7 ms·

> the equally [sic] negative and virulent feminism You mean the negative and virulent feminists who were threatening to rape and decapitate someone they didn't

> the equally [sic] negative and virulent feminism You mean the negative and virulent feminists who were threatening to rape and decapitate someone they didn't like? Oh, right, no such thing happened. Please, please do not equate attempts to bring people's attention to inappropriate sexual language during conferences - whether you agree with them or not - to the massive outpouring of hatred, abuse, personal attacks and misogyny that accompanied this incident.

deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
smsm42 14y ago
The story went a bit further than "attempts to bring people's attention". As it is pretty clear by now, Richards is a crusader, repeatedly blowing things out of proportion and raising big controversy out of most mundane things, and in this case it cost somebody his job. So while indeed she did nothing nothing comparable to death threats and other such filth, something more that "attempt to bring attention" did happen.
- RyanMcGreal 14y ago
  That's not clear at all. I highly recommend reading this essay for a more careful look at what Richards has actually done by way of promoting gender equality rather than what her detractors (both civil and hateful) are saying about her: http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-the-surface-that-amanda-blum-article-on-adria-richards-is-not-what-it-seems/ http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-th... What is clear is that a huge number of people who thought it was totally unacceptable for Richards to identify inappropriate behaviour at a conference in the manner she did (or, according to some people, at all) have been silent or supportive about the massive and sustained outpouring of hatred, rage, vulgar insults and detailed threats of rape, bodily harm and murder that Richards has faced since then. Indeed, the GP comment actually equated what Richards did with what has since been done to her (the word "equally" has since been edited out), and an earlier posted reply by the same user (reply since deleted) suggested that since no one has actually raped or murdered anyone, there is no harm other than the firing. I really don't know what to say to someone who doesn't see the harm in a full-spectrum blizzard of abuse, hatred and threats - not only to the direct target but also to any other woman who is unsure how to respond when she sees or experiences something inappropriate. More perspectives: Courtney Stanton, A Woman Walks Into A Tech Conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a-tech-conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a... Sarah Milstein, I Have a Few Things to Say About Adria http://www.dogsandshoes.com/2013/03/adria.html http://www.dogsandshoes.com/2013/03/adria.html Matt LeMay, On PyCon http://mattlemay.tumblr.com/post/46004653389/on-pycon http://mattlemay.tumblr.com/post/46004653389/on-pycon
  - pifflesnort 14y ago
    This is a rhetorical device, intended to use an emotional argument ("hatred, rage, vulgar insults and detailed threads of rape, bodily harm, and murder!!!") to justify totally unrelated behavior of public naming and shaming for a mild offense. This is exactly the sort of virulent emotionally-driven argumentative behavior that I don't want to have become a standard fixture in the technology community. Issues like this should never rise to this level of heated unprofessionalism and immaturity such that we become a target or amusement for the trolls of the internet at large. The whole thing was and is a ridiculous mess, and it all was avoidable by behaving like responsible adults. No amount of bad behavior from teeming hoards of anonymous teenage internet commentators justifies the behaviors that preceded the public circus.
    - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
      It's not a freaking rhetorical device to point out that every single time a woman speaks up about inappropriate behaviour, she ends up paying a terrible price in harassment, abuse, threats, and hatred. It is theoretically possible to have a civil discussion about whether Richards went about reporting the inappropriate behaviour in the right way (and it is 100% clear that the PyCon organizers agreed the behaviour was inappropriate). However, if you continue to evaluate what Richards did in denial of the abundant reality of insults, abuse, threats, hatred, contempt, ridicule, disdain, disregard that women in tech routinely face - and further, if you continue to ignore the fact that women are routinely punished with huge storms of abuse for speaking up about it - then you will remain oblivious to the fact that there is nothing "rhetorical" or "emotional" about pointing these facts out. You will, in effect, continue to be a part of the problem.
      - pifflesnort 14y ago
        > It's not a freaking rhetorical device to point out that every single time a woman speaks up about inappropriate behaviour, she ends up paying a terrible price in harassment, abuse, threats, and hatred. There was a code of conduct, a means to report issues, and the issue was addressed appropriately through it. End of story. The fact that the internet trolls became involved is totally unrelated to the behavior of the offending parties at PyCon, and is the simple consequence of using an editorial platform in ways that can anger anonymous commentators of dubious maturity and judgement: http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/03/14/olivia-wilde-justin-bieber-feud-twitter-diss/ http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/03/14/olivia-wilde-justin-bieb... > It is theoretically possible to have a civil discussion about whether Richards went about reporting the inappropriate behaviour in the right way (and it is 100% clear that the PyCon organizers agreed the behaviour was inappropriate). They simply enforced the basic human courtesy of taking reasonable steps to avoid offending the people around you.

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

smsm42 14y ago

The story went a bit further than "attempts to bring people's attention". As it is pretty clear by now, Richards is a crusader, repeatedly blowing things out of proportion and raising big controversy out of most mundane things, and in this case it cost somebody his job. So while indeed she did nothing nothing comparable to death threats and other such filth, something more that "attempt to bring attention" did happen.

RyanMcGreal 14y ago
That's not clear at all. I highly recommend reading this essay for a more careful look at what Richards has actually done by way of promoting gender equality rather than what her detractors (both civil and hateful) are saying about her: http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-the-surface-that-amanda-blum-article-on-adria-richards-is-not-what-it-seems/ http://www.technologywoman.com/2013/03/24/digging-beneath-th... What is clear is that a huge number of people who thought it was totally unacceptable for Richards to identify inappropriate behaviour at a conference in the manner she did (or, according to some people, at all) have been silent or supportive about the massive and sustained outpouring of hatred, rage, vulgar insults and detailed threats of rape, bodily harm and murder that Richards has faced since then. Indeed, the GP comment actually equated what Richards did with what has since been done to her (the word "equally" has since been edited out), and an earlier posted reply by the same user (reply since deleted) suggested that since no one has actually raped or murdered anyone, there is no harm other than the firing. I really don't know what to say to someone who doesn't see the harm in a full-spectrum blizzard of abuse, hatred and threats - not only to the direct target but also to any other woman who is unsure how to respond when she sees or experiences something inappropriate. More perspectives: Courtney Stanton, A Woman Walks Into A Tech Conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a-tech-conference http://www.buzzfeed.com/courtneystanton/a-woman-walks-into-a... Sarah Milstein, I Have a Few Things to Say About Adria http://www.dogsandshoes.com/2013/03/adria.html http://www.dogsandshoes.com/2013/03/adria.html Matt LeMay, On PyCon http://mattlemay.tumblr.com/post/46004653389/on-pycon http://mattlemay.tumblr.com/post/46004653389/on-pycon
- pifflesnort 14y ago
  This is a rhetorical device, intended to use an emotional argument ("hatred, rage, vulgar insults and detailed threads of rape, bodily harm, and murder!!!") to justify totally unrelated behavior of public naming and shaming for a mild offense. This is exactly the sort of virulent emotionally-driven argumentative behavior that I don't want to have become a standard fixture in the technology community. Issues like this should never rise to this level of heated unprofessionalism and immaturity such that we become a target or amusement for the trolls of the internet at large. The whole thing was and is a ridiculous mess, and it all was avoidable by behaving like responsible adults. No amount of bad behavior from teeming hoards of anonymous teenage internet commentators justifies the behaviors that preceded the public circus.
  - RyanMcGreal 14y ago
    It's not a freaking rhetorical device to point out that every single time a woman speaks up about inappropriate behaviour, she ends up paying a terrible price in harassment, abuse, threats, and hatred. It is theoretically possible to have a civil discussion about whether Richards went about reporting the inappropriate behaviour in the right way (and it is 100% clear that the PyCon organizers agreed the behaviour was inappropriate). However, if you continue to evaluate what Richards did in denial of the abundant reality of insults, abuse, threats, hatred, contempt, ridicule, disdain, disregard that women in tech routinely face - and further, if you continue to ignore the fact that women are routinely punished with huge storms of abuse for speaking up about it - then you will remain oblivious to the fact that there is nothing "rhetorical" or "emotional" about pointing these facts out. You will, in effect, continue to be a part of the problem.
    - pifflesnort 14y ago
      > It's not a freaking rhetorical device to point out that every single time a woman speaks up about inappropriate behaviour, she ends up paying a terrible price in harassment, abuse, threats, and hatred. There was a code of conduct, a means to report issues, and the issue was addressed appropriately through it. End of story. The fact that the internet trolls became involved is totally unrelated to the behavior of the offending parties at PyCon, and is the simple consequence of using an editorial platform in ways that can anger anonymous commentators of dubious maturity and judgement: http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/03/14/olivia-wilde-justin-bieber-feud-twitter-diss/ http://hollywoodlife.com/2013/03/14/olivia-wilde-justin-bieb... > It is theoretically possible to have a civil discussion about whether Richards went about reporting the inappropriate behaviour in the right way (and it is 100% clear that the PyCon organizers agreed the behaviour was inappropriate). They simply enforced the basic human courtesy of taking reasonable steps to avoid offending the people around you.