5 ms·
What they said was that "This is clear discrimination against men", which is true. The program discriminates against men. You might think that's a good thing, b
by ryanmonroe 8y ago
What they said was that "This is clear discrimination against men", which is true. The program discriminates against men. You might think that's a good thing, but if you do you should argue that. Responding to a statement of fact with accusations about the motives behind the statement doesn't do any good.
- matthewmacleod 8y agoYes, this is "discrimination against men" in the strict sense of discrimination. And I want to know what they hope to achieve by pointing out this very obvious truth. We see exactly this sort of comment all the time, and I want to know what the motivations for it are.
- ryanmonroe 8y agoI'm not sure why you think there must be some sinister motive here. The comment chain was P1: Does this violate some California law by deciding who can attend based on sex? P2: The third member of your team may be any gender P3: It's still discrimination based on sex It seems pretty clear to me the "motivation" for the comment was to respond to P2's implication that this isn't discrimination. You clearly don't actually "want to know what the motivations for it are", but to attribute motives to the commenter yourself. > I think, if you're honest with yourself, you'll realise that your goal isn't really to help or support anyone, or to end gender inequality, but instead to take the opportunity to engage in a little bit of reflexive and unhelpful "look how much men are discriminated against" complaining.