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

481–490 of 829 posts

Re: "Lighten up"

#481

Post by zasz »

daenz wrote: post #297
InclinedPlane wrote: post #266

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Why wasn't he able to save all the jews?" Because all of the other Germans who didn't agree with what was happening just accepted it and went along. Are we done here?

> Because all of the other Germans who didn't agree with what was happening just accepted it and went along. That's not why Schindler didn't save all the jews. The point was risk analysis. > Are we done here? Unless you want to inject yourself between my reply to another poster again, yes. Feel free to see yourself out.

Schindler saved a bunch of Jews. More than zero, which is what would have happened if all he said was "hang in there." It's not like your choice is between learning how to cope and trying to assassinate Hitler. There are many options in the middle, with varying levels of commitment required. Calling out bad behavior when you see it is one of them.

Re: "Lighten up"

#482

Post by knightenvy »

scott_s wrote: post #373
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…

Physical appraisals of another person's attractiveness do not belong in the work place. It puts people in awkward positions, and introduces power asymmetries. And yes, I do not want people at work to say such things about me, regardless of gender.

Well, I differ there. If someone gives me a compliment, I appreciate it. Usually it is about a hair cut, or a choice piece of clothing. I never took it as a sexual advance. However your post bring up an important subject.

There are differing opinions here. Why is one opinion more justified than the other in the work place? For example: Why should I not be able to give a genuine complement about let say a woman's shoes? The work place is so filled with terror to the point where some companies policies are that a member of the same sex must be present to do simple coaching tasks. Is this not absolutely ridiculous?

Re: "Lighten up"

#483

Post by knightenvy »

ErrantX wrote: post #351
Jabbles wrote: post #172

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

> Making a specific comment about a colleague's sex appeal is inappropriate. I don't see how you can't see that someone might be offended by it. Absolutely. One of the first jobs I worked was doing admin & tech support in a small office - full of women. Worst 6 months of my life, and my experience was much the same as this bloggers. Which has really helped me avoid this sort of problematic behaviour now I am working…

Did you at any time ask them to not make those comments?

Re: "Lighten up"

#484

Post by burgerbrain »

beedogs wrote: post #376
yelsgib wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, wouldn't it be great if everyone was just totally psychologically normal? I bet everyone can just fix everything that's wrong with themselves. Everyone has a surplus of love in their life available to help them overcome their problems. Men are not puppies, asshole.

So you're saying that anyone who makes misogynist remarks at work has some sort of "mental issue", and that because of this we should just let it slide, or at least be sympathetic? Give me a fucking break. Calling out negative behavior tends to be very effective.

If you want to treat the symptoms, then by all means villianize the perpetrators.

If however you are interested in treating the cause, then I suggest you listen to what yelsgib has to say.

Re: "Lighten up"

#485

Post by jQueryIsAwesome »

astine wrote: post #255
mtrimpe wrote: post #138

Being an ex-queer (bi ;) I've had to put up with my fair share of subtle jabs and general discomfort with my presence. After a long time I figured out that the only thing that worked for me was to be more dominant than 'them.' The thing is, women (and queers) are fucking powerful, they're just powerful in a different way. Ironically, but not unsurprisingly, women are taught not to use this power as it's 'inappropriat…

"In the workplace, open competitiveness and overt displays of hierarchical dominance (boy's game) are perfectly acceptable, but figuring out the motives of your enemy's friends, observing when he breaks them and subtly informing those friends about that in order to weaken his support base (girl's game) is considered 'nasty.'" It is nasty. It's called passive-aggressiveness and it undermines honest communication in th…

> The fact that you think this form of behavior is more natural to women than men is actually quite sexist.

All gender generalizations are sexist? That doesn't make sense; there are generalizations that are true even if that population doesn't like those generalizations (ie: women are physically less capable than men) and in some situations it may be important to have them in mind.

What could be sexist is to speak out those generalizations in an environment where it could blur the qualities that are actually needed for the context (in this case her performance as a programmer) but not in places such as an open forum like this comment section.

Re: "Lighten up"

#486

Post by msbarnett »

chunkybacon wrote: post #479
throwawaymar2 wrote: post #428

Earlier quoted context omitted.

sexism, as that's reserved for unwanted attention between the sexes That's harassment. Sexism is believing or acting as though one sex is intrinsically better than the other, as racism is the same with race. Sexism is not directly related to sexuality in the "having sex" sense, any more than racism has to do with sprinting.

That's not what sexism or racism is. Racism is not statements like "black people dance better," it is only when a negative statement is made about a race in a perceived inferior statement (e.g. vis-a-vis white people).

Racism and sexism are, respectively, stereotyping someone based on their perceived race or sex. Yes, even positive stereotyping ("pracism") like "black people dance better", "asians are great at math", or "girls are better note-takes".

The negative effects of this form of racism & sexism are fairly well documented.

Re: "Lighten up"

#487

Post by adrianparsons »

stdbrouw wrote: post #338
adrianparsons wrote: post #283

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A female friend who worked in an office setting described it this way to me: "I can't wear anything too revealing, because I'm perceived as easy or slutty. I can't wear anything too modest, because it makes me seem prudish or not fun. I have to find that perfect middle ground -- between professional and cute. Every single day."

There's a kernel of truth to this, but it's also somewhat disingenuous. At work, as a male, I can't wear anything too casual because it's unprofessional or might mark me as a hipster, but I also can't suit up every day unless I want to be seen as a corporate drone. I have to find that perfect middle ground -- between professional and hip. Every single day.

Woah, not the same at all. If you wear a low cut top in a room full of guys and are seen by some as a sexual object, it's taken on a new dimension. I appreciate the subtleties of male dress (I deal with the same issues you raised), but the pressure isn't the same.

Re: "Lighten up"

#488

Post by knightenvy »

tomp wrote: post #394
Swizec wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Public perception (as judged by art, which usually represents a slightly caricatured version of reality) seems to imply that your attractiveness and the appropriateness of your comments are inversely correlated. That is to say, if you tell a woman she looks good, it will be a compliment if she likes you, a sexist remark if she doesn't.

There's much more to this... A totally attractive guy (model-like) that emanates low self-confidence (shyness, bad posture, ...) could still have his comments perceived in a negative way (i.e. as being sexist, not compliments). So, I believe that we tend to judge this from the perspective of the perceived intent of the person making the comments. A self confident gut -> he's probably just being sincere -> cure. A not…

I have always believed that confidence has a huge effect on what a person looks like. The most beautiful person can look like a mess if they do not believe in themselves.

Re: "Lighten up"

#489

Post by jimmyjazz14 »

I am very glad this subject is being discussed here. The subtle sexism in the tech industry has always been disturbing to me as a man and I can only imagine how women must feel about it. Sexism in our industry is not only offensive it is counterproductive. It saddens me to think of the great female innovators that may be turned off from entering the industry because it is seen as unwelcoming to them.

Re: "Lighten up"

#490

Post by mtrimpe »

philwelch wrote: post #319
mtrimpe wrote: post #138

Being an ex-queer (bi ;) I've had to put up with my fair share of subtle jabs and general discomfort with my presence. After a long time I figured out that the only thing that worked for me was to be more dominant than 'them.' The thing is, women (and queers) are fucking powerful, they're just powerful in a different way. Ironically, but not unsurprisingly, women are taught not to use this power as it's 'inappropriat…

To whatever extent the "girl's game" is such, it's largely because for centuries, female social hierarchies consisted of social groups of gossiping housewives and male social hierarchies consisted of business and politics--though the two certainly intersected when the wives of businessmen and politicians talked. (One notable intersection happened during the Andrew Jackson administration and ultimately led to the end…

Thanks for your very well thought out reply. To a certain degree what you are saying is very much true.

What you are forgetting however is that if you go further back in time men were hunters and women were gatherers. Women stayed around the camp and were free to chat and men went off to hunt and had to be silent.

I'm trying to make the point that part of this is probably genetically/hormonally engrained into the female psyche (it's probably what you have tweak to 'fix' people like me) and that part of what is holding women back in the workplace, especially in tech as compared to e.g. fashion, is that they are asked to leave this part of them behind.

'If women are going to be peers and equals to men in a professional workplace, they should act like it.'

Equals in what way?

Post reply on HN