5 ms·

did you not notice the article's comparison between SSD drives and "hot/crazy women?" it was highly offensive.

by allenbrunson 15y ago

StavrosK 15y ago
That was from a show, and I imagine the same goes for guys. I didn't find it sexist at all.
- allenbrunson 15y ago
  so if I were to claim that unicorns are real, it would be okay, so long as I am quoting from a TV show? it was objectifying a human, reducing her to a series of inputs and outputs, no better than a microwave oven. it would not have been acceptable whether the victim was male or female.
  - eliasmacpherson 15y ago
    I didn't notice but now I realise that you are right. Would changing the article so that it didn't directly quote the show, instead referring to someone theoretical that the reader is attracted to, make it less distasteful? The article could credit the show without going into specifics.
    - nzmsv 15y ago
      I'm not sure if this reference is appropriate at all. Imagine how the article would read if the quote was from a fictional female or gay character on the topic of what type of male they were attracted to. Just one data point, but it would make me wonder why that's there at all and what it adds to the discussion of SSD reliability.
  - StavrosK 15y ago
    I'm sorry, but I genuinely don't understand. It was saying that Stinson would date someone even though she was crazy, as long as she was hot enough. Isn't that what humans do with everything, weigh the pros and the cons? How is it objectifying?
- ajross 15y ago
  No, I'm with the OP on this. In the show, this kind of thing works because part of the schtick of the Barney character is that he's a sexist jerk. Everyone knows it, so you can riff off that to say things you can't in isolation. Here, there's none of that context. Drives, like women, are irreparably either hot or crazy and the only question left to users (or men) is whether they're "worth it". That's just sexist, sorry. The only people who have an excuse for thinking its not are the ones who get the sitcom reference.
  - StavrosK 15y ago
    Hmm, maybe it's because I can't see it out of context, but I sort of understand what you mean. I guess people who haven't seen the show don't know that Barney basically doesn't date, which makes this line even more nonsensical.
  - Helianthus 15y ago
    I'm not saying I disagree with you, but I think there is an impulse to label things sexist without addressing it, so I'm gonna ask a few questions. If a woman wrote this about men, would it be sexist? (I expect you'll say yes.) If a lesbian woman wrote this about other women, would it be sexist? (I feel like you're forced to say yes since you are committing to the idea being sexist independent of the sex of the speaker.) Is it possible for a man like Barney to be honestly and accurately analyzing trends of the women in his life, given that he only ranks women shallowly? Careful now. It's not necessarily sexist for Barney to _only care about looks,_ or at least: since we all care about looks to some degree, it is dangerous to imply that caring about looks is sexist. And if his analysis of his desires is based on his decision to only try for attractiveness, how is that analysis sexist instead of revealing the frailty of being so shallow? So the comparison is basically that there are two orthogonal traits, one negative and one positive. It is not "Drives, like women"; it is "Drives have orthogonal traits, and evaluation of them therefore proceeds along the Barney Analysis."
    - ajross 15y ago
      I understand the argument, but this isn't about logic. Context matters. Sexism directed by men against women (well, "heteronormative" to use the jargon) is "worse" than the reverse because it exacerbates an existing situation. It's easy for a typical man in our society to shrug off a comment equating his looks with his worth. It's much harder for a woman. "Should" it be? Of course not, but that's sort of the point: let's try laying off things for a while before demanding logical equality, OK?

did you not notice the article's comparison between SSD drives and "hot/crazy women?" it was highly offensive.

StavrosK 15y ago

That was from a show, and I imagine the same goes for guys. I didn't find it sexist at all.

allenbrunson 15y ago
so if I were to claim that unicorns are real, it would be okay, so long as I am quoting from a TV show? it was objectifying a human, reducing her to a series of inputs and outputs, no better than a microwave oven. it would not have been acceptable whether the victim was male or female.
- eliasmacpherson 15y ago
  I didn't notice but now I realise that you are right. Would changing the article so that it didn't directly quote the show, instead referring to someone theoretical that the reader is attracted to, make it less distasteful? The article could credit the show without going into specifics.
  - nzmsv 15y ago
    I'm not sure if this reference is appropriate at all. Imagine how the article would read if the quote was from a fictional female or gay character on the topic of what type of male they were attracted to. Just one data point, but it would make me wonder why that's there at all and what it adds to the discussion of SSD reliability.
- StavrosK 15y ago
  I'm sorry, but I genuinely don't understand. It was saying that Stinson would date someone even though she was crazy, as long as she was hot enough. Isn't that what humans do with everything, weigh the pros and the cons? How is it objectifying?
ajross 15y ago
No, I'm with the OP on this. In the show, this kind of thing works because part of the schtick of the Barney character is that he's a sexist jerk. Everyone knows it, so you can riff off that to say things you can't in isolation. Here, there's none of that context. Drives, like women, are irreparably either hot or crazy and the only question left to users (or men) is whether they're "worth it". That's just sexist, sorry. The only people who have an excuse for thinking its not are the ones who get the sitcom reference.
- StavrosK 15y ago
  Hmm, maybe it's because I can't see it out of context, but I sort of understand what you mean. I guess people who haven't seen the show don't know that Barney basically doesn't date, which makes this line even more nonsensical.
- Helianthus 15y ago
  I'm not saying I disagree with you, but I think there is an impulse to label things sexist without addressing it, so I'm gonna ask a few questions. If a woman wrote this about men, would it be sexist? (I expect you'll say yes.) If a lesbian woman wrote this about other women, would it be sexist? (I feel like you're forced to say yes since you are committing to the idea being sexist independent of the sex of the speaker.) Is it possible for a man like Barney to be honestly and accurately analyzing trends of the women in his life, given that he only ranks women shallowly? Careful now. It's not necessarily sexist for Barney to _only care about looks,_ or at least: since we all care about looks to some degree, it is dangerous to imply that caring about looks is sexist. And if his analysis of his desires is based on his decision to only try for attractiveness, how is that analysis sexist instead of revealing the frailty of being so shallow? So the comparison is basically that there are two orthogonal traits, one negative and one positive. It is not "Drives, like women"; it is "Drives have orthogonal traits, and evaluation of them therefore proceeds along the Barney Analysis."
  - ajross 15y ago
    I understand the argument, but this isn't about logic. Context matters. Sexism directed by men against women (well, "heteronormative" to use the jargon) is "worse" than the reverse because it exacerbates an existing situation. It's easy for a typical man in our society to shrug off a comment equating his looks with his worth. It's much harder for a woman. "Should" it be? Of course not, but that's sort of the point: let's try laying off things for a while before demanding logical equality, OK?