Re: [LCA2011-Chat] Some Anti-Harassment Policies considered harmful

From: David Woodhouse <dwmw2_at_infradead.org>
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2011 09:22:36 +0000

On Tue, 2011-02-01 at 19:26 +1000, Russell Stuart wrote:
> Which sparks an idea. Perhaps the answer to this problem lies in the
> numerous reports of genuine harassment I saw during the Geek Feminism
> promotion of its policy. I was genuinely taken aback by the shear
> number of them by them, and I noticed many others said they felt the
> same surprise and dismay I did.

I used to feel that way too. It's lost a *lot* of its impact now though.

Having seen the response to this issue, and also having seen Ted's
analysis of some of the other statistics which have been presented, I am
*much* less inclined to take such data at face value.

I now find myself wondering how how many of these 'reports of genuine
harassment' are actually cases where the perpetrator, if not in a police
cell, ought to be put in the stocks outside the rego desk and have
rotten fruit thrown at him — and how many of them are *much* less
clear-cut than that.

For me, the OTT policy that LCA2011 adopted in replacement of LCA2010's
existing T&Cs, and the seemingly indiscriminate application of that
policy, have made me *much* less sympathetic to The Cause and much more
inclined to take any such claims with a *serious* pinch of salt.

I don't think I'm the only one, and that's why I think this whole
débâcle has been seriously counter-productive on the *real* issues that
our community faces with making women feel welcome and unthreatened.

-- 
dwmw2
_______________________________________________
Chat mailing list
Chat_at_lca2011.linux.org.au
http://lists.followtheflow.org/mailman/listinfo/chat
Received on Wed Feb 02 2011 - 09:22:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Mon Oct 29 2012 - 19:34:12 GMT