Doesn't read as fifth grade to me. Just has a little spiciness to it, I appreciate that. Think about it, the person could have linked and linked and linked to other articles to back up some point of disagreement. But instead, they shared their own opinion, relatable, easy to follow, and refreshing.
> HR typically wants their diversity numbers up badly so if you're gay
You're right, I always fail that interview question where they ask me what my sexual preference is and I say women... ...Seriously? you are just making stuff up now.
The question is fully answered. Men today are no less deserving of support than anyone else. They deserve the same support that other groups have today.
If you read the article you’ll see that men do not have the same support that other groups have, and proposals to provide that support are rejected on the basis of history rather than present need.
The desire ‘not to help white men’ is explicitly mentioned.
yea totally changed my mind, it does sound like things just aren't fair and the other "groups" have it better while the white man "deserves" it's fair share. Should we start a group or what? Which other group should we target first to get the "support" that we need?
Your response is dripping with sarcasm. Why do you have such hatred of white men in particular?
Also, why are you making this about race? The basis of the article was about how men are not getting the support they need. Why do you keep bringing “white men” into it?
All we’re taking about is recognizing that there are support services provided to women which are not provided to men, and there is no reason that men shouldn’t also need such services.
These are simply facts stated in the article.
What have you got against men that makes you want to deny them the same services as women?
Is it your opinion that white men, or men in general are somehow less deserving than young women? Or perhaps you think young men are inherently superior to women and therefore don’t have the same needs.
You are making a lot of huge jumps there, incorrectly, (except for the sarcasm, completely on point), and you asked like 5 questions.
Everyone should get support! More support! Everyone. By focusing on men, you are stating it is MORE challenging for men. It is not. Men should get more support, so should everyone, but if we are handing out bread, men should be last to receive, as our plate is the fullest. Do you really think men have it worse? I don't, being a guy is super great, much easier, and complaining about it just makes you seem like you lack perspective. Only you can tell us.
Jesus, zepto:
A) Thanks for such a detailed response
B) Screw you for such a detailed response, my thumbs gonna hurt
I write on my phone while watching travel videos on youtube and drinking, quoting is a pain, you deserve a better conversation, but I'll do my best,(thats a lie).
Sarcasm is great, its meant to get people riled up, you should try it, makes these comments more entertaining while also exaggerating another's end goal to show where those ideals lead.
Regarding focusing on men, (each paragraph to your points), I read the article, (like three times now because I feel like we read different things), its an opinion piece, I am trying to tell you I disagree with the summation that men, and white men, (the article brings up race!), are at a disadvantage and don't have the same LEVEL of support. They get different support, like being white and/or male, which for real, I will not go over again why its so much easier/better to be male and/or white. (Higher paying job while you get through school!)
At this point you aren't stating much, just trying interview me or something, so I'll assume all I want.
The article is providing context as pertains only to college. Disregards that white men have better access to college prep classes, paid more while they go to school, less chance of hardships, (not saying there are no hardships but again white male life = easier life) I really don't care if less men are going to college, I didn't graduate, not the end of the world, still had it easier. And no, not college age, but if you are, I swear life is better when older.
(oi i am only half way through)
Yea, "in terms of" thats the point that gets me, like caring about that, with all the other advantages you get from being white and/or male, you need to made sure no one else can ever have a different advantage, especially one thats easy to get around and still get to where you want.
Again, it's an opinion piece article, I am pointing out I think it's disagreeable because its so shortsighted.
Now you point out it's an age thing, I mean, sleep easy on that point, you are right. I haven't been that age for 13 years. Still live and work with people of all ages, share stories, listen to their lives, try to do my best to figure out whats going on, empathize... But if you want to say its a secretive world I would only understand if I were you, please help me get it, pretty sure these threads can go as long as we want.
I mean, you are debating heavily to prove that men have it worse, "in terms of" whatever, I can take that another step and just say you are complaining. Could go further with sarcasm and take if further but you pointed out you are not a fan.
I get your argument, but I am pointing out that while you are saying "same" you literally mean men should have access to support that is reserved for different people that have different hardships, in order to try to make the playing field more level. You, (not saying you personally, but in case you go there), can't say we should have the same access to support in college while having much different obstacles in life.
And yea definitely not trying to contribute anything, button says "comment" or "reply", not contribute, you feel like my opinions are that lame or what?
And yea, tying in a lot of things, but all related and what your greater point of view may be.
I like you zepto, just trying to help with your perspective. Obviously, that was a lot to write from both of us.
> Sarcasm is great, its meant to get people riled up, you should try it, makes these comments more entertaining while also exaggerating another's end goal to show where those ideals lead.
You aren’t exaggerating another’s “end”. You don’t actually know what that is.
You are simply being dishonest in your representation.
> At this point you aren't stating much, just trying interview me or something, so I'll assume all I want.
Lying about another person’s position is just that.
> Disregards that white men have better access to college prep classes, paid more while they go to school, less chance of hardships,
Even if true historically or when you went to college.
This is certainly not true of every white man today..
Whilst it’s certainly true that statistically Black people are less likely to have resources like college prep classes, that is a function of money. There are more poor white people than there are poor black people, even if statistically if you have black skin you are more likely to be poor.
There are also large numbers of rich and middle class black people who live in nice neighborhoods and have all the supports you mention.
That’s why it’s racist to base your discriminatory policies on race rather than actual hardship.
If you want to argue that people who have fewer resources should receive supports that others don’t, I will agree with you.
If you want to argue that being white means you have access to college prep, I think you are delusional.
> I didn't graduate, not the end of the world, still had it easier. And no, not college age, but if you are, I swear life is better when older.
You may have had it easier in your day, but as the article explains things have changed.
> I mean, you are debating heavily to prove that men have it worse, "in terms of" whatever, I can take that another step and just say you are complaining.
> you are debating heavily to prove that men have it worse
The article indicates that they do, at college. I’m not ‘arguing that’, I’m referencing it.
If you are claiming that I’m making a more general claim, then you are just misrepresenting me - I.e. you are intentionally lying about what I am saying.
> Could go further with sarcasm and take if further but you pointed out you are not a fan.
I’m not a fan because you are being at best fooling and at worst dishonest.
> I get your argument,
The evidence is that you don’t.
> but I am pointing out that while you are saying "same" you literally mean men should have access to support that is reserved for different people that have different hardships, in order to try to make the playing field more level.
I’m not arguing that some general “playing field” should be more level.
I am arguing that men are just people, and there is no reason they should receive less support in their education.
> You, (not saying you personally, but in case you go there), can't say we should have the same access to support in college while having much different obstacles in life.
Your position continues to embody racism and sexism
It seems like you are saying that men today should receive a worse educational experience than other people because men in the past like you had more advantages in life.
The problem is that this hurts those men who are less advantaged deliberately on the basis of their sex.
If there are advantages men as a category receive later in life, then those need to be addressed, but it’s reprehensible to use that as a justification for harming people’s educational experience.
worse educational experience? thats dramatic as hell. You are just mad that can't steal support reserved for other folks.
You keep throwing around priveledge and advantage but I don't think you get it. Do women make less money than men, underrepresented in industries, way higher percentage of being victims of domestic abuse and sexual assault? But your argument, is always "some men", but we are talking about "in general". Huge difference between situational advantage and systematic disadvantage.
Calling me reprehensible, and you are all high and mighty about how mean sarcasm is hahaha. This whole thread, is you getting all bent out of shape because you think the white man isn't getting enough, just leave it at that. I hope one day you see how ridiculous that is.
Please make this your last comment thread on HN, this was painful to read. This type of discourse does much better on twitter or reddit, feel free to keep it there.
"you know what this old thread needs? some hacker news superiority" - you
You jumping in a old thread, and you expect me to believe it's because you want me to stop? sounds like to showed up late to the party and just sad everyone left, and you want me to jump back in to talk to you. How you doing?
Yea black people always getting that advantage, you should let more people know. I mean, people just don't understand how hard it is to be white these days with twitter hate and everything. Be the voice! Let me know how it goes.
Why do you think a college would have an "advantage" for someone black that would not be available to someone white? Is it possible, hear me out, that maybe white people are still at a massive advantage getting to college and that colleges are trying to equalize the playing field?
"intellectually dishonest"
as opposed to physically dishonest or...?
Preferential admissions, sure. And that's not new, admissions take a lot of things into account besides race, like religion, family members who were alumni, hell you can even just pay to get in. You think maybe white men get more preferential treatment in life though? "BUt THaTs NOt WhAT We ArE TALkiNg AbOuT". Huge difference between situational advantage and systematic disadvantage.
It's called therapy, not blaming other people that don't look like you coming up. And yea, therapy is expensive and usually not covered by medical insurance. So vote.
all the men on here complaining they aren't getting support while others are, definitely aren't blaming anyone, you're right, I took that too far. Seeing a lot of men write how they are super stoked women are finally getting some small advantages in academia.
> all the men on here complaining they aren't getting support while others are,
Where are these complaining men? I see people critiquing policies. I think you are making up in your head that there are men on here complaining about their situation.
> definitely aren't blaming anyone, you're right, I took that too far.
Your sarcasm is causing you to dishonestly represent what others are saying.
> Seeing a lot of men write how they are super stoked women are finally getting some small advantages in academia.
They aren’t getting a small advantage. The advantage is huge across the entire educational spectrum now.
Nobody should be celebrating that any more than we should have been celebrating men having an advantage in the past.
The goal is for our systems to support everyone. Not to punish present day people based on arbitrary characteristics they share with people in the past.
your right, sarcasm is a tool of the devil and it's so unauthentic, it's like lying but with an even more evil purpose.
You are complaining, right now, about how now women get a situational advantage. And we shouldn't celebrate that they are better represented in academia! No mas zepto, at this point you just need to get out in the world and see what life is like for others, quit worrying about how underprivileged you are.
I hear you, this is alarming. No support! We deserve it, right? Being a young white male is probably the hardest thing to be in the world. Getting profiled... by twitter. And then, not to mention, all the dirty looks we get when we lock our doors, protect our families from this new wave of white hate. I proclaim we change this, but it won't be easy. We'll need to wear some hoods... ... Or just stop being a sad boi, join society and have some fun? Don't be a jerk? Like actively try to make others lives better? Might just get, actually it will, get better for you.
No way. Being white is definitely a leg up. Well, at least for me, a white guy, no college degree. Life is much easier. I don't think there is any support missing for us, that actually sounds hilarious. We need to work on lifting others up.
Based on the number of "affirmative-action" initiatives that I see all over the US, in many tech-companies (I don't know about other fields), I'd say that being a women, or black, is definitely a huge plus to get your foot through the door, with many recruitment programs blatantly saying they are only for minorities, which sounds to me like pretty much segregation in reverse, but that indeed seems to be the agenda of some leftists.
I'm a white guy and I bootstrapped my career with no degree and little college (dropped out of community college) by simply padded my resume doing some basic contracting gigs for friends and their professional networks and parlayed that into full-time work. I'm now an engineering manager at a unicorn.
I will also say that for all this talk about how easy Blacks and women have it, I don't buy it, and I think people spinning tales about how "My company only hires Blacks and women" aren't involved in technical hiring. We are desperate for experienced talent and are under tremendous pressure to build an effective team. We don't have the luxury to be picky about demographics. And my team isn't unique: It's the same story from my peers both inside and outside my company. Likewise, the pipeline itself doesn't have very many women or Black candidates from what I can see, so even these people got automatic interviews I doubt it would change team demographics significantly. And finally: if this is indeed "segregation in reverse" (which it's not: it would just be segregation with the roles reversed), where are these tech companies where the majority of their engineers aren't White or Asian men?
This. Everywhere I have been as a team lead has had issues hiring. I don't remember ever having two desirable candidates in the pipeline at the same time and getting one felt like striking gold. We didn't give two shits what your gender or race was.
You must not have a lot of women friends in tech to say this, all of my women friends in tech have had one hell of a bad time breaking in. The default attitude of recruiters and interviewers when they interview a women is to assume they know nothing.
It is illegal, but that doesn't stop people from doing it. In the US, things like this have to go to court to actually be struck down, and there haven't been any sympathetic plaintiffs suing over these laws yet.
When "positive discrimination" makes it before a judge, it usually gets stuck down.
Yea, but we got no problem getting to that door. Minorities might get pulled over and get a knee on the neck. Women might get assaulted on their way. Being a white dude, I'll get a taxi there, no problem. So if I have to try harder to get the position, pretty understandable, since I got the head start.
Not saying life is easy for anyone, saying it's so much easier being a white dude with a nice hair cut. You know I used to be so broke I had to "beg" for gas money at a gas station to get to my first day at a new job, first person I asked gave me a $20. Life. is. easier.
You've been reading too much news. That doesn't happen to normal people in real life. Blacks have a huge disadvantage of poor upbringing by their own family and community and women have a huge "disadvantage" of not wanting to be a computer programmer.
No, I just get outdoors and live with real people, and see it myself. I've been pulled over in a car with two other dudes, and watched the darkest skin guy get the crap kicked out of him because they thought he is a gangster, while we had to sit on a curb and watch. Where I went to school, counselors tried to get me to take AP classes, which I didn't want, while my friends with darker skin, and better grades, had to go on the wait list. I lived in an area where 13 year old pregnancies were regular. Guys raping chicks while they are passed out drunk in high school was regular. Jumping the gay kids were regular. I got to watch it, empathize with my friends, but I never had to bear the burden. My burden was folks like you, denying there are any problems because you are so safe, can't fathom life being different, even when it's across the street.
> normal people
Point exactly, when you say normal, you are thinking of white dude America. And yes, this does not happen to them.
> the darkest skin guy get the crap kicked out of him
On his way to a job interview? And also for many of your other darker skinned friends on their way to job interviews? And your female friends on their way to theirs? I'm not denying it happened in some isolated cases, but that it causes normal people to not get to "the door". It didn't even happen to normal people among your "dark-skinned" friends.
I think "to the door" might be a metaphor for going through life up to that point, but I like you literal interpretation better, like everyone in those stories specifically faces atrocities ONLY on the way to an interview. Because if you get shitbagged on a Tuesday and have the interview Wednesday, then really, it's an equal playing field.
Again, with the normal, who are you talking about? People are complex, all people, normal is your perception of others, check yourself.
This is what the science actually says. Black disfunction is attributed to culture spread from adults to children. Black mothers, for example, criticize their children more often than they praise them, but the reverse is true for white mothers. That's just an example of the kind of cultural effect that can be included - I'm not sure if that one specifically has been shown to be causative of lifelong disadvantage.
You want researchers to not attempt to identify the causes of black social problems? Why's that? So you can promote your own ideologically motivated causes without any bothersome science getting in the way?
Women have the disadvantage that if they reveal their gender online, they're barraged with sexual harassment and even death threats for nothing but being a woman. Do you suppose this treatment encourages curiosity in computing?
Can you hear yourself though? Can you put yourself in the shoes of a young white man? They are recipients of this message on a regular basis. When many of them end up having a difficult time despite being told how easy they have it, and how if they received help that would just be resources being taken away from less privileged people, it's easy for them to think something's wrong with themselves, to feel unwanted, depressed, and to end up taking the route outlined by the article.
The examples in the article tell a different story. Mr. Briles could easily go to college if he wanted to. It's just that he would rather stay at home and "invest" in cryptocurrencies and make music, and his parents fund it. That is a very privileged position to be in.
I was young once, and I am white. Yea sure, I understand it. And this is no way new, I had plenty of other white people feeling sorry for me because, "the country is being taken from the white man". That is ooooold, old, old. Fear based racism been around.
But to your weak sauce point, some folks are just going to have a hard go at life, but is it easier being white through life, no matter what? Yea, for sure. No one says it's an easy life, but it is easier being light skinned.
> unwanted, depressed
I think there used to be some organizations that helped with that. Specifically white men. You know, the kind that would give them a purpose, make them feel wanted. You got a hood and everything.
My observations are not racist, or rooted in fear. They are, however, rooted in compassion for my fellow human beings who find themselves in the crosshairs of reactionary political ideologies, even if they wear labels like "progressive", "feminist", or "anti-racist".
I'm mixed so I can generally wriggle out of such accusations by playing the race card. The only situation I ever feel good about doing so are ones like this.
haha not so much, feeling sorry for someone that can afford a Ferrari and then complains about the car insurance would be ridiculous. Similar to feeling sorry for white guys having to deal with politics, its warranted, not serious, and does not deserve more attention that many other REAL issues. But anyways, have a good day.
That's not the point that person was making. But (figuratively) its very true not many people at all can own such a car. Imagine owning one, you got well over $100k of f-off-money, but then tell your barista "life is rough with these car insurance prices on Ferraris". It's perspective.
Yeah. I think its really difficult (impossible?) to know what its like for the other gender/other ethnicities - even if there is more cultural outputs/conversations out there about different groups its still really hard/impossible to know what its like for others.
Having said that working class (poor) white males are known to have amongst the worst educational performance in the UK. This is different from employment.
If I had my time back I would seriously consider not going to uni/get a masters and just become a plumber/electrician. I reckon I would be as happy/if not happier then doing an office job.
I don't have a degree and am from US as well. In most my jobs, I am usually the only one without it. In Europe, it's even more rare, (majority of colleagues have PhDs). When people find out I am not educated, they are not happy about it, initially.
People can be really mean, especially when you aren't "smart". I had to read a lot about a lot of things just so I could go to lunch and participate in the chatter with coworkers.
But, not getting a degree never blocked me from getting great money or any position, I just had to work hard for it, always had to prove myself, earn trust. It's life on hard mode for sure, but not a blocker.
Awesome. So the last two years I have asked people if they know anyone with shrooms, I really wanted to quit dipping (Copenhagen tobacco), been dipping for 15 years, and heard this really works.
No one I knew had any leads, not really shocked by that. But I quit dipping anyways, about 6 months ago. Moral of the story: sometimes your friends don't have illegal drugs and you have to suck it up and do right things the hard way. Second moral: having friends that have drugs would have made all this so much easier.
Defiantly not European and if I where the profiling type I would almost bet money on a) that it's a him and b) him living in my region of the US. If I, am wrong on the second follow-up guess would be northwest plains states. But the stuff was really popular in the South, and in some places for a time more popular than smoking. I grew up on a farm and the cowboys at the feed store would always give me some when I was a kid. It started a life long love-affair that I wish I would have never started. In those cowboys defense, in the 70's Big Tobacco was still convincing people that tobacco was totally safe.
In European Snus is more popular and funny enough due to being water cured has less carcinogenics in it.
Spore syringes eh? A friend I know does agar tek and then to rye grain, then spawns to an unmodified tub with CVG.. he seems to have a lot of fun with this new and fun hobby!! I could totally see some engineer and tech oriented folk here getting really into it.. Gordotek bulk mushroom cultivation all the way!!
Plus the fruits really are medicinal for the mind body and spirit. It’s so good seeing the world starting to wake up to these natural technologies..
Just delete this comment. If you're not an expert on mushrooms, picking mushrooms is basically playing Russian roulette. Telling people to do so is wildly irresponsible.
While I tend to agree with you, it also depends on your region. In the US south you can take one look at the psychedelic mushroom picture that grows here and pretty readily identify it. It also only grows in cow poop, so if you see one that looks like the picture, and it's growing in cow poop it's a magic mushroom.
In other areas it may not be that simple, that being said, it's pretty sage advice to not just go out and pick mushrooms to eat.
Personally I never did them or any other hallucinogen, but helped gather them for my friends when I was a kid. My dad is slightly schizophrenic and everyone says he was never the same after they scored some LSD in the 60's. While I am fine, save some depression and ADD, I figured with the family history why risk it, and with the anxiety disorder that comes from depression the thought of having a panic attack while hallucinating pretty much guarantees that it would happen. The one time I tried pot, was an absolute nightmare and that's not even a true hallucinogenic, just has some properties.
It's perfectly safe to pick any mushroom. You can take them home, take a spore print, dry them, and carefully identify them with the help of the internet at your leisure.
All that's important is that you know not to eat them until you've done so.
And when you do think you've identified them, and want to eat them, first eat a small amount just to play it safe.
Picking mushrooms is not playing Russian roulette. It's completely harmless, no mushroom kills you on contact, you're being ridiculous.
It's actually a quite fun hobby to forage and collect mushrooms when in season, take them home and try classify them. Even if you just throw them all away afterwards. In the process you've dispersed their spores too.
And I've picked and eaten A LOT of supposedly dangerous ones, as well as other plants; something I suspect most people speaking out on the subject haven't.
As a matter of fact, I just got some red amanitas out of the freezer that I picked a few days ago. I'm going to fry them in butter with onions and garlic and make a lovely shroom sandwich.
Like amanitas, liberty caps have a very distinctive look. Soak them in water for a while if at all unsure, and only eat a small amount to begin with.
The really dangerous stuff is pushed by "science" and the people who come up with this FUD to sell their artificial, truly poisonous and addictive chemical cocktails for awesome profits instead.
I too would very much recommend people pick and eat the "desriable to eat" kind of mushrooms. If I had to describe what they look like, I'd say it's very similar to the "will kill you horifically" kind of mushrooms.
EDIT: I should say that I mainly said this because I thought it was funny. I actually think it's fine if people to take risks like that if they understand the responsibility and do their own research. I also think it's fine if people occasionally die from things like those, so take that as you will.
There is no such thing as self-taught, (doesn't even make sense). No one opens a computer, figures out how the processor takes instructions and invents their own language. If you went to college, you listened, you studied, and you practiced. If you did't go to college, you studied, you practiced, and you had to have found someone who will answer your questions.
It's hard for everyone to enter the industry, especially now, college or not. It's not about how smart you are, or your identity, or your environment. It's how bad you want it, how hard you'll work for it, and if someone is willing to help you.
As software engineers, degrees or not, focus on that last part. Be there for someone learning, studying or just trying to figure it out. Feels great to see a finished product. Feels even better to teach someone how to fish, (code for money). I wouldn't be here if it wasn't for people along the way, giving pointers, telling me where to look, telling me what not to do. I was a gawd dang line cook. Be that helpful person.
