zlacker

>>femfos+(OP)
I'm a bit sad about how eager everyone is jumping on the idea that "candid advice" will always be construed as possibly sexist. I'm from Germany and we are famously blunt, so maybe there is a cultural aspect to this, but to me candor != risk of sexism. If your advice is candid, it also shouldn't leave any ambiguity..."I'm unsure about you doing the pitch because the last N times you froze up and you seem nervous again" makes your reasoning clear without beating around the bush. How can you twist this into something sexist?

>>igorkr+5i
“Yet another man who thinks all women are hysteric. What next, are you going to ask me if it’s my ‘period’?”

Once one moves from a position of effective prejudice (“he will criticise me because I’m a woman”), any critical statement can be read from that perspective. It’s a bit like with conspiracy theories, where every debunking attempt can be turned into “of course THEY would say that!”.

>>toyg+zo
You are inventing a hypothetical straw-man. Until you can point to conversation where someone said something fact based like I gave as an example and people accept your twisting and start a twitter mob of any impact, this remains a hypothetical victimization.

>>igorkr+pr
There's nothing hypothetical or straw-man about his comment. If you surf around english-language forums where the new breed of feminist hangs out, you'll see dozens of posts pretty much exactly like that, all highly liked/upvoted and with huge numbers of responses agreeing and amplifying. Any posts with the message of "hold on, maybe it's not just sexism and he actually has a point" will be downvoted and attract hateful responses: "you sound like just another one of those sexists!".

>>ufmace+3D
I mean, can you provide me a link? Because neither Reddit not Hackernews has supplied me with examples so far

>>igorkr+tG
If you haven't seen them yet, it's because you don't wanna see them.