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

The long-term cost of sexual harassment

techcrunch.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 81 posts

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#61

Post by Mz »

dba7dba wrote: post #49
Mz wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't tell if you are trying to be helpful or trying to be critical of me. I don't see a clear label. The photo fits the description given in the article, but if the article clearly states that THIS, right here, is the photo in question, I am failing to see it. Which, you know, could just be because I have pathetic eyesight. But I honestly do not see a clear and unequivocal indicator to that effect.

Trying to be helpful. Here are the excerpts from the article. > I realized she was taking a photo. Later, when I asked her why she had done that, she said she didn’t get what was going on. Being photographed in that situation by someone I kept hoping would help me felt terrible. > I saved the photo my friend took, even though I hated knowing it was in my storage.

Yes, I saw those remarks, which is how I inferred this was the photo in question. But I still see no statement nor caption clearly saying "THIS photo RIGHT HERE is the photo we are talking about."

That may seem pedantic to you, but I have had a couple of law classes and I worked in insurance for over 5 years. Those are environments in which such distinctions matter.

I am inferring that it is the photo and you apparently agree that it is, but I still don't believe there is a clear and unequivocal statement in the article to that effect.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#62

Post by fwn »

bookmarkacc wrote: post #58
fwn wrote: post #52

It's a fair point on the long-term cost of sexual harassment combined with an uncivilized, one-sided public accusation. Do I miss something here? Which part of the argument could not have been made without ruining a reputation through TC reach? How far are those accusations confirmed? I've no stake in any of those people and I am not particularly opinionated about the current cultural matters surrounding harassment,…

Sexual harassment is not a very civil approach either. She states that she was inspired to share her experience (with photographic evidence) base on accounts of other women coming forward in a similiar manner.

My criticism was meant to be valid irrespective of the actual accusations quality. The concern would still stand for the accusation of more serious crimes like rape, murder, genocide, etc.

Being inspired to skip the trial and personally decide to put somebody in the pillory is an understandable, but deeply flawed motivation.

The author can, of course, make every accusation. The publication however should not make the crime appear to be a secured fact. Breaching the journalistic objectivity might be a current trend but is intellectually dishonest and no service to the cause.

This looks more like vigilantism than a serious conversation.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#63

Post by tptacek »

dang wrote: post #56
jdp23 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'dang, this has been the top comment on the post for the last 20 minutes. You and others at YC who want to make the enviroment on HN less hostile to women (and people with PTSD and other invisible disabilities, and to people of all varieties who have been sexually harassed) need to understand the impact things like this have. [edited to clarify that this doesn't just make it a hostile environment to women]

That comment was flagged by the time we saw it. 20 minutes is not nearly long enough for the community process to complete, and instantaneous moderation is impossible. Nor would it be a good thing if it were possible.

Something that seems plain to me: if overtly malicious troll comments can survive at the tops of threads for 20+ minutes, and troll-ridden threads get (reasonably!) flagged off the site, then trolls have a hecklers veto on HN.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#64

Post by Mz »

skocznymroczny wrote: post #54
swiley wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't know if it's the same for everyone else but growing up I was told you're supposed to chase girls and that if you don't actively pursue them you'll end up alone. I think that's where this kind of thing comes from.

Also, as a man, you are respected to break the girl's apparent resistance. If you are in early stages of relationship and want to wait for the girl to be comfortable to kiss you, you'll never get here. Asking a girl if you can kiss her will be awkward too and will probably be a no. Leaning in and kissing her will do the trick. Obviously if she says no and leans away, you stop and don't try it.

I really liked the scene in some movie where Will Smith's character is coaching some guy to lean in like 80% of the way and then let her decide whether or not to seal the deal with a kiss.

I'm pretty picky about consent. There are men who know how to delicately signal their interest and invite me to signal back whether or not I am amenable. I have the general impression that such tactics get men a lot more action than tactics that intentionally step on a woman's boundaries as a matter of course.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#65

Post by pm90 »

yitchelle wrote: post #50
codeisawesome wrote: post #31

Why is anyone acting surprised that the man is still in place at his company, when Mr. Grab-em-by-the-pussy is also Mr. Most-powerful-man-on-the-planet? Especially considering he was elected by the United States of America AFTER those comments were made public? Control your expectations about the world people. It's only a nice place as depicted in media. Many, many, terms and conditions sadly apply :-(

The "Lead by example" behaviour mode is going to get more visible in the US, I imagine. Let's hope that most of the population has a good sense of what is right and what is wrong and only do the right things.

We like to think that is the case, but just the presidential election itself has shown this not to be true. I'm tired of people apologizing for Trump voters by saying that they were choosing the lesser of two evils or whatever other crap they say. The election showed that almost half of Americans simply don't give a shit what their party does as long as its THEIR party, they will continue to vote for it. Such partisanship not only gave us President Trump, but is actively hindering efforts to reign in the descent into dictatorship. e.g. Republican congressmen and Senators seem unwilling to address some rather serious concerns with the Trump family because they know now that it doesn't matter. As long as they're not "liberal snowflakes", anything, anything goes.

The optimist in me looks at the other half of Americans who still have their good sense intact, and even those who chose not to vote. But as Robert Reich and Dan Rather have said repeatedly: these are dangerous times for our democracy.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#66

Post by pm90 »

Mz wrote: post #64
skocznymroczny wrote: post #54

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Also, as a man, you are respected to break the girl's apparent resistance. If you are in early stages of relationship and want to wait for the girl to be comfortable to kiss you, you'll never get here. Asking a girl if you can kiss her will be awkward too and will probably be a no. Leaning in and kissing her will do the trick. Obviously if she says no and leans away, you stop and don't try it.

I really liked the scene in some movie where Will Smith's character is coaching some guy to lean in like 80% of the way and then let her decide whether or not to seal the deal with a kiss. I'm pretty picky about consent. There are men who know how to delicately signal their interest and invite me to signal back whether or not I am amenable. I have the general impression that such tactics get men a lot more action tha…

This. Precisely this. I would just like to add that the lean in does work, but only when its pretty clear that you're having a great time and are very comfortable with each other. e.g. holding hands in a booth in a bar, dancing together and having fun etc.

But there are also many women, in my experience, that for whatever reason, don't or can't signal their interest or intentions. In that case I ASK them. It sounds very awkward to say it, but if done in private (i.e. you don't shout it out) I've actually noticed it creates a lot of comfort in the women. e.g. once I asked a girl I was on a date with, and she said she wasn't comfortable with PDA (we were inside a bar). I didn't push it, but after we left the bar and nobody was in sight outside, we did make out. I like to think if I had just "gone for it" in the bar, she would have been uncomfortable, I would feel rejected, and generally bad things all around...

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#67

Post by pm90 »

swiley wrote: post #34
Mz wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Typical response from a man is that I'm a great catch; she just doesn't know that she wants me. Once she's had sex with me she'll marry me. It's worse than that. For various reasons, some men are actively more interested if you reject them. It is a little bit like the principle that running from a bear will incite its chase instinct.

I don't know if it's the same for everyone else but growing up I was told you're supposed to chase girls and that if you don't actively pursue them you'll end up alone. I think that's where this kind of thing comes from.

The chasing means to pursue them romantically, not be aggressive sexually. And that whole notion is quite outdated now anyways.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#68

Post by owebmaster »

And how do you think that individuals' behavior can lower the friction of "male-female" relationship in a societal scale so a man wouldn't abuse a powerful position to approach and seduce a woman and that a woman wouldn't abuse its position of dozens of men courting her?

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#69

Post by pm90 »

owebmaster wrote: post #68

And how do you think that individuals' behavior can lower the friction of "male-female" relationship in a societal scale so a man wouldn't abuse a powerful position to approach and seduce a woman and that a woman wouldn't abuse its position of dozens of men courting her?

You can't change fucking everything. I like Mz's suggestion because (s)he isn't advocating any specific action, just that people think hard and rationally about their actions.

There will always be disparity while this change takes place, if it does. There will be both men and women who abuse the system and get away with it with no repercussions. But you can't use that as justification for acting the way they do.

Re: The long-term cost of sexual harassment

#70

Post by Mz »

owebmaster wrote: post #68

And how do you think that individuals' behavior can lower the friction of "male-female" relationship in a societal scale so a man wouldn't abuse a powerful position to approach and seduce a woman and that a woman wouldn't abuse its position of dozens of men courting her?

When other powerful men choose to publicly signal that this is just not how things should be done, it serves as a role model for others. It sets the example.

But you don't have to be a person with a lot of power to make this choice. When enough people make this choice, then the predators are far less free to do whatever the fuck they so choose because more people will call them on it earlier, before it turns to assault.

Catherine Shu (author of this piece) was in a public setting and there were other people there who knew her. One took a photo of the incident without realizing the incident was basically assault. The same person had earlier sent mixed signals to Pollock, on the one hand saying Catherine was unavailable because she was married, on the other saying she liked white men because she was married to a white man.

So Pollock's predatory behavior was enabled by other people who not only failed to be supportive of Catherine, but even to some extent cooperated with his plans to get laid, and propriety be damned. I think it is completely gross and disgusting that her friend said she likes white men, she is marred to one.

When ordinary people stop doing things like that, then predators have a lot less latitude for pursuing their ugly goals. When you reduce their latitude enough, you may find that in order to get laid at all, they need to behave something like decent human beings instead of overentitled rapey bastards.

People get away with this shit because everyone either averts their eyes and refuses to see what is happening right in front of them or actively supports some powerful man's ugly agenda because he has power and they desire to curry favor. That is a choice. You can decide that you aren't willing to curry favor at that price.

Post reply on HN