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

What I told the students of Princeton

abigailshrier.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 36 posts

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#21

Post by leephillips »

dustintrex wrote: post #3

I would like to be sympathetic to the author's argument, but this article is just riddled with trivially falsifiable inaccurate assertions. > There are books that are never recommended by the Amazon algorithm, irrespective of how well they’ve sold or how likely a specific shopper is to buy them. Or, at least, there’s one such book. I’ll let you try and guess what it is. YMMV, but if I search for "transgender" on Amaz…

All three of your examples are correct statements on the author’s part. Recommendations and search results are not the same thing. The swimmer does hold records. And Wikipedia does assign editors.

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#22

Post by kcplate »

tzs wrote: post #18

As far as sports go, maybe it is time to stop having men's sports and women's sports and instead have different leagues in a sport be based on performance or measurable characteristics directly related to the sport. You finish near the top a lot in your league, you get bumped up to the next up higher performing league. You finish near the bottom a lot in your league, you get moved to the next lower performing league.…

> and it opens up competitive sports to more people.

The minor minor league levels will get zero audience and therefore zero money.

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#24

Post by artfulhippo »

krageon wrote: post #6

I think the author has a point to make that is definity valid, but she wraps it up in this hyper-western freedom ideal that says if you conform you may as well not have been born. To me this is a shame, because the argument that perhaps gender politics is entirely too violent at times and could benefit from having more calm adults is a reasonable one. It doesn't really matter if you are a proponent or a detractor, th…

How can you resist the dominant ideology without valuing freedom? How can you challenge the norms set by the elite without asserting your right as an individual to take a non-conforming stance? Even if you argue that society would be more harmonious if we all followed a different/better norm, how are you entitled to make a statement that contradicts the current paradigm if you don't value the ability to contradict the current paradigm of society?

I suppose that an alternative basis than freedom is faith; eg "God told me to stand up for divine principles" — but even then, why are you uniquely responsive to God's will?

Seriously, I'd love to understand how you critique the status quo/advocate for change without valuing freedom.

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#25

Post by cafard »

tzs wrote: post #18

As far as sports go, maybe it is time to stop having men's sports and women's sports and instead have different leagues in a sport be based on performance or measurable characteristics directly related to the sport. You finish near the top a lot in your league, you get bumped up to the next up higher performing league. You finish near the bottom a lot in your league, you get moved to the next lower performing league.…

We can also get rid of weight classes in boxing, wrestling, and MMA.

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#26

Post by lupire »

mrjangles wrote: post #11
krageon wrote: post #6

I think the author has a point to make that is definity valid, but she wraps it up in this hyper-western freedom ideal that says if you conform you may as well not have been born. To me this is a shame, because the argument that perhaps gender politics is entirely too violent at times and could benefit from having more calm adults is a reasonable one. It doesn't really matter if you are a proponent or a detractor, th…

I don't know, I think there are plenty of people out there who aren't angry, you just can't really hear them because they aren't yelling. One thing I know for sure, the amount of anger someone has is always inversely proportionate to how much they know about a topic. Whenever someone gets angry about a topic I know for sure they know nothing about it and are therefore not worth wasting time on.

You believe no one is ever legitimately angry? Really?

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#27

Post by the_optimist »

krageon wrote: post #6

I think the author has a point to make that is definity valid, but she wraps it up in this hyper-western freedom ideal that says if you conform you may as well not have been born. To me this is a shame, because the argument that perhaps gender politics is entirely too violent at times and could benefit from having more calm adults is a reasonable one. It doesn't really matter if you are a proponent or a detractor, th…

Your statement on 'hate' is self-referential on self-identity, akin to labeling others divisive. It's not simply 'there to see,' like a brick or a tree. You're conjuring it. As such, I directly disagree with you.

Re: What I told the students of Princeton

#30

Post by krageon »

the_optimist wrote: post #27
krageon wrote: post #6

I think the author has a point to make that is definity valid, but she wraps it up in this hyper-western freedom ideal that says if you conform you may as well not have been born. To me this is a shame, because the argument that perhaps gender politics is entirely too violent at times and could benefit from having more calm adults is a reasonable one. It doesn't really matter if you are a proponent or a detractor, th…

Your statement on 'hate' is self-referential on self-identity, akin to labeling others divisive. It's not simply 'there to see,' like a brick or a tree. You're conjuring it. As such, I directly disagree with you.

The stance that anything that cannot be touched exists only as a reflection of the observer is philosophically interesting, but not much more than that. It directly stifles communication with almost everyone else and it stops you from seeing harmful behaviour besides. There is, to my mind, very little point to it except as a (fun) thought exercise.
Post reply on HN