Live data from Hacker News

Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

butyoureagirl.com

51–60 of 124 posts

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#51
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However that was not the guy she twit shamed as far as I can gather from her not very organized writeup.

I wrote that jokes were fired because she was in the earshot. You commented that I postulate unfounded facts, while they are very well founded if you'd go through as much as first half of her write-up.

That any forking joke was motivated by the fact Richards would hear is not established by your excerpt. (Richards merely says that jokes were made.) Additionally, Richards' interpretation of the fork comment is somewhat disputed by one of the conversation participants: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5398681

It's certainly possible a fork comment was intentionally creepy, a first statement made to a new, female conversation participant, and with an inappropriate tone. But it's also possible two friends were continuing an "I'd fork that repository" riff from earlier, with negligible sexual intent, and the tone was misunderstood by Richards.

It's your definitive conclusion of ill-intent, from incomplete evidence, that people may object to.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#52
post #50

I'm sorry, but I read this as a total overreaction on her behalf. And, there's a massive dose of hypocrisy here, especially given the following tweets that she sent, whilst at PyCon: @skwashd you should put something in your pants next time... like a bunch of socks inside one...large...sock. TSA agent faint [1] How is this not a massive double standard? Is this not dripping with innuendo? Would it have been acceptabl…

Nope, it isn't an overreaction. It isn't hypocrisy either. You appear to have confused the difference between active and passive involvement in a conversation. The tweets were an active response. The problem was directing a "suggestive" / "lewd" conversation at a 3rd Party with no active relationship. As a representative of a company (their name is on your badge), unless you have a personal and independent connection…

>> The problem was directing a "suggestive" / "lewd" conversation at a 3rd Party with no active relationship.

There is nothing in the source material that suggests that the conversation was directed at a 3rd party. Person A was having a conversation with Person B, and made a comment that Person C overheard and got offended at.

The twitter conversation analogy fits perfectly.

How is a joke about socks in pants less sexual in nature than a joke about a big dongle?

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#53

I'm sorry, but I read this as a total overreaction on her behalf. And, there's a massive dose of hypocrisy here, especially given the following tweets that she sent, whilst at PyCon: @skwashd you should put something in your pants next time... like a bunch of socks inside one...large...sock. TSA agent faint [1] How is this not a massive double standard? Is this not dripping with innuendo? Would it have been acceptabl…

The reason you can't get offended by any of these is that they're in no way offensive. Did you read the conversation around that first tweet? It in no way degrades anyone, with the possible exception of TSA agents. The one "about autism" is a comparison in which someone is compare to someone autistic because they're good at something. It seems to me that you've basically gone looking for stuff to beat her up with and…

>> The reason you can't get offended by any of these is that they're in no way offensive.

That's entirely subjective, which is the point of this whole thing.

To me, the comments made in the original conversation were in no way offensive either. Yet, one guy lost his job as a result.

>> It in no way degrades anyone, with the possible exception of TSA agents.

A comment about a big dongle in no-way degrades anyone either. But, Adria took offense at it, yet deemed her own comments acceptable.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#54
post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However that was not the guy she twit shamed as far as I can gather from her not very organized writeup.

I wrote that jokes were fired because she was in the earshot. You commented that I postulate unfounded facts, while they are very well founded if you'd go through as much as first half of her write-up.

Nope, you did postulate an unfounded fact. It isn't clear why the guy made sexual jokes. The author joined in a conversation she wasn't invited in on, and then one of the guys in that conversation made some jokes she didn't like. It's actually not clear whether the tone of the conversation between the two men changed when she joined it. For all we know that guy makes sexual jokes to his buddy all the time, there really are people who are like that. The author simply doesn't say anything about what the offending man was saying prior to her joining the conversation.

So yeah, you were extrapolating. But it does make sense to assume that the guy made sexual jokes because she joined in the conversation, and directed the jokes at her. In the story she tells about the developer making the joke about shaved pubic hair, she seems very reasonable.

It's a shame, the author probably should have been clearer that the jokes were made directed at her. Everyone has their own biases, and the problem with stories like this is that when women read them they think about the worst behaviour of men they've had to put up with, and assume that's what happened and when most men read them, they think about their own typical behaviour and assume it must be a misunderstanding.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#55
To me they are puerile teenage boy jokes...

But they are not jokes that are actually problematic and intimidating.

More worrying overreacting on jokes that are not a real problem makes it that much harder to object to genuinely offensive and damaging humour.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#56

Wait so now it is 100% un-okay to make any kind of sexual joke ever if women are remotely in the proximity? I make sexual jokes with female friends all the time, and they don't care if some of them are duds, because they are reasonable people. Surely the idea of feminism is to be treated like equal human beings, and human beings should have some sense of humour. I mean, of course tits in a slideshow is horrible becau…

It almost feels like we are being denied access to sex-themed humour...

Newsflash... we might not find forking or dongle jokes funny... does not mean that we do not enjoy jokes... it means we enjoy things that are actually funny....

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#57
post #47

Given that it would be trivial to turn around and ask them not to offend, I fail to see the benefit in publicly going after these guys after the fact. Mob justice doesn't allow the other party the ability to alter their behaviour (we don't know if asking would have worked) nor does it allow the other party to tell their side of the story. In addition, it has a habit of causing both sides to dig their heels in and oft…

Don't make sexual jokes in professional environment period. It is wrong and it is an act of hostility.

Prior to addressing your comment I'd like to make it clear that any jokes or insults with the intention to harm are not acceptable.

To address your comment - these things are not often as clear cut as you'd make out. The real world just isn't like that. Where this particular situation gets murky is that one of the men in question has replied to the charge against him, giving his side of the story:

  I had decided forking someone's repo is a new form of flattery
  (the highest form being implementation) and we were excited
  about one of the presenters projects; a friend said "I would
  fork that guys repo" The sexual context was applied by Adria,
  and not us.
Whether you agree with his comments or not, he should have the opportunity to present his side of the story before being 'sentenced'. In this case that hasn't happened and so he's out of a job for what may have been an innocent comment taken in the wrong way by OP.

It's for these reasons that vigilantism is never a solution to these issues. It's possible that in this case a deeper divide will created between those who see the comment as trivial and those who do not. The outcome will be that the former group pays less attention to more serious issues because of what they see as "crying wolf" by some parties and the latter group becomes more emphatic on trivial issues which "never get resolved". This helps neither group and does nothing to reduce these problems in the future, a net negative for all involved.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#58
post #31

This whole thing was a massive failure on all sides. It was a social failure by the guys who kept on making annoying and unfunny jokes (I think it actually starts with this obnoxious "thank me! thank me!" stuff). It was a total benevolence failure on part of the author who seems exceedingly gleeful about her well-calculated coup. It's a failure of society in general to think that "sexualized" environments somehow att…

I'm not sure we can be all that certain about the author's failings (apart from some failures as a writer). Certainly in her other story about inappropriate behaviour, she acts very reasonably. However, we can't really tell from how she writes the story whether the guy she complained about was just joking around with his friend, or directing sexual comments towards her in a harassing manner.

The problem with sexual harassment isn't that it attacks expectations of chastity, and to be honest, that's quite a condescending attitude to take. Sexual harassment is unpleasant because it makes people feel uncomfortable and frightened. If you think jokes can't be frightening then that is a failure on your part.

Sexual harassment isn't uncomfortable and scary because unwanted sexual attention offends one's virtue. Overt sexual advances are unprofessional, they put people in awkward social positions, and embarrass them in front of their peers. Unwanted sexual attention in a professional environment can be very disrespectful - it's an unwelcome diversion away from the desired professional interactions, and sends a clear message that you're not being taken seriously at all. It's potentially career damaging stuff, so it makes sense that it makes people uncomfortable.

Sexual harassment becomes deeply uncomfortable when it persists. When someone receives a sexual comment and responds coldly or uncomfortably, with obvious embarrassment or disinterest, they expect the sexual content to stop. If the sexual comments persist, that is creepy. It's not necessarily that the comments themselves are deeply offensive, it's the fact that someone is persisting in an action that is intrusive and unpleasant to you. In a professional environment, it is expected that everyone behave politely and with consideration. If someone presses the point and tries to engage with you in a sexual manner beyond the bounds of normal politeness, then you begin to think they are motivated by some strong feelings, and that is scary. Worse still, once you become scared, if they persist further, that means they don't even care about frightening you.

It is genuinely quite scary when someone has some strong feelings towards you that drive them to ignore social convention and your discomfort and fear. Worse still, complaints about sexual harassment often get dismissed as simple misunderstandings and not taken seriously. The fact is, misunderstandings are scary if someone is misunderstanding your fear and discomfort as an invitation to bed.

Re: Forking and Dongle Jokes Don't Belong At Tech Conferences

#60
post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope, it isn't an overreaction. It isn't hypocrisy either. You appear to have confused the difference between active and passive involvement in a conversation. The tweets were an active response. The problem was directing a "suggestive" / "lewd" conversation at a 3rd Party with no active relationship. As a representative of a company (their name is on your badge), unless you have a personal and independent connection…

>> The problem was directing a "suggestive" / "lewd" conversation at a 3rd Party with no active relationship. There is nothing in the source material that suggests that the conversation was directed at a 3rd party. Person A was having a conversation with Person B, and made a comment that Person C overheard and got offended at. The twitter conversation analogy fits perfectly. How is a joke about socks in pants less se…

Since you didn't say who A, B and C were I have to assume,

A - person to the left B - person to the right C - Adria

Yes, you have missed the distinction and the twitter "analogy" is false.

Adria[C] (I've no idea who any of these people are) turned and spoke to the person to the far left [A] behind her - and it "involved forking the repo to continue development".

Then, the "guy next to him" [B] .... um, the 3rd Person [B], began making forking jokes.

So how does [B] have an active relationship to [C]? (Speculation: [B] thinks there is a relationship because they are sitting next to [A]?)

Now we have to introduce [D] -- the traveller inbound to the USA. The "socks in pants" sexual innuendo is between party [D] and [C]. Party [D] tweets about the TSA, party [C] responds.

Where is [B] or other letter if twitter is supposed to be analogous? Being an observer or a passive listener doesn't count!

Post reply on HN