bubblewrap
I still don't see what exactly is so mocking about it. Yes, I was perhaps "conjuring up" a stereotypical scenario. So what? Clearly, the stereotype exists. Even if it doesn't reflect reality, imo it would still be valid to refer to the stereotype, as the stereotype exists and is part of reality. The much celebrated Toni Morrison book also conjures a stereotype, about a black girl obsessing to become white. Somehow that is good - why?
And again, no - nobody should be forced to spend time learning about the behavior of racists. Why should they? Life is too short to spend it studying nasty people. I reject this as an attempt to control other people's life, with the power of being a minority.
"Generally the way to avoid being offensive in that situation is to write your characters respectfully as human beings, and to ask members of the minority group you are portraying to review your work for any unintentional offensiveness before publication."
Nope, and that is also why I am so defensive. I value freedom of thought and freedom of art higher than people's choice of being offended.
Of course any writer is free to make the choice to try to offend as few people as possible. But writers should also be allowed to write what they think.
So if it is so commonly used, why on earth should it be offensive to refer to it? In what way would you consider my statement "mocking"? I don't think it is very relevant what racists commonly do. I don't feel obliged to obtain knowledge about the lifestyle of racists, and neither should anybody else.
Even more interesting in the context of the original complaint of there not being enough books with black heroes. So if a white writer would write such a book, they wouldn't be allowed to use the word "momma" or refer to anything that PoC might do that is different from white people? You are creating an impossible world.
https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/momma
As I said, I am not a native speaker, so I don't really know how momma is typically used (if at all). It was more of a spontaneous use on a whim. But I also haven't found any indication yet that it is a derogatory term.
Sorry I still think the "offense taken" is overblown. I am also not concerned about not offending anybody at all. Frankly I think many people who feel offended about certain things perhaps should just get over themselves. I mean in this case, is momma used in the real world? If so, then I think it should be OK to use it. I don't believe in censoring statements about the real world.
Thanks for trying to explain, though.
Are there many non-white authors writing books with white heroes/heroines? Maybe they should just write more books about people who "look like them"?
A lot of popular children books actually have female heroines, like Pippa Longstocking, Astrid Lindgren being one of the most popular authors of children's books. I never had a problem enjoying them, strange enough. It never occurred to me as a kid that I shouldn't be allowed to enjoy reading those books, because the protagonists have the wrong gender. Good thing today's children have better education on such issues - god forbid they could enjoy a book of the wrong identification!!!
What about Lord of the Rings, should PoC be able to enjoy that book? Should it be considered a hate crime to recommend the book to a PoC? Should the government give out a grant for someone to write an alternative to Lotr with PoC heroines?
Female Superheroes exist, but it is also only one rather silly genre (and only two publishers). Plus, there are other reasons why action heroes tend to be male: because men are expendable and therefore supposed to do the dangerous work, as in real life. Superheroes are a lie, anyway, but to tell women they could simply be action heroes would be an even greater lie.
As for the experiment: "These findings exposed internalized racism in African-American children, self-hatred that was more acute among children attending segregated schools" - that is clearly an unwarranted interpretation of the result, fueled by ideology. And wanting to play with white dolls is not "obsessing" over white dolls.
Do real world PoC even ever obsess over white female dolls with blue eyes? It was just a work of fiction, after all. Do white girls obsess over black dolls? We have a black doll, that my white wife grew up with. I don't think it disturbed her in any way.
I thought this is about emotional upheaval and hating big corporations, not the law.
If it is about the law, why even discuss it, instead of waiting for the courts to sort it out?
It's also just one of countless doomsday scenarios out there.
As for Amazon's Fulfillment centers, I'd like to read a statement by their operators before making a judgement. I suspect it is not as easy to make unskilled workers do useful work as many people think.
Would be nice to have a warehouse operator for an AMA some time.
This is actually normal for averages - some years are higher, some are lower. Otherwise it wouldn't be an average.
Maybe the state of affairs is still alarming, but then they should describe it better.
What would be a good comment on Socialism, in your opinion?
I know you have a policy against politics, or used to have it. It doesn't seem to be strictly enforced, though (see global warming, feminism and so on).
I know why you have your policies, but I am not convinced that they are optimal. Have you ever even tested them against alternatives?
I've been on HN since it was called Startup News. I actually almost hate it now, because of some of the policies. Sure, maybe you don't want people like me on the site. Your call. I know several oldtimers feel the same, though.
You have actually found some ways to make users hate you, which is an achievement in itself. For starters, how about a warning that you are beyond your posting limit BEFORE people spend time and effort to write comments?
And it feels very one sided now, so not as interesting as it used to be (is it really the quality of my comment, or just criticism of Socialism that is the issue?). Still, I keep coming back, admittedly. But grudgingly so.
Edit: looking through the policies again, I still don't see how my comment is supposed to break the rules: "Essentially there are two rules here: don't post or upvote crap links, and don't be rude or dumb in comment threads.". It's not a crap link, and it is not rude or dumb. Imo, of course. That the same argument has been made before can hardly be a deciding factor, because then you'd have to shut down the site right now.
As with most AI scares, people forget that AIs only replace the even more faulty human brain. Bias in AI can be debugged and worked around. Bias in human brains is much harder. You get no insights into why your bank doesn't give you a credit. Is it because of your skin color? Because they didn't like your nose?
The scary scenario of an AI judging people's attitudes and ruling them criminals only because they had a bad morning: the scenario of a human mob believing somebody to be guilty is much more scary, and it happens on a regular basis.
It would of course be bad to leave the judging to an AI alone. Of course the whole justice system would still be in place. That is unrelated to AI. The surveillance camera is not calling a killer squad on an unsuspecting grumpy person on public transport. It could merely draw the attention of a human to the scene, who could then judge on needed actions.
The example of the illegal immigrants also seems weird. Isn't it a good thing to be able to expose illegal behavior? I sympathize with the plight of immigrants, but rather than tolerating illegal behavior, it seems better to improve the laws to make good, desirable behavior legal.
You do the same. You claim it is "technically a solved problem". It really isn't. You are just naive about "renewable energy".
Afaik a lot of stories repeat on HN, so the "newsworthiness" criterion seems a bit arbitrary. Also, shouldn't it make a difference if it is a top level thread? I wouldn't submit a story about "socialism starving millions of people".
I know, your "new" policies have been in place for a while, but I think you really kind of destroyed Hacker News. I don't understand why you worry about curbing discussions in deeply nested threads, as they would be easy to ignore by people who don't care. I don't think you worry about SEO or anything like that, so really, what is your incentive?
Also, there are lots of "boring" and repetitive threads on HN (like on global warming), I think you may actually single out "capitalism vs socialism" for ideological reasons. I don't believe you that nobody is curious about capitalism vs socialism anymore. On the contrary, the "battle" is more relevant than ever, with socialist having a real shot at the US elections. It is a question that affects most of us a lot more than most topics would.
Subsidization of coal would of course be equally wrong.