4 ms·

I agree that the comment sections on those articles devolves really quickly. To me, those comment sections are the worst part of HN. The normally very civil dis

I agree that the comment sections on those articles devolves really quickly. To me, those comment sections are the worst part of HN. The normally very civil discourse found in here tends to be more "reddity". Of course, I don't have a concrete example right now. But I do tend to stay off those topics in here cuase it feels like a shit show. Really makes me sad because the comment sections on other non-tech topics like music or literature are always interesting to read.

mxkopy 3y ago
[flagged]
- arp242 3y ago
  That is a spectacular bad faith reading of what was actually said. They just tried to explain why birth rated dropped, with no judgements being made one way or the other. They absolutely did not claim that "women’s purpose is to keep them high". They even clarified that in a follow-up: "I think you misinterpreted my words: it's fantastic that humans (both men and women) have more options, if they choose to have less kids that's noone's business but their own."
  - mxkopy 3y ago
    Read: > Empowerment of women made "get married and out of your parents house" a less interesting option…Having children is just another bucket list item these days. It’s a slimy comment blaming women’s opportunities for declining birth rates. How you expect anyone to read that in good faith, I have no clue.
    - arp242 3y ago
      Trying to explain something ("A led to B") is not blaming. And again, the poster followed up clarifying that. Constantly taking the worst possible interpretation of everything and divining the worst possible malicious motivations at the drop of a hat is one of the main reasons these debates turn in to such drek all the time.
      - mxkopy 3y ago
        An explanation is atonal and objective, the comment said “Having children is just another bucket list item these days.” which pretty obviously implies they don’t think well of the situation. There is some blaming here, and not just on “cultural shifts” and “expectations”, but also “women’s empowerment”. And it’s not like the things they mention are things men weren’t doing before that are allowed by modernity. Men travelled all the time (ex: war), while women were expected to stay home. Men’s virginity wasn’t prized, it was to women that having accepted premarital sex was new. Women being able to prioritize their careers was new. As the bigotry goes on HN this comment is pretty tame, but civility doesn’t excuse ignorance, in fact it makes it more dangerous.
johnnyanmac 3y ago
I do. You could even see how quickly discussion evolves when talking about the education system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36839983 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36839983 far from the worst example, but a pretty recent one to show a bit of how bad it can get. I guess I was still (naively) surprised that affirmative action is still such a hot button topic.

mxkopy 3y ago

[flagged]

arp242 3y ago
That is a spectacular bad faith reading of what was actually said. They just tried to explain why birth rated dropped, with no judgements being made one way or the other. They absolutely did not claim that "women’s purpose is to keep them high". They even clarified that in a follow-up: "I think you misinterpreted my words: it's fantastic that humans (both men and women) have more options, if they choose to have less kids that's noone's business but their own."
- mxkopy 3y ago
  Read: > Empowerment of women made "get married and out of your parents house" a less interesting option…Having children is just another bucket list item these days. It’s a slimy comment blaming women’s opportunities for declining birth rates. How you expect anyone to read that in good faith, I have no clue.
  - arp242 3y ago
    Trying to explain something ("A led to B") is not blaming. And again, the poster followed up clarifying that. Constantly taking the worst possible interpretation of everything and divining the worst possible malicious motivations at the drop of a hat is one of the main reasons these debates turn in to such drek all the time.
    - mxkopy 3y ago
      An explanation is atonal and objective, the comment said “Having children is just another bucket list item these days.” which pretty obviously implies they don’t think well of the situation. There is some blaming here, and not just on “cultural shifts” and “expectations”, but also “women’s empowerment”. And it’s not like the things they mention are things men weren’t doing before that are allowed by modernity. Men travelled all the time (ex: war), while women were expected to stay home. Men’s virginity wasn’t prized, it was to women that having accepted premarital sex was new. Women being able to prioritize their careers was new. As the bigotry goes on HN this comment is pretty tame, but civility doesn’t excuse ignorance, in fact it makes it more dangerous.

johnnyanmac 3y ago

I do. You could even see how quickly discussion evolves when talking about the education system: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36839983 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36839983 far from the worst example, but a pretty recent one to show a bit of how bad it can get. I guess I was still (naively) surprised that affirmative action is still such a hot button topic.