It Doesn’t Count Unless I Know You’re Hitting on Me.(thetechnobody.com)
thetechnobody.com
It Doesn’t Count Unless I Know You’re Hitting on Me.
http://thetechnobody.com/it-doesnt-count-unless-i-know-youre-hitting-on-me/
26 comments
Oh man, whenever sexes are involved the comments read like World War II.
To the posters here: Getting a girl's number to ask her on a date on the pretense of networking is creepy.
To the author: Some guys are creepy. Deflect them like you usually do.
This doesn't seem such a big deal!
To the posters here: Getting a girl's number to ask her on a date on the pretense of networking is creepy.
To the author: Some guys are creepy. Deflect them like you usually do.
This doesn't seem such a big deal!
I think there are two different realities that fit the evidence we've been presented with equally well. One is unacceptable -- and she's well within her rights to complain; the other is acceptable -- and she's making too much of the issue.
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the following is the case:
It's not beyond the realms of possibility that the following is the case:
The men "hitting on" her are perfectly polite and
interested in her professionally, but also want to see if
there's a chance of a date. If she were to reply, "sorry
no", they would leave it at that.
No, I think that sounds unpleasant. Just imagine some guy you met once phoning you about business and then asking you for a date. Still think mixing business and pleasure is okay?
It's also obviously totally unprofessional of the person. I mean, what are they going to say to their boss?
It's also obviously totally unprofessional of the person. I mean, what are they going to say to their boss?
I met the smart freelancer we're looking for,
but then I asked her for a date and now she isn't
returning my calls. Sorry boss.
I don't know about the business aspect, because I'm not a businessman, but if I met someone through the "business" of one of the volunteer organisations I work for, then I think it's perfectly OK for them to contact me, or me to contact them, and ask for a date.
If I wasn't interested I'd say "no thanks" and expect them to get on with life and not harass me. Granted, this may not accurately describe the situation in the article, but in that case the author has not made her point well.
If I wasn't interested I'd say "no thanks" and expect them to get on with life and not harass me. Granted, this may not accurately describe the situation in the article, but in that case the author has not made her point well.
I think context is important. If she is getting phone calls from guys asking for a date straight off then sure, I'd be annoyed too.
But if you develop a business relationship with someone it seems fine to ask if they'd like to go on a date - just like you might as something in the office.
From my observation, though, the former is probably more common than the latter ;)
But if you develop a business relationship with someone it seems fine to ask if they'd like to go on a date - just like you might as something in the office.
From my observation, though, the former is probably more common than the latter ;)
Would you find it acceptable for someone to call you after finding your resume online but then after the business pretext asking you on a date?
Well I'm a guy but if I wasn't married I'd be flattered.
I'd find it odd if I'd never met them. Having met someone in person is a whole different issue.
How are so many comments misreading things?
She's not complaining about being hit on. She's complaining about a bait-and-switch -- pretextually getting her number or other contact information in a business context, and using it later for personal contact.
She's not complaining about being hit on. She's complaining about a bait-and-switch -- pretextually getting her number or other contact information in a business context, and using it later for personal contact.
She explicitly said that she will reject anyone who hits on her. How's that not complaining about being hit on?
Rejecting is not a direct complaint. She seems to understand that this indeed is just part of life. Yes, she doesn't want to be hit on. But that's a straightforward interaction she can deal with -- by rejecting it, as she says, and moving on.
The bulk of the post, the actual problem she's complaining about, is being hit on by "stealth", where she can't bluntly reject without compromising other interests, whatever the context is supposed to be on the surface.
EDIT: Whoever downvoted you is an asshole. Explaining the reasoning for your interpretation is a necessary part of this conversation.
The bulk of the post, the actual problem she's complaining about, is being hit on by "stealth", where she can't bluntly reject without compromising other interests, whatever the context is supposed to be on the surface.
EDIT: Whoever downvoted you is an asshole. Explaining the reasoning for your interpretation is a necessary part of this conversation.
No.
She's saying that anyone who wouldn't hit on her, but still take her card and use it to get a date, are the types of guys she'd want to reject if they did suddenly decide to hit on her.
She's saying that anyone who wouldn't hit on her, but still take her card and use it to get a date, are the types of guys she'd want to reject if they did suddenly decide to hit on her.
So....girl writes a blog that is half blog, half glamour photo shoot, and is obviously trading on her appearance. Fine, it's a free country, work an advantage if you've got it. She openly admits in the "about" section of her blog that she has all of one year of experience. Then girl is shocked, just shocked, when business professionals don't take her seriously and are only interested in one thing. A superficial girl (with little experience, to boot) running into a bunch of superficial men.
Hmmm....
Hmmm....
How is she 'obviously' trading on her appearance exactly? If she was minging and had exactly the same online presence you wouldn't be saying that. Tard
Huh? This comment makes almost no sense, but if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying that I wouldn't think the same thing if she showed up at a tech conference in crimson lipstick and a black dress and made pouty faces all over the place?
Um...yes, actually. Yes I would think that.
Um...yes, actually. Yes I would think that.
Anyone with any common sense can see that she's attempting to exploit sexuality to her advantage. In no way does that diminish her potential competency, nor does it excuse sexism and pigs, but come on -- project "consider me sexually" (from a male/female relationship perspective), and that is exactly what people will do.
And it's not exactly surprising that someone writing about being hit on, and their concerns with being hit on, does such a thing. It's all a part of the same visage.
To bring up Reddit, because this is a very Redditesque story, this reminds me of the hilarious comic someone submitted there of the difference of guys and girls showing off something in a picture for other Redditors to appreciate, be it a game, animal, etc: every guy picture is just the object. Every girl picture is 90% the girl, 10% the object. Wish I could find a link to it because it is far too true.
And it's not exactly surprising that someone writing about being hit on, and their concerns with being hit on, does such a thing. It's all a part of the same visage.
To bring up Reddit, because this is a very Redditesque story, this reminds me of the hilarious comic someone submitted there of the difference of guys and girls showing off something in a picture for other Redditors to appreciate, be it a game, animal, etc: every guy picture is just the object. Every girl picture is 90% the girl, 10% the object. Wish I could find a link to it because it is far too true.
The article does come across as though she's acting very much the 'self-involved woman pirate whore' she's trying to avoid, but it's her site, her prerogative.
Casting that aside for a moment, biology happens. I'm a guy, married and have been hit on in the past (my best defence was to stop working out and put a few pounds on, hasn't been a problem since then although it may have introduced new problems which I'm now working on).
It's natural for men and women to flirt, to hit on each other in an attempt to achieve evolution's goal. It's what we're all wired for. However, having said that as long as boundaries are made clear it shouldn't be a problem.
I'd also like to say that I have both been 'that guy' and been hit on by 'that woman'. In both cases there are worse things in the world to worry about. In the case of 'that woman' I made a pretty good friend and business associate, in the case of being 'that guy', you chalk it up and move on, or in my case make friends with someone who you wouldn't have perhaps spoken to if you weren't initially attracted to.
I'd also second the context. A woman being hit on in SF is nothing like being hit in Cairo, Delhi or even Paris.
Casting that aside for a moment, biology happens. I'm a guy, married and have been hit on in the past (my best defence was to stop working out and put a few pounds on, hasn't been a problem since then although it may have introduced new problems which I'm now working on).
It's natural for men and women to flirt, to hit on each other in an attempt to achieve evolution's goal. It's what we're all wired for. However, having said that as long as boundaries are made clear it shouldn't be a problem.
I'd also like to say that I have both been 'that guy' and been hit on by 'that woman'. In both cases there are worse things in the world to worry about. In the case of 'that woman' I made a pretty good friend and business associate, in the case of being 'that guy', you chalk it up and move on, or in my case make friends with someone who you wouldn't have perhaps spoken to if you weren't initially attracted to.
I'd also second the context. A woman being hit on in SF is nothing like being hit in Cairo, Delhi or even Paris.
So after examining her site a little more closely, I'm not sure what she actually does? I see vague hand waving towards a facility for schmoozing in some fashion and copious hand waving toward her having very little idea what's going on in her field with a healthy dash of self deprecation thrown in.
If all you do is schmooze then is it really so strange that someone might mistake your intent as unrelated to acting as a supplier, partner or client to their business? How cut and dried really is it? It's not like she's a developer looking for a new project or something that would clearly qualify as "serious business".
It does have the not-so-faint whiff of life is so hard everybody wants me.
If all you do is schmooze then is it really so strange that someone might mistake your intent as unrelated to acting as a supplier, partner or client to their business? How cut and dried really is it? It's not like she's a developer looking for a new project or something that would clearly qualify as "serious business".
It does have the not-so-faint whiff of life is so hard everybody wants me.
I'm not sure what this comment has to do with the article at all. Try to evaluate the idea, and not the author.
Whether or not you think women are treated unfairly in the industry (I used to bristle at the idea, then watched my wife interview for jobs and radically changed my take), and whether or not this particular woman endured any real unfairness:
It is still worth considering how totally unprofessional and inappropriate it may be to ask a woman for her business card in order to abuse it for your personal benefit. It's not something I had thought of before. It's worth discussing.
If gender politics makes your brain turn off (and, it used to do that to me too), just pivot the story in your head so that instead of asking for a date, the guy takes her card at a tech convention and later calls and tries to sell her a dental insurance policy. It's spam. Spam is bad. There's an implied agreement when I give you my card that you're going to use it for its intended purpose: to contact me about something relevant to my business.
Whether or not you think women are treated unfairly in the industry (I used to bristle at the idea, then watched my wife interview for jobs and radically changed my take), and whether or not this particular woman endured any real unfairness:
It is still worth considering how totally unprofessional and inappropriate it may be to ask a woman for her business card in order to abuse it for your personal benefit. It's not something I had thought of before. It's worth discussing.
If gender politics makes your brain turn off (and, it used to do that to me too), just pivot the story in your head so that instead of asking for a date, the guy takes her card at a tech convention and later calls and tries to sell her a dental insurance policy. It's spam. Spam is bad. There's an implied agreement when I give you my card that you're going to use it for its intended purpose: to contact me about something relevant to my business.
I don't think your analogy is a good match, someone selling you dental insurance out of the blue is also considered a nuisance, someone asking if you would like to go out on a date out of the blue is par for the course on normal human relations, and the author admits as much and points out that it is easy to simply refuse in this instance.
I have been propositioned for this kind of thing in a business context and have refused and not had negative blowback from doing so. That was actually the first mental shift I tried to see if it made any more sense to me that way, but it still seemed overblown. I can't think of an invitation that it is socially acceptable to make to a new acquintance that it is not socially acceptable to make to a new potential business contact, admittedly I guess that might be a consequence of the extremely limited array of things I consider to be socially acceptable invitations to new acquaintances.
Just saying no thanks is really not so hard, and if it continues after that point it becomes a hell of a lot less ambiguous or defensible.
I have been propositioned for this kind of thing in a business context and have refused and not had negative blowback from doing so. That was actually the first mental shift I tried to see if it made any more sense to me that way, but it still seemed overblown. I can't think of an invitation that it is socially acceptable to make to a new acquintance that it is not socially acceptable to make to a new potential business contact, admittedly I guess that might be a consequence of the extremely limited array of things I consider to be socially acceptable invitations to new acquaintances.
Just saying no thanks is really not so hard, and if it continues after that point it becomes a hell of a lot less ambiguous or defensible.
Taking someone's business contact information with no intent of building a business relationship and then using it for your own personal benefit is unprofessional and rude. I'm not sure any number of words is going to get you around that fact.
mentioned multiple times a) it is not clear that there was no intent beside personal benefit and b) it is not clear where the line between personal and business is if your business is schmoozing.
This is not to say this is absolutely positively an instance of either of the above, merely that it is too ambiguous and unclear to not come across poorly.
This is not to say this is absolutely positively an instance of either of the above, merely that it is too ambiguous and unclear to not come across poorly.
It's always going to be possible to come up with some circumstance the author didn't foresee or insulate themselves from that might mitigate the specific facts they're using to promote their idea. But who cares? That's a nerd message board game.
The question is: is taking someone's business card under the auspices of a business inquiry and then using it solely for your own personal reasons unprofessional or not? The answer (I'll go out on a limb here...) is: yes. It's unprofessional. Interesting point, blog author! Thanks!
The question is: is taking someone's business card under the auspices of a business inquiry and then using it solely for your own personal reasons unprofessional or not? The answer (I'll go out on a limb here...) is: yes. It's unprofessional. Interesting point, blog author! Thanks!
Your single paragraph summary was immeasurably clearer than her entire rant. Yes, under those exact circumstances it is both unprofessional and stalkerish.
As far as I can tell she does social media.
This is not a sarcastic question but what does that actually mean? Anyone? I'm genuinely curious.
It's a kind of marketing. But yeah, it's bullshit. It's the new "SEO consultant".
'Doing social media' isn't necessarily bullshit. For example, it could be useful for a large company to know what's being said about them on Twitter -- maybe even to respond -- and it's not necessarily clear whose job that would be... except for the person who does social media?
So the same kind of thing one could do with an irc bot in your dev chat room that monitors social media for mentions of your name? That would actually be useful if you didn't know how to do the above I think.
I have karma to burn so mod me down as much as you please, but for the record this was not intended as a sarcastic comment either, I was trying to see exactly what this "monitoring of social media" actually implies beyond my stated example.
What you described is essentially grep. Hiring someone to give you an executive summary of your image on the internet is different.
Honestly, I don't know if this is really the most important function of a social media consultant. They are really a domain expert. Like any consultant, their job is as not just to perform tasks in the domain, but to offer expertise and help make decisions as well. Knowledge of effectively using Twitter, Facebook, Yelp, etc can be leveraged for shareholder value. This could be marketing campaigns, coupons, contests, tech support, retweeting when relevent or almost any other use of social media.
Now, not every company needs this. But for big companies with large support and customer relations staffs, it's not unreasonable that a few social media experts can save enough money to make it worth their while.
Honestly, I don't know if this is really the most important function of a social media consultant. They are really a domain expert. Like any consultant, their job is as not just to perform tasks in the domain, but to offer expertise and help make decisions as well. Knowledge of effectively using Twitter, Facebook, Yelp, etc can be leveraged for shareholder value. This could be marketing campaigns, coupons, contests, tech support, retweeting when relevent or almost any other use of social media.
Now, not every company needs this. But for big companies with large support and customer relations staffs, it's not unreasonable that a few social media experts can save enough money to make it worth their while.
[deleted]
Hmmm. I'm frustrated, because I think the author is making a very important point in a very, very poor way.
Gender issues are important. They are important everywhere and they are especially important in industries like ours where the gender ratios are so unbalanced.
That being said, I find it extremely difficult to take this author seriously. I don't think I can critique her writing in a way that doesn't either come off as mean or completely expose me as the curmudgeonly bastard that I am, so I will just say that I found her style distracting. It's her blog and she should by all means write however she wishes - and to be fair she may not have expected the attention she is getting - but it's disappointing to me to see this issue represented in this way.
Hopefully, though, people will be able to see past that and realize that it's pathetic and rude to collect someone's personal contact information under the guise of business networking with the intent of calling them later for a date.
Gender issues are important. They are important everywhere and they are especially important in industries like ours where the gender ratios are so unbalanced.
That being said, I find it extremely difficult to take this author seriously. I don't think I can critique her writing in a way that doesn't either come off as mean or completely expose me as the curmudgeonly bastard that I am, so I will just say that I found her style distracting. It's her blog and she should by all means write however she wishes - and to be fair she may not have expected the attention she is getting - but it's disappointing to me to see this issue represented in this way.
Hopefully, though, people will be able to see past that and realize that it's pathetic and rude to collect someone's personal contact information under the guise of business networking with the intent of calling them later for a date.
Hopefully, though, people will be able to see past that and realize that it's pathetic and rude to collect someone's personal contact information under the guise of business networking with the intent of calling them later for a date.
Sure, it's underhand, but she hasn't said anything to suggest that they're not interested in her both personally and professionally.
This is agreement with you: she's very unclear.
Sure, it's underhand, but she hasn't said anything to suggest that they're not interested in her both personally and professionally.
This is agreement with you: she's very unclear.
Why doesn't she get a second phone/line for business only. If someone abuses that then at least they don't have her personal number and she can deal with the inappropriate use of her business number accordingly.
She could also make it clear on the card that it is a business number.
She could also make it clear on the card that it is a business number.
It doesn't really matter, I've had an ex get asked to dates over email by potential business leads. Especially awkward is the "half and half" situation where they asked you to dinner to discuss business. For her it was especially hard to turn down because it wasn't just a networking client is was often a potential client for her firm.
The point is you take steps to separate your business and personal details so that some percentage of your encounters will get the picture.
For those that don't, you should be able to deal with them quite candidly. If they persist and start harassing you then block their number or report them.
If you can't do this, then maybe the problem lies on your end. Stop putting yourself in the position where you are helplessly being tormented.
For those that don't, you should be able to deal with them quite candidly. If they persist and start harassing you then block their number or report them.
If you can't do this, then maybe the problem lies on your end. Stop putting yourself in the position where you are helplessly being tormented.
How does that make a difference? All numbers are the same to predators haha! I doubt she advertises the number on her business card as a personal one anyway.
Two things:
1. You're a woman, and men will hit on you, and that's not a bad thing; it's biology.
2. If you think SF men are aggressive, then obviously you haven't been out much. I don't think I've been anywhere in the world that's LESS aggressive than SF when it comes to dating/mating. Go to Brazil and see what aggressiveness is.
1. You're a woman, and men will hit on you, and that's not a bad thing; it's biology.
2. If you think SF men are aggressive, then obviously you haven't been out much. I don't think I've been anywhere in the world that's LESS aggressive than SF when it comes to dating/mating. Go to Brazil and see what aggressiveness is.
All she's complaining about is not that she gets hit on, but that she keeps getting hit on in the wrong way. She gives her contact details out to men whom she thinks want to be business contacts, who then wind up calling her for dates.
It's a simple rule: if you meet a woman and you're interested in her in that way, then hit on her properly and ask her for her number in a way that makes your intentions non-ambiguous. If you're interested in her professionally then by all means exchange business cards. If you're interested in her in both ways then... well, choose one.
It's a simple rule: if you meet a woman and you're interested in her in that way, then hit on her properly and ask her for her number in a way that makes your intentions non-ambiguous. If you're interested in her professionally then by all means exchange business cards. If you're interested in her in both ways then... well, choose one.
#2 doesn't make it right.
Does a woman not have the right not to face that? If you've got a girl, don't you feel personally that she shouldn't have to face that?
At what point are aggressive come-ons just harassment?
Does a woman not have the right not to face that? If you've got a girl, don't you feel personally that she shouldn't have to face that?
At what point are aggressive come-ons just harassment?
From my perspective? No, she really doesn't have the right not to face that. She's a woman. It's biology. Part of being a human being is interacting with other human beings, many of home would like to sleep with you.
She should have to deal with harrasment? Nope, but that's a different thing entirely. Somebody scoping out your card and then asking you out on a date isn't harassing you. They're asking you on a date. It's what happens after you say 'no' that things become different.
She should have to deal with harrasment? Nope, but that's a different thing entirely. Somebody scoping out your card and then asking you out on a date isn't harassing you. They're asking you on a date. It's what happens after you say 'no' that things become different.
"Does a woman not have the right not to face that?"
Are you speaking for ALL women?
In Brazil, women love it when you aggressively peruse them.
In SF, men don't talk to women, and women's number one complaint is exactly that.
Are you speaking for ALL women?
In Brazil, women love it when you aggressively peruse them.
In SF, men don't talk to women, and women's number one complaint is exactly that.
You know, some people say a woman mind is a mystery, but this thread is making me think that some guys simply don't make any effort to actually understand what women mean when they say something clear and to the point...
Plenty of people make every effort to understand what they mean - but it doesn't work so well when the woman is saying one thing and lacing it with tons of subtext that say something else.
From the TFA:
>> when we’re at a business networking event, and we exchange cards
You're really stretching the definition of subtext if you're suggesting that a woman giving you her business card actually means she wants to get personal with you.
>> when we’re at a business networking event, and we exchange cards
You're really stretching the definition of subtext if you're suggesting that a woman giving you her business card actually means she wants to get personal with you.
I can't speak to what actually happens when she's at one of these events since I'm not there. But given that her whole blog is a coy, disingenuous photo-shoot, I have to say I look askance at this woman in particular. It's not difficult to imagine her interpersonal style being similar. That's where the above comment was coming from.
Here's another site full of photoshoots of the writer. Think he's asking for personal contact if he hands out his business card? http://stallman.org/photos/rms-working/
Unfortunately, yes: http://stallman.org/extra/personal.html
False analogy. There's a world of difference between a tech nobody (in her own words) and a very well known, established programmer with decades of experience who is seen as an authority in the field. At that point you are, to some extent, a media personality as well, and that sort of behavior is a somewhat more understandable.
RMS is not looking particularly sultry in those photos.
So you're saying she's asking for it?
Her appearance suggests to me she's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable. If she acts in real life in a manner which reflects what her blog headline photos suggest about her, then I would expect her to get asked out a lot.
(That doesn't excuse any men from being douches about it, but if they're polite and take no for an answer then I don't see any problem)
(That doesn't excuse any men from being douches about it, but if they're polite and take no for an answer then I don't see any problem)
>Her appearance suggests to me she's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable.
And there it is: Pure sexism.
Knew you couldn't hold it in.
Edit: Just to prove the point. Find a picture of a man that you think qualifies as "His appearance suggests to me he's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable."
And there it is: Pure sexism.
Knew you couldn't hold it in.
Edit: Just to prove the point. Find a picture of a man that you think qualifies as "His appearance suggests to me he's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable."
The TOP BAR OF HER WEBSITE, that is to say, THE VERY FIRST THING YOU SEE when you go to her site, is a series of glamour shots of her smiling, laughing, nibbling on her glasses, staring into the camera, voguing all over the place - all while wearing what could very well be a black dress, with bright red crimson lipstick on.
And that's perfectly fine if she wants to trade on her appearance this way, but the minute someone suggests she may be doing so, suddenly they're "sexist." How does that work?
"Find a picture of a man that you think qualifies as "His appearance suggests to me he's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable."
I, for one, would not be terribly turned on by a guy wearing red lipstick, etc. That's just me, being straight and all. Men and women have different signals, that's just how it is. If the pictures where all of an aquiline Abercrombian staring off into the distance with his shirt off, casually slung over his shoulder, showing off rippling pecs and abs, well....what would YOU say he was doing?
And that's perfectly fine if she wants to trade on her appearance this way, but the minute someone suggests she may be doing so, suddenly they're "sexist." How does that work?
"Find a picture of a man that you think qualifies as "His appearance suggests to me he's open to the suggestion of initiating a romantic relationship with someone suitable."
I, for one, would not be terribly turned on by a guy wearing red lipstick, etc. That's just me, being straight and all. Men and women have different signals, that's just how it is. If the pictures where all of an aquiline Abercrombian staring off into the distance with his shirt off, casually slung over his shoulder, showing off rippling pecs and abs, well....what would YOU say he was doing?
Pardon me?
Men and women are different when it comes to (at least, heterosexual) relationships, and signal their interest differently. If observing that makes me a sexist, then so be it.
Men and women are different when it comes to (at least, heterosexual) relationships, and signal their interest differently. If observing that makes me a sexist, then so be it.
As the old saying goes, don't judge a book by its cover...
Regardless of how goofy she wants to make her blog look, I think she still has a good point (although, granted, it was a rant and thus not exactly written in the most positive way possible)
Regardless of how goofy she wants to make her blog look, I think she still has a good point (although, granted, it was a rant and thus not exactly written in the most positive way possible)
In my opinion she's anything but clear. She doesn't explain, for example, when she gets asked out on a date (is that exactly what she's suggesting these men are doing -- it's again not clear) why can she just not say "no thanks" and leave it at that?
>In my opinion she's anything but clear.
Seriously? You miss her saying that trading business cards is not an invitation for personal contact?
I found it blatantly obvious that she finds direct flirting acceptable while the subterfuge of faking a professional interaction to acquire contact information to be creepy and spineless.
I think a lot of people here are taking this woman's complaint personally which is actually quite funny.
Seriously? You miss her saying that trading business cards is not an invitation for personal contact?
I found it blatantly obvious that she finds direct flirting acceptable while the subterfuge of faking a professional interaction to acquire contact information to be creepy and spineless.
I think a lot of people here are taking this woman's complaint personally which is actually quite funny.
Fine, so those who read her blog won't be asking her out on a date, but it shouldn't hold them back from asking out other women who they think might be more receptive to the same approach. This is her personal opinion and personal taste, not a guidebook to women.
I fail to see how "when we’re at a business networking event, and we exchange cards? Yeah, that’s not me ‘giving you my number’." is not clear. Got the business card, don't call her for a date. It's not rocket science...
>> why can she just not say "no thanks"
You don't rant when some business contact you just met asks you if you'd like to go hit a gay pub later. You do it after it has happened for the hundredth time this month.
>> why can she just not say "no thanks"
You don't rant when some business contact you just met asks you if you'd like to go hit a gay pub later. You do it after it has happened for the hundredth time this month.
If it's happened to her hundreds of times in a month, then yes, I'd say that the men she's been meeting are out of tune with reality.
Why do you say they are out of tune with reality only after a hundred (or whatever) men asked her out? It's not like women advertise how many inappropriate requests they have turned down.
She's right on point, IMHO. It's not the fact that she's being hit on that bothers her. It's the fact that the people who ask for her card give no clues as to their intentions. She wants people who ask for her card for personal reasons to say that is what they are doing. Makes sense to me.
It's not clear to me if she's
a) complaining for the sake of it, b) looking for advice on how to handle this, or c) offering advice to guys on what not to do.
Point c is probably really good advice to a lot of people, but she's muddled it so much with points a and b that it's not going to help anyone.
I suspect the bait-and-switch wouldn't be such an issue in a more sexually equal environment. Physicians are about 50:50 and while I've heard plenty of female doctors complain about being called "nurse", I've never heard a complaint about "bait-and-switch". I have heard a few complaints about "where'd all the men go?"
The environment in tech sounds about like the military: women have to be prepared to physically fight their own team. Which is deeply unfortunate.
The environment in tech sounds about like the military: women have to be prepared to physically fight their own team. Which is deeply unfortunate.
I see her point, but I don't blame any of those guys. The hottest chick at the party is going to get hit on in every way possible and there is really nothing you can do about it. "My wallet's too small for my fifties and my diamond shoes are too tight."
She did do something about it, didn't she? It's not going to solve the problem overnight but it's more likely to create change than just bucking up.
Why is this story still on the front page?
Because it's... hacker... news...? :-/
This is what the flag button is for, IMO.
This is what the flag button is for, IMO.
How long were Noirin Shirley's false allegations on the front page? Once the white knights finish their posturing, it will disappear (until next time).
If you feel the need to pull that in here, at least provide sourcing for your allegations of falseness.
How about the fact that her police report resulted in nothing happening? All we got out of the entire incident was a character assassination under false pretenses and a lot of whining.
It probably also violates HN etiquette to link your comments to your female friends and ask them to upvote it. Please don't do it anymore.
It probably also violates HN etiquette to link your comments to your female friends and ask them to upvote it. Please don't do it anymore.
I wouldn't expect ANY outcome from a police report prior to a conviction in court. After all, the investigation now spans at least two states and two continents. I expect that the "accused", if informed that he has no case to answer, will immediately let all us know that fact! I WAS sursied when Shirley posted her accusation, but then got to thinking that she has no other mechanism to warn others - the police case is "sub-judice". Have a nice day and remember that women can knee you in the balls if you are smaller than them.
Good point. I think Michael Arrington redacted the relevant TechCrunch post, didn't he? My respect for Arrington picked up a lot that day.
Wow that youtube video she included was the most annoying thing I've seen all week. I lasted 30s. And yes, she does sound self-involved, as she speculates at the end of the post. Of course she gets to have her rant (why ask?) but I have to wonder why... it doesn't come off very well.
Well she's got eight, count em, EIGHT pictures of herself and her shiny red lips at the top of the page. So yeah, self-involved? Could be.
True. That's a flirty rather than a professional image by US standards. That said, it can take some time to adjust when you move here from the UK (or is it Australia/NZ? Didn't check). I found California quite strange for the first year. Also, Americans like foreign accents a lot. I get flirty remarks about mine all the time despite being here for years and a wedding ring.
Self-involved? It's a personal site -duh?
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
<snark>Yeah ... it reallly sucks to be goodlooking.</snark>
I understand what she's saying, and I empathize, I really do, but its is a hazard of being attractive ...
SUCK IT UP.
Its bad form to rant about that kind of stuff ... its almost like some dude who owns a Ferrari/Aston Martin/whatever, complaining about how people are always crowding around his car wherever he parks it. (Yeah how dreary it must be to own a Ferrari!) ... It just comes across wrong.
If she really wants to solve her problem and stop ranting ... let her put on 30 pounds. I promise the shennanigans will stop ... abruptly.
I understand what she's saying, and I empathize, I really do, but its is a hazard of being attractive ...
SUCK IT UP.
Its bad form to rant about that kind of stuff ... its almost like some dude who owns a Ferrari/Aston Martin/whatever, complaining about how people are always crowding around his car wherever he parks it. (Yeah how dreary it must be to own a Ferrari!) ... It just comes across wrong.
If she really wants to solve her problem and stop ranting ... let her put on 30 pounds. I promise the shennanigans will stop ... abruptly.
Methinks the lady doth protest too much. If she has as big a problem with this as she claims then she has greater challenges facing her then learning how to set (or correct) a boundary. Seriously. I was recently fired by a client after rejecting her sexual advances. Maybe I'll make a blog post bragging about my animal magnetism to assuage my disappointment over my professional failure.
Also, it doesn't count unless I know you're hitting on me.
A male hit on her, in San Francisco. Context is everything, no? This is possibly amazing, but amazing enough to generate a blog post?
I've seen a lot of comments in social media from SF women stating that they can't get a guy to even look at them.
I've seen a lot of comments in social media from SF women stating that they can't get a guy to even look at them.
I have anecdotal evidence that if women will show that she is more versatile in some hi-tech/IT fields she will get more attention from men, compared with women who don't show it.
That's not what the post is about.
Context really is everything, which is why I found your comment misleading. The topic of her post is not that a male hit on her anywhere in San Francisco. What she's talking about is the fact that some male(s) interpreted exchanging of business cards as "giving out a phone number" which can then be used for personal reasons, such as hitting on her. Furthermore, she finds herself facing an interesting dilemma: she feels she can't be "harsh", because they're a business contact.
It is an interesting topic, at least for me: I'm male, so I haven't had to go through a situation like that and I don't have a clue how I would respond to something like that if I were in her shoes. Had I heeded your summary without reading the blog, I would've missed a mildly interesting topic.
It is an interesting topic, at least for me: I'm male, so I haven't had to go through a situation like that and I don't have a clue how I would respond to something like that if I were in her shoes. Had I heeded your summary without reading the blog, I would've missed a mildly interesting topic.
Yes, but the "hitting on her" part is why she is aggrieved. I agree totally that using business card exhange for that is creepy.
I'm a man and I've certainly questioned the intentions of quite a few women who "network.". I've also had questionable intentions with women I've networked with. So what? Flirting happens when sexes meet. Sometimes even more. If you want to close the door on that, say you have a boyfriend or your not interested in dating, or just don't flirt back. Otherwise you're the wuss for being unable to handle the facts of life. Disrespectful or overly persistent is another matter, but that doesn't seem to be the case.
A lot of people go to networking events to meet partners as well as network.
And American men are aggressive? Try Italian, Spanish, French, ...
A lot of people go to networking events to meet partners as well as network.
And American men are aggressive? Try Italian, Spanish, French, ...
You're missing the point, it's not the flirting, it's the getting of contact information under the false pretences of doing business that's she's understandably annoyed about.
[deleted]
I think she had better get used to it. Hot women, and she is hot, are hard to approach, so guys will take any segway they can get, even if it's somewhat disingenuous. I have a feeling if she really wanted this to stop she would put on a fake wedding ring, but I somehow think that might put a damper on her professional success... sadly enough.
The author's issue not with men hitting on her, as she clearly explains. Her issue is with men obtaining her contact information ostensibly to do business and then using that contact information to hit on her.
Really, is that distinction so hard to understand? Stop excusing bad behaviour under the guise of "biology" or other lame rationalizations. They are as demeaning to men as they are insulting to women.