[Noisebridge-discuss] anti-anonymity proposals

[hep]

I would like to take this opportunity to point out that this entire
discussion is a pretty good example of why in 2013 we need a firm, clear,
anti-harassment policy for noisebridge to take the first step for being a
truly safe environment for everyone. Here in November 2013, a man is
seriously proposing that women*, many of whom: may be smaller than many
males, non-confrontational for one reason or another, alone except for
their attacker, and/or may possibly have reasons for not wanting to engage
physically with a male who has just sexually assaulted them, hit their
attacker and then silence themselves from any community support, over an
issue that will often be called into question repeatedly as to a) whether
it happened b) whether it was "enough" to warrent a response, and c)
whether the victim merely "misinterpreted" what happened to their own
body.

Then that man asks a woman who is upset by the tepid official response to
sexual assault in the community if she should really be so mad, and if she
really has the "higher ground" to stand on.

Then that man goes on to repeatedly back these points.

Then that man *claims that the community should support his viewpoints
because he is somehow a less privileged community member* and deserves
equal "community support" as a sexual assault victim.

Just sayin'.

-hep

I say woman only because he framed that as the example.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131116/6aca1c3b/attachment.html>