[nlarew]

How do you know GP isn't a woman?

More broadly, can a comment on a forum thread that isn't directed at anyone in particular really be considered "mansplaining"? I consider that term to mean something like "a man explaining something to a woman because he assumes she doesn't know".

Just because the topic is about women doesn't mean a man can't post a thought that is relevant and (mildly) thought provoking.

[whoknowsidont]

>So my advice wouldn't be for women to ask for lower salaries

It's right there in the comment. There's other "supporting" statements/phrases but that's really all you need to read.

>consider that term to mean something like "a man explaining something to a woman because he assumes she doesn't know".

What do you think that comment is doing? The comment is acting from a perspective of wisdom/knowledge as a male and addressing the entire female populace lol. It's textbook.

Honestly it was hilarious, I had quite a chuckle after reading that.

On a thread about how AI is surfacing implicit biases mind you. Crazy world right now.

And if you doubt the GP is a male:

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42569375

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39703955

* https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=37143282

>Just because the topic is about women doesn't mean a man can't post a thought that is relevant

You're right. It doesn't mean that. Though I'm not sure why you think anyone is remotely implying that?

[vouaobrasil]

Hey, my advice wasn't for women at all. It was just advice for myself and for people in general. I don't care at all about the headline or AI - if something goes wrong with AI, it's karma for your using it in the first place.

[whoknowsidont]

I said my original comment kind of as a joke (even if it was applicable), I don't think you meant anything nefarious by it.

But of course it elicited a pretty bland response on HN and immediately devolved into a meta discussion; which in and of itself is ironically, recursively topical.

[vouaobrasil]

Yeah, I took your comment as a joke, and I didn't mean anything by it. But I do think it's understandable that there's a very strong reaction against it. It's only natural for some men to denounce any hint of "mainsplaining" or other phenomena because if they don't, they are likely to be painted as collaborators in the oppressive hierarchy by overzealous leftists that pervade modern high-tech corporations.

Of course, there interesting thing is that pretty much nothing took place here except some casual discussion, which is turned into a farce in which no one really knows what anyone is talking about, and instead we have resorted to becoming heads of headless ideologies.

[Tainnor]

I think you could make your point without resorting to rhetoric like "overzealous leftists", which usually doesn't make discourse better.

[Tainnor]

I'm not sure if "mansplaining" is the correct word, but the comment is a poster child of looking at an example of reported bias and saying "it's actually not that bad because ...".

[vouaobrasil]

Is it really reported bias, or just a reflection of different choices in life?

[Tainnor]

If the model statistically significantly returns a different number for men and for women when controlling for all other factors, then it's a bias. I don't understand how this is even contentious.

[vouaobrasil]

The weasel phrase is "controlling for all other factors", which is actually impossible.

[Tainnor]

This is literally what they did in the study.