Live data from Hacker News

Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

ruthburr.com

31–37 of 37 posts

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> You should check your double standards at the door if you want to be taken seriously. You say that as though male-male, female-female, male-female, and female-male interactions are all identical; they're not. I really don't think that she's saying she's going to indiscriminately grope people based on "whether or not she feels they're on hugging terms". As far as a double-standard goes, it's a fact of (Western) life…

Thanks tonyarkles, and to clarify: I'm not saying that it's OK for me to indiscriminately go around hugging people, either. I'm saying that in general the only people I hug are people that I know well enough to know that a hug will be OK from both sides.

That's not remotely what you were conveying in your original piece, despite whatever intentions you may have. Go read your original words about offering a hug vs what you just wrote as the parent of my comment -- they're just plain not the same.

That fine-grain material, your incorrect use of the word "sexist"/"sexism" and your stated desire to create a COMPLETELY de-sexualized environment in places that have thousands of people (PyCon this year had a larger population than the town in which I grew up) just makes this stuff really hard to read.

We're missing out on REAL sexism by people complaining about getting hit on and hugs and shit. It's depressing.

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#32

I agree with everything she wrote. But please stop with the "Dude" this and "Dude" that.

The reason I use "Dude" is an abbreviation for "Type of Dude to Whom This Post is Addressed," as I say in the beginning of the piece - i.e. assuming you're already one of the good guys.

That's fucking bullshit and you know it. You did it to be cute, dismissive and to satisfy your passive aggressiveness. Dude.

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#33
> Again, context matters: you’re not just hanging out at a bar drinking with your buddies, chatting up the attractive woman sitting next to you. You’re at an industry function, talking to women who are your industry peers. They’re simply not there to be hit on – even in ways that might not be creepy in another setting.

Wait a second. Is the bar reserved by the conference organizers for the exclusive use of conference attendees? Or is this just the regular bar at the conference hotel, open to not only conference attendees, but attendees of other concurrent events there, and open to individual hotel guests there as not part of an event, and open to anyone who cares to wander in off the street?

If the latter, then I can't agree with some blanket rule against asking someone about considering a romantic relationship. Quite a lot of people, of all sexes, genders, and orientations, want romantic partners who are their peers, but must exclude the possibility of such partnerships with their co-workers because of the problems that can cause in their work place. Many such people (of all sexes, genders, and orientations) congregate at parties and bars at conferences because those are one of the few occasions to meet peers in a social situation that allows seeking romantic partnerships.

Use common sense. People who are at the bar because they have switched from "conference" mode to "social" mode and are looking to meet new people for social purposes should be distinguishable from people who are at the bar because they wanted to find a place that they could drink while they continued discussing the subject of the conference. The former should not ask the latter for dates. When in doubt, play it safe and don't ask.

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#35
post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Certainly - the comments on the original article are eye-opening to say the least. Having never been to a tech conference I haven't experienced the type of atmosphere. To restate my comment with that in mind; I don't think banning innuendo will solve any problems. Perhaps it might improve the atmosphere, but it won't fix the underlying attitude problems placed in the spotlight for the last week.

Innuendo is a really really hard one, because a lot of women appreciate a dirty joke as much as men do. I wish the solution could be "let's go ahead and all be grown-ups about it" but that doesn't seem to be working. So instead I'll say "let's think about the things we say and whether or not we're contributing to a sexually-charged environment at work events." Again, context matters: go ahead and make innuendoes amon…

As I've mentioned before, culture matters too. I've mentioned before that in France, sexual tension at the workplace is pretty commonplace in big cities. It's kind of a way of enjoying oneself at work among colleagues. It's typically viewed as harassment, though in some cases it can become so in France as well. Also, imagine the 70s when, at least young unmarried, people were a lot less preoccupied by what previous generations found sexually acceptable and not. Lots of people were more into romping off (of course this was before the wide spread of diseases) --it helped that in the late 60s easy contraception became available.

So, I think a lot of how sexual innuendo and repartee and double entendres is received is dependent on society and mores. I'm not saying contemporary America should emulate any other society, just saying it's not necessarily a given that our way of understanding this is the one way to view this.

Here's a different example. For some people male circumcision is seen as the right way and even extol health benefits --to others it's tantamount to mutilation and undue suffering such that some locales have considered banning the practice.

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#36
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The reason I use "Dude" is an abbreviation for "Type of Dude to Whom This Post is Addressed," as I say in the beginning of the piece - i.e. assuming you're already one of the good guys.

That's fucking bullshit and you know it. You did it to be cute, dismissive and to satisfy your passive aggressiveness. Dude.

Dude. Y U SO grumpy?

Re: Things You Think Aren’t Sexist, But Really Are

#37
post #36
post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fucking bullshit and you know it. You did it to be cute, dismissive and to satisfy your passive aggressiveness. Dude.

Dude. Y U SO grumpy?

Oh, did I sound grumpy? I was totally going for sweet and agreeable, but I guess I chose the wrong words.
Post reply on HN