Live data from Hacker News

I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

decomplecting.org

61–68 of 68 posts

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#61
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For most of feminism "privilege" was not a concept. There is only the concept of oppression and possibly of rights. The introduction of "privilege" came to try to explain oppression to men in ways they could more easily stomach, and is something I personally tend to avoid because I'm not shy about confronting men with the damages of masculinity. You'll notice that framing many things in terms of privilege removes the…

I don't mean to play at anything, and I'm not confused. But its off-putting to begin a conversation by accusing those who are essentially as innocent as the oppressed. And to offend or annoy those who are meant to be recruited to the cause is perhaps not the best process to a desirable outcome. Especially as the premise is, these are the people holding all the cards. I understand the point of it, and the injustice. B…

All men that are not active feminists, that are not actively doing everything they can to undermine and destroy their privilege, are not "as innocent as the oppressed." You aren't going to get a cookie for not beating your wife recently. Feminism is not that easy; being a male ally to women isn't that easy. The point of the concept of privilege was to force men to reflect on how they benefit, usually without their active intervention, from patriarchy.

>And to offend or annoy those who are meant to be recruited to the cause is perhaps not the best process to a desirable outcome. Especially as the premise is, these are the people holding all the cards.

I know it can be hard to imagine, because it was once hard for me to imagine, but men are actually entirely tangential to feminism. There are enough women that all feminism needs to do to succeed is win a baseline amount of political power and then command vast numbers of women. This has already happened to the degree to which it has and it is responsible for all social change won by feminism.

Freedom can never be given. It can only be taken. Either by oppressors who take it away, or by the liberatory struggle that takes it back.

As in any political struggle, no individual person or even group of people hold "the cards", the cards are a socialogical construct that the ideology with the most memetic power has control over.

Also, you do indeed have control over whether you access privilege. This is more apparent in some situations than others; a good example is culture fit. If you are interviewing and the interviewer makes a misogynist joke, do you laugh (exploiting your privilege, as a man, both to laugh at the joke and to be told it in the first place) or do you call the interviewer out on his misogyny? When you start, do you join in objectifying women with your co-workers, do you meekly avoid the issue, or do you confront it?

The degree to which you have privilege is the degree to which you make yourself an ally of the patriarchy. You can be a good ally, you can try not to take positive action (in which case you cannot be called a good ally, but you cannot be said to be helping feminism either, siding as you are with the status quo), or you can sabotage patriarchy at every chance you encounter.

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#62
post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If some baseline human right can be defined as a privilege, then there still needs to be terminology to distinguish it from undeserved privilege so that it can be properly addressed. Undeserved male privilege should be eradicated, but basic human rights and dignity should be extended to all. I have seen some people make this distinction and some not when using this term.

For most of feminism "privilege" was not a concept. There is only the concept of oppression and possibly of rights. The introduction of "privilege" came to try to explain oppression to men in ways they could more easily stomach, and is something I personally tend to avoid because I'm not shy about confronting men with the damages of masculinity. You'll notice that framing many things in terms of privilege removes the…

An awful lot of feminists take the concept of privilege seriously as its own concept, if you're such a great ally maybe you should consider the great wealth of academic literature on the subject written by them instead of just writing it off as a weaseley way to explain oppression.

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Substantively: why should the previous behavior of the reporter matter one bit? If someone is actively baiting people on the basis of gender, it should have equal consequences regardless of the speaker's gender. > My sympathy for the fired guy is very limited. I never said he shouldn't have been fired. I think the problem is trolls can provoke people to the point they get fired and the trolls suffer no repercussion…

She's an entrpreneur, and has a small but healthy Gittip stream. So, she can freely troll without major economic repercussions. That also presumes the trolling is as bad as the offense, I don't think it is.

When a person consistently trolls on the basis of gender and race, like Shanley does, I'm uncertain why you think that is not "as bad" except because a woman is doing it?

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#64
post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think many bristle against feminism for exactly the reasons you give: they want tolerance and respect instead of blame. The blame-language is endemic to the feminist literature - e.g. men are 'privileged' when they exercise ordinary rights that women would like to share.

>The blame-language is endemic to the feminist literature - e.g. men are 'privileged' when they exercise ordinary rights that women would like to share. I don't follow. Is the act of being able to exercise basic human rights not a privilege if others are denied those rights? Why the scare quotes?

When that offended woman calls names and other bullshit to other people, she is fighting oppression. When it is another person calling her names, she is the oppressed and more than that... she will create a pogrom against that guy.

A pogrom is not basic human rights. Calling names is just an ad hominem and swearing an appeal to emotion. Both seem to enjoy it.

- https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/ad-hominem - https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/appeal-to-emotion

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#65
post #3

This isn't the decline of agency, it's feminism and anti-racism creating agency for oppressed people. Traditionally, if a woman or ethnic minority is being harassed in their workplace, they are unable to speak out against it for fear of being fired by their bosses. In this sense, capitalist hierarchies (as the author identifies) are used to enforce gender and race hierarchies. Now that it's become unacceptable to be…

Wow, that was a nice piece of rhetoric. Mixing race problems, employer/employee power imbalances and gender issues. So you manipulate the feelings of reader while putting gender issues inside. Good appeal to emotion.

Sexism is still an issue. When decisions are justified because penis or vagina.... it smells sexism and not equality or rational thinking or science. Politically correct speech dominates the media and makes you feel that you're doing the right thing while you're at being a bigot. Power protects bigots too.

Allow me to remove capitalism and racism to focus a bit more in the agency issue.

Shanley is more privileged that the person that was fired. She runs a media outlet (Kudos! good for her), and a lot of people know her and read her. She influences people, she has power.

She used her power to defend herself about a tiny speck on the internet that called her names, and even understood that it wasn't right. I cannot find anything more abusing than being in power and inflicting pain. That is not even justice, it is hatred.

I would say that defending that hatred is chauvinism.

Anyway, you better put your achievements in your profile to "take you seriously"... but wait that would be a fallacy: https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/genetic

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#66

Honest question, how does a comment like this get you fired? I mean, beyond the person calling for your head. Since when do personal statements translate into firing offenses at your place of work? I'm from the "I May Not Agree With What You Say, But I’ll Fight For Your Right to Say It" camp and things like this honestly confuse me. To clarify, I think what he said was morally wrong.

The article omits a lot which might cause people to disagree with it. For instance, @zivcjs aggressively harassed her, retweeting attackers calling her "animal" and I believe "psychob---h". He also deleted many of his tweets. Furthermore, such harassment campaigns generally cause an increase in the violent threats they already normally receive. It contributes to an environment where women are terrorized and chased ou…

Appealing to emotions!

Because other people think like him, he is harassing her. Nice logic.

The bonus point is: because other people think I'm an asshole, they're harassing me. That totally made my day.

At least he got a job with an employer that can defend employees against pogroms. Good for him.

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#67
post #3

This isn't the decline of agency, it's feminism and anti-racism creating agency for oppressed people. Traditionally, if a woman or ethnic minority is being harassed in their workplace, they are unable to speak out against it for fear of being fired by their bosses. In this sense, capitalist hierarchies (as the author identifies) are used to enforce gender and race hierarchies. Now that it's become unacceptable to be…

Wow! Is this for real or a white dread, lesbian, earth first parady?

Re: I'm Telling: Employer-Tattling and the Decline of Agency

#68
post #3

This isn't the decline of agency, it's feminism and anti-racism creating agency for oppressed people. Traditionally, if a woman or ethnic minority is being harassed in their workplace, they are unable to speak out against it for fear of being fired by their bosses. In this sense, capitalist hierarchies (as the author identifies) are used to enforce gender and race hierarchies. Now that it's become unacceptable to be…

What a load of crap. Shanley spews rude, toxic, curse-laden streams of hatred at people in the tech industry with her every waking-hour. When someone returns the favor she has them stripped of their livelihood, tries to ensure he can't ever return to the industry, and then tweets her delight over the situation. You want to talk privilege? How about Shanley is the founder and owner of a successful media company vs. th…

Right on brother man.
Post reply on HN