[Noisebridge-discuss] anti-anonymity proposals
dharlette at gmail.com
Sun Nov 17 00:31:31 UTC 2013
You know what actions I've taken in response to harassment that have felt
really empowering, Jim?
*Getting an anti-harassment policy passed.*
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 3:59 PM, jim <jim at systemateka.com> wrote:
> My replies interspersed below:
> On Sat, 2013-11-16 at 13:30 -0800, hep wrote:
> > I would like to take this opportunity to point out that this entire
> > discussion is a pretty good example of why in 2013 we need a firm,
> > clear, anti-harassment policy for noisebridge to take the first step
> > for being a truly safe environment for everyone.
> JS: I believe such a policy will have negligible
> > Here in November 2013, a man is seriously proposing that women*, many
> > of whom: may be smaller than many males, non-confrontational for one
> > reason or another, alone except for their attacker, and/or may
> > possibly have reasons for not wanting to engage physically with a male
> > who has just sexually assaulted them, hit their attacker and then
> > silence themselves from any community support, over an issue that will
> > often be called into question repeatedly as to a) whether it happened
> > b) whether it was "enough" to warrent a response, and c) whether the
> > victim merely "misinterpreted" what happened to their own body.
> JS: I proposed no such thing.
> > Then that man asks a woman who is upset by the tepid official response
> > to sexual assault in the community if she should really be so mad, and
> > if she really has the "higher ground" to stand on.
> JS: I have previous experience with that person
> and stand by my suggestion that she may be living
> too much in anger.
> > Then that man goes on to repeatedly back these points.
> JS: incorrect, as your description of the points
> is largely erroneous.
> > Then that man *claims that the community should support his viewpoints
> > because he is somehow a less privileged community member* and deserves
> > equal "community support" as a sexual assault victim.
> JS: I made no such claims. I suggest that individuals
> consider that taking action might be empowering for
> them. I do not suggest that anyone necessarily take
> action alone, and as someone rightly suggested, taking
> action, especially alone, might prove dangerous and
> > Just sayin'.
> JS: and liking it.
> > -hep
> > I say woman only because he framed that as the example.
> JS: yes, and I now regret choosing such a lurid
> example. I now wish I'd used a homeless-seeming
> and non-hacker-seeming person as an example. The
> dynamics would have been more interesting to
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Noisebridge-discuss