US Controversy over canceled sex talk at hacker convention

[Envy]

The point is that certain things are triggering, whether they occur behind closed doors or not. For example, I wouldn't feel better about attending a conference where rabbits were being killed, skinned and dissected, even if it were being done behind closed doors and I didn't have to watch/listen.

If it's legal, then what power should you have to stop it?

Are your needs more important than other peoples needs?

What is arbitrary and what is not?

I guess you're completely against any kind of animal welfare or animal rights activism then.

Maybe if you'd consider morals and ethics to be some kind of emotion.

 

[das_nut]

So their only opportunity to learn any of this information is at a professional conference? Wow, and here I thought these people were internet savy, at least internet savy enough to log onto Amazon and order a book. Even I can do that.

Most people in the US are able to either buy a book online, or find a shop that sells books on sex.

Yet the American population as a whole doesn't seem very educated about sex.

Tell me, would you be equally up in arms if the talk that had been cancelled had been about eating right and exercising, or would your response have been - "That's really not what professional conferences are about, and anyone who has managed to remain oblivious about the risks associated with mixing a sedentary lifestyle with a bad diet can find the info in plenty of places?"

Hackers are already ahead of you: The Hacker Diet.

It appears that a talk based on it was given at a Con in Budapest.

I'd definitely support a talk based on that at a con. That would be awesome.

 

[mlp]

I don't know if Dan Savage writes it, but he heavily promoted Seattle's HUMP! erotica/porn festival on his blog.

Yeah, I don't see a substantive difference between promoting that and promoting telephone sex lines, strip clubs, etc.

 

[mlp]

The point is that certain things are triggering, whether they occur behind closed doors or not. For example, I wouldn't feel better about attending a conference where rabbits were being killed, skinned and dissected, even if it were being done behind closed doors and I didn't have to watch/listen.

If it's legal, then what power should you have to stop it?

Are your needs more important than other peoples needs?

What is arbitrary and what is not?

I guess you're completely against any kind of animal welfare or animal rights activism then.

Maybe if you'd consider morals and ethics to be some kind of emotion.

Sometimes your posts don't make any sense to me. This is one of them.

 

[Spang]

Yeah, I don't see a substantive difference between promoting that and promoting telephone sex lines, strip clubs, etc.

But certainly there's a difference between writing about sex for money and engaging in sexual acts with another person for money. At the very least, writing about sex is not nearly as risky as having sex with a complete stranger.

 

[mlp]

Most people in the US are able to either buy a book online, or find a shop that sells books on sex.

Yet the American population as a whole doesn't seem very educated about sex.

But would you agree that anyone who (a) is interested in learning about it, (b) is literate, and (c) has access to the internet has the ability to educate him/herself about it?

Would you also agree that hackers generally meet at least the second two criteria? And isn't it a whole lot easier to push a few keys on a keyboard than it is to sign up for a conference, pay a registration fee, and travel to the conference? So what's the difference? The interest in learning/motivation? Is it the fact that you get to be in the same room with and listen to a woman by the name of Violet Blue, advertised as a "sex educator" - is that what's necessary to motivate people who can't bring themselves to push a couple of keys on a keyboard?

I'd definitely support a talk based on that at a con. That would be awesome.

Cool. I look forward to a thread expressing your outrage if those talks don't materialize at conventions, or if they're poorly attended.

 

[mlp]

Yeah, I don't see a substantive difference between promoting that and promoting telephone sex lines, strip clubs, etc.

But certainly there's a difference between writing about sex for money and engaging in sexual acts with another person for money. At the very least, writing about sex is not nearly as risky as having sex with a complete stranger.

I agree. Although engaging in phone sex for money isn't risky.

 

[Spang]

I agree. Although engaging in phone sex for money isn't risky.

If you ignore verbal abuse and the affects it can have on a person, sure.

 

[das_nut]

Most people in the US are able to either buy a book online, or find a shop that sells books on sex.

Yet the American population as a whole doesn't seem very educated about sex.

But would you agree that anyone who (a) is interested in learning about it, (b) is literate, and (c) has access to the internet has the ability to educate him/herself about it?

Would you also agree that hackers generally meet at least the second two criteria? And isn't it a whole lot easier to push a few keys on a keyboard than it is to sign up for a conference, pay a registration fee, and travel to the conference? So what's the difference?

For most of the talks given, the information could be found online or in a book. Yet it seems that cons keep going, and keep being attended.

The interest in learning/motivation? Is it the fact that you get to be in the same room with and listen to a woman by the name of Violet Blue, advertised as a "sex educator" - is that what's necessary to motivate people who can't bring themselves to push a couple of keys on a keyboard?

Presentations, if they are any good, tend to be a good overview of a broad subject, or a good in-depth view of a narrow subject. You're kind of trusting the speaker to have enough experience to know what they are talking about and to disseminate the important information.

Since a person may go to a con for other reasons than to attend a specific presentation, they have the chance of stumbling upon other information they wouldn't otherwise seek out. I know I've been to a few cons where I've sat through a presentation even though I normally wouldn't seek out such information.

Cool. I look forward to a thread expressing your outrage if those talks don't materialize at conventions, or if they're poorly attended.

I've already given you a link to a health talk being given at a con.

But I wouldn't be outraged if they were poorly attended. I'm not the sort of person who normally advocates that people should be forced to attend a presentation they don't want to hear about. I'm instead advocating that, in this case, the information should be there for the people who *do* want to hear about it.

I might be a little saddened by the lack of attendance (health is important), but the one I linked to seemed well enough attended for what appears to be a smaller con. And people involved in tech and related pursuits seem to be interested enough in health information if it's presented in an informative and entertaining manner.

 

[Pickle Juice]

This thread is completely ridiculous. I am absolutely appalled by some of the crap coming out here. Since when is trying to talk sensibly about sex a bad thing? Since when is writing frank sexual manuals equated with writing erotica (which in itself is no bad thing)?

Also apparently Violet Blue is her given name.

What the hell is going on here? I see a knee jerk reaction to Dasnut talking about women. I get the feeling if someone else had posted this, the reaction to Violet Blue would have been very different.

You're not getting it. I don't know whether that is on purpose or not. But what I would like to know from das_nut is whether he would be whining about censorship if this had been about anything other than men being denied the chance, by women, to be lectured about sex in an environment that is supposed to be safe for both sexes, but clearly is not. Constantly trying to make this look like it is all about being against public lectures about sex is deliberately misleading and clouding the real issue.

No one here has a problem with talking about sex. But there are times and places for it. A hacker convention with a history of male aggression against female attendees isn't one of those places.

If you think that criticizing someone harshly because they do not respect the interests of people who are triggered by certain issues because they have been sexually harassed or raped is "crap" then I just don't know. *shrug*

 

[Pickle Juice]

I guess I also have a question to any of the women here who think das_nut has a valid point.

What kind of atmosphere would you want to see if you were going to attend a lecture about sex? How comfortable would you be attending a sex talk at which men would out number you by about five to one, were already drunk or high, and had a documented history of sexual harassment against women? Good for you if, like Violet Blue, this wouldn't bother you in the slightest. I don't think that gives you, or her, the right to expect other women to share your opinion, not does it give you, or her, the right to dismiss their concerns.

 

[Envy]

I guess you're completely against any kind of animal welfare or animal rights activism then.

Maybe if you'd consider morals and ethics to be some kind of emotion.

Sometimes your posts don't make any sense to me. This is one of them.

That "I don't like to see it" and "This is not a thing that should happen in our society" are two different things.

 

[Spang]

If you think that criticizing someone harshly because they do not respect the interests of people who are triggered by certain issues because they have been sexually harassed or raped is "crap" then I just don't know. *shrug*

Your criticism of Violet Blue extends much further than your idea that she is publicly shaming rape survivors via her blog and involves a large amount of fabrication that you claim is solely used for comic effect. I take issue with making **** up about a woman (any person, really) and using said falsehoods as a means to being funny. If that's genuinely why you're making **** up about Ms. Blue, I hope you don't quit your day job, if you're fortunate enough to have one.

 

[Freesia]

I guess I also have a question to any of the women here who think das-nut has a valid point.

What kind of atmosphere would you want to see if you were going to attend a lecture about sex? How comfortable would you be attending a sex talk at which men would out number you by about five to one, were already drunk or high, and had a documented history of sexual harassment against women? Good for you if, like Violet Blue, this wouldn't bother you in the slightest. I don't think that gives you, or her, the right to expect other women to share your opinion, not does it give you, or her, the right to dismiss their concerns.

That is how I see it too. I have been at Sexpo shows with stalls etc before where there were all sorts of sex workers, strippers, toys, gstrings, fetish gear etc. But there the gender balance was 50/50 and somehow that didnt make it seem awkward or scary. There was no alcohol there either, only food.

Once I went to a Girls Day out and it was about 90% female there with a few males. They looked so uncomfortable, I kind of felt sorry for them being so outnumbered.

I imagine going to a conference where your gender was well outnumbered could definitely make you uncomfortable at times, and if it were only you, 100 men, and the only woman in earshot is talking about participating in orgies on ecstasy, I know I would feel uncomfortable, and I am lucky enough not to be a rape survivor (I have had a couple of close calls though).

I have been out to bars with groups of men and never felt unsafe, especially because I knew them. But a large crowd of mostly strange men is another thing altogether.

 

[Pickle Juice]

Your criticism of Violet Blue extends much further than your idea that she is publicly shaming rape survivors via her blog and involves a large amount of fabrication that you claim is solely used for comic effect. I take issue with making **** up about a woman (any person, really) and using said falsehoods as a means to being funny. If that's genuinely why you're making **** up about Ms. Blue, I hope you don't quit your day job, if you're fortunate enough to have one.

Making **** up? I quoted her directly from her own blog, twice. All the rest was not to be taken entirely seriously. I even said so in one of my posts. All you are doing by constantly accusing me of fabricating stuff against her or attacking her is revealing your own shortcomings. Either that or you have a greater obsession with her than you are willing to admit.

It's also interesting that you seem so willing to make **** up about me in your aim to prove I make **** up about other people. Kinda takes the wind out of your self-righteous sails a bit.

 

[Spang]

Making **** up?

Yes.

I quoted her directly from her own blog, twice.

In those two instances, then, you weren't making **** up.

All the rest was not to be taken entirely seriously.

But what's the point in creating all of these falsehoods about, in this particular case, Violet Blue? Is humor really the reason?

 

[Renee1]

This thread makes me uncomfortable for so many reasons.

On the one hand, geek culture and misogyny go hand in hand. A hacker convention would be a very uncomfortable place for a woman. Not exactly sure why the talk was scheduled for the hacker convention, but I don't see why sex has to be separate from all other aspects of public lives. It's as natural as anything and shame associated with sex (and possibly sex work - but that's an entirely different topic) is more of problem than anything else. Your shame need not apply to others, though we do like to spread that around.

On the other hand, why all the disdain for a sexually open woman? It smacks of internalised misogyny. If it is not the kind of sex education that you deem appropriate - that's your prerogative - but it really is not anyone's place to decide that it is not a valid method of teaching people (who are going into her talk/buying her books willingly). Perhaps her image is meant to be subversive? Perhaps it isn't. I don't know much about her - and I don't care to - it's the vitriol (yes, I see it too) being spewed. I guess her work is not appropriate for a woman. Dealing with sex in a colloquial and confident manner might reach some that would otherwise be turned off by the heterosexist, man-centric and, quite frankly stuffy, approach to sex education in our culture.

I'd like to be a sex educator (though focusing on queer youth), so the attitudes expressed in this thread are not at all surprising. I know what I'm getting myself into. I'm not particularly concerned - I only hope to change attitudes in whatever sphere of influence I may be lucky enough to engage with.

Not that there isn't misogyny to be addressed in sex positive attitudes, but those aren't what I'm talking about here.

After having a conversation with my fiancé, who attended and gave a talk at a hacker convention last weekend (at the request of his work), it seems the reason a sex educator was invited because it is a part of the industry to talk about issues (even regarding sex ) - retrospective - what have we done wrong and how can we fix it. It's well known in hacker culture that there is a discrepancy between male and not male participants and there has been an effort of late to even it out. The attendance numbers have been evening out but the speakers are still overwhelmingly male. In the higher echelons of tech sub-culture, balance is closer to being achieved. They want to bring that down to the lower dregs of hacker/programmer culture. Work to be done, I suppose. For those of you who are interested in reading more about the culture, from a feminist point of view: http://geekfeminism.org/

Regarding Dan Savage - it needs to said: He is out rightly both trans* and biphobic. I've read Savage Love and I have no problem with his frank approach to sex, but his self-appointed kingship over lGbtq (because anyone who knows anything about Dan Savage represents throwing the other letters under the bus) issues is more than problematic. Though if any of you really cared about this particular issue beyond proving your own point, you'd already know all of this. He's also a racist. So there's that.

Never ******* mind anything in this thread reinforcing rape culture because I've already had a PTSD trigger today and I don't need to get into it with any rape apologists right now.

That being said, I really respect The Ada Initiative.

I don't have a problem with the talk being scheduled or with it being cancelled tbh. I do have a problem with shaming women because of the way they chose to present themselves, rape culture & women in hacker/tech/nerd culture.

 

[Pickle Juice]

But what's the point in creating all of these falsehoods about, in this particular case, Violet Blue? Is humor really the reason?

I don't know what specific falsehoods you are complaining about. It looks to me like you are overreacting. I also suggest you lay off the insults. They aren't helping your case.

 

[Spang]

I don't know what specific falsehoods you are complaining about.

I addressed some of these falsehoods in a previous post.

Your response to said post:

You have no sense of the facetious I guess, or of exaggeration for comic effect. I've gotten more laughter out of this whole thread than anything else.

 

[Renee1]

Also, hacker doesn't always mean what you think it does; depends on the context. Clever and inelegant problem solving should stay in your mind when you're thinking about a hacker convention.

Edit: Computer programming is an interdisciplinary field - so a sex talk could easily fall into the appropriate category.