I don't really see why there should be a correlation between conference policies and any statistics about rape.
From what I just read, at any point Ted calls rape victims liars. It just seems he was making an argument regarding statistics and quite obviously not all accounts of rape are true. Maybe his argument was outside context but in principle there's nothing tabu about discussing rape statistics. Moreover there's nothing wrong with his reply about the definition of rape. If two people are drunk and have sex without any of the two physically forcing it, I can't see why it would be considered rape. I understand any of the people involved may regret the act and even get angry, but that's it.
Regarding actual conference policy, I see it as a matter of common sense. I don't see though any necessity to enforce rules that are acceptable society-wide. Many artistic performances, motion pictures, paintings, retail stores, events and so on contain sexual content. Actually, people themselves are live portraits of sexuality, to more or less extent. So policies such as not allowing references to sexuality in presentations seems a bit of an Americanization. I mean, the American approach to sexuality is seen as almost medieval by other parts of the World, quite on par with Saudi Arabia. Too much is always too much, but as a general rule I see absolutely no issue with this. I'de have no second thoughts on using an image of a "a pig and a duck apparently having sex" to prove a point.
Power management, mobile and firmware developer on Linux. Security developer at Aurora. Ex-biologist. mjg59 on Twitter. Content here should not be interpreted as the opinion of my employer. Also on Mastodon.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
A different perspective..
Date: 2012-10-29 10:37 pm (UTC)From what I just read, at any point Ted calls rape victims liars. It just seems he was making an argument regarding statistics and quite obviously not all accounts of rape are true. Maybe his argument was outside context but in principle there's nothing tabu about discussing rape statistics.
Moreover there's nothing wrong with his reply about the definition of rape. If two people are drunk and have sex without any of the two physically forcing it, I can't see why it would be considered rape. I understand any of the people involved may regret the act and even get angry, but that's it.
Regarding actual conference policy, I see it as a matter of common sense. I don't see though any necessity to enforce rules that are acceptable society-wide. Many artistic performances, motion pictures, paintings, retail stores, events and so on contain sexual content. Actually, people themselves are live portraits of sexuality, to more or less extent. So policies such as not allowing references to sexuality in presentations seems a bit of an Americanization. I mean, the American approach to sexuality is seen as almost medieval by other parts of the World, quite on par with Saudi Arabia. Too much is always too much, but as a general rule I see absolutely no issue with this. I'de have no second thoughts on using an image of a "a pig and a duck apparently having sex" to prove a point.