The fact that EVERYBODY here sees it but you, tells you that perhaps you should take a step back and try to understand... it might be YOU who don't get it at all...
Folks, we're now 5 levels deep on this thread and I still haven't heard it spelled out what's wrong.
I see "it's obvious" "cringey" and allcaps being used. Being able to vocalize specific problems and having the courage to clearly state it is a life skill.
Please be specific about the problem and why. Bonus points for replacement suggestions.
The boys-fight-for-girl is a very typical movie trope and this is a scene-based product. Maybe that's why they defaulted to it.
Its the plague of western people thinking they have the moral high ground over other cultures and nations. In the place where I grew up this kind of scene would be considered normal. But you must be the one who dictates what is right and what is wrong, don't you?
Please do tell me which culture finds it acceptable to throw rocks at people because they happen to like the same woman.
Even ignoring the unnecessary language, sexist content, gender stereotyping, and so on and so forth, just the warrantless violent act in that story is enough for people to object to. And enough people have objected that there isn’t any good reason for the author to keep that animation included. Particularly when it doesn’t actually demonstrate this library in a way that literally any of demo couldn’t. So why even defend it?
> moral high ground over other cultures and nations.
I don't think I have that, really. But I have the high ground over people who objectify groups of other people, and if that is really central to your culture, then I am not accepting of it. Make of that what you will; you do not seem particularly open to criticism either.
No-one's mentioned that anything's sexist, or how. You're filling in the blanks to create content where there wasn't any.
That's how conversation works. Things can be implied when it's obvious.
And if it's not, the onus is on you to ask why.
> That's how conversation works. Things can be implied when it's obvious.
That's how groupthink works.
> And if it's not, the onus is on you to ask why.
I have asked why. Note the lack of answers, but the surfeit of pearl-clutching replies.
1 reply →
The behavior depicted is literally sexual competition.
The fact that EVERYBODY here sees it but you, tells you that perhaps you should take a step back and try to understand... it might be YOU who don't get it at all...
I think the poster gets it. As do I. And I do not believe either of us care all that much about the vocal minority.
1 reply →
Folks, we're now 5 levels deep on this thread and I still haven't heard it spelled out what's wrong.
I see "it's obvious" "cringey" and allcaps being used. Being able to vocalize specific problems and having the courage to clearly state it is a life skill.
Please be specific about the problem and why. Bonus points for replacement suggestions.
The boys-fight-for-girl is a very typical movie trope and this is a scene-based product. Maybe that's why they defaulted to it.
4 replies →
Its the plague of western people thinking they have the moral high ground over other cultures and nations. In the place where I grew up this kind of scene would be considered normal. But you must be the one who dictates what is right and what is wrong, don't you?
Please do tell me which culture finds it acceptable to throw rocks at people because they happen to like the same woman.
Even ignoring the unnecessary language, sexist content, gender stereotyping, and so on and so forth, just the warrantless violent act in that story is enough for people to object to. And enough people have objected that there isn’t any good reason for the author to keep that animation included. Particularly when it doesn’t actually demonstrate this library in a way that literally any of demo couldn’t. So why even defend it?
> moral high ground over other cultures and nations.
I don't think I have that, really. But I have the high ground over people who objectify groups of other people, and if that is really central to your culture, then I am not accepting of it. Make of that what you will; you do not seem particularly open to criticism either.
Why are you passionately defending this? I doubt the author cares much, it's clearly an example that came about through vibe coding.
It's not core to the tech/product, people think it's off-putting, why not change it?
Hacker News loves to talk about being amazing business-people and "understanding the customer" but somehow that gets dropped for things like this.