Live data from Hacker News

“Let her speak please”

facebook.com

431–440 of 723 posts

Re: “Let her speak please”

#431
post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, a level-headed comment is what is required in this situation. This is her livelihood, her career.. Pretty much everything for her. If she was to attack her colleagues, it would spell certain doom for her career. Her opinions and proofs would be dismissed and denigrated. And the specter of "Will I be accused of sexism if I pan this paper?" will rear its ugly head anywhere she would turn. Think of this as an an…

Aren't you doing the same thing the moderator did? You're dismissing her comments out-of-hand as not entirely honest and assuming you know her true feelings. Maybe now that she's been given the opportunity to speak, we should listen to and consider her thoughts.

[deleted]

Re: “Let her speak please”

#432
post #86

> 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…

So the top comment here on HN is the one that minimizes the possibility of the incident being rooted in sexism. What a shock.

There's a strange mindset at work here. Everyone perfectly well knows sexism is a real thing that happens in billions of incidents all over the world every single day. Yet somehow the possibility that somewhere, sometime, an accusation of sexism might have been misjudged to some degree, gets some people revved up.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

No - I'm saying I trust first hand accounts from supposed victims more than I trust third hand accounts from random people on the internet mansplaining what happened.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#434

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. People have different levels of introversion and extroversion. Moderators sometimes over talk introverts when they feel they have to keep things moving. It may not have anything to do with sexism but because the the sexes of the participants it's turned into a conversation that may have no base in the reality of the situation. It is arrogance to assume that we know the mind of another well enough to call thi…

We don't need to know one's mind to call their behavior sexist. If, in a particular setting, they do something objectionable to the women and not the men, that is sexist behavior .

Not necessarily. Sure, all else being equal, then yes, I would agree. But I think the point being made here was that there was something different with the woman - specifically, that she is more introverted than the other panel members and the moderator was reacting differently toward her because of that personality trait, not just because she is female.

To gauge for myself, I clicked the video linked above in the comments that went straight to the segment under scrutiny. My immediate response (without reading the comments here or anywhere else) was not that the moderator was sexist, but rather that he seemed extremely energetic and really into the topic that happened to be her area of expertise and got carried away with himself and started rambling about string theory. From the video I actually get the impression he has a great deal of respect for her and is genuinely extremely interested in the topic and just ran off course.

Revisiting it after the comments here, I think that's still very true, but I think what was mentioned by another about this being his extroversion filling the gap her introversion left is probably even more accurate. Watching some more of the video, she seems more introverted and slightly less comfortable speaking than the other panel members. I also think that in the general case the other panel members made their responses a bit more concise. I think all of this was a factor in how he responded to her.

Maybe that makes him a poor moderator. But I don't think he's necessarily sexist.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#435
post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

Her words: > I had early on decided that I like physics so much that I’d be quite willing to give up quite a bit of other comforts for it, but perhaps having made that decision and bracing oneself, then made the actual “discomforts” not only more bearable, but genuinely less discomforting. I think the subjective severity of a lot of these issues can be greatly influenced by one’s mindset, one’s psychology. If you all…

I like how you quote her response where she is talking about sexism in general(which certainly exists), when I and OP were talking about the specific event, and whether it was sexism.

Why didn't you quote this part instead?

> Maybe I’m too naive, but I simply gave him the benefit of doubt that he was so excited by the newly-learned idea of the duality that he couldn’t resist, and that the same might have occurred had the panelist been a male instead of me. So it didn’t bother me.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#436

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't agree more with this assessment of Rose. I don't understand how he got or keeps his job. I wish they'd give that position to Alec Baldwin. His work on "Here's the Thing" has proven him to be an adept interlocutor. While he also has a tendency to talk over his guests it's usually to help enlighten or at least to say something funny.

I feel like he was a good interviewer when he was younger. I'm just into my 40s now and I can see how you could get worse with age as you start to assume you already know the answers. It's why I've stopped listening to the "In Our Time" podcast in the past few years: all of a sudden Melvyn Bragg talks to the panel like he's double-parked.

he was tolerable even five years ago!

Re: “Let her speak please”

#437
I don't know if Holt behaved the way he did out of sexism, enthusiasm for the subject, generally liking the sound of his voice or what. Regardless, I think the narrative of this exchange between him, Hubeny, and Talkington can function as a nice morality play that most of us can learn from.

But I think it only works if we don't jump demonize or defend Holt and try to simply use him to score points for our side. Instead, if I empathize for all of the characters, there's something to be gained from each.

When I imagine myself in Holt's shoes (which, to be honest, is unfortunately a little too easy for me to do), it's a reminder to be more of a listener and less focused on filling silence or letting my own inner monologue take over. I'm overly sensitive to pauses in conversation and tend to rush to fill them. But some people are naturally quieter, more pensive, or have a different preferred cadence. It's important to cater to them. This is true regardless of their gender, but is particularly true for women where society has trained them to be the conceding person when two people — deliberately or accidentally — start talking at the same time.

Hubeny handled the whole thing with remarkable grace, both during and after. She didn't get irate on stage and tried to respond to Holt and go with the flow to keep things moving, even when she had every right to be frustrated. She certainly would have been justified in pushing back on him, but she demonstrated another important social skill, which is giving people some benefit of the doubt. Good engineers never forget about tolerances and safety factors and our social interactions need those too. We're humans. We make mistakes. When others around us handle those tactfully, it helps the whole machine run smoother.

It is, of course, totally unfair when women find themselves having to do a disproportionate amount of this social lubrication. But that's why it's useful for me (a man) to empathize with her in this interaction. It helps remind me to pick up that role more than I probably do now.

And, then, of course, Talkington's description is a perfect encapsulation of how frightening, but also important and rewarding it is to stand up for what you believe in. The applause she received afterwards shows that while most in the audience didn't have the courage she had, at least most of them did have their hearts in the right place. That's a sign of progress to me.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#438
post #425

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't get what you are trying to say. I clearly put "talking over people" into the category of informal social rules, not law.

Yes you did, but then you said that the solution is to reform society so that informal social rules are never broken. And I'm saying that unless you want to make those rules into laws, or something like laws, it's not doable.

I still don't get it. Who said that informal social rules shall never never broken? Who talked about reforming society?

I was just talking about making cultural progress. All I said is that informal rules are established (almost by definition) by reacting to those who break them. Doing so reduces the chances that these are broken again, which is just another way of saying that these informal rules are established. And if a good climate within a group is important to you (in a leading position it usually is), then you need to be part of establishing those. Otherwise you risk that your group becomes a hostile place.

The strategy I described does work, and is generally recommended, so I'm not sure what you are arguing against.

I've seen it working in various groups. If shitty behaviour is criticized as such, people become more aware and more careful. As long as the criticism itself is in an appropriate place and reflects the group's values, this is a very healthy thing to do. If the criticized person refuses to adjust their behaviour, they usually leave the group on their own, which is also healthy. In the worst case there's to way but to throw them out, but that is surprisingly seldom. Either way, these people either have to find a group that is okay with their behaviour (good luck!), or they need to change their behaviour in order to engage in groups.

Re: “Let her speak please”

#439
post #405
post #157

Earlier 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…

> If you allow yourself to enjoy the beautiful things that really matter, if you don’t let social or peer pressure dissuade you from pursuing a field which appeals to you, then no pettiness or childishness or boorishness that you encounter can harm you so much. I like this and also like how it's phrased. Yes, sexism, racism and other forms of bigotry are real; the way they'll truly be beat is if more and more ostraci…

> If you allow yourself to enjoy the beautiful things that really matter, if you don’t let social or peer pressure dissuade you from pursuing a field which appeals to you

I'm amazed at some of the comments here who seem to say "If you just ignore it, it will get better." I highlighted the ifs above because NOT everyone has the strength to overcome what they perceive as discrimination. Sure we can debate as much as we like whether the different treatment was due to discrimination or not, but let's stick to the real fact here: the treatment is perceived to be different.

When this happens sometimes, we can shrug it off - it's not exactly productive nor courteous to express outrage all the time. And absolutely, it may just be in our imagination, or someone is having a bad day! But when that different treatment happens often enough, no matter how subtle it seems, it can cause pain and affect the person's behaviour and performance.

Not everyone is delusional. Not everyone wants to get the limelight. So if someone is claiming that he/she is being discriminated, listen.

Post reply on HN