Live data from Hacker News

The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

nytimes.com

11–20 of 37 posts

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#11
post #10
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean “free labor”? This “free information” you speak of requires the labor of humans in many forms to publish.

Media channels get paid even when they are free: in goodwill, reputation, visibility, etc etc - all that stuff they are so keen to bestow on their workers in the lower organizational rings. Regardless, the guilt trip you're so keen to induce would maybe trigger if I could pay these folks by article, rather than with feudalistic subscriptions that are notoriously hard to cancel. As it is, my conscience is unblemished.

Artists are paid by exposition I guess!

I'm not sure why using the archive for stealing has become the norm here.

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#12
post #11
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Media channels get paid even when they are free: in goodwill, reputation, visibility, etc etc - all that stuff they are so keen to bestow on their workers in the lower organizational rings. Regardless, the guilt trip you're so keen to induce would maybe trigger if I could pay these folks by article, rather than with feudalistic subscriptions that are notoriously hard to cancel. As it is, my conscience is unblemished.

Artists are paid by exposition I guess! I'm not sure why using the archive for stealing has become the norm here.

Stealing is the wrong word, but then we've had this conversation for 30 years so clearly you know what you're doing. If you must, "freeloading" would probably be a better term.

> Artists are paid by exposition I guess!

If it allowed them to pick political candidates and set the nation's agenda, yeah, I guess they would be.

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#13
> Indeed, many men self-police their hands around each other. In younger men this manifests in the ubiquitous “No homo!”

If you think men police their hands around each other, just wait 'til you see how much they police their hands around women.

(There's also the empirical pattern that men show more physical affection with one another in cultures where homosexuality is more off-limits and strictly punished. For reasons that make sense if you stop to think about them. But enough about that...)

> There’s a reason the majority of clients seeking private services from the nascent professional cuddling industry are overwhelmingly male

In like every interview with a prostitute, they say that a lot of their clients want to spend most of their time talking. And, yes, there's sex, because of course that contributes to those (ersatz?) feelings of closeness and wellbeing they're looking for. So how is this substantially different? Or different from going to a shrink? It sounds to me like these things are all more closely related than we admit. Oh, and, as we all know, most prostitutes' clients are men. Why is none of this a surprise?

> men are “more likely than women to report that they received less affection from others than they wanted.”

I'll bet rich men and old women break this pattern. Because rich men have something people want, and old women don't.

Didn't Donald Trump have a line about that? Something like, "Being rich, being famous -- it's amazing, you can do anything and they love it -- you can grab 'em by the pussy!" I forget exactly, I'm paraphrasing.

> the 30 heterosexual undergraduate males interviewed felt safer cuddling, hugging and, especially, confiding in platonic male friends than they did with their girlfriends. These “bromances” provided less judgment and increased “emotional stability, enhanced emotional disclosure, social fulfillment, and better conflict resolution, compared to the emotional lives they shared with girlfriends.”

I mean, men don't typically "cuddle" with each other, but yeah, there is male bonding, and some of it is somewhat physical, albeit gender-conjugated. And it's not surprising that men often get along better with their friends (I believe this is called "a boys' club" and "misogyny", when it happens).

Not a great comment on the state of heterosexual relationships in 2022 though, is it?

I also laugh at this line about there being more "emotional stability" with men ("that's a dog whistle!"), but, uh, yeah, not uncommonly...

> "Women have it right," I said [...]. "They find friends or sisters to talk with when things are rough"

If "men are defective women" is the only framing you can use to get this published, go ahead, do what you need to do.

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#14
post #4
post #2

Any chance of un-paywalled versions, for us poor souls still believing in freedom of information...?

Did you mean “free labor”? This “free information” you speak of requires the labor of humans in many forms to publish.

Did you just call article writing labor?

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#15
post #10
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean “free labor”? This “free information” you speak of requires the labor of humans in many forms to publish.

Media channels get paid even when they are free: in goodwill, reputation, visibility, etc etc - all that stuff they are so keen to bestow on their workers in the lower organizational rings. Regardless, the guilt trip you're so keen to induce would maybe trigger if I could pay these folks by article, rather than with feudalistic subscriptions that are notoriously hard to cancel. As it is, my conscience is unblemished.

> if I could pay these folks by article

Ah! This is good logic. Next time I'm at a restaurant, after service and food have been rendered, I will say, "You won't let me pay in the amount and manner in which I want, so I'm not going to pay at all!" Thanks for the tip!

> all that stuff they are so keen to bestow on their workers in the lower organizational rings

So two wrongs make a right? Come on. These are ethics that are intuitively grasped by grade school children.

> Media channels get paid even when they are free: in goodwill, reputation, visibility

Oh good. So when it comes time to pay their server bill, office rent, employee payroll, etc. etc. they will just forward goodwill, reputation, and visibility on. What is the current conversion between reputation and USD these days?

The basic and inexorable truth is this: journalism isn't free. Never has been, never will be. Especially good journalism. Childish, self serving rationalizations on why its not only OK but "good" to never pay for it are exactly what's got us in the current mess we're in (worse and worse clickbait, the slow merging of editorial and hard news, the rapid merging of monetization and 'news', etc. etc.)

> my conscience is unblemished

Might be worth a deeper examination. Seriously. What would it do to the incomes in your field if people were able to just take your work product without paying? How would you feel if those takers said to you, "my conscience is unblemished because "?

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#16
post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you mean “free labor”? This “free information” you speak of requires the labor of humans in many forms to publish.

Did you just call article writing labor?

Yes. It is human work, aka labor. [1]

What would you call it?

[1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/labor

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#17
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you just call article writing labor?

Yes. It is human work, aka labor. [1] What would you call it? [1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/labor

A paid hobby, or a side gig. Labor has the context of strain and effort, and I don't want to pay money for bla-bla entertainment.

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#18
post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. It is human work, aka labor. [1] What would you call it? [1] https://www.dictionary.com/browse/labor

A paid hobby, or a side gig. Labor has the context of strain and effort, and I don't want to pay money for bla-bla entertainment.

What do you do for a living?

Whatever it is, I will say to you: that's a paid hobby or a side gig. Then I will take the product of your efforts without paying for it. See how that works?

Perhaps it would be worth thinking through the consequences of your attitudes if they were applied back to you?

Re: The power of touch, especially for men (2017)

#20
post #12
post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Artists are paid by exposition I guess! I'm not sure why using the archive for stealing has become the norm here.

Stealing is the wrong word, but then we've had this conversation for 30 years so clearly you know what you're doing. If you must, "freeloading" would probably be a better term. > Artists are paid by exposition I guess! If it allowed them to pick political candidates and set the nation's agenda, yeah, I guess they would be.

> so clearly you know what you're doing

??

> freeloading

No I chose stealing for a reason. Freeloading is not the right term. I'm not a native english speaker, freeloading seems to mean "to impose upon another's generosity or hospitality without sharing in the cost or responsibility involved". It's not the right word to convey my idea.

Post reply on HN