4 ms·

I don't think the problem lies with feedback. I think it lies with willful ignorance of it. I believe that most people in group 1, are in fact aware of the pro

I don't think the problem lies with feedback. I think it lies with willful ignorance of it. I believe that most people in group 1, are in fact aware of the problem of their behaviour and are willingly ignorant of it. This is because if they made any unwanted advances against women, even if the women didn't tell them to stop or publicly humiliate them, they surely ignored or tried to get away from the situation. At the very least the victim did not enjoy it and that is feedback enough. Now the question boils down to whether a perpetrator considers the victim to be a human with a standing equal to his/her own. So as far as I can tell, it is the general problem of dehumanizing victims. The blame does not lie with Type 2 people who did not feel "comfortable" enough to publicly speak up. Take any crime which doesn't take in public view, let's say child abuse. Is it the responsibility of the victim to give feedback to the perpetrator, or is it the responsibility of the perpetrator to view the child as a human being? PS - I made a very similar comment down the thread to another commenter as well.

imartin2k 9y ago
The other commentor was me too :) I also like to use analogies. But this one really is misleading. We are not speaking about juridical crimes here and not about children but adults. It’s one if the main differences between children and adults that society expects the latter to communicate, to express their thoughts, and to take responsibility for their actions or lack of action. But nowadays in debates like these I see the emergence of a devaluation of these features that until now clearly differentiated children from adults. The individual of age is described like a helpless, voiceless child. I find this seriously worrying (which is why I spent hours this Saturday in this comment debate, which I rarely do).
- ashwinpp 9y ago
  As far as analogies go, I'll rescind my analogy based on the difference you have stated. However, it does not negate the point I was trying to make, that the problem lies not with feedback but with willful ignorance of it. Since, I didn't realize you were the same person, here's my response for the other comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15942520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15942520) you made. I think I understand what you mean by saying that what appears unwanted to one party might appear playful and wanted to another party based on their mindset. But then what guarantee is there that if the victim escalates the issue, that the escalation isn't considered playful either. Note that escalations can come in increasingly severe degrees and can also have equally "playful" connotations from the perpetrators perspective. If a victim tells her close girlfriends about the sexual assault, to the perpetrator it can sound as "I made such love that she couldn't stop talking about it". If a perpetrator has violated many victims, who have tried to warn their female colleagues, it can sound as "I'm so good that, some women want me for themselves and are spreading rumors about me to prevent others from getting close to me". I feel vile coming up with legitimate sounding sentences such as these, but I believe putting the onus on victims to give feedback need not make the perpetrators realize that boundaries have been crossed. In my opinion there is an objective measure of whether a person is welcome or unwelcome. Now perpetrators might have a different viewpoint about it in which case no matter what the victims do to escalate the issue, it need not necessarily mean feedback for the perpetrator. On the other hand from the victim's perspective there is a cost to be paid in terms of engaging with the perpetrator apart from other costs which you already mentioned. Finally, a few perpetrators might have such a removed world view that nothing below public shaming opens their eyes to the harassment, which is the only time we come to know about it. We might assume that no feedback was given by victims, but it might just be that the feedback wasn't nearly enough. To summarize, the victims do not have nearly enough incentive to give feedback and perhaps many did and the harassment didn't stop until public shaming. It is definitely not the case of victims not having enough integrity to overcome costs to of giving feedback.

imartin2k 9y ago

The other commentor was me too :) I also like to use analogies. But this one really is misleading. We are not speaking about juridical crimes here and not about children but adults. It’s one if the main differences between children and adults that society expects the latter to communicate, to express their thoughts, and to take responsibility for their actions or lack of action. But nowadays in debates like these I see the emergence of a devaluation of these features that until now clearly differentiated children from adults. The individual of age is described like a helpless, voiceless child. I find this seriously worrying (which is why I spent hours this Saturday in this comment debate, which I rarely do).

ashwinpp 9y ago
As far as analogies go, I'll rescind my analogy based on the difference you have stated. However, it does not negate the point I was trying to make, that the problem lies not with feedback but with willful ignorance of it. Since, I didn't realize you were the same person, here's my response for the other comment (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15942520 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15942520) you made. I think I understand what you mean by saying that what appears unwanted to one party might appear playful and wanted to another party based on their mindset. But then what guarantee is there that if the victim escalates the issue, that the escalation isn't considered playful either. Note that escalations can come in increasingly severe degrees and can also have equally "playful" connotations from the perpetrators perspective. If a victim tells her close girlfriends about the sexual assault, to the perpetrator it can sound as "I made such love that she couldn't stop talking about it". If a perpetrator has violated many victims, who have tried to warn their female colleagues, it can sound as "I'm so good that, some women want me for themselves and are spreading rumors about me to prevent others from getting close to me". I feel vile coming up with legitimate sounding sentences such as these, but I believe putting the onus on victims to give feedback need not make the perpetrators realize that boundaries have been crossed. In my opinion there is an objective measure of whether a person is welcome or unwelcome. Now perpetrators might have a different viewpoint about it in which case no matter what the victims do to escalate the issue, it need not necessarily mean feedback for the perpetrator. On the other hand from the victim's perspective there is a cost to be paid in terms of engaging with the perpetrator apart from other costs which you already mentioned. Finally, a few perpetrators might have such a removed world view that nothing below public shaming opens their eyes to the harassment, which is the only time we come to know about it. We might assume that no feedback was given by victims, but it might just be that the feedback wasn't nearly enough. To summarize, the victims do not have nearly enough incentive to give feedback and perhaps many did and the harassment didn't stop until public shaming. It is definitely not the case of victims not having enough integrity to overcome costs to of giving feedback.