13 ms·

I don't think he was doing that because he was sexist, I think he was doing that because he was really excited about the duality. The only way to improve socie

I don't think he was doing that because he was sexist, I think he was doing that because he was really excited about the duality. The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent and when they're the result of: geeking out + bad social skills

FussyZeus 9y ago
But again, his bad social skills only kicked in for the woman. We can't ever know for certain if it was sexism. I'm not saying take the guy out and shoot him. I'm not even saying do the thing we normally do and try and humiliate him in a public space. I'm saying: This is evidence of the accepted cultural norms in a society that I don't think anyone would disagree was largely designed by and is largely ruled over by men, and there are consequences to that.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
vog 9y ago
> The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent I strongly disagree. We need to fix issues no matter if they had been done because of ignorance or because of ill intent. The measures and consequences should be different, but naming and fixing the issue should be independent from that. "Bad social skills" is a common excuse, but in the end, it's just another word for ignorance. Learning a few social rules is like learning design patterns, and learning not to be sexist or racist is like learning about anti-patterns. It is not harder than coding! If anything, learning social basics is easier than programming. But if you don't care, you won't learn it. Which you may choose to, but then, it's ignorance, not inability.
- trendia 9y ago
  Are you saying we should fix when people geek out about a topic and ramble? If so, I agree. But good luck making progress on that!
  - vog 9y ago
    It may be uncomfortable, but it's the only way to make cultural progress. You should especially take care of that if you have any major position in a larger group, not matter if it is a company department, an open-source project or a user-group. If nobody cares visibly about social behaviour, that group is either doomed and won't achieve anything in the long run. Or it reduces a very low number of active participants - usually just one.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - ShannonAlther 9y ago
      "Prevent all potentially offensive behaviour" is not a valid solution. What constitutes offense is subjective, and furthermore the topic at hand is sexism.
      - vog 9y ago
        The issue at hand is an example for precisely the opposite. Everybody agrees that the moderator's behaviour was inappropriate, the discussion is mostly about how bad it was (what should the consequences be?) and the label (sexism or not?). More general, regarding subjectivity: Although the individual members of a group or society have different subjective standards, they can still find some common ground on what behaviour they accept or don't accept. You'll find such emerging consent not just in informal rules about social behaviour, but also in formal rules which we call "laws".
        ShannonAlther 9y ago
        You're using a different definition of 'offensive' than I am. Also, note that no societies we regard highly have outlawed talking over people. Unless your plan is to modify institutions to reduce offensive behaviour you won't have much luck.
        9y ago
croon 9y ago
The way I see it: * He was geeking out. True. * There was no ill intent. True. * He wasn't sexist. False. He could geek out all he wanted, but speaking for her multiple times over her trying to get a foot in was very sexist, regardless of intent. I hold the door for guys all the time, but if you're only doing it for "feeble girls" it is telling. This was the case in this panel. She's there because she knows her shit, let her explain it. > The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent and when they're the result of: > geeking out + bad social skills No, the only way to improve society (equality wise) is to recognize when you're treating someone differently (condescendingly) only when they're one gender, however well meaning YOU think it is. Do you think it's annoying if your parent treats you like you're 10 when you're 35, even when you know they love you and they don't mean it? It's exactly like that, but it's a large portion of the population.
- trendia 9y ago
  I've spoken to people like this moderator and they just ramble over any topic they get excited about. What specifically makes you think he rambled because she was a woman?
  - croon 9y ago
    > I've spoken to people like this moderator and they just ramble over any topic they get excited about. Sure, me too, and they're generally consistent in that between genders. This guy isn't. And people like him are very common too. > What specifically makes you think he rambled because she was a woman? By watching the entire video and comparing him to his conduct with the other panelists interviewed. She also wasn't the only non-native speaker, so it's not that either.
  - cmiles74 9y ago
    Because he did. He rambled over the only woman.
    - iiv 9y ago
      That he rambled over the only woman does not mean that he rambled over her because she is a woman.
orcdork 9y ago
What about the possibility that if someone is being a douchebag, blaming their shitty behaviour on the "bad at social skills" strawman is not an excuse any more (or ever was).
- pyroinferno 9y ago
  But a lot of the times it is the case. In SJW-speak, "You sound like an ableist who's trying to project your better social skills onto others".
  - dang 9y ago
    Please don't troll here. On HN, if you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't post.
cmiles74 9y ago
Many things that hurt people are done without ill intent. They are often done out of fear, or laziness, or ignorance. The people that do them often do them thoughtlessly or out of a belief that the reasons they do them are so self-evident that they don't deserve much thought. In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the long run. We also do a disservice to the perpetrator, if they are truly well meaning or absent of meaning then we're robbing them of an opportunity to improve.
- braveo 9y ago
  > In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the long run. OTOH, maybe you should man the fuck up and move on with your life. I know that seems blunt and assholeish, but that's sort of the point. I've been offended plenty of times and talked myself down because I knew ultimately it was my emotions misinterpreting the intent. There is nothing that says just offense can't be mistaken. edit: watch someone call the phrase 'man the fuck up' sexist.

FussyZeus 9y ago

But again, his bad social skills only kicked in for the woman. We can't ever know for certain if it was sexism. I'm not saying take the guy out and shoot him. I'm not even saying do the thing we normally do and try and humiliate him in a public space. I'm saying: This is evidence of the accepted cultural norms in a society that I don't think anyone would disagree was largely designed by and is largely ruled over by men, and there are consequences to that.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]

vog 9y ago

> The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent I strongly disagree. We need to fix issues no matter if they had been done because of ignorance or because of ill intent. The measures and consequences should be different, but naming and fixing the issue should be independent from that. "Bad social skills" is a common excuse, but in the end, it's just another word for ignorance. Learning a few social rules is like learning design patterns, and learning not to be sexist or racist is like learning about anti-patterns. It is not harder than coding! If anything, learning social basics is easier than programming. But if you don't care, you won't learn it. Which you may choose to, but then, it's ignorance, not inability.

trendia 9y ago
Are you saying we should fix when people geek out about a topic and ramble? If so, I agree. But good luck making progress on that!
- vog 9y ago
  It may be uncomfortable, but it's the only way to make cultural progress. You should especially take care of that if you have any major position in a larger group, not matter if it is a company department, an open-source project or a user-group. If nobody cares visibly about social behaviour, that group is either doomed and won't achieve anything in the long run. Or it reduces a very low number of active participants - usually just one.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - ShannonAlther 9y ago
    "Prevent all potentially offensive behaviour" is not a valid solution. What constitutes offense is subjective, and furthermore the topic at hand is sexism.
    - vog 9y ago
      The issue at hand is an example for precisely the opposite. Everybody agrees that the moderator's behaviour was inappropriate, the discussion is mostly about how bad it was (what should the consequences be?) and the label (sexism or not?). More general, regarding subjectivity: Although the individual members of a group or society have different subjective standards, they can still find some common ground on what behaviour they accept or don't accept. You'll find such emerging consent not just in informal rules about social behaviour, but also in formal rules which we call "laws".
      - ShannonAlther 9y ago
        You're using a different definition of 'offensive' than I am. Also, note that no societies we regard highly have outlawed talking over people. Unless your plan is to modify institutions to reduce offensive behaviour you won't have much luck.
        9y ago

croon 9y ago

The way I see it: * He was geeking out. True. * There was no ill intent. True. * He wasn't sexist. False. He could geek out all he wanted, but speaking for her multiple times over her trying to get a foot in was very sexist, regardless of intent. I hold the door for guys all the time, but if you're only doing it for "feeble girls" it is telling. This was the case in this panel. She's there because she knows her shit, let her explain it. > The only way to improve society is to recognize when things are really done with ill intent and when they're the result of: > geeking out + bad social skills No, the only way to improve society (equality wise) is to recognize when you're treating someone differently (condescendingly) only when they're one gender, however well meaning YOU think it is. Do you think it's annoying if your parent treats you like you're 10 when you're 35, even when you know they love you and they don't mean it? It's exactly like that, but it's a large portion of the population.

trendia 9y ago
I've spoken to people like this moderator and they just ramble over any topic they get excited about. What specifically makes you think he rambled because she was a woman?
- croon 9y ago
  > I've spoken to people like this moderator and they just ramble over any topic they get excited about. Sure, me too, and they're generally consistent in that between genders. This guy isn't. And people like him are very common too. > What specifically makes you think he rambled because she was a woman? By watching the entire video and comparing him to his conduct with the other panelists interviewed. She also wasn't the only non-native speaker, so it's not that either.
- cmiles74 9y ago
  Because he did. He rambled over the only woman.
  - iiv 9y ago
    That he rambled over the only woman does not mean that he rambled over her because she is a woman.

orcdork 9y ago

What about the possibility that if someone is being a douchebag, blaming their shitty behaviour on the "bad at social skills" strawman is not an excuse any more (or ever was).

pyroinferno 9y ago
But a lot of the times it is the case. In SJW-speak, "You sound like an ableist who's trying to project your better social skills onto others".
- dang 9y ago
  Please don't troll here. On HN, if you have a substantive point, make it thoughtfully; otherwise please don't post.

cmiles74 9y ago

Many things that hurt people are done without ill intent. They are often done out of fear, or laziness, or ignorance. The people that do them often do them thoughtlessly or out of a belief that the reasons they do them are so self-evident that they don't deserve much thought. In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the long run. We also do a disservice to the perpetrator, if they are truly well meaning or absent of meaning then we're robbing them of an opportunity to improve.

braveo 9y ago
> In my opinion, ignoring hurtful behavior because we believe the intent wasn't meant to be hurtful will only encourage these behaviors in the long run. OTOH, maybe you should man the fuck up and move on with your life. I know that seems blunt and assholeish, but that's sort of the point. I've been offended plenty of times and talked myself down because I knew ultimately it was my emotions misinterpreting the intent. There is nothing that says just offense can't be mistaken. edit: watch someone call the phrase 'man the fuck up' sexist.