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

271–280 of 546 posts

Re: We were wrong

#271

Post by scarmig »

WA wrote: post #159
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…

Ask 100 women if they find it romantic to be kissed without being asked or if they want to be asked first. I'm pretty sure the answer is: being kissed, don't ask. The author writes on reddit: IMPORTANT NOTE ON RESISTANCE: If at any point a girl wants you to stop, she will let you know. If she says "STOP," or "GET AWAY FROM ME," or shoves you away, you know she is not interested. It happens. Stop escalating immediatel…

Aside from king_jester's good point, he doesn't even follow that CYA in the guide. The other (more offensive, IMO) passage that people are in an uproar about is when he talks about how even when she rejects your touching or rubbing her when you first meet, she's actually secretly getting turned on, and that you should continue.

Re: We were wrong

#272

Post by ownagefool »

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…

While I agree with the gist of the post, I disagree with this part:-

"If women are loudly saying "This is assault.", you need to take them at their word, because it is their judgment, it is their consent that matters. Not yours."

We live in a world where not everyone is resonable. Anyone suggesting you forcibly put someones hand on your penis as a courting move is not resonable. However there are also many woman who are also not resonable and you shouldn't simply back them up just because they're woman.

I also haven't read the book, so have no real opinion on it's content.

Re: We were wrong

#273

Post by [deleted] »

newnewnew wrote: post #263
loumf wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To my understanding the two sides of this issue are whether or not Kickstarter has the right to choose what is on their site. I say they do. I do not understand the position that they must allow any project even if they don't want to (as long as they comply with the law) The issue of whether this book is misogynist or not doesn't really matter. You can still buy it if you want or any other legal material you want to…

But what happens when the feminists run kickstarter, and facebook, and google, and tumblr, and twitter, and hacker news? There are many sites who would simply ban one side of the conversation. Sure, you may have the legal right to speak then, but not the ability. Meanwhile, I don't think it is wrong to sell books to men to help them learn what women want to succeed in the confusing world of dating. If you can write a…

[deleted]

Re: We were wrong

#274

Post by fusiongyro »

bmelton wrote: post #219
Apocryphon wrote: post #191

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're a business. If a larger amount of their customer base doesn't want it, then they would presumably respond accordingly. Microsoft did it for the XBox One, after all.

I don't disagree with that either. But, for me, and I can't say whether I'm in the majority or the minority, nor do I care, but I will now literally never use Kickstarter for anything lest my project be deemed to avant garde by the populace at large. I do sincerely hope, not for Kickstarter, but for us, that this doesn't discourage truly innovative art projects from being crowdfunded, as I think that sets art back, c…

I think for your disaster scenario to be taken seriously there would need to be major cultural works--peers of Harry Potter, Huck Finn, and NIN--that were products of the Kickstarter process. Using examples that predate crowdfunding to discuss the negative repercussions of not having crowdfunding is a little ridiculous. The avenues that produced HP, HF and NIN still exist.

Re: We were wrong

#275

Post by 300bps »

gregd wrote: post #240
hacker789 wrote: post #181

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Take your exposed penis, and thrust it into her vagina. Don't wait for her to put it in for you. Be dominant." That could be instructions for rape. Or it could be instructions for the kind of a sex that millions of straight couples have every day . It all depends on the quote's context, right? Right? So stop taking quotes out of context from the author. > If women are loudly saying "This is assault.", you need to ta…

The bullshit excuse I keep seeing about " taking quotes out of context " is making me mad. The author himself, removed those specific passages from his Reddit thread when the shit storm started brewing. If he worded what he wanted to say correctly and with the proper context, why remove them?

>If he worded what he wanted to say correctly and with the proper context, why remove them?

Why refuse to speak to the police without an attorney present if you have nothing to hide? Your question is no more fair than that one. If I were stirring up a "shit storm" by offending people about a hot-button topic I would certainly start deleting everything I could. Seriously, the guy got a measly $16,000 for this and people were threatening to ruin his life over it.

Regardless of whether what I did was wrong or not I would've deleted it all, refunded the $16,000 and disappeared for a while.

Re: We were wrong

#276

Post by Helianthus »

scarmig wrote: post #207
garethadams wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a good job the "pulling out your dick and forcibly placing the woman's hand on it" advice comes in the section of things you do after you're hundreds of moves down the line and you're alone in an intimate setting with a girl, after a number of dates then. The counter-article writer doesn't make clear that he's picked quotes from all over the guide, they aren't all "the first thing you should do" quotes

”5) Get CLOSE to her, damn it! To quote Rob Judge, “Personal space is for pussies.” I already told you that the most successful seducers are those who can’t keep their hands off of women. Well you’re not gonna be able to do that if you aren’t in close! ” “All the greatest seducers in history could not keep their hands off of women. They aggressively escalated physically with every woman they were flirting with. They…

>You boys need a lesson in basic empathy.

Don't talk down to me.

>Now, don't skip that scenario: I want you to stop and think about it in detail. How would it make you feel? Do you feel turned on? Do you feel violated?

I take control of the situation by removing myself from the situation or making a scene. And I get over it.

Look, I'm queer and I'm actually pretty sympathetic to the anti-seddit et al crowd.

But the notion that I'm supposed to care about every person's feelings around me is nonsensical. It's exactly the kind of sentiment that you're violating by lecturing your audience. You're _deliberately_ provoking an uncomfortable reaction and prioritizing your own emotions above those of others.

And I'm going to tell you to shove off, and get over it.

This isn't about rape, the violent action and definable crime. It's about communication in a social space. And you can't communicate if you can't aggress, as you have _just demonstrated_.

Re: We were wrong

#277

Post by gregd »

tomp wrote: post #266
gregd wrote: post #240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bullshit excuse I keep seeing about " taking quotes out of context " is making me mad. The author himself, removed those specific passages from his Reddit thread when the shit storm started brewing. If he worded what he wanted to say correctly and with the proper context, why remove them?

Actually, he didn't. Open [1] and search for "permission" and "dick". It's all right there. [1]: http://www.reddit.com/r/seduction/comments/1dvnem/above_the_...

Actually he had. Those passages were not there and clicking on your link led to those passages having been removed at one point at the height of the shit storm.

Re: We were wrong

#279

Post by Cushman »

tomp wrote: post #260
Cushman wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This "defense" misses the point. The gist of the controversial advice is "Don't wait for signs before you make your move. Let her be the one who rejects your advances. If she says no, stop immediately and tell her you don't want to do anything that would make her uncomfortable. Try again at a later time if appropriate or cease entirely if she is absolutely not interested." This is not a defense. This advice leads to…

I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss. It is, of course, somewhat sad that our culture taught us it's inappropriate and shameful to talk about sex, and that we're more comfortable having sex with someone than we are talking about sex. That's also why the most comm…

> I don't know about you, but I would prefer if things happened "naturally", without talking about it explicitly. Us sitting closer, slowly drawing our heads closer, lips touch, mouths open, kiss.

I used to think that, too, as a teenager. Then I had sex with a bunch of people and realized, who gives a fuck? Sex is fun. It's fun when it happens spontaneously, with mutual passion. It's fun when it's discussed and scheduled ahead of time. It's just fun!

As long as both people want to. Then I thought about some of those times things just happened "naturally", and I realized, I'm not really sure if she did want to. That's not fun.

So now, if there's any doubt in my mind whatsoever, I just ask. I'm in a committed, long-term relationship now, and I still ask her regularly if I'm not sure if she wants to. Because I'm even less interested in pressuring someone I really care about into something she doesn't want. And she will do the same for me.

Guess what? Still fun.

> Btw, you realize, right, that with your comment you're promoting rape (according to your definition)? After all, a woman taking "explicit proactive action" without your explicit verbal consent is, the same as a man would if the situation was reversed, raping him.

Yes. It goes both ways, regardless of gender. Did you expect me to disagree with this?

Re: We were wrong

#280

Post by blocking_io »

pizza234 wrote: post #187
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…

The same women that scream "assault", are very likely to have taking the of a stranger, consensually, in their hand, at least once in their lives. What you naively don't know, is that in this field, the culture is very far from reality. Some ahem "people" would scream horror to things that they would secretly do. It's nothing new under the sun.

Are you actually arguing that if a woman has touched a penis in her life before, she is consenting to touching all future penises?

Either you mean that or your writing is appalling.

Post reply on HN