Hacker News Reader

Comment by LudwigNagasena | Hacker News Reader

Even in a tweet about algorithms the guy can’t help but dunk on men to show what a nice guy he is.

The comment you're referring to didn't occur in the tweet about algorithms - it was a reactive comment that occurred in response to an experience that happened after the tweet. Also, I'm not sure what "to show what a nice guy he is" means here, though I'm guessing it's just being used an insult in the same family as "white knight".

I can't know whether his comment was reasonable without looking through the comments he was referring to (and neither can you), but even given that he was being unreasonable, you chose to be unreasonable in turn.

> I can't know whether his comment was reasonable without looking through the comments he was referring to (and neither can you)

Nah, I can. It seems quite toxic regardless of what has been said to him.

> even given that he was being unreasonable, you chose to be unreasonable in turn

I don’t see what is unreasonable about shaming anti-social behavior. When you see any “unsolicited advice”, even between two same gendered persons, as a manifestation of patriarchy you are bound to come off as toxic.

Rainbow, BLM, it's all there, so he can afford the sharp reaction towards the "random dudes".

Without the protective ideological shield, that reaction would have been deemed "hostile" and "toxic" by the twitteria.

I had a good laugh because that's actually a comment against the mansplaining common narrative, people will jump to explain things everytime they feel it's easy to add their contribute, being the audience a woman or a random guy on the internet or anyone they perceive weak enough to be a good target to show off their knowledge and skills

I think that’s a really cynical way to look at it, especially when the explanations are public. People can explain things to others without there being a hidden power dynamic.

How is an example in another context a "comment against the mansplaining common narrative"? Even your explanation makes it pretty clear that a man-to-woman combination would be one of the most common versions.

He's the one who extrapolated the context, my point is that the explainer does it for reasons that have nothing to do with the gender of the receiver. And this is one example

> Update: random dudes are now saying the unsolicited toxic replies are actually my fault for saying something in the first place. So NOW I feel like I've gotten a little glimpse of what it's like to be a woman on the internet.

I was very curious about how this is evidence that women specifically get berated on the internet rather than evidence that everyone is a potential target. Obviously from this interaction alone you can't tell if it happens more to women or not but... I thought it was kind of funny to say "this thing happened to me as a man and now I really understand that this thing happens to women."

Reply on news.ycombinator.com