
What's with the silence? - KuraFire
http://farukat.es/journal/2013/02/681-silence
======
NathanKP
The most telling thing for me when I was reading this post is that I was just
looking at the words and assumed the author was a woman, because they were
writing about sexism and poor treatment of women in the tech industry. It
wasn't until I scrolled back up and looked at the image in the sidebar that I
realized the author of the post was actually male.

Not that men don't ever write about such issues, but I guess I'm so used to
seeing such articles penned by women that I assumed that this one was also
written by a woman. That mental bias I experienced alone is demonstrative of
how rarely men speak out.

------
philwelch
In my admittedly limited experience, I haven't seen anything to speak out
about. I appreciate when others report their experiences and don't want to
invalidate them, but if I'm "silent" it's because I simply have nothing to add
to the conversation.

Outrage propagates itself perfectly well without my help. The fact is, I've
seen more outrage over sexism in the developer community than I've seen sexism
in the developer community.

~~~
KuraFire
You (and, especially, the women you’ve worked with) are either very fortunate,
or you’re not talking to women enough for them to reveal to you what they’re
experiencing. I’ve worked in several different countries, various different
cultures, and I have yet to work with a woman who didn’t notice or experience
various forms of sexism. And most men I know are aware of it, too, but don't
necessarily know what the best way of dealing with it is.

As an side, I really do suggest you read some of the stuff posted to
<http://everydaysexism.com/> for example. There is a chance you're not seeing
the sexism for sexism.

~~~
philwelch
I don't currently work with any women in a technical capacity. When I did, I
reported to her and didn't witness any problems. The women I work with in a
non-technical capacity seem to do fine, though I spend more time doing my job
than trying to catalogue every hidden oppression they may or may not face.

Thanks for the link, but if I wanted to keep myself continually outraged over
anonymous anecdotes, I'd spend more time on Reddit.

~~~
KuraFire
Well, thanks for admitting your complete and utter ignorance on this matter,
expressing your refusal to educate yourself, and portraying your inflated
sense of self-importance to spend time telling us all this. You've contributed
nothing here other than wasting our time telling us you've no interest in
being an ally to the cause.

~~~
philwelch
I've addressed your oddly bullying tone in another comment.

The simple fact is that I have no genuine experiences or evidence to add to
the conversation, and I suspect this is true of others as well. I reject the
notion that I should speak out if I have nothing to say. I'm not the one
ruling myself out from being anyone's "ally", I'm just ruling myself out from
being anyone's parrot. If all you want is parrots for allies, that says more
about you than me.

If all you're asking for is someone to say "yep, that's awful" whenever
someone else reports something awful happening, I have to question the notion
that there isn't enough of that already.

~~~
KuraFire
> _If all you're asking for is someone to say "yep, that's awful" whenever
> someone else reports something awful happening, I have to question the
> notion that there isn't enough of that already._

That's pretty much what we're asking for at a bare minimum, and no, there
isn't enough of that at all. Educate yourself, man. When women are blogging
left and right (all those links in the article were from just the past week)
about still being harassed on a regular basis, it's Really Quite Clear that
this isn't happening enough at all.

~~~
philwelch
Yup, that's awful.

------
Zikes
Honestly, I'm just here to learn and make a living.

There are many issues in society which I abhor, including all forms of sexism,
corruption, violence, the list goes on. I try to live to the best of my
ability and without contributing negatively to any of the aforementioned
issues, but I have my own crosses to bear, I cannot carry all of yours.

~~~
KuraFire
That’s the point of the article though: you don’t need to be an activist, but
silence itself is a negative contribution. Simply the act of tweeting links to
such articles and saying you agree with it, is enough to let people know
you’ve got their backs in this matter.

~~~
philwelch
Silence is a non-contribution. You put too much stock in the leftist notion
"if you're not part of the solution, you're part of the problem", an
interesting euphemism for the old slogan "if you're not with us, you're
against us."

~~~
KuraFire
Silence is not a non-contribution. You're not getting it, but then, you
already told us you don't wish to spend even a second learning more about this
issue, so I guess this won't help you either:
<http://tommorris.org/posts/8084>

~~~
philwelch
I've "learned" plenty about this issue, and the main thing I've gained is a
greater appreciation for the power of ideology to obstruct rational thought.
The symptoms of ideology include disproportionate emotional reaction to
disagreement and accusing people of "ignorance" when they disagree with you.

Let's disengage from that, if we can, and try to answer my question. How is
silence an action rather than a non-action? All you've asserted (well, you've
let bloggers assert it for you, which doesn't add any more weight than saying
it yourself) is that speaking out would be appreciated. I'll grant that. But
just because action is appreciated doesn't turn non-action into action. It
simply doesn't follow.

The purpose of this "with us or against us" tactic is to bully sympathetic
people into radicalism, which is why radical bullies like Lenin and Mussolini
were so fond of it. It is a self-replication mechanism for ideology. Which is
why you become so angry when someone merely says "I have nothing to speak out
_about_ ". Apparently one is supposed to go looking for outrage that motivates
them to join your side when none is apparent, rather than simply acting on the
evidence they have at hand.

I reject your bullying, reject the implication that I should speak out about
things I have never witnessed just to further your agenda, and reserve the
right to speak out about and solve the problems I do see in a calm and
reasoned fashion.

~~~
KuraFire
When people tell you they are in need of help, doing nothing is the action of
not giving help.

There's no bullying or anything like that going on, here, and you're being
disingenuous by presenting it as such (and also, you're being an asshole by
comparing me to dictators). You've stated your refusal to learn more about
this subject, it's disingenuous to try and turn that around claiming you
already know “plenty” when you clearly don't, because you're arguing that this
isn't a massively systemic problem, when all evidence clearly points out that
it is.

Just because you don't see a problem doesn't mean it isn't there.

~~~
philwelch
I was comparing you to demagogues. The fact that they became dictators is
testament to the effectiveness of that style of demagoguery, which is my
reason for speaking out against it.

I never refused to learn more about the subject, I just refuse to accept
anonymous, tendentious anecdotes and ideological dogma as sufficient
information. As far as I can estimate, sexism is indeed a "massively systemic"
problem in American culture. But it's a complicated problem and one that is
probably ill-suited to ideological solutions, especially those that emphasize
the notion that it is chiefly women who suffer from sexism. I've personally
witnessed sexism going both ways, and when appropriate I've spoken out about
it. In my profession? Not much to report, it turns out. Maybe I'm lucky.

But see, you never asked those questions, you just gave me a shit-test over
whether or not I'm a feminist, and applied the "with us or against us"
response to it. The notion of a more complicated, sophisticated, nuanced view
that you very well might have large areas of agreement with is alien to you.
But this is how rational adults in the real world should address each other--
with careful consideration, not with bullying and condemnation and
polarization.

By the way, you still haven't answered my question. Speak plainly: what action
is there in silence?

~~~
KuraFire
You mean “How is silence an action rather than a non-action?”? Which I already
answered before you even asked it?

When people ask you for help and you don't give it, that inaction is telling
these people you won't give them help.

Inaction can make you be criminally accountable, so stop having this weird
belief that inaction automatically clears you of all responsibility.

~~~
philwelch
I haven't said anything about responsibility, I was just poking at your
contradictions. Inaction is not action. It's failure to act. By even using
that word you've conceded the point.

Speak plainly. If you think there's a positive duty to speak out, make a case
for that. Don't equivocate and say inaction is action. You can't build your
case on contradictions and be taken seriously among rational folk. Nor does it
work to get huffy and antagonistic whenever you are questioned.

~~~
KuraFire
I think you're completely missing the point of the article, which is saying
(as I've been trying to explain here as well) that the silence, or inaction,
still has a negative effect. It still causes harm. It's completely irrelevant
whether you want to classify it as an action or not; it has a result, and the
result is negative.

edit: and I fully acknowledge that I let myself get dragged into a side
discussion on it, which I shouldn't have.

~~~
philwelch
My point is that you're being incoherent and doing disservice to whatever
point you have to make.

------
mwetzler
Thank you Faruk! Keep up the good work.

