With all the commentary here you'd think all feminists are the kind that want to "overthrow" men and it's women's fault a company primarily consisting of men were funded, and have developed and marketed this app.
There are far creepier and more intrusive apps and services out there. Instead of blindly blaming feminists (without actually understanding what most feminists actually stand for) for them being on the marketplace, blame the developers and encourage the ecosystems they're a part of to stop allowing apps whose primary intentions are to shame or label unknowing persons. Your rage is Streisand-effecting this thing and propelling it further than it would have gone otherwise.
What were the totals in those gender polls yesterday? The current numbers are sitting at Male - 1201 / Female - 72 / Other - 30. And it shows (particularly because a lot of women specifically signed up yesterday just to participate in it and will probably go back to lurking for good reason).
I think many forget this place is actually less diverse than Reddit in demographics, frequented mostly by the 18-24 male, we just pretend that there's higher expectations in how one speaks and treats the upvote/downvote system even though that seemingly goes out the window when discussing topics like these, where opposing viewpoints are downvoted as quickly as they're posted and the women-blaming posts are upvoted.
When we have threads about revenge-porn sites, where are these same angry posters? Instead we get slut-shaming in the form of, "Well maybe you shouldn't be sending those types of photos if you don't want them to end up in the wrong hands." They act as though photos of naked males are passed around as quickly and have the same effect on the victim as they do females.
Do you remember the threads about /r/creepshots and how many here were defending the right to post these photos even if they contained personally-identifying information (location, scars, tattoos, etc.) because "freedom of speech" and "let Reddit be Reddit" and the always rational "well she was in public so she doesn't have any say in who can take a picture of her, regardless of how depraved it is". But oh no, some woman on some app nobody is going to use is going to call me a creep and it's going to ruin my life - the privilege!
The idea that "I don't experience privilege and I know this because I am not to blame for anything that happened before my existence," is trying to argue a point that only extremist feminists are making; no one's blaming the current crop of men for past problems that exist today (not most of them, anyway). That doesn't negate the fact that these values and expectations have already permeated through our society and are affecting everyone in ways many do not notice in their day-to-day.
It's a shame that this was the first post I am commenting on today, after seeing the existing dialogue here and the sibling comment to my post (albeit [dead]), I'm sure there will be some fun responses. But I needed to get things done today anyway.
TL;DR We have things to work on on both sides, but blaming women for a product not even created by women is really unnecessary and unproductive, particularly when similar apps for men are already on the market and have been linked in this thread.
> The idea that "I don't experience privilege and I know this because I am not to blame for anything that happened before my existence,"
This has come up so much in this thread its almost baffling. Newsflash: If you are apart of the majority demographic on this website (18-35, upper middle class educated white male) you live the privilege EVERYDAY. Of course you arent conscious of it because it exists in your favor.
>Instead of blindly blaming feminists (without actually understanding what most feminists actually stand for) for them being on the marketplace
Why do discussions like this always get such ridiculous strawman arguments tossed around? Nobody is blaming feminists. People are pointing out that the vocal, hateful group of internet "feminists" constantly claim they are against sexism in all forms, and thus men's rights advocacy should not exist and those people should just be feminists. But in reality, when obvious sexism like this happens, those same "feminists" do not speak out against it.
"Feminist" found count - 41. "Feminism" found count - 13. "WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS NOW?!" was one of the top comments when this post was on the front page a few hours ago and helped set the stage for the continuing commentary.
The uproar in this thread is over placing inappropriate blame on people that neither asked for nor made this app. As Stavros said above, the company is primarily male and this aspect of the app was a last-minute pivot he hadn't heard of before he left the company.
Now look at how HN handled the same type of app for men -- https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5087859. Seems to be a lot less gender-blaming/misplaced fear going around there.
A better way to handle something like this is to shut down the very notion of it and do what was necessary to tell developers and distributors that this is not acceptable, like the thread linked above did. Instead, it turned into a hateful, woman-bashing array of bruised egos and hurt butts over what women you'd probably be smart enough not to date in the first place had to say about you.
>"Feminist" found count - 41. "Feminism" found count - 13. "WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS NOW?!" was one of the top comments
I'm not sure how you could misunderstand my post as it was quite clear. I know people mentioned feminists. Yes, they say things like "WHERE ARE THE FEMINISTS NOW?!" just like I said. That is not blaming feminists for the creation of the app, which is what you claimed, and what I very clearly and explicitly responded to.
>The uproar in this thread is over placing inappropriate blame on people that neither asked for nor made this app
No it is not. Asking why feminists aren't speaking out against something is not blaming them for the creation of that thing.
Are you a feminist? Are you voicing your opinion? Then yes, feminists are speaking out. I don't know what this place expects; a story comes out and within hours members of this community decide that not a group isn't "doing their job" because they're personally not seeing enough outrage to satisfy them and prove the group is worthy of their support. As linked in other comments, plenty are.
Yet many of people come into these threads with the intent to argue with those whom they inherently believe will approve of an app like this because their misguided thought-process has them thinking the majority of feminists would praise it. They're quick to get mad at women, not at the developers or the mindset that this is okay. They're quick to complain at a movement for not doing enough in 24 hours, when we're all a part of it.
Not only that, but the current top comments here are complaining about how women abuse their "privilege" by calling men they deem unworthy of their time "creepy" and have decided to pile on needlessly to the idea that everyday interactions are going to land them with such a title. Again, there are very few women on HN alone, no less those willing to engage with people who honestly think that this is standardized practice for +/- 50% of the population, thus leaving dissenting opinions in the dust and piling on one-off anecdotes as some sort of social proof that they're right. How is that benefitting anyone?
This is not the first women's-issue thread in which I've seen you (and others here) personally go out of your way to talk without actually having anything to say. I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to prove here, but it isn't conveying anything other than you are arguing to argue.
>I'm not exactly sure what you're trying to prove here
That is clear from the content of your post. The question is, why are you so unsure. It is very simple, and I made it very clear. Twice in fact. You said that people here are blaming feminists for the creation of the app. I said that is false. That's it. That is the whole thing. I do not see how you can have such a hard time understanding such a very simple statement.
Did you reply to the wrong post by accident or something? I was asking about the motivation behind strawman arguments, not requesting /b/ tier trolling.
Just because you have no response to something doesn't make it trolling.
The men's rights movement as it is should not exist. Not because male inequality is covered by feminist ideals, though it is, but because the "men's rights" movement is largely nothing more than a pretext for men to openly and self-righteously flaunt their anti-woman beliefs.
>Just because you have no response to something doesn't make it trolling.
Certainly not. Posting deliberately inflammatory nonsense is however. Especially when posting it as a complete non-sequitur reply to an entirely unrelated post. Doubly so when you then proceed to act like a response is warranted, and double down on the random nonsense.
The post I replied to was, in part, a (poorly worded) justification of the need for "men's rights advocates," and that is the part I chose to reply to.
If you're angered by my disagreement, it's not because I'm being inflammatory. I have not engaged in the name-calling you have, nor have I tried to undermine your posts by pretending to be unable to understand them. I have simply stated my honest opinion.
Perhaps you really do have trouble understanding what I'm communicating; if so, my condolences.
But it's more likely that you're simply unprepared for direct challenges, so you avoid the topics at hand and try to score points via misdirection.
>The post I replied to was, in part, a (poorly worded) justification of the need for "men's rights advocates
No, it was not. I said nothing about men's rights, you simply assume that I must be an MRA because I disagreed with something you perceive as feminist. Just like MRAs assume I am a feminist when I disagree with something they say.
>If you're angered by my disagreement
Why do you think I am angered? And you have not expressed disagreement, your post literally had nothing to do with anything I said. You posted a complete non-sequitur, which you know is deliberately inflammatory, under the assumption that I am someone who will be offended by it. That is the very definition of trolling, even if your assumption is incorrect.
Don't be disingenuous. Your comment introduced a group opposed to MRA's existence, then argued that they were wrong in doing so.
As for the rest, I have no interest in labeling people into petty little tribal buckets. I don't care what you call yourself.
That said, the amount of effort you are expending trying to undermine my opinion by personal attacks and misdirection strongly suggests you find my beliefs threatening, but lack either the evidence or the intellectual capabilities to produce a counterargument.
Finally, of course you are angered. On what other basis can you label my comments "inflammatory"?
> the amount of effort you are expending trying to undermine my opinion by personal attacks and misdirection strongly suggests you find my beliefs threatening, but lack either the evidence or the intellectual capabilities to produce a counterargument.
Exactly why I couldn't continue responding to him. Everything he says is just some empty non-statement coupled with how I'm "wrong" or "not getting it" when there's nothing even there to get. Keep fighting the good fight.
>Your comment introduced a group opposed to MRA's existence, then argued that they were wrong in doing so.
I did neither of those things, perhaps you should try reading it again.
>That said, the amount of effort you are expending trying to undermine my opinion
I have said absolutely nothing about your opinion in any of my posts, other than that it was entirely unrelated to anything I have said.
>Finally, of course you are angered. On what other basis can you label my comments "inflammatory"?
I possess basic literacy and adult level reading comprehension. If you said "gay rights is largely the same old prejudices, finding renewed strength under a thin mask of collective victimhood, desperately clung to" it would also be obviously intended to be inflammatory. Even if I am not gay, and even if your comment does not make me angry, I am still capable of grasping the obvious inflammatory nature of the statement.
Are you a dunce, or just too cowardly to stand behind your own words?
Introduction of a group opposed to MRA: "the vocal, hateful group of internet 'feminists' constantly claim they are against sexism in all forms, and thus men's rights advocacy should not exist ..."
Your counter of said group's supposed reason for believing MRA to be superfluous: "But in reality, when obvious sexism like this happens, those same 'feminists' do not speak out against it."
> I have said absolutely nothing about your opinion
Exactly. Yet you are strenuously trying to dismiss it nonetheless -- but doing so by attacking the messenger and other weasel tactics, rather than by honest disagreement.
But the amount of faux outrage you're all whipping yourselves into a froth over is really over the top. So much hate and resentment. :(
Oh, and those of you claiming there would be some sort of anti-man frenzy if there was a site targeting similar gossip by men?
It's been done. No outrage. The most prominent example? Facebook.