Quote:
Originally Posted by Abbaddabba
I also didn't say she offered a blowjob, i suggested he was hoping for one. But even if i did suggest she used her sexuality in an opportunistic way, why exactly would that be misogynistic?
First, you said something to the effect of "maybe he got a bj out of it," which is ambiguous with respect to who solicited the act. But that's not the point. The point, and the reason your commentary is highly inappropriate, is that if the author were male, you would not casting aspersions on anyone's motives. If Bob the Psychologist decided to write a book about poker and a noted poker pro agreed to coach him, your first thought would not be that Bob and the poker pro must be gay, because why else would the poker pro work with Bob except for sexual attraction.
What I am encouraging you to be introspective about is why you assume solely on the basis that the author is a woman that Seidel must have had ulterior motives for working with her.
The corollary to your assumption, which does real harm in the world, is that Konnikova must have used her sexuality to accomplish what she accomplished. I do no intend to single you out -- ever since women began entering the workplace, many people (of all genders) have assumed successful women "slept their way to the top." Have some women done so? Possibly. But when that is our default, when our first explanation for a woman's success is that it was attained
unfairly, or at minimum attained
for reasons other than merit, we propagate the idea that women are less capable, less deserving than men.
P.S. I know this is a derail, but I think we have an obligation to call out sexism in the poker community where it happens, most especially in the rare thread that discusses a woman in this male-dominated environment.