4 ms·

I don't know if I should be disturbed or amused that you were willing to say "And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks?" under your

by DKnoll 11y ago

I don't know if I should be disturbed or amused that you were willing to say "And if we're going to have a good ol' oppression-off how about blacks?" under your real name. It says a great deal about your motives when you speak facetiously about the struggle of others as if it's just a trump card to be used in debate. I could digress into a rant about academics here but I'll hold my tongue and let you use your imagination.

jonathankoren 11y ago
My point was that it sucks for all oppressed groups, but trying to say, "yeah but this other group has it worse," or even, "but why isn't this other group mentioned" isn't helpful to any group. It's like showing up at an event to fight cancer, and complaining that and heart disease isn't getting its due. Yes, heart disease is important too, but that's not why we're here.
- DKnoll 11y ago
  What I questioned is why the author misrepresented who actually developed the ENIAC through vague wording and omission. You can be wrong on the details and still ultimately be right. I wasn't trying to start a 'who has it worse' pissing contest, I was pointing out that making a broad generalisation about all white men is discriminatory and unfair... a bit ironic for an article discussing discrimination against women. There are people in all ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations and classes that have faced adversity, you can't use someone's demographic to determine how much. Turing probably looked like your average socially awkward, white, male programmer up until he was chemically castrated and killed himself. Using the term 'socially awkward' seems more like a schoolyard taunt than an unbiased description of a demographic... especially when similarly alienating treatment is what caused many to want an escape and persue computers in the first place. The shallow see awkwardness, but others recognise it as the detachment and eccentricity that often accompanies intellect. Showing up to an event to fight cancer will have null effect unless you're doing research or dropping off a cheque anyway, so what's the harm in bringing up heart disease while you're there?

by DKnoll 11y ago

jonathankoren 11y ago

My point was that it sucks for all oppressed groups, but trying to say, "yeah but this other group has it worse," or even, "but why isn't this other group mentioned" isn't helpful to any group. It's like showing up at an event to fight cancer, and complaining that and heart disease isn't getting its due. Yes, heart disease is important too, but that's not why we're here.

DKnoll 11y ago
What I questioned is why the author misrepresented who actually developed the ENIAC through vague wording and omission. You can be wrong on the details and still ultimately be right. I wasn't trying to start a 'who has it worse' pissing contest, I was pointing out that making a broad generalisation about all white men is discriminatory and unfair... a bit ironic for an article discussing discrimination against women. There are people in all ethnicities, sexes, sexual orientations and classes that have faced adversity, you can't use someone's demographic to determine how much. Turing probably looked like your average socially awkward, white, male programmer up until he was chemically castrated and killed himself. Using the term 'socially awkward' seems more like a schoolyard taunt than an unbiased description of a demographic... especially when similarly alienating treatment is what caused many to want an escape and persue computers in the first place. The shallow see awkwardness, but others recognise it as the detachment and eccentricity that often accompanies intellect. Showing up to an event to fight cancer will have null effect unless you're doing research or dropping off a cheque anyway, so what's the harm in bringing up heart disease while you're there?