zlacker

>>femfos+(OP)
The payout matrix for "give honest advice / don't give honest advice" has changed, radically. Then some people noticed that, and then their behavior changed to match. It isn't punishing anyone, it's adaptation to a new risk. The "Pence Fence" is a defensive strategem and it didn't arise in a vacuum. It is a costly defense, too, so it being kept up is likely worth the cost to mitigate the risk.

Most of what comes after when discussing the issue is "how to 'fix' this 'problem.'" by encouraging men to speak anyway. But that is the wrong approach, because it relies on people changing their behavior back like hurling themselves on grenades -- you can't count on it. Still high-risk, low-reward. Perhaps even no-reward. Making plans on people (well, men in this instance but it could be anyone) being irrationally drawn to self-sacrifice is not going to pan out, especially if your reputation is destroyed in the mix after. Leaping on grenades typically earns a medal, but here it gets you vilification.

>>at_a_r+vs
Can you elaborate what the pence fence is?

>>sooheo+SZ
It's related to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Graham_rule perhaps?

[Though that's not AFAIK intended as a defensive strategy against reputational harm, rather as one against the dangers of lust].

>>jan_In+M21
It’s exactly this - and perhaps more useful in ways not originally expected.

The old form of it was “avoid occasions of sin or scandal”.