3 ms·

> The problem in contemporary culture is that we are not even allowed to have this conversation So what type of conversation are you having right now? We have

by hising 7y ago

> The problem in contemporary culture is that we are not even allowed to have this conversation So what type of conversation are you having right now? We have word in swedish for using that type of "arguing", it is "offerkofta". I dont think it is a good word for it in english, but starting a discussion in an open forum saying something and then stating you are not "ALLOWED" to discuss what you are discussing is just a way of victimizing oneself and make it more or less impossible for other people to argue against. If I argue against you can always call me politically correct or stating that I just dont see behind the propaganda. "Offerkofta" by the way is literally "putting on the victim cardigan".

ceilingcorner 7y ago
This is a mostly anonymous forum which is slightly more open to controversial ideas than the average media outlet. Any person openly questioning the effectiveness of treating men and women as exact equals is usually treated as some sort of ultra conservative or fringe figure in the media. People in general have a hard time understanding the idea that there are different scales of value. The old Einstein quote about a fish judging itself to be stupid because it can’t climb a tree is relevant here. I’m also referring to American society. I don’t know how Sweden is.
- hising 7y ago
  As I said earlier, you have your right to an opinion, and can express it freely. If it feels awkward for you to not being agreed with or people not liking your views is not the same as someone not allowing you to have that opinion. So feel free to say and argue whatever you want, but people not liking what you say or people thinking you are having a strange opinion and rather not discussing with you have nothing to do with not allowing you to express that opinon. Saying that you are not allowed to have an opinion kills conversations.
- KirinDave 7y ago
  The largest news Network in the US ran this story from multiple angles including yours, and even has a panel. If you really need someone to pander to this perspective, American society is full of people loudly discussing it. It is obviously so. So either you are angry that your local discourse doesn't treat this topic kindly, or you were just making a rhetorical jab that wasn't meant to be taken literally. In either case it doesn't seem very fair to do, imo.
zajio1am 7y ago
Well, considering that original post was immediately downvoted into unreadability, it has a bit of point.
- hising 7y ago
  Not agreeing is not the same as not allowing. I think this is a false logic. I see a lot of people mistaken freedom of speech with some god-given right of being listened to.
  - nec4b 7y ago
    We are talking about a conversation(a dialog) not freedom of speech or god given rights.
nec4b 7y ago
Had you bothered to read this little sub thread, you would have noticed that the original post was down voted into oblivion. Is that what you call a conversation in Sweden?
- hising 7y ago
  See my response to another comment below ...
- hising 7y ago
  And saying that "you are not allowed to have this conversation" is like saying: "If you argue against me you are part of the problem". So it is a good way of just throwing out an argument and killing conversation.
  - nec4b 7y ago
    It really isn't. Preventing someone to converse is killing the conversation not a plea express an opinion.
- fzeroracer 7y ago
  The original post was downvoted into oblivion in part because it explicitly broke HN rules and argued that people whom disagreed with him were autistic. That's not a conversation. That's being deliberately inflammatory.

by hising 7y ago

ceilingcorner 7y ago

This is a mostly anonymous forum which is slightly more open to controversial ideas than the average media outlet. Any person openly questioning the effectiveness of treating men and women as exact equals is usually treated as some sort of ultra conservative or fringe figure in the media. People in general have a hard time understanding the idea that there are different scales of value. The old Einstein quote about a fish judging itself to be stupid because it can’t climb a tree is relevant here. I’m also referring to American society. I don’t know how Sweden is.

hising 7y ago
As I said earlier, you have your right to an opinion, and can express it freely. If it feels awkward for you to not being agreed with or people not liking your views is not the same as someone not allowing you to have that opinion. So feel free to say and argue whatever you want, but people not liking what you say or people thinking you are having a strange opinion and rather not discussing with you have nothing to do with not allowing you to express that opinon. Saying that you are not allowed to have an opinion kills conversations.
KirinDave 7y ago
The largest news Network in the US ran this story from multiple angles including yours, and even has a panel. If you really need someone to pander to this perspective, American society is full of people loudly discussing it. It is obviously so. So either you are angry that your local discourse doesn't treat this topic kindly, or you were just making a rhetorical jab that wasn't meant to be taken literally. In either case it doesn't seem very fair to do, imo.

zajio1am 7y ago

Well, considering that original post was immediately downvoted into unreadability, it has a bit of point.

hising 7y ago
Not agreeing is not the same as not allowing. I think this is a false logic. I see a lot of people mistaken freedom of speech with some god-given right of being listened to.
- nec4b 7y ago
  We are talking about a conversation(a dialog) not freedom of speech or god given rights.

nec4b 7y ago

Had you bothered to read this little sub thread, you would have noticed that the original post was down voted into oblivion. Is that what you call a conversation in Sweden?

hising 7y ago
See my response to another comment below ...
hising 7y ago
And saying that "you are not allowed to have this conversation" is like saying: "If you argue against me you are part of the problem". So it is a good way of just throwing out an argument and killing conversation.
- nec4b 7y ago
  It really isn't. Preventing someone to converse is killing the conversation not a plea express an opinion.
fzeroracer 7y ago
The original post was downvoted into oblivion in part because it explicitly broke HN rules and argued that people whom disagreed with him were autistic. That's not a conversation. That's being deliberately inflammatory.