6 ms·

That's ridiculous. 1) that's an idiotic stereotype. Men and women both will react in similar ways. 2) Doesn't make a difference what "type" of person she is.

That's ridiculous. 1) that's an idiotic stereotype. Men and women both will react in similar ways. 2) Doesn't make a difference what "type" of person she is. They are married and she has every right to know (and voice her opinion on) if a big part of their financial future will be impacted by him feeling burned out. Hopefully she'll be supportive, but either way she deserves to know the truth.

cheez 9y ago
1) I never said that women are the only ones who do this. I just said if she is the type who will support you. Nowhere in my statement did I say anywhere near all women are of type X. You seemed to assume I meant that, which I didn't. I know the value of a supportive woman. My girlfriend is MOSTLY supportive but I don't dump everything on her. Learn to deal with stuff yourself and you'll be happier. 2) It absolutely does make a difference. Freak out type? Divorce on top of the stress. Supportive? Let's go on a vacation and I'll blow you till your head pops. Other people mentioned stoicism. You will naturally become stoic after making it through a brutal pain like this one. Stick it out. It is a superpower. It will help you withstand anything without buckling.
- theseoafs 9y ago
  > My girlfriend is MOSTLY supportive but I don't dump everything on her. Learn to deal with stuff yourself and you'll be happier. Learning to deal with stuff yourself doesn't preclude asking your partner for help with making a decision that can impact both of you for the rest of your lives.
  - surrey-fringe 9y ago
    You do what you like doing, and he'll do what he likes doing. This isn't an interesting argument.
    - obmelvin 9y ago
      It's a discussion, not an argument. Why would you marry someone if you couldn't talk to them about decisions like this? The whole damn point of a life partner is to have someone you can figure out life with.
      - ShabbosGoy 9y ago
        It's a tough call, realistically speaking. On the one hand, you'd expect your significant other to be supportive. But on the other hand, your significant other may be used to a certain kind of lifestyle, and may not take too kindly to losing that lifestyle.
- ggggtez 9y ago
  >blow you till your head pops Gross. Please practice better analogies. Edit: and the implication that sexual favors are the way a wife can support her husband... Geez...
  - cat199 9y ago
    yep, sure was silly to presume sexist attitude in original comment..
  - joyeuse6701 9y ago
    It may have been crude, but his example isn't wrong. On the contrary is it not the case that sexual activity is recommended by therapists for stress relief? Is he really implicating anything here or is this fitting a predetermined narrative you've conjured?
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - openasocket 9y ago
      > is it not the case that sexual activity is recommended by therapists for stress relief? No. Not it is not the case. No therapist would suggest sex for stress relief. While there is some evidence suggesting regular sex can reduce stress, it's on the same order of magnitude as exercise, getting enough sleep, eating right, etc. Using sex with your partner as some sort of stress release activity is really not healthy for the relationship.
      - justinclift 9y ago
        > Using sex with your partner as some sort of stress release activity is really not healthy for the relationship. That sounds really strange to me. Is that from a religious viewpoint of sex? eg "sex is a sin" type of thing?
        openasocket 9y ago
- babyrainbow 9y ago
  I agree with you. HN, infact most people don't like or are comfortable to hear truth. Like how 15 - 20 years before ago could not really say that "How good you look absolutely matters". If HN has existed at that time, that would have got downvotes like you are getting now, for stating an "Idiotic steriotype"
- jakelazaroff 9y ago
  > Supportive? Let's go on a vacation and I'll blow you till your head pops. Not appropriate. Take that shit elsewhere.
backpropaganda 9y ago
He's not saying that only women can react in a bad way. Re-read the statement by replacing women with people and she with they.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- ghughes 9y ago
  If you have to replace words to interpret the statement correctly, then there is a problem with the statement, not the reader.
- aanm1988 9y ago
  So don't talk to your spouse because they might get upset. Great relationship advice.
- xapata 9y ago
  The commenter did not write "people". They wrote, "women."
Oxitendwe 9y ago
>1) that's an idiotic stereotype. Men and women both will react in similar ways. Do you say this from a position of experience and authority on this subject (i.e., you know that it is false because you yourself have experience with seeing how different people react to news like that), or do you disagree just because such statements conflict with your value system?
- ingenuous2 9y ago
  Not OP, but I believe this because if there is no evidence, we should assume there is no effect. Gendered issues are highly problematic to bias, so it is imperative to redouble the value of force of science.
  - Oxitendwe 9y ago
    What you're really saying is that people should not have opinions or views on things, instead they should have their opinions handed down and dictated to them from on high, by people of a particular social institution (which, as luck would have it, is both almost entirely dominated by people on one side of the cultural/political divide, and also whose value system conflicts with the views expressed by the parent to my post). Even if the product of science really was objective truth (which is quite difficult to argue, especially for the field of psychology) and its interpretations and conclusions from the collected data were not subjective, you have it completely backwards. Do you think scientists don't hold opinions until someone publishes a paper whose conclusion tells them what to believe? Do you think they believe the conclusions of papers are never contested? It's wrong to think that people should not have opinions until science tells them to, people have opinions and then scientists wonder whether they are true. But the product of science isn't objective truth, they are never in a position to dictate to you on high what is objectively true and what isn't, because the conclusions they reach are not objective. The data they collect is arguably objective, but then it is subject to interpretation and integration into man-made ideological and theoretical frameworks, and that process and its product are not objective. That's not to say that the product of science is meaningless, or that any random theory someone comes up with is equal in value to whatever theory is popular among scientists. It certainly becomes difficult to argue against technological progress and experimental evidence, so if someone says something blatantly false then it is these products of science that make it easy for you to disprove their claims. For example, if someone were to say that they don't believe in Einstein's theory of relativity, then you could show them experimental data of the positions of stars when their line of sight to an observer crosses right next to the sun, and then show them how Einstein's model predicts the correct position, and Newton's model does not. This argument, with all the calculation and experimentation involved, is the product of science. Going on Wikipedia, or opening your science textbook, or googling it and seeing that someone with the special title "scientist" has said it, and using that to argue against them, this is not the product of science. That is an argument to authority. It has no value. Using an absence of evidence (as opposed to evidence of absence) to shut down arguments and delegitimize people's experiences has nothing to do with science, and its only purpose (I suspect) is to prevent discussion of things which conflict with your value system.

cheez 9y ago

1) I never said that women are the only ones who do this. I just said if she is the type who will support you. Nowhere in my statement did I say anywhere near all women are of type X. You seemed to assume I meant that, which I didn't. I know the value of a supportive woman. My girlfriend is MOSTLY supportive but I don't dump everything on her. Learn to deal with stuff yourself and you'll be happier. 2) It absolutely does make a difference. Freak out type? Divorce on top of the stress. Supportive? Let's go on a vacation and I'll blow you till your head pops. Other people mentioned stoicism. You will naturally become stoic after making it through a brutal pain like this one. Stick it out. It is a superpower. It will help you withstand anything without buckling.

theseoafs 9y ago
> My girlfriend is MOSTLY supportive but I don't dump everything on her. Learn to deal with stuff yourself and you'll be happier. Learning to deal with stuff yourself doesn't preclude asking your partner for help with making a decision that can impact both of you for the rest of your lives.
- surrey-fringe 9y ago
  You do what you like doing, and he'll do what he likes doing. This isn't an interesting argument.
  - obmelvin 9y ago
    It's a discussion, not an argument. Why would you marry someone if you couldn't talk to them about decisions like this? The whole damn point of a life partner is to have someone you can figure out life with.
    - ShabbosGoy 9y ago
      It's a tough call, realistically speaking. On the one hand, you'd expect your significant other to be supportive. But on the other hand, your significant other may be used to a certain kind of lifestyle, and may not take too kindly to losing that lifestyle.
ggggtez 9y ago
>blow you till your head pops Gross. Please practice better analogies. Edit: and the implication that sexual favors are the way a wife can support her husband... Geez...
- cat199 9y ago
  yep, sure was silly to presume sexist attitude in original comment..
- joyeuse6701 9y ago
  It may have been crude, but his example isn't wrong. On the contrary is it not the case that sexual activity is recommended by therapists for stress relief? Is he really implicating anything here or is this fitting a predetermined narrative you've conjured?
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - openasocket 9y ago
    > is it not the case that sexual activity is recommended by therapists for stress relief? No. Not it is not the case. No therapist would suggest sex for stress relief. While there is some evidence suggesting regular sex can reduce stress, it's on the same order of magnitude as exercise, getting enough sleep, eating right, etc. Using sex with your partner as some sort of stress release activity is really not healthy for the relationship.
    - justinclift 9y ago
      > Using sex with your partner as some sort of stress release activity is really not healthy for the relationship. That sounds really strange to me. Is that from a religious viewpoint of sex? eg "sex is a sin" type of thing?
      - openasocket 9y ago
babyrainbow 9y ago
I agree with you. HN, infact most people don't like or are comfortable to hear truth. Like how 15 - 20 years before ago could not really say that "How good you look absolutely matters". If HN has existed at that time, that would have got downvotes like you are getting now, for stating an "Idiotic steriotype"
jakelazaroff 9y ago
> Supportive? Let's go on a vacation and I'll blow you till your head pops. Not appropriate. Take that shit elsewhere.

backpropaganda 9y ago

He's not saying that only women can react in a bad way. Re-read the statement by replacing women with people and she with they.

deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
ghughes 9y ago
If you have to replace words to interpret the statement correctly, then there is a problem with the statement, not the reader.
aanm1988 9y ago
So don't talk to your spouse because they might get upset. Great relationship advice.
xapata 9y ago
The commenter did not write "people". They wrote, "women."

Oxitendwe 9y ago

>1) that's an idiotic stereotype. Men and women both will react in similar ways. Do you say this from a position of experience and authority on this subject (i.e., you know that it is false because you yourself have experience with seeing how different people react to news like that), or do you disagree just because such statements conflict with your value system?

ingenuous2 9y ago
Not OP, but I believe this because if there is no evidence, we should assume there is no effect. Gendered issues are highly problematic to bias, so it is imperative to redouble the value of force of science.
- Oxitendwe 9y ago
  What you're really saying is that people should not have opinions or views on things, instead they should have their opinions handed down and dictated to them from on high, by people of a particular social institution (which, as luck would have it, is both almost entirely dominated by people on one side of the cultural/political divide, and also whose value system conflicts with the views expressed by the parent to my post). Even if the product of science really was objective truth (which is quite difficult to argue, especially for the field of psychology) and its interpretations and conclusions from the collected data were not subjective, you have it completely backwards. Do you think scientists don't hold opinions until someone publishes a paper whose conclusion tells them what to believe? Do you think they believe the conclusions of papers are never contested? It's wrong to think that people should not have opinions until science tells them to, people have opinions and then scientists wonder whether they are true. But the product of science isn't objective truth, they are never in a position to dictate to you on high what is objectively true and what isn't, because the conclusions they reach are not objective. The data they collect is arguably objective, but then it is subject to interpretation and integration into man-made ideological and theoretical frameworks, and that process and its product are not objective. That's not to say that the product of science is meaningless, or that any random theory someone comes up with is equal in value to whatever theory is popular among scientists. It certainly becomes difficult to argue against technological progress and experimental evidence, so if someone says something blatantly false then it is these products of science that make it easy for you to disprove their claims. For example, if someone were to say that they don't believe in Einstein's theory of relativity, then you could show them experimental data of the positions of stars when their line of sight to an observer crosses right next to the sun, and then show them how Einstein's model predicts the correct position, and Newton's model does not. This argument, with all the calculation and experimentation involved, is the product of science. Going on Wikipedia, or opening your science textbook, or googling it and seeing that someone with the special title "scientist" has said it, and using that to argue against them, this is not the product of science. That is an argument to authority. It has no value. Using an absence of evidence (as opposed to evidence of absence) to shut down arguments and delegitimize people's experiences has nothing to do with science, and its only purpose (I suspect) is to prevent discussion of things which conflict with your value system.