Attached: 1 image
Seen on Bluesky:
Guy explains to CEO of Signal (messaging) that it's going to add "AI" to the service. She says no. He insists, not knowing or caring who he's talking down to.
He replied to her post about how signal won’t use AI and she said “we”. He 100% assumed a woman was a nobody so he paid no attention. This is all on him.
Important context. Yeah that definitely reduces the benefit of the doubt, but I still wouldn’t jump to sexism. People refer to the organizations they’re employed by as ‘we’ all the time - that doesn’t imply any kind of authority. He definitely assumed she was a nobody, but 99.999% of us are just peasants milking a roof over our heads from a system we have absolutely no control over… so, assuming she’s a nobody is a pretty safe assumption. Were she a dude and all else the same, I don’t see the conversation going any differently.
There are tons, and tons, and tons, and tons of examples of demonstrable and absolutely clear misogyny in our dumb fucking society - it’s really not necessary to try to find it by attempting to read between the lines.
So… unless that dude has a history of misogynistic bs, imo the safer assumption is that he’s being cynical about platform enshittification (and reasonably so when you consider the patterns shown by every single other platform), vs an attack based on gender.
It definitely does; my take is only that is has the hallmarks of more benign activity too. I can’t say with any certainty that it IS one or the other. Suspicion is justified; torches and pitchforks, not quite yet.
He replied to her post about how signal won’t use AI and she said “we”. He 100% assumed a woman was a nobody so he paid no attention. This is all on him.
https://bsky.app/profile/meredithmeredith.bsky.social/post/3lrqccvwnqs2z
Important context. Yeah that definitely reduces the benefit of the doubt, but I still wouldn’t jump to sexism. People refer to the organizations they’re employed by as ‘we’ all the time - that doesn’t imply any kind of authority. He definitely assumed she was a nobody, but 99.999% of us are just peasants milking a roof over our heads from a system we have absolutely no control over… so, assuming she’s a nobody is a pretty safe assumption. Were she a dude and all else the same, I don’t see the conversation going any differently.
There are tons, and tons, and tons, and tons of examples of demonstrable and absolutely clear misogyny in our dumb fucking society - it’s really not necessary to try to find it by attempting to read between the lines.
So… unless that dude has a history of misogynistic bs, imo the safer assumption is that he’s being cynical about platform enshittification (and reasonably so when you consider the patterns shown by every single other platform), vs an attack based on gender.
Sometimes it’s obvious misogyny and sometimes it isn’t but this has the hallmarks.
It definitely does; my take is only that is has the hallmarks of more benign activity too. I can’t say with any certainty that it IS one or the other. Suspicion is justified; torches and pitchforks, not quite yet.
Because nobody on the internet ever talks down to a man.