3 ms·

> being a cis het white western man or be subject to all manners of harassment and offensive jokes. Believe it or not but cis white western men were and still

> being a cis het white western man or be subject to all manners of harassment and offensive jokes. Believe it or not but cis white western men were and still are subject to all manners of harassment and offensive jokes. As a cis white western man myself I personally have experienced harassment online.

Spivak 5y ago
I didn't say they couldn't be. You're doing the thing where you assume that a implies b means that b implies a. "If you did not pass as a cit het white man you would likely be harassed for it on the early internet." is not the same thing as "If you were harassed on the early internet then you must not have passed as a cis het white man." During a safety meeting at a lumber yard you wouldn't respond to "workers who use the malfunctioning machine in building A have been getting injured" by saying, "well I didn't use that machine and I also got injured."
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  > I didn't say they couldn't be. The way you worded it sounded like you were as explicit as you can be without explicitly saying that men are not harassed. You said you either adopt the persona of a man OR you are harassed. You also said you gave up and learned to talk like a man (to stop certain harassment). Both of these implies that you are not harassed if you act like a man. >During a safety meeting at a lumber yard you wouldn't respond to "workers who use the malfunctioning machine in building A have been getting injured" by saying, "well I didn't use that machine and I also got injured." There is a difference in your original post and your analogy due to the use of the word 'or' in the original post. If you go to a restaurant and they ask if you want salad or soup as a side dish they are not implying you get both, but one or the other. It is too bad in English we do not have xor to prevent such confusions.

Spivak 5y ago

I didn't say they couldn't be. You're doing the thing where you assume that a implies b means that b implies a. "If you did not pass as a cit het white man you would likely be harassed for it on the early internet." is not the same thing as "If you were harassed on the early internet then you must not have passed as a cis het white man." During a safety meeting at a lumber yard you wouldn't respond to "workers who use the malfunctioning machine in building A have been getting injured" by saying, "well I didn't use that machine and I also got injured."

_-david-_ 5y ago
> I didn't say they couldn't be. The way you worded it sounded like you were as explicit as you can be without explicitly saying that men are not harassed. You said you either adopt the persona of a man OR you are harassed. You also said you gave up and learned to talk like a man (to stop certain harassment). Both of these implies that you are not harassed if you act like a man. >During a safety meeting at a lumber yard you wouldn't respond to "workers who use the malfunctioning machine in building A have been getting injured" by saying, "well I didn't use that machine and I also got injured." There is a difference in your original post and your analogy due to the use of the word 'or' in the original post. If you go to a restaurant and they ask if you want salad or soup as a side dish they are not implying you get both, but one or the other. It is too bad in English we do not have xor to prevent such confusions.