agateform's comments

There is more I didn't see and it doesn't look good for RMS.

On page 7 of the same email list documents released by vice. RMS wrote the following: "I think it is moraily absurd to define "rape" in a way that depends on minor details such as which country it was in or whether the victim was 18 years old or 17." https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6405929-091320191420...

RMS also wrote the following on his blog in 2006: "I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren't voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing." https://stallman.org/archives/2006-mar-jun.html#05%20June%20...

The following is the quote from RMS found on page 16 in the document posted by vice https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/6405929-091320191420...

"We can imagine many scenarios, but the most plausible scenario is that she presented herself to him as entirely willing. Assuming she was being coerced by Epstein, he would have had every reason to tell her to conceal that from most of his associates."

The following quote posted on righteousruminations blog does not appear in the PDF file posted by vice. Here is the quote from the blog -> "it might not be so terrible if a 73 year old * an underage girl if he didn't know she was underage and being coerced." (I removed the curse word so this post doesn't get blocked)

I assume the quote by the righteousruminations blog to be an opinion and not an actual quote from RMS.

A true Pythonista would not be offended by a dongle joke. The following link has a penis song from Monty Python's The Meaning of Life http://youtu.be/p9PiqCeLEmM

>Actually, it's based on the radical notion that our brains are not made out of a magical substance that's immune to genes and hormones.

There is a mind blowing Norwegian documentary on the nature versus nurture debate the HN community should watch. The show touches on a lot of taboos, which might be too controversial for some people. The first episode is about gender equality. The interviewer investigates why/how there are less women in engineering and less man in nursing in a country listed having the highest level of equality. Other episodes are about parents influence, sexual preference, violence, sexual desire/commitment and race.

According to wikipedia a producer has made the series available online with English subtitles. http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xp0tg8_hjernevask-brainwash...

It's also on youtube (ignore the terrible comments as usual) http://youtu.be/KQ2xrnyH2wQ

Do you mean the Feminist meaning of patriarchy?(from wikipedia) ""The patriarchal construction of the difference between masculinity and femininity is the political difference between freedom and subjection."[27] In feminist theory the concept of patriarchy often includes all the social mechanisms that reproduce and exert male dominance over women."

Patriarchy Feminist theory basically mean women are victims, man have power over woman and are conspiring (conscious or unconscious) oppressors. It is a very toxic and sexist theory, it ignores mens issues and it's also an Apex fallacy. Just because the majority of people at the top are male it does not mean they represent the majority of man. Did you know that in USA women hold the majority of the vote?

However I agree that people should not be forced in to gender roles and maybe that is what you meant when you wrote Patriarchy.

>metaphorically patted on the head by men

The majority of men (including traditionalists) don't treat women like dogs. Traditionalist men even believe in sacrificing their lives to save womens lives. A lot of modern men also believe in that sacrifice.

There is a Stanford lecture on Human Sexual Behavior that is related to the discussion of neurobiology of homosexuality http://youtu.be/LOY3QH_jOtE#t=1h13m27s (the relevant part starts at 1:13)

Watch the last 3rd of this Stanford University lecture on Human Sexual Behavior http://youtu.be/LOY3QH_jOtE (I think the relevant part starts at 1:13)

I think Jaye might be right.

While its true that the majority of people in tech jobs or dangerous working class jobs are man, I understand why some people see misogyny when you wrote "white collar men need to stop apologizing for doing the difficult programming jobs" because it can come across as woman not being capable and not doing those difficult jobs...

With that said... It still surprises me that people in HN are quickly to point out misogyny but completely misses the man bashing, "boyish" shaming misandry from this article.

The article was not just sexist but also generally demeaning or condescending.

"...my first day at Facebook, the young, plain-looking guys in T-shirts..." "...woman in the office—an administrative assistant—was more animated, smiling toothily as she welcomed me in...."

The bad types of feminists seems to think that all man have power and/or privileges and are oppressors of woman and woman are always the oppressed victims with no privilege or power. The following quotes made her seem like she might be this type of feminist.

"...slight mocking disapproval that was my new colleagues' default tone in response to anything that resisted their power...."

"...Facebook album that Monday I was struck by the loaded nature of the image, ripe for interpretation, in which Mark appeared to be commanding a female employee to submit..."

"...photo was taken and posted on Facebook is that it didn't occur to anyone in the office that there was anything wrong with it, or that it revealed something unattractive about the culture of Facebook."

"...As Mark wrote on his business card with boyish hubris, "I'm CEO, bitch." The image of me in the bearskin was saying that power wasn't something to be questioned; it was something to collect and brandish..."

IIRC the "I'm CEO, bitch." business cards had to do with developers not becoming CEO of the company and not making as much money from their own creation.

"When I met Sheryl, the first thing I said was that she had really good skin," Mark continued, "and she does," he said, gesturing toward Sheryl, whose face had an admittedly creamy tone.

Was Mark talking about the actual skin or that she had good thick skin? It's pretty ironic if this is criticism of Mark considering she writes about peoples appearances in a condescending way.

What laws? Could you please define "unrepentantly boyish"?

>There are liars the world over. I don't think that is necessarily a trait that is just for men. I've know quite a few guys in high school that had unprotected sex because their girlfriend was on the pill end up with a baby because that is the way she thought she could keep him forever.

A friend's x-girlfriend got pregnant because she poked a hole in the condom without him knowing. If you are male and don't want to have kids, make sure you use your own condoms. Woman has many more options to avoid pregnancy, man has one shot with the condom (AFAIK vasectomy can be permanent).

I think this type of birth control has the potential of lowering paternity fraud since man will know the child is not his. It also reduces unwanted pregnancy when woman poke hole in condom or other condom issues.

This birth control for man is great news and I hope to see more male birth control options in the future.

You might want to tell your girlfriend that joking about domestic violence is very dangerous to you as a male.

I agree with everything you said but the liberals part... I think we should be careful to assume that all liberals are feminists. This can turn off the liberals that have noticed the misandry in feminism and are trying to learn more.

Sorry for the large reply but please bear with me.

>Also, patriarchy doesn't imply that all men have incredible power, any more than institutionalized slavery meant that all white people had incredible power. Patriarchy also misuses men who step outside their role in the system, in the same way that white anti-slavery and anti-segregation activists were treated poorly.

You are comparing patriarchy to slavery which implies that husbands have incredible power as slave lords of their wifes and that husbands are evil.

Even if you look at the past, by comparing husbands to slave lords you are forgetting that husbands where required to work to provide, care of wife and children, be legally accountable if their wifes committed a crime for their entire lives all by them selves. Wifes also had much more rights then slaves.

Although there are differences between how man and woman suffers in a patriarchy, its safe to say that in a traditionalist patriarchy both man and woman are less free.

I think instead of assuming that woman has it worse all the time we should take in consideration all gender and sex issues. You can look at my recent post for some examples of mens issues https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3768116

Please watch the Girl Writes What videos that I linked. While I don't agree with everything she says her videos are quite insightful.

>It's true that critique of feminism is not necessarily anti-woman. Many feminists sometimes critique parts of feminism. However, when some guy turns up and turns a discussion of an actual woman's actual bad experience into a discussion of how oppressed he is by feminism, I'm still going to make some assumptions.

This is the right time and place to discuss misandry since misandry and misogyny often happens in such discussions and is not out of topic.

You are making assumptions because I'm "some guy" how is that not sexist? How is comparing husbands to slave lords not sexist? Why do you despise and distrust your own sex?

In a previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3745578 you mentioned that only extremist feminists are sexist. I'm still not convinced that feminists are generally not sexist.

I don't agree that because there is misogyny we should forgive/turn a blind eye to misandry.

Please note that my posts are sincere and I'm open to different ideas and opinions.

I agree that a job post for brogrammer might not seem welcoming towards woman.

>You realize that bro culture and brogramming are actual, existing things started by guys, yes?

Please tell us your definition of brogramming and brogrammer.

From watching the initial joke video on brogramers I understood that brogrammer is a prejudice term for male coder which likes to party, drink alcohol, flirting and is usually more interested in main stream culture. There is nothing wrong with any of those qualities but we still talk about brogrammers as bad people. Aren't we also sexist and prejudice?

What would you say about an equivalent sisgrammer term for woman?

>But most groups who say "I'm not anti woman, just anti feminism" are flat out patriarchal, whether the flavour is religious or "men's rights", it's the same garbage.

Unfortunately my perception is similar to yours. I have seen enough nut case traditionalists and misogyny to not want to get involved with mans rights movement. Traditionalist ideology hurts MRM and I feel they are shooting themselves on the foot by allowing this sort of thing.

This is why I can't see my self associating with MRM or Feminists. Both groups can be pretty extreme although both have some (in my opinion) good goals like womans rights to choose & legal paternal surrender.

Thank you for your comment.

edit: I must say that I have seen MRM people against traditional patriarchy. Their idea is that a patriarchy does not allow men to be free.

It seems natural that very little attention is being placed on mans issues.

I think just selectively pointing out gender issues will not prove that the specific gender has it worse. I think instead of always assuming that woman has it worse we should also look at mens issues along with womans issues. This is difficult because humans have a tendency of protecting woman and not worrying much about men. Here is a video about this http://youtu.be/TBzx-SMSwGE and a paper (which I haven't got a chance to read completely) http://adamjones.freeservers.com/globe.htm

I can't find a good list of mans issues but here is a OK list. http://goodmenproject.com/ethics-values/the-top-10-issues-of...

This list does not contain issues like the rape of man by woman and other man, incarceration issues, man having a much higher death rate in the work place (more man at dangerous jobs), higher suicide rate of man, less men graduating college then woman, crazy rape laws like drink + sex = rape of woman but not man, tricky asking for consent = coercion = rape (at some colleges), draft only applies to man, millions of mostly male veterans committing suicide, male sexual mutilation & forced circumcision, domestic violence against man, legal paternal surrender/financial abortion, man are more likely to be assaulted and mugged then woman (even criminals tend to protect woman, see what happens to rapist in prison), in average man live less time then woman etc...

Note. Criticism of feminism is not necessarily anti-woman or anti-womans rights. I support womans rights like rights to chose.

>But I agree that men generally don't mind Bob with his hourly cracks about women (and maybe gays).

I'm male and certainly mind very much! I tend to find people that make cracks about woman not very smart. I also can't stand misandry which goes completely unnoticed by society.

>That's why men swear up and down that they've never seen sexism in their workplaces. Because we simply can't see it. (And our society is sexist, so sexism is kind of like air.) Hard to imagine that silly ol' Bob is doing anything so impressive as "reinforcing patriarchy."

The feminist patriarchy concept is also sexist. It implies that just by being a men one is in a more powerful and advantageous position. For a more detailed explanation please look at this video http://youtu.be/JHkGZvC0z4I

Note. Criticism of feminism is not necessarily anti-woman or anti-womans rights.

I just wanted to point out that being anti-feminist does not necessarily mean anti woman or anti womans rights.

I do agree that sexist jokes are a bad thing and not only when done against woman.

Are you saying that porn only objectify woman?

I see the sexual objectification concept often used as a way to demonise natural human sexual attraction. If man and woman ignored physical appearance and resourcefulness we would probably be extinct by now.

georgieporgie is not a her https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3737621

He can't possibly have experience with ALL males of 25 - 35 in the industry. Making such a general statement can be perceived as misandry.

EDIT: My reaction was similar to how some people react to "I'm seriously considering leaving the field of software because I'm tired of working with 25 - 35 year old immature bitches/sluts ."

I will consider the comment on reading comprehension and sensitivity.