I hate that feeling.. the knowledge that engaging in the discussion is going to be exhausting and the chance of making traction is slim, and the feeling that inaction is the only reasonable alternative. Allow me to suggest another alternative to actual discussion in situations like this:
Tell the person to fuck off.
I'm serious. It registers disagreement, and to any rational person the lack of interest in attempting serious discussion. Ideal? No. Preferable to inaction? Absolutely. Plus where do you even start with a comment like that? I'd prefer to make it clear that I'm shocked than do someone who would say that the favor of jumping into a thoughtful discussion about how the merits of their opinion.
I agree with you wholeheartedly, but for a non confrontational person this course of action is still a battle. When you see this all the time and fight it even just by calling it out, it still wears you out.
Like it or not the hackerverse is full of people who deemphasize social experiences in favour of other things. When someone makes a comment this inappropriate in public you're not just battling their sexism, you're going up against years of personality developed in an insular environment. I've known quite a few devs whose only social interaction in a year is GDC, barring a few friends of theirs who are like minded. They are awkward and inexperienced, and 360 days a year this is reinforced and tit jokes get laughs all round. Going up against that, I can really empathize with the authors central point. I'm tired.
I think this is so right on, and one of the best sum-ups of the problem our industry has dealing with this sort of thing. I don't have these issues with confrontation, but I'm super familiar with the fact that so many people I've worked with do. That's hard.
"deemphasize social experiences in favour of other things"
The situation shows an active effort in eschewing societal norms. You have to work hard to shut down the mental filter that normally prevents you from making such an off-kilter remark
The set of rules you internalize to be "normal behaviour" is influenced by your environment. A boy growing up in an isolated household in the woods will have a different model of normalcy, and so when he goes in to town he'll seem "off" to everyone else.
My favourite pop culture example of this is Mose Shrute (Dwight's brother) from The Office (US). He doesn't try to be weird, he just is, because he's grown up in family with weird norms. Similarly the offensive guy in this story probably isn't deliberately pushing aside his common sense, he is just being who he is all the time: someone who is poorly socialized.
It's easy to try to bush incidents like this aside by saying "he knew it was wrong and did it anyway, because he is a jerk" but that deflects from the underlying issue. Socializing makes a lot of devs uncomfortable, so they dont do it. They develop their norms in isolation, and then "go in to town" to conferences like GDC and then set off firestorms. Reacting to these situations in person, you start out trying to convince someone that their comment is rude and wrong. However you end up trying to convince them that their whole model of society is wrong. That is what makes me truly tired.
In what relative normality is it acceptable to tell a group that one of their members received something due to her "award-winning tits?"
I'm all for multi-lateral motives, but some things are wrong for anyone "in town," whether they rode in on a buckboard or lived there their entire lives.
If swear words aren't appropriate in this situation exactly what were they invented for?
Tell the guy to fuck off, and if he doesn't immediately apologise then call a waiter over and ask them to find him a table on his own somewhere because he's no longer welcome at this one.
Surely decent human beings don't meekly sit back and let bullying happen like that?
For a bit of nuance, instead of "fuck off", you could try something like "I disagree, but I'm pretty tired of that conversation", and change the topic.
So.. You're probably right. Here's my (quite possibly unreasonable) defense of the language I suggested...
It grinds conversations to a halt. "I disagree, but.." doesn't register shock. That's not the kind of language people use when they witness horror, or abuse. It's not emotional. If anything, if I was at the table and that was your reaction I'd probably take it to mean that your primary takeaway is to be annoyed at pesky sexism and how these unfortunate jock-types ruin it for the rest of us.
That's not how you'd respond to abuse. This is abuse.
Fuck you registers shock, and anger. It's not a naughty word, it's a tool. I think there's an appropriate time to use language like this, and I think this is it. I definitely don't see it as "coming down to their level", with all due respect I find that kind of absurd.
I agree with you 100% fuck off conveys exactly the response a comment like that warrants. It singles out the speaker and separates him from the conversation, just like his comment did to the woman. If he wants back in, he has to do so awkwardly and sheepishly, which is I'm sure exactly how the woman in the story felt
I'm conflicted about my feelings about this, but that's exactly my intent when I speak like this to someone. It's the desire to make them feel small and communicate how little I have respect for them in that moment. I'm honestly not sure if that's healthy. If I was charged with defending the opposing view I'd argue that it's fighting bullying with bullying, or that maybe the ability and desire to make insensitive comments like that in the first place come from feeling small and I'm only fueling the fire. I'm really not sure. I just know that it's worked for me in the past, at least in the small... in situations where I've wanted to diffuse a situation and shut someone up who's expression was abusive. I'm not convinced there's not a better way, though. I just really hope the takeaway to this thread isn't that I think it's obviously perfectly righteous and productive to react like this, just that I think it's (at least occasionally in my experience) effective, and vastly preferable to doing nothing.
Correct, but I assumed "I'm tired of losing friends over this" could refer to either side in the argument. If you don't want to hurt anyone, brush off silly comments and move on.
If you want to make a point, by all means.
ps.: "fuck off" might also trigger more discussion, which he's trying to avoid. It's easier to say "my opinion is different" than "your opinion is stupid".
I feel the need to emphasize. This was not a silly comment. It was abuse. This wasn't misplaced careless language, overheard. This was a targeted and abusive insult to another person who was sitting across the table.
Brushing off the 'silly' comment and moving on is the easiest way to hurt the target more than the comment already has.
I agree that it's easier to say that "my opinion is different", but it's chicken-shit and offers a level of respect that signals unwarranted sympathy. "Your opinion is stupid" would be a profoundly more appropriate statement had it been be, because it much better describes my feelings.
Without making specific slippery-slope arguments, surely at some point we'd all find it ridiculous to say "Thanks, but my opinion is different" after witnessing something disgusting, right? So I guess the question is where that line is for us individually. "You got this pass because of your tits" is severely past that line for me. It's miles deep into "Fuck off" territory.
Actually, I would argue that "fuck off" is the better response. "I disagree" implies that there's grounds for legitimate discussion when the initial remark is so far out of line there really isn't.
Yes.
Not to mention: "I disagree" in this particular situation also has the unintended consequence of possibly implying something about whether she has nice breasts, while "fuck off" does not.
(One of the oddball cases where the "more polite" response may in fact, be more harmful)
Exactly, "Fuck off" gets the full message across loud and clear. It is also short enough that you can deliver the full message without any risk of interruption; just two syllables that can slip under the radar after you have the subjects attention.
[looking the person in the eyes]
"Hey [whoever]"
[repeat as necessary until you have eye contact, at most one or two more times]
"Fuck off."
There is no chance for them to interrupt you mid-protest to make excuses, and it sends a clear signal that the subject is not up for discussion.
While I agree wholeheartedly, remember that some of the problem is the current dichotomy. The sexist ass on one hand and the too non-confrontational to say anything on the other. I'd posit that it's more useful to figure out a realistic way to get that second group to speak out--even if it's not a hearty "fuck off".
I'm a non-confrontational person myself actually. It took me over 35 years to learn being that direct is actually less stressful in certain circumstances. Quite arguably, I'm still learning it. We get it in our heads that we owe the asshole an explanation. That's a trap. The explanation becomes it's own source of stress. Odds are strong, the asshole knows they're being an asshole. No, explanation is required.
If you can pull it off, something like "Really? I thought you were smarter than that…" works pretty well. You kinda need to be able to dominate the conversation with the comment though (which is often pretty easy if it's just one jerk speaking out of place, but can be much harder if they've got an audience-of-idiots laughing along with them).
One thing to keep on mind - the "offender" has given up any expectation or right of politeness or manners extended towards them - there's no need to craft a response that doesn't hurt their feelings, since they've already gone down that path. (I suspect if I were just the right amount of uninhibitedly drunk, I'd quite enjoy responding to "She only got the tickets 'cause of her tits" with "Yeah, that's what everyone with a tiny dick says…")
I think my response would be somewhere in the middle. I probably wouldn't curse the person ("fuck off") but frankly "I disagree, ..." is far too light of a response.
I would ask the offending person to leave. If they refused to leave, I would encourage all of my friends to leave.
Such a statement is so beyond-the-pale inexcusable that simply stating your opposition is insufficient. While I agree you don't need to "go down to their level", I see no reason to allow them any more of my time than is absolutely required (i.e. time spent organizing my friends' departure and paying for the check).
I agree about the need to clearly register disagreement, but I'd opt for slightly less shock... I'd say, calmly and sternly "that is entirely inappropriate." I'd then call on others in the group to register their disagreement.
Okay, I may get many downvotes here, but this doesn't seem like the solution to the problem. Rudeness and insults are rudeness and insults. Cursing doesn't help the matter.
Inaction is not the solution either, but I'm sure there's a more mature way to handle things. Asking the party to leave politely is better than keeping your mouth shut, and it also seems better than cursing them out.
Of course, if they refuse to behave, then tell them the magic words.
It probably depends on the person. With a guy who uses phrases like "because tits", "fuck off" might be the only thing that makes it through his thick skull.
Right. There are a number of attempts to generalize the terms of the discussion, but "because tits" guy is a specific wanker. It's OK to say things to this person precisely because of his specific behavior.
This was painful to read. It's hard to get into the usual is-there-sexism-in-tech-or-not debate because this is so beyond the pale-dysfunctional. First, that anyone could say such a thing in polite company. Second, that the rest of the table did not demand the offending person to leave. Seriously, how is anyone, espicially the targeted woman, expected to enjoy their dinner and have a non-awkward conversation after that?
And really, this is not just a problem of some guy saying something kind of sexist. It's a guy who thinks the scales are so much in his favor that he can just say such a thing to a stranger without really offending people. He's not beyond hope, but he's not someone you should break bread with without making clear at he was completely out of line.
Edit: I'm not helping much with the OP's guilt trip...it's never easy thinking about what you should've done when the shock was over. The OP shouldn't chastise himself for not throwing a punch or making some other dramatic stand. But leaving out of protest is always an option. If it makes the troll and everyone who decided to stay feel awkward, well, that's their decision.
Why should I ruin my evening due to this guy? What exactly are you protesting? Do you think this kind of person gives a shit if you walk away? Do you think the entire rest of the table will follow you? (Answer: No.) Stand up to him and resolve it; if no progress is made and it turns ugly, that person is no longer welcome at your table and you move on. I laid out a template here[0].
I see lots of people saying "walk away" -- you're letting the troll win. That's your dinner. This isn't like high school where you can just up and walk away and get whispers going in the hallway about what happened at lunch last Tuesday, OMG! Handle it like a grown person.
This is important: TROLLS WILL CONTINUE TROLLING AS LONG AS YOUR SILLY CLINGING TO POLITENESS MEANS YOU WON'T CONFRONT THEM. Your being polite enables them. Think about that. Just don't get it wrong and draw down on a harmless comment that you misunderstood.
It is not your dinner. It is everyone at that table's dinner, troll's included. And you seem to be stuck on ejecting him from the table. If the majority of the table agrees with you you can probably shame him into leaving. How are you going to do that if you don't have that consensus or if he refuses? Are you going to get physical?
I would probably try to make him leave first, but failing that, walking away is the appropriate choice. You are passing judgment, in a way, on the whole party when you do this. You are saying that this behavior is not acceptable in your company and if the present company disagrees then this is important enough for you to remove yourself from that company because it is not something you can tolerate.
We cannot force people to be polite or even tolerant. We can choose who we keep company with.
Simply leaving doesn't hold the aggressor accountable for what they've said; I think it should be a last resort.
If you leave, probably there's awkward silence, someone makes a halfhearted joke, and eventually the conversation changes to something else. Out of sight, out of mind.
If you stay and demand an apology politely but firmly, the aggressor is in an awkward position. An apology is something utterly reasonable to demand and there's a lot of social pressure around that, at least if you want to be seen as a (relatively) mature person.
It also gives the aggressor a way to reconcile. They're probably more likely to reflect than if you just flounce; the possibility for further conversation is still there.
Of course, that said, if they apologize insincerely or not at all, there's not much you can do but leave. But you don't want to raise the stakes that high until you've offered some concrete way for the aggressor to end the confrontation.
Oh, certainly. You should first try to hold them accountable. If the rest of the table is more concerned with getting past the awkward confrontation than dealing with the aggressor's behavior, then you leave. I was arguing against this position:
> I see lots of people saying "walk away" -- you're letting the troll win. [..] TROLLS WILL CONTINUE TROLLING AS LONG AS YOUR SILLY CLINGING TO POLITENESS MEANS YOU WON'T CONFRONT THEM.
Walking away isn't just politeness and it doesn't mean you don't confront them. But this type of confrontation is not productive if there is not a consensus at the table. It devolves into the kind of situation that just makes the original victim feel smaller and worse. You end up throwing a tantrum trying to force the rest of the table to punish the aggressor.
Stand up against this kind of behavior, certainly. Hopefully this will give the others at the table courage to denounce it also and make the offender unwelcome. But becoming belligerent and trying to force him to leave, as tiredofcareer seemed to suggest, is not a productive way to handle the situation.
Best scenario is when you call the person out on their remarks and they apologize. Short of that, you hope everyone else makes it socially difficult for them to stay without apologizing. Worst case you leave.
I also strongly disagree with this:
> This isn't like high school where you can just up and walk away and get whispers going in the hallway about what happened at lunch last Tuesday, OMG!
Yes, this is not highschool. We all expect to be more mature than that. If a friend of mine left a dinner saying, "I'm sorry, this behavior is not acceptable to me and I can't stay," that would make me seriously reconsider my position. This person is my friend. I value their opinion. If they are so upset that they feel they cannot in good conscience stay then I must have seriously misjudged the importance of what just happened. That is the reaction you are trying for.
> If a friend of mine left a dinner saying, "I'm sorry, this behavior is not acceptable to me and I can't stay," that would make me seriously reconsider my position.
Because you're rational. Someone who doubles down on a comment about someone's tits being her weather helm for success after being lightly called on it is not rational. You can't put yourself in this guy's shoes, because you aren't that guy. I've dealt with this kind of person before, directly, with significant results.
I, personally, would make a joke at your expense after you're gone and get the rest of the table back on my side. Because I swim in the middle of this moral compass. Something like: "wonder what got under his skin, sorry about the scene, there, guys;" bam, I just got the table back on my side and now you're the idiot. I know this because I've been in this exact situation after I offended someone into leaving my company. Next thing said was "yeah, he's been testy lately, maybe he needs some time alone". We completely forgot about my poor remark that shoved him away in the first place. As much as you'd like to believe you've "sent a message" to me and the other people at the table, we've really said "what a dork" and moved on with our lives with minimal interruption.
Weak people are going to do two things in that scenario: (a) not follow you from the table when you "make your stand" by fleeing, because they're not sure about it, and (b) instantly flop back to wondering what the hell is wrong with you after an ever-so-gentle shove from the original offender in your absence.
Emotional manipulation is comically easy, and after you've worked with typical Silicon Valley types for 10+ years, this is a pretty consistent roadmap.
> Best scenario is when you call the person out on their remarks and they apologize.
I don't understand what you're saying here. I'm positing that you should call the person out on the remarks and demand apology. You say the same thing in this sentence, then spend the rest of your comment explaining how I'm wrong. Making him leave is the last step of my escalation path, which I laid out in the linked comment, which it seems like you didn't read.
> Because you're rational. Someone who doubles down on a comment about someone's tits being her weather helm for success after being lightly called on it is not rational.
This kind of person is not the kind of friend I keep. And anyways, this is more directed at the rest of the table who lacked the conviction to act.
> get the rest of the table back on my side.
Sounds like the whole table is full of people who are not actually my friends and not who I am interested in spending my time with. I am glad to have left.
I read your linked comment. I do agree with you about the first course of action. What do you do when you get step 8 and the person says, "Pff. No, I'm staying." Are you going to forcibly eject them? What if the rest of the table doesn't care enough? Get into a fight?
I disagree with your strong stance against leaving the situation. You characterize it as weak and ineffectual. I call it choosing who you keep company with. I myself am coming up on 15 years as a software developer. Maybe it is a cultural disconnect as I am in Austin, not Silicon Valley, but outside of college I have never been party to an incident as offensive as that described by the OP. I don't work for companies full of people like this, I don't hire people like this, and I don't socialize with people like this. If someone insists on remaining too immature to be respectful and tolerant of other people I do not want to waste my time and energy on them.
> Emotional manipulation is comically easy
This confuses me. I do not know too many people who would be easily manipulated in this way. Certainly not my coworkers. Maybe young kids in their early twenties who have still not figured out who they are.
You shape your society by who you choose to keep company with and by the expectations you place on that company. People in my life know that I will treat them with respect and courtesy and will deal with them honestly. They know I expect the same in return. If the rest of the table sides with the aggressor, or is unwilling to side with me and demand the aggressor apologize then at some point I determine that this is not the company I want to keep and I leave. There are a lot of things I will tolerate, because nobody is perfect--surely I'm not perfect--and people have differences. But a persistent lack of basic respect and civility is something I won't tolerate.
Finally:
> "wonder what got under his skin, sorry about the scene, there, guys;" bam, I just got the table back on my side and now you're the idiot.
This is understandable because we are strangers, but saying this after I left would not likely make me look like an idiot. I am not going to cause a big scene when I leave. I am still going to be polite and leave calmly. It would be hard to label me as testy. In an actual situation I would probably be a little more verbose: "I'm sorry guys, that's not cool/that' not OK/this isn't acceptable (depends on setting). I'm going to head out. I'll see you later. (to the injured party) You want to finish dinner/have dessert/grab coffee at <destination>? (if they say no) OK, have a good night." Then leave calmly.
Ironically, you are causing a big scene when you force conversation to stop until the guy apologizes. If the rest of the table agrees with you, great. I am not saying a big scene is always a bad thing, but if the table doesn't side with you then you look like the idiot. Maybe in their minds they are thinking, "Here tiredofcareer goes again. He's always getting worked up about something. Just give him what he wants so he'll calm down."
Not knowing everything about the OP's situation and/or the company he keeps and/or the relation to everyone else at the table, I'm just saying that if nothing else, leaving out of protest is an option. I don't mean, leave because your stomach isn't feeling well. Leave because the offender is intolerable and make that clear. In certain situations, having a big scene may not be possible...but leaving, and possibly convincing others to join, is far better than just letting things slide.
Do you think the entire rest of the table will follow you? (Answer: No.)
It can happen. It takes some guts and if you don't have the social capital with this group you may not be able to pull it off. Everyone goes to a new table but leaves the dickhead sitting there.
There is no downside to leaving the table. I have two axes, based on the reaction of the douchebags and of the others at the table. There are no neutral parties.
1) Douchebags may think you're a 'fag' - You win, they are still douchebags and you are not around douchebags.
2) Douchebags may get embarrassed - You win, they may think before douching again and you are not around douchebags.
3) Douchebags may apologize (assume sincerely), ceasing to be douchebags - You win, the table can return to normal conversation, and you are not around douchebags.
A) Others stay at the table, giving you no support - You win, you have upheld the virtue of equality, you have taken the measure of people you thought were not douchebags, and you are not around douchebags.
B) Others stay at the table, telling douchebags that they were over the line - You win, you have encouraged dissent, and you are not around douchebags.
C) Others leave the table or restaurant - You win, you have led others to take an affirmative stand against the douchebags, and you are not around douchebags.
D) Others follow you to a different table or restaurant - You win, you have led others to take an affirmative stand against the douchebags, you can have a conversation without shouting (unless it's because Tottenham are CRUSHING Chelsea, Liverpool, Man U, or Arsenal) and you are not around douchebags.
The important thing is making your stand there and then. It takes chutzpah, but the more you work it, the stronger it gets.
Why is this even a topic anymore? I don't understand how this can even enter into someone's mind as an acceptable remark to make. This is the 21st century - if you don't treat women with respect and as equals then please, don't show your face in public anymore until you learn normal human etiquette.
When I was in basic training for the Army, my drill instructor told us that they can turn us into soldiers but there is nothing they can do to fix 18 years of bad parenting.
For me, there are certain traits and ways of thinking that I just can't tolerate. In some cases, I can tolerate those beliefs if the person is able to keep them locked up when I'm around. Usually this person is smart enough to know a certain belief if controversial or similar and knows when to keep quiet.
Some people know when to keep quiet, some people don't. Some people can swear like a sailor when drinking with friends at a private location but have the good sense not to do the same when out at a family location on a normal day.
People probably can't / won't change. Discussion and arguments won't do it. Even if you could change a person, it's not worth the effort for you to try. It's best to just cut the cord right there and move on with your life.
Not sure why this comment is being downvoted. It's entirely true. The reason we've got people in the world who make comments like this is because they were raised in an environment where it was normal, and they think it's normal. We've got bad eggs in all walks of life. Society moves on and ultimately those people will suffer for going against the grain. It's a shame that ladies are so overwhelmed by this in our industry but you can't let the dweebs in society get you down.
Most of the people in her group shared the same reaction: they were surprised and defended her. I realize that ladies have it tough in our industry, but it's not a 50:50 men vs women war.
When you're in a jam like that, there isn't much you can do. You don't engage them. When someone says shit like that, you just ignore them. Or change the subject. Or leave. As the author said herself ... she isn't a confrontational person. Most women aren't. So, you just drop it and walk away. I do it all the time. I have no patience for stupid people, regardless of their gender.
> When you're in a jam like that, there isn't much you can do.
Sure there is. You can switch majors. Or quietly put your resume out in a different industry. Go somewhere your superiors and peers actually give a shit about whether people are treating you horribly.
What do you think happened to all the women who aren't programmers?
You're right that it's not OP's job to fix broken people.
If the broken person wishes to change, he can. He can ask for help. I hope this wasn't a cry for help because it got lost.
However, signalling that his behavior is not OK is important for everyone else at the table. Maybe there is some naive young guy sitting there who didn't think the jerk's comment was okay, but without seeing any kind of sanction he may start thinking "oh, that's how I'm supposed to talk to be respected." Make sure that he doesn't end up thinking that. It's also important for the person who was insulted, of course.
I once witnessed overt racism at an event. I didn't know either party. To this day, I regret not intervening.
Perhaps I'm now over compensating, but I became "that guy" who always speaks up. That time, I was so shocked, I didn't know how to respond. Replaying it in my head over and over, now I don't need to hesitate when it happens again.
Note: you're not persuading the antagonist. Screw him. By speaking up, you're putting him and everyone on else on notice that pathological behavior will not be tolerated.
A year or two back, we had a guest female speaker at a local user group. I felt that she wasn't being given the same level of respect afforded every other speaker. People talked over her, interrupted her, etc.
So I said something. I pissed some people off. Others laughed at me.
But next time we had a female speaker, EVERYONE was super courteous. They even joked that if anyone was rude, Specialist (me) would bring on the hurt.
My advice to Andy Moore, and everyone, is to learn from his experience, and prepare for the next time, until such time that the trogs realize they can keep their sexism, racist, hatred, etc to themselves.
The guy who was making sexist statements is ignorant, not a "fucking loser."
How do you make these situations positive for everyone?
Empathy.
Empathy for all sides.
Everyone exposed to this kind of social ignorance is a victim if you dig deep enough.
In the tech world we are quick to call users idiots, each other inept, ideas retarded...
I ask for empathy.
Empathy for this offensive guy who most likely grew up intimidated by social situations. He was picked on and bullied, and never grew past it. If I ventured a guess, I'd say he's still in pain, and still not sure how to act due to years of relative social isolation. He is simply ignorant of the effect of his actions. He literally knows no other ways to relate.
Calling him names makes us no different from him, or the people who encouraged his social isolation. Do you think shaming him will convince him we're right? He'll just view us as "another bully" and continue his anti-social behavior.
Encouraging growth through understanding, not through social imposition or public shaming is how we resolve these situations positively.
I don't think the person in this particular story is being ignorant -- he's being willfully sexist. This situation is not a misunderstanding. And we don't know why he thinks the women in the post can't get by on her own merits.
We do know that after hearing what other people had to say, he insisted on his sexist remark. He had a chance to reflect on it, and exhibited no remorse or apprehension. That kind of behavior doesn't deserve empathy, it deserves harsher correction and condemnation by his peers. Letting a situation like that slide only says, "If you insist enough, people actually shut up because they're agreeing with you or don't think it matters enough to merit dissent." Silence is just as bad as agreement in a case like this.
This guy doesn't need a kindergarten-level explanation of why it's not nice to tell a lady she got where she is "because of her tits" -- he needs someone to tell him to cut the crap because it won't be tolerated.
"Calling him names makes us no different from him"
In my opinion, you've missed one very important detail. He's only getting "called names" in response to his "offensive guy" actions. Nobody involved in this conversation would have said a single word, good _or_ bad about the guy, except for the fact that he chose to publicly be a sexist jerk and intentionally offend someone in a social situation.
I _do_ feel empathy for people with poorly developed social skills - having been there myself and having friends and colleagues in the same boat (as I suspect most of us in this industry/profession do), BUT, if you've made it to 20 or 25 years old without having worked out that accusing a female of ony having accomplished something "because TITS!", you're clearly in need of stronger education techniques than "encouraging growth through understanding" - I'm not advocating punching him in the face, but if he were a puppy I'd be whacking him on the nose with a newspaper. Social imposition and public shaming are _entirely_ appropriate tools to deal with adults who make comments like he did.
While I'm not going to argue against empathy in general, registering some blunt disapproval is less of a bullying behavior than saying nothing and passive-aggressively excluding someone, which seems to be the runner-up suggestion in the thread.
Drawing moral equivalence between participating in hostility against women and hostility against the rude and ignorant is a bit of a stretch, too.
Registering blunt disapproval may stop the behavior temporarily, but what caused it in the first place? It can't be entirely due to a general passive acceptance of such statements.
Our approach to ending racism was similar, and it was effectual, but over a great period of time incorporating generations of ignorance.
However, there were individuals who managed to help end the passive acceptance of racism by taking a vested interest in changing the thinking of one individual, all without guilting them into compliance.
The NAACP president of Oklahoma, Wade Watts convinced the imperial wizard of a national KKK organization to reconsider his perspective on race. Rev. Watts did not accomplish this through expressing disgust or disapproval, but through patience and empathy. Johnny Lee Carly was swayed from imperial wizard to anti-racism activist. Wade saved Johnny's progeny from harboring the same ignorance, accomplishing in a single generation what had previously taken acts of congress, violence, protest and over a hundred years of blunt disapproval.
I'm not saying Wade's approach is the only way to accomplish a means to societal change, but it can change the perspective of an individual.
Saying "fuck off" is not morally equivalent to implying a specific woman was hired for their purely physical assets irrespective of their intellect.
And public shaming is absolutely the way you do it. You need to draw a very firm line in the sand which cannot be interpreted in any other way; some wishy-washy "I wish you wouldn't say that" isn't going to do it for some classes of people, who'll just think you're saying that because the woman is there.
Now, myself, I would probably not say "fuck off." I might stand up and say something like "I'm going to have to ask you to apologize for saying that. You disrespected her and you disrespected me." It is polite but firm. It brings to bear social pressure, letting him know in clear terms what he has done and how he can fix it in the near term.
This is why I never use the word "fuck" in common discorse. For these situations exactly. So that when I hold up my hand and say "$name, fuck you" it goes off like a bomb and I don't have to say anything else.
That's because they're not the target audience. It's a call to action for everyone who may have witnessed a scenario like that one and didn't tell the guy to fuck off.
And the usual stack of classic comments building on there already as well. "Man the fuck up bitch".
Some guy talking about how he's totally on side but somehow is unable to keep himself from commenting on her breasts; presumably he subscribes to the idea that if you can pretend to be ironic, you can still say it. Classic stuff.
Despite the feeling that "some people can't / won't change" I believe in teachable moments[1]. I can't recall where I heard this, but someone once said that racism and bigotry were diminished in this country when people shamed friends and family members for making insensitive remarks.
> Defenses and arguments tried to be brought up, but conversation quickly moved on with the men talking over the woman until she just sat there quietly and resigned.
Hmm. Why haven't I seen a single woman post an article about this issue? I'm tired of all the me-tooism from men about this subject. Yes, sexism is abhorrent fallacy, but inverse-sexism is still sorta sexism -- enough with the White Knights, already.
Not to defend the guy who made some joke about tits, but I look forward to the day when we can be more than humorless automatons regarding this issue. Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XgqUQ17sYm0
I suggest next time this happens saying, "you're being rude", and change the topic. I've gotten really good results with that statement, ymmv, but hth.
Reactionary and probably won't help. Involving some sort of arbitrary authority only serves to dilute the cause and adds external interests to influence an outcome. It also means this type of behavior will continue when the 'sexism police' aren't looking.
I think social pressure is what needs to make this stop. We need to be mindful of what's not ok and have the courage to say something. That means that the authority is open-sourced to you and me.
Speaking based on experience with what happened to Jesse Noller and the PSF just two weeks ago, you do not want to escalate this to any level where someone might lose a job or be asked to leave the conference. The same people that cannot handle social situations with women without discussing their tits resort to death threats and nonstop harassment when one of "their own" is chastised publicly for such a thing. If I were Jesse, I'd be having second thoughts about my volunteer work after that shitshow. It's just not worth it to be kind to these people. Ever.
Someone else I know wrote a blog post about the Adria Richards thing. He then moderated one comment which was extremely offensive. In retaliation, the person that wrote the comment launched a denial of service against his blog. This industry is full of emotional children that cannot handle being adults, and most of them can never admit that they might be wrong. Had OP confronted this jackass, it probably would have gone nowhere, and running to the cops/conference people is just shoving your problems on someone else. There is just no easy solution here without stepping up and being confrontational.
I'm assuming the game development people (different industry) and GDC might have missed that brouhaha, even though it was all over the news, so I'm sparing the benefit of the doubt that game development should have learned a valuable lesson from the PSF's (and Python community's) misfortune.
I think that this has to come from both directions:
1. Remember those silly class codes of conduct we had to do at the beginning of each school year? Bring something like that back at the beginning of each conference. OK, not quite that cheesy, but a reminder at the start about the code of conduct. Offer refunds at that point if people don't agree with them. Hell, we have to sit through the Health and Safety stuff anyway so it's a good time to add them in.
(Speaking of which, I think it's too late to do anything int regards to the guy this year).
2. At a grass roots level. I know it's a horrible analogy, but I remember when I was taking my dog through dog obedience (OK, puppy kindy) that if you don't punish a dog within four seconds for something they've done wrong, you might as well forget it as they will have. In that respect, I think any social reactions have to be swift and to the point. Walk away from a group if something is unacceptable, or very quickly say something along the lines of 'that crossed the line and isn't cool'.
The notice to the individual need not be overtly public-facing. It could just be a dialog between the conference committee (who should care about the quality of its attendees) and the person in question. I personally would also prefer less public vitriol everywhere.
Whilst I understand the idea you're trying to get across, we have to make it clear to these people that they're outright not welcome any more. Getting this asshat barred from future GDC's can only be a good thing and perhaps if (and when) people get up in arms over it a la Adria Richards, they need to be warned, or even barred, too.
Doing nothing because you fear the verbal reprisals of a group of immature misogynists seems, to me at least, the worst of all possible options.
I'm not advocating doing nothing. I'm saying don't make this a public spectacle or attempt to get the person fired or banned from GDC. Here's why: In my reading, this person was not confronted about it enough for him to change his behavior. In the author's writing, it was swept under the rug.
Right now resolution of these incidents goes like this:
Hear ugly -> politely ignore in person -> report to others
So yeah, if you want to be deferential to other people and never get things accomplished by yourself, and passive aggressively "send a message" to the person by getting them banned by GDC, by all means. Just know that nothing will change. The person will resent you for getting him banned from GDC, not for being offended at his ugliness.
This is like calling the police because someone shouted in your face and you can't handle it. The correct answer is handling it yourself. The police don't have time for that shit, and I've seen way too many people think that's what the police are for (even calling 911 because someone was shouting at them, or laid a hand on them -- though the latter gets a little more complicated). Here's how this sort of thing should go:
Hear ugly -> stop socializing and make offender cry
Seriously, a step by step guide to handling this:
1. Someone says something ugly.
2. "Whoa whoa, everybody stop. Shut up a second."
3. "What did you just say?"
4. Continue silencing the table.
Do not let anybody else stop you or get involved.
5. "That is completely unacceptable."
6. "You owe your victim an apology."
Do not stop until you get an honest one.
7. If the offender whimpers, good. You got through.
8. If the offender refuses apology, eject the offender.
Think of this as garbage collection. Pause the world, clean up the garbage, resume socializing. It's important that everybody else defers to you and doesn't attempt to interrupt you or stop you. Several people always will to avoid the confrontation happening in front of them. "I'm sure he didn't mean it that way." Neutralize them or you will never be able to get through to the person you need to change. The target of your confrontation will cling to the people around you who are less sure of what you're doing and use it against you. Be resolute. This isn't "alpha male" behavior, this is standing strong and not taking no for an answer.
Seriously, be the change you want to see in our industry. Quit calling the cops to make other people fix your problems. Stop being polite to assholes. Your politeness is what feeds them -- they know you won't confront them.
I'm not saying getting the offender banned from GDC should be the only action, by all means confront the offender too. But you can't expect people to be able to, or feel safe in, confronting someone who has already shown a disregard for their agency.
But of course, for a large number of people it'll be more like this:
Hear ugly -> ensure safety of ones self and others -> inform others
Merely confronting the asshat is great until you discover the asshat in question is just doing this again and again and saying sorry as if that makes their original transgression alright. There needs to be something the offending party can lose for it to make sense, especially when the potential reputation loss isn't in the circles they care about anyway.
And in one respect, making a change isn't my first priority. My first priority is making these places a safe place for people to be. Making the people who would otherwise make this an unsafe space rethink their actions is a secondary goal.
Why is informing others necessary? You dealt with the problem, give the person a chance to change. If they're a repeat offender, eventually they'll piss off enough people that the overlapping social networks will catch wind of it organically. There's no reason to broadcast, make a list, or "save the world" by putting a face out there as someone to avoid.
I see the safety argument making an appearance here yet again, even though neither Adria nor the woman in this story were in any danger from the person (as far as I can tell). If you think jokes make PyCon or GDC an unsafe place, I'm sure everyone who's ever been sexually assaulted would like a word with you about what 'safe' means. It's making the assumption that people who joke inappropriately will eventually be rapists, and we should therefore warn everyone to stay away from them, which is fundamentally flawed.
Just deal with it in person. If he's a repeat, eventually it'll catch up with him enough. Of course, there's no saying something this controversial without geek feminists trotting out the "you're just shutting up the victim" line, which is complete hogwash. I've been called a rape apologist for making the point about dealing with something privately. People do change, even in the extreme scenarios, and the age of rapid social media and Internet communication demands ever higher vigilance over our actions online.
There are two outcomes, if we extrapolate this to the ends: we shame someone publicly and effectively destroy a career, eliminating any possibility of improvement as a human being and the contributions that person might have brought to the table, or we deal with it in person and attempt to steer him toward the right path. The default tendency to feel hopeless about fixing something is swaying this choice the wrong way.
If someone is going around causing issues sufficiently that they're a repeat offender, I don't see why they should be given additional chances. Let them have their ever shrinking circle of misogynists, just don't let them into conferences. Access is a privilege, not a right.
The argument that because in these two cases (of the damn near uncountable issues of people having to put up with similar comments, criticisms or slurs) the person in question wasn't in any danger doesn't mean that in every instance the person was neither in danger nor felt in danger. And what's more, these comments, jokes etc. actively contribute to an environment where it is insinuated that these words and by extension these actions are okay.
So an asshat making a sexist joke will hopefully never rape someone, but they're certainly making it a more fertile environment for the bastard who then goes on to rape someone. Under this understanding of the issue, yes it makes sense to actively exclude those people making sexist (or for that matter homophobic, racist etc., the "rape culture" argument extends just fine to other examples) jokes.
It's an aggregation of stories from people working in the service industry who have horror stories to tell from the customers they serviced. If you read through a few stories you might pick up on a anomaly that seems to pervade. Particularly any story from the "Awesome Customers" category.
For some stories we see normal, self-righteous, mildly ignorant, comical behavior, typical of human beings in general I would say. Other stories have this strange, caricature, like quality about them. People come off like comic book villains, cackling maniacally as they monologue about how demographic X is inferior in way Y. They say statements which are way beyond the pale of current society, and in these stories one brave individual stands against their unwavering ignorance in a triumphant display, shaming the villain.
I think you'll pick up on it as well. These stories are fantasies. Spirited teenagers imagining themselves slaying the ignorance and wrong-doings of their bigoted elders, and reporting it as if it actually happened for the mass approval of people on Facebook.
That's the thing, if things had happened as the OP said, the reaction from any of the human beings I know would of being proportionately extreme. Something is just a bit surreal here.
Really? You don't see around you the "bro-grammer" culture, and the promo girls at tech trade shows? While, like you, I like to think I surround myself with like-minded rational people - and I honestly think I manage to do that in my social/friendship circles - it's _abundantly_ clear that there's many many people in programming/tech profession that'd laugh along with the comment related in the story.
I had the same reaction. After years on the Internet you have to develop a sensitive bullshit detector. I'd love to hear this story told from the perspective of someone else at the table.
She did speak up. See the comments (you can't at the moment because the traffic's taken the site down). And the comments have a guy who is behaving exactly like that.
To paraphrase - she tried to make the witty comeback but was talked over, and part of the point is this isn't isolated, she gets rape threats every game release; can you imagine how wearing that is?
She suggests that others also need to speak up - a quick "Not cool, dude" to anyone who behaves like this.
seriously, the internet is a big rape threat. are there any smart people that treat random anon trolling seriously? (except opportunists and journalists that by occasion use such crap as a 'proof' of whatever)
Whether you treat it seriously (as in, call the police) depends on the level of implied threat. But are you really just saying ignore it? Think about the spam you get. It's a little annoying. Now think if all of that was threats directed at you.
It's not just about whether you take them all seriously, it's whether this constant drumbeat of abuse gets to you. Would you still love your dream job after a year of that? Would you just want the relief of bowing out of any kind of public life?
Women deserve better. Telling them to toughen up doesn't help, it's blaming the victim. Try speaking out instead.
a few years ago, a member of our national female volleyball team resigned from sport because somebody on the internet, anonymously, wrote she has fat legs (at least that was her official statement). the question is not if a woman has the right to get her feelings hurt, but whether empowering the trolls by admitting publically you very much care what they write is an effective thing to do in fighting this behavior.
btw rape threats that show a slight chance of being 'real' (say, not a frustrated teenager or drunk idiot from the other side of the globe) should be reported, even just for the sake of it. that said, knowing certain aspects of the gaming community, I imagine there is a bigger chance of the latter.
When you are intellectually advanced to the point where sexist jokes simply make you want to rip out the throat of the party saying them, you begin to realize that disrespect for women is not only illogical but very perverse. Telling someone they have "good tits" is not funny or even sexy to the party that it is said to.
It's a fucking disgrace to humanity. Not only is it objectifying, but it's insulting, rude, and so incredibly improper.
I thought we had reached the point where our minds found others attractive based upon intelligence, and not on physical appearance. I thought we had reached the point where sexism had all but disappeared.
Of course, as I always am, I was wrong.
This is quite frankly getting ridiculous. I don't tell women anything about their physical appearance, unless I've known them for a long time; which is when an "You're a very beautiful person" may be appropriate.
I know many others that go by the same maxim. It's a shame some men haven't matured enough to behave.
Wait, nobody's even bringing up the fact that maybe the game developer didn't get the pass on merit alone? Yeah, the comment was rude (people are rude everywhere, always), but maybe he had a point.
The cached version is a little hard on the eyes so here is text:
Last night was the end of an amazing GDC trip. A handful of remaining friends and I made a journey out to JapanTown and we had an amazing meal. It was a great way to end the trip.
One of my friends, and a fellow game developer, was there for dinner. Her trip to GDC was planned last-minute, thanks to someone obtaining her a (very expensive!) all-access pass.
When recounting this chain of events, a male game developer at the table said that she only got the GDC pass “because of her tits.”
The table largely responded with aghast looks and silence. It was brought up that perhaps her ticket was thanks to being an award-winning game developer.
The same male responded with the ever-classy “sure, award winning tits.”
Defenses and arguments tried to be brought up, but conversation quickly moved on with the men talking over the woman until she just sat there quietly and resigned.
I’m posting about this because this shit has to stop.
I’m posting about this because I was silent when I should have spoken up. I shouldn’t have let the conversation sweep this transgression under the rug.
I’m posting this because I am tired of being made complicit (due to inaction) when these things happen. I’m tired of having to yell at people for this shit every night at GDC. I’m tired because I want this to end, and I’m tired of having this conversation over and over again.
I’m tired of feeling like shit because I don’t have enough energy to defend my friends every fucking DAY.
I’m terrified of losing friends over this.
I’m not a very confrontational person. Usually I deal with shit like this by making a mental note to avoid the person in the future. And now that my friends’ feelings are hurt and people are accusing me of inaction and being a bad person because of it, I feel like my last few years of championing anti-harassment policies (and ENFORCING them) doesn’t even matter.
It sucks that my entire personality can be judged on my last exchange.
So, hey: if you are a sexist ass around me, and think it’s just ironic meta-humour, know that it’s hurting me. It hurts me for days, weeks, months afterwards. It hurts my friends. It hurts my business. It makes me less creative, it makes me want to just hide in my basement all day. It makes me not want to go to GDC again.
If I don’t tell this to your face it’s probably because I’m tired of having this exchange this week. It makes me feel angry, upset, and sad. I hope someone links you to this.
And if you’re going to write me to apologize, you’d sure as shit better apologize to the actual people you pissed on first.
(the situation, not the reaction.. I would have asked him to leave (and have in similar situations), though I realise not everyone is as comfortable as with confrontation as I ;)
I would encourage people to name names in these situations. Group humiliation is a very good catalyst for change, if it comes to that.
How does a wise and tactful man react to a tactless remark in a large group?
He doesn't. He might try to direct the conversation to more agreeable matters. He certainly doesn't draw attention to the offense and impress it indelibly in the minds of the others.
Generally, you are better off improving your own behavior than that of others. As Dale Carnegie pointed out, it's not only more profitable; it's less dangerous.
So I'm supposed to feel sorry for you because women are discriminated against? Why are you making yourself the focus of this story?
There's a real story of discrimination here - against the woman who was insulted.
"I’m terrified of losing friends over this." - so you're against discrimination only to the extent that it doesn't negatively impact your life. This is meaningless.
My reaction to something nasty like this would've have been to stand up and ask the person to leave and if they don't, just walk away. This is nowhere close to being acceptable. Where does this person work where it's acceptable for employees to say such things?
That's quite a bold statement to make to someone, basically equivalent to saying, "you're nothing without your genitals". The proper response isn't "I disagree" or even "fuck you", it's a punch to the face. Seriously, if someone tells you, or your friend that they're worthless, you don't have to argue with them, you can knock them the fuck out.
That would be assault, and you could be jailed for it. Plus, then you look like the troglodyte for raising the problem from the verbal domain to the physical domain.
Yay! My first downvotes! The law doesn't prevent anyone from doing anything. It simply prescribes a liability. You can educate someone by saying, "your comment is sexist", to which they will save face and complain about your lack of sense of humor, etc. You can also educate them about the consequences of insulting someone with mild violence, which is far more likely to stick with them. Of course, you can't go around beating people up, and I didn't suggest anything of the sort. Mild violence is a common response to insults. A bruised ego goes a long way in social calibration, which this idiot was clearly missing.
A punch to the face, in a public setting, to someone that you don't really know is (in America at least) a great way to get arrested and sued. Nothing about that escalated situation would be mild.
That male at the table needs to have his balls removed for such a statement.
He may be male, but he isn't a man. A real man wouldn't behave like that.
Edit: OK, maybe having his balls removed is excessive.
He is mocking a womens anatomy and the reverse would make him feel good. i.e saying he got into GDC because of his testicles isn't the same type of insult as the female getting in for her "tits". So this isn't an argument that levels the playing field.
Perhaps he is just a socially awkward human being that doesn't respect women. Someday he will cross the wrong path and insult the wrong women and then I guess Karma kicks in?
Edit 2: Thanks everyone for pointing about that I was indeed going overboard with the removal of anatomy phrase. Overboard from being outraged people still act like this and in front of a table full of people.
Please stop, you're over compensating. Yes the person in this story is a dick but being a dick does not mean someone should have their body mutilated, nor does it somehow make them a faux-person. Saying someone isn't a "real man" is just as ridiculous as what the person in the story said.
You're not scoring any magical man points with a comment like this.
It isn't an insult. The insult was what he said to begin with.
Would it had been better if I said he needs to "have his mouth washed out with soap" like a 5 year old?
Seriously. To tell me he doesn't deserve a similar treatment to what he displayed to the female is naive. He needs to know that what he did is not excusable and wont be tolerated.
We all understand that what he did was wrong. That doesn't mean you need to drag out more sexist tripe like what makes someone a "real man." It's just negative and passion-inducing without actually adding or helping anything.
Your comment is completely empty of content and is just inflammatory. Yes, what we said was wrong. We all arrived at that conclusion on our own and don't need your vivid imagery to reinforce, thank you.
You can't possibly imagine that calling for mutilating someone isn't inflammatory. Can you? (Your discussion of 'real men' aside, which is a fight I don't feel like having, much like OP!)
Yes, it is an insult, and you're not doing anyone any favors by dissembling. Regardless of your motivations, you decided to employ a gendered attack with a very long list of connotations--one of the more prevalent being that those who are not 'real men' are themselves exhibiting feminine qualities.
His behavior is 100% unacceptable. Yours isn't, either. "An eye for an eye" doesn't help anyone be better, and education, not feel-good attacks, is the goal.
ok, I can see your point. Education is the real goal. When enough people are educated over time this type of stuff goes aways.
Isn't perpetuation of the problem double edged? Those that make those comments dont accept education without having a reason to. Those that try and convey that reasoning, if they do it in a similar manner, are accused of perpetuation. So how does one make someone understand what they did without giving them a does of what it feels like?
Tell the person to fuck off.
I'm serious. It registers disagreement, and to any rational person the lack of interest in attempting serious discussion. Ideal? No. Preferable to inaction? Absolutely. Plus where do you even start with a comment like that? I'd prefer to make it clear that I'm shocked than do someone who would say that the favor of jumping into a thoughtful discussion about how the merits of their opinion.