1. 8

A reply/commentary to the “The Web We Have To Save” essay

  1.  

  2. 10

    Though I agree with much of the article, I think the author is labeling a lot of behavior as “male” which isn’t particularly peculiar to either gender, and it gets on my nerves to a certain extent.

    1. 10

      I don’t understand the male angle of this. Maybe he thinks it will generate more views because of the trend of misandry in blogging. It ends up taking all the valid points out by injecting some weird narrative that doesn’t need to exist.

      1. 5

        I wouldn’t say it takes them out. It gives them a spin that can be seen as valid, depending on your perspective. (He only uses the gender reference twice as well, and made more than two valid points).

        The first ‘very male understanding’ is a resoundingly solid characterization of the position in question, in my opinion. The ability to embarrass people at will is the sort of thing that plays right into harassment and the typical community supporting it as a Good Thing TM are primarily male (based on my own interactions with them).

        The second ‘starkly male point of view’ is a bit sketchy, but I can see why he’d label it that way. It’s a hyber-libertarian point of view – a position now (unfortunately?) nearly impossible to separate from the (stereotypically male) masses that abuse it on reddit, twitter, HN, and the chans.

        We can argue all day about whether the stereotype of internet-hyper-libertarians being primarily white males is valid or not, but that seems to be the root reason he labels things as male in his essay, and for better or worse that’s a common association these days.

        (my biggest dislike in the essay was the fucking tumblr gif. I swear to god we need a tumblr gif blocker)

        1. 1

          I swear to god we need a tumblr gif blocker

          But how to avoid blocking cat gifs?!?