4 ms·

Honestly, I have to say I consider this a stupid discussion. On the Internet, where people are anonymous, you are going to have more rude comments from men. Th

Honestly, I have to say I consider this a stupid discussion. On the Internet, where people are anonymous, you are going to have more rude comments from men. The male of the species is hardwired to see women as sexual objects and while that doesn’t forgive crude comments it does point to their cause being an evolutionary fact. Men are programmed with a strong sex drive to propagate the species. So men are, by their nature, sexually driven and hence crude. But that crudeness is already considered socially unacceptable and that’s why the great majority of men don’t make them. So having a "discussion on the topic" is stupid. Because all a discussion would yield is the rational conclusion that crude comments are wrong which we already know and which won't stop those who make them from continuing to do so.

whacked_new 18y ago
Here's why it is not stupid. What you mentioned explains the current. But it doesn't imply that the future will be like it. Another example: you spot a rock moving in space. Hey, it has been moving along this path, because it always has been. We can stop talking about it, and expect it to move in the same direction. Or, we can talk about it, and decide to exert force on it to change its direction. The fruit of an intelligent discussion on this topic can lead to positive changes in behavior. Many people tend to overlook this, which I find to be an unfortunate side effect of the growing number of people who study, in some form or another, evolutionary psychology: that's how it is now, that's how it's going to be. They complete the first step of explaining why, but they don't go a step beyond that and think, knowing this, what can we do about it? In my opinion this is one of the most important traits of humans and human-related discussions: their ability to learn to self-evolve. /rant To preempt any rebuttals, notice that I am not making any assumptions about positives and negatives here.
- jonas_b 18y ago
  I can see what you're getting at, but I think the point Tom was trying to make was that even if 99% of men are non-sexist and make reasonable on-topic comments on female bloggers, the vocal sexist minority is still going to be there and make stupid comments. Indeed, it's not very optimistic. I think a solution would be if more sites implemented HN's rating system which hopefully would increase the ignorability of crude comments.
lutorm 18y ago
That's like saying that because men are more testosterone driven and prone to violence, society should just accept it because any discussion about it would be "stupid". Your assumption is that your opinion that violence (or crudeness) is socially unacceptable implies that opinion is shared by everyone. Clearly it is not, as is evident from the fact that these things happen. Do not underestimate the power of a strong community response to influence the behavior (if not opinions) of individuals. You should also not underestimate the value of a strong condemnation to the victims of such crudeness/violence. After all, how should these women know that the majority of men consider this behavior unacceptable if that majority doesn't pipe up?

whacked_new 18y ago

Here's why it is not stupid. What you mentioned explains the current. But it doesn't imply that the future will be like it. Another example: you spot a rock moving in space. Hey, it has been moving along this path, because it always has been. We can stop talking about it, and expect it to move in the same direction. Or, we can talk about it, and decide to exert force on it to change its direction. The fruit of an intelligent discussion on this topic can lead to positive changes in behavior. Many people tend to overlook this, which I find to be an unfortunate side effect of the growing number of people who study, in some form or another, evolutionary psychology: that's how it is now, that's how it's going to be. They complete the first step of explaining why, but they don't go a step beyond that and think, knowing this, what can we do about it? In my opinion this is one of the most important traits of humans and human-related discussions: their ability to learn to self-evolve. /rant To preempt any rebuttals, notice that I am not making any assumptions about positives and negatives here.

jonas_b 18y ago
I can see what you're getting at, but I think the point Tom was trying to make was that even if 99% of men are non-sexist and make reasonable on-topic comments on female bloggers, the vocal sexist minority is still going to be there and make stupid comments. Indeed, it's not very optimistic. I think a solution would be if more sites implemented HN's rating system which hopefully would increase the ignorability of crude comments.

lutorm 18y ago

That's like saying that because men are more testosterone driven and prone to violence, society should just accept it because any discussion about it would be "stupid". Your assumption is that your opinion that violence (or crudeness) is socially unacceptable implies that opinion is shared by everyone. Clearly it is not, as is evident from the fact that these things happen. Do not underestimate the power of a strong community response to influence the behavior (if not opinions) of individuals. You should also not underestimate the value of a strong condemnation to the victims of such crudeness/violence. After all, how should these women know that the majority of men consider this behavior unacceptable if that majority doesn't pipe up?