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

We were wrong

kickstarter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 546 posts

Re: We were wrong

#131

Post by bmelton »

fusiongyro wrote: post #105
bmelton wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've been tweeting jeers to @DoSomething (the group that garnered the petition) and kudos to Perry Chen and Kickstarter for not having ceded to censorship. To be fair, the book is ugly. The passages quoted are disgusting. I would never buy this book, nor endorse that anyone else buy this book. If asked, I would state that I think the book is disgusting and that you probably should not buy it. What is even more disgus…

You have kind of a funny idea of censorship. Kickstarter can't stop the book from being made, and authors are certainly not owed assistance by Kickstarter or anyone else to get their work published. It's actually never been easier to get books published and there's certainly no actual censorship happening here. The only role Kickstarter plays is aggregating funds. The author is not limited from pursuing that goal thr…

You're absolutely right. It was within Kickstarter's rights to defund the work, or to disallow the project, or to impose whatever burdens their whimsy could think up. Nor are they the government, from which the first amendment is intended to protect us.

The author, meanwhile, is of course free to publish the book in whatever other means he chooses.

That doesn't make it any more right in my book, and sets up a dangerous precedent that Kickstarter will now subject themselves to the whims of whichever populist group can be the most vocal.

Re: We were wrong

#132

Post by onli »

citricsquid wrote: post #54
angersock wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Would you mind listing some of the quotes you found "rapey"?

The blog post linked from the kickstarter blog post includes lots of examples of what most people would consider to be "rapey" “Decide that you’re going to sit in a position where you can rub her leg and back. Physically pick her up and sit her on your lap. Don’t ask for permission. Be dominant. Force her to rebuff your advances.” http://caseymalone.com/post/53339539674/this-is-not-fucking-...

I doubt that anyone in a normal situation would consider that to have anything to do with rape.

Re: We were wrong

#133

Post by blaabjerg »

maximilianburke wrote: post #12
emingo wrote: post #2

Maybe I was raised by a bunch of rabid dogs... But after reading the cached page... I really don't understand what the creator did wrong? He was a guy that I a lot of people can identify with, whom is publishing a book about his experiences? Is seduction intrinsically bad?

When the guide is written like a rape manual, yes, yes it is. It features quotes like: "Pull out your cock and put her hand on it. Remember, she is letting you do this because you have established yourself as a LEADER. Don't ask for permission, GRAB HER HAND, and put it right on your dick." (from: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_... ) The whole thing is disgusting, degrading, and has no pl…

Maybe I'm a horrible person, but I don't think taking someone's hand and placing it on your dick is such a horrible, disgusting thing to do when you're in a situation like the one described in that post.

Keep in mind that in the original post it only happens after dating, kissing, fondling and fingering without protest. At that point, if you describe the next step between two consenting adults out of context it's going to sound "rapey".

Re: We were wrong

#134

Post by kristofferR »

ebbv wrote: post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

You do realize that you're saying exactly the same thing about consent that the book is, right?

The misquoted parts is from the chapter about when you're already in a relationship, and ready to get physical.

Re: We were wrong

#135

Post by shawabawa3 »

ebbv wrote: post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

> You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that aren't sexual assault that you could do before resorting to that.

Is it sexual assault if I do that to my girlfriend of 5 years?

In many contexts it would be sexual assault, but in many it wouldn't be. I think you're just assuming it's sexual assault because you don't like the idea of a book that teaches people how to "pick up women"

FYI, the context behind that sentence is:

> offering advice on what to do AFTER a man has met a cute girl, gotten her phone number, gone on dates, spent time getting to know her, and now are alone behind closed doors fooling around

Re: We were wrong

#136

Post by dirkgadsden »

tomjen3 wrote: post #59
gilrain wrote: post #15

I won't touch the issue of whether the action was right or wrong here on Hacker News, but I think everyone has to admit that this is a brilliant example of an apology done well. They do not equivocate (the "sorry you were offended" apology) and they take direct action to fix what their users felt was wrong (new policy made) as well as somewhat atone for the original offense (donation to RAINN). It's also written simp…

I don't see it as brilliant, I see it as a giant foot-in-mouth situation (which may be colored by the fact that I don't have a problem with seduction guides in general, and haven't seen the material in question) - until now Kickstarter has been neutral on legal content so if I see something I don't like, well too bad, but now there is a precedent for removing something because somebody finds it offensive, but others…

This isn't a legal issue. You can write all you want promoting rape culture. Kickstarter, as a private company, is well within their rights and Terms of Service to pull your project if they find it in bad taste. And they should most definitely be commended for deciding that rape-culture-promotion is inappropriate.

Re: We were wrong

#137

Post by angersock »

DannoHung wrote: post #24

Look at all these HNers defending sexual assault.

Look at this one HN ignoring the documented context for the remarks.

Sexual acts, taken out of the context of mutually-interested intercourse, do very much resemble assault. It's a funny sort of fact of life.

Put even more coarsely, to quote probably one or more very confused offspring having happened upon unlocked doors "Why are mommy and daddy wrestling?"

Re: We were wrong

#138

Post by jgh »

ebbv wrote: post #107

Dear fellow HN dwellers, If you read the writings of the Guide's author and do not recognize that it is misogynistic and advocating sexual assault, you have a problem. That problem is that you are mistaking sexual assault for "taking the first step." You do not need to resort to pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it in order to "make a move." There's literally hundreds of other things that…

Thank you for more eloquently describing my feelings about this thread than I could have.

A fellow married HNer in his 30s.

Re: We were wrong

#139

Post by calibraxis »

tomjen3 wrote: post #70
lewispollard wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well of course the misogynist doesn't believe he's misogynistic. Why should his opinion matter more than the hundreds of people who complained?

Truth is not subject to voting and Kickstarter has proved that they consider women inferior and in need of protection by banning this type of content.

When companies reject racist manuals, they're not taking the position that non-whites are "inferior and in need of protection". They're simply making the ethical choice, to the dismay of the people who enjoy racist sorts of things.

Same goes for the misogynist manuals they're now taking the ethical stance against.

So much for your ad hominem. I'd give Kickstarter kudos, except ethics are what people are supposed to have.

Re: We were wrong

#140

Post by joshguthrie »

josh2600 wrote: post #9

Great apology. Right to the point, no dodging blame, and an acknowledgement of the debt to society. Now, that being said, is this not a take on the book "the game", about picking up women? Am I missing something or is Kickstarter now picking and choosing what is "good" content? Obviously they have to do this to some extent, but where is the line drawn?

To me (and based on everything I read/searched/saw/experiences in the "community"), The Game is not really about "you're gonna have sex with plenty women", it's more about "you have to be a better person and then, you may happen to have sex with plenty of women".

It's about self-improvement: it's about "go out, socialize and meet people", it's about "have an activity that you enjoy and that drives", it's about "know yourself and know what you want",... Sure, sex is there (Because we're adults and if some of us like the married life, other crave for the carnal pleasure of one-night-stands) but it's mostly "don't shoot yourself in a foot by asking her if she still thinks about her ex". It was never about forcing oneself on women, it was about "fun for you and the persons you want to interact with".

That said, even I would punch anyone who'd follow the "advices" from this "book".

Post reply on HN