6 ms·

Let’s accept your premise that she wants to be treated as a sex object - and still do tech. Why shouldn’t she have that right?

DoreenMichele 8y ago
That isn't my premise and my comment is not about rights. I'm a pragmatist looking for a path forward that actually works. I don't find it helpful to get hung up on theoretical ideals. I'm much more interested in figuring out best practices. Constantly calling tremendous attention to a thing while complaining that it gets too much attention is not a best practice. I'm aware that the world at large will focus overly much on the detail of her gender no matter how she chooses to handle it and this gets crazy-making and makes it difficult to find a path forward. The fact that it's difficult to figure out all on one's own is why I left the comment. It only compounds the problems women have to avoid talking about a pragmatic approach and what piece women can take a little control over due to the general attitude that talking about what part women can control is routinely decried as victim blaming. I'm not blaming the victim. I'm only saying that if you don't want to be a victim, there are things within a woman's power that can help improve outcomes. It is unfortunate that it is so hard to make such a point. The degree to which I get attacked for trying to talk about what actually works in the world rather often strikes me as an insideous means to deny women better answers and keep them trapped in the role of victim while pretending to ascribe to higher ideals than me.
- slededit 8y ago
  It’s pretty clear she wants to follow her current path despite the obstacles. She’s been hearing the same criticisms for years now. The only change is it’s escalated from random internet people to the NYT. I don’t really see her as a victim and I don’t think she sees herself that way either. Certainly she feels she was dealt with unjustly - and is fighting back. Suggesting it would just be easier if she stopped is accurate but that’s not how change is accomplished. By the way I carefully avoided charged terms like “victim blaming” because I don’t feel the larger debates in the west matter here. She lives in China with its own different set of challenges.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    Hacker News gets 5 million visitors a month. I'm posting on Hacker News and addressing the audience here. I did not try to find contact information for her so I could try to "school" her on how she "should" behave. I don't happen to assume she's ever going to see this remark, much less care about what I think. If she wants to be a force for change, hopefully she's cool with sparking meaty discussion among other people who are trying to sort their crap. Unfortunately, you can't have meaty discussion in the abstract. It's quite hard to latch onto a good topic of discussion without sounding like you are talking about something in specific, in this case her. My attempts to try to talk here really shouldn't be construed as intent on my part to tell her how to live her life. It's impossible to work out best practices for talking about a thing without being allowed to talk about it at all. Replies like yours are basically the norm -- we can't talk generally about what works because someone might take it as an attempt to police their choices. I've generally erred on the side of not commenting on her choices because I believe it's her life. But that de facto leaves me no path forward for talking about any of the issues involved. Yes, she lives in China. But none of the articles I've seen are really about her life in China per se. They are mostly about her life online interacting with the western world. That's even what the title of the piece is about. If she were merely limiting her life to China and not intentionally circumventing their rules to reach a western audience, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's one of the criticisms of her I gave above: you can't post on the internet looking for money and interaction from a western audience and then tell the west "You can't criticize how I choose to express myself!" And now she's been largely cut off from her western audience and their money and is complaining about that fact. If she just wants to be a Chinese individual with a Chinese life and no western audience and no money from Westerners via Patreon/the internet, she is free to go do that. The west only has any interest in what she does because she chooses to go to great lengths to reach out to the west. You can't have it both ways. You and she need to pick one.
    - slededit 8y ago
      > It's one of the criticisms of her I gave above: you can't post on the internet looking for money and interaction from a western audience and then tell the west "You can't criticize how I choose to express myself!" And now she's been largely cut off from her western audience and their money and is complaining about that fact. The problem is not the criticism, its the culture war and tactic of de-platforming anything uncomfortable. If she just got rude messages or even unfair articles in the NYT and it was left there, then she could just ignore them and continue doing what she likes doing - and what her audience likes watching. It should also be noted that her latest deplatforming wasn't even related to her. Paypal cut off her alternative to gofundme because of other people they were funding. She was just collateral damage. Nobody here is complaining about mere criticism. They are complaining about the very real attacks and successful attempts at censure and silencing.
- brenschluss 8y ago
  As a “pragmatist”, you support the status quo. You place agency not on society’s need to change, but on the individual within that society. This means that you seem incapable of being rational and critical of societal norms. Your independent variable is an individual, not society. Voices like yours are well-meaning, and ultimately tools for oppression. If that sounds dramatic, just look at history.
  - DoreenMichele 8y ago
    As a “pragmatist”, you support the status quo. I appear to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leader board of Hacker News (under a different handle). The meaning of that is likely lost on you. Suffice it to say, it hardly supports the status quo.
    - brenschluss 8y ago
      Oh, my sincere and deep apologies. Clearly, your high rank on the leaderboard of a forum directly implies that you don’t support the status quo. What an obvious conclusion I have overlooked!
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - zozbot123 8y ago
    Pragmatists are incapable of criticizing social norms? Where did you get that from? And I'm not saying this as some sort of "supporter" of DoreenMichele or anything like that - far from it. She's of course entitled to her opinions, but I'm under no obligation to agree with them.
    - brenschluss 8y ago
      Not pragmatists in general. More like: resisting social change in the name of “pragmatism” is a very old pattern. Imagine a dialogue like this before 1967: “Hey friend, I’m just being a pragmatist — interracial marriage is illegal. You could go to jail. Just break up and date someone else. Of course it’s not right, but what can you do? We have to understand that our actions have impact in the society we live within. Don’t take this to court, it’ll ruin your life.” Without people disagreeing with this, without people disagreeing with status quo-aligned pragmatism, Loving vs Virginia would have never happened. Not would have the end of slavery, women’s suffrage, gay marriage, etc.
- cwkoss 8y ago
  This is a very regressive, old fashioned view. Please reflect and grow

DoreenMichele 8y ago

That isn't my premise and my comment is not about rights. I'm a pragmatist looking for a path forward that actually works. I don't find it helpful to get hung up on theoretical ideals. I'm much more interested in figuring out best practices. Constantly calling tremendous attention to a thing while complaining that it gets too much attention is not a best practice. I'm aware that the world at large will focus overly much on the detail of her gender no matter how she chooses to handle it and this gets crazy-making and makes it difficult to find a path forward. The fact that it's difficult to figure out all on one's own is why I left the comment. It only compounds the problems women have to avoid talking about a pragmatic approach and what piece women can take a little control over due to the general attitude that talking about what part women can control is routinely decried as victim blaming. I'm not blaming the victim. I'm only saying that if you don't want to be a victim, there are things within a woman's power that can help improve outcomes. It is unfortunate that it is so hard to make such a point. The degree to which I get attacked for trying to talk about what actually works in the world rather often strikes me as an insideous means to deny women better answers and keep them trapped in the role of victim while pretending to ascribe to higher ideals than me.

slededit 8y ago
It’s pretty clear she wants to follow her current path despite the obstacles. She’s been hearing the same criticisms for years now. The only change is it’s escalated from random internet people to the NYT. I don’t really see her as a victim and I don’t think she sees herself that way either. Certainly she feels she was dealt with unjustly - and is fighting back. Suggesting it would just be easier if she stopped is accurate but that’s not how change is accomplished. By the way I carefully avoided charged terms like “victim blaming” because I don’t feel the larger debates in the west matter here. She lives in China with its own different set of challenges.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  Hacker News gets 5 million visitors a month. I'm posting on Hacker News and addressing the audience here. I did not try to find contact information for her so I could try to "school" her on how she "should" behave. I don't happen to assume she's ever going to see this remark, much less care about what I think. If she wants to be a force for change, hopefully she's cool with sparking meaty discussion among other people who are trying to sort their crap. Unfortunately, you can't have meaty discussion in the abstract. It's quite hard to latch onto a good topic of discussion without sounding like you are talking about something in specific, in this case her. My attempts to try to talk here really shouldn't be construed as intent on my part to tell her how to live her life. It's impossible to work out best practices for talking about a thing without being allowed to talk about it at all. Replies like yours are basically the norm -- we can't talk generally about what works because someone might take it as an attempt to police their choices. I've generally erred on the side of not commenting on her choices because I believe it's her life. But that de facto leaves me no path forward for talking about any of the issues involved. Yes, she lives in China. But none of the articles I've seen are really about her life in China per se. They are mostly about her life online interacting with the western world. That's even what the title of the piece is about. If she were merely limiting her life to China and not intentionally circumventing their rules to reach a western audience, we wouldn't be having this discussion. It's one of the criticisms of her I gave above: you can't post on the internet looking for money and interaction from a western audience and then tell the west "You can't criticize how I choose to express myself!" And now she's been largely cut off from her western audience and their money and is complaining about that fact. If she just wants to be a Chinese individual with a Chinese life and no western audience and no money from Westerners via Patreon/the internet, she is free to go do that. The west only has any interest in what she does because she chooses to go to great lengths to reach out to the west. You can't have it both ways. You and she need to pick one.
  - slededit 8y ago
    > It's one of the criticisms of her I gave above: you can't post on the internet looking for money and interaction from a western audience and then tell the west "You can't criticize how I choose to express myself!" And now she's been largely cut off from her western audience and their money and is complaining about that fact. The problem is not the criticism, its the culture war and tactic of de-platforming anything uncomfortable. If she just got rude messages or even unfair articles in the NYT and it was left there, then she could just ignore them and continue doing what she likes doing - and what her audience likes watching. It should also be noted that her latest deplatforming wasn't even related to her. Paypal cut off her alternative to gofundme because of other people they were funding. She was just collateral damage. Nobody here is complaining about mere criticism. They are complaining about the very real attacks and successful attempts at censure and silencing.
brenschluss 8y ago
As a “pragmatist”, you support the status quo. You place agency not on society’s need to change, but on the individual within that society. This means that you seem incapable of being rational and critical of societal norms. Your independent variable is an individual, not society. Voices like yours are well-meaning, and ultimately tools for oppression. If that sounds dramatic, just look at history.
- DoreenMichele 8y ago
  As a “pragmatist”, you support the status quo. I appear to be the only woman to have ever spent time on the leader board of Hacker News (under a different handle). The meaning of that is likely lost on you. Suffice it to say, it hardly supports the status quo.
  - brenschluss 8y ago
    Oh, my sincere and deep apologies. Clearly, your high rank on the leaderboard of a forum directly implies that you don’t support the status quo. What an obvious conclusion I have overlooked!
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- zozbot123 8y ago
  Pragmatists are incapable of criticizing social norms? Where did you get that from? And I'm not saying this as some sort of "supporter" of DoreenMichele or anything like that - far from it. She's of course entitled to her opinions, but I'm under no obligation to agree with them.
  - brenschluss 8y ago
    Not pragmatists in general. More like: resisting social change in the name of “pragmatism” is a very old pattern. Imagine a dialogue like this before 1967: “Hey friend, I’m just being a pragmatist — interracial marriage is illegal. You could go to jail. Just break up and date someone else. Of course it’s not right, but what can you do? We have to understand that our actions have impact in the society we live within. Don’t take this to court, it’ll ruin your life.” Without people disagreeing with this, without people disagreeing with status quo-aligned pragmatism, Loving vs Virginia would have never happened. Not would have the end of slavery, women’s suffrage, gay marriage, etc.
cwkoss 8y ago
This is a very regressive, old fashioned view. Please reflect and grow