3 ms·
> Living by yourself in the woods is apparently manly. Yes, men are more likely to live in the woods by themselves than females. I haven't looked up this fact
by Xcelerate 14y ago
> Living by yourself in the woods is apparently manly.
Yes, men are more likely to live in the woods by themselves than females. I haven't looked up this fact anywhere, but I guarantee I can find you a reference if you want one.
> But saying that she is "more of a man"...
... means she is better than most men at something they typically perform "better" (in a quantitive sense, mind you) than females. Which is completely the same as the situation I provided above. Perhaps you are getting confused by common American phrases. I might guess that you are not a native (American English) speaker?
EDIT: Just checked out your Twitter from the link on your HN profile and confirmed what I thought with regards to American vernacular.
And "somebody dunk that nerd's head in a toilet. It'll put hair in his chest. Like a real man!" Wow, seriously? This kind of hypocrisy? May I ask why it's okay to discriminate/oppress only certain groups?
I am certain your (and your friend's) views are highly abnormal, OR you are both greatly misinterpreting what scrapcode said (hint: this is the more likely explanation).
Check out the definition of sexist:
"Discrimination on the basis of sex, esp the oppression of women by men"
I do not adhere to this definition one bit, and quite frankly, I'm upset that you are having fun at my expense (with something that is not true) on Twitter. Anonymous HN users on are people too.
- untog 14y agoIt should be pretty self evident that that particular Twitter reply was sarcastic. And I would say that my view is highly normal, but I suspect that we will never agree with each other. Attributing gender as a broad label is sexist because it creates a gender definition where there is not one. There are women stronger than the average man, it does not make them "more of a man", it makes them "stronger than the average man". There is an important distinction. Again, nothing would have been lost if the original post described her as "strong" instead of "more of a man". (And yes, I understand American English perfectly, thank you. It is not difficult.)
- cowpewter 14y agoThank you untog, that was exactly my issue with the original phrasing. It's not that she was praised for being stronger than all the men the OP knew, but that she was being praised for, essentially, being better at being a man than all the men the OP knew. A small distinction, that makes the original sentiment come off as very sexist. I don't think the OP was being sexist on purpose, or maliciously, or even consciously. I just wanted to bring attention to it, because this is the sort of casual sexism that pervades a lot of people's thinking without them even realizing it.
- untog 14y agoThanks, I thought I was going crazy for a second there. Agreed that no one is being intentionally sexist- I think it's just a side effect of phrases and colloquialisms that have been in our culture for a long time.