3 ms·

I don't think it's ok to just say "she's a woman so she automatically will be crucified if she speaks up". To me that's much more damaging than the initial sent

I don't think it's ok to just say "she's a woman so she automatically will be crucified if she speaks up". To me that's much more damaging than the initial sentiment of speaking up in the first place and the potential damage therein. I believe that you're perpetuating the idea that women aren't on a level playing field by repeating that point. Whether or not it's true, repeating it does nothing to solve the problem. Whereas my points offered a potential way to alternatively address the situation, yours seem to throw your hands up in the air and say "gee this is pretty bad huh. Somebody should really clean that up...". In short, what would you say should've been done if being loud or being quiet have negative consequences?

djcapelis 14y ago
> I don't think it's ok to just say "she's a woman so she automatically will be crucified if she speaks up" That is in fact not what I said. What I said was more along the lines that you're in a bad position to be giving advice on what women should do when they encounter this situation. (And for what it's worth, if you were a woman (which I made the assumption from your username that you weren't, feel free to correct me) I would write the same thing except I would say "other women". I don't think it's terribly productive for anyone to spend a lot of time telling someone else how to raise a point in a situation they weren't a party to.) > I believe that you're perpetuating the idea that women aren't on a level playing field by repeating that point. I happen to know that women are not on a level playing field in tech and I happen to chose not to pretend like the world is a different place than it is. > what would you say should've been done if being loud or being quiet have negative consequences? I think it's important to respect an individual's choice in terms of how they react to dealing with a situation they find problematic. Which isn't to say someone's actions can't be questioned, but engaging in a discussion of how you think someone that isn't you and who was in a situation you weren't in should have gone about raising a point seems a lot less useful than actually addressing the point they were trying to raise.

djcapelis 14y ago

> I don't think it's ok to just say "she's a woman so she automatically will be crucified if she speaks up" That is in fact not what I said. What I said was more along the lines that you're in a bad position to be giving advice on what women should do when they encounter this situation. (And for what it's worth, if you were a woman (which I made the assumption from your username that you weren't, feel free to correct me) I would write the same thing except I would say "other women". I don't think it's terribly productive for anyone to spend a lot of time telling someone else how to raise a point in a situation they weren't a party to.) > I believe that you're perpetuating the idea that women aren't on a level playing field by repeating that point. I happen to know that women are not on a level playing field in tech and I happen to chose not to pretend like the world is a different place than it is. > what would you say should've been done if being loud or being quiet have negative consequences? I think it's important to respect an individual's choice in terms of how they react to dealing with a situation they find problematic. Which isn't to say someone's actions can't be questioned, but engaging in a discussion of how you think someone that isn't you and who was in a situation you weren't in should have gone about raising a point seems a lot less useful than actually addressing the point they were trying to raise.