of female founders.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#267

Post by Perihelion »

crassus wrote: post #261
smtddr wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>>Provided you aren't a sexist/rapist, I see no reason why you need to be walking on eggshells all the time at a place where you spend a large percentage of your day. It's been my experience that when men feel like they're walking on eggshells around women in the workplace it's because they're normally comfortable making sexists/rape jokes and/or have sexist beliefs. The feeling of eggshell walking is them trying to…

> "It's been my experience that when men feel like they're walking on eggshells around women in the workplace it's because they're normally comfortable making sexists/rape jokes and/or have sexist beliefs." translated - "If you're afraid of being labeled a witch, you're probably a witch."

I disagree. There's a reason that the term "witch hunt" has the connotation that it does.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#268

Post by iamjustin »

aaronem wrote: post #233
iamjustin wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both men and women were killed during the Salem Witch Trials. A "witch hunt" isn't terrorism against women.

I seem to remember hearing that the final score in Salem being nineteen women and one man. Given this data, trivial statistical analysis tells us that the use of "witch hunt" in this context is 95% sexist, a value well within the margin of error.

21 were executed, 6 male. Regardless, in common use, when someone uses the term 'witch hunt', it's gender-neutral.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#269

Post by klipt »

aaronem wrote: post #233
iamjustin wrote: post #189

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Both men and women were killed during the Salem Witch Trials. A "witch hunt" isn't terrorism against women.

I seem to remember hearing that the final score in Salem being nineteen women and one man. Given this data, trivial statistical analysis tells us that the use of "witch hunt" in this context is 95% sexist, a value well within the margin of error.

Only if you ignore all witch hunts outside Salem. That would be incredibly US-centric.

Bertrand Guilladot and Louis Debaraz come to mind.

Anyhow, that completely misses the point - that witch trials were based on a presumption of guilt against which no defense could be made. Much like the way certain media sites attack people.

Re: What I Didn't Say

#270

Post by smtddr »

Perihelion wrote: post #264
smtddr wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, so let's see. If this kind of stuff is going on with gender relations, does it exist with race too? Orientation? For the tech-world, I guess a black lesbian would be a triple-concern? I would say that is a problem. Not sure how to fix it, but that's a problem. I personally don't have to change my behavior or speech when a lady is in the room. But then again, I'm probably unique in that... I never, ever use profa…

I'll agree with you partially. This sort of thing is definitely going down based on race/orientation as well, but I see less of that and more men vs women sorts of discussions. It's not just a tech problem either. This stuff is going on all around the world. I don't claim to have solutions to these problems, but I would appreciate it if the public shaming and witch hunts would stop. I'm tired, SV. So very tired. I've…

>>Perhaps you experienced the same sort of thing I did where people assumed you wouldn't appreciate their words/actions and elected to avoid you?

Being a black male myself, it saddens me to think that you're probably right in more ways than one....

Post reply on HN