Iāve continued to work hard to see things from the perspective of women like you over the last couple days, and just had another surprising realization. Iāve actually experienced a conversation in EA that I think could have gone in the Time article (similar to some of the milder examples they gave like the man who expressed an interest in adult relationships with large age gaps to a young lower status woman, not the OPās example). I will give no details because I donāt want to get anyone in trouble. I enjoyed the conversation and it took this intense dialogue for me to realize a different woman in my position might feel opressed by it. Not being able to have as many fun, edgy (to me) conversations like that anymore will decrease my quality of life. However, the pain that people are experiencing seems a lot more intense than the joy I get from edgy conversations. Iām really looking forward to the results of the polls EA is putting together about this. My sense is Iām in a minority for my gender and status, but I have no idea by how much.
Hey Sonia, I have been trying to see things from your perspective as well. I think itās great youāre feeling empathetic for women who might feel differently than you in those situations. I think thereās probably still a lot of ways you can get joy having edgy conversations without contributing to this culture within EA itself. I kinda appreciate Willās take on this here. I struggle between feeling like āpolicingā peopleās relationships and whatnot is probably bad, while also knowing that not being firm the way I am about professional/āpersonal boundaries likely contributes to a culture where people are taken advantage of. In an ideal world, we could have both your preferences (and the preferences of many others) and a healthy culture, but I donāt actually know if thatās possible.
Iāve continued to work hard to see things from the perspective of women like you over the last couple days
Upvoted!
Not being able to have as many fun, edgy (to me) conversations like that anymore will decrease my quality of life. However, the pain that people are experiencing seems a lot more intense than the joy I get from edgy conversations.
I can see why this feels like a tradeoff, but I do think itās worth thinking about these conversations in the context that they happenedāI donāt think people are (or should be!) advocating for EAs to never talk about sex ever again. But clearly there are contexts where personal topics can be discussed safely, and contexts in which these discussions are inappropriate.
For example, is it important to you that you are able to have these conversations with anyone, in any context, or just that you are able to have these conversations when you feel comfortable to?
Thank you for your contributions Lauren and Bruce.
Personally I get a lot out of being able to have these conversations with anyone no matter how high their status is in EA, as long as we donāt have a specific workplace relationship with a large power differential. For example, the man Iām referring to was one of the top people at an EA organization I wanted very much to work at at the time, but if I already worked there and it happened at work or in a private environment (this was a group conversation), I would have felt uncomfortable.
If I wasnāt allowed to have unique conversations that mention sex/āromance with higher status EAs anymore, I wouldnāt be able to have them at all at the moment, because I am in a very early stage of my career (Iām an undergraduate) and all my close friends are EAs. Not centering my social life around EA would be a very large sacrifice I am unwilling to make. However, Willās post Lauren referred to seems like it might be a good compromise. I donāt personally sleep around, but it appears to be something easier to enjoy with less unique people than edgy conversations are.
I also think reducing global poverty and x-risks is so important that I would be willing to make a lot of sacrifices if it made a big difference to these causes. Iām already planning to donate most of my income to charity starting within a few years of graduation. Surely if my personal enjoyment is the only thing at stake, I can dramatically reduce the edgy conversations I have about sex with my friends. Iām only advocating for us to compromise to the extent that I think this is about broader epistemic quality within the movement.
I should clarify how I interpreted the example in the Time article Iām comparing my experience to, as people have different interpretations of the example they gave. I think I would have experienced it as an edgy conversation that involved bad wording that happened to have a large power differential, but didnāt involve pressure to engage in a relationship. This is because if the man in the Time article had done something concrete that would make someone with my personality feel pressured to be in a relationship with him like ask her on a date, I think the article would have mentioned it. Instead it referred to her feelings, which I think we are learning depend a lot on peopleās personalities as well as objective facts. I am open to it just being bad writing and actually referring to something different than my experience though.
Iāve continued to work hard to see things from the perspective of women like you over the last couple days, and just had another surprising realization. Iāve actually experienced a conversation in EA that I think could have gone in the Time article (similar to some of the milder examples they gave like the man who expressed an interest in adult relationships with large age gaps to a young lower status woman, not the OPās example). I will give no details because I donāt want to get anyone in trouble. I enjoyed the conversation and it took this intense dialogue for me to realize a different woman in my position might feel opressed by it. Not being able to have as many fun, edgy (to me) conversations like that anymore will decrease my quality of life. However, the pain that people are experiencing seems a lot more intense than the joy I get from edgy conversations. Iām really looking forward to the results of the polls EA is putting together about this. My sense is Iām in a minority for my gender and status, but I have no idea by how much.
Hey Sonia, I have been trying to see things from your perspective as well. I think itās great youāre feeling empathetic for women who might feel differently than you in those situations. I think thereās probably still a lot of ways you can get joy having edgy conversations without contributing to this culture within EA itself. I kinda appreciate Willās take on this here. I struggle between feeling like āpolicingā peopleās relationships and whatnot is probably bad, while also knowing that not being firm the way I am about professional/āpersonal boundaries likely contributes to a culture where people are taken advantage of. In an ideal world, we could have both your preferences (and the preferences of many others) and a healthy culture, but I donāt actually know if thatās possible.
Upvoted!
I can see why this feels like a tradeoff, but I do think itās worth thinking about these conversations in the context that they happenedāI donāt think people are (or should be!) advocating for EAs to never talk about sex ever again. But clearly there are contexts where personal topics can be discussed safely, and contexts in which these discussions are inappropriate.
For example, is it important to you that you are able to have these conversations with anyone, in any context, or just that you are able to have these conversations when you feel comfortable to?
Thank you for your contributions Lauren and Bruce.
Personally I get a lot out of being able to have these conversations with anyone no matter how high their status is in EA, as long as we donāt have a specific workplace relationship with a large power differential. For example, the man Iām referring to was one of the top people at an EA organization I wanted very much to work at at the time, but if I already worked there and it happened at work or in a private environment (this was a group conversation), I would have felt uncomfortable.
If I wasnāt allowed to have unique conversations that mention sex/āromance with higher status EAs anymore, I wouldnāt be able to have them at all at the moment, because I am in a very early stage of my career (Iām an undergraduate) and all my close friends are EAs. Not centering my social life around EA would be a very large sacrifice I am unwilling to make. However, Willās post Lauren referred to seems like it might be a good compromise. I donāt personally sleep around, but it appears to be something easier to enjoy with less unique people than edgy conversations are.
I also think reducing global poverty and x-risks is so important that I would be willing to make a lot of sacrifices if it made a big difference to these causes. Iām already planning to donate most of my income to charity starting within a few years of graduation. Surely if my personal enjoyment is the only thing at stake, I can dramatically reduce the edgy conversations I have about sex with my friends. Iām only advocating for us to compromise to the extent that I think this is about broader epistemic quality within the movement.
I should clarify how I interpreted the example in the Time article Iām comparing my experience to, as people have different interpretations of the example they gave. I think I would have experienced it as an edgy conversation that involved bad wording that happened to have a large power differential, but didnāt involve pressure to engage in a relationship. This is because if the man in the Time article had done something concrete that would make someone with my personality feel pressured to be in a relationship with him like ask her on a date, I think the article would have mentioned it. Instead it referred to her feelings, which I think we are learning depend a lot on peopleās personalities as well as objective facts. I am open to it just being bad writing and actually referring to something different than my experience though.