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

The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

uncrunched.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

201–210 of 311 posts

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#201

Post by anonbanker »

dfc wrote: post #189
anonbanker wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and yet, all these testimonials came out from LGBTQ*'s working at Mozilla, with Brenden Eich, saying that he treated them as equals. Perhaps you could elaborate on when Eich said they were second-class citizens. you know, so you aren't accused of putting words in someone's mouth.

I am not familiar with the asterisk variant: LGBTQ*. Initially I thought it was a italic formatting error but you have used it in a number of places in addition to lgBtq. What does the added asterisk represent? And is there any significance to the capitalization of "lgBtq"?

in recent years, most pride marches and supporting organizations have adopted the asterisk to handle the inclusiveness of all those that aren't neccessarily "Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgendered, genderQueer", but still fall under the umbrella of the movement. Recently, this has included Genderfluids, Furries and the Polyamorous as well.

I capitalized the letter in which I personally identify. though I can't capitalize the asterisk. :)

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#202

Post by bane »

scarmig wrote: post #161
Aqueous wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So many on the left (including myself) revere the style of politics of Nelson Mandela and yet when it comes time to actually behave like Mandela would in a given situation they completely fail, and conduct the same style of embittered, vengeful politics when they are asked to treat the other side with an attitude of forgiveness and reconciliation. Do you think Mandela systematically purged all those whites who once s…

For forgiveness you need Truth and Reconciliation. There's a reason that committee was set up. "Forgiving and being reconciled to our enemies or our loved ones are not about pretending that things are other than they are. It is not about patting one another on the back and turning a blind eye to the wrong. True reconciliation exposes the awfulness, the abuse, the hurt, the truth. It could even sometimes make things w…

I'd add that a similar model is being followed in Rwanda. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/04/06/magazine/06-pi...

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#203

Post by bjterry »

thatthatis wrote: post #171

There's an enormous false equivalency here: Prop 8 groups are single issue donations. A donation means exactly and only that you agree with the cause of anti-gay marriage. Politicians are many-thousand issue donations. I know of exactly zero people who I agree with on everything. A donation to a politician can have thousands of motives, and even be done in staunch disagreement about certain issues (especially in the…

The CEO of a non-political company is even more of a many-thousand issue than a politician, so I am not sure that this removes the hypocrisy. He was calling for Eich to resign based on one issue which wasn't related to his job, but donated to a politician in spite of that same issue that is directly related to the politician's job. (I made the same argument you did to someone else, and this was his good counterargument)

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#204

Post by smtddr »

downandout wrote: post #131

I have no issues with gay marriage, and I don't think that individual religious views have any place in the creation of laws that will affect people's everyday lives. However, this idea that someone can't keep their personal political views outside of their workplace is the territory of small-minded idiots. A good CEO can, indeed, support causes in his personal life that don't wind up becoming policy at the company h…

>>However, this idea that someone can't keep their personal political views outside of their workplace is the territory of small-minded idiots.

That can't be true for everything. If you think it's possible that a KKK member could be an effective leader/planner/organizer for an outreach program for the all the kids of low-income in Oakland, then you'd be wrong.

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#205

Post by stcredzero »

pyduan wrote: post #47

What is regrettable in all this is that no one seems to consider the possibility that people may have nuanced views about gay marriage. According to the mob you're either a saint or a bigot, and thus Eich's value as a human being was supposedly entirely determined by this one opinion he voiced in 2008. I'm staunchly in favor of gay marriage, which I consider to be a no-brainer -- but it seems to me the motivations of…

What is regrettable in all this is that no one seems to consider the possibility that people may have nuanced views about gay marriage.

The norm portrayed on television and in so much of the media is that nuanced views are just a cover for being a "bad guy." In a story, black and white morality is so much more palatable for the least common denominator audience. News media now also follows this pattern, as do political commercials. However, reality is actually pretty complicated, and informed opinions are often nuanced by necessity.

There are other possible reasons one could have (for example, those who in ignorance of the many studies that showed that children of homosexual households grow up just fine could have unfounded reservations about gay adoption, but would be ready to change their mind if shown the evidence

A college housemate of mine was dead-set homophobic when she first moved in. However, she eventually became the best friends of a gay man who lived with us. Understanding in a pluralistic society comes from the everyday interaction of normal, decent people. This is how prejudices are debunked and the wounds of societal injustice are healed. The actions of OkCupid are vindictive and only unproductive in this regard.

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#206

Post by bluntly_said »

jerryr wrote: post #150
baddox wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm seeing a lot of disagreement over the facts of Proposition 8. Several people are saying that homosexual couples in California already had a legal partnership with all the same rights as "married" heterosexual couples.

Okay, let's take the facts in question off the table and say that there are absolutely no differences between marriage and domestic partnerships besides the name. At best then, Prop 8 kept us "separate but equal". History has shown that doctrine to be discriminatory and oppressive. There's an inherent inequality in my inability to say that I'm married.

And I think the separate but equal problem is a very compelling reason to remove rights from marriage entirely. Codifying religious beliefs into law shouldn't be accepted. Trying to redefine religious beliefs in law stirs up more controversy than it should.

Amending the law to force all couples to get the equivalent of a civil unions satisfies both camps.

Further, once marriage holds no rights, the government cannot stop a gay couple from getting married if a nice tolerant church wants to marry them (of which there are plenty). The issue is solely religious at that point. And "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof ..."

Just like the government can't force a church to marry someone, or force a very intolerant religious community to accepting that marriage.

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#207

Post by anonbanker »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #175
anonbanker wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

right. ignore the validity of my comments. just take offense to the words. Whilst living in Montana, I have been harrassed multiple times for my sexuality. I have been beaten to unconsciousness by people I didn't even see approaching me, left with a sign saying "HOMO" on my body. I have had a rope around my neck, and three men lift my drugged body to a tree so I could die. Thankfully, a less bigoted person scared the…

You sound terribly un-empathetic and it ruins any point you're trying to make.

right. ignore the validity of my comments. just take offense to the words.

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#208

Post by hackinthebochs »

Karunamon wrote: post #198
hackinthebochs wrote: post #192

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But those contracts and benefits can be had without the word. Was Prop 8 attempting to permanently remove the ability to gain those benefits?

Which is a longer and more arduous process to fix. In the mean time, you've got a constitutional issue that must be addressed now . California had a few options here. * Redefine all "marriages" as "civil unions". Makes the religious folks and libertarians happy, but introduces a problem in that you've deleted something that every other state recognizes. How will marriages in other states carry over? How about contrac…

This is a rational argument, and this is the argument people should be having with those who oppose it rather than name calling and mudslinging. But nothing that you say here justifies calling those who oppose this bigots, etc. Either way, the California legislature is probably the wrong place to have this discussion, as a marriage in California wouldn't necessarily be recognized in other states anyways.

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#209

Post by bluntly_said »

krainboltgreene wrote: post #175
anonbanker wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

right. ignore the validity of my comments. just take offense to the words. Whilst living in Montana, I have been harrassed multiple times for my sexuality. I have been beaten to unconsciousness by people I didn't even see approaching me, left with a sign saying "HOMO" on my body. I have had a rope around my neck, and three men lift my drugged body to a tree so I could die. Thankfully, a less bigoted person scared the…

You sound terribly un-empathetic and it ruins any point you're trying to make.

I don't think it does. I think too many people are trying to short circuit real discussion around this issue by either calling people bigots, or taking offense to the term "bully".

Re: The Hypocrisy Of Sam Yagan and OkCupid

#210

Post by scarmig »

dfc wrote: post #189
anonbanker wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and yet, all these testimonials came out from LGBTQ*'s working at Mozilla, with Brenden Eich, saying that he treated them as equals. Perhaps you could elaborate on when Eich said they were second-class citizens. you know, so you aren't accused of putting words in someone's mouth.

I am not familiar with the asterisk variant: LGBTQ*. Initially I thought it was a italic formatting error but you have used it in a number of places in addition to lgBtq. What does the added asterisk represent? And is there any significance to the capitalization of "lgBtq"?

I think it's just bash globbing.
Post reply on HN