Slashdot Mirror
A Software Project Full of "Male Anatomy" Jokes Causes Controversy
An anonymous reader writes with the story of a Github user's joke repository that is causing some controversy. "There's no question that the tech world is an overwhelmingly male place. There's legit concern that tech is run-amok with 'brogrammers' that make women programmers feel unwelcome. On the other hand, people just want to laugh. It's at that intersection that programmer Randy Hunt, aka 'letsgetrandy' posted a 'project' earlier this week to software hosting site GitHub called 'DICSS.' The project, which is actual free and open source software, is surrounded by geeky jokes about the male anatomy. And it's gone nuts, so to speak, becoming the most trending project on Github, and the subject of a lot of chatter on Twitter. And, Hunt tells us, the folks at Github are scratching their heads wondering what they should do about it. Some people love DICSS ... and some people are, understandably, offended. The offended people point out that this is exactly the sort of thing that makes tech unwelcoming to women, and not just because of the original project, but because of some of the comments (posted as "commits") that might take the joke too far."
Actually find the male anatomy to be hilarious...
Since when is it the task of others to make one feel comfortable? Do alcohol jokes make recovering alcoholics uncomfortable? Do displays of wealth make the poor feel uncomfortable? Do candy aisles in supermarkets make dieters uncomfortable? Do dogs make victims of dog-attacks uncomfortable?
Why do women constantly get to claim they feel uncomfortable and expect the world to rush in and see to it that reality meets with their expectations?
She keeps wanting me to write a new operating system called PENIX.
It's not so much a brogrammer thing as a controversy between us low brow folks and snooty people who pretend that our dick jokes and fart jokes aren't hilarious.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
They can try project CNDY 4$$
I feel like that it is borderline in this case, it is not a commercial product but an open source project, you may not agree but shouldn't they be able to run their own project how they want ?
Does this infringe some kind of law in the US ?
Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
Should github be involved? We could ramp it up and pretend the project was actually hateful, instead of not being that at all. When should github care? If they are an open source repo, shouldn't they be that?
Here's an emulator for Nintendo hardware. It's safe on legal grounds (even though console companies have lawyered up and taken down some emus by threatening the authors):
https://github.com/dolphin-emu
Here's an archive of "hacking tools". While almost everyone reading this post will understand the context of "hacking", and the fact that these are completely innocuous, would you put that past everyone in the world?
https://github.com/Gexos/Hacki...
Remember, some people consider "hacking" to equal "a crime done to people that should be result in life in prison". Even among those that are a bit smarter than that, you could EASILY argue that labeling something a "hacking tool" is "encouraging people to commit a crime" or somesuch- there's a reason the crack pipes at the flea market are not labelled as such, and have a sign saying that if you call them that, they'll kick you out.
You could argue that the above two projects, along with MANY others, are offensive or encourage illegal activities. You may not agree, but the argument could be made.
If someone is concerned about some cock and balls jokes because some section of the population (certainly not "women" and not really even "feminists", but likely "people who professionally get offended about bullshit to honk their own horns"), I will point out that **there's already a ton of projects that would offend fucking SOMEONE**.
This shouldn't be a story at all.
It's one guy with a juvenile sense of humour. I don't get why people are making a big deal of this.
People who are offended by the project can just ignore it. Don't use it if/when it becomes a finished product, either. You're free to boycott, after all. You are even free to ask other people to boycott the project. You are NOT free to try to bully these juvenile delinquents into bahaving as you believe they should behave.
Hey, ladies and germs - you can't have it both ways. Just because you are offended doesn't justify cyber bullying, or any other kind of bullying.
In short, just grow the fuck up, alright?
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
I really don't think that ANYONE "has to use it". As you state, it is open source. Anyone can get forked on open source - or with open source - or - well - you know what I mean, right?
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
http://theshake.com.au/wp-cont...
People need to lighten the hell up.
Yes, we should make women welcome in FOSS. That doesn't mean we can't enjoy a good laugh at the same time. We all need to stop with this BS #activistmorality
Get your PostgreSQL here: http://www.commandprompt.com/
But I ignore them and let it slide. And frankly, many times it's none of my business anyway - like the religious themed billboards running down I-75 around Tifton,GA. That's their community and I don't have to look at them. And I have no problem with the "Jade" or whatever massage parlor billboards. So, to each his own.
But when people express their offense, it is to get the other person to change their behavior to one's liking. It's a power trip.
For instance, back when Paula Deen made her comments, the folks who expressed the most offense were white people.
Why?
And here is a rational comment by a black chef.
It's one thing when your in a public place - like a restaurant - and someone there is loudly expressing their neo-nazi hate in earshot - it's hard to tune that out. But when you have to go out and look for the offense material in order to be offended (as in this case), I come to the conclusion that it is about control and bullying.
Exclaiming that you are offended about something can be a great politically correct way to bully someone. And I think that is where a lot of social conservatives are coming from when it comes to politically correct speech. When one gets lambasted by a white person for saying "Eskimo" to describe Indians living in Northern Canada or Alaska, I don't think I'm being corrected, but bullied.
But if I as a white guy refers to African-Americans as 'niggers', I expect to be corrected because the African-American community finds that extremely offensive - but not indignantly embarrassed by another white person. But if I insist on using that term, then I would expect to receive the consequences.
A little dirty humor "is controversial" in the United States and probably would be in, say, Iran. But there are cultures that consider talking about sex totally harmless. I know that's a foreign idea in a country where you can lose your job or, conceivably, end up in court or even prison for making a harmless joke at the wrong time or in front of the wrong person. Cultures that aren't so uptight are superior to ours.
For example, he would have code like this to represent the most significant and least significant words of a 32-byte unsigned int:
hungLo = word & 0xFFFF;
hungHi = (word & 0xFFFF0000) >> 16;
wellHungLo = word & 0xFF;
The problems started happening when the company grew and and some women were added to the team and took over the responsibility for the code; you can imagine the sort of complaints we got; ultimately we had to have a semi-major release whose only purpose was to sanitize the codebase.
Women could write their own program. I'm in need of a Bidirectional Open Optical Bus Interchange Engine System.
Get free satoshi (Bitcoin) and Dogecoins
Maybe the DICSS project is juvenile and crude, but ignore it if you don't like it. None of Github's business.
I used to have a sig, but I set it free and it never came back.
More power to DICSS ! Give the middle finger to the Femi-Nazi-Maoists !
is it really news that a subset of people hate men and wish to eradicate gender? the more airtime these people get, the more they get to push their agenda and market themselves. so you hate the penis and have no sense of humour, great. stop complaining and go get some therapy.
The problem with slashdot is that most of its users were bullied and stuffed into lockers as kids!
I could totally understand if Github told DICCS to move their stuff to another website. The purpose of github is to share files related to OSS. Toilet humour isn't exactly software.
Buck Feta. You know what to do.
Have the crazies who use words like "rape culture" or "safe space" ever cared about laws, or even common sense?
Even by asking that, you are triggering. How dare you.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
For the record, I'm a man who works in IT. I don't know enough about this project to take a stand one way or the other, but I do know that crap like this is why the IT profession (if you can call it that) struggles for respect. I see this sort of stuff all the time, and it's frustrating because I really thought we were beyond the stereotype of "asexual nerds living with Mom in the basement." Not everyone in IT has a juvenile sense of humor, but oh boy, those who do can sometimes make workplaces pretty uncomfortable. And no, I'm not easily offended, but it's not exactly the most professional interaction when you have to listen to someone talk about their adventures at the strip club in detail. Not the content so much, but usually it's because the people saying these things just make you think, "eww, gross." If I was a woman, I would sure select myself out of an environment like that.
For everyone who is going to respond to this in a "Fuck you, I can say and do whatever I want" fashion, can you please explain why it is so difficult to refrain from inappropriate jokes in an office environment? Does anyone in a work situation really need to hear about what you'd like to do with the hot new intern, etc.? I've worked both in "normal" office environments, and environments where behavior like this is tolerated or encouraged. Normal workplaces are a lot better in my opinion.
Same thing goes for overt sexual harassment -- I often wonder why we need to watch HR's presentation over and over again on this subject, then I see real issues in the news that I just can't believe. I wouldn't even think about saying/doing some of the stuff some guys are accused of, and it just amazes me that this goes in in 2015. I know there are a few people who develop a "rockstar" aura and can be untouchable in the eyes of management, but it would seem to me that unless you are the sole author of a company's core money making product, or an executive, you can't get away with this stuff anymore.
That's the first thing that occurred to me. Look at all the games that focus on female anatomy. Now you get an entirely different group of people complaining. The game devs can't make even 1/2 the people happy at any given time. So why bother trying? Novelty sells. Cash in on it.
I work for the Department of Redundancy Department.
One wonders how he greets people?
Him: "Hi, I'm Randy" ..., do you need a few minutes on your own? To take matters in hand, as it were?"
Me: "Er, yeah,
I have to say, this particular joke always gets me modded down below groundlevel, but I am hopeful it will do well in this setting. I would say that a few, saucy jokes is what being male is all about, although come to think of it, it's also what being female is all about, really. If you've ever happened to overhear a gaggle of girlfriends going at warp 5, you'll know us blokes have a thing or two to learn in that department. Still, it is good manners to tone it down when you have reason to think that other might feel embarrassed.
I don't know if women in general feel 'threatened' by male company - I suspect it is often more because there are some people who are on the lookout for reasons to feel outraged. On the other hand, I have several colleagues who are contemptuous about women, whether it is because they are just insecure or perhaps gay, who don't want to come out. Nothing wrong with being gay, but OTOH, nothing wrong with being female either.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/money/2014/10/21/357629765/when-women-stopped-coding
I'd encourage you to listen to the story as well.
No, they're complaining about trivializing an issue.
The guy is definitely free to continue doing what he does - after all, what better way to broadcast to women that he's a total dickhead?
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Relevant picture - http://i.imgur.com/MUYhFT4.jpg
In all seriousness, I can't even count how many times I've been literally forced to sit and read github commit's against my will. I can barely go outside without Github being on every billboard, every public bathroom, forced to listen to kids talk about their favorite commits on public transit. Something HAS to be done! Women who never coded a day in their lives are right!
I's OK. We'll see you next tuesday!
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
You'd be wrong. If you didn't know, most women like VAGGS, but most also claim that VAGGS and DICCS are equally offensive.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
They are the reason why we can't have nice things or have fun anymore.
Or, maybe you could just be a little bit professional and don't use software projects to make jokes about anyone's anatomy.
I know, I know. If you were a little bit professional, you'd be getting paid for your work instead of contributing to some projects with other latent homosexuals who seem obsessed with penises. But still, a little bit of self-respect is a good thing, even if you don't happen to have any respect for anyone else. It looks good on your resume when you're not a complete asshole.
You are welcome on my lawn.
I don't think many British are actually offended, it's just that higher caste Brits don't want to admit they are not.
I mean have you ever seen British humor?
This is a hard topic which should be discussed at length!
Probably even more then men?
A shame people are so sensitive--I think engineering is a tough place to be emotionally, regardless of the gender of one's jokes. Engineers are some of the most arrogant, social inept people I've ever worked with (the bastards, and yes, I'm work in the field).
I was told a story of a technical draftsman, who specialized in farm equipment for a very well known company. He literally placed a scrotum (where's Waldo style) in all his technical drawings. The guy was so good that instead of reprimanding him or some other such punishment, they actually assigned a person to find and remove the scrotum from each drawing before sending them out.
and appropriate social behavior. You don't have a right to be a douche nozzle anywhere you want. Whoops, just did it myself there, didn't I? See how easy it is? Then again, it's about your forum and understanding your audience. On /. the phase douche nozzle is highly appropriate. On the forum of a popular open source project, or even my favorite retro gaming podcast's site? Not so much.
The trouble is, there are a _lot_ of folks who never learned tact, and blurt out whatever the hell enters their mind when ever it does; often just to get attention of any kind (good or bad).
So yeah, the world doesn't need to rush to meet their expectations, but a certain amount of civility at certain times/places is definitely called for.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
I don't see a lot of this, or any of it really, having the slightest impact on actual politics. Then again I'm in America, and the only thing that impacts our politics since "Citizen United" is corporate money, so this might be a bigger issue in Europe.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Haven't read every comment, so maybe this has been covered. It just seems like few of the comments on here are really differentiating between what kinds of humor are OK in the workplace setting versus what might be OK in a non-workplace setting.
I don't think the existence of this "project" reflects on tech-workers and tech jobs at all, as long as people are only accessing it and laughing about it on their own time. At work, though, there's really no place for this kind of humor, even if the jokes embedded may be pretty funny (although somehow I doubt most are).
Why is this not acceptable at work? Because some people are offended by such jokes, even if others are not. And work isn't someplace one should have to put up with being offended just because one happens to have different sensibilities than their co-workers. It's just a question of respecting that fellow employees may feel differently about something.
But if someone wants to tell dick jokes on their own time... there's no reason anyone else should be taking the position that it reflects on their occupation as whole.
And, furthermore, I even have a hard time connecting this to occupation even if people are accessing the site and talking about it at work. This would hardly be the first occupation where people told off-color jokes at work. I don't condone it. And I would hope/expect that someone at a leadership level puts a stop to it. But the existence of such jokes in the workplace, unfortunately, does not put tech occupations in a different category than most other occupations.
Exactly.
Documenttion may be funny, but if the readme mainly consists of jokes i drop the attempt of using somethign without hesitation. I dont care if the jokes are good or bad (like here), but my experience is that people who do ot follow a naming scheme directly to whats going on usually produce worthless code anyway.
And: i am not a woman.
...people COULD just GROW UP AND START WORRYING ABOUT THINGS THAT MATTER INSTEAD. You know, little things like 80% of the women in the Sudan have had their clitorises cut off. The fact that you can buy a 10-year-old girl for "marriage" - just for a couple of hours - in most of the Middle East. the fact that there is a massive and growing army that has stated in no uncertain terms they mean to exterminate Jews and anyone who defends them, including the entire US. Maybe we could even get a SENSE OF PERSPECTIVE!
But I guess not. Too many Democrats...
Another Americanism. The term "Indian" is much more common in the USA, in Canada we would say First Nations or Aboriginal. Indians come from India.
Just because some women say that an environment is hostile, in order to further their leftist-fascist speech-control agenda, does not mean that it actually *is* hostile, or offensive. Even if these females are not simply lying for the sake of acquiring political power, which is more than a possibility imho, there is no telling what a particular person may find offensive: potentially, anything.
There is no crisis of under representation of women in software. And even if there was, are you seriously suggesting that women who were so feeble-minded as to be unable to strip comments they didn't like would actually have anything useful to contribute?
Maybe you should re-read what you wrote.
When one gets lambasted by a white person for saying "Eskimo" to describe Indians living in Northern Canada or Alaska>Alaska.
In Canada, the proper term is Aboriginal (or First Nations). In Alaska, it's Native Americans.
, And the first two word in NAGPRA are "Native American".
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Should we have a vagina joke project too?
A software project, absolutely not. But a Broadway show would be OK.
Or are people just hypothesizing that women will be offended? Because I didn't see a single tweet expressing outrage. This strikes me as "brogrammers" trying to pick a fight where there is none. If anyone is actually offended by the comments, they could always fork the project, rewrite the readme, and change the method names to things that are gender-neutral In other words, they could neuter the project.
And if I ever see their resume come in to me for review recommend 'Do not hire'. If you cannot behave professionally, I have no patience for you.
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
There is no right to create a hostile working environment for women.
A 'random' github repository isn't a hostile working environment. For that matter, why do we automatically assume that sexual jokes are 'hostile' towards women? Even when they're for anatomy that women typically don't have?
Why do we assume that women don't have a sense of humor and men aren't offended, apparently, by anything?
Many of the women I've worked with are just fine with a certain amount of humor. Dick jokes all day would get boring quickly, but if you have a 'joke of the day' board that pulls from a list of jokes that include everything from 'why'd the chicken cross the road' to 'your mama' to George Carlin thoughts, to 'How NOT to get your ass beat by the police', and containing about 1% jokes that can be considered sexual, is 3-4 sexual jokes a year creating a hostile environment? Or perhaps I should say, would preventing those 3-4 jokes a year going to create a more hostile environment?
As for your frat house arms race - yeah, that's going overboard, ala my 'dick jokes all day' example. Extremism is bad, everything in moderation(including moderation).
I don't read AC A human right
There is no right to create a hostile working environment for women.
I remember a workplace turned into a nightmare for men - at least the normal guys. The guys everyone knew harassed women? not a change.
After being told that "Whatever a woman considers Sexual Harassment is sexual harassment turned the workplace into one where men avoided women at all costs, had witnesses to protect themselves, and made the US-Russia cold war look like a honeymoon, What manner of workplace was that?
All came to a head one day, when HR came down to tell a machinist he had to remove the photo of a cheerleader he posted on his toolbox. Apparently it was offensive to some women.
He refused. Was that sexually objectifying women, and therefore offensive?
It was his daughter, who was a cherleader in high school.
Now as apocryphal as that sounds, it did happen. And a not too long later, they made the harassment guidlelines much more realistic. Apparently most of the women really hated them as well. THey had interesting commentary on the women who were originally in charge of the program, one that you might think only evil men would make. But even that is telling.
This is why blanket statements as "creating a hostile work environment for women" is so broad as to be unworkable. Two of my friends at work were the dirtiest minded, crude sexual innuendo joke telling women I've ever had the pleasure of knowing. Both found the draconian regulations very very uncomfortable. And if you thik that seeing a acronym makes for a hostile work environment, try working in a place where everone is scared shitless of you, finding you the equivalent of a hand grenade with the pin already pulled.
So what you are really saying is that we should not be allowed to make the workplace hostile to women who are offended by any mention of sex. It's really catering to the thinnist skinned individuals when you make acronyms illegal. There is a fundamental problem of catering to the lowest denominator.
I wonder if we should make the workplace less hostile to Muslim men who are offended by seeing women not in Burkhas? Are they not just as offended and is it not about sex?
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
GitHub is a commercial service. It has the right to refuse hosting on whatever grounds it wants to, except for some specific reasons that are protected by law, such as race, gender, sexuality and religion. Since none of those cover this issue they are free to do as they please.
It's up to GitHub to decide if they would rather give people the leeway to create crude joke projects like this, or if they agree with the criticism and would rather keep their service free from them the can. Simple as that.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
It is not possible to avoid doing this. It is not possible. No matter what you do, no matter how many lengths you go to, there will always be a borderline insane woman, or a man in a wig, and most importantly a legion of emotionally stunded, formerly chauvanist, balding middle aged men prepared to defend and promote whatever offense any of these decide to take with anything they please in your company.
We are living in a world where "micro-aggressions" are an accepted theory. Where spread legs and talking loudly are equated with rape. You cannot win by trying appease. It will not work.
There is only one solution. Your company must hire experienced female nannies, preferably 50+ years old and with some frame, to keep these children in line and off your back. With minor training, the nannies can double as managerial/secretarial/programming/accountancy staff. But their primary role will be to deal with the tantrums and hysteria created by histrionic people, by telling them that they are foolish, immature, and need to sit down and behave themselves.
Failing a nanny, you could also try hiring a dominatrix. But the effects won't be as permanent, and you could end up with longer term ... complications.
Since the word isn't actually in any dictionary: I had believed that "brogrammer" was a term for gay software developers in a relationship, but after reading this it seems it is actually a "politically correct" expression that is used instead of either "male chauvinist pig", or "mentally and relationship challenged arsehole" ?
Or, maybe you could just be a little bit professional and don't use software projects to make jokes about anyone's anatomy.
Not all software projects are professional ones. There are projects "just for fun", as well. I think that's where this project lies.
Nobody should use it as-is for a professional project.
If you want to do that, then fork it first and clean out the inappropriate comments.
There is no right to create a hostile working environment for women.
Someone's personal non-employer-owned git repo on the internet is not a working environment.
It's only a working environment if you pull the code into a professional software development project and then incrorporate the inappropriate comments into a codebase where both yourself and coworkers or employers have access to it as part of the working arrangement.
>some projects with other latent homosexuals who seem obsessed with penises
Defending women's rights while hating on homosexuals? Wow, what a hypocrite.
What you want is an environment that is hostile to men. Offended by this project? WTF are you doing nosing around the project? Offended by strippers? WTF are you doing nosing around strip clubs and the like? Offended by foul language? Why are you listening? Offended by... well, you get the idea. You don't like something, don't pay money for it, don't support it, don't publicize it, don't bother with it, etc. Find something you DO support and do something you find to be positive. Otherwise, yes, you're going to be offended, and it's your own stupid fault.
Until someone messes with your wallet, your person, your reputation, your family in like manner, or your property, your right to exert control ends on property you have control of (which usually means you own or rent it.) Other than that, you can say anything you want, anywhere you want but on property others rent or own where you are not, and should not be, in control, and sane people will roundly ignore you.
Because there truly is not, and should not be, any right "not to be offended." Pull up your big girl panties and buck the heck up. The world is not made of sugar and spice, and every effort you undertake to make it so is a Very Bad Idea.
Push your controlling ideas too far, and someone will eventually push back. Odds are you really won't enjoy it.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
/nt
Somebody did write clit (also known as "convert lit") -- it was a project to remove the DRM from Microsoft Reader books. Since it was different times when the group now known as SJWs were on the wane, and no one ever cared about Microsoft Reader anyway, it got relatively little hate.
Not only is it funny (with overtones of pitiful), it gets a rise out just about everyone who cares to erect an objection. Rigid, upright individuals, blood flowing copiously to their heads, cocking their virtual pistols and ready to shoot the first time someone rubs them in a manner that provides enough friction. It's a penetrating form of humor, a kind of humor that some have to stretch to get, especially those who are anally retentive. For others, it's just plugging along as usual, strapping on the first thing they come to, and then using it to probe everyone within reach. I don't know why it's got you so inflamed. Me, I'm having a ball sacking the opposition. I can't do it all the time (I'm old) but I find it satisfactory to work in spurts. And while my youth is gone, at least I can remember it as not so much checkered, as spattered. Because the rubber didn't always meet the rode, y'see.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
This goes both ways. Employers are not crazy about any kind of trouble maker.
So basically,,, eeeeeeh ,, what you are saying is, don't be a dick.
After being told that "Whatever a woman considers Sexual Harassment is sexual harassment turned the workplace into one where men avoided women at all costs, had witnesses to protect themselves, and made the US-Russia cold war look like a honeymoon, What manner of workplace was that?
I had one even worse.
While discussing harassment at the workplace, the bookkeeper (who I found to be a pretty offensive person herself) said "ANYTHING I consider to be offensive is sexual harassment."
Thinking she didn't mean that quite the way she said it, I said "You mean anything sexual you find offensive is sexual harassment."
She gave me a rather nasty look and said: "No. ANYTHING I find offensive is sexual harassment."
The problem there, of course, being that we knew she got offended at comments about politics, at the front page of the newspaper, and any number of other things. It was a bit of a surprise to find that she considered ALL of those things to be sexual harassment.
I quit not long after that. That wasn't the primary reason, but it was certainly one of the reasons.
Many years ago we had a system admin who used sexual innuendo in root passwords on our non-production research equipment. Thankfully, only a handful of people ever used these machines and they were all in our department.
Within months of my arrival, he was laid off. His skills weren't great but they were good enough to keep him above the "layoff bubble." I have a strong hunch that his sexist style made it easy for his boss to decide to get rid of him.
The new passwords didn't have any sexual innuendo.
At the time, we were a small branch of a research arm of a large corporation. Personally, I found his willingness to use such innuendo on the job distasteful and I found having to type them in on a routine basis uncomfortable but not so much that it was enough to complain about. Now that I am many years wiser and aware of the larger effects that tolerating such behavior has on the workplace, recruitment, and retention, I would probably either ask him to change the passwords or raise the issue with his/our boss.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
It's his project, his online handle to ruin, and he can call anything in it whatever the hell he wants. Maybe everything in the project is named after dicks because he doesn't want some company taking it out from under him before it's finished.
Not to say that it's not immature and in poor taste, but Christ, what's next? Are people going to complain because some strangers use potty mouth in notes they write to themselves? I called myself a pecker once in an email to myself that contained a URL I kept forgetting. Does that make me sexist?
Stuff like this undermines real issues of sexism. Please, if you don't like his naming conventions, create software to do the same thing his does and be professional about it. You don't get to have someone do your work for you *and* complain about aesthetics that the end user won't even see.
He needs to grow up, sure. But I don't expect better from some random online handle. People who apparently stand for equality and social justice though? I kind of expect you guys to have better sense than an angry twelve year old.
thank you, well said
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
She gave me a rather nasty look and said: "No. ANYTHING I find offensive is sexual harassment."
I've met a few. Severe anger and dominance issues, and sexual harassment is the tool they use to bludgeon others with. Sexual harassment is their hammer, and everything is a nail that needs hammered.
And there are all kinds of people you meet in life. THer eare certainly men posting in here that are the same as the women they hate, only difference is the gender, all the other issues the same.
But what we have to do as rational people is decide who to pay attention to. I'm not certain it's all that smart to cater to the angriest on either side of the issue. Hell, I'm sure it isn't.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Penis jokes are not hostile to women. Nor are posters. Anyone offended by a poster should not be taken seriously. It's not like women don't hang up calendars of men in their cubicles. No one cares about that..
Said "ANYTHING I consider to be offensive is sexual harassment."
Just because a woman says it is so does not mean it is. Sexual harassment has a specific definition.
And she is doing women a disservice by trying to argue that frivolous offenses would be harassment. This kind of abusive behavior on the part of some women could ultimately lead into many claims of harassment being rejected, even when harassment claim was actually legitimate
or maybe these 'professionals' should show how professional they are by focusing on the task instead of getting offended by dumb shit.
O'Reilly is that you?
putting the 'B' in LGBTQ+
It's not even a matter of standing up to them. It's more that choosing your battles is kind of an important skill, no matter what your goals are. That's fundamental. It comes before choosing good or evil, support or opposition, stripes or plaid... Though if anybody ever finds a way to somehow force everybody to be the picture of class without undermining our laws, then they should let me know. Because I'd totally have other applications for that kind of mass scale mind control device.
When it comes to unprofessional language in commercial, scientific, and engineering endeavours, there seems to be two assumptions people make:
1. All women are offended by the sorts of words and phrases used by 9th graders in their daily speech.
2. No men are offended by the same sort of language.
Both assumptions are incorrect.
Now, in most situations, I think that people should be able to say what they want. You can talk about body parts in naughty ways, and you can say all manner of insulting things (right or wrong) about anybody's religion. Basically, anything short of threatening to kill people. And if people get offended, they can shove it. I think that the proper and polite thing to do is to make sure that someone who doesn't want to hear what you say isn't forced to listen -- that to read what you wrote or hear what you said requires some positive action on their part, so if they don't like it, it's their fault for seeking it out.
However, in a professional setting, it's time to act like an adult. Discussions of sex and insults about religions are out of place, not because they're *fundamentally* inappropriate, but because they're accepted as inappropriate for professional and public settings. I'm sorry. I don't care how much you and your pals get a kick out of jokes about Jews and dead babies, people shouldn't have to listen to it at the office.
So, then there's this ambiguous situation with FOSS projects. Is this play time or work time? It's kinda both. People do it for fun, but if you don't want to make it a public thing, then you don't put it up on github. If your objective is to get public participation in a technically-oriented project, unprofessional language is out of place. If you want people to take FOSS in general serious, then unprofessional language is out of place. Linus Torvalds didn't publish the source code to Linux because he thought it would be hillarious or an asshole thing to do. The purpose was to attract people into a development community around the project.
In general, I object to certain subject being out in public where it's shoved up everyone's noses. Nude beach? No problem, because you have to travel there to see it. Nude parade down my street? That depends on the purpose, but there are many ways in which human nudity can be a good thing, for artistic, educational, or scientific purposes. (In general, I wouldn't be offended unless it was just really tasteless.) What about people in the nude parade having sex while they travel on floats down my street? No fucking way. I'm not a huge fan of Islam, and I think that its adherents deserve a great deal of criticism, constructive and otherwise. On the other hand, I would find it unacceptable to have to a parade whose purpose was to shout anti-Islamic hate language for everyone to hear. Speaking of screwing in the streets, that's one of the things that bothers me about gay pride parades. Standing up against oppression from bigots who hate you for a perfectly natural thing is good (homosexuality is ubiquitous in the animal kingdom). However, this does not require that your presentation be so hypersexualized that I can't take my kids to see it. (Honestly, we just dont need sex in the streets. Gay people are as normal and weird as any other subset of the population, living their lives, working jobs, etc. Connecting "gay" with "hypersexual" in a public event gives people the wrong idea.)
The bottom line is that people need to learn to be considerate and have some professional decorum. If you're going to do or say something that might insult someone, do it in a principled way as a means to be constructive. Do it because you DO give a shit, not because you don't. This applies to FOSS projects as much as to any other situation.
Although I wouldn't necessarily say you have the "right" to be an asshole, it's vital that you have that freedom. Consider obscenity laws that restrict porn to certain venues. Those may or may not have some value, but laws that try to cu
"Fuck 'em if they can't take a joke."
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
Poor Jane/Lonny Eachus. Was this why you started posing as a woman on the internet? To get back at the sexist tyrant women by making all women look bad?
Not at all. The problem is with closeted people creating a hostile environment for someone else. They should know better.
You are welcome on my lawn.
No, Jane. You might think you're seeing "that kind of crap" almost every day, but as usual you're just putting words in peoples' mouths.
I wasn't hating on homosexuals. I was hating on closeted homosexuals creating a hostile environment for other people.
You are welcome on my lawn.
THIS
So, breast jokes are hostile to women. Vagina jokes are hostile to women (EXCEPT at the monologues, apparently). Dick jokes... well, apparently also hostile to women.
How about we just declare that anything intended to be funny that wasn't first scrubbed down with bleach-grade PR antiseptic is going to be offensive to (some) women. Except it's not offensive to them because they're women, it's offensive because they're FUCKING PRUDES.
(and not, this doesn't justify girly posters, personal comments, or sexual harassment in the workplace, but some people need to know the fucking difference).
Pretty much. "Don't be a dick" is the phrase that pays for everyone, everywhere. You want to draw an erect penis on the back of your notebook and show it to your pals at recess, go ahead. If you try to project it onto the facade of the school building, you might have a problem.
Or, "Go ahead and be a dick, but don't piss yourself when there are consequences".
You are welcome on my lawn.
>*the idea of a software repository, and open source projects, is that anyone can contribute* //
So because of this one project suddenly the whole repo is unusable or the whole idea of OSS is untenable?? Like because one guy flicked a booger in a restaurant now no one in the world can eat at a restaurant - the whole concept of restaurants is tainted and all chefs must commit seppuku?
On a wider view it could well be argued that you're simply trying to deny something inherent to the character of many males. Personally I'm not in to jokes about genitalia, and toilet humour but it seems pretty widespread amongst men and not entirely uncommon amongst women. So do we stop men being men?
Does this mean that women in majority female employment have to stop discussing soap operas and fashion - stereotypically female mores. If not why not, many men find them toxic and unhelpful and that a pre-occupation with such things excludes them.
I choose making strict - democratically agreed - boundaries within working environments, assessing work on the merit of the work, and leaving people who want to make adolescent jokes to do so as they please so long as they don't do it during work and it doesn't affect their performance.
I'm sure the fraternity brothers in Oklahoma thought it was a hoot to sing a little ditty about making sure no black person every can be pledged, but the university hosting the party thought it kind of sucked, so out you go.
Disagree. I believe this will go to court (and I hope it does), and I believe the university will lose (and it should).
Just because you think something is fun doesn't mean anyone else has to put up with it.
"Put up with it" is an interesting phrase. If you don't like my speech, you can ignore me. You can denounce me. You can organize a boycott. But, you cannot compel me with law to stop.
If you want to make your little dick joke software at home, go right ahead. If you try to distribute it using somebody else's shit, don't whine if they tell you to fuck off.
Agreed. As a private organization, github can do whatever they want. Note that this is different from how, for instance, private bakeries or florists, are allowed to operate. They cannot pick and choose their customers based on customer speech!
Oh be fair, everyone has killed millions in gulags. The important thing is to get it out in the open. I know I have!
2. drive away women and socially normal programmers
You're assuming both women and 'socially normal programmers' don't enjoy the occasional dick joke. Which is my second paragraph.
1. suppress the toxic, asocial frat boy douchebaggery
You're also assuming that a repository of dick jokes is automatically toxic.
I don't read AC A human right
Accusing someone you don't like of "latent homosexual" tendencies is actually pretty insulting to homosexuals (and nonsensical, but I was planning on ignoring that part!).
So because of this one project suddenly the whole repo is unusable or the whole idea of OSS is untenable?
(facepalm)
if you leave a bag of chocolate in a room and it's empty in 10 seconds, what have you learned?
is it safe to assume the people in the room like chocolate?
do you understand that?
now:
if this socially moronic project rockets to the top in popularity on GitHub, what have you learned about the prevailing culture?
you tell me
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Not if it's true. The best predictors of being (in the closet) gay are
1) being a Catholic Priest
2) Being a Republican in Congress talking daily about "family values", and
3) constantly talking about penises, while denying thinking about penises.
Homosexuals I've run this list past tend to agree, and none have so far indicated feeling insulted.
Learn to love Alaska
You're talking about this guy! http://www.politico.com/magazi...
You are welcome on my lawn.
She's right, under most of the laws. The sexual harassment laws don't require a sexual element in the harassment for them to be sexual harassment by law.
Learn to love Alaska
how old are you?
Old enough to avoid setting up strawmen too often. I guess you're not that old then.
I don't read AC A human right
is it safe to assume the people in the room like chocolate?
Nope. It's probably safer to say that you either have a thief that took it all, IE you have a singular person who really, really loves chocolate. ;)
if this socially moronic project rockets to the top in popularity on GitHub, what have you learned about the prevailing culture?
It's a culture thing. Most repositories are rather serious affairs, only joined by those interested in contributing. However, it seems a large percent do indeed, like the occasional dick joke, so the repository of those sees greater numbers.
Then it hits the news, goes viral, and you have a lot of people joining just to see what the deal is.
I don't read AC A human right
that's a nice story
more likely, social immaturity is rampant here
not necessarily as a function of malice: plenty could be socially immature teenage boys who are inexperienced with females and haven't learned yet
others might be socially isolated older males who, for one reason or another, are socially malformed and are honestly unaware of the faux pas
only a slight few might be genuinely malicious, misogynistic douchebags
regardless, that behavior is popular tells you something obvious about the prevailing culture
and to not admit that, to try to deflect that, like you are, is a clumsy, unsuccessful attempt at avoiding the obvious
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Which implies that homosexuals are unprofessional.
There is a fundamental problem of catering to the lowest denominator.
Don't tell Justin Bieber's accountants that!
PopeRatzo was making a reference to the Barney Frank Rule. It's okay that you didn't spot it (not everyone knows everything), but now you know.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
"Put up with it" is an interesting phrase. If you don't like my speech, you can ignore me. You can denounce me. You can organize a boycott.
Because I'm sure the person you were replying to isn't sharp enough to have picked up on it (after all, they thought their only option was to "put up with it"), I'll point out, since you didn't, that all of those are alternatives to "put[ting] up with it".
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
a strawman is an off-topic unrelated issue
Incorrect. A strawman is where you make a argument based on a false representation of the opponent's argument. Which you did with your presentation of 'walking up to a group of females' - implies a more or less random group, 'making dick jokes' - In my very first post I endorsed moderation, so implying that you were telling nothing but dick jokes violates that suggestion. It also violates the second where I specify 'occasional'. Which should imply some level of social context. It's around as strange to be walking up to a random group of women and telling knock-knock jokes.
but inquiring as to your age is completely relevant, as not understanding that women don't like hearing dick jokes is a sign of social immaturity
And not understanding that, at least occasionally, they do, means that you're socially immature because you haven't met enough women yet.
of course, it's possible you could be an older, socially deformed individual, that could be the cause of your immature faulty reasoning on the topic
I suppose you could be an ivory tower intellectual, sheltered from the 'real world' by your own personal echo box.
I don't read AC A human right
and to not admit that, to try to deflect that, like you are, is a clumsy, unsuccessful attempt at avoiding the obvious
That you're an ivory tower type trying to find something to feel superior about? That you get to look down on society because *sniff*, it's so crude? That you can't deal with sexual humor?
I'm not calling it high art, obviously. But humor is humor, and part of humor is being inappropriate at times.
I should probably rephrase my point a bit to make it clearer. There are lots of serious repositories out there. The people working on said repositories spend lots of time there. Somehow the 'dick joke' one goes viral(see 'slashdot effect'), and you end up with lots and lots of people signing into said repository to see what's up, even if they only spend 5 minutes on it.
I don't read AC A human right
It's around as strange to be walking up to a random group of women and telling knock-knock jokes.
no it isn't. aggressive sexuality, dick jokes to women you don't know, is an immediate uncomfortable put off to all women as it tells them something about the male no female wants to deal with. we're not talking about your girlfriend late at night in bed. we're talking about a fucking software repository. and you're the one bloviating about social context, hilarious
to not know dick jokes to women you don't know is a complete uncomfortable turn off is identifying yourself as an immature person. thus "how old are you?" is a reasonable question to ask. it's logical deduction. who else would not know this fucking obvious social point?
yes, you could be an unfortunate older male with no social abilities, but i'm trying to be charitable here and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are young
but, since you keep arguing, unable to admit the fucking obvious, you just make yourself look more socially stunted: you can't gracefully concede a point
but keep talking. stubbornness over intelligence is awesome. never mind really attractive to women, right? right? (btw, that's called sarcasm. i'm not sure you have the social skills to understand that. i have to save you from embarrassing yourself further and gloating and arguing with me that stubbornness is not sexy)
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
yes, "i was just joking" is the standard go-to cover story for socially immature douchebags when they realize they have been inappropriate or transgressive or pathetic. thanks for demonstrating that
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
if this socially moronic project rockets to the top in popularity on GitHub, what have you learned about the prevailing culture?
you tell me
You have learned that your point of view is not as popular as you thought it was. You may want to re-examine your definition of "socially moronic".
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
thanks for skipping the simple point and substituting the actual fucking topic with your pathetic prejudicial fears
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
You find this risible?
"He wanks as high as any in Wome" :-)
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
The fact that it rockets to the top seems to indicate that it has, for better or worse, become socially normal. Just sayin'.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
You might want to research what a strawman is before you're wrong about that particular definition again.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
yes, "normal" (you mean typical) for a site dominated by teenage boys and socially immature men
not typical for socially normal men, and women
so a socially stunted subset is making github toxic to the wider society, the mature society, and half the entire population (women)
that's not a development that github wants to support: becoming a ghetto for immature social morons
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
no matter how many lengths you go to
Careful, talking about length is hostile towards women, don'cha know?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Does "the media" cause young girls to associate boobs with women, and therefore cause the girls to later grow boobs, or is there perhaps a biological thing called hormones, which effect all manner of gender differences?
Of you look at people who take testerone or other steroids, you'll find that it has a very obvious effect on their behavior, by way of the hormone's effect on the brain. Over the course of millions of years, male brains evolved around their essential tasks of "go kill something and drag it home for dinner" along with "fight off the predator". See how muscle cars and football might stimulate something in the male brain which is now lacking in means to express the "kill something and drag it home" instinct? For these millions of years, females had a different role, to which their brains adapted. Neither is better or worse, our brains and other parts are different.
* obviously I'm speaking of the majority of men vs the majority of women. Exceptions exist - Chrisley probably wouldn't have survived and reproduced in the days of hunting wild boars to eat.
What kind of "females" are you hanging out with? Elderly members of the British Royal Family?
No one is approaching a random group of stranger "females" to tell dick jokes. There just happens to exist somewhere, in public, a place with lot of dick jokes. People going in there, men or women, are idiots if they think it's supposed to make them feel uncomfortable. If it does make them feel uncomfortable anyway, well, tough luck! The world is full of things that would make us uncomfortable if we sought them out. Hope you never have to deal with someone from another culture, if you can't even handle some crude humor from your own.
xkcd is not in the sudoers file. This incident will be reported.
the point is to ask "how old are you" is not a strawman
the topic is the existence of the socially immature and teenage boys ruining github
and i am responding to a post that uses a rationale directly out of the mind of a socially immature person
therefore, it is valid and logical to inquire as to the person's age, since their thoughts reveal an immature psychology
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
and half the entire population (women)
My wife's laughter at the absurdity of this whole issue begs to differ.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
But, but, but... Equality means women can do whatever we want and men can only do what we say. Now go make yourself a sandwich; make me one too, while you're at it. And don't forget to clean the kitchen afterward.
She sees the same absurdity in the "feminist" movement that I do. Note the quotes; I know a decent number of feminists who despise "feminists" as much as my wife and I do. They wear the label, loud and proud, but do nothing but damage the entire notion of gender equality, which hurts everyone.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
oh you're right, i'm sorry
/s
just the other day i went up to a group of females and started telling dick jokes
they loved it!
There's a million miles between the idea of shoving your dick joke in a woman's face and a woman being unable to simply not seek the damn things out.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
yes, "i was just joking" is the standard go-to cover story for socially immature douchebags when they realize they have been inappropriate or transgressive or pathetic. thanks for demonstrating that
Again with the Strawman. Where in my post did I suggest that I was joking? I might be talking about humor, but I'm being serious. Well, other than my picturing you as a cloistered noble getting the vapors, covering your nose with a handkerchief.
I don't read AC A human right
your wife is trying to sell stupid (are you buying?) if she is suggesting that aggressively sexual bombast doesn't put women off
i'm not talking about bedroom sweet nothings with your dearest
i'm not talking about some cool guy a woman is trying to impress so she puts up with a certain amount of bullshit sniping from random male douchebags around nearby
i'm talking about a social setting of a large anonymous group of obviously socially immature males you don't know, all cackling with moronic glee
identify yourself as a woman, and you will get hounded and harassed, guaranteed. no woman has time for that shit. ask your wife if that's an absurd suggestion
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
a strawman is an off-topic unrelated issue
Actually, a straw man fallacy consists of portraying an opposing argument in an incorrect manner, usually missing important details or appearing overly general, and then implying that the original argument has been fully disproved.
just the other day i went up to a group of females and started telling dick jokes
This is actually an example of a straw man fallacy, because however unsavory you find it to be that Firethorn thinks people might actually enjoy penis jokes, he did not advocate that there is never an inappropriate context. Your statement contrives what is probably one of the clearest examples of when a penis joke would be considered harassment (unsolicited to a group of strangers, of any gender really) and without considering any other example, dismisses the entire argument.
You were probably attempting to use sarcasm or hyperbole--and you probably frequently suppress divergent opinions--without ever actually knowing the name of the rhetorical tactic that you employ... the straw man fallacy.
the /s denotes sarcasm
do you not understand this common internet convention or are you not familiar with the concept of sarcasm?
how old are you?
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
do you not understand this common internet convention or are you not familiar with the concept of sarcasm?
Sarcasm is a frequent veil on the straw man fallacy, but in reality you are portraying the original argument in a reduced way which appears so stupid that it is obviously incorrect, which is the textbook definition of said fallacy.
So, your complaint boils down to "I have to put up with men's shit and I don't like it". I could say the same about women's shit, but that would make me a misogynist. Yup, we're really fuckin' equal, ain't we?
Grow up and realize that you can simply not read offensive writings. Something offensive someone says directly to you, or shouts in a group, that's different; you don't have the opportunity to simply not hear that. but something someone wrote, that you had to actively seek out (clicking a link, knowing what that link leads to, is actively seeking that thing), that's a choice; and if that thing offends you, it's up to you to make the choice to not seek it out.
The absurdity I was referring to is that people like you can't seem to understand the difference between voluntary and involuntary communication Taking offense to voluntary communications is a child's folly; an adult should know well enough to simply avoid it. Your counterexample was centered around involuntary communication and, thus, not much of a counterexample at all; hell, I won't even say your wrong (nor would my wife), but you're not talking about anything related to the topic at hand.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
you keep using the term "strawman" like someone who thinks it is a witty rhetorical convention to constantly throw that out there, when you haven't even tried to understand the simple fucking point of what someone said. you can't just knee jerk parrot "strawman" "strawman" "strawman" all the time in response to an argument and not look like an idiot. it just makes you look like a simpleton who doesn't even know what a strawman is
if you actually thought about what i was writing, it would lead you to realize there isn't a strawman in anything i said
what i am doing is called insulting you. because i don't respect you. you're commenting on a topic you don't understand
the simple fucking point:
nobody wants to hear dick jokes except immature douchebags
it's really not a complicated, deep realization
unless... you happen to be socially immature
and there you are
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I got the sarcasm. You were sarcastically saying they loved it (because they didn't). The scenario you describe, however, is vastly different from the situation being discussed, though. You don't need to know how old I am, just that I'm old enough to be able to tell the damn difference. Let's just say, a damn adult who knows he can simply not read something he finds offensive.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
no it isn't. aggressive sexuality, dick jokes to women you don't know, is an immediate uncomfortable put off to all women as it tells them something about the male no female wants to deal with.
...I wasn't saying it was a good thing. Done inappropriately, the knock-knock jokes can be almost as off-putting as the dick jokes.
You're the one that brought up social context with your little scenario. Don't worry about it, if you make it to college speech and debate classes should help immensely.
to not know dick jokes to women you don't know is a complete uncomfortable turn off is identifying yourself as an immature person.
Some editing issues in here. I'm going to assume you meant to start with 'to tell'. Personally, I find telling knock-knock jokes to anybody I don't know(short of being up on stage in a comedy show), to be almost as bad as dick jokes. And you're still setting up strawmen because I never said telling dick jokes to random people in random situations to be 'acceptable'.
yes, you could be an unfortunate older male with no social abilities, but i'm trying to be charitable here and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are young
hehehehehe... No, I'm not young. Retired as a matter of fact, returned to college for a second degree. Of course, if your strawmen were actually true, then yes, I'd be an socially immature sort, but of course, I call them strawmen for a reason. You're either missing or deliberately ignoring the context of what I'm saying.
If anybody, man or woman, doesn't want to browse a repository of jokes, dick or otherwise, they're free to close it. That they're going there indicates that they want to go there. It's not OUR place to judge people on whether or not they like enjoying dick jokes on the privacy of their own computer. It's not my thing, but whatever.
Also, I'm not conceding jack because you have failed in your arguments. You have failed to correct the debate errors that you make. You have failed to address that women are indeed as sexual as men, they are NOT generally 'special little snowflakes' with no sense of humor. You instead set up and quite successfully knock down a series of strawmen while I'm waving 'Over here!'
but keep talking. stubbornness over intelligence is awesome. never mind really attractive to women, right? right? (btw, that's called sarcasm. i'm not sure you have the social skills to understand that. i have to save you from embarrassing yourself further and gloating and arguing with me that stubbornness is not sexy)
Strawman. I guess I'm going to have to start pointing out the irony in my posts to you, aren't I? The subtle as a hammer inversions of any insults against me that I turned back on you, that you apparently didn't catch onto, because you keep using the same argument schemes. Also, not trying to be sexy on the internet. Yet another strawman, I guess.
I don't read AC A human right
nobody wants to hear dick jokes except socially immature douchebags
it's just not complicated
this is not deep complex philosophy here, oh exalted logician
although, if you are a socially feeble individual, the topic might appear deep and complex. but it appears this way to some only because they possess immature social faculties. teenage boys. adults with social disorders
and there you are
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
does person {X} enjoy dick jokes?
then person {X} is probably an immature douchebag
any questions?
did i properly parse the deep and complex logic here for you?
i'm sorry, it's just not that complicated
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
[...] not understanding that women don't like hearing dick jokes is a sign of social immaturity [...]
It is so good to find you here on Slashdot to explain to us how all the women in the world universally feel about a given topic. So those amongst my friends who sport breasts must all be transsexuals. Else they would not come up to me and tell me dick jokes on a regular basis.
Thank you so much. The world just became a much simpler place.
Rudolf Hess edited Mein Kampf. He was the very first grammar nazi.
Given that you've surely read my other comments (as you've replied to several of them), that seems to have been a roundabout way of calling me an immature douchbag. Why don't you stop being an immature douchebag and just come right out and say it? Choosing to take offense to things you could have simply avoided (e.g. the DiCSS project), now that's a sign of immaturity. Laughing, in private, at the jokes contained therein? Not so much. Judging others for not being offended by the same things that offend you? Well, there's another sign. Changing the subject when someone points out your argumentative fallacy? Another. Well, I suppose we should get you some kind of hypocrite award, shouldn't we?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
Ahh... I see... Well, it's no fun once you admint to being a troll. Ironic that you post faux anti-sexism comments here after your diary entry about "meet[ing] chicks". You know it's sexist to call them chicks, right?
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
the topic, if you would kindly read the fucking summary above us, is that DICSS creates a toxic experience for anyone who isn't immature or male
but thanks for that list of strawmen
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
yes, in answer to your question, stalking is the next step in the continuum of aggressive asocial bullshit no one wants to deal with
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
An *avoidable* experience for anyone who might be offended by it. MY wife is neither immature nor male and she certainly didn't take offense.
It might be time to stop trolling when the first Google result for your email address outs you.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
I'll bite. Because that's really one of the things I come here to do: feed the trolls.
Do you not see the rift between looking up someone's posting history to gauge what kind of personality you're up against and stalking? It's not like a doxxed you, your email address is right there above every one of your posts. I typed it into Google and clicked the first result; if that's stalking, well, my email address is at the top of every one of my posts, as well; go ahead, file a report and have me arrested. Stalking is a felony, after all.
You're really missing an opportunity to make an excellent point, though, so I'll make it for you: everything you post online is there for the world to see, and it's trivial to link your past posts with your identity. That reason, alone, should be enough to stop people from posting immature drivel (like dick jokes) others may find offensive in public forums.
For the record, although I do find the occasional dick joke amusing, no, I have not read through the DICSS repo. I did take a peek to find out what DICSS was an acronym for, and it's a legitimate name; or, at least, it would be if the code wasn't rife with dick jokes.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
oh i'm sorry
this is a terribly complex and deep concept that requires extensive hand holding
the popularity of DICSS creates the impression that github is the domain of immature men and teenaged boys, indicating a toxic experience, throughout, for anyone who isn't immature or male
am i piercing the veil of this horribly complicated and thoroughly mystifying idea for you?
good luck! you can do it! you can get it someday, i believe in you!
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Huh, well, it seems that, thus far, GitHub hasn't weighed in on the matter. If anyone has the right to be offended (as they didn't have the opportunity to avoid it), it's them. If GitHub agrees with you, they'll pull the project; if they don't, then it would seem you're just spouting nonsense for attention. Not really that hard of a concept to grasp, really.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
i'm sorry, i didn't read any of that
this is tedious and stupid
the actual fucking topic is a very simple concept to grasp
and i'm just not interested in now in changing the topic and sitting with you and patiently arguing about how awesome and totally cool it is that you stalk me online because of this moronic argument
socially retarded thread over
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
I was running out of troll food, anyway. Peace be with you.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
when you haven't even tried to understand the simple fucking point of what someone said.
Oh, I recognize the point. I just think it's irrelevant, because like I said before 'Hallo! I'm over HERE!'. You're normally so off course that if we were on a firing range you'd be practicing excellent muzzle control keeping it downrange and away from me at all times.
if you actually thought about what i was writing, it would lead you to realize there isn't a strawman in anything i said
I accurately identified and noted the strawmen. Sounds like you need a few English courses as well. Tell me, have you read the wiki I linked to yet? Even re-read the argument stream I called strawman on you for? I explained most of them.
Me: "The occasional dick joke is funny"
You "I approached a group of females, telling dick jokes, they loved it(sarcasm)".
Do you see how this is a strawman? This is like my saying "enjoying an occasional cookie is good" and you going all cookie-monster. The two situations are substantially different.
the simple fucking point:
nobody wants to hear dick jokes except immature douchebags
Ah, we're back to step 1. Now, sure, you may define people who want to hear dick jokes as 'immature douchebags', but that's your personal definition. It takes a lot more than just that for me to consider somebody an 'immature douchebag'.
So now it's up to you to PROVE this statement of yours, preferably without using circular logic. Keep in mind that somebody who's 'dick jokes, dick jokes all day' is indeed probably going to qualify as an immature douchebag in my mind, and that my position is that 'the occasional dick/sexual joke, in a reasonably appropriate context, can be funny'. You're apparently arguing that they're NEVER appropriate, and that reading them is as bad as saying them, etc...
It comes down to this: We both agree than an 'excess' of dick jokes is bad. What we disagree on is what amounts to said excess.
I don't read AC A human right
She sees the same absurdity in the "feminist" movement that I do.
The problem for feminists today is that their parents (or grandparents) won all of the easy battles. Now the only ones left are difficult and nuanced. Addressing them is hard - it's much easier to make up an easy target to attack than deal with real issues.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Why does my entire life including hobbies need to be professional?
The most sexual offensive jokes I receive in the office are from women.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Let's live in a perfectly politically correct world where our jokes, every sentence we speak and every message we write is controlled by the thought police.
And I say that as someone who was bullied at school. But here's the point: There's harassment, which has a victim and there's jokes about a class the size of half the worlds population and either you are incredibly insecure or unbelievably egomaniac to consider yourself the individual target.
Every real woman I've met in my life laughs about jokes that ridicule women in general the same way that I laugh about jokes where guys in general are the target. These jokes are funny exactly because they contain a piece of truth.
Everything, taken to extremes, is evil. That includes feminism, no-harassment policies and political correctness. No, wait. That last one is evil from the start.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
There is no right to create a hostile working environment for women.
You are right. There's no reason to make boob-grabbing a sport at work, or install under-table cameras and post the up-skirt shots in the Intranet. There's no reason to announce publicly the menstruation periods of every girl in the office, or enforce a dresscode that ignores female anatomy. Definitely sex should not be a condition for promotion, and meetings should not start with blowjob requests, made in order of beauty to the attending women. Likewise, putting a single toilet for women into the basement while having men toilets everywhere.
Oh wait, you were talking about a software joke project on some random Internet site that nobody is forced to visit or even know about? Yeah, that definitely is the dictionary case for "hostile working environment".
the entire back office being papered over with pinups
That's absolutely the same as a random Internet site that nobody... why am I wasting my time here, a monkey would see the difference.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
In that context "sexual" means "gender based", not "to do with reproduction". It's unfortunate because a lot of people are confused by that. Gender based harassment would have been a better term.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
There are some extremes, of course, but that doesn't mean the whole concept of a non-hostile work environment where there is no gender based harassment is a bad one. It just means that sometimes the implementation is broken.
Rather than trying to portray it as a "men vs. stupid bitches" war, why not try to figure out we can all work together? Where I work half the programmers are female and by boss is female, and it's a really good place to work. Everywhere should be like that.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Github offers commercial hosting services. It's up to them if they think it is acceptable to host that kind of thing in a public repo, or if they think it creates a bad impression because for them.
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
Anyone offended by a poster should not be taken seriously
Well. you're bucking for a Godwining, there. So many opportunities for offensive posters.
Basically what you're saying is that no one should ever be offended by anything ever, which is frankly, a bit of a silly thing to say.
SJW n. One who posts facts.
I would like to propose a new software defined network application.
CUNTS common underlying network tunneling service.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You I think there is a certain type of individual that is attracted to technical/mechanical work. I don't care if its software architects or actual architects planning out a sky scraper. The sort of person who wants and likes to think about details, consider behaviors across large input domains be they the length of a string or a snow load and work through problems in highly structured procedural ways tend to exhibit certain personality characteristics.
This goes for males and females. Just about everyone I have ever met who is successful fields of this type tends toward this sort of off color humor. Probably because they see ( correctly IMHO ) that in most case our interactions with one another are rather scripted and predictable. Humor pretty much means violating expectations but in a way the logical connection between the subjects is immediately apparent in retrospect. Sex jokes are simply easy to construct and lets face it whether certain groups of people care to admit tend to be reliably funny. Just look at the sheer number of "Sex/LateNight Comedies" Hollywood turns out. It may not be the avant guard of humor but it works.
Technical people and engineers don't generally seek to make things harder than they need to be. If the reaction they want is a chuckle from their peers, an a sex joke is the easiest way to get it. A sex joke they will use.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
I really don't see what all the fuss is about. Delete the project and tell all involved to stop being dicks. Why does this need to generate so much bullshit?
[FUCK BETA]
... just waiting for someone to quote Team America.
Yours doesn't, don't worry.
My guess is that ship has sailed.
You are welcome on my lawn.
..."tech unwelcoming to woman" - well, sounds like women need fucking thicker skins....
That statement is unwelcoming. Please hand in your internet card and report to re-education asap. kthanx.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
The university is not a government institution and they didn't send these kids to jail. The university chose to no longer affiliate with that particular frat.
That sounds perfectly reasonable. The university has some standards of behavior to be an affiliated organization and chose because the behavior was not in keeping, to kick them out.
Under what law do you think the frat is protected?
Yep, those who are wired for hunting and fighting just might have an interest in speed and power. Around the house, the car is by far the finest example of speed and power a kid will encounter. Who would have thoughy a Mustang, Ram, or Bronco could engage that part of the brain.
You might even notice that little boys have a disturbing* tendency to violently crash their toy cars, on purpose. Worse, dad doesn't even sit down and talk to the poor disturbed kid because dad is too busy watching football or rugby. We don't outgrow it; we graduate from watching toy cars crash together to watching large men crash into each other.
* Disturbing to some moms and imasculated men. If that includes you, your condition is not permanent; you CAN get your balls back. You just have to decide you want them back. Do not ask your wife for permission on this one.
The problem is that neither side in this impasse is worth defending: You have sophomoric perverts creating dick-themed content and wittering fragile flowers who can't help but be offended and complain about it.
The idiots who posted the rude content should pull it down and apologize for being total *ssholes. The "professional offendees" p*ssing and moaning about it should grow a thicker skin and shut up.
Since neither of those two solutions is ever going to happen, people with a brain and an adult personality should just ignore the whole thing and let it wither away. If the FOSS software is any good, then fork it, give it a sensible name and move on.
Sometimes the "writing on the wall" is blood spatter...
If it's longer than it is wide, it's a phallus; that's why our office is switching to square monitors and paper and no longer provide pens for employee use.
All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain.
You're talking about penises a lot.
Are you sure you're not a Republican Catholic priest?
Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
not understanding that women don't like hearing dick jokes is a sign of social immaturity
I know a seriously fucking large number of socially immature women then, given how many of them like joking about men's sexual organs when in female company.
You have to prove malice. Which I don't think the OP project ever had.
Yes but we are talking about infants here, how do they even know that cars means speed and power?
*why do you belive that men who don't agree with you are imasculated? It's not like I believe that men who squat/deadlift/benchpress less than I do is less men than me just to take another stupid example.
It doesn't, but when it interacts with others who are trying to be professional, don't be surprised when they tell you to stop being a muppet. If dancing is your hobby, and you dance in to the frame of a TV news broadcast, you can expect to be shouted at. You can't complain about how your hobby should be special and untouched in this instance. The same applies here.
As for your frat house arms race - yeah, that's going overboard, ala my 'dick jokes all day' example. Extremism is bad, everything in moderation(including moderation).
Well, the DICSS project is definitely all dicks, all the time, so it definitely fits under the "going overboard" category. That being said, DICSS is a joke project, so anyone who isn't in the mood for phallic humor can easily avoid it. If a workplace were like that, it wouldn't be so easy to avoid.
Anyway, I'm a dude, and I don't really like office environments where everyone walks around all day with their potty mouths set to "maximum potty". It's unprofessional and is a distraction from actual work. In my mind, the best policy is for everyone to make their best effort to keep things professional and in exchange, for people who might be offended to just chill out when there is an occasional, inevitable slip-up.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
if this socially moronic project rockets to the top in popularity on GitHub, what have you learned about the prevailing culture?
That people want to see what all of the controversy is about?
Look, the Internet has actual pornography on it, and I'm told it is very popular. But do you have to look at it if you do not like it? No, you do not. Same goes for the DICSS project. You can go your entire programming life without actually looking at the DICSS project.
Indeed, I intend to go my entire programming life without looking at the DICSS project. I did not click the link, and I am not going to. And it's not because I'm offended by dicks or dick jokes. It's because my sense of humor has changed a bit since middle school, and I just don't see any reason to bother.
They don't grade fathers, but if your daughter's a stripper, you fucked up. --Chris Rock
You'd be right if "socially" referred to the people who hang out on GitHub, which isn't exactly going to be a very precise reflection of society in general. Something can be wildly popular on GitHub and still be moronic to the rest of society.
His point stands, yours doesn't.
Did you notice that in your example, it became a problem only when jerks escalated it? One poster should not have been a problem, but it turned into a furball of idiocy because people are stupid. Bad behavior is the problem.
Gamingmuseum.com: Give your 3D accelerator a rest.
Rather than trying to portray it as a "men vs. stupid bitches" war, why not try to figure out we can all work together?
I have no idea who you are replying to, because nowhere do I say "stupid bitches". And I wonder exactly why you choose to decide that I wrote something that I never wrote, would never write, and then make a complete untruth the basisi of a presumed argument I was making. That you want to believe I was making?
The problem is who do you listen to? That there are women who hate men with a passion is no more untruth than that there are men who hate women with a passion. There is Andrea Dworkin and Robin Morgan, and there is John Knox and Pat Robertson
And these radical oppressed women are not exactly ready to extend their experience and sympathy to others, as many oppose sexual equality with transgenders.
Which is exactly why both of the kook groups should get no more attention than the guy wearing a placard yelling at people to repent because the end is near.
Back to your odd deciding what I said then beating me up for it
I was giving an example of what happens when you decide to implement policies by women who have fringe beliefs.
Because there is a huge gulf between making certain that women are not mistreated in the workplace, and making telling a woman you think her new hairstyle looks nice - which was considered harassment by the kooks.We were told exactly that. Do not tell a woman you think she looks nice. Kooks.
Because in the darkest deepest reality, vengeance is not removing harassment. Men and women should be able to speak among each other, share jokes and camaraderie and become friends with each other, not make one gender avoid any interaction. And there are people on both ends of this argument who will implement exactly that if we decide to listen to them.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
The Puritanical mindset is that pleasure of any kind is immoral. As long as you're ashamed of what you're doing, you're in line with their morality. The fact you're not is a problem--you are a "shameless"...whatever it is you're doing. The act is not your crime--it's your failure to recognize that you're wrong that makes you the worst kind of person.
"Everything is harassment" is a red herring:
In the late '80s, the harassment trainer told us "whatever she (and it was explicitly she), says is harassment is harassment". My employer at the time was a multinational medical device manufacturer in the Forbes 60. It ain't like that anymore, and hasn't been for a long time.
These days, you'll typically hear something like:
"If somebody's doing something at work that makes it hard for your to get your job done, ask them nicely to quit it. If you don't want to talk to them directly, tell your supervisor and they will ask them to quit it. If they keep doing it, it's harassment. And, no, you can't say absurd things like 'they're breathing too loud and it's distracting me'. And, yes, if there's a dispute where one party is a member of a Protected Class and the other isn't, then all things being equal we're going to side with the one that is."
The accusation here isn't harassment and it's never been. The accusation here is "offense", and not an "offense" as a tort or a crime with some sort of objective definition. This is the kind of "Offense" where someone "feels offended". For obvious reasons, feeling offended doesn't get you very far in front of a judge, but you can still convince stupid people of stupid things with enough pearl-clutching.
A related example:
Several years ago I'm working in the US a crew of guys, one who was from Canada. My friend sees a sign for a "Hooters" restaurant and asks if that means what he thinks it does. I explained what it's about and the whole crew went there for lunch. My friend explained that this would be absolutely impossible in Canada. The feminists' there would would consider it incredibly offensive and they would picket and sue until it was gone. We happened to be working in an auto plant, so everyone there had worked in Detroit, and everyone there had also been to Windsor. When I pointed out that we all knew that at least one city in Canada was filled up with titty bars my friend explained it to me:
"Titty bars are dark and shameful. You're supposed to be embarrassed to be a customer and humiliated to be an employee. But Hooters is fun. People bring their families there (yes, there was a man, wife, and kids when we ate there...). THAT's the problem. Sex is supposed to be guilty; you're making it fun."
A couple years later I sent him a picture of me standing on a street in Toronto in front of a Hooters sign and the CN tower in the background. ;)
"Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
The pendulum is going to swing the other way and the perpetually aggrieved will not like it.
Anyway, I'm a dude, and I don't really like office environments where everyone walks around all day with their potty mouths set to "maximum potty". It's unprofessional and is a distraction from actual work. In my mind, the best policy is for everyone to make their best effort to keep things professional and in exchange, for people who might be offended to just chill out when there is an occasional, inevitable slip-up.
And I agree with you. However, almost inevitably when management comes down on an incident they do overkill as well, and a little bit of humor/fun in the office just makes the day go by better.
I don't read AC A human right
No. And no.
No, it simply miscasts offense in an attempt to gain an unjustified rhetorical handle on it.
No. It isn't. When someone messes with your wallet, your person, your reputation, your family in like manner, or your property, you have been interfered with. Actions designed to remedy the interference can now be put on the table. This is a very sane way to look at these matters, and it is generally what anyone seriously considering them will come up with. From it, we derive that any such action constitutes violation of the principle that "your right to swing your fist ends at anyone else's nose", or in other words such action is "swinging one's fist where it impacts the other person's nose" and so we don't accept it as valid action when considering these issues.
The water balloon constitutes physical interference with your property, your path, and your ability to drive in a safe manner, thereby additionally and (further) irresponsibly constituting risk to yet others via potential secondary and tertiary effects. Your suggestion is not the same, or even similar to, someone cracking a dick joke.
This is not "offense." This is incitement and inappropriate exercise of power. You are moving the goalposts quite a distance here.
"Offense" is seeing or hearing something that you don't approve of, and undertaking, at a minimum, a line of thought that criticizes that thing. Offense may often further extend to a verbal or written reaction, but its root remains in your own thought processes, for which you, and only you, are responsible.
If others are made responsible for what you think, then it follows that everyone is responsible for everything everyone else thinks in an unending causative loop, and as virtually everything offends someone, life would be constrained to living in an isolated environment so no one could see, hear or otherwise be exposed to you -- as your speech, appearance, actions, or even your very presence might very well be offensive to them.
It is perfectly legitimate to argue that something you find offensive, should also be found offensive by others; even so, no one has the obligation to agree with you, or even to pay you any attention. But when you impose control of others based on your perception of offense -- legislation, rule making -- now we're back to behavior that can only be valid on property you own or otherwise control (rent, have custody of, etc.)
On the other hand, tolerance, that thing we offhandedly characterize as "live and let live", is a social practice that leads to people generally not interfering with others, or even confronting them with argument. Highly recommended. It's very respectful of the personal agency of others. Note that this is not advice for discussion; it simply applies to venues and happenings that you were not involved with in the first place. There's nothing wrong with amiable discussion of issues that concern you, of course, as long as the other party(s) wish to engage.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
My wife and I did just that this weekend with a group of friends.
Started off as surgery stores, moved into horrible doctor visits, and finally big dick jokes. Everyone seemed to have a great time.
Women should ban together to create a new JavaScript rendering engine for web browsers. They could call it "VaJ-JS".
Not true. When I was growing up in Chicago's Little Italy neighborhood, I was the youngest (and smallest, at the time) of my cohort. Because of that, and because a movie starring Dustin Hoffman called "Midnight Cowboy" had recently been released (and we all snuck in to see it), I was given the nickname "Ratzo Rizzo". It stuck with me through high school.
The "Pope" part came from the fact that I was an altar boy at the time, and my friends liked to give me shit about it. First it was "Father" and then "Monsignor" and then, "Cardinal Ratzo" and finally, by the eighth grade, "Pope Ratzo".
The identification with the former Nazi youth Pope Benedict XIV was just a happy coincidence.
In summary, go fuck yourself, cuck.
You are welcome on my lawn.
You'd be right if "socially" referred to the people who hang out on GitHub, which isn't exactly going to be a very precise reflection of society in general. Something can be wildly popular on GitHub and still be moronic to the rest of society.
His point stands, yours doesn't.
His point was regarding dick jokes, which Monty Python proved to be wildly popular with in Life of Brian. My point still stands, in that society saw nothing wrong with an extended "dick jokes" scene before and they are thus unlikely to do so now.
You are quite welcome to believe that society is siding with you and the rest of the peanut gallery, but the evidence indicates otherwise. Dick jokes in all sorts of contexts remain to be seen as funny by the world.
I'm a minority race. Save your vitriol for white people.
> Yes but we are talking about infants here, how do they even know that cars means speed and power?
Technically, we're not talking about infants, but rather toddlers and above - those able to say "car! To quote you, for example, "A kindergarten ..". My littlest doesn't yet pronounce any words, she's working hard on "no", but it comes out "nyam". She sees that cars are big a little bit scary. So yes, by the time they can say "car" and certainly by the time they can ride a bike ("a kindergarten") , tey know that cars are big and fast and powerful enough to carry the whole family around.
My baby, who again cannot yet speak, also knows that the cat is soft and fluffy and she likes to press her face into the cat's fur. Soft and fluffy is comfy, she wants to be close to that. Big, loud and fast is a bit scary. Surprise, she's a girl!
I honestly think these women are the product of broken homes. Daddy didn't treat sister as well as brother; since he'd have been her template for a man, her view of all men is skewed by this, and confirmed the first time she picks up a random douchebag at a bar. Case in point, I have an ex who was so broken from the way her father and her first boyfriend (thankfully, not one in the same) mistreated her that she was so convinced I was cheating on her (mind you, I was faithful) that she felt the affair she had was justified. I didn't learn of the affair until several years later when I put two and two together (I was naive and young, didn't see what was right in front of me); the reason I actually left her is that she was also physically abusive (and thought herself justified in that, as well). Her physical attacks always ended in me defending myself, her hurting herself instead, and then telling everyone I attacked her. That was a hell of a situation that I'm glad I got out of; but I don't blame her nearly as much as I blame her father.
That said, it is impossible to sympathize with someone who insists that every action you take is a display of weakness or inferiority. It's sad, really, as these women truly just need help, they need to be shown that chauvinistic, abusive, asshole pig men are the minority, but, just like any minority, they're also much easier to spot in the crowd, making it seem as though there are many more of them than there are. The battles being waged are imaginary battles against all men, rather than targeted battles against the few who are actually the problem. It's to the point where the faux feminism (fauxminism?) these women display can probably be diagnosed as a form of PTSD. True feminists are only interested in advancing their gender (e.g. equality) and, in general, have no interest in knocking men down in the process; in my experience, they also have no problem calling out fauxminists for what they are.
APK quotes people (including myself) without context and should not be trusted. Just thought you should know.
... and I find the DICSS project hilarious.
:)
I don't find sex jokes offensive. I have learned though that I can offend male programmers a lot more than they can offend me. How? By fixing their code.
So you must prove malice for any noise ordinance to be enforced against a noisy neighbor? Reality proves you wrong.
Learn to love Alaska
So... where's the project on GitHub with jokes about Female anatomy? Maybe one with jokes about alien anatomy? GitHub projects may be publicly viewable, but they are still individuals' accounts. A person should be free to make stupid, disgusting jokes if that's their thing.
Then everything is sexual harassment because everyone has a gender.
Learn to love Alaska
Classic divide and conquer propaganda. In this example, women are being cast as victims, and men are being cast as organized criminals. A cartoon involving human anatomy is being used as evidence.
From the modern left's perspective, women, Latinos, LGBTQIA all need their own Civil Rights Act to be "free at last". What a tragedy for the American zeitgeist -- to be pumped full of this hideous message.
The K-12 educator sector is 78% female -- if one of the most powerful taxpayer unions in the nation isn't diverse, how is tech company diversity a crisis? Shouldn't they hire the best that are graduated out of the Universities, regardless of other considerations? The physics community sure hired a lot of Austrians, Germans, and Jews in the 1920's. They're hiring a lot of Asians today. It's hardly surprising that successful groups can be identified.
Could it be a nurturing problem, not much more complex than raising a good dog? Who raises bad dogs, and why? Can a bad dog be recovered through training? When domesticated animals compete, the best trainer develops the best competitors.
We the People need to draft our own policies on the internet, using social commentary and polls. We should ask for input from the National Academy. Issues should be identified and addressed. Either the two tribes support the policy or they do not. They should be compelled to explain their voting record.
Tribe Left has spent decades and trillions funding policies yet the media streams out of New York and Los Angeles claim that everything is unfair. That's a major reform indicator.
> There's no question that the tech world is an overwhelmingly male place.
You can stop reading here. Some moralists sermon will follow.
I'm sorry for disrupting the discussion. But I'm a little more concerned about the fact that Jane's spreading civilization-paralyzing misinformation about one of the defining issues of our time, and libeling scientists by repeatedly and baselessly accusing them of fraud.
Every minute Jane spends cussing and screaming at me is one minute he can't spend trying to confuse someone else, or attacking yet another scientist.
Actually, it's the exact opposite of that.
As Neal Stephenson famously pointed out in The Diamond Age, when you have no shared notion of ethics or morality, the only "sin" is hypocrisy. I can't judge you for not sharing my ideals, but I can judge you for violating your own.
The Barney Frank Rule states that it's okay to out someone for publicly oppressing people for doing what they do in private, no more and no less.
sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f(q{sub f{($f)=@_;print"$f(q{$f});";}f});
Yes, it certainly does. A sudden splash that opaques your windshield and/or distorts your view -- which a water balloon can most definitely do -- can startle and disorient the driver, leading to dire consequences. Throwing water balloons at vehicles is not a harmless prank. It is a thoughtless act that can directly endanger others. It is shortsighted and naive to characterize it any other way.
First of all, rain is an act of nature. Consequently you're going to have trouble equating it to voluntary human action. Secondly, rain can indeed endanger drivers. As can sudden splashes from puddles, clouds of spray from passing trucks and so on. Mitigating these risks is a big part of why cars have windshield wipers, why companies sell products like "Rain-X", and why sane people drive differently when rain interferes with their view of the road and/or the vehicles on it. And yes, absolutely, if rain is predicted, it is factored into my driving plans. Likewise snow, hail, high winds, or sandstorms.
You have not demonstrated this in any way. You may, of course, continue to attempt to try. :)
There aren't any when offense is the metric. There certainly are where incitement is concerned, though. You put your finger right on one of them: when incitement is directed at someone who is not competent to take responsibility for their own actions -- such as your putative mentally ill minor.
Pleasure is real and measurable with medical tools as well. So is itching, the length of your fingernails, and the salinity of your tear ducts. The point is that measurement is not the determinant. The determinant is, is it harmful, and with offense, the answer is no unless you undertake self-caused harm entirely on your own.
For your benefit, from my other writings:
What offends you may not offend me. And vice-versa. What serves no purpose for you, may serve a purpose for me. Be it intended offense, or otherwise, or both at once.
No one in the USA (or anywhere with sane law) has the "right to not be offended." Being offended is subjective. It has everything to do with you as an individual, or as part of a particular group; it varies due to your moral conditioning, your religious beliefs, your upbringing, your education; what offends one person or group (of any size) may not offend another, nor a person of another grouping; and in the final analysis, it is also flawed in that it requires one person to attempt to read the mind of other persons they do not know in order to anticipate whether a specific action will cause offense in the mind of another.
And no, codifying an action in law is not in any way sufficient... it is well established that not even lawyers can know the law well enough to anticipate what is legal, and what is not -- any more than you can guess what is offensive to me, or not.
Sane law relies on the basic idea that we try not to risk or cause harm to the bodies, finances and reputations of others without them consenting and being aware of the risks. It does not rely on the idea that we "must not cause offense." It relies on the idea that we must not cause harm.
Law that bans something based upon the idea that some individual or group simply finds the behavior objectionable is the very worst kind of law, utterly devoid of consideration of others, while absolutely permeated in self-indulgence.
I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
I agree.
You are welcome on my lawn.
The university is not a government institution and they didn't send these kids to jail. The university chose to no longer affiliate with that particular frat.
Well, actually, the University of Oklahoma is a public--meaning government--institution. Given your errant assumption, I don't think the rest of your post needs replying to?
I believe the university will win (and it should). So, when will we know who's right and who's wrong?
Right in terms of predictions? In a couple of months or years? :-) Right in terms of "good outcome or bad outcome"? That's another question. I don't believe the government should be able to punish unpopular speech. That's also pretty much the accepted case law--universities cannot punish students based solely on unpopular speech.
The law doesn't agree. If you deliberately try to aggravate people, you can and will be charged. Whether it's for verbal assault or one of the nuisance laws, there are plenty of ways to compel someone deliberately causing harm from causing that harm.
I should have been more clear. Absolutely there are a very few specific exceptions. Threats of immediate violence are not protected speech--for instance, if the frat members had said "we're going to kill some n*rs" that is a clear threat of violence. That is not protected. Another (famous) example is shouting "fire!" in a crowded theater creating a potentially deadly situation. None of these situations apply here.
Contrary to what you say, you can be aggravating and you can even try to deliberately aggravate people without breaking the law! Think of those "god hates fags" morons. That's pretty much as hateful, stupid, and aggravating as you can get, but it's still protected speech.
Said "ANYTHING I consider to be offensive is sexual harassment."
Just because a woman says it is so does not mean it is. Sexual harassment has a specific definition.
It has a definition now that is not what it was at one point. I take it you either didn't read my other post, or you are just saying I made up a shaggy dog story. I didn't.
We were indeed told that it was whatever a woman thought it was, Believe it or do not believe it.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
She's right, under most of the laws. The sexual harassment laws don't require a sexual element in the harassment for them to be sexual harassment by law.
One specific one, is the tactic that some guys use of standing in a doorway and blocking it, so that whne the woman finally gets tired of his bs, she has to rub against him as she leaves the room.
Not overtly sexual, but at times, rubbing against someone is definitely sensual. A guy I used to work with used to do that to ladies he wanted to boink all the time.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
So you must prove malice for any noise ordinance to be enforced against a noisy neighbor? Reality proves you wrong.
Whoever claimed that "malice" was involved in the standard is quite wrong, but it's worth noting that local noise ordinances are struck down as unconstitutional all the time.
Contrary to what you say, you can be aggravating and you can even try to deliberately aggravate people without breaking the law! Think of those "god hates fags" morons. That's pretty much as hateful, stupid, and aggravating as you can get, but it's still protected speech.
"fighting words" and "incitement" are illegal acts in many places, and there's a fine line for what are illegal words.
Learn to love Alaska
Noise ordinances are constitutional. Vague and confusing laws are unconstitutional. The problem is if most of the laws on #1 fit in category #2. It doesn't mean anything about #1, other than lawmakers are dumb.
Learn to love Alaska
Seems to me you've just picked a couple more unpopular groups to insult!
Not exactly. A noise ordinance that specifically targeted, e.g., loud rap music (but not loud classical music or loud NPR playing--if such a thing exists!), would be considered an unconstitutional law. The law doesn't have to be vague or confusing to be unconstitutional, though vague or confusing laws certainly can be unconstitutional tool!
I cannot determine which of the narrowly defined punishable exemptions from the first amendment the Okies would fall under? They weren't inciting, they weren't fighting, there was no public danger, etc. It was just plain, dumb, hateful speech. And hateful speech is protected.
What do you think?
I looked up the ones found unconstitutional, and they were all ruled unconstitutional for being vague. A noise ordinance that used dB levels and specific times should be fine. But "too loud, causes discomfort" or such would be too vague.
Learn to love Alaska
Yup, that's how it works.
Learn to love Alaska
although, if you are a socially feeble individual, the topic might appear deep and complex. but it appears this way to some only because they possess immature social faculties. teenage boys. adults with social disorders
Switching from the straw man fallacy to the ad hominem fallacy, classy.
nobody wants to hear dick jokes except socially immature douchebags
Odds are, somebody thinks you are a douche bag too. Do we need a campaign to rid Slashdot message boards of punctuation disrespecting, fallacy flinging, intellectually immature douche bag, bibliophobes?
It's up to them if they think it is acceptable to host that kind of thing in a public repo, or if they think it creates a bad impression because for them.
Not really.... legally, yes. Just in the same way, that your landlord could kick you out of the apartment, because he doesn't like the color of your bedsheets visible from outside your open window, or a web hosting provider can shutdown your site, because you posted a recipe for making something that calls for sugar, and the CXO finds sugar-laden foods offensive.
These are legally possibilities, but widely considered an overreach / improper behavior on the part of the service provider. Which could very much come back to haunt the provider and have negative consequences.
I would point out that Github has had plenty of time to act, if they intend to commit that overreach, and yet the project's still online, huh.
In a couple months it will probably fade into obscurity, and we'll have forgotten it ever existed ---- noone dare use the library in their serious project now.
Posting something on github is not the same as stepping into a TV broadcast. Now dancing into the frame on your own TV broadcast would be a good analogy, in which case if someone told me off I'd tell them things in very unprofessional ways.
Two words that might help: Streisand Effect.
http://duckduckgo.com/?q=streisand.effect
There's no time like the present. Well, the past used to be.
There is no right to create a hostile working environment for women.
A 'random' github repository isn't a hostile working environment. For that matter, why do we automatically assume that sexual jokes are 'hostile' towards women? Even when they're for anatomy that women typically don't have?
More to the point here, women make dick jokes. I've heard lesbians making dick jokes. I've seen women clear rooms of men via dick jokes. I'm not sure what the misogyny here is--is somebody insisting that only those what got dicks can make jokes about them?
Why do we assume that women don't have a sense of humor and men aren't offended, apparently, by anything?
Many of the women I've worked with are just fine with a certain amount of humor. Dick jokes all day would get boring quickly, but if you have a 'joke of the day' board that pulls from a list of jokes that include everything from 'why'd the chicken cross the road' to 'your mama' to George Carlin thoughts, to 'How NOT to get your ass beat by the police', and containing about 1% jokes that can be considered sexual, is 3-4 sexual jokes a year creating a hostile environment? Or perhaps I should say, would preventing those 3-4 jokes a year going to create a more hostile environment?
As for your frat house arms race - yeah, that's going overboard, ala my 'dick jokes all day' example. Extremism is bad, everything in moderation(including moderation).
More importantly, women make sexual jokes. Exactly how does banning sexual jokes make a working environment more 'women-friendly'? (I will agree that dick jokes all the time is a bit much, but more on the basis that either the quality drops or it starts getting repetitive like the production line at a dildo factory.) Are 'real women' supposed to be all neo-Victorian prudes and the feminists just didn't care to tell us because if you're a 'real woman' you know this?
Some women seem to consider 'a hostile environment' one in which their boss(es) expect them to do work in a place with coworkers who do not share their neo-Victorian woman-ness--even, oh horrors, men! Some, I suspect, would not be satisfied until their work environment was completely free of even the slighted possibility of them having to deal with even the concept of the existence of anybody whom they do not consider a 'real woman.'
no it isn't. aggressive sexuality, dick jokes to women you don't know, is an immediate uncomfortable put off to all women as it tells them something about the male no female wants to deal with.
So you are saying that all women are weak minded little pussies that can't take a joke! Are you sure you believe they are equals to men or do you actually believe that they are substandard and we should all tip-toe around them because they can't handle adult conversations. Are they allowed to hunt and kill animals if they want, or should we keep them locked up in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant? Your views seem old fashioned to me.
-- ssoorrrryy,, dduupplleexx sswwiittcchh oonn.. -Quote found on actual fortune cookie.
No, they're complaining because having a new trumped-up social injustice to screech about every few days is part of their identity and they wouldn't feel like special snowflakes without it. What's most interesting is that the people complaining about DICSS are being a thousand times more rude, offensive, vulgar, and anti-social than the whole DICSS joke ever was. If anything, he's broadcasting to women who are actually level-headed and socially capable that he has a sense of humor and isn't going to live in fear of some bigoted professional victim admonishing him.
From what I've seen from the SJW camp, they try to get people to bypass the grey matter and get an emotional reaction. Same as trolls. So, if it acts like a troll ...
I think what he did was a dick move (pun intended), and he's demonstrated a level of immaturity by thinking this will get his "real" projects more publicity. Not all publicity is good publicity. Maybe he was thinking of the old adage "Bad publicity is better than no publicity." He should have been thinking "Better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you're a fool than open and prove it."
"Transparent" is a shit show that trades on every stereotype going. A man in drag is NOT a transsexual.
Political correctness often *is* the hostile work environment.
And while you are probably rferring to the liberal version, make no mistake - the conservative version of political correctness is just as pernicious.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Oops, I meant to write that "Jane seems to be saying he isn't lecturing scientists about what scientists think."
Lecturing scientists about science is Jane's other hobby.