7 ms·

I find the underlying premise of this article and the claim that there is a "war on boys" absurd. It's a old argument from the same old set of people who have t

by zekkius 11y ago

I find the underlying premise of this article and the claim that there is a "war on boys" absurd. It's a old argument from the same old set of people who have the same old intolerant (and dying) paradigm. Not sure why it is on HN at all as the content has nothing to do with tech...

dudul 11y ago
Did you read the article? It answers your question and demonstrates that it is not a fallacy.
- WaxProlix 11y ago
  I read the article but don't see exactly that myself (not OP) - would you be willing to pick out a few salient parts?
ccernaf 11y ago
I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.
- realityking 11y ago
  How is the fact that the article has been posted to less than agreeable subreddits an indication of it's quality or the validity of the arguments and opinion in it?
  - rewqfdsa 11y ago
    Besides, what makes those subreddits "less than agreeable"? I think they're important. Social justice is cancer.
    - rmxt 11y ago
      The extreme of both sides of this debate, as illustrated in your post and in the actions of the most egregious student complaints at Yale, lack the nuance needed to find a healthy compromise. Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses to perhaps slightly less outlandish beliefs.
      - rewqfdsa 11y ago
        > Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses Do they? What "outlandish responses" might those be? You're smearing by implication. What specifically do you find so "outlandish"? As far as I can tell, people making claims like yours think that creating a consistent set of rules for all, promoting free expression of all views, and countering group libel are thoughtcrimes. What's "disagreeable" is countering the idea that I might be guilty of something because of my gender and ancestry.
        rmxt 11y ago
        I don't have to do much "smearing by implication" when the upvoted comments speak for themselves. I think there are people that do this sort of "bullying" and unproductive rabble-rousing on both sides of the debate. I personally agree with the principles of "a consistent set of rules for all, etc.," but I don't think that the road to productive debate begins with including "hate," "sucks", "fuck them", etc., as a means to evoke an emotional response. Specific instances of outlandishness: SJWsAtWork -- low comment traffic, a bit more agreeable than the rest. ThisIsNotASafeSpace -- top comment on the top all time submission, very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace/comments/3t6awz/had_an_interesting_runin_with_a/cx45az4 https://www.reddit.com/r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace/comments/3t6awz... SJSucks -- highly upvoted comment (relatively speaking) on top all time post, again, some very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/sjsucks/comments/1vs4kj/watchmen_comic_creator_alan_moore_sick_of_dealing/cevez97 https://www.reddit.com/r/sjsucks/comments/1vs4kj/watchmen_co... SJWhate -- this one speaks for itself, I hope: https://www.reddit.com/r/sjwhate/comments/3u0t33/ahmed_mohamed_demands_15m_compensation_and/cxb3i5q https://www.reddit.com/r/sjwhate/comments/3u0t33/ahmed_moham...
- jerf 11y ago
  You might to find out who you're contemptuously dismissing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt , in particular the first few paragraphs. If you've progressed to the point where you can dismiss that guy without a thought, given his credentials and accomplishments, I submit to you that alarm bells ought to be going off in your head that you might have epistemologically closed yourself too far. I'm not saying you're obligated to agree with him. I'm saying if you can't even engage with his arguments, it may be you that has the problem. I can also recommend:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUM4akzLGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUM4akzLGE "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion"
- henshao 11y ago
  What in this article is "disappointing"? I'm curious.
  - SHIT_TALKER 11y ago
    Calling something or someone "disappointing" or "problematic" is how these people evade enumerating arguments while still attempting to establish themselves as intellectually superior to those they are criticizing. They assume to have the correct position and condescend to anyone who demurs.
- bmelton 11y ago
  Not affiliated (except that I follow him on Twitter), but the author, Jonathan Haidt, is one of America's pre-eminent social psychologists. He is (or at least was) a liberal who has engaged in some very serious social psychology that gives massive insight into how people tick, especially where those ticks are related to or concerning political party affiliations. If the idea is to dismiss him as an anti-SJW, or anti-free speech, then I would posit that you're simply inclined to dismiss no matter what. If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault. He may not be right, or he may not have done appropriate research, or he may be based (his own studies would suggest that it's inevitable that he is), but any dismissal predicated in part on that he's trolling is almost certainly knee-jerk.
  - ccernaf 11y ago
    I don't doubt at all Haidt is qualified. My complaint was more to your second point, that "If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault." I do see a problem with how one-sided the comments on the page (Heterodox Academy) are, and I do think that he should have stepped in. Then, when I came to Hacker News, I saw similar comments, and that was disheartening. My distaste really came from comments like these, on the main page: "My white male sons are now 30 and 28. I’m so happy they escaped public high school relatively unscathed, but I could see the beginnings of the nonsense, led by a faculty of activist females and male eunuchs. Public schooling in this country may have begun with noble intent; kids are now truly being inculcated rather than educated." and "You state this like it is an article of faith that women would be totally rad in STEM if only men would stop holding them back. What makes this “sketchy”? There is an abundance of evidence that men and women are different and think differently. There is almost no evidence that women will change that position based on upbringing." and then on hnews itself: "#KillAll(White)Men is literally calling for ethnic / gender purging." (though it was downvoted). It would be great to have a conversation with Dr. Haidt, but I was turned off by how both Heterodox and Hacker News turned into "amen" forums. There were two students who posted on Heterodox, and they had some interesting points, some of which disagreed with Dr. Haidt.
    - 11y ago
- dibujante 11y ago
  That's a logical fallacy. I could repost anything you like to a subreddit you don't like; would that change the value of the thing you like?
- cthalupa 11y ago
  Any sort of work should always be judged based on the actual content, not who likes it or where it has been shared. To reduce this argument to absurdity, let's say I create a recipe for pecan pie. People love it, including the people at stormfront or other white power sites. Let's say I created this recipe back in the 1920s, and it happens to be Hitler's favorite pie. Is there anything wrong with that pie? People with extreme viewpoints will often like things that are a more moderate version of their own viewpoints. Just because you don't agree with the extremists doesn't mean that you should also disagree with the moderates.
detaro 11y ago
So what's your explanation for the events described?
- flopto 11y ago
  The school (teachers and students together) recognizes an ideology (patriarchy) that they see as a problem and responds by creating a culture that opposes that ideology, in order to reduce the power of that ideology. I don't see any way to take a neutral stance on this issue, as ``doing nothing'' is supporting the status quo (patriarchy), so if you agree that patriarchy is a problem, then the school should be celebrated for picking the right side of the issue. If you like patriarchy, that's a different issue.
  - woah 11y ago
    So basically, anyone who disagrees with you is a racist/sexist?
    - flopto 11y ago
      Well, if racism and sexism are real (they are) and person A believes that these are bad, then if person B disagrees with person A, that means person B believes racism and/or sexism are not bad. Language like "racist/sexist" suggests that it's a binary, that each person is either racist or not racist. It's more useful to recognize that the dominant culture in the US is racist and that people benefit from/support that culture to varying degrees. Person B supports it.
    - socksy 11y ago
      In isolate, this is an absurd sentence. If I said "I don't think we should [do horrible thing to group x]", then you could easily retort with "yeah, but if I disagree with you I'm against group x?" in a "screw you" sort of way, and, well, it'd be true, wouldn't it? I'm not saying anything either way about the GP, but I'd suggest it'd be better to tackle the point, rather than have such a knee-jerk reaction.
  - ams6110 11y ago
spinlock 11y ago
Lulz. You're getting downvoted because the people in power on HN don't like your comment.
dang 11y ago
Content on HN needn't have anything to do with tech, as you'll see if you read the first of the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html It's not good that large parts of the thread have erupted into low-rent flamewars, though.

by zekkius 11y ago

dudul 11y ago

Did you read the article? It answers your question and demonstrates that it is not a fallacy.

WaxProlix 11y ago
I read the article but don't see exactly that myself (not OP) - would you be willing to pick out a few salient parts?

ccernaf 11y ago

I'm pretty disappointed in the article and the comments, and how like Reddit this website is turning out to be. I'm not going to make any judgements (though I really really am), but this same article has been posted to 10 subreddits, among them such gems as: SJWsAtWork, ThisIsNotASafeSpace, sjsucks, and sjwhate.

realityking 11y ago
How is the fact that the article has been posted to less than agreeable subreddits an indication of it's quality or the validity of the arguments and opinion in it?
- rewqfdsa 11y ago
  Besides, what makes those subreddits "less than agreeable"? I think they're important. Social justice is cancer.
  - rmxt 11y ago
    The extreme of both sides of this debate, as illustrated in your post and in the actions of the most egregious student complaints at Yale, lack the nuance needed to find a healthy compromise. Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses to perhaps slightly less outlandish beliefs.
    - rewqfdsa 11y ago
      > Those subreddits are "less than agreeable" because they advocate outlandish responses Do they? What "outlandish responses" might those be? You're smearing by implication. What specifically do you find so "outlandish"? As far as I can tell, people making claims like yours think that creating a consistent set of rules for all, promoting free expression of all views, and countering group libel are thoughtcrimes. What's "disagreeable" is countering the idea that I might be guilty of something because of my gender and ancestry.
      - rmxt 11y ago
        I don't have to do much "smearing by implication" when the upvoted comments speak for themselves. I think there are people that do this sort of "bullying" and unproductive rabble-rousing on both sides of the debate. I personally agree with the principles of "a consistent set of rules for all, etc.," but I don't think that the road to productive debate begins with including "hate," "sucks", "fuck them", etc., as a means to evoke an emotional response. Specific instances of outlandishness: SJWsAtWork -- low comment traffic, a bit more agreeable than the rest. ThisIsNotASafeSpace -- top comment on the top all time submission, very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace/comments/3t6awz/had_an_interesting_runin_with_a/cx45az4 https://www.reddit.com/r/ThisIsNotASafeSpace/comments/3t6awz... SJSucks -- highly upvoted comment (relatively speaking) on top all time post, again, some very high quality discussion here: https://www.reddit.com/r/sjsucks/comments/1vs4kj/watchmen_comic_creator_alan_moore_sick_of_dealing/cevez97 https://www.reddit.com/r/sjsucks/comments/1vs4kj/watchmen_co... SJWhate -- this one speaks for itself, I hope: https://www.reddit.com/r/sjwhate/comments/3u0t33/ahmed_mohamed_demands_15m_compensation_and/cxb3i5q https://www.reddit.com/r/sjwhate/comments/3u0t33/ahmed_moham...
jerf 11y ago
You might to find out who you're contemptuously dismissing: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Haidt , in particular the first few paragraphs. If you've progressed to the point where you can dismiss that guy without a thought, given his credentials and accomplishments, I submit to you that alarm bells ought to be going off in your head that you might have epistemologically closed yourself too far. I'm not saying you're obligated to agree with him. I'm saying if you can't even engage with his arguments, it may be you that has the problem. I can also recommend:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUM4akzLGE https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONUM4akzLGE "The Righteous Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion"
henshao 11y ago
What in this article is "disappointing"? I'm curious.
- SHIT_TALKER 11y ago
  Calling something or someone "disappointing" or "problematic" is how these people evade enumerating arguments while still attempting to establish themselves as intellectually superior to those they are criticizing. They assume to have the correct position and condescend to anyone who demurs.
bmelton 11y ago
Not affiliated (except that I follow him on Twitter), but the author, Jonathan Haidt, is one of America's pre-eminent social psychologists. He is (or at least was) a liberal who has engaged in some very serious social psychology that gives massive insight into how people tick, especially where those ticks are related to or concerning political party affiliations. If the idea is to dismiss him as an anti-SJW, or anti-free speech, then I would posit that you're simply inclined to dismiss no matter what. If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault. He may not be right, or he may not have done appropriate research, or he may be based (his own studies would suggest that it's inevitable that he is), but any dismissal predicated in part on that he's trolling is almost certainly knee-jerk.
- ccernaf 11y ago
  I don't doubt at all Haidt is qualified. My complaint was more to your second point, that "If the complaint is that his work is spreading to, or being adopted by the anti-SJW crowd, that's hardly his fault." I do see a problem with how one-sided the comments on the page (Heterodox Academy) are, and I do think that he should have stepped in. Then, when I came to Hacker News, I saw similar comments, and that was disheartening. My distaste really came from comments like these, on the main page: "My white male sons are now 30 and 28. I’m so happy they escaped public high school relatively unscathed, but I could see the beginnings of the nonsense, led by a faculty of activist females and male eunuchs. Public schooling in this country may have begun with noble intent; kids are now truly being inculcated rather than educated." and "You state this like it is an article of faith that women would be totally rad in STEM if only men would stop holding them back. What makes this “sketchy”? There is an abundance of evidence that men and women are different and think differently. There is almost no evidence that women will change that position based on upbringing." and then on hnews itself: "#KillAll(White)Men is literally calling for ethnic / gender purging." (though it was downvoted). It would be great to have a conversation with Dr. Haidt, but I was turned off by how both Heterodox and Hacker News turned into "amen" forums. There were two students who posted on Heterodox, and they had some interesting points, some of which disagreed with Dr. Haidt.
  - 11y ago
dibujante 11y ago
That's a logical fallacy. I could repost anything you like to a subreddit you don't like; would that change the value of the thing you like?
cthalupa 11y ago
Any sort of work should always be judged based on the actual content, not who likes it or where it has been shared. To reduce this argument to absurdity, let's say I create a recipe for pecan pie. People love it, including the people at stormfront or other white power sites. Let's say I created this recipe back in the 1920s, and it happens to be Hitler's favorite pie. Is there anything wrong with that pie? People with extreme viewpoints will often like things that are a more moderate version of their own viewpoints. Just because you don't agree with the extremists doesn't mean that you should also disagree with the moderates.

detaro 11y ago

So what's your explanation for the events described?

flopto 11y ago
The school (teachers and students together) recognizes an ideology (patriarchy) that they see as a problem and responds by creating a culture that opposes that ideology, in order to reduce the power of that ideology. I don't see any way to take a neutral stance on this issue, as ``doing nothing'' is supporting the status quo (patriarchy), so if you agree that patriarchy is a problem, then the school should be celebrated for picking the right side of the issue. If you like patriarchy, that's a different issue.
- woah 11y ago
  So basically, anyone who disagrees with you is a racist/sexist?
  - flopto 11y ago
    Well, if racism and sexism are real (they are) and person A believes that these are bad, then if person B disagrees with person A, that means person B believes racism and/or sexism are not bad. Language like "racist/sexist" suggests that it's a binary, that each person is either racist or not racist. It's more useful to recognize that the dominant culture in the US is racist and that people benefit from/support that culture to varying degrees. Person B supports it.
  - socksy 11y ago
    In isolate, this is an absurd sentence. If I said "I don't think we should [do horrible thing to group x]", then you could easily retort with "yeah, but if I disagree with you I'm against group x?" in a "screw you" sort of way, and, well, it'd be true, wouldn't it? I'm not saying anything either way about the GP, but I'd suggest it'd be better to tackle the point, rather than have such a knee-jerk reaction.
- ams6110 11y ago

spinlock 11y ago

Lulz. You're getting downvoted because the people in power on HN don't like your comment.

dang 11y ago

Content on HN needn't have anything to do with tech, as you'll see if you read the first of the site guidelines: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html It's not good that large parts of the thread have erupted into low-rent flamewars, though.