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

561–570 of 829 posts

Re: "Lighten up"

#561

Post by kabuks »

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.

Yeah stdbrouw, I think you missed the mark on this one. These things aren't even in the same ballpark.

I imagine that being marked as 'hipster' has very different consequences for you than being marked as a 'slut' would have.

Re: "Lighten up"

#562

Post by kabuks »

DanielBMarkham wrote: post #134

I applaud the author for sharing her feelings. I also note that she does not speak for all women. All we can do is share our own experiences. I've been through many of these discussions: sexism, racism, ageism, and so on. After receiving many a rhetorical punch in the nose, I have a simple rule: I don't do it, I don't approve of it being done, if I am in management I stop it. I also don't let people yank me around by…

I respectfully disagree.

It was precisely from countless discussions like this that I began to see my sexism. Through patient, non-judgmental, and intelligent discourse, I started to see how I was trained by our society to see women differently, and how my often well-intentioned choices were hurting the people I care about.

I am really really grateful for discussions like this. Messy? Yes. Useless? Hell on.

Re: "Lighten up"

#563

Post by mhartl »

wpietri wrote: post #441
mhartl wrote: post #356

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think that blog posts like this are absolutely a part of fixing the problem. I hope you're right. You're far more optimistic than I am. In particular, I've seen an awful lot of hand-wringing about this subject in the Ruby community over the past five years—most of it similar in content and tone to the OP—and it doesn't seem to be having any effect.

This is one tiny facet of a society-wide problem that goes back millennia. How much progress can you expect in a few years? In the broader scope of things, I'd say we're making great progress. But that progress has come through continuous effort, not from people saying, "Oh, honey, you should just accept that you can't vote. You'll never change it, so it's not rational to try."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whig_history

Re: "Lighten up"

#564

Post by eric-hu »

ryanwaggoner wrote: post #330
drhayes9 wrote: post #254

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? Yes, Virginia, this is sexist. Holy hell, is it sexist. You are characterizing a woman's behavior in terms of how it makes you, as a man, feel. There are many reasons that a human might dress a particular way, but by characterizing it as a gender-based, "she wore that to make me do this" kind of transaction you have incor…

Are you sure? Of course I'm not sure . But when you hear hoofbeats, think horses, not zebras. Why do all the waitresses in Hooters wear low-cut tops? Is it for comfort? Is it because they couldn't afford the other 30% of the shirt? Or is it because that's proven to be very effective at gaining male attention? I wore them for me, not for anyone else. This makes no sense. In a post-apocolyptic world where you're the on…

> This makes no sense.

From the post:

> ... Start wearing sweaters, even though my breasts feel like they're boiling in there (yup, that's one reason women like low tops, guys)? ...

Comfort is her reason for wearing low cut tops. No need to speculate further than that.

To flip this around to me, I know that at times, I've done the bare minimum in the clothing department. Sometimes this means getting into my clubbing attire when I'm low on laundry. Do I own this shirt for a certain kind of attention? Yes. Am I looking for that attention at work? No, it's just getting close to laundry day

Re: "Lighten up"

#565

Post by ComputerGuru »

mechanical_fish wrote: post #168
kevinalexbrown wrote: post #140

As the woman, I've been the only person in the group asked to put together a pot luck (presumably, this work is beneath the males). I've been the only one asked to take notes in a meeting... even if I'm the one who's presenting (because my title really should be 'secretary who we let on the servers'). This, more than the jokes and comments, is the meat of the problem. Inappropriate jokes can be much more easily addre…

It seems to me that this is where the men on the team can help: As a man, I'd volunteer to take notes. Of course, this may not be tempting, because you may be on the kind of team where you just know that, if you volunteer to do some thankless task, you'll be stuck with it forever. And that is an entirely different kind of problem. But it's a problem that should not be covered up by deploying sexism.

As a man, I've handled this by being the one to turn it into an obvious sexist thing by making a joke aloud "yeah, Sarah, boss says it's your turn to take notes again because, you know, you're the only girl at the table :P. Ha ha ha ha."

Everyone laughs, boss realizes what he's doing, Sarah is off the hook.

Re: "Lighten up"

#566

Post by natep »

knightenvy wrote: post #451
antiterra wrote: post #293

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is the core problem. Feedback is occurring, and the response isn't "Oh, I'm sorry. I'll avoid doing that in the future." It's "lighten up!" That translates roughly to: "what I was doing that bothered you is so important to me that I refuse to stop, so get over it." I think that is the core problem.

I disagree. Lighten up means "I don't understand why that is bothering you because it wouldn't bother me." It is a lack of communication issue. In that article, many of the "lighten up's" are assumed based on past experiences. For example, she did not even address the guy for fear of interrupting the meeting.

That can't be what "lighten up" means because "lighten up" is a command, and your definition is not.

Re: "Lighten up"

#567

Post by natep »

knightenvy wrote: post #469
Jabbles wrote: post #310

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hmm, I can see the difference between that and "reasonable". Thanks for the clarification. In that case the point I made is fairly moot, as it basically agrees with you in that it's a "BAD" thing to say.

Sensitivity needs to be used with common sense. If a small fire has started in the kitchen, do you wait hoping it will go out on its own because using a fire extinguisher will make a mess? Before I continue, how often have you said a line or phrase to a friend or someone you have had a long term relationship with (without defining that relationship) that could be viewed as "bad" out of context? I have seen blacks cal…

I try not to respond to the same person twice in a thread, but please, don't blame the victim, or make assumptions about situations that you have scant details of.

Re: "Lighten up"

#568

Post by ChristianMarks »

I consider the phrase "lighten up" patronizing and would avoid it altogether. I was once told to "lighten up" by an interviewer at a bank and immediately knew that I did not want to work there. It's insulting to suggest that a person ought to have feelings other than the ones they have. In my view, feelings (not behavior) are generally involuntary, largely beyond conscious control and lie outside the moral sphere.

I'm in academia, where the use-mention distinction isn't recognized where sexual innuendo is concerned. To be on the safe side, I take the attitude that even non-interacting, space-like separated particles at opposite ends of the universe could be accused of sexually harassing each other--and probably are.

Re: "Lighten up"

#569

Post by mhartl »

MartinCron wrote: post #341
paulhauggis wrote: post #133

Have you ever worked in an office with all women? I did and the sexism and comments are worse because they know they can get away with it. Our world has become too politically correct. At one of my jobs, they brought all of the developers into a room and said that "something somebody said was offensive and we needed to watch our language". We're adults, not kids at school..but it sure doesn't feel like it because peo…

It's really easy to say that the world has become too politically correct when you're not the one offended. It's easy not to be offended when you're not in an isolated or alienated group. What's not too PC for you? Blackface minstrel shows? Cross burning? Swastikas? Effigy burnings? Many developers find stereotypes of "tech nerds" offensive. If the women in your office showed up with plaid shirts, pocket protectors,…

It's hard to know WTF is going to offend people. The result is a choice between potential opprobrium and insufferable blandness. This is how it happens:

http://android.eonline.com/article.ftl?category=Latest+News&...

I pretty sure DeNiro didn't burn any crosses.

Re: "Lighten up"

#570

Post by natep »

mitchellhislop wrote: post #551
nl wrote: post #506

Earlier quoted context omitted.

is this kind of response sexist and demeaning Yes Why do women wear low-cut dresses if not to attract male attention (in the majority of cases)? Because they think it looks good or is comfortable or is fashionable or they didn't have anything clean or their sister bought it for them and they are seeing them for lunch. Have you heard of the Bechdel Test[1]? It's a simple way of seeing gender bias in a movie: It has to…

Bad example: we buy them for the thrill of driving fast. The #1 thing on my list when I was car shopping was how it felt on twisty roads and freeway entrance ramps - and I got a new Focus, not a 458. Shirts don't cause adrenaline responses like that by wearing them.

It doesn't matter if the response to an attractive outfit is different from the response to a fast car. In both cases, it is possible that one is motivated by something other than gaining the attention of the desired sex. By providing your reason, you proved GP's point.
Post reply on HN