4 ms·

I think we mostly agree. 100% with you that we've got to help everyone learn to say "no" firmly. I disagree with your assertion that employing other tactics di

I think we mostly agree. 100% with you that we've got to help everyone learn to say "no" firmly. I disagree with your assertion that employing other tactics diffuses energy that could have been used in the pursuit of more complete solutions, and I really don't think the codewords thing is that silly. It was used in a bar, and the bartender was in on it. This is kind of an elegant solution to make help available if someone wants it. It's not like the bartender would then call in a swat team to arrest the offending party, he/she would (I assume) find a tactful way to help the two parties end their conversation or whatever is appropriate to resolve the situation. In this case the solution was only offered for women, but it wouldn't be much additional effort to have an equivalent offer in the men's room. >it doesn’t provide a real solution, but diffuses energy meant to solve the problem; it portrays the issue of sexual assault as a gendered issue, and fails to help male victims; it creates drama and victimhood mentality for no reason, by portraying sexual assault as James Bond style crime, when really, you generally just need to firmly say no. I just disagree with you on all but "and fails to help male victims". Even the item "portrays sexual assault as a gendered issue" - This particular suggestion only helps women, but it is just one suggestion, and it's not implied that it is a complete description or solution to the issue. To go back to the beginning - you accused the author of unserious social LARPing, and in doing that I think you're angrily and seriously disagreeing with her. If I'm right in assuming the author offended you in a pretty serious way, can you help me understand the cause of the offense?

FakeComments 8y ago
> If I'm right in assuming the author offended you in a pretty serious way, can you help me understand the cause of the offense? This is what I mean by social LARPing. There’s two quite long posts explaining what I find objectionable to her post, which you’ve demonstrated having read by discussing where we agree and don’t, but you end your comment with formulaic “concern” sounds. Those don’t represent a genuine interest in what I said, or my concerns, they’re a cover for the veiled ad hominem that’s meant to construe me as merely upset and not having supported my point after multiple posts. You admit here that codewords require a trained staff, were only deployed in a large scale setting like a bar (ie, 100 people crowds), and even with scale and training, you’re not sure how they operate or even what benefit they provide versus simpler solutions, and admit the proposed solution is inherently sexist, because it relies on only offering the solution to a single gender. That sounds like an unserious suggested solution for small groups to utilize — what you claimed it was meant for earlier. You then feign not understanding why anyone would object. You’re a social LARPer: your post isn’t about seriously discussing the issue, it’s social posturing.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]

FakeComments 8y ago

> If I'm right in assuming the author offended you in a pretty serious way, can you help me understand the cause of the offense? This is what I mean by social LARPing. There’s two quite long posts explaining what I find objectionable to her post, which you’ve demonstrated having read by discussing where we agree and don’t, but you end your comment with formulaic “concern” sounds. Those don’t represent a genuine interest in what I said, or my concerns, they’re a cover for the veiled ad hominem that’s meant to construe me as merely upset and not having supported my point after multiple posts. You admit here that codewords require a trained staff, were only deployed in a large scale setting like a bar (ie, 100 people crowds), and even with scale and training, you’re not sure how they operate or even what benefit they provide versus simpler solutions, and admit the proposed solution is inherently sexist, because it relies on only offering the solution to a single gender. That sounds like an unserious suggested solution for small groups to utilize — what you claimed it was meant for earlier. You then feign not understanding why anyone would object. You’re a social LARPer: your post isn’t about seriously discussing the issue, it’s social posturing.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]