6 ms·

I mean people who say stuff like that are almost without fail racist sexist shitheads but I had to dig a bit further for proof: https://devinhelton.com/hate-gr

I mean people who say stuff like that are almost without fail racist sexist shitheads but I had to dig a bit further for proof: https://devinhelton.com/hate-group-history https://devinhelton.com/hate-group-history https://devinhelton.com/principles-of-formalism https://devinhelton.com/principles-of-formalism

iamdave 9y ago
What exactly is your critique of his Black Panther article? I'm reading it now, but I need more than just you pointing me at an article and telling me "It's racist". Why is it racist? What are your counterpoints? What is your actual argument here? On the face of it, sans anything substantive to what you're saying, what you're doing right now looks like textbook character assassination.
- kmicklas 9y ago
  Wew... You're asking me to explain why it's racist???
  - iamdave 9y ago
    Because you're the one who made the claim, and I've already stated I am just now reading the article, yes-in fact I am. And let me offer some context for you here for a second: I am a black man. And there are elements of the black community that deserves some critique from within the black community, but is labelled prima facie as "racist" by individuals engaging in what I've learned to call "performative wokeness" when it comes from not-black voices. Sometimes (and sometimes often) without care or regard for the factual accuracy and relevance of those critiques. Moral conviction be damned. So yes, I'm still reading the article, but you're making the claim, I'm holding you to that claim considering your profile identifies you as someone who "push[es] back the tide of racist libertarians and startup bros" If you're going to "push back", there should be a reasonable expectation of resistance from people who want an honest, earnest and intelligent debate. Otherwise, IMO you're just putting on performances.
    - kmicklas 9y ago
      > If you're going to "push back", there should be a reasonable expectation of resistance from people who want an honest, earnest and intelligent debate. Otherwise, IMO you're just putting on performances. I'd like to think it's more like venting than performance, but fair criticism, and thanks for the thoughtful response. Intelligent debate just doesn't sound like fun when so much of the HN crowd is like the guy from this article.
      - icebraining 9y ago
        Intelligent debate can't happen if people don't actually, you know, debate.
stagbeetle 9y ago
Someone already replied towards the first link, so I'll address the second. The only thing in that post that could be construed as sexist is 10th point: > Humans were born unequal in talent and desires. The gifts of nature were not distributed equally among the sexes or various peoples. Governance systems must select for talent, and any such selection process will produce inequalities. The never-ending attempts to purge all such inequalites will eventually destroy the ability of the government to function. Men have natural abilities and disposition towards leadership. To deny this, to mandate equality of results, to push women into masculine roles, to domesticate and feminize men, only results in misery for both men and women. One could pin the label of sexism on this if one thinks this is an indirect jab at inclusiveness and equality. Perhaps if the author had also paralleled and listed the qualities women have over men, he could've covered his bases. It's more likely that the author holds more "traditional" views on gender roles, but without the prejudice and hate towards women commonly found in sexists.

iamdave 9y ago

What exactly is your critique of his Black Panther article? I'm reading it now, but I need more than just you pointing me at an article and telling me "It's racist". Why is it racist? What are your counterpoints? What is your actual argument here? On the face of it, sans anything substantive to what you're saying, what you're doing right now looks like textbook character assassination.

kmicklas 9y ago
Wew... You're asking me to explain why it's racist???
- iamdave 9y ago
  Because you're the one who made the claim, and I've already stated I am just now reading the article, yes-in fact I am. And let me offer some context for you here for a second: I am a black man. And there are elements of the black community that deserves some critique from within the black community, but is labelled prima facie as "racist" by individuals engaging in what I've learned to call "performative wokeness" when it comes from not-black voices. Sometimes (and sometimes often) without care or regard for the factual accuracy and relevance of those critiques. Moral conviction be damned. So yes, I'm still reading the article, but you're making the claim, I'm holding you to that claim considering your profile identifies you as someone who "push[es] back the tide of racist libertarians and startup bros" If you're going to "push back", there should be a reasonable expectation of resistance from people who want an honest, earnest and intelligent debate. Otherwise, IMO you're just putting on performances.
  - kmicklas 9y ago
    > If you're going to "push back", there should be a reasonable expectation of resistance from people who want an honest, earnest and intelligent debate. Otherwise, IMO you're just putting on performances. I'd like to think it's more like venting than performance, but fair criticism, and thanks for the thoughtful response. Intelligent debate just doesn't sound like fun when so much of the HN crowd is like the guy from this article.
    - icebraining 9y ago
      Intelligent debate can't happen if people don't actually, you know, debate.

stagbeetle 9y ago

Someone already replied towards the first link, so I'll address the second. The only thing in that post that could be construed as sexist is 10th point: > Humans were born unequal in talent and desires. The gifts of nature were not distributed equally among the sexes or various peoples. Governance systems must select for talent, and any such selection process will produce inequalities. The never-ending attempts to purge all such inequalites will eventually destroy the ability of the government to function. Men have natural abilities and disposition towards leadership. To deny this, to mandate equality of results, to push women into masculine roles, to domesticate and feminize men, only results in misery for both men and women. One could pin the label of sexism on this if one thinks this is an indirect jab at inclusiveness and equality. Perhaps if the author had also paralleled and listed the qualities women have over men, he could've covered his bases. It's more likely that the author holds more "traditional" views on gender roles, but without the prejudice and hate towards women commonly found in sexists.