Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

On Geeks and Gays

newstilt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 232 posts

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#161

Post by bootload »

elblanco wrote: post #141
bootload wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"... I managed not to get bullied much (it usually stopped quickly after a round of fisticuffs and my father being a boxing coach in his youth) ..." However this technique does not always work. Bullying is about finding weakness and applying an asymmetric attack. I'm not sure this approach will work with say a group of girls?

For guys? It works pretty well, close to 100%. If you can stand up for yourself, even "losing" a fight will usually put a stop to the bullying. The desire not to get hurt, even as a fight "winner", will typically prevent most bullies from engaging in the behavior. Self-preservation is a powerful motivator. Bullies seem to try and pick most subjects to pick on because they believe that subject won't fight back. Once t…

"... What always fascinated me is how girl bullying has almost no effect on a guy (even with other girls), so girls quickly give up on bullying guys (I'll come back to this in a second), but can devastate a girl, while the inverse, guys bullying girls can be just as effective as guys bullying guys. ..."

Don't know about this. I've seen groups of women cut men down in bars all the time. Another explanation is maybe men don't show weakness.

"... She knows that she has a peer group she can draw positive socializations from, while her friends are still thinking that someday, those popular girls might want to be friends with them and care about maintaining that possible relationship -- which the popular girls seem to use as an avenue for their bullying. ..."

Excellent observation.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#162

Post by DanielBMarkham »

John -- congratulations in your quest. I never understood it and even after reading your description don't understand it. Turing had a great mind, but there are a plethora of people with great minds who were killed by society in some fashion or another because of being different. The Holocaust comes to mind. We could take up reams of paper with people treated just like Turing. What real impact does this have aside from making people feel like they did something of value? I really do not understand -- but that's not important.

Obviously this was great for both you and your supporters. I can respect the fact that everybody has different motivations and values, some of which are fathomless. So while I can't share your joy, I can be happy for you. Congratulations in accomplishing your goal!

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#163

Post by cj »

tome wrote: post #145
cj wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you saying being raised in a foster home makes for a better childhood than having two loving (same sex) parents?

Where did anyone mention love? I think you've just presented us with a false dilemma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

I was accentuating the difference between foster care and growing up with parents. Foster care provides for little to no genuine love.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#164

Post by axod »

henrikschroder wrote: post #158
axod wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wasn't talking about 'looks'. I was talking about behavior. Whenever I see gay couples on documentaries etc, there almost always seems to be one 'feminine' one, and one 'masculine' one. Regardless of what sex they actually are.

Documentaries != real life.

Documentaries are a subset of real life. So there must at the minimum be some couples who fit this pattern :/

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#165

Post by jjs »

elblanco wrote: post #141
bootload wrote: post #132

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"... I managed not to get bullied much (it usually stopped quickly after a round of fisticuffs and my father being a boxing coach in his youth) ..." However this technique does not always work. Bullying is about finding weakness and applying an asymmetric attack. I'm not sure this approach will work with say a group of girls?

For guys? It works pretty well, close to 100%. If you can stand up for yourself, even "losing" a fight will usually put a stop to the bullying. The desire not to get hurt, even as a fight "winner", will typically prevent most bullies from engaging in the behavior. Self-preservation is a powerful motivator. Bullies seem to try and pick most subjects to pick on because they believe that subject won't fight back. Once t…

I knew, because of that, that if I was called out to a fight, I could show up at the designated time and place and give what I could.

Whenever someone would try to designate a time and place, my response was invariably, "No. Right now."

I thereby avoided the scenario where I won the fight in private but the challenger publicly claimed victory anyway.

It also cut down the number of challengers very quickly. I didn't have to fight at all in high school. :)

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#166

Post by tome »

cj wrote: post #163
tome wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did anyone mention love? I think you've just presented us with a false dilemma. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

I was accentuating the difference between foster care and growing up with parents . Foster care provides for little to no genuine love.

But foster care wasn't what dzorz was arguing for.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#167

Post by Confusion »

dejb wrote: post #61
mpk wrote: post #11

I'd say that geeks tend to think about their environment a lot more than other people because geeks tend to think about systems in general. I have never encountered a rational argument for homophobia. Gay people seem to me to be just as likely to be virtuous or decadent as straight people. Discriminating against people for having a different sexual orientation seems totally irrational to me. As far as I'm concerned,…

> I have never encountered a rational argument for homophobia. From parents and close relatives it is easy to see a evolutionary reason. However from unrelated males (more common) it would seem that they would have every reason to encourage homosexuality in other males. Maybe it comes from when most people who lived together were related.

  From parents and close relatives it is easy to see a evolutionary reason
Which is not a rational reason. That would be the naturalistic fallacy.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#168

Post by henrikschroder »

axod wrote: post #164
henrikschroder wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Documentaries != real life.

Documentaries are a subset of real life. So there must at the minimum be some couples who fit this pattern :/

Of course, you'll find the same pattern among some straight couples as well. Your original statement that most gay couples fit the pattern simply isn't true, most couples of gay men is two guys living together, dividing household chores in a way that does not follow stereotypical gender roles, and most couples of gay women living together is the same. Hell, even most straight couples I know don't divide household chores that way, or have one partner being the dominant one.

So no, you are not likely to find the "male"/"female" pattern among gay couples, but since it's not even common among straight couples, I strongly doubt it's relevant for raising children.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#169

Post by axod »

henrikschroder wrote: post #168
axod wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Documentaries are a subset of real life. So there must at the minimum be some couples who fit this pattern :/

Of course, you'll find the same pattern among some straight couples as well. Your original statement that most gay couples fit the pattern simply isn't true, most couples of gay men is two guys living together, dividing household chores in a way that does not follow stereotypical gender roles, and most couples of gay women living together is the same. Hell, even most straight couples I know don't divide household cho…

I'm not sure where you're basing that on.

Most couples have pretty strongly defined roles. For example, if a shelf needs putting up, it's more than likely that the male will be tasked with this. If a daughter is after makeup advice, it's likely that they'll go to their mother rather than father.

Perhaps you're reading way more into what I'm saying than is actually there.

Re: On Geeks and Gays

#170

Post by ElliotH »

RyanMcGreal wrote: post #4

All in all, a great essay. But: >I’m conflicted about whether gay couples should be allowed to adopt. Why on earth shouldn't a gay couple be allowed to adopt?

There are studies that show that lacking either a male or female parental figure can have bad long term effects. Which I would say is a good reason to prefer a male-female paring as adoptive parents.

However, with the number of children in care rather than with adoptive parents being quite massive I imagine the damage done by missing one gender of parent is significantly less than the damage done by living in such an institution.

Post reply on HN