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

The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal (1995)

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–75 of 75 posts

Re: The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal (1995)

#71

Post by etfb »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #70
etfb wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That women, far from having extra privilege in this area, felt extremely threatened at being made to be naked, knowing that this level of vulnerability had no upside for them. Whereas men had no particular concern, because their photos would not likely be misused. Frankly, the suggestion that women have more power in this sort of situation is so wrong-headed that I honestly can't imagine how anyone familiar with West…

What was the upside for men?

They were doing what they were told, and would therefore get whatever benefits obedience brings.

Whereas the women now had:

- a bunch of male scientists leering at them [1];

- some photos in the hands of those scientists that could be embarrassing;

- the possibility of those photos being stolen and distributed;

- a strong sense that they have no right to privacy or dignity in the highly male-dominated Ivy League world.

That last one would count as an educational bonus, at least.

[1] I'm only guessing that the scientists were male here, but I think it's a safe bet. Even nowadays, but more so then.

Re: The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal (1995)

#72

Post by yetanotherphd »

etfb wrote: post #71
yetanotherphd wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What was the upside for men?

They were doing what they were told, and would therefore get whatever benefits obedience brings. Whereas the women now had: - a bunch of male scientists leering at them [1]; - some photos in the hands of those scientists that could be embarrassing; - the possibility of those photos being stolen and distributed; - a strong sense that they have no right to privacy or dignity in the highly male-dominated Ivy League worl…

So if it was such a bad idea for the women, why did they do it?

When it is better for men to do what they are told than otherwise, you classify it as a benefit. When it is better for women to do what they are told than otherwise, you call it oppression. I'm trying to draw attention to this double standard.

To be clear: neither the men nor women gained directly from having their photographs taken.

Re: The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal (1995)

#73

Post by etfb »

yetanotherphd wrote: post #72
etfb wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were doing what they were told, and would therefore get whatever benefits obedience brings. Whereas the women now had: - a bunch of male scientists leering at them [1]; - some photos in the hands of those scientists that could be embarrassing; - the possibility of those photos being stolen and distributed; - a strong sense that they have no right to privacy or dignity in the highly male-dominated Ivy League worl…

So if it was such a bad idea for the women, why did they do it? When it is better for men to do what they are told than otherwise, you classify it as a benefit. When it is better for women to do what they are told than otherwise, you call it oppression. I'm trying to draw attention to this double standard. To be clear: neither the men nor women gained directly from having their photographs taken.

I don't honestly believe it's possible for someone to ask questions like that without a malicious purpose, so I shall refrain from engaging you henceforth. I pray that the women in your life, if you have any, can see what you are -- but I'm fairly sure it's obvious, so I'm not worried.

Re: The Great Ivy League Nude Posture Photo Scandal (1995)

#74

Post by yetanotherphd »

etfb wrote: post #73
yetanotherphd wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if it was such a bad idea for the women, why did they do it? When it is better for men to do what they are told than otherwise, you classify it as a benefit. When it is better for women to do what they are told than otherwise, you call it oppression. I'm trying to draw attention to this double standard. To be clear: neither the men nor women gained directly from having their photographs taken.

I don't honestly believe it's possible for someone to ask questions like that without a malicious purpose, so I shall refrain from engaging you henceforth. I pray that the women in your life, if you have any, can see what you are -- but I'm fairly sure it's obvious, so I'm not worried.

My purpose is to get people to question feminism and see outside a very narrow worldview in which women are always victims. In your case, I have failed. And the way you make this argument personal is really pathetic, although not surprising.
Post reply on HN