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

241–250 of 546 posts

Re: We were wrong

#241

Post by king_jester »

cgag wrote: post #213
scarmig wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

”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…

Excuse me miss may I please sit close to you and touch you? May I kiss you now? How exactly do you think people should go about this kind of thing?

Are you dense? If someone was OK with that kind of intimate contact at that moment asking would result in a 'yes'.

Re: We were wrong

#242

Post by newnewnew »

doktrin wrote: post #178
hacker789 wrote: post #28

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it. Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. > The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advic…

What I dislike most about these discussions is that it invariably attracts ideologues of all stripes, of which you appear to be one. > " Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. > Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. " You're attacking a straw man with ad-hominems. More importantly, you're glossing over the fact that women legi…

I missed the chapter on murdering your partner.

Re: We were wrong

#243

Post by newnewnew »

hacker789 wrote: post #28

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it. Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. > The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advic…

The tension in feminism between sexual liberation, on the one hand, and repression of male sexuality on the other is remarkable. And make no doubt, feminism is now included in the official religion of our day. How long before "misogynist" tweets are banned on twitter? Before "misogynists" are kicked off of facebook? And don't worry gentlemen, it is not violating your freedom of speech because these are private companies controlling every means of communication you have...

We are slouching towards a soft tyranny of the mind, driven by the marxist ideology that each member of an "inferior" group has the right to not be offended.

Re: We were wrong

#244

Post by king_jester »

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.

Not facilitating the promotion of sexism and materials that essentially advocates for sexual assault isn't a statement on any gender, but rather the company is not there to support oppression.

Re: We were wrong

#245

Post by noamsml »

This annoys me greatly. Whether or not the book itself was bad, an open platform shouldn't have to apologize for not immediately censoring its users on public outrage. To the contrary, I would have expected an apology if, given the first blush or public outcry, they suspended the account without a proper investigation into it.

Re: We were wrong

#246

Post by Samuel_Michon »

jmduke wrote: post #217
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…

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? This is a book on seduction, not a book on long-term relationships. I'm not defending the OP, but don't be intentionally dense.

Actually, the book has an entire chapter on long-term relationships and compatibility.

Re: We were wrong

#247

Post by king_jester »

WA wrote: post #56
hacker789 wrote: post #28

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it. Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. > The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advic…

Is this a joke? Inferior? Women like to have sex just like men do. But many women, especially in their early 20s, are often reluctant to take the first step. So a man needs to take action. That's what the whole fuss is about.

There is a difference between being the one to break the ice vs. violating someone's physical space, which is what the project in question advocates.

Re: We were wrong

#248

Post by AnIrishDuck »

dkokelley wrote: post #147
iandanforth wrote: post #30

I don't respect this. I acknowledge that as it is their playground they can make this kind of judgement call, however I have always believed that freedom of speech also protects the freedom to hate and be a terrible person. There are countless texts, movies, and other 'creative works' which both condone and encourage violence against women, mass murder, torture, and other things I find abhorrent, but I don't get to b…

A couple of points: 1) The project creator has freedom of speech to a point. For one, he cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater unless there actually is a fire. He also cannot advocate or call for illegal activity by others (such as "Go and mug that guy walking down the street"). This is where the line of protected speech gets blurred. Reading some excerpts from his works it's clear that he advocates for aggressive…

> For one, he cannot yell "Fire" in a crowded theater unless there actually is a fire.

This meme really needs to die. The "fire in a crowded theater" standard hasn't been relevant for half a century [1].

> He also cannot advocate or call for illegal activity by others (such as "Go and mug that guy walking down the street").

This sounds like the "imminent lawless action" standard [2]. IANAL, but it seems that the "imminent" part of the standard applies to someone telling his pal to "go and mug that guy", not to someone who writes terrible advice for seducing women. Even if those that follow that advice are guilty of sexual assault, it is doubtful this author is placing women in imminent danger of sexual assault.

> Whether or not it is within the project creator's right to publish this as free speech, Kickstarter has their own interests in mind. By facilitating funding for this project, they may open themselves to legal liability if someone going by the guidelines set in the book does end up sexually assaulting someone.

Again, IANAL, but I doubt that Kickstarter faces real legal liability here. This seems like standard first amendment territory. I am not aware of any constitutional law that forbids running a campaign to fund a book, no matter how bad the advice in that book is. If you can cite relevant statutes or caselaw, or can state a potential civil cause of action, I'm willing to be proven wrong.

> Just understand that this work dances the line between protected and unprotected speech, and Kickstarter does not want to play a part in that.

It seems firmly on the right side of that line, no matter how distasteful it is.

IMO, it is far more likely that Kickstarter doesn't want to be branded in the public eye as a safe haven for molestation advocates, which I can understand.

1. http://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/three-generations-of-a-hac... 2. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brandenburg_v._Ohio

Re: We were wrong

#249

Post by DanielBMarkham »

META: I know it's wrong to talk about flagging, but I think it's also important for the community for people to try to bring up good reasons to flag posts.

I read the linked article, I skimmed many of these comments, and hell if I got anything useful at all from them. Dating standards and decisions about misogyny and important topics, but they're also highly subjective. We HN'ers could argue until the cows come home and not accomplish a damned thing. In addition, it's highly emotionally-charged.

A couple commenters tried to take the conversation towards how a company should act in the face of public outrage. Kudos to you guys. You were drowned out, though.

I love talking about controversial topics. Heck, I'll post about the existence of God, the reasons for controlling speech, the relationship between organized religion and societal progress -- I really love good conversations among smart people about important things.

But I got none of this here. Just a bunch of people making speeches to themselves. Which looked like it could go on forever without either the writers or readers gaining much insight. I flag not based on the topic, but on the quality of the comments I see around the posting. So I had to flag it. Sorry.

Re: We were wrong

#250

Post by newnewnew »

lewispollard wrote: post #48
hacker789 wrote: post #28

Women are sensitive, fragile, inferior creatures who require constant, vigilant protection from honorable men. If it becomes necessary to take a few quotes out of context in our noble quest to protect the fairer sex, so be it. Kudos to Kickstarter for adhering to feminist principles. > The thing that the commenters on social media are leaving out is that the advice was taken from a section in the guide offering advic…

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

Is it misogynist to learn what women like in a partner and attempt to be that? Isn't that making a world more according to women's preferences? How is that "hatred of women"?

If the author is wrong, and you write a better manual, many men struggling with the modern dating world will gladly buy your more effective book. But we aren't arguing fact, are we? We're arguing religion.

Post reply on HN