Pretend for the moment we're in some crazy mirror world where women are frequently mistreated, in ways that many well-meaning men don't see. In this world, it makes sense for a woman to lecture those well-meaning men about empathy - to ask them not to tell women what to feel - because they're just missing some basic information.

Pretend for a moment we're in some crazy mirror world where whites are frequently mistreated, in ways that many well-meaning blacks don't see. In this world, it makes sense for a white to lecture those well-meaning blacks about empathy - to ask them not to tell whites how to feel - because they're just missing some basic information.

No, wait, that would be racist.

But your version magically is not sexist?

Edit: To the folks downvoting this without being able to offer a counterpoint: that strong negative emotion you're feeling? That's called cognitive dissonance.

I think you're being downvoted because you may have misunderstood the parent comment and replied with an analogy that makes no sense.

There is no misunderstanding. The parent comment is trying to reinforce the practice of pitting the genders against each other and continues to argue that men need condescendingly "lectured" on the matter.

My change in wording is meant to show how ridiculous a notion that is. Sexist remarks in articles such as this are getting a free pass because at one time feminism served a purpose, and today's hypersensitive political-correctness puts it above reproach. But when you take those same statements and put them on an axis of racism, their nature is revealed.

The view of the piece's author is that there are things going on that women experience that some men are not aware of. She is trying to explain those things.

You feel this is being "condescendingly lectured", and I don't see a way around it. Being receptive to someone explaining something to you requires that you: 1. acknowledge you do not know or understand that thing; 2. acknowledge that the other person does; 3. are willing to receive that knowledge from the other person. If you are not willing to grant any one of those, you will feel the other person is being condescending.

I feel like you've ignored everything I've said up to this point. If the article had simply been an account of those four women's experiences, I would likely have no criticisms of it.

Instead, it's written as a hit piece and men are the target. I know exactly how hyperbolic that sounds, but it is the truth.

At every opportunity, men are painted as the problem: men aren't listening, men aren't doing this, men are saying that, men need to read this entire article of Do's and Don'ts to dictate their behavior towards women.

See my other comment in this thread[1] for just a few excerpts from the article I take issue with. I could provide more, as that's only going as far as the very first anecdotal account, but I would think they would be sufficiently convincing.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8070340

Not all men, eh? Don’t be so sensitive, grow a thicker skin!

Is it really so hard for you to believe that you can’t understand – at least not completely – the situation someone is in? I would never be so arrogant as to believe that I, as someone who is straight, understand how it is to grow up gay, for example.

It's good to see that sloganeering and thought-terminating cliches will drive what could have been a proper debate on the issue.

I guess there's no room at all for dissenting opinions, especially when they point out hypocrisies or bring counter evidence to the discussion.

What hypocrisies? There are none. You are imagining those.

When there is something you cannot understand it’s proper to address that with “Men just don’t …” That’s ok. It’s no claim that all men act disgustingly, it’s only a claim that men don’t understand.

That’s also completely unrelated to the “What can you – as a man – do to help?” part. I mean, where is the connection there.

You are saying very confusing things.

Hypocrisy is saying men should not tell women how to feel, and then following that up with an entire article telling men how to feel and behave.

Pretty sure I didn't imagine that.

And now you are on hacker news telling people how they should feel. How hypocritical of you.

Today I learned that calling out people's sexist propaganda is actually telling people how they should feel.

I am enlightened, you should feel proud of yourself.

(whoops, sorry)

(not really)

Just curious - have you read an article online about women's rights that you personally haven't thought was sexist propaganda? It's times like this where I think people get confused between whether your against just this article (saying it's horribly written) or just women speaking out in general.

If I seem confused to you, that is a failing on both our parts. Let's take a moment to correct that.

On the issue of the author's hypocrisy, I have clearly stated the contradictions in the article which satisfy the definition of the term. I don't think there is any confusion on that and after another read I don't think my comments on that point specifically could lead you to believe I'm confused about that issue.

So, what is it exactly that makes you think I'm confused? Was it anything in particular that I've said, or perhaps since you think I don't understand the article as a whole, do you think I'm making the wrong points entirely?

The linked article gives men actionable advice on how to support women. It does not tell men what their experience is.

> You are saying very confusing things.

So you admit that you just cannot understand.

Ha!

Am I wrong that this would have been the top upvoted comment on HN 5 years ago? If so maybe that counts as a tiny bit of progress/small strides. Or maybe this will be the top voted when I come back later, /sigh...

I haven't been reading HN for that long, but I'm rather impressed that this thread didn't get that much similar comments. I think it shows community maturity and also that these subjects are getting through in the IT crowd.

You're impressed there weren't more comments like mine? Can I ask what it is about my comment that you did not like?

Your comments in this thread are about dismissing the message of the article, by reversing the roles (you talk about men being "harassed" by this article), by using rhetoric analysis (which looks to me like an excuse to share two links that have nothing to do with the article).

Sure, anyone can pick flaws in an article, especially in a piece of opinion like this one. One could go on and on about how this is biased, how that is a fallacy, how this is a red herring. That's usually the vast majority of comments you'd get on articles about women condition in our society/our communities. Thing is, this is not a mathematical demonstration or a scientific call for review.

What I didn't like about your comment is that you don't show the faintest sign of empathy towards what women in the video game industry might endure, and that you actually put a fair amount of energy dismissing what I see as a call for reflection, or help.

What I like about the other comments in this thread is the "shit, I never knew that was broken, thanks for the article, what could we do to fix it?" mentality that I generally see in HN threads about technology, hacking, health, etc.

I have not once in my comments on this thread said that women do not face harassment, which is the stated message of the article.

What I have done, is point out the many, many ways in which that message has been used as a front to put forth sexist and propagandist messages intended to disparage men. Those two links directly follow my statement calling out the unacceptable assertions the article's author put forth that men are primarily at fault and cannot sympathize or understand the author's position.

I will not give any message wrapped in that sort of hate speech the time of day, and I certainly will not thank them for it.

Why I don't understand when I read your comment is the generalization over "men". These articles are not about how each and every single man harrassed, raped or killed a woman. It's the other way around: it's women saying "I've been harrassed, threatenned, or raped, in my life: is this a coincidence that it was always by men or is there something broken in our society". I think that generalization over "all men" comes from one's identification with the harassers (because you are a man, not because you are an harasser), not from the article itself. Feeling accused and then trying to dismiss such calls for help is really counter-productive, especially if you agree that women face harassment.

I don't get how you take a testimony of people enduring such violence and turn it into men being the real victims of such articles. "Men are much more likely to be accused of rape and murder", as someone said earlier. Can't you see how twisted that is? That's rape culture 101 by the way: putting the focus on how the attacker is a victim since he'll be facing society disapproval/lose job/go to prison.

If you disagree with any of the points I've made, I'm all ears.

I did not make that comment in some lame attempt to troll or stir up controversy. I have presented my case against using the harassment of women in gaming as an excuse to target and harass the male demographic, and I'm willing to discuss it further with anyone that's interested.

As a male, I didn't feel targeted by the article. I don't think the article was anti-men, it was just pro-women which is not the same thing. In fact, I'm having a hard time thinking what kind of harassment I could get as a result of the article.

> I’ve personally never heard of a man in the games industry getting rape threats for having an opinion.

> A male friend of mine that develops AAA games told me, "When a woman criticizes me, it goes to a different part of my brain than when a man on my team does. I get defensive really quickly. I’m trying to get better about it." I don’t think his is a unique experience.

> We live in a society that’s sexist in ways it doesn’t understand. One of the consequences is that men are extremely sensitive to being criticized by women. I think it threatens them in a very primal way, and male privilege makes them feel free to lash out.

I don't know how anyone, male or female, could read that excerpt and not be offended.

First, it starts out by basically asserting the premise that men do not get rape threats.

Second, it quotes one man as saying he reacts viscerally to criticisms from women and then asserts that this is typical behavior for men.

Third, it says society is sexist in ways it doesn't understand, asserts men are extremely sensitive to criticism from women, and then calls them primal and invokes male privilege.

This is hashtag feminism as its worst. It's building flimsy pretexts on top of anecdotal evidence, and hiding it in an article about harassment women face in an attempt to lend it some sort of legitimacy. It's as bad as the "think of the children!" excuses used to pass laws, and just as insidious because it is automatically above reproach in exactly the same way. It's clearly demonstrated right here in the way any comment at all that disagrees with the author is immediately set upon with downvotes, rather than reasonable discourse.

OK, actually, I agree with some of this. I didn't think labeling that behavior as "primal" was accurate or helpful. It's certainly social, and bound to be more or less strong depending on the person and situation. Calling it primal is defeatist, plus it assumes that men have to fight against their base nature to be decent people.

On the other hand, I don't think the article says men don't get rape threats, just that they're rare. Also I think society really doesn't understand how sexist it is.

> Also I think society really doesn't understand how sexist it is.

Oh I absolutely agree with you there. This article is largely sexist against men, but few people are willing to admit it because it's buried in a legitimate rant about sexism against women.

This writer has had negative experiences in the game industry due to her gender and is hoping to change that. She is not placing blame on all males. She is merely relating her personal experience where there happens to be a correlation between the negativity and males. Maybe you're reading the tone incorrectly. Her writing is pretty abrasive.

I don't think you've read any of the previous comments in this thread. If you'll go back up to this[1] comment you'll see that "tone" has as much to do with this argument as the brand of laptop she used to write the article in the first place.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8070340

If you were all ears you might have digested TFA instead of spinning it as men being the real victims.

I'm not refuting that women are harassed, I'm taking offense at it being used as an excuse to disparage the male gender. That is no spin, that is calling out unacceptable behavior.

Please read the thread located here for more details: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=8070237

It's making sweeping, disparaging generalizations about the male gender.