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

When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

theferrett.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 110 posts

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#101

Post by belorn »

dragonwriter wrote: post #64
slowhadoken wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, I don’t like how the term “men’s rights advocate” is thrown around. Maybe some groups that use that term are crazy or something but men deserve rights and advocates for those rights. Men are often treated as second class citizens. People laughing at that is senseless.

Men are politically, economically, and socially dominant in pretty much every society on Earth, though there are a few where that has been reduced so that women are near parity. Advocating for “Men’s rights” pretty much anywhere on Earth is like advocating for “White rights” or “Christisn rights” in the USA (and, in fact, there's substantial overlap between those groups.)

socially dominant?

Let logically test that. Statement: A person with larger social power have also larger social network. Proof: we count the social network of a person with low social power and compare that to a person with high social power.

If men has on average more social power than women then they should also have a larger social network. The outcome however is the reverse. This prove that either the claim that men has higher social power on average is false, or that the relation between social power and the size of the social network is wrong.

Social status has also a proven connection to two aspects for all mammals. Reproductive success and life expectancy in old age. If men had higher average social status compare to women then their reproductive success should also be more guarantied and male live expectancy would be longer then women. It is not.

No respected scientist has ever claimed that men has higher average social status then women. Most split social status on gender lines and don't do any comparison between gender.

What you say is relevant for the top 1% in politically and economically subset of the population. In every other aspect of society it is false. A typical presidents of the united state will be a white male. A typical bottom 1% homeless person would be a African American male. A typical childless person is a male, and typical lonely person is also male.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#102

Post by mcperr3 »

gdhbcc wrote: post #90
phil248 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can't always just be about being nice, unfortunately. Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children could get us all killed. It's a serious threat. If being nice turns out to be the best strategy for curbing this movement, then I am all for it. If screaming in their faces about it turns out to be more effective, then we have to do that. I would love for everyone to be able to "rejoin society" but at a certain…

Humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years with no vaccines. Let's not be needlessly fearmongering when it comes to their necessity. In this day and age, given the quality of medical treatment available to most of the population, any outbreak of diseases can be handled in a much better way, and with less comparative casualties than ever before, regardless of the use o vaccines. Vaccines are useful, there…

So maybe just a few unnecessary deaths resulting from actions of anti-vaxxers is okay as long as it's not an extinction-level event?

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#103

Post by poloniculmov »

leereeves wrote: post #95
poloniculmov wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see that they're always bashing women and feminism as the cause for these problems, instead of actually trying to fix the issues. The main difference between feminists and MRAs, is that feminists actually are trying to solve their issues and MRAs bitch on the internet that women are bad. They're doing absolutely nothing to solve the real issues that men are suffering from.

The second top post on r/feminism right now says: "I was just going off on my mom about how all men are horrible"

Did you actually read it? They're complaining about double standards in how boys and girls are raised and how "boys will be boys" is shit.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#104

Post by repolfx »

dragonwriter wrote: post #93
repolfx wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If that were true, the law would still privilege men. It doesn't - in most western countries it now radically privileges women, on the basis of gender. Men may be "dominant" numerically but the author of this blog post was a man. Numerical dominance doesn't help if a large subset of men want women to have more rights than men out of some misguided identity politics.

> Men may be "dominant" numerically No, they are dominant in power despite not being dominant numerically. (Women outnumber men.)

Sorry, I meant in politics/business leadership roles.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#105

Post by leereeves »

poloniculmov wrote: post #103
leereeves wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The second top post on r/feminism right now says: "I was just going off on my mom about how all men are horrible"

Did you actually read it? They're complaining about double standards in how boys and girls are raised and how "boys will be boys" is shit.

And "bitching on the internet that men are bad".

And you're excusing that behavior from feminists. There's a double standard for you.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#106

Post by poloniculmov »

leereeves wrote: post #105
poloniculmov wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you actually read it? They're complaining about double standards in how boys and girls are raised and how "boys will be boys" is shit.

And "bitching on the internet that men are bad". And you're excusing that behavior from feminists. There's a double standard for you.

Feminists actually do things to solve issues, they're not just bitching on the internet.

All these "meninists" like /r/mensrights or AVoiceForMen and other toxic communities only make it harder for men. Women are not the enemy.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#107

Post by leereeves »

poloniculmov wrote: post #106
leereeves wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And "bitching on the internet that men are bad". And you're excusing that behavior from feminists. There's a double standard for you.

Feminists actually do things to solve issues, they're not just bitching on the internet. All these "meninists" like /r/mensrights or AVoiceForMen and other toxic communities only make it harder for men. Women are not the enemy.

MRAs do things to solve issues too.

For example, when the Department of Education rescinded the guilty until proven innocent policy. That was the work of men's rights groups.

But feminists fight everything MRAs try to do to solve these issues. They complained when that policy changed. When MRAs tried to bring attention to male victims of domestic violence, feminists claimed they were distracting from female victims.

And you're absolutely right, women aren't the enemy. There are plenty of women who support men's rights.

But there are also women who claim that men sitting comfortably are "manspreading", that men speaking are "mansplaining", and who presume that every man accused of sexual assault is guilty.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#108

Post by jhbadger »

brighter2morrow wrote: post #98
jhbadger wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But anti-belief is scientific if the belief for something requires a complete overturning of scientific principles. It's not just an absence of evidence for something. It isn't "open minded" to say "could be..." to Bigfoot, Nessie, or the like -- it's closed minded because to even consider the idea seriously is to think that ecologists and population geneticists have no idea what the minimum habitat of a large animal…

>But anti-belief is scientific if the belief for something requires a complete overturning of scientific principles. It's not just an absence of evidence for something. It isn't "open minded" to say "could be..." to Bigfoot, Nessie, or the like -- it's closed minded because to even consider the idea seriously is to think that ecologists and population geneticists have no idea what the minimum habitat of a large anima…

No. No "blind faith" needed. Non-scientists can, and some do, learn about fields that interest them, sometimes even to a level that lets them participate in the scientific process. There have been new species of insects and new asteroids discovered by amateurs, for example. But to do so, they have to understand where and what types of animal or object are there for the discovery.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#109

Post by brighter2morrow »

jhbadger wrote: post #108
brighter2morrow wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>But anti-belief is scientific if the belief for something requires a complete overturning of scientific principles. It's not just an absence of evidence for something. It isn't "open minded" to say "could be..." to Bigfoot, Nessie, or the like -- it's closed minded because to even consider the idea seriously is to think that ecologists and population geneticists have no idea what the minimum habitat of a large anima…

No. No "blind faith" needed. Non-scientists can, and some do, learn about fields that interest them, sometimes even to a level that lets them participate in the scientific process. There have been new species of insects and new asteroids discovered by amateurs, for example. But to do so, they have to understand where and what types of animal or object are there for the discovery.

It's blind faith if its only presentation is snarky commentary.

Re: When Having Friends Is More Alluring Than Being Right

#110

Post by EpicEng »

gdhbcc wrote: post #90
phil248 wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It can't always just be about being nice, unfortunately. Parents who choose not to vaccinate their children could get us all killed. It's a serious threat. If being nice turns out to be the best strategy for curbing this movement, then I am all for it. If screaming in their faces about it turns out to be more effective, then we have to do that. I would love for everyone to be able to "rejoin society" but at a certain…

Humans have existed for hundreds of thousands of years with no vaccines. Let's not be needlessly fearmongering when it comes to their necessity. In this day and age, given the quality of medical treatment available to most of the population, any outbreak of diseases can be handled in a much better way, and with less comparative casualties than ever before, regardless of the use o vaccines. Vaccines are useful, there…

Back in the real world of today, where one infected person can infect thousands more, if prefer my child not die of polio if it can be avoided.
Post reply on HN