3 ms·

The ends do not justify the means. None of those points are correct. The fact that there is a NWP, a NOW, a White house council on women and girls, and no equ

The ends do not justify the means. None of those points are correct. The fact that there is a NWP, a NOW, a White house council on women and girls, and no equivalent for men, is a problem. An infectious one that leads to things like the "violence against women act" that reminds the minority of DV victims that they are an after thought. The name of this group, and the name of NOW, NWP, WCoWaG are all symptoms of a larger problem. We took a easily generalized concept about how we should treat and respect each other as human beings, and applied it in an excessively specialized and snowflake way. As hackers and programmers most of the people here should be smart enough to know why snowflake code is bad. The same applies to our laws, and even our societal norms.

eesmith 8y ago
If what you say is true then bear in mind that your last paragraph - "As hackers and programmers" - is itself a snowflake thing, since "Programmers for a Just Society" is the same construction as "Moms for an Equal Workplace". Hackers and programmers are not special snowflakes that are any better than others at understanding and opposing racism and sexism in society. That said, I strongly disagree with your statement that there is a problem. The original goal of the National Woman's Party was woman's suffrage. What would the equivalent for men have been? There is none, because men already had the right to vote. The NWP then pushed for the Equal Rights Amendment. What would the equivalent for men have been? Answer: The Equal Rights Amendment. Had ERA been ratified then there would have been no doubt that the Violence Against Women Act would equally be applied to men in the same circumstances. As it is, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act#Coverage_of_male_victims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act#Cov... Do you support/would you have supported the ERA? NOW's foundational goal was "To take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men". Do you support that goal, but just have a problem with the word "Women" in the title? Do you support the goals of the NAACP, but are simply opposed to the name? What of 'Black Lives Matter', which also has the goal of racial equality? Note that I am firmly on the side of the critics of the term "All Lives Matter" described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#Criticism . That is, "All Lives Matter" ignores the use of "Black" to highlight structural racism in the US and the lesser value placed on black lives over white ones. Note that NWP was also racist, but it's not like changing the name to "National People's Party" would have fixed that. I have no idea what 'WCoWaG' means. Circling back, do you support the goals of the Momamazons, but are simply opposed to the "Mom" in the name? Is your opposition to their goals based on information given in the article, and if so, what?

eesmith 8y ago

If what you say is true then bear in mind that your last paragraph - "As hackers and programmers" - is itself a snowflake thing, since "Programmers for a Just Society" is the same construction as "Moms for an Equal Workplace". Hackers and programmers are not special snowflakes that are any better than others at understanding and opposing racism and sexism in society. That said, I strongly disagree with your statement that there is a problem. The original goal of the National Woman's Party was woman's suffrage. What would the equivalent for men have been? There is none, because men already had the right to vote. The NWP then pushed for the Equal Rights Amendment. What would the equivalent for men have been? Answer: The Equal Rights Amendment. Had ERA been ratified then there would have been no doubt that the Violence Against Women Act would equally be applied to men in the same circumstances. As it is, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act#Coverage_of_male_victims https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Violence_Against_Women_Act#Cov... Do you support/would you have supported the ERA? NOW's foundational goal was "To take action to bring women into full participation in the mainstream of American society now, exercising all privileges and responsibilities thereof in truly equal partnership with men". Do you support that goal, but just have a problem with the word "Women" in the title? Do you support the goals of the NAACP, but are simply opposed to the name? What of 'Black Lives Matter', which also has the goal of racial equality? Note that I am firmly on the side of the critics of the term "All Lives Matter" described at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#Criticism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_Lives_Matter#Criticism . That is, "All Lives Matter" ignores the use of "Black" to highlight structural racism in the US and the lesser value placed on black lives over white ones. Note that NWP was also racist, but it's not like changing the name to "National People's Party" would have fixed that. I have no idea what 'WCoWaG' means. Circling back, do you support the goals of the Momamazons, but are simply opposed to the "Mom" in the name? Is your opposition to their goals based on information given in the article, and if so, what?