4 ms·

Wrong: if they do name names nothing changes. And I am suggesting that your first thought after being the victim of any crime should not be to broadcast it publ

Wrong: if they do name names nothing changes. And I am suggesting that your first thought after being the victim of any crime should not be to broadcast it publicly on your blog. Blogs change things for the worse in a lot of cases and this is one of them. How can you expect an impartial trial when the victim has already laid out the entire crime publicly? This is why some civilized countries have insane legal controls on broadcasting a trial in progress. Seriously I am not going to fight this battle again only in the end to be accused of being a woman-hater.

potatolicious 15y ago
So what's your suggestion, besides suggesting that people simply shut up about it? I think there's an appreciation to the dangers of a very public airing of dirty laundry - but the alternative (shaming victims into silence) seems far, far worse.
- jules 15y ago
  How about reporting crimes to the police?
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]
  - jsprinkles 15y ago
    When Noirin Shirley wrote her blog post reviling Florian Leibert there was no mention of the police in the post. When the top comment on Reddit was calling her out for that for a while she added in "thanks to the police department!" in an edit. Why get the cops involved when your faithful blog readers can direct their hatred at your whim?
  - bigiain 15y ago
    While I agree that "trial by Twitter" (or "trial by blog-wars") is probably one of the worst ways of dealing with sexual assault, there's an awful lot of anecdotal/hearsay "evidence" that reporting it to police is likely to be even less effective and probably more personally invasive. Seriously. Google some stats about sexual assault case's successfully prosecuted. Read up on research about how few rapes are reported, and notice how often victims suggest the big reasn they don't report rapes is because of the way they expect (rightly or wrongly) to be treated by police and courts. I can fully understand why women who've been raped refuse to want to go through the standard process of reporting and prosecuting that crime. I can fully understand why anyone who suffers something short of rape would think it's not worth bothering trying to get the police to do anything about it. Seriously - what sort of reaction do you thing she would have got fronting up to a police station and saying "This guy banned me from a conference because I refused to have sex with him. Please have him charged." In an ideal world? Yeah, the "police" would fix this. In the real world, not s much...
    - stcredzero 15y ago
      While I agree that "trial by Twitter" (or "trial by blog-wars") is probably one of the worst ways of dealing with sexual assault, there's an awful lot of anecdotal/hearsay "evidence" that reporting it to police is likely to be even less effective and probably more personally invasive. I've also had to take a friend to the hospital after a rape. I had to listen to her complaints about the invasiveness of the rape kit, and I also had to deal with the subsequent futility of it all. The way I have decided to deal with this is to choose my friends and associates carefully, based on their code of ethics as determined by their actions over a long period of time. How about a private service combined with a device to record, encrypt, and upload a "lifestream" style recording? There would be two encryption keys involved, one in possession of the customer and the other in possession of the service provider, who would be under contract to perform their side of the decryption only in certain conditions. This would have saved my friend from rape and also saved me much stress in a situation where I was physically threatened and also in an unpleasant fender bender where the other party lied their ass off. I think this would be a better deterrent to many crimes than widespread gun carry laws. (Epidemiological studies of gun ownership find it's a net loss due to the higher incidence of deadly violence.)
      - rdl 15y ago
        This, minus escrow requirements, is David Brin's "the watchers" or "transparent society". I'd be really afraid of how the escrow happened, but if I could keep control of recordings, I'd support it. Of course, one of the main reasons I'd want recordings is so that if I shot someone in self defense, I'd have video supporting that to show to the DA or jury. The UK has shown that video isn't that great a deterrent of criminal activity. It does make people feel safer, but doesn't actually reduce crime. It is sometimes helpful in prosecutions, but even that isn't a major factor in street environments (in a bank, it's better). I'm a safe and responsible firearms owner. I'm pretty confident that my firearms ownership, training, and use contributes to my personal safety. I think my safe driving and carrying a cellphone, first aid kit, flashlight, etc. and keeping cases of water and some canned good at home is more of a net win, though.
        15y ago
  - Confusion 15y ago
    To quote eropple elsewhere in this thread: There is nothing illegal that's been done (if the blog post is honestly reported). This is a social problem. Now I'm not entirely sure that's true (assuming there were only words involved), but it's definitely murky territory. I can legally tell someone they can only enter my house if they'll sleep with me, but I cannot legally tell someone I will only hire them if they'll sleep with me. Where on the spectrum is gaining entrance to an event organised by a private society? I think it's more effective to direct efforts towards solving the social problem.
- rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
  Shaming victims into silence You really need to calm down and think things through. Just because jsprinkles said that blogging about this accomplishes nothing (and he's absolutely right btw), doesn't mean he's saying that she should stay silent. Since when is blogging/tweeting about this the first line of action? Go to the police. Period. P.S. Try not to throw the word 'victim' around. All we have is her word. If the allegations are proven, then yes, she's a victim. Till then, she's a blogger.
  - jamesaguilar 15y ago
    IMO, she's a victim if the events happened. It matters little whether they are proven.
    - rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
      And how do you know the events happened? Besides her blog post I mean.
      - starwed 15y ago
        Please keep clear in your mind the context of the discussion. The question in this particular thread of comments was, what should someone who experiences these events do? There is no particular person whose words can be proven or disproven, just a hypothetical person who ("by construction") is a victim.
        rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
        You should take your own advice and pay attention. We're not talking about some hypothetical person. We're talking about this specific person. It's ok for Tammy to refer to herself as a 'victim' since in her mind, it may very well be true. But we can't call her a 'victim' since, in this specific case, we don't know what happened.
        starwed 15y ago
arkitaip 15y ago
"Seriously I am not going to fight this battle again only in the end to be accused of being a woman-hater." If you don't want to participate in the discussion, fine. But please don't try to encourage others to do that.
crux_ 15y ago
> be accused of being a woman-hater This only seems fair, as your opening salvo began with accusing anyone who disagrees with you a man-hater. I seriously doubt that a blog post was the "first thought" in any of the many prominent incidents of this nature. It's a very serious, very personal topic, after all; and I've seen no evidence whatsoever that putting it up on the internet for all to see was a 'first thought'. What you really mean in your suggestion is that these women should never make a blog post. One compelling reason for publicity is that these problems go beyond individual occurrences and permeate the startup/IT culture. No number of quiet police reports or settled lawsuits will bring about changes to that culture, but a glaring spotlight may have an effect.
- jsprinkles 15y ago
  I did not accuse those who disagree with me of misandry. I said the misandry will drown out objective discussion of the topic. You are kidding yourself if you think blog posts like this change things. As long as men have had penises things like this have happened. It will always happen. Ranting about it on a blog will do nothing except ostracize and jeopardize the life of the accused. There is nothing special about IT when it comes to gender affairs except a bunch of people who think it is okay to publicly ruin lives and justify it under the guise of "defending a profession from sexual impropriety".
  - crux_ 15y ago
    > You are kidding yourself if you think blog posts like this change things. As long as men have had penises things like this have happened. It will always happen. A response, in several parts: 1) So men are mere unthinking animals, victim to their penis and incapable of higher reason, and thus innocent? Who's the misandrist here, again? 2) Perhaps you also believe that skin-color based slavery is also inevitable, natural and inescapable. After all, it's been happening for all of history! 3) IT (and more so, startups) are significantly and noticeably more sexist than many other professions. Also, it's my profession, and I'd like it to be one I can be proud of. 4) Really? "Jeopardise the life of the accused"? The only death threats I recall from recent situations were made against the woman (accuser). 5) Things have changed. For one, others who have experienced similar harassment have another data point to know that they're not alone. For another, those of us who aren't as tolerant of jackassery as you are have been reminded of how far we have to go.
hristov 15y ago
Huh? I am not sure you know how the legal system works but accusations are supposed to be public. Criminal trials in the US and pretty much every free country start with an indictment which is the accusation of the crime the defendant supposedly committed and that is always public.

potatolicious 15y ago

So what's your suggestion, besides suggesting that people simply shut up about it? I think there's an appreciation to the dangers of a very public airing of dirty laundry - but the alternative (shaming victims into silence) seems far, far worse.

jules 15y ago
How about reporting crimes to the police?
- deleted 15y ago
  [deleted]
- jsprinkles 15y ago
  When Noirin Shirley wrote her blog post reviling Florian Leibert there was no mention of the police in the post. When the top comment on Reddit was calling her out for that for a while she added in "thanks to the police department!" in an edit. Why get the cops involved when your faithful blog readers can direct their hatred at your whim?
- bigiain 15y ago
  While I agree that "trial by Twitter" (or "trial by blog-wars") is probably one of the worst ways of dealing with sexual assault, there's an awful lot of anecdotal/hearsay "evidence" that reporting it to police is likely to be even less effective and probably more personally invasive. Seriously. Google some stats about sexual assault case's successfully prosecuted. Read up on research about how few rapes are reported, and notice how often victims suggest the big reasn they don't report rapes is because of the way they expect (rightly or wrongly) to be treated by police and courts. I can fully understand why women who've been raped refuse to want to go through the standard process of reporting and prosecuting that crime. I can fully understand why anyone who suffers something short of rape would think it's not worth bothering trying to get the police to do anything about it. Seriously - what sort of reaction do you thing she would have got fronting up to a police station and saying "This guy banned me from a conference because I refused to have sex with him. Please have him charged." In an ideal world? Yeah, the "police" would fix this. In the real world, not s much...
  - stcredzero 15y ago
    While I agree that "trial by Twitter" (or "trial by blog-wars") is probably one of the worst ways of dealing with sexual assault, there's an awful lot of anecdotal/hearsay "evidence" that reporting it to police is likely to be even less effective and probably more personally invasive. I've also had to take a friend to the hospital after a rape. I had to listen to her complaints about the invasiveness of the rape kit, and I also had to deal with the subsequent futility of it all. The way I have decided to deal with this is to choose my friends and associates carefully, based on their code of ethics as determined by their actions over a long period of time. How about a private service combined with a device to record, encrypt, and upload a "lifestream" style recording? There would be two encryption keys involved, one in possession of the customer and the other in possession of the service provider, who would be under contract to perform their side of the decryption only in certain conditions. This would have saved my friend from rape and also saved me much stress in a situation where I was physically threatened and also in an unpleasant fender bender where the other party lied their ass off. I think this would be a better deterrent to many crimes than widespread gun carry laws. (Epidemiological studies of gun ownership find it's a net loss due to the higher incidence of deadly violence.)
    - rdl 15y ago
      This, minus escrow requirements, is David Brin's "the watchers" or "transparent society". I'd be really afraid of how the escrow happened, but if I could keep control of recordings, I'd support it. Of course, one of the main reasons I'd want recordings is so that if I shot someone in self defense, I'd have video supporting that to show to the DA or jury. The UK has shown that video isn't that great a deterrent of criminal activity. It does make people feel safer, but doesn't actually reduce crime. It is sometimes helpful in prosecutions, but even that isn't a major factor in street environments (in a bank, it's better). I'm a safe and responsible firearms owner. I'm pretty confident that my firearms ownership, training, and use contributes to my personal safety. I think my safe driving and carrying a cellphone, first aid kit, flashlight, etc. and keeping cases of water and some canned good at home is more of a net win, though.
      - 15y ago
- Confusion 15y ago
  To quote eropple elsewhere in this thread: There is nothing illegal that's been done (if the blog post is honestly reported). This is a social problem. Now I'm not entirely sure that's true (assuming there were only words involved), but it's definitely murky territory. I can legally tell someone they can only enter my house if they'll sleep with me, but I cannot legally tell someone I will only hire them if they'll sleep with me. Where on the spectrum is gaining entrance to an event organised by a private society? I think it's more effective to direct efforts towards solving the social problem.
rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
Shaming victims into silence You really need to calm down and think things through. Just because jsprinkles said that blogging about this accomplishes nothing (and he's absolutely right btw), doesn't mean he's saying that she should stay silent. Since when is blogging/tweeting about this the first line of action? Go to the police. Period. P.S. Try not to throw the word 'victim' around. All we have is her word. If the allegations are proven, then yes, she's a victim. Till then, she's a blogger.
- jamesaguilar 15y ago
  IMO, she's a victim if the events happened. It matters little whether they are proven.
  - rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
    And how do you know the events happened? Besides her blog post I mean.
    - starwed 15y ago
      Please keep clear in your mind the context of the discussion. The question in this particular thread of comments was, what should someone who experiences these events do? There is no particular person whose words can be proven or disproven, just a hypothetical person who ("by construction") is a victim.
      - rumpelstiltskin 15y ago
        You should take your own advice and pay attention. We're not talking about some hypothetical person. We're talking about this specific person. It's ok for Tammy to refer to herself as a 'victim' since in her mind, it may very well be true. But we can't call her a 'victim' since, in this specific case, we don't know what happened.
        starwed 15y ago

arkitaip 15y ago

"Seriously I am not going to fight this battle again only in the end to be accused of being a woman-hater." If you don't want to participate in the discussion, fine. But please don't try to encourage others to do that.

crux_ 15y ago

> be accused of being a woman-hater This only seems fair, as your opening salvo began with accusing anyone who disagrees with you a man-hater. I seriously doubt that a blog post was the "first thought" in any of the many prominent incidents of this nature. It's a very serious, very personal topic, after all; and I've seen no evidence whatsoever that putting it up on the internet for all to see was a 'first thought'. What you really mean in your suggestion is that these women should never make a blog post. One compelling reason for publicity is that these problems go beyond individual occurrences and permeate the startup/IT culture. No number of quiet police reports or settled lawsuits will bring about changes to that culture, but a glaring spotlight may have an effect.

jsprinkles 15y ago
I did not accuse those who disagree with me of misandry. I said the misandry will drown out objective discussion of the topic. You are kidding yourself if you think blog posts like this change things. As long as men have had penises things like this have happened. It will always happen. Ranting about it on a blog will do nothing except ostracize and jeopardize the life of the accused. There is nothing special about IT when it comes to gender affairs except a bunch of people who think it is okay to publicly ruin lives and justify it under the guise of "defending a profession from sexual impropriety".
- crux_ 15y ago
  > You are kidding yourself if you think blog posts like this change things. As long as men have had penises things like this have happened. It will always happen. A response, in several parts: 1) So men are mere unthinking animals, victim to their penis and incapable of higher reason, and thus innocent? Who's the misandrist here, again? 2) Perhaps you also believe that skin-color based slavery is also inevitable, natural and inescapable. After all, it's been happening for all of history! 3) IT (and more so, startups) are significantly and noticeably more sexist than many other professions. Also, it's my profession, and I'd like it to be one I can be proud of. 4) Really? "Jeopardise the life of the accused"? The only death threats I recall from recent situations were made against the woman (accuser). 5) Things have changed. For one, others who have experienced similar harassment have another data point to know that they're not alone. For another, those of us who aren't as tolerant of jackassery as you are have been reminded of how far we have to go.

hristov 15y ago

Huh? I am not sure you know how the legal system works but accusations are supposed to be public. Criminal trials in the US and pretty much every free country start with an indictment which is the accusation of the crime the defendant supposedly committed and that is always public.