4 ms·

This is based on my experience and has no other basis; I hope it's worthwhile: Many people overlook obvious incompetence in men. We let men off the hook too ea

This is based on my experience and has no other basis; I hope it's worthwhile: Many people overlook obvious incompetence in men. We let men off the hook too easily when they demonstrate poor judgment, ignorance, irresponsibility, or disrespect and a lack of understanding of others. It's ok as long as they do it in a hyper-masculine way, aggressively or boisterously; it's even enouraged in many situations as a byproduct and demonstration of strength. Think of Donald Trump, for example. I think it's a result of lowered expectations: People think that it's the way men inevitably will behave; boys will be boys. Also I think people are intimidated, both by the aggression and by knowing that socially, such behavior is generally acceptable and criticizing it likely will be a losing battle and will make the critic look 'soft' for not appreciating 'strength'. EDIT: Some of the angry rants in this thread so far in a way support my idea: Many are ignorant, poorly reasoned, and providing little value to readers. So why is that behavior acceptable? Why do we let it pass or even take it seriously? As a counterpoint to my own question: I generally associate that behavior with men, based also on my experiences, but I don't know the gender of the commenters (though HN is likely mostly male) and I don't know that women behave differently online.

vacri 11y ago
I think it's more gender-biased, in that incompetence is overlooked in areas where we expect one gender to have better skills. If a man fucks up changing a nappy, "well, he's just a man". If a woman fucks up changing a tyre, "well, she's just a woman". When it comes to leadership, we haven't allowed women to be visible leaders for very long; there is still cultural baggage suggesting it as a male area.
- hackuser 11y ago
  > incompetence is overlooked in areas where we expect one gender to have better skills. I agree and that's a good point. However, 1) if leadership is a male field then men should face higher standards, not lower ones; and 2) the consequences for high-level leaders can be much more serious than tires or nappies, too serious to dismiss with casual gender stereotypes.
  - scott_karana 11y ago
    > However, 1) if leadership is a male field then men should face higher standards, not lower ones I suspect that anthropologists and sociologists would say that the OPPOSITE is true: that people inside peer-groups are often subject to less criticism than those out of the groups. ;-)
tomp 11y ago
> Donald Trump If anything, Trump has a demonstrated history of competence. Even right now, he's by far the most competent republican candidate (which of course doesn't mean he'd also be a competent president). Indeed, he's also "hyper-masculine" (your words - I would say hyper-idiotic), but you can't really use him as an example of someone incompetent.
- blahedo 11y ago
  Are you sure about that? He's declared bankruptcy multiple times (three?), and his net worth is either about the same as, or significantly worse than, if he had invested his wealth in index funds (depending on just when the investment would have happened). That doesn't exactly speak to a great level of competence.
  - dllthomas 11y ago
    "He's declared bankruptcy multiple times (three?)" My understanding has it that he has never filed for personal bankruptcy. Corporations with his name, in which he had a non-negligible ownership stake, filed for bankruptcy. It's never been clear to me how much of a management role he had in the time leading up to those events (not that I have looked tremendously hard).

vacri 11y ago

I think it's more gender-biased, in that incompetence is overlooked in areas where we expect one gender to have better skills. If a man fucks up changing a nappy, "well, he's just a man". If a woman fucks up changing a tyre, "well, she's just a woman". When it comes to leadership, we haven't allowed women to be visible leaders for very long; there is still cultural baggage suggesting it as a male area.

hackuser 11y ago
> incompetence is overlooked in areas where we expect one gender to have better skills. I agree and that's a good point. However, 1) if leadership is a male field then men should face higher standards, not lower ones; and 2) the consequences for high-level leaders can be much more serious than tires or nappies, too serious to dismiss with casual gender stereotypes.
- scott_karana 11y ago
  > However, 1) if leadership is a male field then men should face higher standards, not lower ones I suspect that anthropologists and sociologists would say that the OPPOSITE is true: that people inside peer-groups are often subject to less criticism than those out of the groups. ;-)

tomp 11y ago

> Donald Trump If anything, Trump has a demonstrated history of competence. Even right now, he's by far the most competent republican candidate (which of course doesn't mean he'd also be a competent president). Indeed, he's also "hyper-masculine" (your words - I would say hyper-idiotic), but you can't really use him as an example of someone incompetent.

blahedo 11y ago
Are you sure about that? He's declared bankruptcy multiple times (three?), and his net worth is either about the same as, or significantly worse than, if he had invested his wealth in index funds (depending on just when the investment would have happened). That doesn't exactly speak to a great level of competence.
- dllthomas 11y ago
  "He's declared bankruptcy multiple times (three?)" My understanding has it that he has never filed for personal bankruptcy. Corporations with his name, in which he had a non-negligible ownership stake, filed for bankruptcy. It's never been clear to me how much of a management role he had in the time leading up to those events (not that I have looked tremendously hard).