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

521–530 of 546 posts

Re: We were wrong

#521

Post by Crake »

silverlake wrote: post #459
blocking_io wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sorry, but if you're using a Disney film as an example of a good portrayal of women, you've already lost.

I was just curious about this Disney song everyone mentions. It's actually kinda' weird: Yes, you want her Look at her, you know you do It’s possible she wants you, too There is one way to ask her It don’t take a word Not a single word Go on and kiss the girl

RAPE CULTURE

or is it LAND CULTURE?

perhaps it is MER CULTURE??

(I haven't seen that movie in a long while.)

Re: We were wrong

#522

Post by Crake »

blocking_io wrote: post #84
DannoHung wrote: post #24

Look at all these HNers defending sexual assault.

HN is ground zero for privilege denying wealthy cis white men.

Just like tumblr is ground zero for privileged females attending $30,000/year liberal arts colleges for women's studies, right?

Re: We were wrong

#523

Post by Crake »

Chris2048 wrote: post #278
blocking_io wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

HN is ground zero for privilege denying wealthy cis white men.

What's the insinuation here?

That if you are white, or cis, or a male, then you are innately evil and do not deserve to be treated with the respect that all humans deserve.

Re: We were wrong

#524

Post by Crake »

dirkgadsden wrote: post #80

It's easy to see why there aren't more women in computing with the mountain of rape culture, misogyny, and male privilege on display in these comments.

I don't really see any of this...although I do see a lot of examples of female privilege going on in the comments.

The type of women in tech we need are normal people who don't social justice blog for 14 hours a day on their tumblr about how oppressed they are. Oddly, the women who end up in tech are more likely to be the women who did their STEM classes/homework for 14 hours a day, so in the end it usually works out.

Re: We were wrong

#525

Post by Crake »

papsosouid wrote: post #358
dirkgadsden wrote: post #80

It's easy to see why there aren't more women in computing with the mountain of rape culture, misogyny, and male privilege on display in these comments.

Odd you should say so. My wife is a programmer, and distances herself from the online computing world not because of "misogyny", but because of this insane crowd of privileged people who insist on pretending to be victims in her name.

Without getting into specifics, as what the SRWs generally consider to be an "underprivileged" person or whatever...I have been feeling the same way as your wife lately QUITE a lot.

It makes it so that actual victims of sexual assault/rape/sexism/homophobia/etc can't talk about their experiences, because there's no way to distinguish between say people with ptsd!triggers and the people with omg-someone-disagreed-with-me!triggers. I hate it so much.

Re: We were wrong

#526

Post by emiljbs »

king_jester wrote: post #448
angersock wrote: post #285

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is a very touchy subject, right? I'm going to try and convey my thoughts very carefully here, so please try and be receptive. (Context for this is for your bog-standard straight courting scenario--I do not feel qualified to comment on how courting for any other gender scenario works.) ~ In an ideal world, everybody would communicate honestly and openly. You could sit down with a girl, and have a conversation lik…

> So, instead we find ourselves in this curious place where young men who mean well want to get with young women who also mean well. Unfortunately, the women are brought up expecting that the men will do the work, initiate everything, and the men are increasingly told that hey need to--to be safe and respectful, mind you!--wait for explicit confirmation of every step. This is so laden with sexism it cannot be taken s…

>This is so laden with sexism it cannot be taken seriously.

How? Serious question.

Re: We were wrong

#527

Post by lewispollard »

Crake wrote: post #517
lewispollard wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me this evidence. If that is really your attitude towards women then it's no wonder you feel the need to read a book like this. Try a little respect for your fellow people, you'll have much more fulfilling experiences with women if you stop believing what science tells you and actually take an interest in the people around you

>stop believing what science tells you You can't be serious. Someone on Hacker News advocating not to believe in science? Really?

Preaching to the wrong crowd. I love science, but I can't stand it when people try to apply 'logic and reeeason' to social concepts like this one. It's pseudoscience at best. We're human, not vulcan, after all...

Re: We were wrong

#528

Post by lewispollard »

newnewnew wrote: post #394
lewispollard wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Show me this evidence. If that is really your attitude towards women then it's no wonder you feel the need to read a book like this. Try a little respect for your fellow people, you'll have much more fulfilling experiences with women if you stop believing what science tells you and actually take an interest in the people around you

Sure - you're three times as likely to get a woman's number if you ask while walking a dog: http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/homo-consumericus/201007... A light touch on the forearm also increases the chances of getting a number: http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15534510701316177 That's a start for ya. There's nothing this society hates more than beta males. Your comment confirms it. God forbid a guy ain…

My problem isn't with people needing advice to get laid, god knows I was terrible with women in my youth. What I don't appreciate is guides that focus entirely on how to get women into bed via what is effectively trickery and misogyny. It should be teaching fundamental respect, social awareness, equality, consent, self-appreciation - these are the qualities that will allow you to form lasting connections with people (and not just women). Yeah, these tricks might help you get a drunk girl into bed but she'll probably regret it afterwards and so will you!

Re: We were wrong

#529

Post by merlincorey »

blocking_io wrote: post #463
merlincorey wrote: post #422

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The chapter linked appears to be called "Physical Escalation and Sex" and seems to be very late in the book. Consent is assumed in the situation because of all the stuff leading up to it. Like the getting the number, the going out on dates, talking a lot, and finally ending up alone with them in their or your own residence. Are you sure you've had sexual congress with a woman before? As many other posters are pointin…

>Consent is assumed in the situation because of all the stuff leading up to it. Like the getting the number, the going out on dates, talking a lot, and finally ending up alone with them in their or your own residence. Consent should never be assumed. Just fucking ask. This chapter is explicitly talking about transitioning from a non-sexual to a sexual relationship. Assuming that your partner wants this to happen is a…

> Consent should never be assumed. Just fucking ask. This chapter is explicitly talking about transitioning from a non-sexual to a sexual relationship. Assuming that your partner wants this to happen is a recipe for sexual assault.

I think you're mistaken, and I think you're inexperienced with women. Most women absolutely do not want to be asked every step of the way. Many women I have been with have specifically enjoyed it when I have done things such as not ask them but pick them up and place them in my lap, then kiss them.

If someone withdraws their consent, and you do not respect, that makes you a rapist. Consent is typically withdrawn when she says things like "no", which the guide you are calling a rape-manual specifically notes to respect.

You're being disingenuous. No one who already is not a rapist and respects consent, can hear, and read body language is going to continue in the face of withdrawn consent.

Finally, how do you know the "talking a lot" step doesn't establish explicit verbal consent prior to the event?

Re: We were wrong

#530

Post by mamoswined »

rlt wrote: post #175
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…

If I'm in a club and I pull my dick out and forcibly place a random woman's hand on it, then of course that's sexual assault. If I do the same thing in a bedroom with a woman who I've already been (consensually) fondling, is it?

I would personally very much not like that move. If we are fondling, it will get to the point where I'm touching the guy's dick without any sort of prodding on his part, unless he does something to turn me off like forcibly place my hand on his dick.
Post reply on HN