3 ms·

Gender bias will never cease to exist, and for good reasons, the fight for equality happened many times before in history, and never ended well. Male and femal

by speeder 14y ago

Gender bias will never cease to exist, and for good reasons, the fight for equality happened many times before in history, and never ended well. Male and female are very dismorphic, we cannot change that easily, male and female have very specialized roles and purposes. Yes, I am happy that people now in general have more equal opportunity than ever, and that we can have awesome workers on some areas from any background, but we should not push it too much now, society now is already very different, and failing in some aspects, more equality won't make things better, but can make things worse, much worse. Understand that past societies were not forced to be the way they were, they just changed until they settled on something that works, and it worked for good reasons. Why several societies in the world are severely against gays, especially male ones? It is because it was very important on these societies to have children, not having children was unacceptable. Today having children became too expensive, so the focus of relationships changed, and now several countries even allow gay marriage or civil union, but the need to maintain your population don't changed. Some people will argue about over population, yes, I agree that it is a danger, but we must remember that we are not even replacing our populations, we are outright declining, and the result will be some cultures disappearing, and others with higher birth rates taking their place. The funny thing about equality seeking cultures, is that they tend to erase themselves and give way to totally non equal cultures to take their place. People forget that we still live in a world, where in many contexts, might make right.

speeder 14y ago
I love HN, I make a huge post, and when the page finishes loading the tread again it is already downvoted
- lclarkmichalek 14y ago
  Well you didn't really change your argument or raise any interesting points half way through. I mean, you're probably better off that people don't finish it if you want to avoid downvotes, considering that you suggest discrimination against gay people is due to societies wanting to maintain a population.
- shardling 14y ago
  I downvoted you because I don't think the post was very coherent. It rambles, it doesn't make any effort to directly connect to the original story, and in general comes across more as a rant than a piece of thoughtful commentary.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > I love HN, I make a huge post, and when the page finishes loading the tread again it is already downvoted Posts aren't judged based on size, but content. And anonymous voting is often completely unfair -- just like life. I suggest that you take this as useful feedback to improve how you express yourself. Your post has word usage issues (as other have commented), a problem with length versus content, things like that. At risk of quoting a cliche, make lemonade.
  - speeder 14y ago
    It was downvoted in the time between me hitting submit and the page loading again, how it was a judgement of content? The guy can read the whole wall of text in the three seconds it took my 3g to reload?
    - lutusp 14y ago
      > The guy can read the whole wall of text in the three seconds it took my 3g to reload? 1. Certainly. There are lots of speed-readers out there. 2. Why do you assume the downvoter was a guy? That's an everyday example of sexism.
    - deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]
    - speeder 14y ago
      But I did not edited anything, what are you talking about???
- andreasvc 14y ago
  Your points suffer from the is-ought problem. Your last sentence about "might makes right" even reveals you are aware of this, without any attempt to address it. This takes away the foundation of your whole post.
return0 14y ago
- The fight for gender equality is exclusively 20th century thing (correction 18+ century and limited to the industrial world); never happened before - Gender equality wasn't imposed in society by an external entity, it was brought about because it was essential (not only on moral grounds but economic as well) - Most societies for most of history were less hostile to homo/bi-sexuality than the modern (pre-1970s) West (Even in today's islamic countries there's a dont-ask-dont-tell attitude) You also seem to forget that the Western culture was not invented or developed by the same ethnic groups who maintain it nowadays. [edited for corrections]
- speeder 14y ago
  It happened before, I will see if later I find some paper links to paste here. Also gender equality was not needed in the current society, it is that the current society made it possible, quite different.
- lutusp 14y ago
  > The fight for gender equality is exclusively 20th century thing; never happened before No, this is false. All that differed in historical accounts of gender struggles were the methods and the scale, not the goals. Do the names Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony ring any bells (19th century)? Or Margaret Cavendish from the 17th century? Suggested reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_feminism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_feminism > Most societies for most of history were less hostile to homosexuality than the modern West Also false -- very, very false. Even the Bible contains accounts of homophobia.
  - return0 14y ago
    I would not consider a few exceptional single individuals (there were others, beyond the recent anglo-saxon part of history) to constitute a "movement". The social equilibrium at the time did not leave a place for gender equality until the 20th century (industrialization/the need for women to work away from home/the washing machine etc). WRT homosexuality - you are confusing cause and effect. The Bible was what brought homosexuality to such a negative light in the christian/western world.
andreasvc 14y ago
> Male and female are very dismorphic You mean sexually dimorphic. This is actually the subject of significant controversy (esp. with regards to intelligence), so you cannot state this so carelessly. An uncontroversial case of sexual dimorphism is a male spider which is three times smaller than its female counterpart.
- return0 14y ago
  It's only controversial with regards to sensitive issues like intelligence. Of course humans are indisputably sexually dimorphic (and culturally polymorphic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans
  - andreasvc 14y ago
    > It's only controversial with regards to sensitive issues like intelligence. Granted. > Of course humans are indisputably sexually dimorphic Only in a trivial/technical sense, i.e., there have to be differences for there to be distinguishable sexes. But for a biologist, humans as a species are not known for and do not stand out for their sexual dimorphism, compared to other species. Which leads me to conjecture that the differences and problems with sexism are more related to the social construct of gender.
javascripter9 14y ago
Homosexuality exists for a scientific reason. Specifically, the genes that make a male gay, when expressed in a female, make her hyper-fertile, 3-5 children as opposed to the 1-2 on average. The homosexual males then assist in the raising of the additional siblings. So your position that homosexuality leads to population decline is an ignorant one. It's a boon to population, in fact, our entire evolution engineered it to insure the survival of the species. Gender bias may never cease to exist, but the idea that equality can be a bad thing was dead on arrival. No equality seeking culture has ever erased themselves. Name one, and point out what makes that an equality seeking culture that killed itself because it was seeking equality and not because of hundreds of more relevant reasons.

by speeder 14y ago

speeder 14y ago

I love HN, I make a huge post, and when the page finishes loading the tread again it is already downvoted

lclarkmichalek 14y ago
Well you didn't really change your argument or raise any interesting points half way through. I mean, you're probably better off that people don't finish it if you want to avoid downvotes, considering that you suggest discrimination against gay people is due to societies wanting to maintain a population.
shardling 14y ago
I downvoted you because I don't think the post was very coherent. It rambles, it doesn't make any effort to directly connect to the original story, and in general comes across more as a rant than a piece of thoughtful commentary.
lutusp 14y ago
> I love HN, I make a huge post, and when the page finishes loading the tread again it is already downvoted Posts aren't judged based on size, but content. And anonymous voting is often completely unfair -- just like life. I suggest that you take this as useful feedback to improve how you express yourself. Your post has word usage issues (as other have commented), a problem with length versus content, things like that. At risk of quoting a cliche, make lemonade.
- speeder 14y ago
  It was downvoted in the time between me hitting submit and the page loading again, how it was a judgement of content? The guy can read the whole wall of text in the three seconds it took my 3g to reload?
  - lutusp 14y ago
    > The guy can read the whole wall of text in the three seconds it took my 3g to reload? 1. Certainly. There are lots of speed-readers out there. 2. Why do you assume the downvoter was a guy? That's an everyday example of sexism.
  - deleted 14y ago
    [deleted]
  - speeder 14y ago
    But I did not edited anything, what are you talking about???
andreasvc 14y ago
Your points suffer from the is-ought problem. Your last sentence about "might makes right" even reveals you are aware of this, without any attempt to address it. This takes away the foundation of your whole post.

return0 14y ago

- The fight for gender equality is exclusively 20th century thing (correction 18+ century and limited to the industrial world); never happened before - Gender equality wasn't imposed in society by an external entity, it was brought about because it was essential (not only on moral grounds but economic as well) - Most societies for most of history were less hostile to homo/bi-sexuality than the modern (pre-1970s) West (Even in today's islamic countries there's a dont-ask-dont-tell attitude) You also seem to forget that the Western culture was not invented or developed by the same ethnic groups who maintain it nowadays. [edited for corrections]

speeder 14y ago
It happened before, I will see if later I find some paper links to paste here. Also gender equality was not needed in the current society, it is that the current society made it possible, quite different.
lutusp 14y ago
> The fight for gender equality is exclusively 20th century thing; never happened before No, this is false. All that differed in historical accounts of gender struggles were the methods and the scale, not the goals. Do the names Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Susan B. Anthony ring any bells (19th century)? Or Margaret Cavendish from the 17th century? Suggested reading: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_feminism http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_feminism > Most societies for most of history were less hostile to homosexuality than the modern West Also false -- very, very false. Even the Bible contains accounts of homophobia.
- return0 14y ago
  I would not consider a few exceptional single individuals (there were others, beyond the recent anglo-saxon part of history) to constitute a "movement". The social equilibrium at the time did not leave a place for gender equality until the 20th century (industrialization/the need for women to work away from home/the washing machine etc). WRT homosexuality - you are confusing cause and effect. The Bible was what brought homosexuality to such a negative light in the christian/western world.

andreasvc 14y ago

> Male and female are very dismorphic You mean sexually dimorphic. This is actually the subject of significant controversy (esp. with regards to intelligence), so you cannot state this so carelessly. An uncontroversial case of sexual dimorphism is a male spider which is three times smaller than its female counterpart.

return0 14y ago
It's only controversial with regards to sensitive issues like intelligence. Of course humans are indisputably sexually dimorphic (and culturally polymorphic) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_differences_in_humans
- andreasvc 14y ago
  > It's only controversial with regards to sensitive issues like intelligence. Granted. > Of course humans are indisputably sexually dimorphic Only in a trivial/technical sense, i.e., there have to be differences for there to be distinguishable sexes. But for a biologist, humans as a species are not known for and do not stand out for their sexual dimorphism, compared to other species. Which leads me to conjecture that the differences and problems with sexism are more related to the social construct of gender.

javascripter9 14y ago

Homosexuality exists for a scientific reason. Specifically, the genes that make a male gay, when expressed in a female, make her hyper-fertile, 3-5 children as opposed to the 1-2 on average. The homosexual males then assist in the raising of the additional siblings. So your position that homosexuality leads to population decline is an ignorant one. It's a boon to population, in fact, our entire evolution engineered it to insure the survival of the species. Gender bias may never cease to exist, but the idea that equality can be a bad thing was dead on arrival. No equality seeking culture has ever erased themselves. Name one, and point out what makes that an equality seeking culture that killed itself because it was seeking equality and not because of hundreds of more relevant reasons.