3 ms·
It upsets me that we are only able to share sanitized parts of ourselves depending on the situation. I realize that it is a necessity to tone down our ancillary
by ccallebs 14y ago
It upsets me that we are only able to share sanitized parts of ourselves depending on the situation. I realize that it is a necessity to tone down our ancillary personality traits when among strangers and acquaintances, but setting arbitrary rules and guidelines about expected social behavior seems to be killing a fly with jackhammer -- neither effective nor practical.
I also sympathize with those that feel alienated in environments that should be welcoming to people of all demographics. I would not personally partake in any of the things this person speaks of (with the exception of sexual innuendo and only if I was in known company). The parenthetical may seem hypocritical, but it's part of my personality. For better or for worse, toilet humor is something I find funny. Blame it on my upbringing or my public education, but it's a part of who I am. I cannot turn that off, no matter what the setting is.
Ultimately, if someone is making you uncomfortable or crossing any sort of personal boundaries you've set, it's your responsibility to let that person know. If they ignore and persist, it warrants elevation to a higher authority. We must remember that human interaction is human interaction. There are too many variables involved to write a guide book.
All of that being said, I appreciate posts like Ruth's. Anything that helps me expand my own world view is invaluable and praised as a great asset. If the debacle at PyCon has taught me anything, it was that we all need to sit down and listen to each other.
- ruthburr 14y agoI think the parenthetical actually is your most important point. All of the behaviors I've described are perfectly acceptable among known company, but unfortunately not everyone has that fine awareness. I also find sex jokes and toilet humor funny, but not in an environment that's already a sexual harassment minefield to me. I could take a step back and say "don't make innuendoes to people you don't know very well because it's rude" and that would also be true. I agree that we should let people know when they transgress our boundaries, but putting the onus on women to constantly call people out on their behavior (which we should all do more, even though it's really hard and uncomfortable and scary to do) removes men's agency to also help with the problem - something I sincerely believe many men would like to do. I think approaching how we interact with a bit more thought and awareness of the unintentional impressions we may give off will go a long way for all of us, as humans, to interact better.
- ccallebs 14y agoYou've certainly given me some food for thought. I had not considered that it could potentially be a full time job informing those around you that they are being crude and/or disrespectful. It also seems that we are agreement on everything except the agency of men. While I would personally call someone out if they were being overtly sexist or disrespectful to anyone, I cannot expect others to do so. For some people, the thought of calling someone out in public is a terrifying proposition. Which, as I typed that, I realized that this was exactly your point as to why the onus should not be put solely on women. It seems that I have won and lost an argument with myself.
- ruthburr 14y agoMy point about the agency of men is more: I know so many men to whom I've pointed out things like the huge gray area presented by compliments, who were glad to have their awareness raised. Not saying men should be policing other people, just being more deliberate about their own language and actions. So, for that matter, should women.