Most active commenters
  • notahacker(3)

←back to thread

254 points Michelangelo11 | 12 comments | | HN request time: 0.001s | source | bottom
Show context
naming_the_user ◴[] No.42056718[source]
What comes across from the article to me is the class barrier more than the gender one - basically it's a posh person finding out what the "real world" looks like.

Shop talk and banter are fairly universal. Any difference is going to be a target. Thin bloke who doesn't look strong enough? Ginger hair? Tall guy, short guy? Weird tattoo, etc. Definitely the one black guy or the one white guy is going to get shit. But is it malicious? Almost certainly not.

The other thing, which in my experience is relatively common worldwide, is that working class communities are more accepting of male-female dynamics. In academia and in highbrow society the tendency is to basically sanitise every social interaction. When you're in an environment where that isn't happening then you can't suddenly ignore it any more.

replies(20): >>42056746 #>>42056800 #>>42056807 #>>42056887 #>>42057157 #>>42057392 #>>42057456 #>>42058227 #>>42059471 #>>42063467 #>>42064057 #>>42064775 #>>42064864 #>>42065506 #>>42066833 #>>42067884 #>>42069349 #>>42070085 #>>42070433 #>>42071751 #
esperent ◴[] No.42057157[source]
> But is it malicious? Almost certainly not.

Honestly, it often will be malicious, or will quickly become malicious if you don't take it graciously. And why should you? It's not acceptable to make fun of people for being skinny, ginger, shy, black, white, female, or any other things that the in group considers non-standard for whatever weird reasons.

replies(12): >>42057300 #>>42057344 #>>42057355 #>>42057399 #>>42057444 #>>42057792 #>>42057943 #>>42063286 #>>42063571 #>>42064922 #>>42067327 #>>42067631 #
tuatoru ◴[] No.42057792[source]
> if you don't take it graciously.

That is the point of the banter: to see how you handle stressful situations.

Women don't understand this, but nearly all men do.

Why? For every accident, there are around twenty near misses. For every near miss there are several situations that could have gone bad very quickly unless the person on the spot remains calm and acts rationally.

It is essential to know how you behave under stress in most blue collar work. They're not being assholes for fun; they're doing it to save lives.

replies(5): >>42057812 #>>42057817 #>>42066467 #>>42066631 #>>42069818 #
1. nitwit005 ◴[] No.42057812[source]
The banter is not a cunning safety plan.
replies(2): >>42062691 #>>42064714 #
2. notahacker ◴[] No.42062691[source]
And even if it was and watching sport or going down the pub was in fact an extremely safety-conscious environment compared with the sterility and politeness of, say, the aerospace industry, it's not entirely clear how encouraging people to either escalate or laugh off would help them deal with actual danger which generally requires neither of the above...
replies(2): >>42063970 #>>42064090 #
3. MisterTea ◴[] No.42063970[source]
> sterility and politeness of, say, the aerospace industry,

I work in that industry and can say with confidence that statement is false.

replies(1): >>42067874 #
4. embeng4096 ◴[] No.42064090[source]
It's not about the social actions, it's the traits they represent. Are you quick-witted? Do you freeze or overreact and lash out, behave erratically? Do you stay calm? Can you think fast enough under pressure to choose to say and do things that result in laughter or de-escalation, or escalate in a way that shows you're communicating on the same level (i.e. tease back, but not overdo it and insult the other person)?

If I can't stay calm and think rapidly under mild social pressure without threat of bodily harm or lost lives, I personally wouldn't feel honest in telling my teammates, "yes, if you or I are in a situation with risk to life or limb, you should trust that I'll handle it appropriately and protect myself and/or you."

replies(3): >>42064508 #>>42066190 #>>42069361 #
5. nitwit005 ◴[] No.42064508{3}[source]
People have tried to study groups like Medal of Honor recipients, and found that they have a wide range of different backgrounds and personalities.

Our assumptions about who will succeed in the most difficult situations don't seem to hold up.

replies(1): >>42067066 #
6. ledauphin ◴[] No.42064714[source]
i agree it's not cunning or a plan, but that doesn't exclude the possibility that this is an evolutionary/societal adaptation that _really works_.

Two things can be true at the same time: that this type of banter has undesirable consequences as well as desirable ones. This type of nuance is generally the sort of thing that's worth trying to understand before you try to 'fix' it.

7. dghlsakjg ◴[] No.42066190{3}[source]
Sorry, without some sort of data I’m refusing to believe that social adeptness has anything to do with ability to act in an emergency or other high pressure situation.

My own experience in tall ships and shipyards, where there are plenty of life and death decisions is not that.

There are people that I can fluster easily in a social situation that are perfectly calm and capable in high pressure dangerous situations. There are people that are practically insult comedians that I wouldn’t want driving a car in the same parking lot.

replies(2): >>42066991 #>>42067720 #
8. ◴[] No.42066991{4}[source]
9. ◴[] No.42067066{4}[source]
10. notahacker ◴[] No.42067720{4}[source]
Not to mention that people doing boring, safe jobs behave like that too. Trust me, when I have the banter with my friends in the pub, I'm really not evaluating whether I can rely on their accountancy or web design to save my life

What actually seems to be the common factor is male groups in informal settings

11. notahacker ◴[] No.42067874{3}[source]
Sterility and politeness is variable, but I also work in that industry and have yet to encounter a situation where the banter resembles that of a largely risk free but comparably male environment like, say a sports ground or pub lunch with friends I've known since we were kids.

Which is a good thing really, because I wouldn't want to think that people were actually determining fitness to be trusted with a soldering iron or embedded systems design based on their witty comebacks or tolerance for jokes about their wife.

12. howenterprisey ◴[] No.42069361{3}[source]
No, I don't think ability to banter has any relationship with ability to properly handle those risky situations. There's zero intrinsic reason why someone who freezes when insulted must also freeze if a bay crane lift starts going wrong, because to me they are clearly different kinds of stress.