Hacker News Reader

Comment by daenz | Hacker News Reader

Hang in there. The norms are always transitioning, so someone is always getting "the shaft" (hopefully that won't come across as sexist :) And unfortunately, when you can't change everyone's "natural" behavior, the next healthiest choice is to grow thicker skin.

EDIT>> I'm not saying that it's ok she's treated like this, but you can't change everyones behavior. It takes lifetimes. In the meantime, if you want to have a healthy mind and continue to be around that kind of behavior, you have to grow a thicker skin.

View on HN

You're right. That is the healthiest approach for her. Which makes dealing with the bullshit that people fling at her for not having thicker skin all the more valuable. She could go along to get along, but hasn't, so everyone else won't have to go along with this crap too.

Your "hopefully that won't come across as sexist" bit, by the way, belittles the concern. It's not just her concern; it's my concern too, and you've belittled it. Thanks, internet message board guy.

> Your "hopefully that won't come across as sexist" bit, by the way, belittles the concern. It's not just her concern; it's my concern too, and you've belittled it.

I'm sorry if you feel that way. Someone "getting the shaft" is a common phrase. When I typed it, I realized that it had obvious masculine connotations, so I thought I'd point that out with a smiley face. The rest of my response should make it more than obvious that I took her concern and health seriously.

The rest of my response should make it more than obvious that I took her concern and health seriously.

It doesn't, unfortunately. That's the problem with mixed signals: they're mixed.

For the record, if you realize ahead of time that a word or saying will have an unintentional double meaning in a context that you don't want, find another way of saying it.

> You're right. That is the healthiest approach for her. Which makes dealing with the bullshit that people fling at her for not having thicker skin all the more valuable. She could go along to get along, but hasn't, so everyone else won't have to go along with this crap too.

Sorry, I'm a little tired today, could you rephrase this so it's easier to tell if you're being sarcastic? (serious question)

I am literally saying that you are right. The easiest thing for her to do, the thing with the best personal outcome, is to lighten up and get on with her life.

The problem is that is also the response with the worst outcome for the field in general.

So, what I'm saying is, she's taking a hit (for instance, by being told to "stop victimizing herself" and to just work harder) in order to stand up against this stuff.

And I'm also saying that as a husband and the father of a little girl who could god-help-me end up in this field, she's standing up for my family too. And so I personally have an issue with belittling her for doing that.

You put a little smiley face after your comment because you thought it was amusing. It's not funny.

> You put a little smiley face after your comment because you thought it was amusing. It's not funny.

That's the beauty of humor: different things are funny to different people. I'll send you an email when I'm going to start catering my comments to you and your sensibilities :)

Assume for a moment that you're right. Assume, even, that the original poster agrees with you.

Now, re-read the post. You'll see that the poster doesn't have a thin skin; they're just sharing something that happens all the time.

The blatant stuff is, perhaps, easier to deal with because you can let off steam and have a rant. It's the gradual drip drip drip of every day comments - comments that your colleagues don't get, and the only reason they don't get them is because they are male - that just wears you down.

UK Comedian Josie Long has a good talk about it here:

(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1oXIZVLthw)

I don't get the idea that these are weak people, or oversensitive, or they have weak skins. I get the impression that they've just had enough.

(I hope you see that I've tried to engage your argument and not just attack you. Personally, I really dislike the idea of telling people that "jerks are out there and it'll take years to change them so sorry, deal with it.)

I don't think she has thin skin, or is weak, or oversensitive. And believe me, I know what it's like to have an above-average wearing of my patience daily from people. What has helped me is understanding the psychology of why people behave the way that rubs negatively, and framing it in that every time I deal with it. That's the change of perspective, that's growing a thicker skin.

At the same time, the realist side of me knows that people take a long time to change, and in the meantime, I'm going to be the one that has to deal with it.

That is an excellent talk. She really conveys why all the little stuff mentioned in the article adds up to a big problem. Thanks for posting it.

Really? Your sole contribution here is an earnest restatement of the dismissive line decried over and over in the linked piece? For shame.

Edit in reply: Exactly how are these not all the same: “Hang in there,” “lighten up,” “change your perspective”?

How is what I said dismissive? I take her concern seriously, and I gave her my opinion of the best option for her health. I'm being a realist here, there is no "changing everyones behavior." There is only changing your perspective.

But there IS changing everyone's behaviour. In my lifetime, drunk driving and spoual abuse have become socially unacceptable. Overt racism has become socially unacceptable. Two women got engaged at centre-ice in a hockey game, a bastion of blue-collar society.

All these changes happened because people said, "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any more!"

> In my lifetime, drunk driving and spoual abuse have become socially unacceptable

Seeing the change in your lifetime does not mean the entire process occurred in your lifetime. How many lifetimes is it taking for women, gays, and black people to become treated as equals, and we're still not there. Like I said, it takes lifetimes.

I'm not saying don't fight discrimination. I'm saying she should consider her health. Unless she wants to be a full-time martyr and campaign for this cause, then by all means, she should give herself 1000%. But if she doesn't, she's going to need to focus on your health in the face of this alleged behavior, and that includes not letting herself get worked up to an unhealthy level if she can help it. But by all means, continue the fight.

Hey, growing up all sorts of Black people decided to "not make waves" and all sorts of gay peple decided to live in the closet. I'm grateful for the people who made other chouces and didn't listen to the "voice of reason."

It's a game theory thing, isn't it? Fighting is cooperating, and lightening up is defecting, and the payoff for cooperating takes years or decades and only happens when enough people ooperate to make change.

Interracial marriage was illegal in much of the US until just 45 years ago. The Stonewall Riots were the same year we landed on the moon. Romer v. Evans wasn't until 1996, and Lawrence v. Texas is just eight years old. You have a poor sense of history and the passage of time if you do not recognize the staggering speed with which the world can and has changed.

I'll say it again:

> Seeing the change in your lifetime does not mean the entire process occurred in your lifetime.

When did slavery start in america, the 1600s?, and when was interracial marriage legalized, 45 years ago? That is the timeline of change for african americans. Just because you see the end of something in your lifetime, it does not mean the process also started in your lifetime.

OK, black people were literally property in mid-19th century America. That's pretty much rock bottom, just 157 years ago. For reference, a full human lifespan is something like 120 years, and the average is a little over 70. So today, a mere two lifetimes later, a guy descended from the slave owners can marry one of the slaves' descendants and nobody even bats an eye. And a first-generation African-American is running the country. In the face of all this, how can you say meaningful change can't happen on the scale of a person's life? (And most of that civil rights process did happen in raganwald's lifetime if he was born before the '60s.)

Read your history, slavery in america started in the early 1600s. That's almost 400 years ago. That's almost 6 lifetimes. That agrees with my statements.

You, sir are correct.

Incidentally, daenz is also correct. Albeit with a little addition to what he says:

"There is no changing everyones behaviour in a matter of days."

Which means that daenz's suggestion is the "best" (as in "highest gain") solution in the short run. It is not incompatible with simultaneously trying to change people's behaviour in the long run.

They have different connotations:

"Hang in there" - common phrase of support. Have you seriously never heard of this? "lighten up" - dismissive, which I didn't say. "change your perspective" - Helpful advice for many situations people have to endure unjustly. If you've never been in a situation like that, be glad. If you are, and you cannot change it easily, changing your perspective works.

You're trying way too hard to villainize me, to the point of erring on the side rashness.

EDIT >> removed ad-hominem. Sorry, I slipped!

Ad hominem.

Uh, nobody is talking about changing any "natural" behavior (whatever in hell you expect that to mean), no matter how shit-headed.

Behave however you like outside the work environment.

But if you behave in a sexist or racist way in the work environment you can expect to be gone. Gone. Period.

Stop blaming the victim.

> Stop blaming the victim.

First of all, stop putting words in my mouth. This villainization of everyone who doesn't instantly white-knight is insane.

> But if you behave in a sexist or racist way in the work environment you can expect to be gone. Gone. Period.

Great, maybe you should run the company she works at. Or maybe you should put your money where your mouth is and go try to stir up a lawsuit for her. Or you can just posture and puff up your chest in the comments.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com