Social justice for the bald man | Hacker News Reader

Social justice for the bald man

stakedy.com

76 pointstoricalea98 comments

Up next: Social Justice for the Short Man, for those with a 'country' accent, for the glasses wearers (in the off-seasons for nerdiness), the straight-up unattractive.

They are all real, the question we must contend with is: Are all externally imposed, negatively perceived features, protected from measurement/discrimination?

What about age? Can you discriminate towards youthfulness if you will, in your time, become old?

Then we have social justice for fat people, dumb people, lazy people, people with anger problems, people with personality disorders, criminals, and so on. Where do we draw the line?

I argue we don't draw the line at all. Rather, we treat everyone with compassion and respect, and find / judge everyone on their true strengths and weaknesses (vs. those characteristic of whatever group they belong to).

Discrimination is OK when the discriminating trait actually matters - i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead or perform brain surgery. Similarly, I have nothing against diversity, but I think portraying people of many ethnicities in a movie whose setting would not have people of all ethnicities is weird and something our current culture gets wrong. But you should not be rude to an idiot or angry person, just like you shouldn't avoid putting ethnic people in general movies (and make sure you actually know your setting, e.g. I recall controversy where black people were in a movie on ancient Greece, but black people actually did exist in Greece at the time).

(Also I still think people who commit crimes and are dangerous should be locked up. The point is they are locked up to protect and deter others and possibly reform them, not just for intrinsic punishment.)

The issue with the current attitude on social justice is that most people don't fall for prejudice or stereotypes, but don't understand why. You don't just avoid stereotypes because they're often wrong (though a lot truly don't line up with statistics), you avoid them because you don't judge people on their surface, people aren't always what they look like, and most people fail at least one stereotype of a group they belong to if not many more. You don't treat someone with respect because they're black or female, you treat them with respect because they're a decent human. Similarly, you don't mistreat someone whose short or fat or even has something wrong with their head which makes them occasionally annoying. But lots of "social justice advocates" don't realize this and hate towards sides which aren't explicitly "protected".

EDIT: There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck. But while you can't always give everyone tangible aid or a thorough evaluation, you can at least treat everyone with respect and common decency.

> i.e. you wouldn't let an idiot or a hot-headed person control a nuclear warhead

Uhhhhhhh… don’t pay too much attention to politics do you?

Being fat and lazy is under your control, being bald is not.

Is it really? Who would honestly freely choose that?

Laziness aka lack of energy can actually be a result of diet. However I question that we choose to eat low quality food. It is plausible that the food industry is lowering the quality of their food to the point that it is actively harmful to humans.

Fat people can exercise and eat less to lose weight, what can bald people do?

Get a weave, of course /s

> There's also the practical situation where you can't save everyone. In that case unfortunately I think whatever disadvantaged or stereotyped groups aren't protected by the current society are out of luck.

If people in the past had felt that way, there would be no protected groups. Society only moves forward because of people who believe they can save disadvantaged or stereotyped groups that aren't already protected.

That quote is what actually happens, not what should happen. I guess what should happen is that the people who are "saved" get picked random. But in practice people almost always have preferences and conscious/unconscious biases.

This is the way.

this is a reddit comment and I have been noticing them much more frequently

> Social Justice for the Short Man

The height wage gap is bigger than the gender wage gap. Short men are more oppressed than average women and everyone knows it

Height is correlated to health, intelligence, and good looks.

So, no offense for short people, but it’s not clear how much of this is height specific bias.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Height_and_intelligence

Not sure why parent got teh downvotes, there is a small positive correlation. Must be some sensitive shorties around here with more than 500 uovotes.

Seriously, there's a lot more diversity in advertising these days, but I don't think we'll ever get to the point where companies are open to diversity of attractiveness. (Or people pushing for it.) Can you imagine an Apple ad where you have average looking, or unattractive, people taking photos with the latest iPhone?

I think we are not far from somebody trying that. We know that people are trained to ignore advertisements by constant practice, and perhaps every possible change will eventually have to be made to stay ahead of the subconscious spam filter.

I suppose the pendulum could swing the other way one day. It might be a fashion thing. People might get tired of seeing attractive people in media all the time. Speaking for myself, I'm genuinely tired of seeing actors looking way too attractive and made up in movies. Let's go back to people looking like regular people who don't have a team of wardrobe and makeup artists behind them.

Watching Netflix, I found that in some countries this is the case: actors are mostly average or bad looking.

Sorry, but I hope the fashion does not catch on :D

That's already happening and they call it "body positivity". It's mostly about overweight women (obesity rates are skyrocketing and women consume more fashion advertizing) but occasionally includes other forms of unattractiveness, like being old, saggy, or out of shape (rarely more than one at a time though).

This underwear ad is from 2015: https://hips.hearstapps.com/cos.h-cdn.co/assets/15/42/4000x2...:*

> They are all real, the question we must contend with is: Are all externally imposed, negatively perceived features, protected from measurement/discrimination?

Define protected. In the legal sense? In the cultural sense?

I wouldn't necessarily say we should impose a specific law to ban discrimination against e.g. short people, but for sure I'd be... uncomfortable with an employer deciding to discriminate against someone solely for their height (assuming that the height isn't a relevant factor for their job performance, of course.)

Would I think it's ok to be culturally against an employer for doing so? Probably yes. Would I think they should be able to be sued for it? Trickier but probably yes? I'm not sure. Should we have specific laws against it (i.e. in the States, making height a protected class)? Probably unnecessary given that there is no specific historical discrimination against short people.

This page is generated by some kind of algorithms, look at the rest of the site.

Why is it that in every post about a problem there's this what-about-ism? We can talk about the issue at hand and then the other ones separately.

At some point 'what-about-ism' must become a good faith comparison.

That’s fair. I’ve probably been reading too much Blind and miscalibrated.

Stakedy is auto-generated by AI. (It’s hard to figure out how, it’s some crazy blockchainy thing.)

The fact that people don’t recognize that and try to argue the merit of the article here makes me scared.

I actually enjoyed the extremely straight-to-the-point argument and how the article was clearly divided into small sections that each motivate the next.

If this was done by AI, I have to say AI may offer something better than human in terms of putting forward an argument than people, if not now, in the near future (this article may be just an early example?).

I hope that we see more of this "clearer argumentation" without fluff on many topics we care about... maybe we can see things we just couldn't before.

It reminds me of a 'well done' essay by an unimaginative 15 year old honors student. Someone not talented or really smart, but someone able to grind out the work. Maybe not even unimaginative, perhaps they were given a task by the teacher write about a type of prejudice that affects our world and they came up with this as a way to subvert expectations. Although this kind of subverting expectations is also like the lowest level of imagination, which wouldn't matter so much if it were done well. But the essay is boring.

Assuming it was written by an adult I would not argue its merits, but make fun of it.

Assuming you are correct it is by an AI, which I think you probably are, it's pretty impressive - looking at this page https://stakedy.com/long/how-staking-on-stakedy-works.html makes me think you are correct because of what it says at the bottom "Stakedy is a product from digital people within Celody. Celody is a digital world powered by music."

You can see how many articles they have and how they are all weirdly same and they all just kind of seem like an argument but not really.

There is “how it works” article but even that seems written in this weird style.

Are you sure? I read https://stakedy.com/long/how-staking-on-stakedy-works.html and it sounds like the articles are (or at least can be) written by people.

I am honestly not sure, but the article are at the same time all exactly the same and weirdly uncanny in how they resemble actual meaningful text, yet contain no actual information or meaning.

The articles are written by "digital people" based on parameters:

https://celody.com/evolution.html

That’s really impressive if it was authored by an AI.

yes it seemed like the article was written by my 90s ircbot

I know the post is satire but using baldness as a feature of villains in movies is surprisingly common still. I noticed it watching Dune recently given that the Harkonnens were not even bald (or specifically entirely hairless) in the books or the 1984 movie.

I don't think anyone's arguing that it's the worst injustice anyone faces but it is surprisingly often used as a visual shorthand for people lacking humanity, which is pretty nasty.

A lot of cartoon villains are ‘masterminds’ and the cartoon image of a scientist or academic is also often an middle aged or older bald man. I’m not sure if hair loss is actually more common among scientists, or if it’s just correlated with age.

Which reveals another interesting and concerning trope: the villain gets ahead by using their intelligence, and the hero solves the problem with brute force, possibly magically augmented. Very seldom is it the other way around.

Sounds like you want more detective stories, not superhero stories. Smart hero defeat the evil brute using his whit is a common sort of story if you know where to look, but Hollywood does seem to be on a superhero glut for the past 15-20 years. They produce a smothering amount of drivel, to the point where it's easy to forget that anything else exists.

It's not limited to superhero stories. Even the quintessential story detective, Sherlock Holmes, meets his match in a "criminal mastermind" whom he ultimately defeats with... his superior skill at wrestling. Admittedly that was some of Arthur Conan Doyle's laziest writing.

I think masterminds are often bald with large heads to suggest exceptional intelligence. Baldness helps show that their head really is big, not just their hairstyle.

Another theme I’ve seen is that games with a bad, brutish, or scary guy as a protagonist tend to have him be bald.

My sample size is too small (just my own limited gaming experience) though so this might not be true if I collected data properly.

That can be a technical choice. Protagonists like these tend to be in games aiming for a more realistic art style, in which it's expensive to render convincing hair.

That makes sense, the levels of the androgens in "androgenic alopecia" they would have to get that much muscle (and that aggressive) would make Elvis go bald.

> the levels of the androgens in "androgenic alopecia" they would have to get that much muscle (and that aggressive) would make Elvis go bald

According to One Punch Man, the following daily exercise routine will make you bald (and more powerful than anyone else in the universe):

100 push-ups 100 sit-ups 100 squats 10 kilometer run

Obviously correct. Being ugly is much worse than racism in the present day and it’s only going to get worse. Nobody is willing to stand up for ugly people rights.

The sad thing is that there's not even any hope that anyone will ever want to standup for ugly people, bald people (me), short people etc. No one wants to "admit" openly to belonging to these groups or somehow having reasons to defend them even.

This was going to be part of a bad stand up comedy routine I am never going to do. Bald is the last label and category that hasn't had its time to shine. Even actors who have hair take media roles that bald men traditionally have. Like Patrick Stewart being replaced by a dude that has to shave his head to be Professor X. And there is a ton of subtle bald hate in society even to the point of influencing career advancement. That is the same media representation problem other groups have.

With all that being said, down with groups and labels. Gotta move on from it as it is too easy for the wealthy class to take our self defined labels and categories and turn everyone against each other. The internet has allowed this process to be amplified.

> Like Patrick Stewart being replaced by a dude that has to shave his head to be Professor X

What is the reference here? In Multiverse of Madness (spoiler) Patrick Stewart plays Charles Xavier. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt9419884/fullcredits

> Patrick Stewart

A cursory Google ("who replaced Patrick Stewart as Professor X") shows that James McAvoy portrayed the character from 2011-2019, sharing some overlap with Stewart (2000-2017 and 2022).

Yes, that is the one

Although part of that is he also portrays a young non-bald Xavier, before Xavier loses his hair.

> hasn't had its time to shine

I see what you did there

I’ve had a few male friends approach me about my baldness and how I manage to live with it. Usually they’re noticing that they’re thinning or their hairline is receding, and they’re genuinely scared about what life will be like.

I could take it offensively, but I started balding so early and I’m so used to it that I’m totally over it and I welcome the questions about their fate.

It’s a little striking in some cases because people ask as though it must be misery. Like, I’m some kind of misfortune half-person, haha.

It’s crazy to imagine asking people about other genetic traits in a similar way, but again, I’m happy to let them know they too will survive baldness.

I mean, some men can pull it off. Most cannot. I know I couldn't. I'm already unattractive as it is, being bald would be brutal.

If you have a pronounced jaw, strong features, you can do it. Weak jaw, receding chin, well ... not so much.

What is this website? What are "accountable posts", slashes, and tokens?

EDIT: There is something called Celody, and now I'm listening to music in the hopes of getting tokens. I assume that I'll be able to upvote and downvote articles on the website using these tokens.

I have no idea how long I have to listen, or why.

I think this comment deserves a better reception, it's easy to (over) react to phrases like 'what is this website' that are too common - but in this case there does seem to be something quite unusual, I think it was meant in ernest.

Even if not, I think it can be explained in ernest, for those others who are confused by the metadata surrounding the post itself:

> This post has reached its slash date. No more votes.

> Staked: 922 tokens

> Slash Result: NO SLASH

> Stakedy is a product from digital people within Celody. Celody is a digital world powered by music.

(Celody is a hyperlink, if you follow it it's just far more confusing; not enlightening.)

The about page [1] seems to explain the system, it’s an interesting concept but it sounds like this would be not suited for controversial posts - just because people don’t like something doesn’t mean it’s bad content.

[1] https://stakedy.com/long/how-staking-on-stakedy-works.html

> I just searched IMDB's 100 Most Beautiful People on the Planet and 0% of the people listed had "androgenetic alopecia". Zero.

Sean Connery, John Wayne, Bruce Willis, Vin Diesel, Jason Statham.

For men, "beautiful" and "sexy" come from the projection of power. Fat men are sexy when food is scarce. The Japanese chonmage hairstyle was a reverence to the older, more accomplished fighters (who often had male pattern baldness).

And hasn't Dwayne Johnson (The Rock) been the highest earning actor for years?

The list: https://m.imdb.com/list/ls066164634/

(Note that it is just a random user's content, not a poll of many users or any expert.)

Balding to men is similar to aging for women. The more attractive folks take it badly because society starts treating them worse.

*the formerly more attractive folks

I’m 50 and have been using a Wahl clipper to shave my head every few weeks since college. I shave my face twice weekly. I find it all to be a chore. I’d give up all the hair on my head without a second thought if I could.

Hair is overrated. On women too. This is a sexy look:

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/84/Persis_Khamba...

It has nothing to do with being bald or short or tall or anything else. It has to do with other people needing to define their own self worth based on someone else’s traits.

Someone is bald and you have tons of hair. Boom, you feel better about yourself. You are super tall so you must be better than anyone else.

Don’t define your self worth based on other people. Base it on yourself and the life you are living.

Other people consider you to be a leader if you are tall, you will literally get treated better or get access to better opportunities if you are tall or beautiful. Short and ugly people don't enjoy the same advantage so it's not just feelings.

Is this article AI generated? Like what even is this website??

Always thought about gpt generated articles guess I’m behind the curve

would you rather have your hair back or have a six pack

one is within your control the other is not.

for the vast vast majority of people a six pack will improve their standing in society more than hair

Unless you have a weird skull

Maintaining a sixpack takes very significant effort.

agree, im no where near one myself but as a bald man it helps me know that there are impactful things I could work on vs lamenting what I cant control.

Stanley Tucci told me this, too, and I believe him.

I grew out my hair to my shoulders over the pandemic, and then I shaved it all off. That was the first time in my life I've ever seen myself without any hair, and I accepted that's how I'd look if I were to lose it all.

I got a lot of closure from that experience, and while I honestly hope I keep it all for as long as I can, if it goes I can just get a wig and have any hair style I want!

The fundamental flaw with this platform is the belief that there is "unbiased" or "uncontroversial" writing. Also, it assumes all other actors are benevolent and not conspiring against those they disagree with or view as their enemies to brigade or otherwise game the platform to their advantage.

Bald men need to get in line, then. Middle aged men are among the least discriminated against demographic.

I would imagine that they are the least protected, but there definitely ARE situations that they are clearly a factor of discrimination, if you can't see it, step outside.

Don't need to. I've got a first hand perspective.

A lot of things aren't a big deal unless you make it one. Weird post. It reminds me of the older man who dyes his hair. There's something to be said about confidence and having the dignity to just be comfortable with yourself. You can be bald and not insecure. It goes a long way.

I think it's meant as satire.

The relationship with testosterone is complex; higher levels interplay with a genetically determined follicle sensitivity.

That said, my favorite T-shirt ever on the subject was spotted on Fire Island:

It's not a bald spot, it's a solar panel for a sex machine.

This article is unintentional satire. (Speaking as a balding man)

As a Mexican mid-class bald, I can confirm we are seen with some kind of disrespect.

You have to get money, attitude or being smart to get some authority.

Does this AI generated website also learn from posts on forums about the articles it generates?

Saitama would surely agree with the headline

Nonsense article there are plenty of highly regarded bald men. Easily searchable on the internet. Easily visible on social media. Easily visible on local television.

It may be nonsense, but not because of that argument, since one could say the same about nearly any disadvantaged group.

Shave your head and grow a goatee

This kind of satire on the eve of the loss of Roe is remarkably poor taste

Reply on news.ycombinator.com