

Why LinkedIn Wasn't Scammed - schmittz
http://epicureandealmaker.blogspot.com/2011/05/jane-you-ignorant-slut.html

======
dablya
Is it me or does the kitchen remodel analogy doesn't make his point at all...
I mean if you sell 5% for 50k through your broker and it's trading at 100k the
next day and you find out that the broker made it available to his best
clients first... How would that not be a scam?

~~~
terio
The point he is making is that the broker could not predict the (inflated)
marked valuation of the slice once it reached the market because of the nature
of the process. It does not matter who profits from it, their privileged
clients or some other speculator.

------
freerobby
How is this dead at 7 points? I agree he is too personal but his points are
spot-on and he does a great job of correcting the overly-simplistic metaphors
that were dominating the media coverage.

------
hoodoof
Seems a bit much to call someone a slut.

<http://www.slutwalktoronto.com/>

~~~
cleverjake
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane,_you_ignorant_slut#Jane_Cu...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jane,_you_ignorant_slut#Jane_Curtin_.281976-1980.29)

Its something Dan Akroyd famously said the Jane Curtain during their "balanced
debates" on Saturday Night Live back in the 70s.

~~~
mooism2
Yeah, the 70s was full of misogynism.

I really don't see that a comedian using a phrase satirically in the 70s makes
it appropriate to use in 2011.

~~~
cleverjake
I think you missed the point, or did not see the footage of the scene. It was
supposed to be misogynic. It was making him out to be a fool whilst also being
comedically overly harsh on something that was almost always not called for.

It is a common phrase (at least in my life) for debates in which a person is
completely wrong. It was regularly used in my Policy Debates in high school.
but there is no accounting for taste.

~~~
mooism2
Yes, I didn't see footage of the scene because I've never lived in the US,
certainly not in the 70s.

And you miss my point. A character being made fun of for being misogynist it
not itself misogynist. But taking that misogynist phrase, using it in a
different context --- now it depends on your readers. Will they all get the
reference?

Maybe that blog's regular readers all get the reference. But then someone
posted it to HN and kept the same title. HN's readership has a substantial
(perhaps majority) share of its readers based outside the US, and I expect the
majority of its readers weren't capable of watching SNL in the 70s. I'd guess
that a majority of HN's readers wouldn't get the reference, so posting it here
crosses the line into casual misogynism.

~~~
cleverjake
I completely understand that it is a highly cultural reference, and I do
(atleast think) I grasp your point, but I do not agree that something that is
said in jest is (especially when so wildly out of context such as this) is any
more offensive on its own because the reader is not a part of the original
intended audience. Nothing against either party, and I don't really want ot
hijack this thread any further so I will leave my comments at that.

<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y7S_XWuKpHc>

=]

