Hacker News Reader

Comment by alphabettsy | Hacker News Reader

Some men truly don’t know how to conduct themselves appropriately, that’s been my lifelong experience. Maybe the response to changing culture also explains the decline in sex for young men and the number of people here saying “here, here” in response to this article rather than being constructive.

This is how change works, people have to adapt. A lot of you are arguing that you should give up rather than deal with changing culture, more for the rest I guess.

View on HN

Why is "the decline in sex for young men" even relevant here? Most people who argue that "some men truly don’t know how to conduct themselves appropriately" would say that 'behaving appropriately' means that professional interactions among strangers should not be unduly sexualized. So why even bring up sex at all, it seems like a red herring here.

I think they are saying that those categories of men overlap closely. The men that do not know how to interact with women in the workforce are closely overlapped with the men who cannot 'get past 3rd base'.

I'm unsure how the modern world is affecting both areas simultaneously though. Perhaps cis-hetero women are just not putting up with things that they used too put up with.

> The men that do not know how to interact with women in the workforce are closely overlapped with the men who cannot 'get past 3rd base'.

Given that the major examples are Harvey Weinstein & Co, I believe that would be comically wrong.

I mean, I didn't say the overlap was 100%. That monster would be obviously outside this.

I haven't seen any overlap tbh, but maybe that's just because the low profile cases aren't publicized. The ones you hear from are usually aggressive, successful men who don't seem shy or socially awkward at all. They just show little care for others and do whatever they can get away with. That sounds very different from the incel community, and to conflate the too for rhetoric effect doesn't seem right to me.

By your example, a rapist technically gets past 3rd base too. But that doesn't in any way reflect on the argument made.

Harvey Weinstein is not and was not by any definition a "ladies man". If for example depp or mcconaughey or any other seemingly successful ladies man were the main archetype of the "Weinstein & Co", your point would stand, here it does not.

This is not in support of how well these two groups overlap or not, just a critique of your logic.

> Harvey Weinstein is not and was not by any definition a "ladies man".

He wasn't a socially awkward recluse either, that's the point: he's an aggressive, ultra-successful alpha-male. Looks work, power does too. Weinstein didn't have the looks, but he had all that power.

It's just a totally different demographic. I'd love to see some hints, because I really didn't get anything even remotely close in the media.

Changing culture is significantly harder than learning a new skill set. Culture isn't a defined set of rules that applies to the different people the same each time. People skills are generally one of the hardest skills to learn for the reason. Plainly there's no reason for people to learn most cultural shifts, while this shift is necessary and right, there's also an extreme variance of what's allowed or expected based on age and political leanings. While there are some really obvious lines that get crossed i.e. sexual favors, making comments about physical appearance, blatant sexist comments, most of what's being debated are things like what's appropriate physical contact? Is a supportive tap on the arm allowed? Is hugging a close co-worker allowed? What if a female coworker makes a sexually suggestive comment? What do you do if you are falsely accused and automatically assumed guilty because we're supposed to automatically believe all women? What path is there for redemption for reformed harassers? To suggest that questions like these are easily answered or even that they have a single answer among women isn't justifiable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com