3 ms·
Yeah, no idea if you're serious or taking the piss, but when the post above is condensed that's kind of what the quote they give is saying. 1. The social justi
by ivvve 5y ago
Yeah, no idea if you're serious or taking the piss, but when the post above is condensed that's kind of what the quote they give is saying.
1. The social justice stuff and "this lady" is clearly the poster's personal view and politics coming to bear. And regardless of it being an illogical argument, it's obviously sexist and culture wars-y etc.
2. Having said that, bosses taking pay rises while workers is laid off is shit, and when they say it's to remain "competitive" I want to scream. Competetive to who? Who's to say that the same pool of people have to be interchangable between any one job at the same time? Who says we need these people running organisations anyway, especially non profits?
3. Seriously though, hope FF pulls through. But also I'm so so sad about MDN, and would want Mozilla foundation to shape up and be ok too so that they could bring MDN back.
- mlang23 5y agoAw come on. If someone were to say "this guy", you wouldnt think about sexism in the slightest. Claiming sexism whenever a woman is criticized is starting to get very very boring. In fact, this sort of argument is hurting the feminist movement more then you'd think. Some of us are fed up with this nonesense. Equality does go both ways, equality of rights and responsibilities. If women want to raise to the top, they have to be prepared to take the shit. If they arent. they should probably go back to the kitchen damnit!
- dang 5y agoWe've banned this account for posting flamewar comments, breaking the site guidelines, and ignoring our requests to stop. Not cool. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
- account_b 5y ago"This lady", or "managerette", and "this guy" are quite different tho, don't you think? The question is, if she's criticized differently, because she's a woman. Personally I feel like the patronizing/infantilizing language wouldn't be used for "a guy". I don't speak up for the CEO's protection, but for the women reading this. I don't give a fuck about the CEO's feelings at all, but the women who may feel discouraged by the additional burden of sexism. Not defending the CEO's parasitic behavior. I don't get why execs should be paid differently at all, anywhere. It's a position which inherently attracts toxic people, if it's hold up as exceptional. She sucks. I totally get why people want to be a little mean, but please consider the collateral damage. That's all.
- soundnote 5y agoI think "managerette" is just rubbing it in that the person is mostly there to wave their hands, with little real vision for the things that matter - I guess "paper-pusher" would be similar in tone but more gender-neutral. > Personally I feel like the patronizing/infantilizing language wouldn't be used for "a guy". Patronizing, maybe not. They'd just get straight hate. Both would still be digging at the incompetent parasitism. Men and women are different, idk why people get their knickers in a twist about insults being gendered. I definitely get insulted in ways women don't for completely understandable reasons, and society doesn't give a fuck. I'd mostly care if they're deserved or appropriate at all in the first place, not whether they're up to some linguistic standards.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- ivvve 5y agoI agree -- if you hadn't used irrelevant, sexist language, I wouldn't have called you a sexist. Did you read my post? I'm not trying to defend her actions, just pointing out that her gender has nothing to do with her venality. Do better, pal.