3 ms·

What It’s Like to Be Invisible

11 points by kareemm 11y ago

xyzzy4 11y ago
Talking to random women is difficult if you're a guy. There's a very blurred line between being friendly and flirting. Flirting is often awkward, and people don't want to create awkward situations. I suppose some guys can do it well and enjoy it, but I don't.
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  That's another good point. Many IT people have poor social skills. Women often feel or act uncomfortable around them when they're acting a bit more "confident." Then, someone expects them to take the lead rather aggressively in an extra-uncomfortable situation. See the double standard about comfort zones and harm in the making? I feel for the "nerd" in that position. A normal, but geeky, person can pull it off easy enough. The other type might be very uncomfortable depending on who they're showing up.
nickpsecurity 11y ago
An attractive CEO and founder of a company that loves adventure... resents being "objectified..." err, desired by men. I agree: everyone desires such women and that's so unfair to the other 98-99%. Better to just admire her professionally, have casual conversation, and then give more personal attention to less attractive, shy women in menial positions who appreciate it. I guess. These very leftist philosophies always confuse me as women in my area aren't bothered by the fact that males are attracted to them: just more serious stuff like harassment or the rest of this article. That's where the problem is: people thinking an attractive woman is only a good night in the making or someone's +1. Introducing the woman and her skills does seem like a good remedy that takes very little effort on our part. Get the side benefit of making someone's life better. It's tricky, though, as some guys will interpret this as someone trying to impress or steal their woman. Heck, I'd do it anyway because to hell with men that don't appreciate the women that make sacrifices for them. ;)
- drdeca 11y ago
  Isn't the idea of "objectified" like, "being viewed as (like) an object"? My understanding is that the idea differs from simply "being viewed as attractive", (perhaps more like "being viewed as being an attractive one", with the difference being that the attractiveness is a larger part of the idea of them? I don't really know what I'm talking about. These are just guesses about what is often meant by "objectified". Something like, being viewed as a means towards an end? idk. I might be confusing multiple ideas.)
  - nickpsecurity 11y ago
    It's a term a subset of women use and many use it differently. So, I can't be sure. Common threads include someone wanting to have sex with them, possess them as a wife/trophy, control what they due like property, and so on. I think she's thinking sex or dating. Anyway, one usually logically follows from the other: attractiveness or desirability increases odds of desire and an advance to be made. Most men are hardwired to want to try. Womens reaction seems to depend on upbringing and ideology. It might be acceptance, totally ignoring it, an eye roll that's neutral, mild irritation, or irritation/anger/hate worth blog posts. Down here the latter is rare. The women let people know what they tolerate then anyone pushing those boundaries too hard is clearly an asshole. Many will gripe about how men are on occasion but their gripes usually apply to their flings, boyfriends, and husbands. ;) Truth is, this position of anything resulting from attraction counts as an unwanted "advance" will be rejected by most men. That's because it means we either can never pursue great, smart women in our field. Or that a double standard exists where only they can initiate the process. Many of them were fine with such double standards that put their gender in control. I'm not. Nor would I want to date the types of women hitting clubs and such. All seems to me as selfish and controlling of social situations as the guys they describe. Too extreme, too, to be realistic. They counter a situation of selfish aggression with selfish passive-aggression then justify it by painting themselves as the victims of that interaction. Note: This all just applies to our tangent. Other behavior she describes show her to almost certainly be a victim of gender discrimination in those situations.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
analognoise 11y ago
I thought it was going to be about the actual invisible people nobody cares about - nope, female tech CEO talking about about men not fully introducing women, or assuming women are accessories. Talk about first world problems. Her advice is good, and it's sad that it has to actually be pointed out, but I've actually noticed that women in tech suffer from the same personal blindness that men in tech do - it turns out that just by being a woman doesn't lend you powers of insight or compatibility. I'm always surprised that people have the gift of speech, and this is what they vomit forth; what a waste of a gift. To be so utterly blind to actual problems in this world and to spend your time mincing about the periphery of worthlessness is exactly what I've come to expect from the technically connected. You're angry about it? Stage a march. Flip some cars over. Light some tires on fire. Nope, we'd rather keyboard warrior it out, pacified by the levers we pull that actually have no effect.
- drdeca 11y ago
  Why would flipping cars over be preferable to making a blog post? I don't understand. Ok I mean like, sure, I'm aware that people argue that people shouldn't complain about riots for some reason or another. But claiming that riots are an inherently more legitimate way of addressing grievances than, communication that uses words other than chants, picket signs, or graffitti, seems absurd to me.
EvanPlaice 11y ago
tl;dr: It's appalling that I was treated as any man would in a similar situation. Where are all the 'good men' in the world who'll protect women from such base treatment. Take any guy, good looking, bad looking, genius intelligence, or idiot. Watch them join a conversation yet make no measurable effort to draw interest from others or offer something of value. How will he be treated? Like like he's invisible. A treatment that isn't just limited to conversation, it extends to life as a whole. Men who have nothing interesting to say or do with their lives effectively don't exist to the rest of the world. That's why we posture and aggressively assert ourselves. To do otherwise is to accept a lifetime of irrelevance. Women have and always will be the 'privileged class' when it comes to human interaction; for the simple fact that most men are singularly incapable of turning off their biological drives. When was the last time you saw a whole group of women fall all over themselves to be inclusive of men (excl celebrities) in any and everything? If you want to be treated with equal consideration that men do, you have to do as we do. Take responsibility and make yourself relevant. Existing and occupying space is simply not enough. Do you know what type of women don't get dismissed or treated as somebody's 'plus one'? The ones who fucking introduce themselves and signal to others that they're more than just an ornament. A la, don't act like an accessory if you don't want to be treated like an accessory. I kinda wish Ronda Rousey wouldn't have lost that last fight because she was on to something really awesome with her 'anti do nothing bitches' campaign. *apologies for the language, I just feel really frustrated that so many women would rather blame men for all of the problems in the world rather than focusing that energy on self-reflection and finding ways to correct the problem

11 points by kareemm 11y ago

Talking to random women is difficult if you're a guy. There's a very blurred line between being friendly and flirting. Flirting is often awkward, and people don't want to create awkward situations. I suppose some guys can do it well and enjoy it, but I don't.

nickpsecurity 11y ago
That's another good point. Many IT people have poor social skills. Women often feel or act uncomfortable around them when they're acting a bit more "confident." Then, someone expects them to take the lead rather aggressively in an extra-uncomfortable situation. See the double standard about comfort zones and harm in the making? I feel for the "nerd" in that position. A normal, but geeky, person can pull it off easy enough. The other type might be very uncomfortable depending on who they're showing up.

nickpsecurity 11y ago

An attractive CEO and founder of a company that loves adventure... resents being "objectified..." err, desired by men. I agree: everyone desires such women and that's so unfair to the other 98-99%. Better to just admire her professionally, have casual conversation, and then give more personal attention to less attractive, shy women in menial positions who appreciate it. I guess. These very leftist philosophies always confuse me as women in my area aren't bothered by the fact that males are attracted to them: just more serious stuff like harassment or the rest of this article. That's where the problem is: people thinking an attractive woman is only a good night in the making or someone's +1. Introducing the woman and her skills does seem like a good remedy that takes very little effort on our part. Get the side benefit of making someone's life better. It's tricky, though, as some guys will interpret this as someone trying to impress or steal their woman. Heck, I'd do it anyway because to hell with men that don't appreciate the women that make sacrifices for them. ;)

drdeca 11y ago
Isn't the idea of "objectified" like, "being viewed as (like) an object"? My understanding is that the idea differs from simply "being viewed as attractive", (perhaps more like "being viewed as being an attractive one", with the difference being that the attractiveness is a larger part of the idea of them? I don't really know what I'm talking about. These are just guesses about what is often meant by "objectified". Something like, being viewed as a means towards an end? idk. I might be confusing multiple ideas.)
- nickpsecurity 11y ago
  It's a term a subset of women use and many use it differently. So, I can't be sure. Common threads include someone wanting to have sex with them, possess them as a wife/trophy, control what they due like property, and so on. I think she's thinking sex or dating. Anyway, one usually logically follows from the other: attractiveness or desirability increases odds of desire and an advance to be made. Most men are hardwired to want to try. Womens reaction seems to depend on upbringing and ideology. It might be acceptance, totally ignoring it, an eye roll that's neutral, mild irritation, or irritation/anger/hate worth blog posts. Down here the latter is rare. The women let people know what they tolerate then anyone pushing those boundaries too hard is clearly an asshole. Many will gripe about how men are on occasion but their gripes usually apply to their flings, boyfriends, and husbands. ;) Truth is, this position of anything resulting from attraction counts as an unwanted "advance" will be rejected by most men. That's because it means we either can never pursue great, smart women in our field. Or that a double standard exists where only they can initiate the process. Many of them were fine with such double standards that put their gender in control. I'm not. Nor would I want to date the types of women hitting clubs and such. All seems to me as selfish and controlling of social situations as the guys they describe. Too extreme, too, to be realistic. They counter a situation of selfish aggression with selfish passive-aggression then justify it by painting themselves as the victims of that interaction. Note: This all just applies to our tangent. Other behavior she describes show her to almost certainly be a victim of gender discrimination in those situations.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]

analognoise 11y ago

I thought it was going to be about the actual invisible people nobody cares about - nope, female tech CEO talking about about men not fully introducing women, or assuming women are accessories. Talk about first world problems. Her advice is good, and it's sad that it has to actually be pointed out, but I've actually noticed that women in tech suffer from the same personal blindness that men in tech do - it turns out that just by being a woman doesn't lend you powers of insight or compatibility. I'm always surprised that people have the gift of speech, and this is what they vomit forth; what a waste of a gift. To be so utterly blind to actual problems in this world and to spend your time mincing about the periphery of worthlessness is exactly what I've come to expect from the technically connected. You're angry about it? Stage a march. Flip some cars over. Light some tires on fire. Nope, we'd rather keyboard warrior it out, pacified by the levers we pull that actually have no effect.

drdeca 11y ago
Why would flipping cars over be preferable to making a blog post? I don't understand. Ok I mean like, sure, I'm aware that people argue that people shouldn't complain about riots for some reason or another. But claiming that riots are an inherently more legitimate way of addressing grievances than, communication that uses words other than chants, picket signs, or graffitti, seems absurd to me.

EvanPlaice 11y ago

tl;dr: It's appalling that I was treated as any man would in a similar situation. Where are all the 'good men' in the world who'll protect women from such base treatment. Take any guy, good looking, bad looking, genius intelligence, or idiot. Watch them join a conversation yet make no measurable effort to draw interest from others or offer something of value. How will he be treated? Like like he's invisible. A treatment that isn't just limited to conversation, it extends to life as a whole. Men who have nothing interesting to say or do with their lives effectively don't exist to the rest of the world. That's why we posture and aggressively assert ourselves. To do otherwise is to accept a lifetime of irrelevance. Women have and always will be the 'privileged class' when it comes to human interaction; for the simple fact that most men are singularly incapable of turning off their biological drives. When was the last time you saw a whole group of women fall all over themselves to be inclusive of men (excl celebrities) in any and everything? If you want to be treated with equal consideration that men do, you have to do as we do. Take responsibility and make yourself relevant. Existing and occupying space is simply not enough. Do you know what type of women don't get dismissed or treated as somebody's 'plus one'? The ones who fucking introduce themselves and signal to others that they're more than just an ornament. A la, don't act like an accessory if you don't want to be treated like an accessory. I kinda wish Ronda Rousey wouldn't have lost that last fight because she was on to something really awesome with her 'anti do nothing bitches' campaign. *apologies for the language, I just feel really frustrated that so many women would rather blame men for all of the problems in the world rather than focusing that energy on self-reflection and finding ways to correct the problem