People Twitter

5210 readers

2662 users here now

People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.

RULES:

Mark NSFW content.
No doxxing people.
Must be a tweet or similar
No bullying or international politcs
Be excellent to each other.

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

386

What the hell (sh.itjust.works)

submitted 2 months ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

60 comments fedilink hide all child comments

https://tech.lgbt/@LilahTovMoon/112962637805429031

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Aedis 10 points 2 months ago (1 children)

It was definitely a loaded or insincere question. The use of "you would" instead of "would you" suggests that the person who is asking this question has already made up their mind about OP's opinion. And no, I don't think that was a typo, a Freudian slip maybe, but not a typo.

[–] voracitude 7 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 children)

Re-reading the post, I absolutely agree that it was phrased badly and unfairly ascribed a view to @Dentzy they hadn't espoused, but I still don't think it was fair to characterise it as a strawman. As to malice, I find Hanlon's Razor to hold more true than Occam's, and I prefer to give the benefit of the doubt wherever reasonable if I'm up to it.

Personally, I find @Dentzy's opinion that it wouldn't be okay in any scenario (meaning with any combination of people) a little odd. The specific problems for women in tech make this carry connotations that wouldn't be there if it were adult men under the lampshades for example. But, I can understand and generally agree with the idea that "presenting people as objects is not okay", even if I would put an asterisk on it because I think there's artistic value in that presentation in some situations (for example, as an illustration of the way that rich people or corporations view the majority of us).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 2 months ago (1 children)

A strawman argument is still a strawman even if there was no malicious intent and it was made through ignorance of making a proper argument.

The phrasing isn't just poor, though, it has a connotation/implication that can only be learned through social context. There's absolutely aggressive intention with the phrasing. At the very least a "gotcha" attempt. Maybe they were raised in that environment and thus are uneducated and generally antagonistic, but then Hanlon's Razor would extend to any acts of hate.

I always like to ask "are you being judgemental or curious?" (Thanks, Ted Lasso)

[–] voracitude 2 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago)

It's not a strawman argument, though. The question does not follow the pattern:

The straw man fallacy occurs in the following pattern of argument:

Person 1 asserts proposition X.

Person 2 argues against a superficially similar proposition Y, falsely, as if an argument against Y were an argument against X.

Now I will quote the post to show that it does not follow the pattern:

So if one of the models was a man in a suit with a lampshade on their head you would have no problem and this would be perfectly normal?

There's no statement that the argument being made is that "it would be fine if the actors were male instead of female". The poster is asking a question, to paraphrase: "is this what you're saying?". This is a common way to phrase this question (even if it is not a good way to phrase it) when asking it honestly, so it would be unfair to assume the worst interpretation.