4 ms·

I find this attitude pretty condescending. A broad gender statement like "boys are trained to be loud and space demanding" isn't honest in representing all boy

I find this attitude pretty condescending. A broad gender statement like "boys are trained to be loud and space demanding" isn't honest in representing all boys.

wpietri 11y ago
No broad statement about X represents all X. That's what a broad statement means. Note that your reply here is basically "not all men!" A response that has been examined and found deeply lacking: https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men
- x0x0 11y ago
  No no -- one counterexample out of the approx 154M men in the United States disproves that point. Logic!
wpietri 11y ago
> I find this attitude pretty condescending. That's fair. When somebody leaps into a discussion without understanding the basics and acting in a way that is basically ignorant denial, I am ok with condescending to them. The discussion of gender bias and gender equity is a rich and complicated subject. Here on HN, people are generally expected to know something before they open their mouths. I think my condescension here is about 1% of what somebody would get if they were ignorant about language design and still offering similarly bold opinions on languages that they've never used.
- zaccus 11y ago
  You don't know what you're talking about either though.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    Do tell.
- chippy 11y ago
  Does anyone else encounter the situation where, when confronted with a challenge to certain ideas, the response sounds like the following: "look it up in the literature" or "you don't understand the basics and therefore you are ignorant"? I have noticed this in particular to do with this ideology of gender etc. It appears to me that this implies that these ideas are beliefs that rely on faith in the belief and that challenging the belief is considered a sign of ignorance at best and a conscious attack at worst. It seems to me that all a questioner need to do is educate themselves in the correct literature and there would be no need to question anymore. To challenge the belief of faith creates incomprehensibility in the holder of the beliefs as it implies that the belief is not certain and can be open to challenge. Thus the most common reply to a question about the certainty of the beliefs is a urgent request to educate themselves.
  - deleted 11y ago
    [deleted]
  - wpietri 11y ago
    Yes, I have noticed that proponents of evolution frequently reply to people with "you don't understand the basics" and "look it up in the literature". So by your logic, they must be working from faith. Or, alternative theory: the topic is actually complicated, they are tired of ignorant people acting like ignorance is just as good as knowledge, and they don't feel obliged to spoon-feed decades of complicated material to people who, by all evidence, have no interested in learning it because it would interfere with what their gut tells them on the topic.
- csorrell 11y ago
  Can you really say that the parent comment lacks an understanding of the basics, or is somehow misinformed in their opinion? People aren't always going to agree with the things you say or the way that you choose to say them. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're wrong or ignorant.
  - talmand 11y ago
    Seeing "The discussion of gender bias and gender equity is a rich and complicated subject" statement with an attitude of "I know more than you despite me not possibly knowing anything of what you know of the topic" paints an interesting picture.
    - wpietri 11y ago
      What I know of what he knows is what he said. In particular, the statement I addressed is one that no reasonable person would say if they had real knowledge of the topic. If you can find some way to interpret him otherwise, I look forward to reading it.
      - talmand 11y ago
        That's the point, I'm not interpreting anything the person is saying. I'm commenting on you admitting the subject is complicated but you are somehow able to guess the knowledge of a person based on one statement you read on a website with little context.
        wpietri 11y ago
        Animal taxonomy is complicated, but if somebody says "bats are bugs" [1] it's fair to guess that they don't know much. Try it yourself. Take any complicated domain that you know well. It's pretty easy to construct statements that make it clear that a speaker wouldn't know much. [1] http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/11/03 http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/11/03
        11y ago

I find this attitude pretty condescending. A broad gender statement like "boys are trained to be loud and space demanding" isn't honest in representing all boys.

wpietri 11y ago

No broad statement about X represents all X. That's what a broad statement means. Note that your reply here is basically "not all men!" A response that has been examined and found deeply lacking: https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men https://www.google.com/search?q=not+all+men

x0x0 11y ago
No no -- one counterexample out of the approx 154M men in the United States disproves that point. Logic!

wpietri 11y ago

> I find this attitude pretty condescending. That's fair. When somebody leaps into a discussion without understanding the basics and acting in a way that is basically ignorant denial, I am ok with condescending to them. The discussion of gender bias and gender equity is a rich and complicated subject. Here on HN, people are generally expected to know something before they open their mouths. I think my condescension here is about 1% of what somebody would get if they were ignorant about language design and still offering similarly bold opinions on languages that they've never used.

zaccus 11y ago
You don't know what you're talking about either though.
- wpietri 11y ago
  Do tell.
chippy 11y ago
Does anyone else encounter the situation where, when confronted with a challenge to certain ideas, the response sounds like the following: "look it up in the literature" or "you don't understand the basics and therefore you are ignorant"? I have noticed this in particular to do with this ideology of gender etc. It appears to me that this implies that these ideas are beliefs that rely on faith in the belief and that challenging the belief is considered a sign of ignorance at best and a conscious attack at worst. It seems to me that all a questioner need to do is educate themselves in the correct literature and there would be no need to question anymore. To challenge the belief of faith creates incomprehensibility in the holder of the beliefs as it implies that the belief is not certain and can be open to challenge. Thus the most common reply to a question about the certainty of the beliefs is a urgent request to educate themselves.
- deleted 11y ago
  [deleted]
- wpietri 11y ago
  Yes, I have noticed that proponents of evolution frequently reply to people with "you don't understand the basics" and "look it up in the literature". So by your logic, they must be working from faith. Or, alternative theory: the topic is actually complicated, they are tired of ignorant people acting like ignorance is just as good as knowledge, and they don't feel obliged to spoon-feed decades of complicated material to people who, by all evidence, have no interested in learning it because it would interfere with what their gut tells them on the topic.
csorrell 11y ago
Can you really say that the parent comment lacks an understanding of the basics, or is somehow misinformed in their opinion? People aren't always going to agree with the things you say or the way that you choose to say them. That doesn't necessarily mean that they're wrong or ignorant.
- talmand 11y ago
  Seeing "The discussion of gender bias and gender equity is a rich and complicated subject" statement with an attitude of "I know more than you despite me not possibly knowing anything of what you know of the topic" paints an interesting picture.
  - wpietri 11y ago
    What I know of what he knows is what he said. In particular, the statement I addressed is one that no reasonable person would say if they had real knowledge of the topic. If you can find some way to interpret him otherwise, I look forward to reading it.
    - talmand 11y ago
      That's the point, I'm not interpreting anything the person is saying. I'm commenting on you admitting the subject is complicated but you are somehow able to guess the knowledge of a person based on one statement you read on a website with little context.
      - wpietri 11y ago
        Animal taxonomy is complicated, but if somebody says "bats are bugs" [1] it's fair to guess that they don't know much. Try it yourself. Take any complicated domain that you know well. It's pretty easy to construct statements that make it clear that a speaker wouldn't know much. [1] http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/11/03 http://www.gocomics.com/calvinandhobbes/1989/11/03
        11y ago