I’m honestly baffled by all the downvotes & disagreevotes this is getting. I’m really struggling to see anything objectionable in Sanjay’s comment; indeed, it seems like a clearly positive and valuable contribution. Our community would be a better place if more people made (& meant) clear statements in this vein.
I didn’t vote on this either way, but I think the response was probably negative because:
People are wary of the effects of a general “assume the accuser is right” approach. I’m completely on board with the approach in the pledge if a friend comes to me, but with community-level accusations this can turn into “whoever says something first wins”.
Skepticism over this kind of pledge as a mechanism for making things better.
I think there are different interpretations that people can take of what it implies. One reading is that the pledge specifies how the pledger responds in the moment, with the person in pain. Another reading would talk about how they reacted through the entire resulting community process. I parsed it as the former, but what you’re describing seems to be closer to the second.
Skepticism over this kind of pledge as a mechanism for making things better.
I am glad you posted this and it got so many agree votes.
It is concerning if people do not understand how this kind of pledge makes things better by:
1. Making people more likely to report incidents of harassment or abuse
2. Reinforcing that this community is a space that wants to be safe and welcoming to women.
This makes me feel like EAs may need much more sensitivity/harassment/discrimination/etc. training than non-EAs do. And highlights the need for stricter workplace dating and sexual harassment policies in EA orgs.
I mostly disagreed based on “I would much rather trust and provide emotional support to someone who later turns out to have been lying than to question—even subtly—the legitimacy of someone who has suffered sexual abuse.”, which feels dangerous to me personally if it were adopted as a community norm. do appreciate the general spirit of attempting to help though.
I would much rather trust and provide emotional support to someone who later turns out to have been lying than to question—even subtly—the legitimacy of someone who has suffered sexual abuse.
I did not see how this in any way implies “I do not support the appropriate authorities from investigating whether the report is a lie” which is the only problematic scenario here.
Not immediately grilling the victim on the legitimacy of their claim when they are opening up to you about a traumatic event and instead providing emotional support makes a lot of sense to me. The cost to me of providing emotional support to a non-victim is low and the cost of immediately being challenged on truthfulness to a real victim is very high.
I’m honestly baffled by all the downvotes & disagreevotes this is getting. I’m really struggling to see anything objectionable in Sanjay’s comment; indeed, it seems like a clearly positive and valuable contribution. Our community would be a better place if more people made (& meant) clear statements in this vein.
I didn’t vote on this either way, but I think the response was probably negative because:
People are wary of the effects of a general “assume the accuser is right” approach. I’m completely on board with the approach in the pledge if a friend comes to me, but with community-level accusations this can turn into “whoever says something first wins”.
Skepticism over this kind of pledge as a mechanism for making things better.
I think there are different interpretations that people can take of what it implies. One reading is that the pledge specifies how the pledger responds in the moment, with the person in pain. Another reading would talk about how they reacted through the entire resulting community process. I parsed it as the former, but what you’re describing seems to be closer to the second.
I am glad you posted this and it got so many agree votes.
It is concerning if people do not understand how this kind of pledge makes things better by:
1. Making people more likely to report incidents of harassment or abuse
2. Reinforcing that this community is a space that wants to be safe and welcoming to women.
This makes me feel like EAs may need much more sensitivity/harassment/discrimination/etc. training than non-EAs do. And highlights the need for stricter workplace dating and sexual harassment policies in EA orgs.
I mostly disagreed based on “I would much rather trust and provide emotional support to someone who later turns out to have been lying than to question—even subtly—the legitimacy of someone who has suffered sexual abuse.”, which feels dangerous to me personally if it were adopted as a community norm. do appreciate the general spirit of attempting to help though.
I did not see how this in any way implies “I do not support the appropriate authorities from investigating whether the report is a lie” which is the only problematic scenario here.
Not immediately grilling the victim on the legitimacy of their claim when they are opening up to you about a traumatic event and instead providing emotional support makes a lot of sense to me. The cost to me of providing emotional support to a non-victim is low and the cost of immediately being challenged on truthfulness to a real victim is very high.