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

What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

meghanboilard.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

391–400 of 416 posts

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#391

Post by yes_really »

dghlsakjg wrote: post #119
AinderS wrote: post #4

Simple. Workplace complaints and management priorities have changed, and Dilbert followed. When Dilbert started, the government wasn't yet training employees how to "interrupt whiteness" [1], or Coca-Cola how to "be less white" [2], or Cigna simply forbidding hiring whites [3], nor did academia require mandatory diversity pledges for new hires and promotions [4]. Dilbert is doing what we are told art is supposed to d…

I want to call out your sources. City Journal is a propaganda outlet (George Soros conspiracy takes should not lead your top stories if you want credibility), The Washington Examiner is also openly biased and prints bullshit, and the story you mentioned has two unproven, unattributed, anecdotes. Newsweek... is Newsweek. The WSJ opinion section is a bad place to look for unbiased facts, as would be the NYT opinion sec…

> What I haven't seen is people being passed over for not being diverse enough on a first hand basis. The people that claim it happened to them, are generally better at complaining than they are at their job.

How do you have that information? Do you know of multiple people saying they were passed over for not being diverse enough and you have personal knowledge that those people are bad at their jobs?

If that's not the case, then stop offending people you disagree with.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#392

Post by yes_really »

CabSauce wrote: post #70
AinderS wrote: post #4

Simple. Workplace complaints and management priorities have changed, and Dilbert followed. When Dilbert started, the government wasn't yet training employees how to "interrupt whiteness" [1], or Coca-Cola how to "be less white" [2], or Cigna simply forbidding hiring whites [3], nor did academia require mandatory diversity pledges for new hires and promotions [4]. Dilbert is doing what we are told art is supposed to d…

You can cherry-pick examples of bad communication and bad policies all you want. But the fact remains that women and minorities are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to just about all aspects of life. The 'woke' problem pales in comparison to the actual problem. Complaining about things going too far isn't a good look when there are real, systemic issues remaining.

> But the fact remains that women and minorities are at a significant disadvantage when it comes to just about all aspects of life.

- 90% of homicide victims are male.

- 80% of homeless people are male.

- 90% of people in prison are male.

- 80% of suicide victims are male.

And there are many, many more issues that men face. But I won't even touch on them because you are clearly against discussing them.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#393

Post by ajot »

dahart wrote: post #269
ajot wrote: post #237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, sure it is a tabloid, but it's a real news from here. And I'm pretty sure it started a trend, even if it's not big enough to be reported yet.

Why is it real news? Why are you certain of this person’s story and motivation? What makes you sure it started a trend? Where are the other reports?

Because it happened. Sergia finally retired at age 60, be it that she transitioned only because of it or not. Every May the 8th some newspaper reminds us of this, or maybe someone gets an interview with Sergia. I'm sorry if I only could get Daily Mail as the only english-speaking media to cover this, but you probably can find news from that year from local newspapers (I did search the Buenos Aires Times first, with no luck, and the Buenos Aires Herald went down a year before Sergia's rise to prominence, so you'll have to deal with spanish-speaking sourcea).

The trend? I've heard about other men in their late 50s transitioning, and boasting about it as a means to retire at 60. I don't believe it's a massive thing though, as most people don't retire with the minimum age here, as retirement plans are very low.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#394

Post by dahart »

ajot wrote: post #393
dahart wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is it real news? Why are you certain of this person’s story and motivation? What makes you sure it started a trend? Where are the other reports?

Because it happened. Sergia finally retired at age 60, be it that she transitioned only because of it or not. Every May the 8th some newspaper reminds us of this, or maybe someone gets an interview with Sergia. I'm sorry if I only could get Daily Mail as the only english-speaking media to cover this, but you probably can find news from that year from local newspapers (I did search the Buenos Aires Times first, with n…

> be it that she transitioned only because of it or not

If not, then this is not news at all, it’s only a person being harassed by a public mob for their choice and because of other people’s fears and imagination. If not, then this really is an example of a talking point and not an example of anyone at all using gender norms to get out of working. She said she did not transition because of retirement. You assumed Sergia is lying by posting the article as an example of the claim that people are transitioning gender just to mess with other people or avoid work. Do you know for a fact that Sergia is lying? What if she’s telling the truth?

Both articles posted here speculate about the possibility of others wanting to transition for retirement in the future. This hearsay claim you shared about men supposedly talking about it is also speculation. It hasn’t yet happened, right? Even if people are boasting they’re going to, that doesn’t mean they will. So doesn’t this discussion of a trend that hasn’t happened also exemplify the original comment that this is talk and not reality?

BTW why is the retirement age different for men & women in Argentina?

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#395

Post by sershe »

bediger4000 wrote: post #3

The easy answer to the title question is that Scott Adams gained enough wealth that he lost touch. That seems to be a common experience of commercially successful artists. The author never explores this explanation.

Could it be that he gained enough wealth that he can speak his mind? Reminds me of http://www.paulgraham.com/say.html. Well, he can say whatever he wants! :)

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#396

Post by gadders »

bediger4000 wrote: post #268
gadders wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people with Fuck you money don't start saying "Fuck you!" then what's the point?

You've got a point, this is like the buddhist idea that without suffering, there's also no joy. However, the "fuck you" in that context is said to managers, bosses, employers and overseers. Adams, as a mass-market artist, will have trouble if he says "fuck you" to his audience. They're only indirectly his employers. As the audience notes, email feedback was key in "Dilbert's" early evolution and success. If Adams say…

Indeed but the point is as an "artist", once you reach a certain point of financial independence, you can afford to take that risk by saying things you believe to be true but that might alienate your audience. It's a lot harder with only $50 in the bank.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#397

Post by gadders »

ryandrake wrote: post #343
gadders wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If people with Fuck you money don't start saying "Fuck you!" then what's the point?

I always thought “fuck you” money specifically meant the ability to say F-U to a job or boss you don’t like. It’s not some general license to be unpleasant or anti-social because you don’t have to care anymore.

Well, for a cartoonist the boss is the newspapers or the audience.

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#399

Post by parrellel »

danaris wrote: post #215
parrellel wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He's confusing it with Bloom County, prolly.

Bloom County? The comic that was pretty openly political back in 1983? Sure, there were stretches of time where it didn't address anything particularly politics-related, but to suggest that it was not political seems to quite spectacularly miss the point.

Ah, but it was funny!

Re: What the Hell Is Up with Dilbert?

#400

Post by ajot »

dahart wrote: post #394
ajot wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it happened. Sergia finally retired at age 60, be it that she transitioned only because of it or not. Every May the 8th some newspaper reminds us of this, or maybe someone gets an interview with Sergia. I'm sorry if I only could get Daily Mail as the only english-speaking media to cover this, but you probably can find news from that year from local newspapers (I did search the Buenos Aires Times first, with n…

> be it that she transitioned only because of it or not If not, then this is not news at all, it’s only a person being harassed by a public mob for their choice and because of other people’s fears and imagination. If not, then this really is an example of a talking point and not an example of anyone at all using gender norms to get out of working. She said she did not transition because of retirement. You assumed Ser…

Those are really goood points, I have to admit. I do still believe Sergia transitioned only for retiring early, but I can never be sure.

> BTW why is the retirement age different for men & women in Argentina?

When state/tax backed retirement plans became universal during the 40s, the argument was that, as women raise children and are housewives, they are doing extra-work and should retire earlier.

Post reply on HN