[Noisebridge-discuss] Community, FTP, & Problem Solving
rachel lyra hospodar
rachelyra at gmail.com
Sat Jun 29 01:32:18 UTC 2013
My assertion is that who needs to go to workshops around creeperism is
everyone who thinks creeperism should be addressed, because then folks who
aren't creepers can learn some things about how to help ameliorate the
problem. The interpretation your second message here reinforces for me is
one where you seem to believe creepers oughta be educated, and that you
also believe workshops would be towards that end. This leaves off any hope
of educating concerned bystanders (that would, presumably, include you) and
creating a non-rapey culture. I am glad if that's not what you mean.
That's how it reads to me.
I empathize if you feel that you've been misrepresented. It was not a
direct quote, but a paraphrase, because my intention was not to convey your
thoughts. That was what you did, or attempted to (all communication being
an approximation, after all).
I wanted to convey the way I read, experienced, and interpreted, what had
been written. It is not my goal to misinterpret people. It is something
that we all do, and hopefully work continually to do less.
I feel like my argument with you here is the same as my recent one on-list
with johnny radio. Some things I expect from people who are my allies:
-accepting my feelings as valid
-accepting that communication is a two-way street
-accepting that your responsibility to attempt to communicate your feelings
accurately is precisely equal to my responsibility to attempt to interpret
For me, the logical outcome of these tenets is that, if an ally of mine
speaks in a way that convinces me they hold a certain belief, then they
would be concerned, and seek to change the way they are speaking. For
others, the logical outcome of being misunderstood seems to be to argue why
the other person was wrong for not understanding them. Shrug.
On Jun 28, 2013 6:14 PM, "Norman" <pryankster at gmail.com> wrote:
> I think you were trying to quote a comment I made and what you said is NOT
> what I said. What I said is that my experience has been that the people
> that need to go to these workshops are the people that don't show up.
> I did not say that there is no use in having them and didn't say anything
> about that I "believed that harassment is only the problem of skeevy
> creepers, and those they creep on." Harassment and assault are a serious
> problem in our society not just at Noisebridge.
> If you are going to quote me please be correct and don't put words or
> motives in my mouth. I am quite capable of doing that myself.
> On 6/27/2013 5:49 PM, rachel lyra hospodar wrote:
>> Thank you for caring! I got really sad about someone else's offhanded
>> comment that if we do any realtime meetups around harrassment issues, there
>> is no use because the people who need them won't be there...
>> Which is to say, that person believed that harassment is only the problem
>> of skeevy creepers, and those they creep on.
>> I believe it's helpful for anyone who wants to demonstrate that they
>> retain some humanity to engage with the issue. I also believe that anyone
>> who is interested in the problem is qualified to engage with it, and in
>> fact the entire thrust of hackering is that you don't need anyone's
>> permission, or to reach an educational benchmark, to begin working.
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.**noisebridge.net<Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss