3 ms·

With due respect, I think that this post is unbecoming HN. JWZ's quip was sexist and so is this follow-up. Also, while there is a long history of the success

by dasht 17y ago

With due respect, I think that this post is unbecoming HN. JWZ's quip was sexist and so is this follow-up. Also, while there is a long history of the successful monetization of business models which "get people laid," generally speaking such models command at best low respect and at worst criminalization. Sometimes some people wonder why computing tech industries are seemingly so uninviting to women. Other times, other people wonder why that first group is acting so surprised. "How many feminists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?" "That's not funny." is funny, because it's true.

lionhearted 17y ago
> JWZ's quip was sexist and so is this follow-up. Guys really want to sleep with girls, and have less options and a harder time of it, especially when they're younger. Guys spend hundreds, thousands of dollars to try to get girls, and almost everything is marketed to men as the answer towards getting women. Making that explicit acknowledges how things are and what's really actually happening in the world, and is probably less sexist than the average car commercial, beer commercial, diamond commercial, men's magazine, or women's magazine.
- dasht 17y ago
  The post in question doesn't acknowledge that "that's how things are" and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition. On the contrary, the post in question joins in making sure that "that's how things are" and thus contributes to an overall environment that is detrimental to most women.
  - lionhearted 17y ago
    Mate, the guy did something sweet for his girlfriend, and she was happy and touched and affectionate with him afterwards. That's a nice thing. > ...and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition. Okay, think about this for a second: Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later. Men? Not so much. For a lot of reasons, women are more sought after and desirable than men, especially from ages 16-24 or so. They have more options and dating and sex is easier for them. Yet, guys tremendously want women, so they work really hard to try to get women. Now, I believe that men should spend their time primarily working on developing their character and becoming more outstanding instead of chasing a particular girl and being less outstanding. But I digress, the way things are is that women's dating/sexual market value is orders of magnitude higher than a man's, especially when they're both younger. Acknowledging that explicitly - "Your goal should be to get your users hooking up and connecting with people" - is much more honest than the vast majority of marketing and commercials where a guy cracks a beer and then there's the bikini team dancing all around him. "Get your users laid" is a slightly crass and amusing way for saying "facilitate communication between genders to make dating, sex, romance, and courtship more rewarding and less awkward", and that's not a bad thing. Using somewhat crass terminology - "get laid" - isn't so much sexist as just being a little crass and casual, but gets the message across a lot easier than some politically correct, "Your app should facilitate interpersonal communication and interaction, especially between people open to an intimate relationship" - which means the same thing, but doesn't call it like it really is.
    - pyre 17y ago
      > be fully confident that they can get home safe later. You're leaving out the possibility of rape (date or otherwise). And I'm not sure what you're implying here about men. Men can't be confident that they will get home safe when they go to a party where they don't know anyone? The only thing that I can guess at here is that you think that a man that goes to a party where he doesn't know anyone will get beat up. If that's the case, how is it more or less likely that a man will get beat up at a party full of strangers than a woman will get raped? If anything I think it would be more likely for a woman to get raped (gets drunk and passes out; guy goes too far while making out and she has a 'victim mindset' so she doesn't protest loud enough for others to hear/notice; etc)
    - deleted 17y ago
      [deleted]
    - philwelch 17y ago
      "Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later." That's very much not the case. How the hell do women judge whether the people at any given party are "decent" without knowing anyone very well? Given the very real risks and dangers women face in these situations (mainly rape), they can't really know. It's one of the more serious problems that women face. I'm not saying you have a bad overall point here, but this particular example is way off base.
      - philwelch 17y ago
        I hate to ask, but can I get an explanation on the downmod here? I did my best to honestly convey an accurate and useful point and am not sure what I did wrong.
        rphlx 17y ago
        Duh. You discouraged girls from attending parties. Correct or not, that's the last thing the world needs. I was in a hotel bar in Santa Clara last night with 60+ men and 0 women.
kscaldef 17y ago
Or maybe what's sexist is thinking that women don't want to get laid too?
pyre 17y ago
> generally speaking such models command at best low respect and at worst criminalization. So... a site that allows people to search for other people that want to have sex is a criminal organization? How does facilitating sex between two consenting parties deserve low respect? If 'Girl A' wants to have sex tonight and 'Boy B' wants to have sex tonight too, what exactly is the problem with finding a way for them to find each other so that they can both have sex tonight? I'm really not seeing the outrage here. Feminism was (supposed to be) all about empowering women. Doesn't allowing a woman to actively search out sexual partners on her own terms empowerment? I mean if you really want to misinterpret his post to the extreme you could say that he's advocating becoming a pimp because it "gets people laid," but I doubt that you'll find many other people willing share in that interpretation with you.
schleyfox 17y ago
With due respect, I am offended by your assumption of heteronormativity. By assuming that "get people laid" refers to a traditional dominate male submissive female sexual dynamic, you clearly reveal your own sexism.
theBobMcCormick 17y ago
Geesh, calm down puritan. The only thing remotely sexist about JWZ's famous quit is that he said "get him laid" rather than "get him/her laid". Pull your head out of the dark ages and wake up to the 21st century. Like the old song said "Sex is natural. Sex is good. Not everybody does it, but everybody should". :-)

by dasht 17y ago

lionhearted 17y ago

> JWZ's quip was sexist and so is this follow-up. Guys really want to sleep with girls, and have less options and a harder time of it, especially when they're younger. Guys spend hundreds, thousands of dollars to try to get girls, and almost everything is marketed to men as the answer towards getting women. Making that explicit acknowledges how things are and what's really actually happening in the world, and is probably less sexist than the average car commercial, beer commercial, diamond commercial, men's magazine, or women's magazine.

dasht 17y ago
The post in question doesn't acknowledge that "that's how things are" and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition. On the contrary, the post in question joins in making sure that "that's how things are" and thus contributes to an overall environment that is detrimental to most women.
- lionhearted 17y ago
  Mate, the guy did something sweet for his girlfriend, and she was happy and touched and affectionate with him afterwards. That's a nice thing. > ...and it certainly doesn't acknowledge that there are reasons why things being that way is an undesirable condition. Okay, think about this for a second: Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later. Men? Not so much. For a lot of reasons, women are more sought after and desirable than men, especially from ages 16-24 or so. They have more options and dating and sex is easier for them. Yet, guys tremendously want women, so they work really hard to try to get women. Now, I believe that men should spend their time primarily working on developing their character and becoming more outstanding instead of chasing a particular girl and being less outstanding. But I digress, the way things are is that women's dating/sexual market value is orders of magnitude higher than a man's, especially when they're both younger. Acknowledging that explicitly - "Your goal should be to get your users hooking up and connecting with people" - is much more honest than the vast majority of marketing and commercials where a guy cracks a beer and then there's the bikini team dancing all around him. "Get your users laid" is a slightly crass and amusing way for saying "facilitate communication between genders to make dating, sex, romance, and courtship more rewarding and less awkward", and that's not a bad thing. Using somewhat crass terminology - "get laid" - isn't so much sexist as just being a little crass and casual, but gets the message across a lot easier than some politically correct, "Your app should facilitate interpersonal communication and interaction, especially between people open to an intimate relationship" - which means the same thing, but doesn't call it like it really is.
  - pyre 17y ago
    > be fully confident that they can get home safe later. You're leaving out the possibility of rape (date or otherwise). And I'm not sure what you're implying here about men. Men can't be confident that they will get home safe when they go to a party where they don't know anyone? The only thing that I can guess at here is that you think that a man that goes to a party where he doesn't know anyone will get beat up. If that's the case, how is it more or less likely that a man will get beat up at a party full of strangers than a woman will get raped? If anything I think it would be more likely for a woman to get raped (gets drunk and passes out; guy goes too far while making out and she has a 'victim mindset' so she doesn't protest loud enough for others to hear/notice; etc)
  - deleted 17y ago
    [deleted]
  - philwelch 17y ago
    "Women can go to basically any party with decent people, whenever they want, with no money and no transportation, without knowing anyone very well, and be fully confident that they can get home safe later." That's very much not the case. How the hell do women judge whether the people at any given party are "decent" without knowing anyone very well? Given the very real risks and dangers women face in these situations (mainly rape), they can't really know. It's one of the more serious problems that women face. I'm not saying you have a bad overall point here, but this particular example is way off base.
    - philwelch 17y ago
      I hate to ask, but can I get an explanation on the downmod here? I did my best to honestly convey an accurate and useful point and am not sure what I did wrong.
      - rphlx 17y ago
        Duh. You discouraged girls from attending parties. Correct or not, that's the last thing the world needs. I was in a hotel bar in Santa Clara last night with 60+ men and 0 women.

kscaldef 17y ago

Or maybe what's sexist is thinking that women don't want to get laid too?

pyre 17y ago

> generally speaking such models command at best low respect and at worst criminalization. So... a site that allows people to search for other people that want to have sex is a criminal organization? How does facilitating sex between two consenting parties deserve low respect? If 'Girl A' wants to have sex tonight and 'Boy B' wants to have sex tonight too, what exactly is the problem with finding a way for them to find each other so that they can both have sex tonight? I'm really not seeing the outrage here. Feminism was (supposed to be) all about empowering women. Doesn't allowing a woman to actively search out sexual partners on her own terms empowerment? I mean if you really want to misinterpret his post to the extreme you could say that he's advocating becoming a pimp because it "gets people laid," but I doubt that you'll find many other people willing share in that interpretation with you.

schleyfox 17y ago

With due respect, I am offended by your assumption of heteronormativity. By assuming that "get people laid" refers to a traditional dominate male submissive female sexual dynamic, you clearly reveal your own sexism.

theBobMcCormick 17y ago

Geesh, calm down puritan. The only thing remotely sexist about JWZ's famous quit is that he said "get him laid" rather than "get him/her laid". Pull your head out of the dark ages and wake up to the 21st century. Like the old song said "Sex is natural. Sex is good. Not everybody does it, but everybody should". :-)