4 ms·

Let’s assume that the tweet author is reasonably well-versed in business operations, since he is himself a very successful businessman.

DoreenMichele 7y ago
Sure. Let's assume I am very well versed in other pertinent domains of knowledge, like social psychology and the tendency for people to get mad as hell about social justice issues and leap to ugly conclusions that fit their SJW narrative about evil in the world that can be conveniently lumped under a one word heading, like sexism. Let's further assume that this is actually actively counterproductive, so it's reasonable to point out that correlation is not causation and it's unhelpful to insist on a particular conclusion you cannot prove. I already noted he's right to be outraged at the situation and critical of the black box nature of the decision. I'm just not comfortable with him ranting that it's clearly and obviously due to sexism.
- kennywinker 7y ago
  There a many people chiming in that they have had the same experience, and nobody saying they had the opposite. If the credit limit difference was unrelated to sex there would be random distribution of couples with the inverse experience. So you sayyyy that he flew off the handle because he's an SJW or whatever, but because his initial assumption continues to be proven correct as more data is accumulated... it seems like you are wrong that it was an overreaction.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    So you sayyyy that he flew off the handle because he's an SJW or whatever, but because his initial assumption continues to be proven correct as more data is accumulated... it seems like you are wrong that it was an overreaction. That's basically a dismissive personal attack. One of the most frustrating and crazy-making aspects of participating on HN as openly female is the frequency with which one must politely endure phenomenal open disrespect from people trying to position themselves as pro women's lib while violating the guidelines here concerning how to engage respectfully with other members. The only thing more crazy making is that there tends to be hell to pay should a woman dare to point it out or otherwise try to defend herself. For me, it is made more bearable by the quiet support of the many people who upvote my comments and posts, flag the worst replies and comment thoughtfully on pieces I submit. Yes, sexism is very much alive and well. I get to experience it on a daily basis. It still does little to no good for powerful men to engage in public white knighting and level accusations they cannot backup. I will note we are reading his tweets on HN, not his wife's. We are discussing the opinions of a powerful man, not a woman. We are reading them largely because he is a powerful man, not because he can back up his assertions. Discussions of this sort are sometimes a case of "two steps forward, one step back." But as a woman participating in them, they all too often feel like a dystopian bit of theater in which men get to claim virtues they don't have and treat a woman badly while loudly proclaiming themselves against this evil thing called sexism.
    - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
      I don’t see how what he said to you is a personal attack, nor is it different from how men talk to each other here on a daily basis. Saying someone is wrong is routine.
    - kennywinker 7y ago
      Not all attempts by men to advocate for equality or call out bullshit are “white knight”-ing. White knighting implies that it is unwanted. I am charging in to “rescue” someone when they do not want to be rescued. It is legitimate for a man to call out a bias when he sees it. To ignore it and leave it for women to point out is... frankly helping maintain the status quo. I’m sorry you found my comment dismissive and a personal attack. I found your use of the term “sjw” dismissive of the issue, since it’s such a loaded term. So my tone was a bit... glib... in reaction to that. I also definitely didn’t read your username, so don’t take anything i said to be a reaction your female handle. I definitely assumed a male writer (which is it’s own problem).
      - DoreenMichele 7y ago
        I also definitely didn’t read your username, so don’t take anything i said to be a reaction your female handle. I definitely assumed a male writer (which is it’s own problem). It is, in fact, a much larger problem. To my mind, white knighting is about men playing hero in order to enhance their ego and public reputation as the primary or sole goal such that actually addressing sexism is not only incidental, it's actually counter to their goal. Being chewed out by you and lectured about how I'm wrong to find any of this offensive amounts to mansplaining. At every turn, no matter how much men theoretically decry the existence of sexism in the world and pretend to fight against it, when push comes to shove, they expect to be treated with respect by women while not themselves being respectful to women. That expectation amounts to demanding deference from women. Start by working on treating actual women you are actually interacting with in the here and now with actual respect instead. That includes not assuming everyone you speak with on HN is male. If you don't know, don't assume. That assumption based on the odds is a fundamental part of sexism, racism, etc. It's a really huge issue. If you really want to see change in the world, get with the man in the mirror and work on his bad habits. He's the person you have the most control over. If every man who ever beat his chest about how sexism is a bad thing spent more time working on his bad habits, things would change. Instead, what happens is every time I comment, multiple people treat me like shit and then come up with justifications for their behavior and reasons why the problem is me and then fail to see the irony in decrying sexism while basically telling me "Shut up, woman." in the same breath.
- acjohnson55 7y ago
  Also in compliance training, as mentioned in a different reply to you, we talk about disparate impact. As I'm sure you can guess, this principle implies that sexism can be thought of as an outcome, not just the result of explicitly "evil" attitudes. In other words, I think he's right to say that Apple should be accountable for the issue he has pointed out, regardless of how it happened, which you rightly point out that he can't possibly know for sure.
  - DoreenMichele 7y ago
    I desperately wish that I knew a different word for the negative impacts that harm the lives of so many women. Both allies and others seem incapable of hearing that I would like to see better outcomes when the only word available is sexism. To far too many people, that words means "It's done on purpose by evil people with a heart of darkness." This actively interferes with effective communication because "good guy" ally types don't ever want to hear that some behavior of theirs is part of the problem and needs to change. It helps make the problem insanely intractable.
    - acjohnson55 7y ago
      As a black person, I know what you mean. I suppose I'd rather fight the battle of expanding people's notions of what these isms are. They're not just horrifically bigoted beliefs with harmful intentions. They're all beliefs they hold with the best of intentions that are nonetheless harmful to some people (e.g. paternalism towards marginalized people). But they're also impacts they have that don't have and explicit belief at all. I just personally believe that personal responsibility entails doing the work to uncover the ways in which we ignorantly step on other people. I recently wrote something along these lines: https://acjay.com/2019/10/07/ableism-the-sneakiest-ism/ https://acjay.com/2019/10/07/ableism-the-sneakiest-ism/
      - DoreenMichele 7y ago
        In some cases, they are beliefs people hold and don't even realize they hold. My ex was career military and we arrived at a new duty station and he became fast friends with a coworker. He talked all the time time about his coworker "John" this and "John" that (John is not his real name). He rather got on my nerves with how much he blathered on about John. In all those months, he never once mentioned that John was black. It wasn't anything that made his radar at all as worthy of noting. When I met John and his family, I was very surprised that he (and his family) was black. I had assumed he was white. With seeing him, I realized in an instant that I had made this assumption because I grew up in the Deep South and if you didn't mention skin color, the signal there was that they had to be white. If they weren't white, you should give other white people the head's up. I realized in that instant that this was a racist assumption and I wasn't as immune to the racism around me as I had thought I had been. I still had been inculcated with practices I was oblivious to as being a problem in that regard. The surprise showed on my face and I was not able to figure out how to explain that I didn't care that he was black, I was just shocked and appalled to realize that I had made this assumption and was having a come-to-jesus moment with myself. It made for a very awkward meeting. After that, I tried to just let my kids model race stuff from their father and did my best to butt out. It's an uncomfortable incident that I thought of quite often for some years afterwards. In part because of that incident, I can be pretty thick skinned about a lot of low level, run of the mill sexism because I'm aware that a lot of people are doing pretty much that same thing without realizing it. In most cases, it is easier to combat if I don't try to point fingers, make them feel guilty, publicly embarras them, etc. I do sometimes make pointed remarks to try to educate people, but I spend a lot of time trying to simply be the change I would like to see and letting other people react to that as they see fit. Thank you for engaging me. I did read your piece (and the piece it links to at the start as background).
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  I'm not sure how them possibly being a 'SJW' has any relevance to this argument, as that's essentially a dismissive personal attack and a rather shitty one at that. Given my experience with ML algorithms having bias against minorities, I think it's fair to assume the worst when it's a black box algorithm. You feed it bad data, and you get bad results out.

DoreenMichele 7y ago

Sure. Let's assume I am very well versed in other pertinent domains of knowledge, like social psychology and the tendency for people to get mad as hell about social justice issues and leap to ugly conclusions that fit their SJW narrative about evil in the world that can be conveniently lumped under a one word heading, like sexism. Let's further assume that this is actually actively counterproductive, so it's reasonable to point out that correlation is not causation and it's unhelpful to insist on a particular conclusion you cannot prove. I already noted he's right to be outraged at the situation and critical of the black box nature of the decision. I'm just not comfortable with him ranting that it's clearly and obviously due to sexism.

kennywinker 7y ago
There a many people chiming in that they have had the same experience, and nobody saying they had the opposite. If the credit limit difference was unrelated to sex there would be random distribution of couples with the inverse experience. So you sayyyy that he flew off the handle because he's an SJW or whatever, but because his initial assumption continues to be proven correct as more data is accumulated... it seems like you are wrong that it was an overreaction.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  So you sayyyy that he flew off the handle because he's an SJW or whatever, but because his initial assumption continues to be proven correct as more data is accumulated... it seems like you are wrong that it was an overreaction. That's basically a dismissive personal attack. One of the most frustrating and crazy-making aspects of participating on HN as openly female is the frequency with which one must politely endure phenomenal open disrespect from people trying to position themselves as pro women's lib while violating the guidelines here concerning how to engage respectfully with other members. The only thing more crazy making is that there tends to be hell to pay should a woman dare to point it out or otherwise try to defend herself. For me, it is made more bearable by the quiet support of the many people who upvote my comments and posts, flag the worst replies and comment thoughtfully on pieces I submit. Yes, sexism is very much alive and well. I get to experience it on a daily basis. It still does little to no good for powerful men to engage in public white knighting and level accusations they cannot backup. I will note we are reading his tweets on HN, not his wife's. We are discussing the opinions of a powerful man, not a woman. We are reading them largely because he is a powerful man, not because he can back up his assertions. Discussions of this sort are sometimes a case of "two steps forward, one step back." But as a woman participating in them, they all too often feel like a dystopian bit of theater in which men get to claim virtues they don't have and treat a woman badly while loudly proclaiming themselves against this evil thing called sexism.
  - lawnchair_larry 7y ago
    I don’t see how what he said to you is a personal attack, nor is it different from how men talk to each other here on a daily basis. Saying someone is wrong is routine.
  - kennywinker 7y ago
    Not all attempts by men to advocate for equality or call out bullshit are “white knight”-ing. White knighting implies that it is unwanted. I am charging in to “rescue” someone when they do not want to be rescued. It is legitimate for a man to call out a bias when he sees it. To ignore it and leave it for women to point out is... frankly helping maintain the status quo. I’m sorry you found my comment dismissive and a personal attack. I found your use of the term “sjw” dismissive of the issue, since it’s such a loaded term. So my tone was a bit... glib... in reaction to that. I also definitely didn’t read your username, so don’t take anything i said to be a reaction your female handle. I definitely assumed a male writer (which is it’s own problem).
    - DoreenMichele 7y ago
      I also definitely didn’t read your username, so don’t take anything i said to be a reaction your female handle. I definitely assumed a male writer (which is it’s own problem). It is, in fact, a much larger problem. To my mind, white knighting is about men playing hero in order to enhance their ego and public reputation as the primary or sole goal such that actually addressing sexism is not only incidental, it's actually counter to their goal. Being chewed out by you and lectured about how I'm wrong to find any of this offensive amounts to mansplaining. At every turn, no matter how much men theoretically decry the existence of sexism in the world and pretend to fight against it, when push comes to shove, they expect to be treated with respect by women while not themselves being respectful to women. That expectation amounts to demanding deference from women. Start by working on treating actual women you are actually interacting with in the here and now with actual respect instead. That includes not assuming everyone you speak with on HN is male. If you don't know, don't assume. That assumption based on the odds is a fundamental part of sexism, racism, etc. It's a really huge issue. If you really want to see change in the world, get with the man in the mirror and work on his bad habits. He's the person you have the most control over. If every man who ever beat his chest about how sexism is a bad thing spent more time working on his bad habits, things would change. Instead, what happens is every time I comment, multiple people treat me like shit and then come up with justifications for their behavior and reasons why the problem is me and then fail to see the irony in decrying sexism while basically telling me "Shut up, woman." in the same breath.
acjohnson55 7y ago
Also in compliance training, as mentioned in a different reply to you, we talk about disparate impact. As I'm sure you can guess, this principle implies that sexism can be thought of as an outcome, not just the result of explicitly "evil" attitudes. In other words, I think he's right to say that Apple should be accountable for the issue he has pointed out, regardless of how it happened, which you rightly point out that he can't possibly know for sure.
- DoreenMichele 7y ago
  I desperately wish that I knew a different word for the negative impacts that harm the lives of so many women. Both allies and others seem incapable of hearing that I would like to see better outcomes when the only word available is sexism. To far too many people, that words means "It's done on purpose by evil people with a heart of darkness." This actively interferes with effective communication because "good guy" ally types don't ever want to hear that some behavior of theirs is part of the problem and needs to change. It helps make the problem insanely intractable.
  - acjohnson55 7y ago
    As a black person, I know what you mean. I suppose I'd rather fight the battle of expanding people's notions of what these isms are. They're not just horrifically bigoted beliefs with harmful intentions. They're all beliefs they hold with the best of intentions that are nonetheless harmful to some people (e.g. paternalism towards marginalized people). But they're also impacts they have that don't have and explicit belief at all. I just personally believe that personal responsibility entails doing the work to uncover the ways in which we ignorantly step on other people. I recently wrote something along these lines: https://acjay.com/2019/10/07/ableism-the-sneakiest-ism/ https://acjay.com/2019/10/07/ableism-the-sneakiest-ism/
    - DoreenMichele 7y ago
      In some cases, they are beliefs people hold and don't even realize they hold. My ex was career military and we arrived at a new duty station and he became fast friends with a coworker. He talked all the time time about his coworker "John" this and "John" that (John is not his real name). He rather got on my nerves with how much he blathered on about John. In all those months, he never once mentioned that John was black. It wasn't anything that made his radar at all as worthy of noting. When I met John and his family, I was very surprised that he (and his family) was black. I had assumed he was white. With seeing him, I realized in an instant that I had made this assumption because I grew up in the Deep South and if you didn't mention skin color, the signal there was that they had to be white. If they weren't white, you should give other white people the head's up. I realized in that instant that this was a racist assumption and I wasn't as immune to the racism around me as I had thought I had been. I still had been inculcated with practices I was oblivious to as being a problem in that regard. The surprise showed on my face and I was not able to figure out how to explain that I didn't care that he was black, I was just shocked and appalled to realize that I had made this assumption and was having a come-to-jesus moment with myself. It made for a very awkward meeting. After that, I tried to just let my kids model race stuff from their father and did my best to butt out. It's an uncomfortable incident that I thought of quite often for some years afterwards. In part because of that incident, I can be pretty thick skinned about a lot of low level, run of the mill sexism because I'm aware that a lot of people are doing pretty much that same thing without realizing it. In most cases, it is easier to combat if I don't try to point fingers, make them feel guilty, publicly embarras them, etc. I do sometimes make pointed remarks to try to educate people, but I spend a lot of time trying to simply be the change I would like to see and letting other people react to that as they see fit. Thank you for engaging me. I did read your piece (and the piece it links to at the start as background).
fzeroracer 7y ago
I'm not sure how them possibly being a 'SJW' has any relevance to this argument, as that's essentially a dismissive personal attack and a rather shitty one at that. Given my experience with ML algorithms having bias against minorities, I think it's fair to assume the worst when it's a black box algorithm. You feed it bad data, and you get bad results out.