from the ashamed dept.
Margaret C. Hardy reports that the life sciences have recently come under fire with a study that investigated the level of sexual harassment and sexual assault of trainees in academic fieldwork environments and found that 71% of women and 41% of men respondents experienced sexual harassment, while 26% of women and 6% of men reported experiencing sexual assault. The research team also found that within the hierarchy of academic field sites surveyed, the majority of incidents were perpetrated by peers and supervisors. "More often it is the men of one’s own field team, one’s co-workers, who violate their female colleagues," writes A. Hope Jahren:
There is a fundamental and culturally learned power imbalance between men and women, and it follows us into the workplace. The violence born of this imbalance follows us also. We would like to believe that it stops short of following us into the laboratory and into the field — but it does not. I listen to my colleagues talk endlessly about recruiting more women into STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) disciplines, and postulate what the barriers might be. Sexual assault is a pernicious and formidable barrier to women in science, partly because we have consistently gifted to it our silence. I have given it 18 years of my silence and I will not give it one day more.
Many of us work in fields related to this study - what are your experiences?
Written in a New York Times article and summarily paraphrased here,
Elissa Shevinsky can pinpoint the moment when she felt that she no longer belonged. She was at a friend's house watching the live stream of the TechCrunch Disrupt hackathon, when she saw that it opened with two men who developed an app called Titstare. After some banter, one of Titstare's developers proudly proclaimed, "This is the breast hack ever."
Ms. Shevinsky felt pushed to the edge. Women who enter fields dominated by men often feel this way. "It's a thousand tiny paper cuts," is how Ashe Dryden, a programmer who now consults on increasing diversity in technology, described working in tech. Women in tech like Shevinsky and Dryden advocate working to change the tech culture from inside-out, but other women like Lea Verou write that,
' women-only conferences and hackathons cultivate the notion that women are these weak beings who find their male colleagues too intimidating...As a woman, I find it insulting and patronizing to be viewed that way.'
This all being hot on the heels of engineer Julie Ann Horvath's departure from Github as a result of similar concern.
Any of you care to address your own personal experiences or opinions regarding the subject matter; as well as the accuracy of the articles' stories compared to the industry-at-large?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @04:32AM
There are literally no women on Soylent.
So at least they won't be getting an abuse here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @05:40AM
Not only is it the straight up truth without any spin or distortion, it isn't intended to provoke anyone.
If you think pointing out the gender imbalance on SN is trolling then you are part of the reason there is an imbalance.
(Score: 2) by q.kontinuum on Monday September 22 2014, @06:45AM
May be because it is an unwarranted assumption? What makes you think there are no women here?
Registered IRC nick on chat.soylentnews.org: qkontinuum
(Score: 3, Informative) by Arik on Monday September 22 2014, @01:01PM
The aim is to get women to self-identify in response. In the most common form of the troll, they are then posed the dilemma "tits or gtfo" although there are many other possibilities.
But excitable white-knight types attempting to argue the point are bonus points as well.
If laughter is the best medicine, who are the best doctors?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @01:51PM
As I wrote both the original and the complaint about moderation, I'm pretty sure the point was not what you described.
Fix your damn font, it is antisocial.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday September 22 2014, @09:15AM
This is almost entirely thanks to one member! Way to go, Eth! (We should all sexually harrass him, but he would just enjoy it and it would encourage him.)
So, Universal Declaration of Human Rights, it is international law, so it is your law. Read it, and stay out of the Hague.
(You do realize that the International Criminal Court now has jurisdiction over crimes by individuals, no matter where the crime is committed. Careful when you travel, Republicans!)
(Score: 1) by silverly on Monday September 22 2014, @04:37AM
In any situation that involve other people I feel that everyone should follow the number one rule.
> "Don't be an ass".
It sucks that life sciences/technology has this issue and there is never a reason when harassing someone is okay. Just follow rule one and you be okay.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @05:37AM
> In any situation that involve other people I feel that everyone should follow the number one rule.
If only it worked that way. Very rarely are asses conscious of the fact that they are being asses. If you asked them, they would say they weren't being an ass and would blame their victim instead. Often they will say the woman was being an ass - too sensitive, up tight, uppity, etc. That is the nature of unearned privilege, when you think the status quo is not only normal, that it is right, then when challenged you'll blame the challenger rather than recognize your own responsibility.
(Score: 1) by silverly on Monday September 22 2014, @09:56AM
Such is the life of trying to follow rule one :(
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @05:45AM
Did you know that over 9000% of women experience sexual assault every day at the hands of the patriarchy?
Report to your nearest SJW recruiter today!
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @07:52AM
The definition of "sexual abuse" has gone from molesting to unwanted advances and flirting. Basically, from actual abuse to what a woman doesn't like.
(Score: 2) by mtrycz on Monday September 22 2014, @08:39AM
Only that TFS clearly states that 26% of women reported sexual [i]assault[/i].
In capitalist America, ads view YOU!
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @01:55PM
what the AC said is correct though, women in western society (mostly North America) now say its assault if you even go so far as to ask them if they would like to have a drink after work. this SJW bullshit really needs to end, its nothing more than mental illness.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Atatsu on Monday September 22 2014, @02:19PM
And why shouldn't it? Why in the hell should a person have to put up with getting hit on when they're going to their friggin job? Seriously. They go there to work. Not hook up. Most of us can't know what it's like to go to a place of employment and have to worry about fending off assholes who think everything is up for grabs.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by pnkwarhall on Monday September 22 2014, @04:14PM
So I should avoid personal relationships at the location I spend 1/3+ of my life. Sounds reasonable.
Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @09:27PM
Actually, if you work a normal 40-hour work week you spend less than 25% of your time on the job. Even less if you have vacation time and holidays off. As for whether you should avoid personal relationships at work, that will have to be left up to your best judgement. Sometimes working with your significant other can be great, sometimes less so. In any case, if your female co-workers want to keep their relationship with you strictly professional, I'm afraid that you will have to respect that. Trying to press the issue is career suicide.
(Score: 1) by pnkwarhall on Tuesday September 23 2014, @12:34AM
But my use of the term "personal relationships" was an intentional allusion to my own experience that many meaningful relationships, romantic or otherwise, are borne of the massive investment of time in close-quarters that we experience at our jobs. My experiences in the US Navy in the early 2000s (co-ed ships only started being common after the late 90s) have led me to believe that the current so-called "sexual harassment" trend is the growing pains of a fairly modern co-ed workplace with an ever-increasing ratio of women-to-men.
A common response to these troubles, that one should avoid personal relationships with the opposite sex in favor of a purely "professional" relationship, seem to me to be administrative knee-jerks, instead of realistic solutions.
[...]left up to your best judgement
Easier said than done, especially in romantic matters. But it will become easier with time, as the co-ed workplace matures.
Lift Yr Skinny Fists Like Antennas to Heaven
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @06:07PM
I think the source of your confusion is that you are mistaking American cinema for real life. Much of what you see on the big screen is fiction. Even when the story is purported to be "based on a true story", the story line has often been finessed somewhat to make it more interesting for the viewing audience.
If she wants to keep it professional, I'm afraid that you don't have much choice. Ignoring her wishes on the matter will likely earn you an uncomfortable meeting with the head of your company's HR Department. Of course, you could try to gamble that she will eventually come 'round, but in my experience that is not what is likely to happen.
Yes, easier said than done, especially when it comes to romantic matters. On the other hand, I have my doubts that it will become easier as the co-ed workplace matures. The rules of the road are already being laid down now and it doesn't look good for those who want to romance where they work. Just sayin'.
BTW, thank you for your service to the nation.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @04:21PM
Dude! If you are regularly doing things at work that "a woman doesn't like" then you are almost certainly not doing your job well. How the hell can you even manage to hold a job for any length of time? Just sayin'.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by tftp on Monday September 22 2014, @05:50AM
Sexual assault is a pernicious and formidable barrier to women in science
Isn't it a barrier to women everywhere, not only in science?
A handy rule, of course, is to not have a romance of any kind where you live or work. But it comes with such a convenience that some fail to follow that simple rule. Science says that love is a chemically induced temporary insanity...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @06:33AM
> Science says that love is a chemically induced temporary insanity...
No, "Science" says no such thing.
A philosopher wrote [blogspot.ca] "Romantic love is an altered state of consciousness."
But sexual harassment isn't about romantic love at all.
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Monday September 22 2014, @07:49AM
Men hit on women. This behavior will continue, until the day that it ceases getting results.
Just look at telemarketers. Even the ones that are selling legitimate products are widely disliked because of their tactics. Yet they continue to operate. Then there are the ones who are purely scammers, who are universally hated and have laws standing against them, and they also continue to operate. Because again, occasionally they get results.
This is not to say that people shouldn't be called out for bad behavior. But there will always be a debate over where to draw the line, even if women get to be the only judges.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by jimshatt on Monday September 22 2014, @10:00AM
Of course, sexual assault is another story altogether. I'm curious how these numbers compare to other sectors. Maybe they are about equal in every sector?
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Monday September 22 2014, @01:38PM
And the point is that while the man and woman in question are together primarily because they're working together, the only result they should get is reprimands, discipline, and eventually firing if it continues.
The line isn't that complicated: At work, you call women by their names, and talk to them mostly about work. If it drifts away from work, there are many topics which have nothing to do with her appearance or sexual desirability. If you wouldn't be comfortable discussing the topic at hand with a nice little old lady you just met, then it is probably not an appropriate conversation for work. And yes, that means you don't call your female colleagues "honey" unless you have some sort of outside-of-work relationship that would make that appropriate (e.g. she's your niece).
If you want to hit on somebody, go to some place where women are (a) not required to be there in order to financially survive, and (b) have the viable option to leave at any time. And if she doesn't react favorably to your first hints, then back off.
In my experience, the line is only fuzzy when somebody wants to cross it or doesn't know how to keep thoughts to themselves when appropriate.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @01:47PM
Sorry, it's not good enough to say that the issues of violence against women and sexual harassment are "everywhere", so people in the STEM field can ignore it, or leave it to law enforcement.
The aggravating factor in STEM is that it is predominantly male, particularly in the power structure.
See: Goodell, Roger
(Score: 4, Informative) by stormwyrm on Monday September 22 2014, @07:00AM
What are similar statistics for elsewhere? 26% of women and 6% of men sounds like a lot, but is this high or low compared to other organisations and industries? What are the analogous stats for, say, the US military? I find it's something like 23% of women and 4% of men in the US military from 2012, from this report (PDF link) [usccr.gov] (around page 16). That, I think puts the numbers into a bit of perspective and if the numbers given in the article were obtained accurately, that makes their situation with respect to sexual assault worse than being in the US military. That makes it rather ugly indeed, if true.
Numquam ponenda est pluralitas sine necessitate.
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday September 22 2014, @12:56PM
"That makes it rather ugly indeed"
which again circularizes the issue, because anecdotally the people I met when in .mil claimed it was better than civilian life.
Unfortunately the two best places I'd guess for a single woman are probably in .mil or academentia. Sales and marketing or modeling industry are obviously not good choices for a woman desiring not to be objectified. Those stats would be much more interesting than .mil
If the only criteria is being far away from men, then there are probably safer fields like school lunch lady (although I heard of a guy working at a lunch counter, once) or maybe a convent, or a female prison (as an inmate or guard, I suppose inmates are slightly safer?).
(Score: 2) by tangomargarine on Monday September 22 2014, @03:47PM
Unfortunately the two best places I'd guess for a single woman are probably in .mil or academentia.
I thought there was a whole thing lately about how the military has a culture of raping female subordinates and then all the male superiors covering it up?
"Is that really true?" "I just spent the last hour telling you to think for yourself! Didn't you hear anything I said?"
(Score: 2) by VLM on Monday September 22 2014, @04:21PM
The PR thing was the latter. The former has always been seen as somewhat less likely in .mil. The latter is hardly a solely .mil thing.
There are also substantial regulations against mere fraternization in the chain of command, so thats why it gets more attention that at a bar or just plain old .com facility.
The inspectors who used to get interested in fraternization violations were ordered off the topic WRT don't ask don't tell, resulting in increased misbehavior in general. Or rephrased given that they're reassigned it may be slightly more risky to steal ammo for deer hunting or use a .gov vehicle to pick your kids up from school, while slightly less risky to have a relationship (consensual or not) with your subordinates.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by bradley13 on Monday September 22 2014, @07:53AM
What a crappy study. This kind of nonsense is counterproductive: it exaggerates the problems, and discredits efforts to address the (much smaller) problems that actually do exist.
First, consider how they recruited participants: "Researchers distributed the link to the survey to potential respondents through e-mail and online social networks. ... These links were then shared and retweeted by colleagues and disseminated using chain referral." So what we have is a self-selected group, rather than any sort of neutral, representative survey.
Then we get the questions. The first questions are background; we get to the first of the relevant questions is question 30, which asks if the field site was "gender differentiated". It then equates the two following situations: "men and women do separate activities with their leisure time" (so what, it may just be the preference of that particular team) and "bureaucratic or cleaning tasks get allocated disproportionately between genders" (which could be a real problem, unless the gender difference also matches a difference in seniority).
Then we get question 32, which asks about "inappropriate or sexual remarks, comments about physical beauty, cognitive sex differences, or other jokes". Do those things have anything common? Note the sloppy wording "inappropriate or sexual remarks" - how is one supposed to understand that? Is "you look nice today" over the line, or does it depend on context? Why would a factual discussion of cognitive sex differences be a problem? What's the deal with "other jokes"? A biologist, a chemist and a physicist get in a plane...
Credit where credit is due: question 39, about physical harassment, is well-written and to the point. The answers to this question do indicate a problem. Sadly, these results are destroyed by the self-selecting nature of the survey. The fancy graphs in the paper make it visually obvious that many more women than men experienced such harassment...but it turns out that the vast majority of the respondents were women. Showing proportional numbers would have been more honest, but the paper shows absolute numbers for dramatic effect.
Worse, the authors admit that they had no controls in place to prevent one person from completing the survey multiple times. They did a retrospective analysis based on the (optional) entry of an email address, but a person seeking to sway the results could reply as often as they wanted anonymously as well as once each for as many (non-verified!) email addresses as they wanted. Given the relatively small number of participants, a few pissed off people would have a substantial impact on the results.
What a crappy study...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 2) by buswolley on Monday September 22 2014, @08:47AM
However, look again at Figure 1. It is % of respondents.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @02:25PM
Woah woah woah...... did you just say this study was garbage because a STRONG, INDEPENDENT WOMYN created it?
YOU JUST TRIGGERED ME!!!!!!!!
I need feminism because comments like these from hetero-normative cis-gendered SCUM are *LITERALLY* WORSE THAN RAPE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 0, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @11:26AM
Men are illegal.
All hail systemd.
The new man.
(Score: 2) by Justin Case on Monday September 22 2014, @11:40AM
Did any scientists ever stop to wonder why nature designed males to be stronger, and females to be weaker? There must be a reason. A scientific reason.
(Score: 1) by harmless on Monday September 22 2014, @12:47PM
Nature doesn't design anything.
The fact that men are stronger than women suggests, that this is somehow advantageous for the species. Nothing more, nothing less.
Especially, it doesn't follow that men harassing women is advantageous. Instead it might actually be disadvantageous, but not enough to balance out the advantages from the difference in power.
(On the other hand, men harassing women might still be advantageous to the species, unless we can prove otherwise.)
But even if men harassing women was advantageous to the species, that doesn't mean we have to condone it as a culture.
(Score: 1) by art guerrilla on Monday September 22 2014, @03:53PM
biologically speaking, neither the sperm nor the egg 'care' if the insemination was mutually enjoyable, or it was rape...
either way, the species is perpetuated, yeah species ! ! !
thus, one could say Nature doesn't give a shit either way...
(Score: 3, Funny) by bob_super on Monday September 22 2014, @06:56PM
But but but... I was told by a highly reputable source that female bodies reject the sperm of rapists, ensuring that only sluts get pregnant out of wedlock, and they don't deserve abortions...
You can't be right, because an elected official would never lie!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @12:48PM
I think that it is obvious that there is sexual abuse everywhere and it can come from just about anyone. Whether it is man-woman, women-man, man-man, or woman-woman it is a problem and I'm not sure if it is a good idea to focus on just man-woman sexual abuse. Much like how people view rape as something only a twisted stranger can do, this may only further isolate those who suffer.
Everyone should be trained on what constitutes sexual abuse and how to recognize it, from the outside and inside, and what to do about it.
(Score: 0, Troll) by zugedneb on Monday September 22 2014, @01:46PM
What I have difficult to see in these kind of reports, is "proportion"...
1: Faggots and such
Some examples: I come from romania, but etnic hungarian, and have lived in sweeden for about 24 years...
Neither the romanians, hungarians or swedes have in their culture to discuss others sexuality in detail. Do homosexuals complain and claim discrimination? Hell, yeah...
I have never been in a conversation, or overheard a conversation, or heard anyone talk about a conversation about someones sexuality... Except, of course, around various religious or middle east immigrant circles...
And yet, the media blows this shit into enormity: we have to do something about discrimination based on sexual preference at workplaces!11!!!1
So where the fuck does this discrimination happen? Never seen it myself...
Of course, I tend not to end up in conversation around some blokes life, but still, I should have at least heard of this from more sources than the media, yes?
2: Sexual discrimination of woman
Again, only heard of this in the media... Never seen it actually happen, neither at university, or any workplace I have visited.
Never heard anyone I know tell me about anyone he/she knows that have experienced this...
Of course, I do not know *that* many people...
Yes, people who have been in poor or far away places in the world, like turkey or middle east, did complain from time to time. On the other hand, they should have followed the dress code in that particular place, instead of looking more lecherous than local prostitutes, and being richer then like 95% of the local population...
But, let me give one other take on this: I HAVE seen a decent amount of people, mostly woman, especially those who look good, regardless of age, looking like whores at workplace... That is, dressing in a fashion that is designed to draw looks.
Now, here is the deal: we are born, we are young, and some may actually look good for a while.
And then, we spend a lot of time ageing, decaying, and not looking particularly good, while still being at full intellectual capacity...
Some may be sad, bitter, angry, depressed or whatever other feelings I can not name over this.
It might be painful for many to realize that the time of "sexual" adventure, and the thrill of meeting new people are over.
Now, if some people dress deliberately as whores, the only message to others is "look at me, I fuck some in unimaginable ways, but not *you*".
This might go home at the local bar, but not at the place you work at.
There is no reason to "tempt" or remind those that have come of age, or do not look "good", what they are deprived of, especially at the place you work, it might cause reactions that are "unpleasant".
I think the english word for this is being "decent". Known by more man, than woman, though...
old saying: "a troll is a window into the soul of humanity" + also: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ajax
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @06:19AM
looking like whores at workplace... That is, dressing in a fashion that is designed to draw looks.
Now, if some people dress deliberately as whores, the only message to others is "look at me, I fuck some in unimaginable ways, but not *you*".
There is no reason to "tempt" or remind those that have come of age, or do not look "good", what they are deprived of,
Speak for yourself. I like looking at them, I don't care that they fuck others and won't fuck me. Now if they complained about others looking at them and enjoying the way they look then they're being unreasonable. Worse if they complained only about some looking at them (e.g. they're only fine if those they find attractive look at them, and they expect the rest to not).
I like looking at beautiful scenery, cute puppies/bunnies, etc. I also like looking at cute, beautiful, slutty and elegant ladies.
As you yourself say - youth and beauty fades and only lasts a short while for most. So it seems logical to me that you should make the most of it while you have it. So you young beautiful ones, don't be discouraged by the prudes BUT beware of the assholes, perverts and dangerous violent ones.
 Some supposed prudes actually fall in the violent perverted assholes category - just take a close look at the religious police in some countries (I wonder about some of the FBI too - they seem to have a rather strange focus when supposedly "battling child porn").
(Score: 4, Insightful) by velex on Monday September 22 2014, @04:26PM
Here's my experience. Granted, this is programming, not STEM in general.
1. Attempt to train somebody to perform basic programming tasks. They just don't get it. That person happens to be female. Now I'm a sexist.
2. Attempt to train somebody else to perform basic programming tasks. They just don't get it. That person happens to be female. Now I'm even more of a sexist.
3. Attempt to train somebody else to perform basic programming tasks. They just don't get it. That person happens to be female. Now I'm being told to my face that I'm a no-talent hack who only has my job because of my assigned gender.
4. Attempt to train somebody else to perform basic programming tasks. They just don't get it. That person happens to be male. Meh. It happens.
5. Attempt to train somebody else to perform basic programming tasks. They catch on. That person happens to be female. Oh, I guess I wasn't a sexist after all.
That's the trouble about being accused of sexism. You have to rely on the actions of others to disprove it. You also have to be careful of not becoming bitter when you've been on the receiving end of sexism many times (see my comments on the other site for an example of what not to do). And, furthermore, the accusation of sexism can be itself motivated by sexism. IOW, you'd better be damned sure the person you're accusing of sexism has actually committed an act of sexism.
It's like a comment I read about date rape a while back. Girl gets date raped. What was she advised not to do? Report it to the cops. So, the guy never gets reported, goes on to date rape a hundred others, and instead we wind up with a "rape culture" where we hold hundreds of assigned males collectively accountable for the actions of 1. In fact, the insane part about these rape cultures is that we force men to attend presentations about it and leave women in the dark.
It's almost like we have some sick cycle here where we'd rather hold men accountable as a whole instead of going after the individual, and we arrange things such that the individual who's the jackass criminal keeps doing what he's doing so we can continue to hold all men accountable for his actions.
So, ok. The question: is it effective? I suppose it's like XML and violence. If sexism isn't solving the problem of sexism, you're not using enough of it.
And remember, girls: we totally want more of you in STEM, but you're going to be sexually assaulted if you do go into STEM! Sounds like a self-fulfilling prophecy to me.
Ok, so we have these numbers even though other posters are questioning the methodology. Here's what I want. I want to know how often sexual harassment policies are enforced. Let's ask HR departments how many complaints they have. Are there repeat offenders? What remedy is enacted when sexual harassment is reported?
Talking about this is great. However, if things haven't changed in the past 30 years of talking about this issue, I'm going to hedge my bets that our current strategy is not working.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Yog-Yogguth on Monday September 22 2014, @04:47PM
Great troll article!
In western culture the main difference between the sexes is that as they grow up nearly all men are brutally forced to realize they are not in any way the center of attention in this world and that nobody will ever give a shit about them no matter what and that those who claim to care about their well-being are lying (and these liars tend to be female). Men are constantly told they have negative worth in all sorts of ways.
Sure if someone (male or female) can gain an advantage from you they will generally be pleasant about it, that's all and enough to explain why work and education easily becomes so important.
Men have no choice but to accept this and most do but it wont change anything. Meanwhile females spend their years cocooned in layers of lies spun by themselves and “friends” while being “social” and “warm” and “caring” and “loving” and if they're ever outside of this life of lies for a significant amount of time (doesn't matter if it's from the beginning or after a while) their personality almost always turns into something really nasty. The taller they stand the harder they fall and sick individuals (female as well as male) and cultures take pleasure in making that happen.
Western women far too often take everything for granted including their own personal safety as they continue to make choices that make them vulnerable, as long as their world continues more or less as before (and it if doesn't it's usually too late) no one can change that for them, they have to change themselves by themselves. Complaining doesn't matter, and exactly who was it they were supposed to be complaining to? Men they don't give a shit about? The scum that hurts them? Other women that continue to live the lie and whom they now likely despise? Or those who blame men for everything and thus reduces women to something akin to barely sentient but oh so “innocent” livestock? Those who do the same only blaming it on women like muslims do? The remaining fools who might be young men who don't yet know any better? The ones (like me) who would be ‘passively polite’ and PC “caring” as a defensive stance while they call the police? Who exactly?
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 22 2014, @07:52PM
Methinks you are in desperate need of therapy. Please get this taken care of sooner rather than later. Don't let this continue until you turn into another Elliot Rodger [wikipedia.org]. You need help. Get it. Please.
(Score: 3, Informative) by velex on Tuesday September 23 2014, @11:02AM
No (s)he's, not. (S)he's making an objective observation. Normally I'd dismiss you as the typical heteronormative "put your blinders back on!" white knight troll, but you've been modded up twice. You probably have a cisgender blindspot visible from LEO. (You know, a kind of cislunar orbit.)
Female privilege is part of this problem.
I routinely get extended female privilege during half my waking hours, so I think I know a little of what I'm talking about. I've even been championed by white knights before, always against my wishes.
You know what? White knights can be downright creepers sometimes. Some of us don't need or want champions.
Disclaimer: Don't take me for an MRA. That movement is just as sexist as feminism.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 23 2014, @04:28PM
Original AC back to respond. But I promise that after this post I am out of the discussion for good!
I'm not even sure what a "cisgender blindspot" is so I have no idea if I have one or not.
Whats-his-name (Yog-Yog-whatever) made a pretty blatant accusation that all women are manipulative bitches. I would say that is an indication he has some rather serious emotional issues that need professional help. Whether female privilege is a problem, or not, is neither here no there when it comes to his issues with women. What I find truly disturbing is that he could potentially be just one step away from an Elliot Rodger type outburst. That puts us all in danger, men and women alike. (Don't forget that most of Rodger's victims were men.)
Fine. Tell the "white knights" in your life that you don't need or want their help. If they are reasonable people they will get the hint. This still has nothing to do with whatever issues Yog-Yog-whatever is struggling with.
I am not even sure what an MRA is so it is unlikely I would take you for one. All the jargon surrounding this issue! Yikes!
(Score: 2) by Yog-Yogguth on Friday September 26 2014, @09:25AM
Hi, “yogurt” here (yes that's the origin of the name, then it was d&d-ified [wikipedia.org] to sound Lovecraftian [wikipedia.org] like this [wikipedia.org] and this [wikipedia.org] and this [wikipedia.org] so it's a playful joke of a name. Read that last part again please). Anyway I just wanted to point out a few things.
After reading what you wrote to velex I don't think you read my comment, you certainly didn't understand any of it but maybe you'll try reading it again without adding so much of your own stuff to it. You can add that stuff afterwards if you still think it applies but try to actually read the words I wrote on their own first. It doesn't mean you have to agree with what I wrote but I'll leave that to you after you've actually read it.
Possibly a lot more important to you: since you made a thing out of psychology what's with the serious emotional issues and murder stuff? You repeat it in various strongly implied forms and use it like some sort a defensive invocation; a psychologist would most likely think you were projecting [wikipedia.org] your own internal state onto others. Is it your preferred “explanatory” rebuttal when you encounter something you don't agree with or possibly don't understand or don't want to understand or deal with? Are you convinced everyone you disagree with (or who disagrees with you) must be mental cases? Sure I'm cranky and a bit acerbic (and not nearly as much as I could be) but I'm an old dying loser who has realized nearly everything about the last forty years has been nothing but lies and completely wasted so what's your excuse for your obvious misanthropy? :D
If you do have emotional scars that's neither uncommon or anything special, are you aware of how many people have lost a loved one, a spouse, or a child, or other family members? And those are just the normal causes, in addition comes all the horrible things people do to each other. Most people above forty (and many below) have encountered serious grief at least once during their life (and some even die from it, it's powerful), are you saying they can't hold opinions contrary to yours? That they should shut up and seek medical treatment because you say so? All I'm doing right now is holding up a mirror in front of you, I won't charge you :)
Beside that would you honestly write the reply you did to me to someone who was violent, a psychopath or sociopath, a killer, a rapist, a sadist, or similar? Do you think it would make them likely to seek help instead of seeking you out or attacking someone else in your place? Most likely you aimed to hurt or to vent or maybe both, if someone does that to people around them who actually feel close to them (or worse: are dependent on them) then it's abusive and damaging …and unfortunately very common. If it's being done to you you should get away from them because they won't stop and you risk becoming like them. If you are female or underage the social services will try to help you (it might not be successful, they have their own peculiar and rigid world view and attract predators) but if you're an older male teenager or a grown male they likely won't believe you or will ridicule and belittle you (they even do that to male victims of rape) so then you're on your own: just run away as best you can (think twice and yet again if you're thinking about joining any armed service —not just in the US— because it's bullshit & more lies —and you'll have to hide it if you realize— but on the other hand you get weapons experience and possibly a better starting point, unless you die. Aim for a navy and ship duty if you can).
Bite harder Ouroboros, bite! tails.boum.org/ linux USB CD secure desktop IRC *crypt tor (not endorsements (XKeyScore))
(Score: 2) by etherscythe on Tuesday September 23 2014, @06:36PM
It goes two ways. On the one hand, divorce court heavily favors the female's interest. On the other hand, the glass ceiling in business heavily favors male interests. Then again, women often use sex as a weapon or a punishment. And again, men have more of a problem with committing domestic violence and sexual predation.
Really, we need to out and abolish the double standards in our society, in both directions.
"Fake News: anything reported outside of my own personally chosen echo chamber"