The Fine Print: The following comments
are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by Anon on Thursday 31/Aug/2006, @19:16
|
introducing her as an "American lass" isn't exactly focussing on her technical abilities either now is it?
are the comments such a surprise when even the submitter felt the need to highlight gender?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by Antonio Salazar on Thursday 31/Aug/2006, @20:35
|
It's very rude and offensive and really sexistic to compliment someone's looks based on a picture? I wasn't going to weigh in at all, but this particular oh-so-overly general comment seems amusing at least and laugh-out-loud ridiculous at worst.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by Josel on Sunday 03/Sep/2006, @08:54
|
You just d'ont seem to get it. Wouldnt you hate to have your work judged by how you look? In fact most of you guys didnt even comment on her work but solely on her looks.
It's no excuse that you probably are around 20 and "latino" - you should know better. And yes its sexistic - not one of you has ever commented on some male developers good looks.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by AC on Sunday 03/Sep/2006, @22:01
|
Sorry, but that's not what happened. Her work was not judged based on how she looks. Her work and her looks were judged independently. You'll notice that the first comment's cuteness remark is prefixed by "and btw"... It's an aside.
If her looks were totally offtopic, why include a picture of her in the article in the first place?
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by Peter H. on Thursday 31/Aug/2006, @21:21
|
You might note that my comment began by saying that I thought she was "cute", [not, I might add, "cute looking"] and ended by saying that my "impression" was that I thought I would find her pleasant to be around. There is a difference. The first term is based partially on appearance, and yes, I find her appearance pleasant. However, this is not the sum total of my 'impression'. I also find her interests and personality, as expressed in her answers to the interview questions, to be pleasant, and yes, "cute". Someone can be cute in more than just the visual sense--there's many aspects to a pleasant person beyond the arrangement of their atoms. You can perhaps even supplement "cute" with 'charming', 'affable', or even 'witty' to get a better grip on my intended meaning.
So, as before, I will not be apologizing for that.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
Re: cute? hur hur hur
by AC on Friday 01/Sep/2006, @00:07
|
How can you say "Her looks is not relevant in any manner to the article."? The article _included_a_photo_of_her_. Commenting on this photo is commenting on part of the article. This is not a case of a purely technical article, and then someone 'dug up' a picture of her from elsewhere.
If you publish an article about yourself to the world, and you choose to include photos (not to mention setting a casual tone with a section for "personal questions"), then you are the one who has opened the discussion to your appearance.
People don't tend to comment on the boring and commonplace. She does stand out as attractive among the photos of KDE developers. It's really no different than if, say, one of the male KDE developers had blue hair, and someone said "Nice hair."
Just take it as a friendly comment directed at her and move on with your life. I'm sure she can handle being called cute. She's probably heard it a lot. She doesn't need a bunch of guys riding to her rescue on the dot. Having her play the damsel in distress in your imagination is far more sexist than the original comment ever was.
|
[
Reply To This | View ]
|
The Fine Print: The previous
comments are owned by whomever posted them.
( Reply )
|
![[KDE Dot News]](http://www.kde.org/dot/Images/kdedotnews.gif)
