4 ms·

Rather embarrassing to see such a piece of propaganda posted on HN :/

dang 6y ago
On HN we consider article quality more than site quality [1]. This doesn't seem like a bad article to me. It's an interesting finding, not one that's been much discussed, and certainly possible to have a curious conversation about. Arguably the article title is slightly misleading, because "stable family" can mean many things and has strong emotional associations. So I've changed the title to representative language from the article body [2], which is more precise. [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22article%20quality%22%20%22site%20quality%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22representative%20language%22&sort=byDate&type=story&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...
- DiggyJohnson 6y ago
  Neutral (if it was possible) observer here...well handled Dang.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- sebmellen 6y ago
  Yes, agreed, I definitely don’t think it should be censored. In fact, the article’s conclusions are interesting, but it is my opinion that it is written in a somewhat deceptive manner. Thank you for changing the submission title.
rayiner 6y ago
Around the world, divorce and single parenthood are taboo, and raising children in two parent households is the social expectation. Even though that’s the dominant view in the world, IFS is one of the few American sources who will take the position that what most of the world believes and practices is actually a good thing. Meanwhile, standard left-leaning news sources like the New York Times religiously follow the minority viewpoint that the increased personal freedom from the sexual revolution and liberalized divorce laws justified those changes. So which exactly is the propaganda?

dang 6y ago

On HN we consider article quality more than site quality [1]. This doesn't seem like a bad article to me. It's an interesting finding, not one that's been much discussed, and certainly possible to have a curious conversation about. Arguably the article title is slightly misleading, because "stable family" can mean many things and has strong emotional associations. So I've changed the title to representative language from the article body [2], which is more precise. [1] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&sort=byDate&type=comment&query=%22article%20quality%22%20%22site%20quality%22%20by:dang https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=false&so... [2] https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&query=by%3Adang%20%22representative%20language%22&sort=byDate&type=story&type=comment https://hn.algolia.com/?dateRange=all&page=0&prefix=true&que...

DiggyJohnson 6y ago
Neutral (if it was possible) observer here...well handled Dang.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
sebmellen 6y ago
Yes, agreed, I definitely don’t think it should be censored. In fact, the article’s conclusions are interesting, but it is my opinion that it is written in a somewhat deceptive manner. Thank you for changing the submission title.

rayiner 6y ago

Around the world, divorce and single parenthood are taboo, and raising children in two parent households is the social expectation. Even though that’s the dominant view in the world, IFS is one of the few American sources who will take the position that what most of the world believes and practices is actually a good thing. Meanwhile, standard left-leaning news sources like the New York Times religiously follow the minority viewpoint that the increased personal freedom from the sexual revolution and liberalized divorce laws justified those changes. So which exactly is the propaganda?