22 ms·

It has nothing to do with lizard brain whatsoever. If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate

It has nothing to do with lizard brain whatsoever. If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. The chances of me being believed would be negligible. I have always been courteous to coworkers, especially women. Your comment has just validified my point about today's politics. Decades ago no one would have thought in those terms let alone wrongly accused someone of them. Just for clarification's sake, when I mentioned I'd be worried about accidentally saying something out of place I wasn't referring to me making sexual innuendos but rather that these days innocent comment is so easily assumed to be offensive or taken the wrong way. It's why so many of us now simply say nothing, as it's safer to do so. Your hair-trigger assumption again proves my point.

mjmsmith 3y ago
Better to say nothing and risk being thought a lizard brain than to say "A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural", and remove all doubt.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  Perhaps so, but if I'm not stating facts then what else do we attribute the subsequent trouble to as outlined in those links? What's worse risk of being shot as the messenger or saying nothing and letting situations get more out of hand? I've always preferred the former but as I've witnessed here many prefer to remain silent.
nvy 3y ago
>If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. Tell me you don't have military experience without telling me you don't have military experience. This statement is patently absurd.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
deanCommie 3y ago
[flagged]
- hilbert42 3y ago
  "Why be EXTRA courteous to women? Already reveals you think of them as different." Because that's the ways boys were taught by BOTH schools and their parents when I was a kid not only from our youngest age but also it was reinforced throughout highschool until we left. This was sacrosanct value of good behavior in our society until recently. It's a damn shame that you and others like you are not old enough to have a sufficient sense of history to realize the problems and damage you are causing by accusing innocent people like me for having the normal views and values of my society's culture. It is extremely upsetting and unfair that you make such allegations. I'm not responsible for society having turned its values upsidedown in recent years.
  - deanCommie 3y ago
    [flagged]
    - hilbert42 3y ago
      "There are tens, hundreds of thousands of others like you on the internet" I've never mentioned this matter on the internet previously. And I do treat women equally both as colleagues at work and elsewhere and have always done so. The difference comes when someone is aggressive towards me. With a male I'll stand ground and argue back (but not physically), with a female I'll walk away. It's the prudent thing to do.
      - vixen99 3y ago
        I'm wondering what -arguing physically- might be.
      - deanCommie 3y ago
        > With a male I'll stand ground and argue back (but not physically), with a female I'll walk away. Could we continue digging into this in good faith? If they're so aggressive that it's unprofessional, then neither men nor women should be doing it to you! You should not rise to their level, remain professional and calm, defend your position intellectually without aggression. Try to settle the dispute, or escalate to management if need be. But after, you can give feedback to either them, to their manager, or to HR to determine how you two can have a similar disagreement in the future without unprofessional aggression. If it's just a tense disagreement of opinion and involves someone coming off aggressive, but remains professional, then why would you argue differently if it's a man or a woman? I'm sure there is more nuance to your point, but to me this seems fairly binary: Each of these scenarios is gender-agnostic.
Dalewyn 3y ago
I made a comment a couple days ago (which has since been flagged, go figure) about how the MeToo movement was and still is a disaster that just made interacting with women more problematic and far too much of a liability than it has to be. I thank you for reaffirming my thoughts on it more eloquently than I ever could.
- hilbert42 3y ago
  Due to the later time of your comment you may not have noticed but a comment in reply to mine was flagged and it meant my subsequent replies had to be removed or they would not make sense (I don't think I said anything in them that alone would have warranted removal). I don't blame HN for this because such action stops the thread turning into a brawl where both sides become even more polarized and arguments get even more heated. When I made my initial post I thought I was just making an observation on the story and I gave experiences which I would not repeat from my observations of cultural shifts of recent years. It certainly was not my intention to inflame and I didn't anticipate a large portion of these comments would have to be removed as a result. Unfortunately, forums have to so act to keep some semblance of order. The tragedy is that issues such this topic—women working in traditional male roles such as the military, the Me Too movement, stuff about kids, veganism, etc.—can no longer be discussed in a rational manner seemingly anywhere in society without them flaring up into melees that have to be quashed to keep order. Why in recent years many people have become so polarized and indignantly and or righteously argumentative about such issues is a complex matter and I don't think anyone fully understands why. There's little point me speculating about the reasons here except to say that there are many HN stories I choose not to comment on for reasons not out of fear they will be flagged but because it's clear to me that even if I put a moderate and well-reasoned case they'll nevertheless draw comments that will likely result in them being flagged. It's not that HN posters are any more rowdy than elsewhere—in fact, HN is one of the more civilized places on the Web—it's that I know such stories will draw attacks by virtue of the topics themselves. In these situations I prefer to self-censor and don't post because if I were to add anything meaningful to the conversation it would draw wrath and ire of many, and as I see no virtue in adding innocuous or irrelevant comment, it's better to remain silent—a point I've already made earlier.

mjmsmith 3y ago

Better to say nothing and risk being thought a lizard brain than to say "A group of males locked up and isolated without sex for three months but still in the tempting presence of women isn't natural", and remove all doubt.

hilbert42 3y ago
Perhaps so, but if I'm not stating facts then what else do we attribute the subsequent trouble to as outlined in those links? What's worse risk of being shot as the messenger or saying nothing and letting situations get more out of hand? I've always preferred the former but as I've witnessed here many prefer to remain silent.

nvy 3y ago

>If for some reason I had to take disciplinary action against one of those women and I had good and legitimate reason to do so then I would be at risk of retribution. Tell me you don't have military experience without telling me you don't have military experience. This statement is patently absurd.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

deanCommie 3y ago

[flagged]

hilbert42 3y ago
"Why be EXTRA courteous to women? Already reveals you think of them as different." Because that's the ways boys were taught by BOTH schools and their parents when I was a kid not only from our youngest age but also it was reinforced throughout highschool until we left. This was sacrosanct value of good behavior in our society until recently. It's a damn shame that you and others like you are not old enough to have a sufficient sense of history to realize the problems and damage you are causing by accusing innocent people like me for having the normal views and values of my society's culture. It is extremely upsetting and unfair that you make such allegations. I'm not responsible for society having turned its values upsidedown in recent years.
- deanCommie 3y ago
  [flagged]
  - hilbert42 3y ago
    "There are tens, hundreds of thousands of others like you on the internet" I've never mentioned this matter on the internet previously. And I do treat women equally both as colleagues at work and elsewhere and have always done so. The difference comes when someone is aggressive towards me. With a male I'll stand ground and argue back (but not physically), with a female I'll walk away. It's the prudent thing to do.
    - vixen99 3y ago
      I'm wondering what -arguing physically- might be.
    - deanCommie 3y ago
      > With a male I'll stand ground and argue back (but not physically), with a female I'll walk away. Could we continue digging into this in good faith? If they're so aggressive that it's unprofessional, then neither men nor women should be doing it to you! You should not rise to their level, remain professional and calm, defend your position intellectually without aggression. Try to settle the dispute, or escalate to management if need be. But after, you can give feedback to either them, to their manager, or to HR to determine how you two can have a similar disagreement in the future without unprofessional aggression. If it's just a tense disagreement of opinion and involves someone coming off aggressive, but remains professional, then why would you argue differently if it's a man or a woman? I'm sure there is more nuance to your point, but to me this seems fairly binary: Each of these scenarios is gender-agnostic.

Dalewyn 3y ago

I made a comment a couple days ago (which has since been flagged, go figure) about how the MeToo movement was and still is a disaster that just made interacting with women more problematic and far too much of a liability than it has to be. I thank you for reaffirming my thoughts on it more eloquently than I ever could.

hilbert42 3y ago
Due to the later time of your comment you may not have noticed but a comment in reply to mine was flagged and it meant my subsequent replies had to be removed or they would not make sense (I don't think I said anything in them that alone would have warranted removal). I don't blame HN for this because such action stops the thread turning into a brawl where both sides become even more polarized and arguments get even more heated. When I made my initial post I thought I was just making an observation on the story and I gave experiences which I would not repeat from my observations of cultural shifts of recent years. It certainly was not my intention to inflame and I didn't anticipate a large portion of these comments would have to be removed as a result. Unfortunately, forums have to so act to keep some semblance of order. The tragedy is that issues such this topic—women working in traditional male roles such as the military, the Me Too movement, stuff about kids, veganism, etc.—can no longer be discussed in a rational manner seemingly anywhere in society without them flaring up into melees that have to be quashed to keep order. Why in recent years many people have become so polarized and indignantly and or righteously argumentative about such issues is a complex matter and I don't think anyone fully understands why. There's little point me speculating about the reasons here except to say that there are many HN stories I choose not to comment on for reasons not out of fear they will be flagged but because it's clear to me that even if I put a moderate and well-reasoned case they'll nevertheless draw comments that will likely result in them being flagged. It's not that HN posters are any more rowdy than elsewhere—in fact, HN is one of the more civilized places on the Web—it's that I know such stories will draw attacks by virtue of the topics themselves. In these situations I prefer to self-censor and don't post because if I were to add anything meaningful to the conversation it would draw wrath and ire of many, and as I see no virtue in adding innocuous or irrelevant comment, it's better to remain silent—a point I've already made earlier.