[xfr]

This is straight up misogynistic and is a great example of why women are driven away from our industry, because of language like this.

[chapium]

I don't think so. If you swap gender roles in the text its not demeaning and is still a cheeky commentary on married life. Mentioning a woman or their relationship to a man (in this case) doesn't automatically make it offensive.

[computerex]

While it is a very unusual metaphor, I don't see how it is misogyny or derogatory against women. This is wildly off-topic but I'd be interested to hear your thoughts.

[ljm]

It’s archaic. The analogy isn’t well served by using women and sex as an example, and I don’t really see why someone needs to hear about touching women in ways they don’t like when all they’re talking about is a shell configuration.

This probably would have gone down well back in the 60s, but we’ve hopefully since moved on from comparing women to objects, and comparing how we treat women to how we treat inanimate things.

Personally, I downvoted because the author’s attitude to women has absolutely nothing to do with discussing good alternatives to laptops.

[asjw]

Because men and women still marry and still chose each other as partners?

And the more men and women wait for that moment to chose the right person, the more the probability of making the right choice increases.

As long as I support women rights, I don't see what's wrong if an eterosexual man talks about choosing the right woman for him.

Should men not chose carefully their partners?

[xfr]

Yes it is a strange metaphor but language like “I might stumble a bit and touch her in ways she doesn't like” is rapey and comparing women to config files is just weird. The whole comment feels like it is objectifying women

[chapium]

You're right, you have a good point there.

[adamsea]

> “I might stumble a bit and touch her in ways she doesn't like, but overall we get the job done and nothing is broken afterwards.”