[Noisebridge-discuss] anti-anonymity proposals

[Hannah Grimm]

+1000 to everything Hep just said.


On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 1:30 PM, hep <dis at gruntle.org> wrote:

> I would like to take this opportunity to point out that this entire
> discussion is a pretty good example of why in 2013 we need a firm, clear,
> anti-harassment policy for noisebridge to take the first step for being a
> truly safe environment for everyone. 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Noisebridge-discuss mailing list
> Noisebridge-discuss at lists.noisebridge.net
> https://www.noisebridge.net/mailman/listinfo/noisebridge-discuss
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.noisebridge.net/pipermail/noisebridge-discuss/attachments/20131116/4344862e/attachment-0003.html>