Comment by KirinDave | Hacker News Reader

Comment by KirinDave | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

You're doing exactly what drove this poor woman to suicide here: saying her rape and subsequent shaming was all but inevitable and until the monsters that did this to here are perpetually appeased, what happened to her is at least partially her fault (either directly or indirectly).

Your sentiment is vile and dehumanizing. It's carefully veiled and couched so as to make it appear to be a cousin of a feninist appeal for sex workers rights, with the safety of these victims in mind. But even casual inspection of your intent reveals that you believe that unless sated by a sex industry, rape is inevitable and we shouldn't blame the monsters who commit it.

I am sure you will protest this and cite the weight of history. Men's rights advocates usually do. And I'll happily point out that progressivism and the slow progress of women's rights against all odds and a nearly endless series of arguments like yours is also a pressure of history. One that many of us are working to further.

It's unfortunate that's how you read my comment, and I take full responsibility for failing to write an unambiguous comment. I did not mean to blame the victim, and don't think I did, but I'm willing to improve the wording to not repeat what you say blames the victim. Please quote what parts can be read in a way that I didn't intend them to be. In fact, what I tried to express is that due to the way sexuality is handled in most societies, we mistreat rape victims as a result. I'm sorry I failed to be clear about that.

You do not need to apologize. This is a hard point to make and trying to make it is highly likely to be wildly misinterpreted, no matter your phrasing.

Don't take it personally. It might help to disengage for a bit and let people say whatever dumb stuff they are going to say. You are not required to reply to every single comment. Sometimes it is more effective to be a bit selective about what you reply to.

Best.

Edit: You have the top comment. So some people are silently agreeing with you by upvoting you.

I'm fascinated by how youve taken the majority opinion-that this woman's death was inevitable-and spun it as a courageous opinion on the face of overwhelming venom. Your opinion is not silent cheering, but rather a deafening thunder that reminds women every day of the place society as put them in.

The ingenuity with which people continue to reframe every story about rape around "what drove men to do it" and to reinforce the message that such actions are a pressure from a society that is in fact biased against men's sexual needs is amazing.

I am fascinated by your ability to put words in my mouth and make stuff up about my views whole cloth.

Edit: Your comments are delicious irony given how often I get accused of being a feminist on this forum and accused of writing feminist blogposts merely for being openly female and giving my personal opinions here.

Probably this part of the thread isn't going to go anywhere productive. You both have things to say that I am interested in hearing --- although in this case, Michele, I think you're wrong. But at this point tone has decisively sabotaged the conversation. Doesn't matter whose fault it is; it's just a fact now.

And yet you choose to crab at the woman and not at the member who is putting words in my mouth and tarring me. Because your whiteknighting tendencies do so much good for the status of women on HN.

If you really think I'm "white knighting" a woman shamed to suicide for her own rape, I think the point I just tried to make should be even clearer.

If you fail to see that you never, ever engaging the top ranked woman here except to shoot her down completely contradicts your stated concern for the status of women, well, I don't know what to say to that. But, then, I never have known, which is why I haven't said it.

You do this sort of thing a lot and it is much more about enhancing your ego than about enhancing the status of women, which you seem to be not terribly knowledgeable about how to do effectively.

It's super weird to me that you perceive me this way, because my working model for you on this site is that I'm generally pretty happy to see you appearing in threads, and that we have an unusual amount of agreement with each other.

I do not care about your assessment of how well I'm enhancing the status of women. I'm not an "ally", just a commenter with opinions. You can score me an "F" on the rest of it --- I take no offense.

PS:

For whatever it's worth, I simplied replied to the last comment on the thread --- I didn't single you out. But the thought did go through my mind that I should be relieved I was responding to you and not Dave, because Dave would flip the fuck out if I stepped in. :)

Well, this is completely news to me, because it does not match up with your behavior. The vast majority of the time, you appear to ignore me entirely. The only time you engage me, it appears to be to put me in my place. I cannot recall you ever expressing agreement with me on the site.

If I simply have not noticed it, I would be thrilled to pieces to see evidence that it occurs and I simply missed it. Because I am entirely unaware of it, but painfully aware of the negative effect that the shunning of women by top ranked members has here.

Thank you for the comment though.

My mental model is that I don't generally respond to comments I agree with; I just upvote them. But maybe I'm doing something that makes it seem like I'm me-tooing some comments and not yours? I'll be more mindful!

I'm married to (and business partners with) a woman in a competitive part of tech. I do not need to be convinced that this kind of stuff happens to women, or that I might be contributing to it myself by some stupid habit of expression. To whatever extent I've done that in the past: I'm sorry!

I actually do worry about point-scoring with comments about misogyny, by the way, so much so that right after I wrote my comment towards the top of the thread, I sanity checked it with Erin, who has taken me to task before for appropriating her anger at how women are treated in our industry and scoring RT's and likes with it. She said this particular case --- and that comment at the top of the thread --- were so bad that I was in the clear this time.

If you see me doing that somewhere else on HN, you'll be doing me a favor to point it out, and I'll do my best to listen and respond civilly.

Thank you.

I am about to log off, possibly for essentially the rest of the evening.

Have a good discussion, probably without me from here on out.

I'm offering a formal apology: if I have misrepresented your position while pointing out the insidious look alikeness of the argument offered at the top of this thread: I apologize.

But your gender identity means little to me nor will it soften my tone if you want to defend that argument. It is at its core an argument that deserves to be censured. It is another plank in the structure that blames victims of sexual assault.

My actual position is that a good argument against the top comment here is that a) this is an incredibly bad place to be trying to make such a point and b) if you want to make such a point, even under better circumstances, you really, seriously need to up your game as to expressing yourself clearly, sensitively and in a nuanced manner.

But the reality is that there are studies suggesting that porn has reduced the incidence of rape and that conservative eras where good girls cannot put out have a great deal more prostitution. So, the essence of his position is not incorrect. It in no way justifies this heinous crime, but raking him over the coals over the deficiencies in his writing also in no way will improve his ability to express the idea effectively and appropriately.

Thank you for the apology. Rest assured I have no desire to have you "soften your tone" over my gender.

http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2014/01/oh-my-god-it...

> My actual position is that a good argument against the top comment here is that a) this is an incredibly bad place to be trying to make such a point and b) if you want to make such a point, even under better circumstances, you really, seriously need to up your game as to expressing yourself clearly, sensitively and in a nuanced manner.

I have a great deal of difficulty reading this position from your response above. But I will take you at your word. Thank you, I appreciate the time you spent further clarifying your point to me.

> It in no way justifies this heinous crime, but raking him over the coals over the deficiencies in his writing also in no way will improve his ability to express the idea effectively and appropriately.

I am not here to or improve anyone. I am here to coldly and meticulously point out misogyny and rape culture of Hacker News wherever I see it. I am not interested in correcting behavior beyond that. It's not my place or my desire to be anything other than to throw a bucket of cold water on every case of it I see.

If you feel a higher calling, I wish you good luck. I no longer care to attempt to carefully untangle if someone is an MRA or if they are just using arguments very much like an MRA uses.

If you were slightly more careful about throwing ice water on the position and not the person, you and I would likely have zero friction. I have a different agenda from you, but our agendas are not incompatible.

You were quick to leap to conclusions about me and tar me. I see this as fundamentally problematic, regardless of your agenda, and quite counterproductive if you want to end rape culture.

Not that you are in any way required to take that point of view under advisement or act on it.

I was actually rather careful to address ideas specifically rather than individuals. I only used the poster as a passive subject in an accusation of an MRA agenda.

> I see this as fundamentally problematic, regardless of your agenda, and quite counterproductive if you want to end rape culture.

That is your opinion. I think shame has its place. We are on a curious website where we can actively call people names if we are discussing technology and it is considered par for the discourse. But once the space of "politics" (read as, "fundamental human rights") enters the equation then suddenly we must all suddenly respect everyone's right to any opinion no matter how oppressive or facile. I reject that notion.

I will not be able to respond to you anymore today. I am rate limited and I'm fairly sure this is my final post for the day.

I am an alpha female. They have different priorities from an alpha male. Those priorities are complementary to each other. While not in direct conflict, they coexist in tension. When the tension is at a healthy balance, it creates a vital social dynamic. http://micheleincalifornia.blogspot.com/2016/09/profile-of-a...

Since I already allowed as how that was merely my point of view, it is redundant to tell me that is just my opinion.

I disagree with Michele, and think that if you ever have a comment like that to do over with, maybe save the concerns about the reputations of people accused of sexual assault for stories that aren't about women shamed into suicide for their own rapes.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com