I believe that (A) discovering what is considered normal in one’s community influences what one thinks, and (B) what one thinks is not disconnected from what one does.
The trap of entitlement is easy to fall into, and if a statement can be interpreted in a way that implies you are owed something and deprived of it by a group who can provide it (that group already having reasons to fear violence from your own group) then I oppose the wording.
The existence of such a statement in vacuum does not matter, the trouble starts when it is published in a community. Bonus points if it’s mentioned casually in passing, implying it’s nothing out of ordinary. Bonus points if it goes by unopposed by the community (thankfully, not on HN).
Someone in the community may have their existing line of thinking reinforced. Someone else, who does not have an established opinion on this matter but is going through a difficult period in life (which during formative years or early adulthood is not uncommonly associated with lack of intimate relationships), may start considering this idea for the first time.
Start feeling belonging to a group where this is normal, and a feedback loop may be formed with horrible publicized outcomes[0] and not unlikely many cases we don’t know about.
If you believe that there is no causal link between those outcomes and perpetrators being able to discover communities where relevant opinions were considered normal, then we disagree and I hope you eventually change your mind.
To be clear, this may not even be purposeful. We may not phrase things carefully at all times, and in some cases casual accidental phrasing can imply things we did not actively consider before. Being aware helps.
> I believe that (A) discovering what is considered normal in one’s community influences what one thinks, and (B) what one thinks is not disconnected from what one does.
It hasn't been considered "normal" to inflict violence on women for decades, so that's not really the context under discussion. The question is, under present circumstances in which domestic violence is a huge no-no, and everyone knows it's unacceptable, would the absence of comments about "scheming women" really prevent or reduce such violence?
There are communities in which it is considered normal and/or advocated. If you read the link, you would be astonished that such communities could be found as close as on Reddit until end of last year.
In many (most?) parts of the world, for a woman walking alone after dark to see a group of men approaching often means to fear for her safety or life; in domestic conflicts women take much, much more damage from men than the reverse, the statistics are readily available.
If you consider “I don’t think it’s normal, so I don’t care what others say or write” a viable position in this context, then we disagree and I hope you will change your mind.
Generalizations, misattribution of intent and other biases against a disadvantaged group may exist in someone’s head, but when vocally expressed in a community they have the power to exacerbate an already difficult situation; especially if the majority of said community belongs to the very group that historically caused the disadvantage of the former group. (This is not limited to men vs. women or gender in general.)
It is worth phrasing things in a neutral way, even if it takes more words.
Everything you've pointed out is common knowledge in the developed world, which is what we're talking about. These communities you speak of aren't created by the language to which you're objecting, they create that language.
You're confusing cause and effect, which was my initial point. If those objectionable statements did not previously exist, incels and others would create them. This is why policing language is stupid. It's a symptom not a cause, and focusing on the language as the problem also punishes people who would never abuse another person.
Comedians run into this wall all the time. No one's going to hear a racy joke and then think it's suddenly ok to go assault someone. Even if someone were contemplating assault, the joke wouldn't be some "final straw" that drives them to do it, and trying to classify it as such simply ignores the real underlying issues.
I don’t understand your point, or why you’re still making it.
The language one uses cannot influence the mindset of another person? Providing avenues to advocate for certain behavior should not be expected to increase the incidence of that behavior?
Then we have disagreed back here:
> I believe that (A) discovering what is considered normal in one’s community influences what one thinks, and (B) what one thinks is not disconnected from what one does.
and we will continue disagreeing.
I hope eventually you will change your mind, but I’m not prepared to (nor expecting to be able to) argue you into that.
I believe that (A) discovering what is considered normal in one’s community influences what one thinks, and (B) what one thinks is not disconnected from what one does.
The trap of entitlement is easy to fall into, and if a statement can be interpreted in a way that implies you are owed something and deprived of it by a group who can provide it (that group already having reasons to fear violence from your own group) then I oppose the wording.
The existence of such a statement in vacuum does not matter, the trouble starts when it is published in a community. Bonus points if it’s mentioned casually in passing, implying it’s nothing out of ordinary. Bonus points if it goes by unopposed by the community (thankfully, not on HN).
Someone in the community may have their existing line of thinking reinforced. Someone else, who does not have an established opinion on this matter but is going through a difficult period in life (which during formative years or early adulthood is not uncommonly associated with lack of intimate relationships), may start considering this idea for the first time.
Start feeling belonging to a group where this is normal, and a feedback loop may be formed with horrible publicized outcomes[0] and not unlikely many cases we don’t know about.
If you believe that there is no causal link between those outcomes and perpetrators being able to discover communities where relevant opinions were considered normal, then we disagree and I hope you eventually change your mind.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incel#2010s
To be clear, this may not even be purposeful. We may not phrase things carefully at all times, and in some cases casual accidental phrasing can imply things we did not actively consider before. Being aware helps.