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

"Lighten up"

therealkatie.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

411–420 of 829 posts

Re: "Lighten up"

#411

Post by bmj »

cperciva wrote: post #381
sukuriant wrote: post #305

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're getting quite a bit of flak for this. You got a sucky boss? I rather like my co-workers, and potlucks are just one method of team-building/friendship making that can be had at work. No, work buddies should never be your only friends, but to have a pleasant time around co-workers, and to have team-building events such as those? There's nothing wrong with that; and, I would argue it helps to create a condusive a…

There's a difference between friends and forced friends. There are lots of FreeBSD developers I'd be happy to invite over for dinner if they were in town, but that doesn't mean I'd be happy if someone told me that I had to invite them over for dinner. My social life is just fine, thanks. I don't need a boss telling me who my friends should be.

My employer does this sort of thing, but it isn't mandatory. A sign-up sheet goes up in the kitchen, and there's never a lack of participation. From what I've seen, folks seem to genuinely enjoy doing this sort of thing, so more power to them. Sometimes I take part, sometimes I don't.

Now, if we were forced to participate, that'd be another matter.

Re: "Lighten up"

#412

Post by choros12 »

geeeezzz... I hate all these biased political correct people... guys why not to talk about having equal amount of male and female childcare professionals? Or coal miners? Sexes are NOT equal. Start dealing with reality. please.

Re: "Lighten up"

#413

Post by Cushman »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #383
Cushman wrote: post #371

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do all the waitresses in Hooters wear low-cut tops? Seriously, stop right there. Read what you just wrote. You're comparing a professional developer who chose to dress comfortably to women chosen for sex appeal by a restaurant which is only a step away from a strip club. There is something seriously wrong with the way you are approaching this issue. To answer your last question-- I'm a straight guy, and no, I w…

You're comparing a professional developer who chose to dress comfortably to women chosen for sex appeal by a restaurant which is only a step away from a strip club. You're arguing a straw man. I didn't say anything remotely close to that; my point was just that wearing low-cut tops and dressing for sex appeal are usually correlated. I'm a straight guy, and no, I wouldn't find it sexually arousing if a co-worker came…

> You're arguing a straw man. I didn't say anything remotely close to that; my point was just that wearing low-cut tops and dressing for sex appeal are usually correlated.

Oh, did I get that quote wrong? Let's play the tape:

> Why do all the waitresses in Hooters wear low-cut tops?

Huh. It sounds like you're saying there that, because women selected for their sex appeal by a restaurant which is only a step away from a strip club wear low-cut tops as part of their required work uniform, it is reasonable to assume that a professional developer who chooses to wear a low-cut top is doing so to attract male attention.

Which part did I get wrong?

> Can you expand on this a little?

Here is a picture of an infant eating: http://www.breastfeedingchild.com/images/lying%20down.jpg

Here is a picture of a procedure which detects cancer: http://www.sciencephoto.com/image/271974/530wm/M4150542-Mamm...

Here is a picture of some people who aren't wearing shirts: http://gothamist.com/upload/2011/08/toplessdaya0811.jpg?882

Which of these pictures (if not all) causes you sexual arousal? Am I really so bizarre in my ability to look at these images, think "That is an uncovered female breast," and have my next thought not be "I would like to have sex with that person"? Because, you know, breasts (like the women who own them) don't exist for my sexual pleasure? Because context matters?

(For the record, my next thoughts, in order: "Awww!", "Oh man, that looks like it sucks," and "Wait, do I know that guy?")

Lastly, if you make inappropriate sexual comments about women, and not men, you are being sexist full stop. You are treating people differently, in a damaging way, solely on the basis of their sex. That is the definition of sexism. The justification is not relevant; in fact a lot of sexist behavior stems ultimately from insufficiently mediated sexual desire. (If you make inappropriate comments about both men and women equally, you are excused from the charge of sexism, though not from that of being a creep.)

Re: "Lighten up"

#414

Post by OneBytePerGreen »

briancurtin wrote: post #331
OneBytePerGreen wrote: post #290

Dunno. I'm a woman, and I think that blog poster needs to lighten up. I've worked in IT for years - usually as the only woman on the team - and I've never felt degraded or discriminated against for being female. Maybe slight prejudices in the beginning when the guys think I'm not as good as them, but I enjoy proving them wrong. There is banter, and sometimes it's not 100% HR approved, but I've never felt that it was…

You think she needs to lighten up because you haven't had the same experiences and you have different ideas of comfortable clothing?

I mean "lighten up" as in, she perceives "a million little barbs" around her and sees herself as the victim of sexism lurking everywhere. She didn't just criticize one company or co-worker, but the whole industry. Her post is a torrent of rhetorical questions, exclamation points, hyperbole, and quotes she ascribes to her co-workers that likely never happened. Do you really think someone responded to her concerns with "if you are not in the middle of being raped or beaten or threatened or fired, lighten up"?

To make such sweeping statements about the industry, I presume she was not happy at her job, changed jobs, and the same thing happened again, and again, to the point where she left the industry altogether, discouraged. Which is weird, given that I changed jobs often myself and never had such experiences.

Two sentences gave me the most pause. One being, "Which label do I want to be stuck with today? Ice Queen or Slut?" It makes me think this is more about herself than the people around her.

The other weird comment was that she loves coding and "spent thousands of dollars to go to conferences so I can learn more about it." All excellent IT people I know learn stuff hands-on by playing around with technologies and studying on their own. Maybe there are other reasons why she felt stuck doing inferior tasks. If you are crucial to the team's success, nobody treats you like the "secretary who we let on the server" or a personal assistant, regardless of your gender.

I hope that the discussion of this topic doesn't make men paranoid about saying anything around women, because the fun and banter is one of the things that makes working in IT so enjoyable.

Re: "Lighten up"

#415

Post by javascriptlol »

drostie wrote: post #348
javascriptlol wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sexual assault is no joke. But so what if someone gives you "unwanted attention"? We have become a culture of whiners and rationalisers. It would be like me, as a man, going on and on about how unfair it is that I'm expected to hide fear and put the safety of females before my own. Of course, we're well along the way to destroying that tradition. People ignore the myriad of subtle advantages to this "sexist" approach…

Well, the "so what" is everything: Unwanted Attention is Unwanted because it embraces some sort of threat or menace or unreasonable expectation or social tension or unease. To say that we should stop giving women this sort of unwanted attention is not whining or rationalizing, nor is it fanatical egalitarianism. It's just demanding a culture where we men know that it's dangerous to control, frightening to objectify,…

Sorry, I can't talk to someone who says that rape is "accepted" as something that we just do. There are some idiots trying to justify it for sure. Not once did I try to justify rape. You talk nonsense about "power culture" that I never even brought up. I believe in small, resilient entities. This is the opposite of a "power culture". Centuries ago it would have been inconceivable that we would eliminate smallpox. The fact that we might eliminate the flu and other small-harm diseases in the future is not a reason to laud the idea as a good one.

Re: "Lighten up"

#416

Post by stewartbutler »

georgieporgie wrote: post #386
tomp wrote: post #365

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why not? If a man (fellow coworker) has nice biceps, I say it (I'm not gay, not trying to seduce him, but being fit is very high on my values list). If a woman (fellow coworker) is cute, I say it (I'm not trying to seduce her, I just think it's nice to give compliments). Asking her to take notes (as in, not asking anyone else), though, is a completely different story. However, I believe that some women handle it in a…

If a man (fellow coworker) has nice biceps, I say it As a man who values fitness, I would be really freaked out if you, as a coworker, complimented my biceps. If you merely asked about fitness, it would be fine. Commenting on my appearance (beyond, "hey, you have a piece of toilet paper stuck to your face") isn't what I consider appropriate to the workplace.

As a person with (perhaps incorrect) assumptions about the normal locations for toilet paper to end up, I have to ask: has someone ever had to tell you you had toilet paper stuck to your face? If so...

Why?

Re: "Lighten up"

#417

Post by javascriptlol »

wpietri wrote: post #323
javascriptlol wrote: post #301

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your response is sad, because you accuse me of things I never said. I never said "bullying" was justified. Infectious disease is a fact of life. We can wash our hands and prevent the worst plagues, but there is every reason to think that total elimination of disease would be ecologically unsound for humans. People need an immune system. Do you think that I am now "justifying" HIV? It's not "sexism" to be a prejudiced…

You justified bullying when you talked about how childhood aggression is useful because it toughens the victim up for later life (that is, putting up with other aggression). Sexism is not some uncontrollable virus. Sexism is something that people do to other people. And, happily something that some people don't do to other people. We have a choice, and pretending otherwise is absurd.

Give me one example of a society where youthful aggression has been eliminated.

Re: "Lighten up"

#418

Post by erichocean »

Jabbles wrote: post #172
klausa wrote: post #87

You see, I have problem with posts like this. First I'm like - "Woah, I can't imagine someone would be so insensitive to make joke like this!" and get all fed up and upset. But then... then I freeze, because next example is something that I can imagine myself saying. "Oop, Katie's got the low cut dress on today! I know where I'm sitting!" I... I'm at loss of words. I was trained during my teenage years, that it's coo…

To give an opposing opinion, I'm appalled that anyone said that to her, and am appalled at you for thinking it's a reasonable thing to say. Why would you make sexual comments at work? Making jokes is fine, commenting on clothes is fine, telling a joke involving sex is probably fine (depending on the joke...). Having a conversation (two-way) about sex is fine. Making a specific comment about a colleague's sex appeal i…

I don't disagree with anything you have to say, but a thought did enter my mind:

At what point did we become okay with excluding sexuality from human lives, or a large portion of them -- the time we spend working? Sexuality is every bit as much a "human" endeavor as, say, eating -- and we don't (currently) say: never eat at work, work is for work only (despite the fact that food does separate people from each other, and accentuates differences).

Anyway, a random rambling, but I thought I'd share anyway...

Re: "Lighten up"

#419

Post by daenz »

hythloday wrote: post #392
daenz wrote: post #309

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A man's opinion of this situation is equally valid, since a man is equally influencing the situation. If this was a problem that occurred in a vacuum, away from men, then a man's opinion would have less weight. Are you disagreeing?

A man's opinion of what a sexist put-down looks like is about as relevant as what a civilian's opinion of what a battlefield looks like.

You can't have it both ways.

You're favoring the opinion of one sex over another because of their experiences. In this example, you're favoring woman's opinion over man's opinion because she naturally has more experience with sexual harassment. That's like saying a man's opinion in the business world is more valuable than a woman's because he naturally has more experience with leadership and conflict. If I said the latter, I would be torn to shreds. But it's the same thing you're trying to pull right now.

Re: "Lighten up"

#420

Post by DieBuche »

[deleted] wrote: post #316
spindritf wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> men don't have a clue as to how group dynamics work Do you think that those thousands upon thousands of (male) political leaders who climbed to the very tops of their social hierarchies -- from Crassus to Clinton, over thousands of years -- got there by pure luck without understanding how group dynamics work? How to make and break alliances? How to inform on their competitors? Open competitiveness and overt dominan…

[deleted]

I think there was another guy, first name Bill I think.
Post reply on HN