2 ms·

> The advice you're giving, frankly, is part of the problem. No. It's your paranoid prophesy that is frankly the problem. You're labelling women as victims be

> The advice you're giving, frankly, is part of the problem. No. It's your paranoid prophesy that is frankly the problem. You're labelling women as victims before any crime has happened. Your confirmation bias has everything worked out ahead of time, including the derogatory remarks awaiting any woman who dares cross the line you've drawn in red paint. Nobody would label the scientist on the panel as pushy or inappropriate for simply correcting a moderator's error. The moment would be forgotten seconds later instead of becoming the next awkward drama 'one woman vs world of men'.

ivraatiems 9y ago
> You're labelling women as victims before any crime has happened. Your confirmation bias has everything worked out ahead of time, including the derogatory remarks awaiting any woman who dares cross the line you've drawn in red paint. Nobody's accusing anybody of any "crime." I don't understand why you're stepping up the rhetoric like this. It's not a war, it's not about punishing anyone, it's about correcting social misbehavior that was harmful - whether it was intended to be or not. > You're labeling women as victims before any crime has happened. Your confirmation bias has everything worked out ahead of time, including the derogatory remarks awaiting any woman who dares cross the line you've drawn in red paint. Knowing nothing about you (as you know nothing about me), I could easily make the same assertion you're making here: That the only reason you don't see sexism is because you are biased against seeing it. But it's no more likely that everyone in this thread arguing against this being sexism is doing so for biased reasons than it is that everyone arguing that it is sexism is doing so. What is actually happening is that we have looked at the same situation and seen it two different ways. What's being requested here is some amount of empathy for and understanding of the viewpoint you don't agree with, not some kind of punishment or shaming. When someone says "let her talk," they're not saying "how dare you oppress her with your talking," they're saying "I want to hear from her about her, not from you about her." I'm a guy; I understand how this could be seen as no big deal to other guys. But I also can see how people not in my situation wouldn't see it that way. I'm asking you to try to do the same, rather than just write off everybody who doesn't share your opinion as irrevocably and maliciously biased.
- exodust 9y ago
  The woman who said "let her talk" indeed sounded like she meant "I want to hear from her". Its a shame she felt the need to follow that up with a facebook soapbox piece you are clearly sympathetic to. I am not symapthetic, and have no interest in extending a gesture of patronising charity for the sake of the greater cause - women's rights and equality. An important cause yes, but that isnt an automatic qualification to piggy back on anything that even might possibly be related to that topic. The expression "mansplaining" is a trashy and sexist term, and when used falsely to condemn someone's likely innocent mistake is highly disrespectful. You want empathy and understanding of a viewpoint stemming from gender put-downs and unfounded accusations of sexism? People need to hold in their sexism trigger finger for when it actually happens, not when some vague maybe and could-be circumstance provides an excuse to let out a wave of built up disapproval.
  - ivraatiems 9y ago
    > People need to hold in their sexism trigger finger for when it actually happens, not when some vague maybe and could-be circumstance provides an excuse to let out a wave of built up disapproval. Whose judgment are we supposed to trust about "when sexism actually happens?" Further, why is it so clear to you that this person is not being genuine in retelling her experience of what happened? Why is she "on a soapbox" for talking about things she observed and felt in the moment, whether you agreed with them or not? What has she done to indicate to you that she should not be treated credibly? If you came forward with a claim of sexism, would you expect us to treat you with the same level of skepticism you're showing here? > The expression "mansplaining" is a trashy and sexist term, and when used falsely to condemn someone's likely innocent mistake is highly disrespectful. You want empathy and understanding of a viewpoint stemming from gender put-downs and unfounded accusations of sexism? "Falsely condemn," again, is language that's unnecessarily harsh and misleading, and "unfounded" is simply not true. Sexism (and most forms of bias) is not always explicit or intentional; in fact, many biases are implicit.[1] When you treat a person differently because of their gender (or race, religion, etc.) - whether you are doing it on purpose or not - you are exhibiting bias. The purpose of calling out that bias is not just or mainly to shame the person. It's to shine a light on behavior that not only is tolerated or not seen as a problem, but that isn't even consciously considered by people whom it doesn't affect. We can argue over the degree to which the moderator was aware that what he was doing was inappropriate, and we can argue over whether the person who called him out delivered her message in the best possible way, but what happened was not acceptable, and the accusation is not unfounded. [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/

ivraatiems 9y ago

> You're labelling women as victims before any crime has happened. Your confirmation bias has everything worked out ahead of time, including the derogatory remarks awaiting any woman who dares cross the line you've drawn in red paint. Nobody's accusing anybody of any "crime." I don't understand why you're stepping up the rhetoric like this. It's not a war, it's not about punishing anyone, it's about correcting social misbehavior that was harmful - whether it was intended to be or not. > You're labeling women as victims before any crime has happened. Your confirmation bias has everything worked out ahead of time, including the derogatory remarks awaiting any woman who dares cross the line you've drawn in red paint. Knowing nothing about you (as you know nothing about me), I could easily make the same assertion you're making here: That the only reason you don't see sexism is because you are biased against seeing it. But it's no more likely that everyone in this thread arguing against this being sexism is doing so for biased reasons than it is that everyone arguing that it is sexism is doing so. What is actually happening is that we have looked at the same situation and seen it two different ways. What's being requested here is some amount of empathy for and understanding of the viewpoint you don't agree with, not some kind of punishment or shaming. When someone says "let her talk," they're not saying "how dare you oppress her with your talking," they're saying "I want to hear from her about her, not from you about her." I'm a guy; I understand how this could be seen as no big deal to other guys. But I also can see how people not in my situation wouldn't see it that way. I'm asking you to try to do the same, rather than just write off everybody who doesn't share your opinion as irrevocably and maliciously biased.

exodust 9y ago
The woman who said "let her talk" indeed sounded like she meant "I want to hear from her". Its a shame she felt the need to follow that up with a facebook soapbox piece you are clearly sympathetic to. I am not symapthetic, and have no interest in extending a gesture of patronising charity for the sake of the greater cause - women's rights and equality. An important cause yes, but that isnt an automatic qualification to piggy back on anything that even might possibly be related to that topic. The expression "mansplaining" is a trashy and sexist term, and when used falsely to condemn someone's likely innocent mistake is highly disrespectful. You want empathy and understanding of a viewpoint stemming from gender put-downs and unfounded accusations of sexism? People need to hold in their sexism trigger finger for when it actually happens, not when some vague maybe and could-be circumstance provides an excuse to let out a wave of built up disapproval.
- ivraatiems 9y ago
  > People need to hold in their sexism trigger finger for when it actually happens, not when some vague maybe and could-be circumstance provides an excuse to let out a wave of built up disapproval. Whose judgment are we supposed to trust about "when sexism actually happens?" Further, why is it so clear to you that this person is not being genuine in retelling her experience of what happened? Why is she "on a soapbox" for talking about things she observed and felt in the moment, whether you agreed with them or not? What has she done to indicate to you that she should not be treated credibly? If you came forward with a claim of sexism, would you expect us to treat you with the same level of skepticism you're showing here? > The expression "mansplaining" is a trashy and sexist term, and when used falsely to condemn someone's likely innocent mistake is highly disrespectful. You want empathy and understanding of a viewpoint stemming from gender put-downs and unfounded accusations of sexism? "Falsely condemn," again, is language that's unnecessarily harsh and misleading, and "unfounded" is simply not true. Sexism (and most forms of bias) is not always explicit or intentional; in fact, many biases are implicit.[1] When you treat a person differently because of their gender (or race, religion, etc.) - whether you are doing it on purpose or not - you are exhibiting bias. The purpose of calling out that bias is not just or mainly to shame the person. It's to shine a light on behavior that not only is tolerated or not seen as a problem, but that isn't even consciously considered by people whom it doesn't affect. We can argue over the degree to which the moderator was aware that what he was doing was inappropriate, and we can argue over whether the person who called him out delivered her message in the best possible way, but what happened was not acceptable, and the accusation is not unfounded. [1] https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/ https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/implicit-bias/