Are you saying that it's important to argue about whether the word 'rape' is the right word or not? (For a specific occurence we have virtually no details about, what do we even have to argue about?)

Why does this matter for the topic matter of the essay? For real.

Why is the most important thing to discuss, in response to the issues raised in the essay, technical or legal definitions of the word 'rape'? Apparently most important thing to a great many HN commenters as it's incredibly well-represented this unusually enormous comments thread.

Seriously, I'm asking, why is this such an important or interesting point to so many here, the legal definition or rape?

I thought one of the most interesting and important points in the OP was about moving away from concerns about legal liability and towards concerns about keeping people safe and treated with dignity -- because the former has not accomplished the latter.

> Where'd you get the inkling that I thought it was important to argue whether to word rape is the right word?

The part where you engaged in argument about whether rape was the right word (for some hypothetical undescribed situation), arguing it was important not to use it unless it was... was where I got that idea. So, the whole comment.

I'm sorry if I got the wrong idea, and at any rate I acknowledge I was reacting to the direction of this collective thread with many participants, not just specifically to your post. In fact, I wrongly assumed you were the same person who participated in the replied-to replied-to post, without checking the names.

I am also sorry that you feel your safety was threatened by my post, requiring you to reply to restore your safety, my intent was not to threaten your safety in any way.

To be clear, by "I don't think I can safely ignore the rest of your comment" I meant I shouldn't let a comment like your stand unanswered.

You're accusatory tone set me in a light that made me look like The Bad Guy™. I don't like looking like The Bad Guy™ so and having already been downvoted, for the "safety" of my reputation, I felt the need to respond to your comment.

I'm not sure what was more accusatory about my tone than yours; I asked a question "Are you saying..." just the same as you did. Do you think your post I was replying to had an accusatory tone? Please quote the section of my comment that gave you the idea I had an accusatory tone, and explain how it differed from your comment I was replying to. You've made a baseless assumption of my tone, and gone on a tirade.

(Yeah, now _that_, which I just wrote, does sound accusatory, I agree. from the demand that you quote me, to calling your post a 'tirade'. You know where I got the template.)

That's why I hate these sorts of topics on HN. The community morphs into a hot-tempered accusatory group of individuals who takes any discussion of gendered discrimination and violence in the workplaces as an attack on them personally, and responds by attacking the honesty, intelligence, or motivation of the women describing their experiences, usually while descending into philosophical sophistry instead of actually engaging the subject matter in an honest discussion of how we can reduce people's feelings of unsafety in our workplaces.

> Please quote the section of my comment that gave you the idea I had an accusatory tone, and explain how it differed from your comment I was replying to.

Someone is downvoting every comment I leave in this thread but I'm going to go out on a limb and explain myself in case you truly care why I believe your post was accusatory and mine wasn't.

pron (the user I originally replied to) said:

> Leave the precise naming of offenses to the courts; these are legal definitions, after all, and we are not judges and not bound by the rules of evidence. The best way to fight it is to express outrage, period.

It seemed to me pron's argument was essentially even if someone was not raped and was instead sexually harrassed they should call it rape as to express outrage. That argument seemed so absurd to me that I felt I needed confirmation that was in fact the argument being made and so I replied to them with the comment:

> Are you saying even if it wasn't a rape by whatever your very own definition of rape, you would rather call it rape to express outrage?

That's it. I was not attempting to be accusatory but just seeking clarification.

You on the other hand asked me:

> Are you saying that it's important to argue about whether the word 'rape' is the right word or not?

Which came straight out of left field for me and thus your comment felt accusatory to me. I didn't feel I did something and but felt I was accused of doing it and thus described your comment as accusatory.

You seem to dislike me. I don't know why. You seem like you care about gender equality. That makes you sound like a nice person. But that way you talk to me is so off-putting and I don't know why you feel the need to be so venomous to someone asking a question. This is not unique to you and not the first time I encountered someone like this on HN. Maybe if we weren't communicating via text and instead speaking to one another face to face we'd treat each other differently. I hope that's what it would be like.

I am saying that if the victim decides to call it rape because that's how it felt, my first response (nor second, nor third) would not be to discuss the finer points of the law and debate the legal use of the term.

People who act maliciously don't need justification from me. But sexism is usually inadvertent, and "everyone's a lawyer" is a classic, usually innocent, response. So people who are not misogynist, but simply sexist (and we all are to some degree) -- because that's how we've been trained to be -- can benefit from me pointing out this difference in how we respond to stories by women differently from those by men. My goal is not to maintain the moral high ground (which I know I possess in this case anyway), but simply to educate those who wish to learn. Change will be made through education of the "innocent sexists"; not by reforming misogynists.

I'm not sure what the point of replying to my comment is if you're not going to answer my question to you. Here it is again if you missed it:

Are you saying even if it wasn't a rape by whatever your very own definition of rape, you would rather call it rape to express outrage?

I see a lot these sorts of threads end up with people talking past each other and not really responding to each other questions. Let's try not to do that. We can maybe move forward in the conversation and perhaps you can educate me on the topic. But if you don't answer straight-forward yes or now question I'm just left wondering if I should take any education I receive from you seriously.

I think I've answered it, but I'll answer again. If the victim calls it rape, I am not going to argue with her, because there are much more important things to discuss than legal definitions. I am not part of the legal bureaucracy, I don't know the law, and besides, the laws are different in different places. When a victim says she was raped she doesn't use the word to match the penal code of whatever jurisdiction she's in, but to describe her experience. As I am not a lawyer, and not discussing legal proceedings, I will use whatever name the victim uses, because, at least for the time being, that's the only name that can be used.

What I think is terrible, though, is that when a fellow worker in my industry describes a horrible experience, some people's first response is to discuss the precise legal definition of said horrible experience. It does not surprise me, though, as "everybody's a lawyer" is a very common sexist response to such events. You'll notice that stories by men are not met with the same discourse.

In any case, the very first thing for someone wishing to learn how sexism and racism work, is by reading this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_(social_and_political)