4 ms·

I mean it’s not a huge reach what OP is saying. Women are generally more open about their feelings publicly and about their mental health - so it would be expec

by calmoo 3y ago

I mean it’s not a huge reach what OP is saying. Women are generally more open about their feelings publicly and about their mental health - so it would be expected so see a higher prevalence of women talking about antidepressants on social media. And a quick google says that women are twice as likely to be prescribed antidepressants.

hammyhavoc 3y ago
It's a reach, because his research almost certainly didn't happen and it doesn't take into consideration algorithmic echo chambers, his own social circle, confirmation bias, and that's without even getting into this being complete and utter sexist shite. Most women I know don't post about their problems on social media, and it's likely a combination of demographic and risk, that and high availability of counseling and therapy. This is without even getting into a lot of men I know posting about it, including me. It probably skews about even. In 2024, there's been an exodus of certain demographics from social media. Does his research take that into consideration? It's just a stupid and sexist comment on HN that deserved to be called out for being a stupid and sexist comment, nothing more.
- mjfl 3y ago
  Do you have any peer reviewed studies that contradict my common sense and intuition?
  - jokoon 3y ago
    Burden of proof is on the person who makes claims. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.
    - mjfl 3y ago
      Burden of proof is on the person who contradicts common sense.
- calmoo 3y ago
  I get where you’re coming from but I think you are overreacting a bit. I would suggest taking the most generous interpretation of OP’s comment. There’s nothing inherently wrong with noticing that women post more about this stuff - anecdotal as it may be. Even you yourself say it ‘probably skews about even’, you too have no evidence. No need to accuse the commenter of sexism. It can also be an innocuous observation of their social media feed.

by calmoo 3y ago

hammyhavoc 3y ago

It's a reach, because his research almost certainly didn't happen and it doesn't take into consideration algorithmic echo chambers, his own social circle, confirmation bias, and that's without even getting into this being complete and utter sexist shite. Most women I know don't post about their problems on social media, and it's likely a combination of demographic and risk, that and high availability of counseling and therapy. This is without even getting into a lot of men I know posting about it, including me. It probably skews about even. In 2024, there's been an exodus of certain demographics from social media. Does his research take that into consideration? It's just a stupid and sexist comment on HN that deserved to be called out for being a stupid and sexist comment, nothing more.

mjfl 3y ago
Do you have any peer reviewed studies that contradict my common sense and intuition?
- jokoon 3y ago
  Burden of proof is on the person who makes claims. Absence of proof is not proof of absence.
  - mjfl 3y ago
    Burden of proof is on the person who contradicts common sense.
calmoo 3y ago
I get where you’re coming from but I think you are overreacting a bit. I would suggest taking the most generous interpretation of OP’s comment. There’s nothing inherently wrong with noticing that women post more about this stuff - anecdotal as it may be. Even you yourself say it ‘probably skews about even’, you too have no evidence. No need to accuse the commenter of sexism. It can also be an innocuous observation of their social media feed.