Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by JSavageOne 2228 days ago
> but that is very much what he was saying

No it's not. Nowhere in the paper did he say that women can't become good engineers. You're literally defaming his work. Either support your accusation with evidence, or don't comment.
4 comments
mabbo 2228 days ago
> those arent the words he used, but that is very much what he was saying

> Nowhere in the paper did he say that

You both are saying the same thing- he did not use those exact words.

The parent comment is saying that despite not saying "Women can't be engineers", the entire purpose of the paper, in the view of that reader, was to insinuate that women can't be engineers. It's not terribly hard to promote an idea without ever saying it explicitly. Perhaps you didn't read the deeper meaning out of the memo.

And demanding those who interpret things differently than you "don't comment" doesn't promote discussion, it ends it. When someone says something you disagree with, don't tell them to shut up, ask them why they see things differently. Debate. Discuss. Grow.

link
h4l0 2228 days ago
> in the view of that reader, was to insinuate that women can't be engineers

Although his intentions were unclear by his vague approach to the subject, I believe he didn't mean to say women can't be engineers.

Most of the time he gave population-based examples of how women decided not to be engineers. His thesis was to show that forcing women in STEM fields is not a fair practice to both women and men who want to be STEM professionals.

link
darkerside 2228 days ago
You're right that they both talked about exact words, but you're indexing too highly on it. Just because they used the same words in places doesn't mean they're saying the same thing. Reading again, I don't know why you start with that statement. It really muddies the rest of your comment.

Please take this idea with an open mind. When you arrive a singular purpose to the paper, it may say more about your views than it does about the author's. He didn't have a thesis that stated directly that he meant to "insinuate that women can't be engineers", so you're literally putting words in his mouth.

And the "don't comment" line explicitly said it was in response to statements that are unfounded, NOT statements that disagree.

Putting that all together, you seem to be having an argument with a ghost of your own making.

link
dirtydroog 2228 days ago
Parent is essentially playing the 'so what you're saying is...' card.
link
JSavageOne 2228 days ago
> the entire purpose of the paper, in the view of that reader, was to insinuate that women can't be engineers.

Ok, please explain to me how the memo suggests that women can't be engineers.

link
icebraining 2228 days ago
No, ergothus is stating their interpretation based on disclosed facts, so it's quite unlikely to be considered defamatory (in the US).
link
jpdb 2228 days ago
> You're literally defaming his work.

His "work" does a fine job of that on its own.

link