4 ms·

The irony is that all the things you argue against him for, his small worldview, not willing to come to his senses, are what you are doing yourself. You are ki

The irony is that all the things you argue against him for, his small worldview, not willing to come to his senses, are what you are doing yourself. You are kicking and screaming against anything that upsets your viewpoint on this issue. And we actually agree on the most important facet (as do most people) that any discrimination based on age, gender, or race is absolutely not tolerated. But how to achieve this in the real world is not a walk in the park. For example, positive discrimination is not a fair system in my opinion. I would think focusing on making the interview process blind is better. So can we argue on these specifics or am I just a bully and a bigot for holding a different opinion?

KirinDave 9y ago
> You are kicking and screaming against anything that upsets your viewpoint on this issue. Interesting. So in this case I shouldn't debate anyone here. Because somehow that makes me wrong because... By not agreeing my worldview is small? > that any discrimination based on age, gender, or race is absolutely not tolerated. Honestly, I genuinely do not believe that many people here believe this. I think they find excuses for men at every turn or rationalize marginalizing women need (e.g., as I write this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14980201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14980201) That is part of _my_ larger point about how the natural response on HN is to say, "Well if you had handled this correctly we wouldn't be in a situation where it looks like sexual harassment." > So can we argue on these specifics or am I just a bully and a bigot for holding a different opinion? I want you to re-read this paragraph and ask yourself what the premise here is. This thread starts by saying, "We should debate." I point out how dismissive this often I'd on HN and your response is, "You're kicking and screaming and just as guilty as James. Now, agree with me in total OR call me names." I don't know if you're a bigot, but this is a poor tactic to adopt when coupled with the ultimatum: "Or am I a bully?"
- mistermann 9y ago
  > Interesting. So in this case I shouldn't debate anyone here. Because somehow that makes me wrong because... By not agreeing my worldview is small? "forgive these men their outrageously outdated and somewhat dehumanizing viewpoints and calmly explain to them that currently they are benefitting from a system called patriarchy that has normalized male dominance" doesn't sound like you're open to a debate, it sounds like you are highly certain that your opinion is correct, full stop.
  - KirinDave 9y ago
    So what you're saying is you don't appreciate my tone? You can nose around my comments. While I'm somewhat acidic with people who suggest it is the feminist responsibility to endure every negative opinion in perpetuity, I'm engaging in most conversations honestly. I am quite confident in the core components of these observations, but I was more skeptical of it some time ago. If you genuinely believe I cannot be swayed, why do YOU bother talking to me?
    - mistermann 9y ago
      Not sure really, I guess it is a bit of a hobby, observing the psychological behavior of humans. To me, it is absolutely fascinating how widespread the affliction is where when you find yourself in a disagreement with a person, you can ask them if they think their position is right, they say yes, are you confident, they say yes (or, perhaps by this time they may already instinctively sense danger and leave the conversation), and then if you say ok, let's make a deal, I will ask you a question, and you must answer the question, the one I asked not a modified version of it, and you cannot change the subject....and then after that you can ask me a question....and so on. In my experiences, this experiment "fails" 90%+ of the time, either by the person refusing to participate, or refusing to hold up their end of the bargain. Yet, they continue to believe absolutely that they are "right"! I mean to me, this is very fascinating to observe in action.
- yebyen 9y ago
  I read the thread you linked and I'm not sure what you want us to see. It looks like Sacho is being completely reasonable and you two are having a rational, honest discussion. I don't see anyone "rationalizing marginalizing women" It looked like the other poster was trying to evaluate the arguments rationally, that's not the same as rationalizing.

KirinDave 9y ago

> You are kicking and screaming against anything that upsets your viewpoint on this issue. Interesting. So in this case I shouldn't debate anyone here. Because somehow that makes me wrong because... By not agreeing my worldview is small? > that any discrimination based on age, gender, or race is absolutely not tolerated. Honestly, I genuinely do not believe that many people here believe this. I think they find excuses for men at every turn or rationalize marginalizing women need (e.g., as I write this: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14980201 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=14980201) That is part of _my_ larger point about how the natural response on HN is to say, "Well if you had handled this correctly we wouldn't be in a situation where it looks like sexual harassment." > So can we argue on these specifics or am I just a bully and a bigot for holding a different opinion? I want you to re-read this paragraph and ask yourself what the premise here is. This thread starts by saying, "We should debate." I point out how dismissive this often I'd on HN and your response is, "You're kicking and screaming and just as guilty as James. Now, agree with me in total OR call me names." I don't know if you're a bigot, but this is a poor tactic to adopt when coupled with the ultimatum: "Or am I a bully?"

mistermann 9y ago
> Interesting. So in this case I shouldn't debate anyone here. Because somehow that makes me wrong because... By not agreeing my worldview is small? "forgive these men their outrageously outdated and somewhat dehumanizing viewpoints and calmly explain to them that currently they are benefitting from a system called patriarchy that has normalized male dominance" doesn't sound like you're open to a debate, it sounds like you are highly certain that your opinion is correct, full stop.
- KirinDave 9y ago
  So what you're saying is you don't appreciate my tone? You can nose around my comments. While I'm somewhat acidic with people who suggest it is the feminist responsibility to endure every negative opinion in perpetuity, I'm engaging in most conversations honestly. I am quite confident in the core components of these observations, but I was more skeptical of it some time ago. If you genuinely believe I cannot be swayed, why do YOU bother talking to me?
  - mistermann 9y ago
    Not sure really, I guess it is a bit of a hobby, observing the psychological behavior of humans. To me, it is absolutely fascinating how widespread the affliction is where when you find yourself in a disagreement with a person, you can ask them if they think their position is right, they say yes, are you confident, they say yes (or, perhaps by this time they may already instinctively sense danger and leave the conversation), and then if you say ok, let's make a deal, I will ask you a question, and you must answer the question, the one I asked not a modified version of it, and you cannot change the subject....and then after that you can ask me a question....and so on. In my experiences, this experiment "fails" 90%+ of the time, either by the person refusing to participate, or refusing to hold up their end of the bargain. Yet, they continue to believe absolutely that they are "right"! I mean to me, this is very fascinating to observe in action.
yebyen 9y ago
I read the thread you linked and I'm not sure what you want us to see. It looks like Sacho is being completely reasonable and you two are having a rational, honest discussion. I don't see anyone "rationalizing marginalizing women" It looked like the other poster was trying to evaluate the arguments rationally, that's not the same as rationalizing.