4 ms·

I don't understand why we're arguing about what the moderator's intent might have been. That seems very much beside the point. I was asking for clarification

I don't understand why we're arguing about what the moderator's intent might have been. That seems very much beside the point. I was asking for clarification because it seemed that the post I was replying to was implying that the perspective of the person on the stage should somehow color what we all learn from the Facebook post. I think the person on stage and the people in the audience are all entitled to their own interpretations of the event. I didn't get the impression from the Ms. Talkington's post that she was upset on behalf of the woman on stage. She was upset by her own experience, sitting in the audience. The point isn't for us to sit here and decide whether or not the moderator's behavior was justified. The point is simply to listen and try to understand another point of view.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
>the perspective of the person on the stage should somehow color what we all learn from the Facebook post. What if you knew she was guiding his PhD thesis? That he was her student. What if he had conversations with her before this topic trying to understand her theory? What the person on the stage was feeling does matter. Ms. Talkington is entitled to her interpretation of the event. But, to say that interpretation is correct, by itself, in all circumstances, is not accurate. > The point is simply to listen and try to understand another point of view. Just simply listen? why? why am I being denied to have an interpretation and opinion and be able to voice it? Ms. Talkington did and I fully support her in her ability to have an interpretation and speak about about it and act upon it. I claim the same and will not let it be infringed upon.
- ajuckel 9y ago
  I don't see how your hypothetical, behind-the-scenes interactions would have affected how observers experienced the event. Again, I feel the point of the facebook post was an observer sharing her perspective, not someone claiming to be reporting on some objective, unassailable truth. I apologize, I wasn't trying to imply that you have less right to speak than anyone else, though I see now how I worded it clumsily. My point in bringing up listening isn't to try to shut you or anyone else down from sharing their experiences. I am suggesting that seeking to fully understand OP's position, starting from the assumption that OP is a rational individual giving a true and faithful account of her reasonable reaction to a sequence of events would be a worthwhile endeavor.
  - AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
    >I am suggesting that seeking to fully understand OP's position, starting from the assumption that OP is a rational individual giving a true and faithful account of her reasonable reaction to a sequence of events would be a worthwhile endeavor. I read the article on Facebook. I read the commentary by the lady scientist on stage. I took them at their word about the reaction that they were having. A reaction of one participant is not the whole story. My comments were an exercise in probabilities where the outwards symptoms would have been same as seen by the participants of the events. Hence I said there is a chance that the moderator was not being sexist. BTW, in what other situations would you grant someone making the claim to be true and faithful recount of events without any further inquiry; especially when you are labeling a living human being as "sexist" for rest of his life, with all the consequences of that in 21st century this day and age.

AmIFirstToThink 9y ago

>the perspective of the person on the stage should somehow color what we all learn from the Facebook post. What if you knew she was guiding his PhD thesis? That he was her student. What if he had conversations with her before this topic trying to understand her theory? What the person on the stage was feeling does matter. Ms. Talkington is entitled to her interpretation of the event. But, to say that interpretation is correct, by itself, in all circumstances, is not accurate. > The point is simply to listen and try to understand another point of view. Just simply listen? why? why am I being denied to have an interpretation and opinion and be able to voice it? Ms. Talkington did and I fully support her in her ability to have an interpretation and speak about about it and act upon it. I claim the same and will not let it be infringed upon.

ajuckel 9y ago
I don't see how your hypothetical, behind-the-scenes interactions would have affected how observers experienced the event. Again, I feel the point of the facebook post was an observer sharing her perspective, not someone claiming to be reporting on some objective, unassailable truth. I apologize, I wasn't trying to imply that you have less right to speak than anyone else, though I see now how I worded it clumsily. My point in bringing up listening isn't to try to shut you or anyone else down from sharing their experiences. I am suggesting that seeking to fully understand OP's position, starting from the assumption that OP is a rational individual giving a true and faithful account of her reasonable reaction to a sequence of events would be a worthwhile endeavor.
- AmIFirstToThink 9y ago
  >I am suggesting that seeking to fully understand OP's position, starting from the assumption that OP is a rational individual giving a true and faithful account of her reasonable reaction to a sequence of events would be a worthwhile endeavor. I read the article on Facebook. I read the commentary by the lady scientist on stage. I took them at their word about the reaction that they were having. A reaction of one participant is not the whole story. My comments were an exercise in probabilities where the outwards symptoms would have been same as seen by the participants of the events. Hence I said there is a chance that the moderator was not being sexist. BTW, in what other situations would you grant someone making the claim to be true and faithful recount of events without any further inquiry; especially when you are labeling a living human being as "sexist" for rest of his life, with all the consequences of that in 21st century this day and age.