3 ms·

I would say the current state of the tech world is antithetical to Bentham's views in just about every sense. We, as a group, are massively sex-negative. Is th

I would say the current state of the tech world is antithetical to Bentham's views in just about every sense. We, as a group, are massively sex-negative. Is that why this article is on the top, or because it was submitted by an admin?

delinka 12y ago
By "sex-negative," do you mean "negative about gender" or "negative about sexuality" or even "negative about the act of intercourse?" I can't begin to generalize about my technology peers because they are such a diverse group and because intercourse, sexuality and gender don't affect our professional interactions. From my perspective, it's just that these things are not relevant to the part of our lives that intersect, not that we're negative about them.
- parennoob 12y ago
  > By "sex-negative," do you mean "negative about gender" or "negative about sexuality" or even "negative about the act of intercourse?" The latter two. > "..intercourse, sexuality and gender don't affect our professional interactions...these things are not relevant to the part of our lives that intersect, not that we're negative about them." You seem to be of the opinion that it is completely possible to separate the personal from the professional. Yet a lot of us absorbed in the tech/startup world spend the larger part of our awake time (~10 hours or more) interacting with people at work. In such an environment, I don't think it is realistic to totally separate the professional from the personal. Otherwise, you turn the meaning of "personal" on its head for the majority of your working week, if you have to behave "non-personally" for > 60% of the time.' And actually I think this is part of what I mean to say. The attitude of, "Sex is not relevant in the workplace. Let's be professional about this." Why not, exactly? Why are professionalism and sexuality mutually exclusive? Maybe if we at least explore the possible reasons why people's sexual motivations may cause them to interact in specific ways at work, we can make progress towards making those interactions somewhat positive and frictionless.
  - delinka 12y ago
    I'm of the opinion that most people don't need to discuss things irrelevant to the task at hand. I deal with personal life throughout the day - I IM my wife and children for various reasons. I have co-worker friends that I lunch with and with whom I do discuss personal matters sometimes. I do not need to discuss personal matters, let alone sexual (for all interpretations) matters, with my manager, with the other team members, with various other male and female co-workers. It's not relevant to the reason I'm at the office. Ever.
    - parennoob 12y ago
      Your things are very specific to your situation, yet you yourself easily generalize them to "most people". What about people who don't have wives or children? What if their social circles are mostly concentrated at the office (as often happens with young people in startups)? What if they have a crush on their manager, or their attractive co-worker? These are real things that happen, and just forbidding them from ever being spoken of is not a very good strategy in my opinion. And I think Bentham's thoughts are very applicable in this regard.
      - delinka 12y ago
        Who said anything about forbidding these topics? I simply express a lack of understanding about why such things would be relevant to a place that has nothing to do with such topics. People want to talk about this stuff at work? Fine let's talk. But at some point, we need to get our jobs done. If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office), then sex and gender discussions are a priority. As it stands, they're not critical to doing my job. If you're standing around the water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex, you're not getting your job done unless you work for a company whose business revolves around these things. Are these things taboo at the office? Certainly not. Are they relevant to the jobs of most people in the US? I doubt it, but certainly I could be swayed by actual data on the subject.
        12y ago
tim333 12y ago
>Is that why this article is on the top, or because it was submitted by an admin? Speaking purely for myself I've previously read up on the history of philosophy and was a fan of Bentham. It was interesting to find this new side to him which is not in the usual text books.

delinka 12y ago

By "sex-negative," do you mean "negative about gender" or "negative about sexuality" or even "negative about the act of intercourse?" I can't begin to generalize about my technology peers because they are such a diverse group and because intercourse, sexuality and gender don't affect our professional interactions. From my perspective, it's just that these things are not relevant to the part of our lives that intersect, not that we're negative about them.

parennoob 12y ago
> By "sex-negative," do you mean "negative about gender" or "negative about sexuality" or even "negative about the act of intercourse?" The latter two. > "..intercourse, sexuality and gender don't affect our professional interactions...these things are not relevant to the part of our lives that intersect, not that we're negative about them." You seem to be of the opinion that it is completely possible to separate the personal from the professional. Yet a lot of us absorbed in the tech/startup world spend the larger part of our awake time (~10 hours or more) interacting with people at work. In such an environment, I don't think it is realistic to totally separate the professional from the personal. Otherwise, you turn the meaning of "personal" on its head for the majority of your working week, if you have to behave "non-personally" for > 60% of the time.' And actually I think this is part of what I mean to say. The attitude of, "Sex is not relevant in the workplace. Let's be professional about this." Why not, exactly? Why are professionalism and sexuality mutually exclusive? Maybe if we at least explore the possible reasons why people's sexual motivations may cause them to interact in specific ways at work, we can make progress towards making those interactions somewhat positive and frictionless.
- delinka 12y ago
  I'm of the opinion that most people don't need to discuss things irrelevant to the task at hand. I deal with personal life throughout the day - I IM my wife and children for various reasons. I have co-worker friends that I lunch with and with whom I do discuss personal matters sometimes. I do not need to discuss personal matters, let alone sexual (for all interpretations) matters, with my manager, with the other team members, with various other male and female co-workers. It's not relevant to the reason I'm at the office. Ever.
  - parennoob 12y ago
    Your things are very specific to your situation, yet you yourself easily generalize them to "most people". What about people who don't have wives or children? What if their social circles are mostly concentrated at the office (as often happens with young people in startups)? What if they have a crush on their manager, or their attractive co-worker? These are real things that happen, and just forbidding them from ever being spoken of is not a very good strategy in my opinion. And I think Bentham's thoughts are very applicable in this regard.
    - delinka 12y ago
      Who said anything about forbidding these topics? I simply express a lack of understanding about why such things would be relevant to a place that has nothing to do with such topics. People want to talk about this stuff at work? Fine let's talk. But at some point, we need to get our jobs done. If sex and gender are an obstacle to getting work done (you know, the actual reason we're even getting paid to be in this office), then sex and gender discussions are a priority. As it stands, they're not critical to doing my job. If you're standing around the water cooler for hours a day discussing football, cinema, the symphony, and/or sex, you're not getting your job done unless you work for a company whose business revolves around these things. Are these things taboo at the office? Certainly not. Are they relevant to the jobs of most people in the US? I doubt it, but certainly I could be swayed by actual data on the subject.
      - 12y ago

tim333 12y ago

>Is that why this article is on the top, or because it was submitted by an admin? Speaking purely for myself I've previously read up on the history of philosophy and was a fan of Bentham. It was interesting to find this new side to him which is not in the usual text books.