Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip Arola
Did I say that there should be disbelief that it was creepy? I said there should be neutrality.
I will phrase it better. Believe that she thought it was creepy, and believe that she wasn't unwarranted in doing thinking so.
Also believe that the offender did not mean to cause offense. Also realize that people come from entirely different backgrounds, and thus, creepy has a different meaning to other people. Lost in conversation here is the fact that castigating someone for behaving differently is one of the best ways to alienate someone from anything.
|
Putting aside the fact that the focus of the thread is how to make STEM more welcoming for *women*, not for those with an contextually inappropriate sense of what is creepy: I have yet to see anyone advocate outright castigation. Most of the suggestions have been preemptive education of social expectations, or bluntly pointing out the offense. Will this elicit embarrassment for the offender? Of course it will, regardless of how it is presented- they did something wrong and are being called out for it. It is natural to learn from these things, and intent does nothing to change the outcomes of these actions. This is very different from screaming and yelling at the poor innocent youth who unknowingly crossed some small line.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Philip Arola
That's the problem with anecdotes right there. There is no reliability and no representation of both sides. Anecdotes only report the side of the person with axe to grind, however justified they are in said axe grinding.
|
Again, in the context of this conversation, there does not need to be equal representation of both sides. The OP asked how widespread these issues were, and how to help. All of these stories and anecdotes illustrate what we think the problem is, and what would help us. Just because you have not personally had these experiences does not make them misrepresentation: they are all very relevant to the conversation.