5 ms·

"People seem to want the penalty for the investor to be very high (public shaming, ban from YC investment opportunities, etc). I'll basically never support some

"People seem to want the penalty for the investor to be very high (public shaming, ban from YC investment opportunities, etc). I'll basically never support something that can majorly impact a person's livelihood which lacks due process." Well this is a tough situation. I'm not sure she could take this fellow to court for touching her sideboob, so there absolutely will not be due process. With that being the case, he should just be allowed to do the same over and over and the victim shouldn't be allowed to say anything?

yummyfajitas 12y ago
Two Sundays ago, a woman flirted with my friend and got him to buy her a drink. She was uninterested in him, merely thirsty. Should the victim spread her name far and wide, publicly shaming her? If unexpected and unwanted physical contact is the dividing line, that same day a different woman kissed me without my permission. Should I publicly name and shame her? I suspect most people's demands for a public naming/shaming are merely knee-jerk emotional responses rather than principled positions.
- chasing 12y ago
  Did this happen in a business setting? Did either women try to use a potential $50k investment as a tool to gain sexual access? If not, your friend should probably just be more careful who he buys drinks for. As for the kissing, you don't provide many details, so I'm going to assume you're talking about your grandmother. In which case, absolutely name and shame. Grandmas have been getting away with that crap for way to long.
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    A similar event did happen in a semi-business setting last year. I met a woman at a bar, discussed work and personal travel, and decided to meet up another time. I thought it was a sale, she thought it was a date. She did touch me in a manner far better suited to a date, at which point I figured out that we talked past each other. Should I name and shame her? If you've actually got some set of abstract principles you are willing to use across the board, I'd love to hear them. But I don't think that's where most of the commenters here are coming from.
    - tptacek 12y ago
      If you feel like that person was exploiting a power dynamic to coerce you into accepting her advance, and that the world would be a better place if you "named and shamed" (note your misdirection here, since the person we're discussing didn't "name and shame" anyone), then yes.
      - yummyfajitas 12y ago
        I know the OP didn't name and shame, I'm referring to the comments here asking for them to do so - this comment thread is about whether or not that should be done. I don't know what "power dynamic" means, but feel free to provide a clear definition for it. If you've actually got some set of abstract principles you are willing to use across the board, I'd love to hear them. From my vantage point, I don't see much of a problem here. Offering investment is a beneficial act. So is offering romantic or sexual options. It's hard to see why offering both together suddenly becomes a bad thing - worst case the recipient can decline and is exactly as well off as before.
        tptacek 12y ago
        From my vantage point, I don't see much of a problem here. Offering investment is a beneficial act. So is offering romantic or sexual options. It's hard to see why offering both together suddenly becomes a bad thing - worst case the recipient can decline and is exactly as well off as before. I'm not sure where to start with this. Is it the idea that you find the act of a stranger putting their hand on a bodily location that would trip the statutes in several US states governing sexual assault "an offer of romantic or sexual options"? The idea that such an "offer" of "options", were we to stipulate that there was any optionality involved, would have been benign? Your statement that the "worst case" is the recipient declines and is "exactly" as well off as before? But then I reread your second graph, where you cordially invite me to litigate the meaning of the term "power dynamic", and I realize you're just going to draw me into a fake debate where you play the nerd trump card of discrediting a straw man notion of social science instead of engaging the actual issue. And it's not like I'd lose that argument, just that it would be an enervating experience for both of us.
- vertex-four 12y ago
  > Two Sundays ago, a woman flirted with my friend and got him to buy her a drink. She was uninterested in him, merely thirsty. Flirting is flirting, and doesn't necessarily imply intent to go any further. Some people enjoy flirting and find it fun in itself. You and your friend are likely in the wrong for expecting it to go any further. > If unexpected and unwanted physical contact is the dividing line, that same day a different woman kissed me without my permission. Should I publicly name and shame her? "Unwanted kissing" is sexual assault under most definitions (including many legal ones). I wouldn't see an issue with publicly naming this woman. It's your choice, though, and strongly depends on what you feel about it.
- kefka 12y ago
  Yeah, that's a shitty thing to do. It's called Pussy Privilege. If a man did this, it'd be screamed at from mental abuse (drink) to rape(kiss). It sums up to : I'm a woman, get me something because I "might" have sex with you. But not really. And those that realize this to its full potential can screw their way to the top.
  - chasing 12y ago
    > It's called Pussy Privilege. On Reddit, maybe, but not when speaking with adults.
  - chrisbennet 12y ago
    That sort of thing only works on men who think they can trade something for sex. If you buy a woman a drink (or bring a deer to her cave) with the expectation that she now "owes" you, be prepared to be disppointed. Suppose someone of the same sex bought you a drink, would you feel obligated to have sex with them? How about if they implied that they would love to invest in your company?
    - yummyfajitas 12y ago
      Yes, blame the victim, a young college kid who didn't know any better. But I suppose even a college kid from a village with less than one lac people should immediately know all the subtleties of picking up women, right? FYI, it's a dick move to accept a drink from someone who you don't want to continue interacting with. I wouldn't accept a drink from a man I didn't want to at least hang out with either.
      - chrisbennet 12y ago
        Yes, it's totally a dick move to misrepresent your intentions in order to exploit someone. I agree with you. (BTW: I'm from a small village!) My comment was aimed at those men who feel "entitled" to things because they somehow imagine that every woman is a prostitute and it's just a matter of price. It's a question of respect and empathy. When someone tries to use the "law or reciprocity" for gain instead of being genuinely generous, they shouldn't be shocked when someone sees through their attempt and shuts them down.
ssharp 12y ago
I think it's a difficult moral judgement to make. If she were to out his name, he would likely have to face extreme consequences. The internet justice mob is relentless and often over-prosecutes. However, by staying silent, she feeds into his power and does absolutely nothing to stop this type of behavior from him or anyone else. I actually think her strategy was good. She is raising awareness without alerting mob. Since this story hit HN, and will likely be circulated outside of it as well, the investor is more likely to come across it, and any other investors or persons in a position of power in technology are also much more likely to read it. In today's age, there is an unfortunate balance between what can be responsibly shared online and what cannot. Once you put something out there, it's no longer in your hands. By not naming the investor publically, she also still has power to let individuals like her peers, colleagues, YC, etc. know of his specifics.

yummyfajitas 12y ago

Two Sundays ago, a woman flirted with my friend and got him to buy her a drink. She was uninterested in him, merely thirsty. Should the victim spread her name far and wide, publicly shaming her? If unexpected and unwanted physical contact is the dividing line, that same day a different woman kissed me without my permission. Should I publicly name and shame her? I suspect most people's demands for a public naming/shaming are merely knee-jerk emotional responses rather than principled positions.

chasing 12y ago
Did this happen in a business setting? Did either women try to use a potential $50k investment as a tool to gain sexual access? If not, your friend should probably just be more careful who he buys drinks for. As for the kissing, you don't provide many details, so I'm going to assume you're talking about your grandmother. In which case, absolutely name and shame. Grandmas have been getting away with that crap for way to long.
- yummyfajitas 12y ago
  A similar event did happen in a semi-business setting last year. I met a woman at a bar, discussed work and personal travel, and decided to meet up another time. I thought it was a sale, she thought it was a date. She did touch me in a manner far better suited to a date, at which point I figured out that we talked past each other. Should I name and shame her? If you've actually got some set of abstract principles you are willing to use across the board, I'd love to hear them. But I don't think that's where most of the commenters here are coming from.
  - tptacek 12y ago
    If you feel like that person was exploiting a power dynamic to coerce you into accepting her advance, and that the world would be a better place if you "named and shamed" (note your misdirection here, since the person we're discussing didn't "name and shame" anyone), then yes.
    - yummyfajitas 12y ago
      I know the OP didn't name and shame, I'm referring to the comments here asking for them to do so - this comment thread is about whether or not that should be done. I don't know what "power dynamic" means, but feel free to provide a clear definition for it. If you've actually got some set of abstract principles you are willing to use across the board, I'd love to hear them. From my vantage point, I don't see much of a problem here. Offering investment is a beneficial act. So is offering romantic or sexual options. It's hard to see why offering both together suddenly becomes a bad thing - worst case the recipient can decline and is exactly as well off as before.
      - tptacek 12y ago
        From my vantage point, I don't see much of a problem here. Offering investment is a beneficial act. So is offering romantic or sexual options. It's hard to see why offering both together suddenly becomes a bad thing - worst case the recipient can decline and is exactly as well off as before. I'm not sure where to start with this. Is it the idea that you find the act of a stranger putting their hand on a bodily location that would trip the statutes in several US states governing sexual assault "an offer of romantic or sexual options"? The idea that such an "offer" of "options", were we to stipulate that there was any optionality involved, would have been benign? Your statement that the "worst case" is the recipient declines and is "exactly" as well off as before? But then I reread your second graph, where you cordially invite me to litigate the meaning of the term "power dynamic", and I realize you're just going to draw me into a fake debate where you play the nerd trump card of discrediting a straw man notion of social science instead of engaging the actual issue. And it's not like I'd lose that argument, just that it would be an enervating experience for both of us.
vertex-four 12y ago
> Two Sundays ago, a woman flirted with my friend and got him to buy her a drink. She was uninterested in him, merely thirsty. Flirting is flirting, and doesn't necessarily imply intent to go any further. Some people enjoy flirting and find it fun in itself. You and your friend are likely in the wrong for expecting it to go any further. > If unexpected and unwanted physical contact is the dividing line, that same day a different woman kissed me without my permission. Should I publicly name and shame her? "Unwanted kissing" is sexual assault under most definitions (including many legal ones). I wouldn't see an issue with publicly naming this woman. It's your choice, though, and strongly depends on what you feel about it.
kefka 12y ago
Yeah, that's a shitty thing to do. It's called Pussy Privilege. If a man did this, it'd be screamed at from mental abuse (drink) to rape(kiss). It sums up to : I'm a woman, get me something because I "might" have sex with you. But not really. And those that realize this to its full potential can screw their way to the top.
- chasing 12y ago
  > It's called Pussy Privilege. On Reddit, maybe, but not when speaking with adults.
- chrisbennet 12y ago
  That sort of thing only works on men who think they can trade something for sex. If you buy a woman a drink (or bring a deer to her cave) with the expectation that she now "owes" you, be prepared to be disppointed. Suppose someone of the same sex bought you a drink, would you feel obligated to have sex with them? How about if they implied that they would love to invest in your company?
  - yummyfajitas 12y ago
    Yes, blame the victim, a young college kid who didn't know any better. But I suppose even a college kid from a village with less than one lac people should immediately know all the subtleties of picking up women, right? FYI, it's a dick move to accept a drink from someone who you don't want to continue interacting with. I wouldn't accept a drink from a man I didn't want to at least hang out with either.
    - chrisbennet 12y ago
      Yes, it's totally a dick move to misrepresent your intentions in order to exploit someone. I agree with you. (BTW: I'm from a small village!) My comment was aimed at those men who feel "entitled" to things because they somehow imagine that every woman is a prostitute and it's just a matter of price. It's a question of respect and empathy. When someone tries to use the "law or reciprocity" for gain instead of being genuinely generous, they shouldn't be shocked when someone sees through their attempt and shuts them down.

ssharp 12y ago

I think it's a difficult moral judgement to make. If she were to out his name, he would likely have to face extreme consequences. The internet justice mob is relentless and often over-prosecutes. However, by staying silent, she feeds into his power and does absolutely nothing to stop this type of behavior from him or anyone else. I actually think her strategy was good. She is raising awareness without alerting mob. Since this story hit HN, and will likely be circulated outside of it as well, the investor is more likely to come across it, and any other investors or persons in a position of power in technology are also much more likely to read it. In today's age, there is an unfortunate balance between what can be responsibly shared online and what cannot. Once you put something out there, it's no longer in your hands. By not naming the investor publically, she also still has power to let individuals like her peers, colleagues, YC, etc. know of his specifics.