Hacker News Reader

Comment by yarcob | Hacker News Reader

> could you elaborate or backup this claim

I'm pretty sure they can't. The preceding paragraph contains 3 links to references, which is a pretty transparent attempt to make it seem like the incendiary sentence that follows isn't completely made up hogwash.

View on HN

Your stating how GP's post makes you feel followed by completely dismissing the evidence GP offers and deciding its truth value based solely on your emotional response is exactly what GP is talking about.

The evidence he provides is of hormonal disruption that seems seem to affect secondary sexual characteristics not of a so called "feminization of society" which if he was trying to get his point across may have taken extra steps like saying "the femalization of society" even though the "of society" is also suspect in retrospect. What about "the regression of male characters in newborn babies"? Seems more reasonable. But back to my point: The parent is trying to conflate hard evidence of something with a very broad claim which is a typical rethorical tactic of conspiracy theorists and altrighters.

> completely dismissing the evidence GP offers

I don't see any evidence for the "apparent feminization of human societies", because that term is just incendiary bullshit and doesn't mean anything.

In the vein of trying to follow the HN guidelines to assume good faith, my assumption was that were referring to the overall lowering of male testosterone as the “feminization of societies”.

Which is why I asked for clarity, exposed two possible interpretations while taking a guess at which was more probable based on the poorly worded "feminization of society" line. I take notice that I did not get an answer as to which was the intended meaning which only reinforces my feeling. Even further, even if the intended meaning was that testicles are shrinking worldwide... Well, that's interesting but I am more concerned by the rise of cancers and other worrying stuff (although there might be a link, curious to know more)

My comment was more to the parent poster who referred to it as “bullshit” rather than yours that asked for them to back up their claim

But sometimes you need to call out pseudoscientific bullshit for what it is, instead of bending over backwards to find an acceptable interpretation of what someone could have meant when they said dumb shit.

This is the reason there are guidelines to try an ensure a modicum of civility. There are more charitable ways of disagreeing than calling out “dumb shit”. One way facilitates discourse, the other shuts it down. If the latter is the goal, I don’t know if HN is the right place for you, considering it does note really fit with the guidelines

It's funny that you expect me to find a charitable reading of what I consider an obvious non-sequitur; while denying my comments the same curtesy.

Yes, I used some colorful language; my argument would probably have been stronger without it. I'll try to avoid loaded terms like "dumb shit" in the future.

After reading this comment again, I realise that I should have just shut up a few comments before. I can't delete my comments any more now.

My apologies for being so argumentative; GP triggered me and I just spewed expletives instead of calmly explaining my point of view.

"Pretty sure" is a thought/judgement, not a feeling.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com