[Noisebridge-discuss] [drama] also [actual action] Re: Cynthia and "Asian" Reference
Mikael Vejdemo Johansson
mikael at johanssons.org
Fri Feb 3 11:45:25 PST 2012
Mmmmmmmm, ginger. Sauteed with garlic. Or maybe candied. With that delicious spicy bite.
On Feb 3, 2012, at 7:27 PM, Matt Joyce wrote:
> People are always bringing up gender issues. But what about ginger issues?
> Have we not suffered under the rusty yolk of these soulless oppressors
> long enough? My people long for freedom from the tyranny of these
> auburn topped dictators.
> When will we lay down some ground rules that force gingers to treat
> all others as their equals?
> On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Danny O'Brien <danny at spesh.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Feb 2, 2012 at 11:49 PM, Peter Werner <germpore at sonic.net> wrote:
>>> Probably opening up a can of worms here, but –
>>> Modifications? Well, for starters, the "geek feminists" have some of the
>>> most over-the-top policies against display of "sexual imagery" this side of
>>> Catherine MacKinnon. I happen to be one of those people who find this and
>>> other aspects of the "geek feminist" anti-harassment policy to amount to
>>> censorship, and if taken at it's word, it would pretty much preclude NB from
>>> hosting Arse Electronica among other events, and in my estimation, that
>>> would not be a good thing.
>> I paid $5 into the drama funds!1!!111
>> I'm not sure you actually realise how large of an intersection there is
>> between the people who organize and speak at Arse Electronica and those who
>> developed the (templated) suggestions for the anti-harrasment policy.
>> Obviously, it'd be far easier for the outrage if they were carefully
>> arranged on two sides of some gaping cultural divide, but actually you can
>> be simultaneously for developing reasonable anti-harassment policies *and*
>> sex positivity *and* freedom of speech. It'd be pretty easy to knock out an
>> anti-harassment variant for Arse or an all-night hummus fucking party; those
>> square brackets are there for a reason. Probably a slightly better reason
>> than your use of scare quotes around a group of people you interact with on
>> a regular basis.
>> Anyway, this is a distraction. Noisebridge is unlikely to collectively adopt
>> a codification aimed at gropy tech conferences; what we settled on is a
>> mediation process, which I know Pearl and others have used in the past.
>> It's imperfect, because we're imperfect, and much of its imperfection is
>> that not everybody knows about it yet, and also people don't feel
>> comfortable asserting themselves against people who break social norms
>> rather than written rules,. This is a far more pernicious issue, actually,
>> than the "strong personality asserting their ideas" issue. Strong
>> personalities wishing to impose their own rules by force of will run
>> screaming from Noisebridge after approximately 5 weeks. I've seen them.
>> People had a fairly long talk about assertion with some relatively new folks
>> yesterday, and there was a do-acratic move to ask people who were sleeping
>> here to move on out.
>> The chatter in the space right now is how well it worked out.
>>> In other words, I don't think it's a policy that should be adopted
>>> wholesale and uncritically. I'm not even sure if it's a particularly good
>>> model policy. That said, I do think some sort of policy on harassment and
>>> violence should be in place, but it should be kept simple and not
>>> excessively ideological. The descriptions I'm hearing of the behavior that
>>> started this discussion sound like somebody is clearly violating other
>>> people's boundaries, and it's the kind of thing that any community that
>>> wishes to remain functional needs to put its foot down about in whatever way
>>> achieves the best balance of being effective without being heavy-handed.
>>> Which, yes, means some agreed-upon set of "rules", which is a concept I
>>> gather a lot of people in spaces like this don't like. But it certainly
>>> beats the hell out of having strong personalities impose their own rules by
>>> sheer force of will. (Social Contract 101 here.) Or veering off into the
>>> opposite extreme of heavy-handed rules (eg, aspects of the "geek feminist"
>>> policy) because "no rules" was tried and didn't work.
>>> For what it's worth,
>>> Peter Werner
>>> On Feb 1, 2012, at 4:49 PM, Tao Neuendorffer Flaherty wrote:
>>> Here is an example of conference anti-harassment policy:
>>> How could it be modified to work with Noisebridge?
>>> It's important for people in Noisebridge to feel safe from each other. My
>>> first day there, watching Hackers, I was attacked from behind by a large
>>> robot rushing in from the other room. That hurt a lot, and was not
>>> We need to be excellent to each other, which involves responding to
>>> destructive attitudes and behavior.
>>> Tao Flaherty
>>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
>> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
>> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
mikael at johanssons.org
To see a world in a grain of sand
And a heaven in a wild flower
Hold infinity in the palm of your hand
And eternity in an hour - William Blake
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss