Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

With feminists like Hanna Rosin writing articles like "The End of Men" [1], perhaps men can be forgiven for a little skepticism as to whether the fight "is for everyone."

[1] http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2010/07/the-end-...



And you know that there are extremists everywhere in all groups?

Should we be wary of all christians because there's some who think all religions that don't match there's should be banned? Should we be wary of all muslims because some think it's OK to kill for their religion? Should we be wary of all black people because some of them kill and are in gangs? Should we be wary of all Americans because some of them own lots of guns? Should we be wary of all police because some are corrupt? Should we be wary of all British government activity because they might want to invade and colonise us? Should we be wary of all germans because some are neo-nazis? Should we be wary of all irish because some set off car bombs? etc. etc. etc.

Come on, aren't we past these gross stereotypes?


Thanks for taking the time to respond.

And you know that there are extremists everywhere in all groups?

I'm glad you think she's an extremist. I think she's an extremist. I start to wonder whether people on the whole share this view when people like Rosin get to speak at TED conferences and are invited to present at think-tanks like the New America Foundation. Is it just because these organizations are "open minded?" Well, take Rosin's "The End of Men" article and try replacing "men" with "black people" and "women" with "white people" throughout the article, and speculate on whether The Atlantic would have published it:

"What if modern, postindustrial society is simply better suited to white people?"

"White people live longer than black people. They do better in this economy. More of ’em graduate from college. They go into space and do everything black people do, and sometimes they do it a whole lot better. I mean, hell, get out of the way—these white people are going to leave us black people in the dust."

I'm guessing that the author of such a piece wouldn't find an audience at TED (which bills itself as the curator of "ideas worth spreading"), or think-tanks like the New America Foundation. But apparently enough people find Rosin's ideas worth considering that she should get an audience at such venues.

Should we be wary of all christians because there's some who think all religions that don't match there's should be banned? Should we be wary of all muslims because some think it's OK to kill for their religion? ...

These are all great questions. Here's another one: should women be wary when a birth control hearing on Capitol Hill has a predominately male panel? I would say yes.


Oh, please.

There's no shortage of troglodytes advocating women stay at home, in the kitchen, bare footed, and pregnant.

There's even laments about women suffrage (enfranchisement, right to vote).

You don't have to look very hard to find whack jobs of any stripe to use as justification for own reactionary / oppositional views.


There's no shortage of troglodytes advocating women stay at home, in the kitchen, bare footed, and pregnant.

And I imagine these troglodytes make some women skeptical of whether they should rely on men to empower women.


For an alternative viewpoint on that article: http://feministing.com/2010/06/16/is-female-dominance-a-succ... Though come to think of it, that's just as bad too. If we deal with women doing worse in some areas through affirmative action and other schemes aimed at compensating for their disadvantages, but deal with men doing worse in others by just trying to do away with the idea that gender matters - which we never consider to be enough when women are worse off - the net result is effectively systematic discrimination in favour of women throughout society.


deal with men doing worse in others by just trying to do away with the idea that gender matters

No-one said we shouldn't have affirmative action for men in female dominated spaces. I think it's a great idea. For example, in Sweden (and some other countries) the father is legally required to take 2 months of the (paid) paternity leave after their child is born. This sort of affirmative action means that it will become much more common for fathers to get involved with child rearing, since, well "everyone is doing it".


The link I posted did actually say that we shouldn't have affirmative action for men in female dominated spaces and should instead try to get rid of the idea of gender roles full-stop in some vague and incompletely defined fashion. (The reason I linked that response in particular was because I read it at the time when the original Atlantic piece came out.)


Yes, I'm sure most men learned what they know about feminism from Atlantic articles. That is the simplest explanation here.




Consider applying for YC's Fall 2025 batch! Applications are open till Aug 4

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: