Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

As a man who's always considered himself a strong feminist, I think that tea's issue are way more profound that just some data breach.

Women were convinced to trust the app as a safe space, but it never was for various reasons. First, as proven by the breach, privacy was not guaranteed. Second, I do not see how a women-only app made to complain on men can help any men get better in their behavior, instead of balcanizing society even more, creating camps and hatred. This is not safe in itself. It won't further women's condition in their relationship with men. It alienates men even more, gives arguments to the Jordan Peterson-style toxic masculinity influencers, and inevitably fosters toxic behavior in women too.



It's an app capitalizing on fear and sexism.

I appreciate that you managed to reenforce and give weight to those same fears and sexist talking points, though. I guess there is a market for both.


The app wasn't made for men to get better. It wasn't made for men at all, believe it or not. It was made, very poorly, for women to protect themselves because women face realities men do not.


And yet it turned into girl's version of Kiwi farms.


I don't think that Jordan Peterson is toxic. Although I haven't watched any of his videos for years now, so that might have changed. What makes him toxic in your opinion?

On the other hand I believe what you wrote can be summarized as toxic feminism.


[flagged]


squints is that what we’re calling libel/slander now?


[flagged]


There really seams to be two kind of "feminists": The first claim it's all about equality and the second which is some weird, kind of reverse sexist, ideology. But they are not distributed equally. The latter seams to be what actually defines feminism, is very vocal and is the one that comes up whenever you hear about feminism, while the former seams to only come up when you start to argue against the latter kind.

I also don't get what the former kind is getting from calling themself feminists, when they really only seam to promote common sense.


> The latter seams to be what actually defines feminism, is very vocal and is the one that comes up whenever you hear about feminism, while the former seams to only come up when you start to argue against the latter kind.

This linguistic game is basically the core defining feature of progressivism as practiced: one can hold a term in linguistic ambiguity and choose, post-hoc, whichever one is most convenient for them to assume at the time (which may be a completely different definition from the one they operated under yesterday).

This way you can have your cake and eat it too by advancing radical feminist ideology at the bailey before retreating to the motte of what you call common sense.

[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy


Yes, let's use blanket statements to justify our preconceived notions. I'm not sure what the conclusion you're trying to push here -- feminism is about women having rights. Including the right to complain.


If you edit a comment after another community member has replied, please disclose it with an "EDIT: ..." statement at the end.

It's unfair to change the context of someone's reply after they've posted it, and confusing to other readers.


But didn't you just do exactly that by calling the parent's thoughts preconceived notions?

Edit: parent changed his/her comment after I posted my criticism. Originally it was much shorter and only wrote that the parent's comments are preconceived notions. No context, no nothing.

We really need a see history feature on HN


can't tax two people if only one is in the workforce.


[flagged]


If it’s bad for Kiwifarms to dox, it is also bad for Tea to dox.

Data privacy needs to be a thing so that Tea and Kiwifarms cannot exist.


Not sure what your point is, it's pretty clear the target is the self labelled feminist and the post is more a defence the idea of Tea as platform rather than suggesting it's okay for Tea be technically incompetent.


My point is that data privacy should be enough of a thing that whispering/doxxing campaigns that can’t be a thing, no matter who.


I find this comment hateful. Typical hatred fueled comment. Blatant misandry. Why is this tolerated here on HN?


The comment has been flagged and killed by other users. Though it makes valid points, it contains inflammatory rhetoric of the kind we just don't want to see at all on HN, as do many other comments on all sides of the debate in these threads. We'd be better off without any of it. Please don't feed it.


I apologize for the tone but not the sentiment.

It's difficult to treat every subject with the detached and clinical air that Hacker News insists upon when you actually care about something beyond the distraction of intellectual exercise and debate.

On the other hand, arguing about things on the internet is futile, regardless of the house rules.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: