5 ms·

It's not okay because it (1) assumes a false equivalence - the actual counts are more like "a wrong versus a hundred million wrongs" (2) it puts a burden on the

It's not okay because it (1) assumes a false equivalence - the actual counts are more like "a wrong versus a hundred million wrongs" (2) it puts a burden on the victim of sexism to be perfect, while putting no such burden on the sexists (3) it's a variation on victim-blaming.

deleted 15y ago
[deleted]
bmelton 15y ago
I knew when I posted that comment that it would get downvoted, but I honestly don't know when or how "They're bugging me so I'm going to 'take the high road' and bug them back" became acceptable behavior. If it was something my daughter had done, she'd be in trouble for it, but because she has somehow appealed to the vigilante in everyone, while trumpeting the almighty PC agenda of sexism, she's apparently justified in being just as much an asshole as her tormentors. The irony of course being that of course people would treat her as having done "the right thing", because she was "the victim". Just the same as people root for the guy who hacked Sony, or for whatever random "little guy" stands up for whatever negatively though of "big baddie." It still doesn't make it right, and we're supposed to have learned that lesson by the second grade.
- wpietri 15y ago
  So if I understand your argument correctly, you're saying that a bot posting feminist quotes is as offensive to guys as a bot posting sexist jokes is to women?
  - bmelton 15y ago
    In particular, what I'm saying is that "fighting fire with fire" is a far cry from "taking the high road." In another comment, oskarth posits that she "did everything right" by not going to her supervisor, so as to avoid "turning it into drama". How does this not turn it into drama? Isn't that what supervisors are for? I understand the inclination to avoid being the snitch, but all this does is set her up for equally serious rebukement by management if and when it does get escalated there, and prevents her from having a leg to stand on. Whether or not it is as offensive as the other, I think we all know that it was intended to be at least as annoying. What she's effectively done is the digital equivalent to "I'm not touching you. I'm not touching you." while holding her finger one inch from the face of her co-workers. That's fine and dandy, but she doesn't get to respond like a two year old and also expect me to think highly of her actions.
    - wpietri 15y ago
      Right. By calling them both "fire" you're drawing an equivalence between a bot posting sexist jokes and a bot posting feminist quotes. Or more simply, an equivalence between sexist and non-sexist behavior. See the problem?
      - bmelton 15y ago
        Honestly, no. They're both, in and of themselves, wrong. I therefore look down on both parties almost equally. I'm not saying that what she did is any more wrong than the actions that prompted it, however, it certainly isn't right, and that's why I don't consider it appropriate. Regardless of equating it to 'fire', which I certainly didn't intend for anyone to take literally as it is an idiom, I'd think my synopsis at least appropriately defined the situation. She knowingly tried to out-annoy her co-workers to get them to resolve the issue, and expects that to somehow smooth things over? Perhaps it's a stupid thing to be arguing about, but you'll have to forgive me if I save my applause for someone not seeking the most annoying way toward peaceful resolution.
        wpietri 15y ago
        I'd say that when comparing sexist and non-sexist behavior, only one of them is necessarily wrong. That being the former in case you're missing it. Indeed, by posting feminist quotes rather than something equally but oppositely sexist, I'd say she de-escalated the situation. So she in fact did not take the most annoying way out.
        readymade 15y ago
        What do you think is wrong about writing an IRC bot that responds to "that's what she said" with quotes from famous women? I'm curious. Because the only answers I can imagine are (a) you think writing IRC bots is wrong, (b) you think that displaying quotes from famous women is wrong, or (c) engaging in public discourse that politely and indirectly calls attention to sexist behavior is wrong. I'll wait. I'd really love to hear more of your opinion on this.
- geekchick77 15y ago
  Every time a TWSS joke went by, I noticed, and it bothered me a little. It seemed to me that it was easier for at least some of the guys to ignore it as background noise. What I was hoping for was to make the joke visible, something people noticed and thought about. - Jessamyn P.S. And it worked really well, in the sense that we were able to have the conversation I tried to have in the first place but nobody was interested at the time.

deleted 15y ago

[deleted]

bmelton 15y ago

I knew when I posted that comment that it would get downvoted, but I honestly don't know when or how "They're bugging me so I'm going to 'take the high road' and bug them back" became acceptable behavior. If it was something my daughter had done, she'd be in trouble for it, but because she has somehow appealed to the vigilante in everyone, while trumpeting the almighty PC agenda of sexism, she's apparently justified in being just as much an asshole as her tormentors. The irony of course being that of course people would treat her as having done "the right thing", because she was "the victim". Just the same as people root for the guy who hacked Sony, or for whatever random "little guy" stands up for whatever negatively though of "big baddie." It still doesn't make it right, and we're supposed to have learned that lesson by the second grade.

wpietri 15y ago
So if I understand your argument correctly, you're saying that a bot posting feminist quotes is as offensive to guys as a bot posting sexist jokes is to women?
- bmelton 15y ago
  In particular, what I'm saying is that "fighting fire with fire" is a far cry from "taking the high road." In another comment, oskarth posits that she "did everything right" by not going to her supervisor, so as to avoid "turning it into drama". How does this not turn it into drama? Isn't that what supervisors are for? I understand the inclination to avoid being the snitch, but all this does is set her up for equally serious rebukement by management if and when it does get escalated there, and prevents her from having a leg to stand on. Whether or not it is as offensive as the other, I think we all know that it was intended to be at least as annoying. What she's effectively done is the digital equivalent to "I'm not touching you. I'm not touching you." while holding her finger one inch from the face of her co-workers. That's fine and dandy, but she doesn't get to respond like a two year old and also expect me to think highly of her actions.
  - wpietri 15y ago
    Right. By calling them both "fire" you're drawing an equivalence between a bot posting sexist jokes and a bot posting feminist quotes. Or more simply, an equivalence between sexist and non-sexist behavior. See the problem?
    - bmelton 15y ago
      Honestly, no. They're both, in and of themselves, wrong. I therefore look down on both parties almost equally. I'm not saying that what she did is any more wrong than the actions that prompted it, however, it certainly isn't right, and that's why I don't consider it appropriate. Regardless of equating it to 'fire', which I certainly didn't intend for anyone to take literally as it is an idiom, I'd think my synopsis at least appropriately defined the situation. She knowingly tried to out-annoy her co-workers to get them to resolve the issue, and expects that to somehow smooth things over? Perhaps it's a stupid thing to be arguing about, but you'll have to forgive me if I save my applause for someone not seeking the most annoying way toward peaceful resolution.
      - wpietri 15y ago
        I'd say that when comparing sexist and non-sexist behavior, only one of them is necessarily wrong. That being the former in case you're missing it. Indeed, by posting feminist quotes rather than something equally but oppositely sexist, I'd say she de-escalated the situation. So she in fact did not take the most annoying way out.
      - readymade 15y ago
        What do you think is wrong about writing an IRC bot that responds to "that's what she said" with quotes from famous women? I'm curious. Because the only answers I can imagine are (a) you think writing IRC bots is wrong, (b) you think that displaying quotes from famous women is wrong, or (c) engaging in public discourse that politely and indirectly calls attention to sexist behavior is wrong. I'll wait. I'd really love to hear more of your opinion on this.
geekchick77 15y ago
Every time a TWSS joke went by, I noticed, and it bothered me a little. It seemed to me that it was easier for at least some of the guys to ignore it as background noise. What I was hoping for was to make the joke visible, something people noticed and thought about. - Jessamyn P.S. And it worked really well, in the sense that we were able to have the conversation I tried to have in the first place but nobody was interested at the time.