Looks like she missed John Gruber's post on Facebook last week. :(
“Let her speak please”
411–420 of 723 posts
Re: “Let her speak please”
#412Earlier quoted context omitted.
A Youtube comment: He spends 0:40 asking her the first question. He continues talking when she tries to speak once. She talks for 0:30 He redirects her from her answer and tries to clarify what he wants to know for 0:55 She talks for 1:00 answering this question He begins clarifying/providing an example of what she is saying for 0:20, continuing to talk when she tries to speak once. It is during this interruption tha…
>He spends 0:40 asking her the first question. He continues talking when she tries to speak once. >She talks for 0:30 >He redirects her from her answer and tries to clarify what he wants to know for 0:55 >She talks for 1:00 answering this question > He begins clarifying/providing an example of what she is saying for 0:20, continuing to talk when she tries to speak once. It is during this interruption that "let her sp…
Twice it happens that he is asking a ridiculously long question, she starts to break in but he continues talking. Whom are you counting as the interruptor here? She is the one formally interrupting, but he should cede because his job is to make her talk.
If you count him as "interrupting" merely because he's doing the wrong thing in the context, then interruption-count is no longer the objective measure that it was introduced as. (More generally, it seems difficult to use interruption-count in a context like this where the two interlocutors are not intended to be in a symmetrical relationship to each other.)
Re: “Let her speak please”
#413Earlier quoted context omitted.
When you look at the full response though.. She is supportive of the woman in the audience who spoke up. Veronika Hubeny: I applaud your heroism in standing up for what you believe in! I know well the shaky feeling and subsequent exhilarated and heartwarmed contentment in the knowledge of having done the right thing, and I think that doing so has become more crucial than ever. Your behavior was inspiring and I’m glad…
I think it's worth considering that we're seeing some survivorship bias here - it's possible that she's the only woman on the panel because she thinks this way. In other words, it's possible that other women who would have seen this event as being rooted in sexism may eventually be a part of so many similar events during their career that they effectively burn out and switch to more female friendly fields. This has b…
Yes. I'm a female engineer, and fairly successful one. And I do think that I have on rose colored glasses, so to speak, when it comes to workplace sexism. Often my friends or colleagues come to the conclusion that something sexist happened far before I do. I virtually always assume little actions, slights, etc. are innocent and not rooted in sexism.
Because I think that usually, they are innocent. But that means I also probably miss out on (and don't have to stress out about) some sexism that occurs. And that helps me 1) not burn out like you mentioned, and 2) not be disliked by work by bringing it up and making a (potentially completely valid) fuss. So it probably helps me, oddly.
I can't say that how I evaluate these kinds of things is correct, or even good, but I do think it's probably helped my career more than it's hurt.
Re: “Let her speak please”
#414Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you wear sexism-colored glasses, don't be surprised if everything looks like sexism. That, I think, is what she's getting at. If you're always looking for a slight, always looking for a snide remark, you'll find it. Perception shapes reality.
"If you wear sexism-colored glasses, don't be surprised if everything looks like sexism." and if you wear glasses that block out sexism, don't be surprised if nothing looks like sexism.
[deleted]
Re: “Let her speak please”
#415Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hubeny doesn't seem like a person who would tell someone to shut up though, and sexism or not, it's basic politeness to give shy people a bit more room. Certainly after announcing that you now finally want to hear their perspective :/ I doubt that moderator can watch that part and say "yeah, that's good moderation". Just reading the FB post, I was taken aback a little, to be perfectly honest I rolled my eyes at "why…
I didn't mean for her to tell Holt to literally "shut up", but that Hubeny handled it as she want to - which I conclude based on my confidence in her ability and stature to do so and from her follow-up comment - and she was in fact "White Knighted" as what's meant by the term to have jumped in, even if Talkington was female. Maybe I was raised in a different generation, but disrupting a staged event from the audience…
I absolutely disagree. This emphasis on "not being rude, even to stop others from being rude" is how we get this casual sexism. Waiting for post-commentary media would mean that Hubeny wouldn't get the chance to speak.
Childishness in this instance is deciding that politeness trumps doing the right thing.
Re: “Let her speak please”
#416I'm sure the moderator wasn't even remotely conscious of what he was doing because this is so endemic in our society. The only way this will change is for more people to speak up like this.
Re: “Let her speak please”
#417> You may be amazed to hear it, but during this panel session I genuinely did not feel affronted or discriminated by the moderator’s behavior. It seemed more amusing to see him try posing a question in a way that at the same time tried answering it. It’s true that this made the question a bit of a moving target for me (and therefore harder to address coherently), but I don’t a-priori assume that the incident was root…
Sexism is not misogyny. It is not about intent, and certainly not about hurt feelings. It is an objective quality of a reality where women are given less power. A sexist situation either is or isn't. And as power is a social construct -- e.g. people who are treated with respect by others with a high social status, have their own status elevated and vice-versa -- the reality of sexism is determined by the effect on th…
This. A million times.
I'm the father of two college-age daughters and seeing the world through their eyes is disturbing to me. I wish the world understood this better.
Re: “Let her speak please”
#418Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you watch the rest of the video you will find the moderator imposes himself and cuts off the panellists and talks over them multiple times, seemingly regardless of gender. This makes me strongly inclined to believe that this incident had nothing to do with sexism, but rather with the annoyingly dominant and imposing personality of the moderator. Maybe you think otherwise. Why would you say this incident is a "pain…
Note that behaviours which tend to have disproportionate impact on one gender over another are still sexist, and women often have difficulty interrupting in the way that the men here did.
>Behaviours which tend to have disproportionate impact on one gender over another
This encompasses nearly every behavior we engage in- almost nothing has a 50/50 gender split.
Getting into arguments with people on Hacker News, to choose an example, has a disproportionate impact on men. Is this sexist?
Re: “Let her speak please”
#419Earlier quoted context omitted.
The way I see it: * He was geeking out. True. * There was no ill intent. True. * He wasn't sexist. False. He could geek out all he wanted, but speaking for her multiple times over her trying to get a foot in was very sexist, regardless of intent. I hold the door for guys all the time, but if you're only doing it for "feeble girls" it is telling. This was the case in this panel. She's there because she knows her shit,…
Ok, so the woman who is ostensibly the victim doesn't see it as sexism, but presumably a random man who wasn't there and didn't see the event is arguing it is. Hmm, who to believe? Why are you mansplaining sexism to a woman and denying her lived experience?
You realize you're basically saying Uncle Tom was right.
Re: “Let her speak please”
#420Earlier quoted context omitted.
> He's just a person going about his day delivering packages. He's got his own worries and concerns and things going on in his mind. Of course. He could also be vigilantly looking for 'racists'. I really don't know. I'm using the theory of mind to construct a possible world view. My data set is Twitter/HN/reddit, mainly. I would love to treat everyone like a person, but if I do I leave myself vulnerable to accusation…
HN/reddit/twitter is a horrible barometer for how people act in the real world; there is no negative consequence or conflict if you attack someone or accuse someone of something online. Nobody is developing personal friendships on reddit, or posting on HN as part and parcel of what they need to do in order to get through their day. In real life people are just trying to get through their day, and if you're decent and…
> HN/reddit/twitter is a horrible barometer for how people act in the real world
And still they act as powerful feedback loops going back into the real world. Let's hope it's a loop that is improving over time.