Hacker News Reader

Comment by an_actual_man | Hacker News Reader

How does such a waste of bandwidth even get 27 points? Is this site infested with feminists or what?

Taking feminism to be broadly the belief that women and men should have equal social, political and economic rights, I would be very upset if the site wasn't infested with feminists.

You're describing egalitarianism, not feminism. When you see an article being advertised as "by an actual girl", you know it's not about equality.

"Feminism is a collection of movements and ideologies aimed at defining, establishing, and defending equal political, economic, and social rights for women."

The problem with that is that people's perception of what it means is more important than what is in a dictionary. Given the dictionary definition, one would have to assume 100% of women would be feminists. By the dictionary definition, it makes no sense for any women not to be a feminist. Yet 75% of women refuse to self-identify as feminists. The baggage that comes with the term has too much weight for the dictionary definition to matter any more.

Think a little about what you're saying here.

For example, the dictionary definition of atheism is a lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. However, many religious people believe that atheism is a conscious rejection of an existing God, a deliberate embracing of evil, and that all atheists are intrinsically amoral or indeed immoral. This understanding is so common that most people who do not believe in a god refuse to self-identify as atheists, and those who do are reviled somewhat less than child molesters.

My point here should be obvious: You're right. If you don't believe in God, you are an atheist. If you think your social rights should be independent of your genitals or gender identity, you are a feminist. But if you don't use the word to describe yourself (and that's forgivable), it's not because it has "baggage"-- it's because hateful organizations and individuals have been attacking the word as a proxy for attacking the concept, and it is working.

We don't have to let them off the hook for this.

I'm not sure what you were hoping to get from that post. I have thought about it. I know people in the US don't identify as atheists because the word has lost its original meaning there. So?

People don't refuse to self-identify as feminists because "hateful organizations and individuals have been attacking the word as a proxy for attacking the concept", they refuse because other self-identified feminists promote hatred and radicalism that most people find objectionable.

Who is being let off of the hook? Radical gender feminists took over feminism and alienated women. What hook are they supposed to be on and how are they being let off?

> Radical gender feminists took over feminism and alienated women.

Bullshit. The third wave took over feminism and included homosexuals, transgender and transexual women, and men. Anyone who feels alienated by feminism is being lied to.

Even now plenty of feminists are hostile towards transgender and transexual women, it wasn't just a second wave thing. And second wave feminists didn't vanish into nothingness, they still exist, and still advocate hatred. Why would you suggest that people who choose not to identify with that are "being lied to"? Who is lying to them, and what is the lie?

As to your "bullshit" claim, why do you believe that radical gender feminists and third wave feminists are mutually exclusive groups? Mainstream third wave feminists are almost exclusively gender feminists, and they actively seek to deny equity feminists their views and their identity as feminists. They call equity feminists "anti-feminists" and "self-hating misogynists".

It might be more accurate to say that mainstream feminists think the idea of "equity feminism" is a made up concept promoted by anti-feminists to try to devalue second- and third-wave feminism.

I wonder why they think that.

Sure, you can use their rhetoric if it makes you feel good. It doesn't change the fact that those mainstream feminists who call people whose beliefs align with the dictionary definition of feminism "anti-feminists" are the ones who drove women away from identifying themselves as feminists.

> feminism |ˈfeməˌnizəm|

> noun

> the advocacy of women's rights on the grounds of political, social, and economic equality to men.

No, he's describing feminism.

I think this is living proof that throw away accounts should be dealt with on here. If someone really wants to participate, a good 6/12 hours cool down without posting privileges would do nicely. I don't think anyone wins anything on here with this sort of reddit novelty account phenomenon. It will not stop all trolling, just this sort of troll.

9 times out of 10 I agree with you, but HN is a rare site on which there are often genuine causes for a throwaway account, when people have good input to make on a thread but for work related reasons can't do it under a name that their colleagues/boss/etc. might recognise.

They're already green, so you know which ones to ignore if that's how you feel.

So you think posts like this shouldn't be on HN, but comments like this should be? That's not the Hacker News I love.

What a useless comment.

If you actually read it, it's against over the top feminism.

So you think posts like this shouldn't be on HN, but comments like this should be?

That's the best way of making that point that I've ever seen.

Did you actually read the post? It's an argument AGAINST the .net article that argues that all women are constantly subjected to sexism in this industry

How about some real criticism instead of just fear and anger at a woman expressing an opinion contrary to your own?

As a male feminist. I wouldn't even up vote this. She does point out why the article is stupid but I think most people would agree on that point already.

You'd be surprised. A lot of people took the original post as gospel. Some because if they didn't, they'd be labelled against women. (It's a sort-of mob mentality.)

The original article in .net mag was really difficult to read, I gave up part way through.

After reading Laura's post I went back to it but no still gave up part way through.

The original author was on a hiding to nothing as I think it's really difficult for guys to well write about sexism

Reply on news.ycombinator.com