3 ms·

Kim Kardashian did it pretty well with crypto. Elizabeth Holmes was exceedingly good at what she did. Brian Kolfage did exceedingly well at conning people into

by oooyay 3y ago

Kim Kardashian did it pretty well with crypto. Elizabeth Holmes was exceedingly good at what she did. Brian Kolfage did exceedingly well at conning people into millions. Bernie Madoff was only 5'7'', SBF is only 5'8''. This is a short and certainly non-exhaustive list. I think given sufficient charisma and just enough but not too much mystery around the product alongside short term promising returns anybody can fall for what's being sold.

underlipton 3y ago
It's not a binary. Kim Kardashian set the Western beauty standard for a few years, Elizabeth Holmes and SBF had direct relatives with exceedingly helpful credentials and connections, Brian Kolfage is a decorated veteran who looks "normal" (in our image-obsessed culture) in any bust shots you may find of him, and Madoff started his career when the average height was lower (and followed the pattern of shorter men not becoming hugely successful until later in their careers). Most of the people on your list also benefited hugely from affinity bias in some shape or form, which probably speaks to a large component of what's actually going on here. A marginalized identity can be disqualifying for most would-be marks, but another aspect (or even the same aspect!) of one's identity or presentation can override people's critical faculties and lead them to trust you when they otherwise wouldn't. This itself is an aspect of "charisma" (or the lack thereof). My point is that it's not a product of one's effort, and is, in fact, so out of one's hands that its read can change depending on the audience.
- oooyay 3y ago
  I disagree that this somehow disqualifies their marginalization that they started with. They may have had another characteristics about their lives that affected that marginalization in unexpected ways. For instance, before Kim Kardashian was the "western beauty standard" she was effectively a nobody who did a pornography film with an R&B artist. Generally we regard sex workers as marginalized by default and yet the way she maneuvered everything made it like rocket fuel to her career. Had she messed that up we'd be talking about her more like Paris Hilton, who had vastly different outcomes. Brian Kolfage was similar; the man has to travel in a wheel chair and has a prosthetic hand most of the time, so I heavily disagree that he's relatable to any degree. You may have a point about Holmes and SBF, but I rather doubt many of the people who did business with them knew their parents. That's to say, I think you can find an abundance of reasons to eschew someones marginalization once they're successful. That's what intersectionality tries to address, and your reply seems to be the antithesis to intersectionality.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

by oooyay 3y ago

underlipton 3y ago

It's not a binary. Kim Kardashian set the Western beauty standard for a few years, Elizabeth Holmes and SBF had direct relatives with exceedingly helpful credentials and connections, Brian Kolfage is a decorated veteran who looks "normal" (in our image-obsessed culture) in any bust shots you may find of him, and Madoff started his career when the average height was lower (and followed the pattern of shorter men not becoming hugely successful until later in their careers). Most of the people on your list also benefited hugely from affinity bias in some shape or form, which probably speaks to a large component of what's actually going on here. A marginalized identity can be disqualifying for most would-be marks, but another aspect (or even the same aspect!) of one's identity or presentation can override people's critical faculties and lead them to trust you when they otherwise wouldn't. This itself is an aspect of "charisma" (or the lack thereof). My point is that it's not a product of one's effort, and is, in fact, so out of one's hands that its read can change depending on the audience.

oooyay 3y ago
I disagree that this somehow disqualifies their marginalization that they started with. They may have had another characteristics about their lives that affected that marginalization in unexpected ways. For instance, before Kim Kardashian was the "western beauty standard" she was effectively a nobody who did a pornography film with an R&B artist. Generally we regard sex workers as marginalized by default and yet the way she maneuvered everything made it like rocket fuel to her career. Had she messed that up we'd be talking about her more like Paris Hilton, who had vastly different outcomes. Brian Kolfage was similar; the man has to travel in a wheel chair and has a prosthetic hand most of the time, so I heavily disagree that he's relatable to any degree. You may have a point about Holmes and SBF, but I rather doubt many of the people who did business with them knew their parents. That's to say, I think you can find an abundance of reasons to eschew someones marginalization once they're successful. That's what intersectionality tries to address, and your reply seems to be the antithesis to intersectionality.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]