Hacker News Reader

Comment by epsylon | Hacker News Reader

> 1. I'm basically not allowed to voice an opinion that isn't completely aligned with the feminist status quo (I believe in equality, fuck me right).

Yes, because there is actually a single, unified, globally agreed upon feminist status quo who tries to silence the voices of brave dissenters...

View on HN

There doesn't need to be a single, unified, globally agreed upon feminist status quo, because as soon as a dissenting opinion is voiced the extremist groups are the ones that speak the loudest and the rest of the feminist movement just stands back and watches.

And they wield a ton of power. Ask the programmer that was fired for saying "dongle" within earshot of Adria Richards. Chances are your HR bureaucracy is radically feminist.

More like radically covering-their-ass-ist. HR departments are paid to prevent potential lawsuits and it's cheaper/less risky to fire someone at the first hint of controversy than it is to face the chance of a lawsuit, no matter how small.

If feminist complaints are acted upon by HR, and patriarchal complaints are not (if, in fact, they ever receive one), then you know on which side is HR.

Feminists see themselves as permanent underdogs, like the USA, but it just ain't true.

Adria Richards was also fired for that.

> Chances are your HR bureaucracy is radically feminist.

Ah, the good old feminist conspiracy. Do you really believe what you said ? I will stand by my words. There is no feminist conspiracy.

There isn't a 'single' status quo, but if you question and/or debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or 'rape culture' or various statistics about the relative status of women versus men, watch out.

> debate the existence or definition of certain articles of feminist faith such as 'patriarchy' or 'rape culture'

This is not a debate in good faith. If you come to the table with no previous knowledge about anything and demand to be heard, why should people waste time with bringing you up to speed? The vast majority of the times this happens it ends up in moving the goal posts.

I'm certainly not suggesting that a person go in completely uninformed, nor that he use misguided or misogynist arguments. But it's completely suitable to refute statistics or conclusions if one has done the appropriate reading - both feminist texts and texts criticizing feminism - and come to different conclusions.

I totally agree. However trying to argue that patriarchy or rape culture doesn't exist would imply that someone doesn't have a even a basic understanding of written feminist works as they go over this in various criticism very often.

Why is this debate not in good faith? Because they disagree with you? Assuming they have no previous knowledge about anything solely because they disagree with you is arrogant and lazy. Don't engage in an exchange of ideas, just paint them as stupid and ignorant and move on, firm in your unchallenged convictions.

This point of view you harbor is WHY there can be no debate in good faith.

that's like going to a scientific conference and "debating" climate change. there are lots of things that sound questionable and/or debatable simply because you don't know enough about them.

I'm not debating the existence of extreme opinions among people who label themselves as feminists.

I'm just saying that feminists come in all shapes and colors, and, lo and behold, there are a wide range of opinions among them, and (unsurprisingly) many of these opinions are contradictory, just like in any other group of people sharing some basic ideas.

I'm also saying that you should not base your opinion of social movement around the views of a kernel of extremists. Specifically, if you think that, as soon as someone introduces herself as a feminist, you think that she will stand by extreme opinions and that your differences are irreconcilable, and therefore is not worth talking to, then perhaps you should try to review your judgements.

And I'm also saying that there is a problem with gender equality in our modern societies. Even if you disagree with the methods and propaganda of extremist groups, you should recognize that there is a big problem. And the easiest way to eradicate those extreme opinions is to eradicate the problem that gives a voice to these groups.

Kind of. The feminist movement is a movement, and like all movement it has developed a continually evolving culture, in the same was the US has a different culture than Canada, and Google has a different culture than Microsoft. Seeing how pervasive a culture is almost impossible to do without comparing it to others. It is entirely possible that the feminist movement has developed a culture relatively closed to dissenting opinions.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com