Jessamyn Smith: Fighting sexist jokes with a Python bot • Hacker News Board

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

#301

Post by droithomme » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:29 PM UTC

She handled it very well.

TWSS is funny only as a reference to its use in The Office, where it is said by a clueless sexist imbecile of a boss, always inappropriately. So its use was a sort of in joke between Office fans, and said not seriously. Using it as an actual funny joke, without intent as an Office fan in-joke (which is only funny a few times) is kind of clueless, and it is worthwhile to question it.

Using it as an invitation to create an automated system that educates people to women's contributions to the arts and sciences is pure genius. Those at her place of employment who do not respect her solution are simply clueless and are deserving only of pity.

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

#302

Post by 127 » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:38 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #249

hythloday wrote: post #16

"It has been fascinating to watch the ongoing reactions. There have been complaints that we have too many bots in the channel now. There have been complaints about it spamming the channel. There were several “Make them shut up!” responses. These are not reactions I have seen the other bots elicit, certainly not with such intensity. One person even complained about the name being too long, though to his credit he real…

> Stuff that doesn't bother you (that another poster here describes as being "tuned-out"), as a man, because your gender plays no part in your job, is experienced differently by your female colleagues This is an insightful observation. Guys often like to think that they're much better at taking sexist jokes directed their way. "I have no problem when a commercial makes fun of a guy's inability to do housework!" they…

Feminism is pretty much the opposite joke here.

edit: Both behaviour models breed in my view from insecurity of the opposite sex.

Also why this discussion is very biased: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-u9DdVoV4VU

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

#303

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:40 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #286

rayiner wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The jokes I mentioned are funny because it alludes to men being rapists and child molesters. E.g. the joke about me abusing my girlfriend wouldn't be funny if there wasn't the stereotype of men as abusers.

I'm not seeing it yet. I think "most abusers of women are men" is very different than "most men are abusers of women".

The jokes don't rely on the fact or imply that most men are abusers of women. The jokes rely on the listener associating the behavior in question with the stereotypical behavior of the group.

E.g. most Catholics do not have dozens of children, but the behavior is associated with that group enough such that a joke can rely on the listener making that association.

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

#304

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:42 PM UTC

127 wrote: post #302

rayiner wrote: post #249

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Stuff that doesn't bother you (that another poster here describes as being "tuned-out"), as a man, because your gender plays no part in your job, is experienced differently by your female colleagues This is an insightful observation. Guys often like to think that they're much better at taking sexist jokes directed their way. "I have no problem when a commercial makes fun of a guy's inability to do housework!" they…

Feminism is pretty much the opposite joke here. edit: Both behaviour models breed in my view from insecurity of the opposite sex. Also why this discussion is very biased: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-u9DdVoV4VU

?

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

#305

Post by wpietri » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:43 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #290

wpietri wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I understand your argument correctly, you're saying that a bot posting feminist quotes is as offensive to guys as a bot posting sexist jokes is to women?

In particular, what I'm saying is that "fighting fire with fire" is a far cry from "taking the high road." In another comment, oskarth posits that she "did everything right" by not going to her supervisor, so as to avoid "turning it into drama". How does this not turn it into drama? Isn't that what supervisors are for? I understand the inclination to avoid being the snitch, but all this does is set her up for equally…

Right. By calling them both "fire" you're drawing an equivalence between a bot posting sexist jokes and a bot posting feminist quotes. Or more simply, an equivalence between sexist and non-sexist behavior. See the problem?

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

#306

Post by rayiner » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:45 PM UTC

mkramlich wrote: post #284

I hereby move that all further article submissions focused on gender roles or "sexism" be banned from HN. They aren't intellectually interesting, they aren't productive, they tend to bring out the worst in terms of quality of discussion. Yes, I know some of you may disagree with me, but that does not make me evil or less enlightened than you are, so spare me the downvotes. For those of you that do agree with me, I re…

On the contrary, I've found the discussion on this thread to be extremely insightful.

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

#307

Post by bmelton » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:50 PM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #305

bmelton wrote: post #290

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In particular, what I'm saying is that "fighting fire with fire" is a far cry from "taking the high road." In another comment, oskarth posits that she "did everything right" by not going to her supervisor, so as to avoid "turning it into drama". How does this not turn it into drama? Isn't that what supervisors are for? I understand the inclination to avoid being the snitch, but all this does is set her up for equally…

Right. By calling them both "fire" you're drawing an equivalence between a bot posting sexist jokes and a bot posting feminist quotes. Or more simply, an equivalence between sexist and non-sexist behavior. See the problem?

Honestly, no.

They're both, in and of themselves, wrong. I therefore look down on both parties almost equally. I'm not saying that what she did is any more wrong than the actions that prompted it, however, it certainly isn't right, and that's why I don't consider it appropriate.

Regardless of equating it to 'fire', which I certainly didn't intend for anyone to take literally as it is an idiom, I'd think my synopsis at least appropriately defined the situation.

She knowingly tried to out-annoy her co-workers to get them to resolve the issue, and expects that to somehow smooth things over?

Perhaps it's a stupid thing to be arguing about, but you'll have to forgive me if I save my applause for someone not seeking the most annoying way toward peaceful resolution.

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

#308

Post by readymade » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:50 PM UTC

bmelton wrote: post #290

wpietri wrote: post #287

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I understand your argument correctly, you're saying that a bot posting feminist quotes is as offensive to guys as a bot posting sexist jokes is to women?

In particular, what I'm saying is that "fighting fire with fire" is a far cry from "taking the high road." In another comment, oskarth posits that she "did everything right" by not going to her supervisor, so as to avoid "turning it into drama". How does this not turn it into drama? Isn't that what supervisors are for? I understand the inclination to avoid being the snitch, but all this does is set her up for equally…

What makes you think it was intended to be, or is, annoying?

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

#309

Post by JulianMorrison » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 9:54 PM UTC

agateform wrote: post #207

JulianMorrison wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Among feminists there is. Heck, there's science: "exposure to sexist humor can lead to toleration of hostile feelings and discrimination against women" http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/11/071106083038.ht... The only people trying to argue "lighten up" are anti-feminists.

I just wanted to point out that being anti-feminist does not necessarily mean anti woman or anti womans rights. I do agree that sexist jokes are a bad thing and not only when done against woman.

I'd accept that from a womanist who feels white women's feminism has failed her, or a lesbian or trans woman fed up of being ostracised, or a poor woman annoyed at middle-class feminism's priorities.

But most groups who say "I'm not anti woman, just anti feminism" are flat out patriarchal, whether the flavour is religious or "men's rights", it's the same garbage.

And I won't accept it from a man at all.

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

#310

Post by wpietri » Wed, Mar 28, 2012, 10:00 PM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #303

wpietri wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not seeing it yet. I think "most abusers of women are men" is very different than "most men are abusers of women".

The jokes don't rely on the fact or imply that most men are abusers of women. The jokes rely on the listener associating the behavior in question with the stereotypical behavior of the group. E.g. most Catholics do not have dozens of children, but the behavior is associated with that group enough such that a joke can rely on the listener making that association.

I think stereotypes imply the characteristic to be common. In your example, I think the stereotype is that Catholics have large families (which I believe was true at one point), and the dozens is exaggeration for effect.