You're kidding yourself if that is what you believe.
I think OP is speaking from a medical perspective, and from that perspective I believe OP is correct. You could live a long time without complications taking a medicinal dose of heroin.
To be clear, if you abuse alcohol you get cirrhosis of the liver, if you smoke your more likely to get cancer, emphysema, etc. You don't have those types of complications just from abusing heroin.
So instead of arguing against a straw man, lets try to understand each other.
Is it your belief that heroin use causes medical problems or do you agree with the claim that heroin is relatively benign from a medical perspective. If you disagree, maybe elaborate on the what you believe are the health consequences. (Note: I'm talking about medical heroin, as was the OP. Injecting contaminated substances and sharing needles causes all sorts of health problems. I stipulate that the behavior that typically goes along with heroin abuse is unhealthy).
This is a crucial point. Much of the attention in the football world, in the past few years, has been on concussions—on diagnosing, managing, and preventing them—and on figuring out how many concussions a player can have before he should call it quits. But a football player’s real issue isn’t simply with repetitive concussive trauma. It is, as the concussion specialist Robert Cantu argues, with repetitive subconcussive trauma. It’s not just the handful of big hits that matter. It’s lots of little hits, too.
That’s why, Cantu says, so many of the ex-players who have been given a diagnosis of C.T.E. were linemen: line play lends itself to lots of little hits.
From one heterosexual man to another, surely we can see that we're in a different situation than this woman was.
I am genuinely curious about this point. Why are men in a different situation? Couldn't a homosexual boss want to coerce blowjobs from male subordinates?
> I am genuinely curious about this point. Why are men
> in a different situation? Couldn't a homosexual boss
> want to coerce blowjobs from male subordinates?
Absolutely, and of course that would also be quite wrong. And I am sure that's a thing that happens sometimes, unfortunately.
I only mentioned it because the poster I responded to had said, "I'm sure that as a heterosexual man, regardless of my financial circumstances, no one could coerce me into giving blowjobs" and I thought it important to say that there are different dynamics involved there.
If a male boss tried to coerce a male employee into sex, the male victim would be much more likely to respond with physical force, so it's less likely to happen in the first place. The male victim would also be more likely to be viewed as unambiguously victimized, whereas in a male-on-female situation there's likely to be a lot of well, she probably wanted it type speculation and/or congratulation of the male aggressor.
In some senses it might even be more difficult for a male victim. A male victim might be viewed as "weak" for letting it happen in the first place. Whatever the case I'm sure we can agree that it's quite a different dynamic, so the original poster's well, as a man, I'd never let this happen to meeee is not really a useful road to travel down.
A couple years ago she attended a technical conference and on the first day, she wore a dress...wore a nerdy t-shirt and jeans instead, and she had a better experience that day. People assumed she was technical and didn’t dilute their explanations to her
I'm not sure this really makes the case that its sexism at play. For example, if a guy wore a suit and tie to a conference, people might assume he's not a programmer.
Isn't this anecdote evidence that its the clothes, not the gender?
The author is trying to correct the problem that people dressing in a feminine way are not seen as technical. If people who wear business suits have such a problem, they're welcome to do their own advocacy.
It's about identifying the problem though. Is it sexism, or is it general prejudice?
A dress is definitely more feminine, but it's also more professional. In the same vein, if you were a suit it would be more professional. My point is she was treated as less technical because people assumed she was. When she dressed in the "nerd uniform" people treated her like a technical member.
If that's the case then it isn't sexism, it's prejudice regarding professional appearance.
There is certainly sexism in the tech world but I don't think this is a great example personally.
Keep in mind that the "nerd uniform" was created by only one gender. And most dresses are not stuffy professional attire. Most of my female friends wear casual dresses in casual situations.
When I dress up at programming events, by dress up I mean a button up and nice jeans I stick out. I have people assume I'm non technical.
My real point is that she was treated like a programmer when she dressed in a t shirt and jeans. It wasn't about her sex, it was about her clothing.
I'm all for abolishing the t shirt jeans combo personally, I like wearing adult clothing. But our industry is founded on t shirts, flip flops and ill fitting jeans. If you look substantially out of place, you'll be treated as out of place.
I delight in proving that I fit in despite my appearance. But that's a me thing. I don't expect everyone to act or feel that way.
Yeah, I don't get it. She keeps saying she's "presenting" as feminine and then complaining that people are basing their assumptions on how she presents herself. If more programmers wear pretty dresses maybe that look will become stereotypical of programming, but it hasn't historically been the case. If I show up at a tech conference presenting as a wrestler I might be displaying all sorts of macho manly cues but I stil wouldn't expect to be taken seriously without extra effort.
"If more programmers wear pretty dresses maybe that look will become stereotypical of programming, but it hasn't historically been the case"
She makes the same claim, but instead of accepting that she has to conform to style norms set by the opposite gender, she's trying to encourage more programmers to wear dresses and such, which should be perfectly respectable for a programmer at a conference.
I think there are dresses that would not garner this response. Wearing lingerie would be another way to present oneself as feminine, but I think even the author would reject this as inappropriate attire for a tech conference.
I can't speak for everyone, but something like this seems totally appropriate for the occasion and would not cause me to make any knee jerk assumption.
Obviously neither of us know exactly what the author was wearing since it isn't mentioned in the article, but this quote leads me to believe she may not have been exercising the most restrained judgement in this area:
"Once an ex-partner told me “You look better in jeans and a tshirt. Why do you wear dresses? Why do you wear make up? You don’t have to dress up to impress me.” That moment led me to so many realizations. It made me realize that most people think femininity is an act to impress men. It was then that I was 100% sure my dressing up wasn’t for him at all, I didn’t at all care if a partner disliked my dresses, or makeup. I was wearing them for me. And it was then, that I realized that continuing to wearing dresses just for myself was a totally valid way to say a big FUCK YOU to the patriarchy."
Now don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to deny that sexism exists in this industry or the world. I think people should be able to wear whatever they want wherever they like, but the pragmatist in me thinks some of the responsibility for these issues would be easier solved by the individual than by expecting everyone else to modify their behavior.
Another example, if a black person came to a tech conference dressed in a suit and tie, then the next day in jeans and a hoodie, and were treated differently, I don't think anyone would think it was a sign that the tech scene is racist.
That's actually an interesting hypo because many black men are explicitly discouraged from wearing a hoodie to avoid being perceived as a "thug".[1] For the sake of discussion let's assume the tech scene is better than that and treats a black coder in a hoodie the same as a white person. While not intentionally racist, the de facto requirement of a hoodie or similar apparel to be taken seriously as a programmer might nevertheless have a greater adverse impact on black men than white.
I think OP is speaking from a medical perspective, and from that perspective I believe OP is correct. You could live a long time without complications taking a medicinal dose of heroin.
To be clear, if you abuse alcohol you get cirrhosis of the liver, if you smoke your more likely to get cancer, emphysema, etc. You don't have those types of complications just from abusing heroin.
So instead of arguing against a straw man, lets try to understand each other.
Is it your belief that heroin use causes medical problems or do you agree with the claim that heroin is relatively benign from a medical perspective. If you disagree, maybe elaborate on the what you believe are the health consequences. (Note: I'm talking about medical heroin, as was the OP. Injecting contaminated substances and sharing needles causes all sorts of health problems. I stipulate that the behavior that typically goes along with heroin abuse is unhealthy).