goku12

I'm unfamiliar with the subject. What's the problem with BBC Future?

You are still ignoring the only distinction I made - the one between nurturing and nursing. I always understood them as having widely accepted distinct meanings, and the author of the article seems to follow it too.

You can either argue that their understanding of 'nurturing' is wrong, or that men can't nurture as well as women, without conflating the two. You can't have it both ways. Labeling it as an 'overstatement' after completely ignoring their definition of the terms is a disingenuous argument.

You're conflating nurturing and protection with birthing and nursing.

I also don't understand why this opinion is so controversial. Humans, including men are one of the rare species that nurture and protect babies (consciously and beyond symbiosis) of other individuals or even species, including wild animals. Why is it so surprising then that men are good at nurturing their own babies?

> It’s probably unnatural for adult men to spend much time with tiny children in the first place.

Sorry, what? The framing of this sentence alone has a very creepy vibe. I can't speak for all of us, but most us have strong protective instincts towards kids of all ages, especially the youngest ones.

> This is why many men find it difficult, it is contrary to instinct.

Contrary to whose instinct? If I had a kid, I would want to ensure his/her safety and success. Men in general yearn for it. And there's nothing that suggests men are incapable of it. Research indicates good outcomes. And I know fathers who are the sole care givers for young kids when life makes it inconvenient for the mother.

> Do hunter gatherers split care of tiny children? Whatever they do is what we’re wired for, mostly.

Hunter gatherer culture is at least ten thousand years old - plenty of time for social behavior to evolve. Modern humans, including men are very heavily invested in kids because humans can't have a lot of kids. Ensuring each one's safety becomes important.

Heck! Humans, including males are very nurturing and protective towards even children of other men and other species. Plenty of evidence that your assertion doesn't hold at all.

> I can't speak for the person you're responding to, but my default reaction to people who say things like this is that they probably don't have kids,...

I don't have kids and it still sounds nonsensical. As a man, my instinct isn't to run away from my child if I had one. If life keeps men and their children apart, that's a different matter altogether. But I have seen other men yearn to be with their little kids. My father did the same when I was young. Some of them are their kids' sole caregiver for the majority of the time because life keeps the mother away from the child. And in all instances, I see strong paternal affection and instincts at play. I'm baffled by an assertion otherwise.

Absolutely agreed. These two big corporate players with the biggest market-share are actively ruining the email ecosystem for their profit. I wish people would drop them and stop choosing them. Hopefully, the EU may soon do so.

You are making the exact same defeatist argument that I consider harmful. The reasons are further down my comment above. There are better answers than 'it's doesn't work'.

I didn't name any single AI. But who is providing the AI used by the Pentagon and Israel to plan the mass killings in Iran and Palestine respectively? I'm surprised that people can't see the obvious danger.

As of when I'm writing this, three stories on the front page of HN (17, 18, 19) are about two bigtech companies dissing (for the lack of another polite word) their customers and third party vendors. I don't know how long it will take for the world to realize that these companies have nothing but at most contempt for you, except for your money which they want all for themselves. I'm not going to hold back on the fact that these multi-billion and trillion dollar MNCs lack any sort of scruples or integrity and their relationship with you is purely parasitic in nature.

I know that jailbreak is an option. But that's a rapidly closing avenue. Devices are getting harder by the day to jailbreak. The only correct solution is to vote with your wallet in favor of your own self-respect and independence. To not be their economic slaves. Consistently choose products that value your freedom, even if it's inconvenient and costly. Choose local stores, even if that requires you to walk to the nearby shop. You stand to gain a lot for those sacrifices. In fact, those gains may be things you can't afford to lose in the first place - like the democracy. (It's not a big secret that many of them have fascist ambitions.)

But whenever I raise this point here, somebody or the other rebukes that with some nonsensical argument about 'market demand' or something similar. First of all, market demand is decided by the consumer, unless we concede that right to the market manipulators. Secondly, this isn't something novel. Boycotts and preferential consumerism have been practiced successfully for ages and is in full effect as we speak. Can't you see how the citizens of entire nations are resisting fascism and hegemony through their shopping preferences? Due to this, I have serious reservations about people who make such counter arguments.

The technically proficient people like the HN crowd are the ones who should raise the alarm about technological exploitation and techno-fascism among the larger population and suggest the solutions. Instead, these people are out to defeat all such efforts and expose the population to the greedy cabal. I don't know if it's nihilism or outright betrayal. But don't be like that, please! Your knowledge and voice are valuable and they command respect. Use them to free your society and yourself from this economic exploitation and hegemony. Please start preaching publicly for the sake of all of our future.