3 ms·

These comments and whoever flagged this article seem to be so focused on getting offended at the tone that they missed the thesis and why this article is approp

These comments and whoever flagged this article seem to be so focused on getting offended at the tone that they missed the thesis and why this article is appropriate for HN: > The idea is that a company, as its aims grow more expansive, starts catering less to the locked-in core customer and more to a potential whale which demonstrates some interest. Sure, you can just keep doing what’s made you rich, but how can you even focus on your primary business with that whale out there, swimming so tantalizingly close?

jmeister 5y ago
It’s disappointing that this essay was flagged. There are many points raised here that are applicable to tech companies, small and large, as well.
CarelessExpert 5y ago
I'm pretty sure the article was flagged because this guy apparently thinks that > masculinity is toxic. And that’s also what people love about it, similar to how they’re addicted to the rotten rinds in cheese. All that striving for greatness is indivisible from the selfish need to inflict cruelty on your dominated foe. Take away the latter and there is no sports. It’s just exercise. So, to sum up: Masculinity is toxic. Without toxic masculinity, sports aren't sports. Women, therefore, cannot excel at sports. And so Nike's marketing is bad. Maybe the reason the article is flagged is that the thesis is just dumb?
myWindoonn 5y ago
I will give you the charity here. I see what you're saying, and this would be an interesting discussion, but the author's chosen framing ruins it. Nike is a poor choice for making this point, because their original business was making waffle-iron shoes in a garage. They could have stuck to being a specialty cobbler who only caters to the top stars of track-and-field sports. None of the abuses had to happen. The only sad thing that was obligatory in Nike's story was the death of Steve Prefontaine.

jmeister 5y ago

It’s disappointing that this essay was flagged. There are many points raised here that are applicable to tech companies, small and large, as well.

CarelessExpert 5y ago

I'm pretty sure the article was flagged because this guy apparently thinks that > masculinity is toxic. And that’s also what people love about it, similar to how they’re addicted to the rotten rinds in cheese. All that striving for greatness is indivisible from the selfish need to inflict cruelty on your dominated foe. Take away the latter and there is no sports. It’s just exercise. So, to sum up: Masculinity is toxic. Without toxic masculinity, sports aren't sports. Women, therefore, cannot excel at sports. And so Nike's marketing is bad. Maybe the reason the article is flagged is that the thesis is just dumb?

myWindoonn 5y ago

I will give you the charity here. I see what you're saying, and this would be an interesting discussion, but the author's chosen framing ruins it. Nike is a poor choice for making this point, because their original business was making waffle-iron shoes in a garage. They could have stuck to being a specialty cobbler who only caters to the top stars of track-and-field sports. None of the abuses had to happen. The only sad thing that was obligatory in Nike's story was the death of Steve Prefontaine.