From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: HiPhish Subject: Re: Promoting the GNU Kind Communication Guidelines? Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:29:42 +0100 Message-ID: <7711488.7FXKNf9flN@aleksandar-ixtreme-m5740> References: <11169507.O9o76ZdvQC@aleksandar-ixtreme-m5740> <3893574.yNgoui0T1j@aleksandar-ixtreme-m5740> <87a7mua2kz.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:51356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHpdG-0001Sj-EN for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:29:59 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHpdB-0001BT-B5 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:29:58 -0400 Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:50877) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gHpdA-00012N-K9 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 08:29:53 -0400 Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6A3F2400FB for ; Wed, 31 Oct 2018 13:29:43 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <87a7mua2kz.fsf@gmail.com> List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+gcggd-guix-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-devel" To: alex.sassmannshausen@gmail.com Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org There is a common pattern in all the links you provided: 1) only feminists are seeing this supposed issue, 2) it does not go into the exact nature of the supposed harassment. With regards to the first point: Feminist group have vested interests in furthering conflicts. Even if there is no conflict they will try to create one and then sell you the solution, so please excuse my scepticism. Feminists are proven to keep fabricating issues, like the supposed wage gap. So yes, I am really doubting the veracity of those claims. You know what? When you go into a field filled with awkward nerds that's you occupational hazard. In other occupations you have other hazards: joint injuries from standing at an assembly line, getting your fingers crushed in a machine, falling off a construction site, contracting a disease in health care, having to dig through sewage in plumbing, being shot in law enforcement, or getting into legal problems in nursing. And don't get me started on clients with planet-sized egos holding back payment. I think when it comes to occupational hazards getting hit on by an awkward nerd is pretty harmless. It's certainly much less of an occupational hazard than for the people who are on the receiving end of an accusation and can lose their livelihood in an instant. So please excuse me when I don't fall for the crocodile tears. We are talking about grown-up women here, not children. > According to a TUC/Everyday Sexism study on sexual harassment, 52% of > women have experienced sexual harassment in the workplace and 80% did > not report it to their employer. I am singling out this one as an example of data manipulation. Let's for the sake of simplicity assume that the data is 100% correct and has not been tampered with. Put yourself now in the shoes of an average woman: The question is "Have you experienced instances of sexual harassment in the workplace in the past?". You think a bit and remember Steve who made a dumb joke about your breasts during coffee break last month. So you answer with yes of course. Then the second question is "If so, did you report the incident to your employer?". Considering Steve is a shy guy, it was during coffee break, no one else joined in and after you gave him a stern look he got the message, you of course didn't consider it worth anyone's time to start office drama over pretty much nothing. So you answer with "no". And now your answer gets twisted into "Don't you see all these serious issues going unreported out of fear? You should hire our advocacy agency for sensibility training and diversity counseling. You have a nice business going here, it would be a shame is someone were to call it sexist". > In 2012, in Belgium, the film Femme de la Rue directly influenced the > passing of legislation to make street harassment > illegal. > [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/aug/03/belgium-film-street-harassme > nt-sofie-peeters] It also helped kick-start movements in Belgium and France > where street harassment is fairly common. In london, UK, 4 in 10 women > between ages of 18 and 34 experienced street harassment in 2011 alone > [https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2012/may/25/four-10-women-sexually > -harassed]. Don't you consider it kind of... problematic that the video only shows people from a, let's call it "diverse" background? Why doesn't she show us all the serial catcallers in the less diverse parts of Belgium? It couldn't be that she intentionally picked the bad part of town, now could it? I feel deeply offended by the implication of this video that people of colour are the primary source of sexual harassment.