3 ms·

The funny thing about your line of argument is that she didn't make a "public accusation of a sex crime" because "sexual assault" is not a sex crime that is def

by poet 16y ago

The funny thing about your line of argument is that she didn't make a "public accusation of a sex crime" because "sexual assault" is not a sex crime that is defined in Ohio. If we're going to try to be pedantic here, let's actually be correct. What definition of sexual assault are you using exactly? Your original contention is that the author is trivializing "real" sexual assault by using the phrase "sexual assault" in an inappropriate way, yet in Ohio no such a thing exists. So it's inappropriate according to what definition? What you're actually doing is inventing in your own mind what you think sexual assault should be and then getting angry at the author for violating your contrived definition. Do you see why it's stupid to be pedantic about the specific phrase "sexual assault"? The author used the phrase sexual assault not to conform to a definition, but because she was touched in a sexual way and felt assaulted. In my opinion such feelings are perfectly reasonable in this situation. I would have felt assaulted had I not been given a warning. Anyone who is quibbling about terminology in this thread is guilty of the phenomena that happens when nerds meet reality: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1880553 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1880553.

notahacker 16y ago
Slightly against my better judgment (good link btw) I'm going to post again... I don't think there's anything novel or "contrived" about assuming the phrase "sexual assault" implies some form of illegal gratuitous behaviour with a sexual motivation, regardless of what jurisdiction you live in (sexual assault is a crime where I live, and the Ohio state government appears to use the term frequently with respect to supporting abuse victims). I also interpreted the author's repetition of the phrase in conjunction with other carefully selected terms like "incident" as a conscious attempt to draw parallels between her experience and that of the victims of sex crimes. I don't doubt that she's drawing those parallels because she's sincerely upset, but I do think there's a dangerous line being crossed when we start equivocating intentional assaults and incidental contact, and leave it up to the accuser to define whether conduct was abusive or sexual. I also think it would be doing a disservice to people who've been wilfully abused for others' gratification to suggest that their treatment is akin to what some people experience going through airport security. I hope that clarifies the original intent of my comments.

by poet 16y ago

notahacker 16y ago

Slightly against my better judgment (good link btw) I'm going to post again... I don't think there's anything novel or "contrived" about assuming the phrase "sexual assault" implies some form of illegal gratuitous behaviour with a sexual motivation, regardless of what jurisdiction you live in (sexual assault is a crime where I live, and the Ohio state government appears to use the term frequently with respect to supporting abuse victims). I also interpreted the author's repetition of the phrase in conjunction with other carefully selected terms like "incident" as a conscious attempt to draw parallels between her experience and that of the victims of sex crimes. I don't doubt that she's drawing those parallels because she's sincerely upset, but I do think there's a dangerous line being crossed when we start equivocating intentional assaults and incidental contact, and leave it up to the accuser to define whether conduct was abusive or sexual. I also think it would be doing a disservice to people who've been wilfully abused for others' gratification to suggest that their treatment is akin to what some people experience going through airport security. I hope that clarifies the original intent of my comments.