4 ms·

Isn't the OC about how female guards are effectively getting away with sexual abuse?

fortran77 5y ago
Exactly right. And how people connected with the story were explaining it way by blaming the victims for being "persuasive". Then the HN crowd jumped on me and called me a right-winger. Ha! I'm quite left-leaning.
- unclebucknasty 5y ago
  The part people took exception with is: >Women get away with too much in our society Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. As far as the surprise over being labeled a right-winger, can you imagine a meeting of "left-leaning" people wherein that statement would be comfortably accepted or pass unnoticed?
  - throwawaytruth1 5y ago
    > Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. You can also do this with all the negative statements made about men every day. You'll quickly get banned from HN. Women already get special treatment. And by "ethnicity or race" I assume you mean "ethnicity or race that's not acceptable to make fun of", because people make negative statements about whites or asians/indians all the time.
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >You can also do this with all the negative statements made about men every day. I've never felt unfairly treated for being a man. I understand that there's a difference when speaking about in-power groups and "out-groups", especially when the latter have experienced unequal treatment at the hands of the former. So, on hearing references to "men" I don't feel personally attacked. I hear it as a metaphor for the group that has "configured the system", wield power within it, and most benefit from it. I think we can agree that men have historically held power in many societies, including the US, right? And that equal treatment of women hasn't historically been (and isn't fully now) a thing, correct? So, I think men have a special responsibility here and should be called to task when they're not meeting it. But, I mean are you really claiming there's no difference between, say, a man (as a member of the group that has traditionally held power) declaring that "Women get away with too much in society" and a woman saying "Men get away with too much in society?" >I assume you mean "ethnicity or race that's not acceptable to make fun of" No. That's not what I meant. But, what is the logic behind these kinds of comments? Are you arguing for the right to make negative statements about all racial groups and ethnicities? I mean, if instead you want to make the point that we shouldn't make negative statements about any ethnicities or racial groups, then make that point. But, your lamenting about "acceptable groups to make fun of" actually contradicts the point.
  - wutbrodo 5y ago
    > Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. This doesn't make any sense. The comment is talking about how society treats women (and implicitly, men), not about some quality inherent to women. The analogous racial statement would be "white people get treated preferentially in a number of ways by society". This statement obviously isn't problematic under the leftist mores of "polite society", and probably isn't even that controversial all the way to the center-right. The "halo effect" that women enjoy is well-established, in fact much, much more strongly than the racial bias in my analogue statement. (That isn't to say that there aren't flipsides to gender roles that benefit men, obviously. The best way I've heard it put is that society entitles men to respect and women to compassion.)
    - unclebucknasty 5y ago
      >The comment is talking about society treats women (and implicitly, men), not about some quality inherent to women. The analogous racial statement would be "white people get treated preferentially in a number of ways by society" Of course it's not merely talking about how society treats women. The comment was: "Women get away with too much in society" The obvious assertion here is that women actively and routinely engage in problematic behavior and are able to get away with it. It's framed in a way that directly attributes willfulness to women and casts them as holding some power that they're abusing in society writ large. Hence, a directly analogous racial statement would be "Black (etc) people get away with too much in society". Now, we all understand subjects and verbs. We know who's doing the action here, thus who's behavior needs to be curbed. So, we know how charged that statement would be, and that it's very different from saying "White people get treated preferentially by society...", wherein society is doing the action and needs to change. It's a complete reassignment of responsibility. Worse, the statement itself aligns with an overt political framing that's simply untrue at any reasonable scale. To whatever degree there are pockets of "protection" women enjoy, it pales in comparison to the sum of those areas in which they've had to struggle for equality. So, it's a pernicious generalization that seeks to rewrite history. And, if the ethos allows for the idea that women are getting away with too much, well we can then justify "checks on their power" and, at a minimum, denial of the equal rights they seek. You may think it's pedantic, but these things are extraordinarily impactful to people who've been on the receiving end of unequal treatment. So, words matter. If the commenter wanted to keep the focus narrowly on the topic at hand, then we could all agree that society does see sexual abuse in ways that are probably more favorable to women. But, what is the point of broadening it out to this ridiculous and untrue assertion that "Women get away with too much in society", as if that's been the historical struggle of our society versus the precise opposite: women fighting for the right to be treated equally?

Exactly right. And how people connected with the story were explaining it way by blaming the victims for being "persuasive". Then the HN crowd jumped on me and called me a right-winger. Ha! I'm quite left-leaning.

unclebucknasty 5y ago
The part people took exception with is: >Women get away with too much in our society Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. As far as the surprise over being labeled a right-winger, can you imagine a meeting of "left-leaning" people wherein that statement would be comfortably accepted or pass unnoticed?
- throwawaytruth1 5y ago
  > Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. You can also do this with all the negative statements made about men every day. You'll quickly get banned from HN. Women already get special treatment. And by "ethnicity or race" I assume you mean "ethnicity or race that's not acceptable to make fun of", because people make negative statements about whites or asians/indians all the time.
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >You can also do this with all the negative statements made about men every day. I've never felt unfairly treated for being a man. I understand that there's a difference when speaking about in-power groups and "out-groups", especially when the latter have experienced unequal treatment at the hands of the former. So, on hearing references to "men" I don't feel personally attacked. I hear it as a metaphor for the group that has "configured the system", wield power within it, and most benefit from it. I think we can agree that men have historically held power in many societies, including the US, right? And that equal treatment of women hasn't historically been (and isn't fully now) a thing, correct? So, I think men have a special responsibility here and should be called to task when they're not meeting it. But, I mean are you really claiming there's no difference between, say, a man (as a member of the group that has traditionally held power) declaring that "Women get away with too much in society" and a woman saying "Men get away with too much in society?" >I assume you mean "ethnicity or race that's not acceptable to make fun of" No. That's not what I meant. But, what is the logic behind these kinds of comments? Are you arguing for the right to make negative statements about all racial groups and ethnicities? I mean, if instead you want to make the point that we shouldn't make negative statements about any ethnicities or racial groups, then make that point. But, your lamenting about "acceptable groups to make fun of" actually contradicts the point.
- wutbrodo 5y ago
  > Surely you see the problem here? If still not, then replace "Women" with an ethnicity or race in that statement. This doesn't make any sense. The comment is talking about how society treats women (and implicitly, men), not about some quality inherent to women. The analogous racial statement would be "white people get treated preferentially in a number of ways by society". This statement obviously isn't problematic under the leftist mores of "polite society", and probably isn't even that controversial all the way to the center-right. The "halo effect" that women enjoy is well-established, in fact much, much more strongly than the racial bias in my analogue statement. (That isn't to say that there aren't flipsides to gender roles that benefit men, obviously. The best way I've heard it put is that society entitles men to respect and women to compassion.)
  - unclebucknasty 5y ago
    >The comment is talking about society treats women (and implicitly, men), not about some quality inherent to women. The analogous racial statement would be "white people get treated preferentially in a number of ways by society" Of course it's not merely talking about how society treats women. The comment was: "Women get away with too much in society" The obvious assertion here is that women actively and routinely engage in problematic behavior and are able to get away with it. It's framed in a way that directly attributes willfulness to women and casts them as holding some power that they're abusing in society writ large. Hence, a directly analogous racial statement would be "Black (etc) people get away with too much in society". Now, we all understand subjects and verbs. We know who's doing the action here, thus who's behavior needs to be curbed. So, we know how charged that statement would be, and that it's very different from saying "White people get treated preferentially by society...", wherein society is doing the action and needs to change. It's a complete reassignment of responsibility. Worse, the statement itself aligns with an overt political framing that's simply untrue at any reasonable scale. To whatever degree there are pockets of "protection" women enjoy, it pales in comparison to the sum of those areas in which they've had to struggle for equality. So, it's a pernicious generalization that seeks to rewrite history. And, if the ethos allows for the idea that women are getting away with too much, well we can then justify "checks on their power" and, at a minimum, denial of the equal rights they seek. You may think it's pedantic, but these things are extraordinarily impactful to people who've been on the receiving end of unequal treatment. So, words matter. If the commenter wanted to keep the focus narrowly on the topic at hand, then we could all agree that society does see sexual abuse in ways that are probably more favorable to women. But, what is the point of broadening it out to this ridiculous and untrue assertion that "Women get away with too much in society", as if that's been the historical struggle of our society versus the precise opposite: women fighting for the right to be treated equally?