6 ms·

The chauvinism in this comment is insane. Women aren't points on a scoreboard and dating dynamics aren't meant to be a power struggle.

by herbig 11y ago

noobermin 11y ago
"Score" is a term for successfully attracting a mate. It is not a power struggle per se but dating is a negotiation of sorts in order to reach a consensus about the nature of an interpersonal relationship between two individuals. In that sense, a girl can "score" a guy too, it isn't sexist per se.
- pdabbadabba 11y ago
  "Score" is one thing. "Score something" is, to me, much worse. I don't mind if guys want to speak casually among friends about women as conquests. But it strikes me as disconcerting that there are people who find this way of speaking so unobjectionable that they'd use it on a public forum like hacker news where, I had thought, the general expectation is that the discourse will maintain a certain level of quality and, needless to say, women are supposed to feel welcome and appreciated for their intellectual contributions. What's even more disconcerting is that the comment that used this expression has been voted to the top (though it is otherwise a very good comment), and comments taking issue with the sexist language are voted into oblivion (so far).
  - herbig 11y ago
    Yes. This exactly.
  - rescripting 11y ago
    I took it to mean that the 'something' being scored was a relationship. Maybe this is some kind of sexist dog whistle I'm not hearing but I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt instead of trying to language police a substantive comment.
    - pdabbadabba 11y ago
      Hmm. Possibly. Obviously that's not how I read it, but I don't claim that my way is the only way it could have been read. I can't say I agree with the choice you've assumed, though, between "language policing" a comment, and appreciating it for its substantive contribution. I think we're all sophisticated enough that we can recognize the substantive value of a comment, as I've tried to do, while also trying to suggest ways to build a more respectful community for everyone. In its best form, "language policing" will usually not be unconditional and vociferous condemnation, but rather a thoughtful sharing of perspectives and suggestion for incremental improvement. This is the very ethos of this forum in so many other arenas--tech, business, often politics--but I'm often disappointed that the prevailing attitude here is so closed when it comes to issues of gender politics (for lack of a better term). Part of the issue may be that these issues are not always thoughtfully raised, and there can sometimes be an unwelcome tendency towards outrage (in both directions). But I think it would be a shame if we didn't keep trying to improve ourselves, and the tech community at large to make for a more welcoming community. Edit: As others have pointed out elsewhere, one does not normally describe a relationship as "out of your league." That's a description typically bestowed upon people. I suspect this is why I and others have interpreted the comment they way we have. I don't think this entirely rules out the possibility you raised about the original commenter's intent, but I do think it means that my interpretation is probably correct--or at least eminently defensible. I'd also add that the original commenter's intent does not matter much to me. I was never here to impugn his or her character in the first place. My point has only ever been that the comment, regardless of its precise intended meaning, reasonably communicates a certain disrespect for women.
lighttower 11y ago
> The chauvinism in this comment is insane. Women aren't points on a scoreboard This commenter, the type that is OUTRAGED by speech that hasn't been mangled to be politically correct, is responsible for muffling open and honest communication among people. Specific to this example, there is nothing wrong with the OP's use of scoring - the outraged expressed by the commenter above is basically trolling for a response by feigning outrage.
- herbig 11y ago
  I'm not outraged, just surprised that people would so heartily upvote such a comment. People should be conscious of the language they use, and create a welcoming community for everyone. If "scoring" women wasn't intended in the context it is usually used in, "scoring" shouldn't be the choice of words and people shouldn't encourage it by upvoting a comment that uses words so poorly.
  - Kalium 11y ago
    Perhaps people find the content of the comment sufficiently high-quality that it overrides concerns about language. It's also possible that voters don't share your opinions about what sort of language is "okay" or "not okay". Which wouldn't surprise me in a community with diverse opinions.
- pdabbadabba 11y ago
  Well, I wasn't outraged before, but I have to admit that I may be feeling a touch of outrage now. The "mangling" of speech to be politically correct and the "muffling" of open and honest communications that some of us are asking for is just this: changing "score something 'out of your league'" to, e.g., "meet someone 'out of your league.'" I'm not sure why people see this as so hard to swallow. There may be someone "trolling for a response by feigning outrage" in this conversation, but I don't think it's GP.
  - aninhumer 11y ago
    I strongly agree with this criticism of the language (I winced reading it), but I also agree that the way it was criticised here was unnecessarily inflammatory. There are many people who are not sympathetic to calls for PC language, and including accusations of "insane chauvinism" isn't going to make them any more palatable.
jmilloy 11y ago
Then again, you used the term "insane" inappropriately. To a certain extent, you have to accept some slang during discussion. And, in addition to the fact that power is a core concept in sociology, what dating dynamics are "meant to be" (whatever that means) doesn't really matter.
- pmarreck 11y ago
  No, the scary thing here is that s/he does NOT have to accept ANY slang during discussion AND can declare my entire comment invalid (while using public shame) based on what was (to him/her) a poor choice of wording (which, perhaps it was, but disgust is not an argument)
pmarreck 11y ago
> Women aren't points on a scoreboard Ideally, no. But men often use sports analogies when discussing getting a woman to actually date them, which is a quite difficult goal. I apologize for any offense. > dating dynamics aren't meant to be a power struggle Here you lost me. If you don't think there's often a power struggle in the early stages of dating, I don't know what reality you're living, because it's not mine.

The chauvinism in this comment is insane. Women aren't points on a scoreboard and dating dynamics aren't meant to be a power struggle.

by herbig 11y ago

The chauvinism in this comment is insane. Women aren't points on a scoreboard and dating dynamics aren't meant to be a power struggle.

noobermin 11y ago

"Score" is a term for successfully attracting a mate. It is not a power struggle per se but dating is a negotiation of sorts in order to reach a consensus about the nature of an interpersonal relationship between two individuals. In that sense, a girl can "score" a guy too, it isn't sexist per se.

pdabbadabba 11y ago
"Score" is one thing. "Score something" is, to me, much worse. I don't mind if guys want to speak casually among friends about women as conquests. But it strikes me as disconcerting that there are people who find this way of speaking so unobjectionable that they'd use it on a public forum like hacker news where, I had thought, the general expectation is that the discourse will maintain a certain level of quality and, needless to say, women are supposed to feel welcome and appreciated for their intellectual contributions. What's even more disconcerting is that the comment that used this expression has been voted to the top (though it is otherwise a very good comment), and comments taking issue with the sexist language are voted into oblivion (so far).
- herbig 11y ago
  Yes. This exactly.
- rescripting 11y ago
  I took it to mean that the 'something' being scored was a relationship. Maybe this is some kind of sexist dog whistle I'm not hearing but I'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt instead of trying to language police a substantive comment.
  - pdabbadabba 11y ago
    Hmm. Possibly. Obviously that's not how I read it, but I don't claim that my way is the only way it could have been read. I can't say I agree with the choice you've assumed, though, between "language policing" a comment, and appreciating it for its substantive contribution. I think we're all sophisticated enough that we can recognize the substantive value of a comment, as I've tried to do, while also trying to suggest ways to build a more respectful community for everyone. In its best form, "language policing" will usually not be unconditional and vociferous condemnation, but rather a thoughtful sharing of perspectives and suggestion for incremental improvement. This is the very ethos of this forum in so many other arenas--tech, business, often politics--but I'm often disappointed that the prevailing attitude here is so closed when it comes to issues of gender politics (for lack of a better term). Part of the issue may be that these issues are not always thoughtfully raised, and there can sometimes be an unwelcome tendency towards outrage (in both directions). But I think it would be a shame if we didn't keep trying to improve ourselves, and the tech community at large to make for a more welcoming community. Edit: As others have pointed out elsewhere, one does not normally describe a relationship as "out of your league." That's a description typically bestowed upon people. I suspect this is why I and others have interpreted the comment they way we have. I don't think this entirely rules out the possibility you raised about the original commenter's intent, but I do think it means that my interpretation is probably correct--or at least eminently defensible. I'd also add that the original commenter's intent does not matter much to me. I was never here to impugn his or her character in the first place. My point has only ever been that the comment, regardless of its precise intended meaning, reasonably communicates a certain disrespect for women.

lighttower 11y ago

> The chauvinism in this comment is insane. Women aren't points on a scoreboard This commenter, the type that is OUTRAGED by speech that hasn't been mangled to be politically correct, is responsible for muffling open and honest communication among people. Specific to this example, there is nothing wrong with the OP's use of scoring - the outraged expressed by the commenter above is basically trolling for a response by feigning outrage.

herbig 11y ago
I'm not outraged, just surprised that people would so heartily upvote such a comment. People should be conscious of the language they use, and create a welcoming community for everyone. If "scoring" women wasn't intended in the context it is usually used in, "scoring" shouldn't be the choice of words and people shouldn't encourage it by upvoting a comment that uses words so poorly.
- Kalium 11y ago
  Perhaps people find the content of the comment sufficiently high-quality that it overrides concerns about language. It's also possible that voters don't share your opinions about what sort of language is "okay" or "not okay". Which wouldn't surprise me in a community with diverse opinions.
pdabbadabba 11y ago
Well, I wasn't outraged before, but I have to admit that I may be feeling a touch of outrage now. The "mangling" of speech to be politically correct and the "muffling" of open and honest communications that some of us are asking for is just this: changing "score something 'out of your league'" to, e.g., "meet someone 'out of your league.'" I'm not sure why people see this as so hard to swallow. There may be someone "trolling for a response by feigning outrage" in this conversation, but I don't think it's GP.
- aninhumer 11y ago
  I strongly agree with this criticism of the language (I winced reading it), but I also agree that the way it was criticised here was unnecessarily inflammatory. There are many people who are not sympathetic to calls for PC language, and including accusations of "insane chauvinism" isn't going to make them any more palatable.

jmilloy 11y ago

Then again, you used the term "insane" inappropriately. To a certain extent, you have to accept some slang during discussion. And, in addition to the fact that power is a core concept in sociology, what dating dynamics are "meant to be" (whatever that means) doesn't really matter.

pmarreck 11y ago
No, the scary thing here is that s/he does NOT have to accept ANY slang during discussion AND can declare my entire comment invalid (while using public shame) based on what was (to him/her) a poor choice of wording (which, perhaps it was, but disgust is not an argument)

pmarreck 11y ago

> Women aren't points on a scoreboard Ideally, no. But men often use sports analogies when discussing getting a woman to actually date them, which is a quite difficult goal. I apologize for any offense. > dating dynamics aren't meant to be a power struggle Here you lost me. If you don't think there's often a power struggle in the early stages of dating, I don't know what reality you're living, because it's not mine.