6 ms·

Harassment includes verbal comments that reinforce social structures of domination related to gender, gender identity and >expression, sexual orientation, disab

Harassment includes verbal comments that reinforce social structures of domination related to gender, gender identity and >expression, sexual orientation, disability, physical appearance, body size, race, age, religion, sexual images in public spaces, deliberate intimidation, stalking, following, harassing photography or recording, sustained disruption of talks or other events, inappropriate physical contact, and unwelcome sexual attention. And who gets to determine if I'm doing any of these things? The conference organizers? If I attend this conference, how can they assure me that I won't be at the mercy of conference attendees that suddenly decide I'm harassing them simply because I say something within their vicinity they disagree with a la Adria Richards? Although I guess Richards would have been taken to task for "harassing photography". Although by that point it would have been too late anyway. The problem with these speech codes is that they're just as easily used as a way to silence and shame people who's views differ from those of organizations like geekfeminism (i.e. not radfem). You don't have to be a feminist to treat women respectfully.

tptacek 12y ago
This comment has practically nothing to do with the article. As usual, any submission concerning improving the ratio of women to men in our industry immediately becomes a coatrack for digs about "radfem". For those of you who read the comments before clicking through to the article: this one is a list of things an event organizer did to try to boost attendance among women. None of them appear at all controversial. The "code of conduct" section this commenter takes issue with is table stakes at most major conferences. But that doesn't mean rude commenters will miss an opportunity to beat a dead horse.
- cantastoria 12y ago
  Ah in gallops tptacek on his trusty steed. Dead horse indeed. As usual, any submission concerning improving the ratio of women to men in our industry immediately becomes a coatrack for digs about "radfem". Just because they don't appear controversial to you doesn't make it so. And am I not allowed to take issue with the "table stakes"?
  - idlewords 12y ago
    The problem is you're hijacking a thread about specific, quantifiable steps that one group took, and the results they achieved, in order to spin the kinds of hypotheticals that have a proven track record of spiraling off into wank. Don't do it. Write a blog post or something. Call your mom.
    - cantastoria 12y ago
      I'm doing nothing of the sort. The code of conduct was clearly cited as one of the steps taken. I have issue with that step. And I have as much right to comment here as you do. You're free to ignore me. Please do.
  - angersock 12y ago
    It's an article about how a group running a retreat targeted their message to change their customer demographics, no more no less. Whether or not the mechanisms for doing so have sound philosophical and social underpinnings is quite beside the point--they did X, Y, Z, and it appears to have worked. Go piss and moan about gender (in)equality elsewhere.
    - facepalm 12y ago
      It worked in attracting women (perhaps a certain kind of women, but still). That doesn't mean it didn't have side effects. I don't understand your problem with people criticizing some of the things they did. It's just saying they wouldn't be attracted to the conference. It's a piece of information the organizers can ignore or not, it's their conference. I suppose in economic terms it will work out because having more women will attract more men. What mix of people they'll have is another issue.
- facepalm 12y ago
  The organizers went to the radical feminists for advice on how to attract women(Geek Feminism Wiki). Of course it has everything to do with radfem. There happen to be people who disagree with radfem, so they will be demotivated from attending. Of course this might be their intention - perhaps they want a feminist conference. Their call.
idlewords 12y ago
Can you cite any examples of people who have been silenced or shamed by a conference harrassment code? At a professional conference, it should not be that hard to control your behavior. Just pretend your grandparents are with you. Adults routinely modulate their behavior based on the setting and it really is not a burden. You can come up with all kinds of theoretical scenarios where you're a conference martyr. But I would really like to hear some specific, shocking examples of this happening to anyone. Because I've heard a lot of specific, shocking examples of women being verbally and physically harrassed.
- cantastoria 12y ago
  Can you cite any examples of people who have been silenced or shamed by a conference harrassment code? You mean besides the Adria Richard's example? At a professional conference, it should not be that hard to control your behavior. The conference organizers seem to disagree with you in this case. a conference martyr good one.
  - idlewords 12y ago
    It might be useful to remember how the conference organizers handled that incident: > Both parties were met with, in private. The comments that were made were in poor taste, and individuals involved agreed, apologized and no further actions were taken by the staff of PyCon 2013. No individuals were removed from the conference, no sanctions were levied. But let's grant for argument's sake that this was an example of public shaming that cries out to the very heavens for justice. What are some others? Just to balance out the huge number of reported harassment incidents from tech conferences, and the bigger number that must go unreported.
    - cantastoria 12y ago
      What are some others? Why is the one example not enough to prove my point? I could name a hundred and you still wouldn't be happy. Why bother.
      - 12y ago
superuser2 12y ago
No, Richards would have been fine, because these things are only prohibited when they reinforce "social structures of domination." This is in line with the standard "reverse *ism categorically can't exist" claim. Discrimination is only bad when it favors the more powerful group, or so the claim goes. So a person might be rejected by a conference solely beause he is a white male, but because the system of power is (on balance) in favor of white males, that is not racism or sexism and not prohibited.
- prutschman 12y ago
  > Discrimination is only bad when it favors the more powerful group, or so the claim goes The claim is not (or shouldn't be) that such discrimination can't be hurtful, can't be problematic, or isn't a legitimate target of criticism under some circumstances. The claim is that bigotry and bias in the "other" direction do not constitute structural "*ism." What's the context of someone being rejected from a conference solely because he's a white male? If someone is rejected because the conference is trying to get broader representation then the rejection isn't just because he's a white male, it's because he's a white male AND white males were overrepresented. It's unfortunate from a rhetorical standpoint that sexism easily seems like it could mean "any sex discrimination" but is also used to mean "the structural oppression of women." I welcome the day when the objection is genuinely only about the arguable linguistic inconsistency, but I can't help but thinking the concept is the big hangup, not the word for it.
AlexeyMK 12y ago
To answer specifically for Hacker Paradise, "who gets to enforce the code of conduct" is something we have been discussing internally. Casey and I are very much hoping to be part of the group, and as such we are in a somewhat biased position when it comes to addressing any issues that arise. One idea we've been playing with is having a remote neutral, third-party ombudsman that anybody can email (anonymously, if they prefer) to address any issues. The ombudsman would then ostensibly do some investigation and bring the issue up with us if it feels appropriate. We're still thinking through this - one month to go until the retreat begins - and would love to get HN's input. Has anybody tried anything similar? As an organizer for a ~15-person group and a white dude, I realize and acknowledge that some inherent bias exists. We want to address it as effectively as possible.
- cantastoria 12y ago
  Thank you for taking the time to address my concern. I'm glad we both think it's an important issue in spite of what some other commenters have said.
- Mz 12y ago
  A couple of thoughts: A) Codes of conduct are best enforced by example. So be very, very mindful of your own behavior and that will do a lot to deter problems. B) When I worked at a Fortune 500 company, harassment got reported to HR. HR interviewed people separately. So that might be sort of a vote for a neutral third party to turn to. (I got interviewed after I emailed a male on my team and copied our boss and told him in no uncertain terms "don't you ever speak to me that way again in a meeting." I was never told the outcome but my suspicion is that he was probably sent to sensitivity training. So, presumably, they decided in my favor. He avoided me and was angry for a time. I spent some months winning his trust again. I eventually smoothed things over. But, no, he never spoke inappropriately to me again.) Best of luck.
  - AlexeyMK 12y ago
    Thank you! Any ideas for whom a reputable, neutral third party might be, that would be interested in an experiment like ours?

tptacek 12y ago

This comment has practically nothing to do with the article. As usual, any submission concerning improving the ratio of women to men in our industry immediately becomes a coatrack for digs about "radfem". For those of you who read the comments before clicking through to the article: this one is a list of things an event organizer did to try to boost attendance among women. None of them appear at all controversial. The "code of conduct" section this commenter takes issue with is table stakes at most major conferences. But that doesn't mean rude commenters will miss an opportunity to beat a dead horse.

cantastoria 12y ago
Ah in gallops tptacek on his trusty steed. Dead horse indeed. As usual, any submission concerning improving the ratio of women to men in our industry immediately becomes a coatrack for digs about "radfem". Just because they don't appear controversial to you doesn't make it so. And am I not allowed to take issue with the "table stakes"?
- idlewords 12y ago
  The problem is you're hijacking a thread about specific, quantifiable steps that one group took, and the results they achieved, in order to spin the kinds of hypotheticals that have a proven track record of spiraling off into wank. Don't do it. Write a blog post or something. Call your mom.
  - cantastoria 12y ago
    I'm doing nothing of the sort. The code of conduct was clearly cited as one of the steps taken. I have issue with that step. And I have as much right to comment here as you do. You're free to ignore me. Please do.
- angersock 12y ago
  It's an article about how a group running a retreat targeted their message to change their customer demographics, no more no less. Whether or not the mechanisms for doing so have sound philosophical and social underpinnings is quite beside the point--they did X, Y, Z, and it appears to have worked. Go piss and moan about gender (in)equality elsewhere.
  - facepalm 12y ago
    It worked in attracting women (perhaps a certain kind of women, but still). That doesn't mean it didn't have side effects. I don't understand your problem with people criticizing some of the things they did. It's just saying they wouldn't be attracted to the conference. It's a piece of information the organizers can ignore or not, it's their conference. I suppose in economic terms it will work out because having more women will attract more men. What mix of people they'll have is another issue.
facepalm 12y ago
The organizers went to the radical feminists for advice on how to attract women(Geek Feminism Wiki). Of course it has everything to do with radfem. There happen to be people who disagree with radfem, so they will be demotivated from attending. Of course this might be their intention - perhaps they want a feminist conference. Their call.

idlewords 12y ago

Can you cite any examples of people who have been silenced or shamed by a conference harrassment code? At a professional conference, it should not be that hard to control your behavior. Just pretend your grandparents are with you. Adults routinely modulate their behavior based on the setting and it really is not a burden. You can come up with all kinds of theoretical scenarios where you're a conference martyr. But I would really like to hear some specific, shocking examples of this happening to anyone. Because I've heard a lot of specific, shocking examples of women being verbally and physically harrassed.

cantastoria 12y ago
Can you cite any examples of people who have been silenced or shamed by a conference harrassment code? You mean besides the Adria Richard's example? At a professional conference, it should not be that hard to control your behavior. The conference organizers seem to disagree with you in this case. a conference martyr good one.
- idlewords 12y ago
  It might be useful to remember how the conference organizers handled that incident: > Both parties were met with, in private. The comments that were made were in poor taste, and individuals involved agreed, apologized and no further actions were taken by the staff of PyCon 2013. No individuals were removed from the conference, no sanctions were levied. But let's grant for argument's sake that this was an example of public shaming that cries out to the very heavens for justice. What are some others? Just to balance out the huge number of reported harassment incidents from tech conferences, and the bigger number that must go unreported.
  - cantastoria 12y ago
    What are some others? Why is the one example not enough to prove my point? I could name a hundred and you still wouldn't be happy. Why bother.
    - 12y ago

superuser2 12y ago

No, Richards would have been fine, because these things are only prohibited when they reinforce "social structures of domination." This is in line with the standard "reverse *ism categorically can't exist" claim. Discrimination is only bad when it favors the more powerful group, or so the claim goes. So a person might be rejected by a conference solely beause he is a white male, but because the system of power is (on balance) in favor of white males, that is not racism or sexism and not prohibited.

prutschman 12y ago
> Discrimination is only bad when it favors the more powerful group, or so the claim goes The claim is not (or shouldn't be) that such discrimination can't be hurtful, can't be problematic, or isn't a legitimate target of criticism under some circumstances. The claim is that bigotry and bias in the "other" direction do not constitute structural "*ism." What's the context of someone being rejected from a conference solely because he's a white male? If someone is rejected because the conference is trying to get broader representation then the rejection isn't just because he's a white male, it's because he's a white male AND white males were overrepresented. It's unfortunate from a rhetorical standpoint that sexism easily seems like it could mean "any sex discrimination" but is also used to mean "the structural oppression of women." I welcome the day when the objection is genuinely only about the arguable linguistic inconsistency, but I can't help but thinking the concept is the big hangup, not the word for it.

AlexeyMK 12y ago

To answer specifically for Hacker Paradise, "who gets to enforce the code of conduct" is something we have been discussing internally. Casey and I are very much hoping to be part of the group, and as such we are in a somewhat biased position when it comes to addressing any issues that arise. One idea we've been playing with is having a remote neutral, third-party ombudsman that anybody can email (anonymously, if they prefer) to address any issues. The ombudsman would then ostensibly do some investigation and bring the issue up with us if it feels appropriate. We're still thinking through this - one month to go until the retreat begins - and would love to get HN's input. Has anybody tried anything similar? As an organizer for a ~15-person group and a white dude, I realize and acknowledge that some inherent bias exists. We want to address it as effectively as possible.

cantastoria 12y ago
Thank you for taking the time to address my concern. I'm glad we both think it's an important issue in spite of what some other commenters have said.
Mz 12y ago
A couple of thoughts: A) Codes of conduct are best enforced by example. So be very, very mindful of your own behavior and that will do a lot to deter problems. B) When I worked at a Fortune 500 company, harassment got reported to HR. HR interviewed people separately. So that might be sort of a vote for a neutral third party to turn to. (I got interviewed after I emailed a male on my team and copied our boss and told him in no uncertain terms "don't you ever speak to me that way again in a meeting." I was never told the outcome but my suspicion is that he was probably sent to sensitivity training. So, presumably, they decided in my favor. He avoided me and was angry for a time. I spent some months winning his trust again. I eventually smoothed things over. But, no, he never spoke inappropriately to me again.) Best of luck.
- AlexeyMK 12y ago
  Thank you! Any ideas for whom a reputable, neutral third party might be, that would be interested in an experiment like ours?