Hacker News Reader

Comment by informatimago | Hacker News Reader

Once for all you'll have to understand that without a good distribution of roles (girls must grow to be moms making and educating babies; boys must grow to be warriors (including scientists, explorers, farmers, etc) to defend women and children against invaders of all kinds, then you won't live happy old days, because you'll be invaded, raped and dead by then.

The uproar should be against that uproar!

View on HN

When huge groups organize to force gender norms to be crystallized into society, it prevents the evolution of that society to respond successfully to dangers and problems that face it.

A great example of 15 million or so people adopting this was the Mormon Proclamation on the Family [0], which set a mission statement for their religion that continues to result in political problems and furor.[1] [2]

These groups organizing to fight against existence of their taboo are a great issue, one that will often organize to prevent testing the unknown. I don't know if it's my relative youth and inexperience, but it seems to be getting worse than it was in times past, when entire cultures migrated or philosophically shifted (e.g. Polynesian settlement, the Enlightenment, etc.).

Links:

[0] https://www.lds.org/manual/doctrine-and-covenants-and-church...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008...

[2] http://kutv.com/news/local/defeated-in-the-us-lds-church-tak...

Pardon me, I guess this is sarcasm, but I do not get the reference/joke.

Huh? Exactly what century was this post written from exactly?

He is saying you cannot change gender norms. If you try, you will fail in your own life.

That's also not making sense to me. Women clearly are capable of being scientists, so what's wrong with criticizing magazines that only talk about beauty tips? And why would that necessarily lead to "failing in your own life"? It obviously doesn't. Look at, e.g., Sheryl Sandberg.

And for every Sheryl Sandberg there's 10 men. Being the exception != being the norm.

That's not the ratio of men to women in the tech industry, and said ratio is not caused by competency discrepancies. It's actually partially caused by exactly this kind of sexist drivel that you're spouting; who would want to enter an industry that is so unwelcoming?

Why is there so much sexist trash in the HN comments today?

Just because you disagree with an opinion does not make it sexism. If anything it exaggerates your own self prescribed ignorance.

Theirs is not just an opinion when you have a few decades of sociological research to back it up. If you want to see research supporting the claim that you are wrong a good starting point would be Project Implicit's webpage.

Indeed, the person that responded to you could have been less inflammatory, but it is pretty hard to keep it cool when you are surrounded by people that dismiss an entire group of people based on gender, sexual orientation or skin color.

FYI, the definition of sexism I'm using is the dictionary one, not "things I disagree with". I called your opinion sexist because it is sexist. Here's the definition:

     1. prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially discrimination against women.
     2. behavior, conditions, or attitudes that foster stereotypes of social roles based on sex.

If you want to argue, instead of going all ad hominem and somehow trying to make it be about my supported ignorance or inability to handle disagreement, let's actually stick to the issues.

There is a missing bracket in there somewhere and the bit of my brain that does lexical parsing forced me to eventually abort processing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com