MRA: Women hate engineering because it’s too hard and they’d rather mooch off their husbands.
Computer Engineer Barbie is sick of this bullshit.
Ever wonder why there are so few women engineers? Well, wonder no more, because carchamp1 over on the Men’s Rights subreddit has the answer! It’s apparently his wife’s fault, or something. In a comment with two dozen upvotes at last count, he explains:
I put my wife through four years of college to be an engineer. That’s four years worth of college tuition and expenses, plus not having any income from her. She got a great job and worked for a couple years. She decided she didn’t want to work anymore so she could be a “stay-at-home-mom”. When I urged her to work she said if I didn’t like it she would take our kid and I could leave.
Women don’t want to be engineers that’s why there are so few. It’s too hard. It’s a lot easier doing the “hardest job in the world”, you know, be a mom and living off your husband.
End of story.
Yeah, it’s not like there might be any other reasons beyond laziness and ingratitude, or anything.
Posted on December 12, 2011, in $MONEY$, antifeminism, evil women, I'm totally being sarcastic, men who should not ever be with women ever, misogyny, MRA, oppressed men, reactionary bullshit, reddit. Bookmark the permalink. 414 Comments.
Also, if you refused my sandwich I would be offended and question my sandwich making skills. Why don’t you like my sandwich Mr. Sexbot??? Is there anything I can do to make you like tuna sandwiches?
See? Annoying.
Oddly enough, nobody is suggesting that asking someone out once is sexual harrassment.
I suspect though that if I were asked out once by 50 individuals one after the other based entirely on my being the only woman around, I’d feel somewhat harrassed.
Oddly enough, nobody is suggesting that asking someone out once is sexual harrassment.
Admittedly, it depends a little on the manner of asking. “Hi, I was wondering if you’d like to get coffee with me sometime?” = not harassment. “Hey, hot tits, wanna come back to my place and suck my dick?” = harassment, even if you only say it once.
That’s true. I guess I assumed that the woman who was originally quoted would have called it something other than ‘being asked out’ if this were the way it was put – although I guess technically it is. Ew.
God f’n dammit, I was busy all day with mom stuff and helping the real world libertarians cover the NDAA issues, and I f’n missed Meller and SUPPRESSED SCIENCE!
Meller, can we please cover these issues in our debate, if you agree to have one? Please?
Also, Meller, are you going to tell me what the manhating statements were, or explain why you told me you didn’t think I’d provoked my abuse (though other woman could have!), but then quoted me as an example of something that could drive a man (GENTLE AS A LAMB!) to violence? Seriously.
Another possible occasion when asking someone out a single time would count as harassment is if you have power over them and make them feel like a refusal might negatively impact their life. A supervisor in a workplace could do that, or a professor to a student.
And even if it’s not harassment in a prosecutable sense, it can still be obnoxious.
Incidentally, having HDTV in 1928 would have rocked because it would be just in time for the first Academy Awards.
Regards the matter of technological innovation:
I graduated high school in 1999, during the third season of Buffy the Vampire Slayer. The season finale for that season was centered around the graduation of Buffy et al from high school, and the last part (of the two-part episode with requisite cliffhanger) was scheduled the night before my last final of high school, in the week that I myself would graduate.
Naturally, at the appointed hour, I was primed to view the second part of aforementioned cliffhanger. I did not view this. What I viewed instead was a notice to the effect that the airing of the episode in question had been indefinitely postponed “in light of recent events”. A demon ate the student body, you see. They were concerned about copycats.
So I got on the Internet to see what was known about how long the delay would be and perchance if a script or something had been leaked. What I found was that the episode had been cancelled in the US at the last minute, after its airing in Canada. This would have been of little to no consequence just a few years earlier, as there was little means of getting a TV show from airing in Canada to eyeballs in the US — anime fan communities were still largely operating via VHS tape trading, for instance.
Not so this time, as I discovered to my surprise. The thing was online. It was in Real format, divided into seven parts, and was so heavily compressed that it looked and sounded like underwater synchronized swimming Buffy. It took all night and part of the next day to download. I did it anyway. I marveled. I’d grown up in a time when computers that could record and play realistic (although crappy by modern standards) audio recordings were a Big Deal, and here I was watching an entire 45-minute recording of an hour slot television program, audio and video both, that some random person in Canada had just gone and made with their computer and then put on the Internet.
Three years later, I could download then-current episodes of Buffy, in IIRC what was DVD-level quality, in about two hours.
A couple years ago, if it struck my fancy to watch the very episode of Buffy that constituted an iconic moment in technology for me, I could begin watching that episode on my computer, completely legitimately and in higher quality than I would have seen it at the time had it been broadcast normally, within five minutes of forming the impulse. For free.
Today, I can probably do the same on my phone. Which is understandable, because my phone is more powerful than the computer I watched the original episode on and has significantly better Internet access.
And in a sense that’s really nothing compared to the fact that my grandmother is making contact with former students on a ubiquitous Web-based service that few people could have even thought to include in the freaky glass dome on head future when she retired from teaching.
Too bad about that lack of technological development, eh?
My first computer had 1k of RAM. 30 years later, this one has 4G, which was decent two years ago when I built it and is considered barely enough these days.
Nah, technology’s not advancing anywhere near fast enough.
I predict that technology will slow down when we start reaching the really stupid-sounding prefixes. There’s no way to sound cool bragging that your computer has a “yottabyte.”
True. However, I would totally be down for a Yodabyte.
Can I have a Zetabyte? This would involve Catherine Zeta Jones coming over to do tech support.
Meller: You keep talking about how women are “mutants” if they are good in the mathematical arts.
What are your degrees in?
Hmm, blockquote fail. I should stop playing at having “educations” and submit to the mighty phallus, at least until the cubercuties arrive.
@Sorka – http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_9cxliw0_2S8/TRmslX7ONEI/AAAAAAAAAYI/F3FacXq-jSw/s1600/monopoly2.jpg .
Or, if he tries to implement the not-brothels plan…
http://benke.co.uk/files/virtualbox/monopoly.png
Yes! It’s him!
God f’n dammit, I was busy all day with mom stuff and helping the real world libertarians cover the NDAA issues, and I f’n missed Meller and SUPPRESSED SCIENCE!”
-Adding
And Meller, as I said on the other thread, wtf? You were on manboobz, arguing about how feminism took away your scientific ESP hovercar future, while the NDAA was in the senate and even the most annoying, tinfoli hatted libertarians I know (besides you) were organizing and calling and tweeting and mailing and blogging and screaming and occupying like hopped up worker ants as they really, no shit, no-conspiracy voted to allow us to be held indefinitely without trial?
Mister the NWO is coming was bitching about lady scientists on 12/13/11?
duuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuude.
So Meller rants about things that may not be possible (some of which look to be patently impossible) and complains they don’t exist.
Then, instead of saying they might not be possible, he asserts they are certainly true, and the only reason we don’t have reliable ESP, or gravitic manipulation isn’t because it can’t be done, but because women are stupid.
Don’t forget, his utopia is for women to be slaves.
What were his degrees in again?
People like Meller are the reason Lysenkoism existed. They think science and technological achievement is just a matter of will, that you can bend nature to do whatever you want as long as you’re clever enough.
There are limits to humankind’s genius, Meller. There are scant few unbreakable laws in Physics and Maths, but we’ve found a few of them already. Zero point energy is fool’s gold. ESP is bullshit. Cold fusion and room temperature superconductors are not theoretically impossible but are very unlikely (just like strong AI that is built up from first principles rather than arrived at by evolutionary programming) and looking for means to make those is like looking for a needle in a haystack. There exists statements in mathematics that are true and yet are unproveable (the corrolary is that a universal program that finds all possible bugs in another program is impossible to conceive). And no matter if you put weat grain in freezing cold, they will never grow an immunity allowing them to be grown in Siberia.
“There are limits to humankind’s genius, Meller.”
I would also point out that human genius needs money, time and good education.
No, you’re not. You’re a whiney entitled baby with delusions of being adequate.
No you don’t. I pulled a Masters in Project Management while working full time including multiple 50+ page reports and never had to pull an all nighter.
No you don’t
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22259233/ns/us_news-education/t/study-all-nighters-hurt-students-grades/
Yep, women don’t know shit about sckience. Nothing at all
Well, even with the things that we know are possible because they happened, like computer technology advances, Meller’s speculation that they would have happened faster without feminism is an absolutely unprovable statement.
What if (purely hypothetically, now) if the curve of progress had remained in the XX century what it was in the period roughly 1750-1900, would we have had, e.g. color HDTV in 1928, a working transistor by 1935, PEACEFUL nuclear power by 1939, manned space travel by 1948, and on a commercial basis a decade or so after, maglev transcontinental rail service (both freight and passanger) by 1955, SST by 1960, commercially viable electric vehicles by 1975, and the internet/cellphones–with the supporting hardware–by c.1982?
You know, even taking for granted everything else about this list, that one little “PEACEFUL”
you threw in there doesn’t cut it. You’re talking about a nuclear world in ’39.
You’re talking about a Blitz with the bomb. You’re talking about a “Pearl Harbor” strike with nukes. You’re talking about a world where, to be reasonably optimistic, London, Berlin, Moscow, San Francisco, Los Angeles, Paris, and Tokyo are smoking, radioactive ruins. And then technological process proceeds just dandily?
I get why it’s attractive, Ozy, just for the weird quotient, but DKM you simply cannot give WWII the bomb and expect a livable world for a long time afterwards.
Of course, it’s all nonsense in any case. Many of those innovations /required/ the war to advance as they did; the Enigma machine existed for long before, but nobody was bothering to use it, which meant nobody was bothering to crack it, which meant nobody was inventing computers. Necessity is the mother of invention; war is the mother of necessity. It’s very, very hard to argue that we’d be where we are without the war; it’s even harder to argue that with four or five nuclear powers going into the war, we’d be here at all.
Well then, perhaps you other men who lose efficiency, reliability and competency when in the company of all those distracting women ought to stay confined to the home where you can efficiently, reliably and competently do the cooking, cleaning, knitting, sewing, etc.
Oh, but in DKM’s alternate reality, discrimination was–and is!– necessary, to ensure natural meritocracy.
In retrospect the quotes on “Pearl Harbor” were unnecessary and silly looking. I meant to say that the Japanese Air Force would have attacked the coast of California with nukes and long range bombers, and thus “Pearl Harbor” wouldn’t really be at Pearl Harbor anymore, but changed my mind. Anyway, my point stands, I think.
MRAL: BTW, Pecunium, I’m smart and Have gret time management skills
The first part may be true, but the last is patently not or you wouldn’t be pulling all-nighters. I’ve had to pull all-nighters, because the situation which required it was outside my control. You aren’t in that spot, unless your courses are programmed by the school, with no input from you.
So, somewhere along the way, you chose to either bite off more than you could chew, or you didn’t keep up with the work required to have the mastery needed to avoid the detrimental aspects of cramming.
For Pete’s sake… Nuclear war is not the end of the world. It’s still rather nasty, but humanity and Western civilization would probably survive. Just look at the the blast radius of a typical bomb… Also remember that the radiological effects are quite short from most weapons.
Plus, who’s to say that we would have the bomb before we developed fast reactors or the thorium fuel cycle? The Manhattan project itself was an artifact of the second world war, and I somewhat doubt that it could have happened under any other circumstance.
And… Um.. What are we arguing about again?
Okay, I’ve read the backthread and I’m ready to respond. I just thought I’d fire off that other post first… Radiophobia and opposition to nuclear technology are far problematic than feminism and women’s liberation.
Re: Main topic.
Making major life decisions like that without consulting your spouse makes you a failure as a spouse. Threatening to leave and deny access to your children is even worse. It should go without saying that the wife is completely in the wrong here. These are things a decant husband or wife just shouldn’t do.
Re: Women in engineering.
There is one fundamental point I would agree with most of the manboobz folk on:
Talent is too expensive to waste.
Loosing even a single Grace Murray Hopper to bias within our field would set us back significantly. Even lesser names in the software trades can accomplish an awful lot. Throwing out this contribution without any external gain is a bad thing.
The catch is, (and, you know I wouldn’t be posting if I didn’t have something to argue about) is that even without sexism we will still see inequalities in the engineering fields. For one, there are some biological differences in brain structure and function. Just look at the mental rotation tests. We also have the cultural expiations of motherhood and the cultural expectations that women work in fields that allow them to directly care for their fellow human beings (there may be biological arguments for these tendencies too, but I haven’t researched the fields). Now, to be clear, these factors don’t mean that women can’t make contributions to the math and science fields nor does it mean that the system should exclude them from these fields. But they do mean that we will have unequal numbers of men and women in these fields. And, there’s nothing inherently wrong with this inequality.
This is where the feminists get it wrong. There is serious talk of applying title IX like quotas to science and engineering to enforce equality. This would mean rejecting many qualified male candidates. This violates the single value I mentioned at the start of this argument:
Talent is too expensive to waste.
Some feminists talk of changing culture so that we pressure young women away from marriage and motherhood. This is decidedly unfair to those women who want these things, even at the expense of a career. The same could be said for pressuring women into science and engineering for the purposes of equality when they would be happier studying other fields. This would also mean that you are depriving the other fields of talent. And, remember:
Talent is too expensive to waste.
In this thread, a number of folks have made the argument that “women bring a unique prospective to technical problems”. I don’t quite buy it… Even in the gender-specific examples mentioned (Apple’s new natural language processing program’s ability to find an escort service but not locate an abortion provider), I doubt that the line-level developers involved have the ability to make such decisions. Even if this were true, I don’t think it would justify any sort of forced discrimination. After all, I could make the same argument about Sociology professors and the Republican party. I’ve been told that there are 50 Democrats for every Republican in Sociology departments around the US. Now, I would argue that having a different political ideology means that you would approach teaching and research in the field differently. By this reasoning, this diversity is a good thing. Yet, I doubt that anyone else here would be specifically arguing that universities hire more Republicans. Why is diversity a good thing for gender, but not for political ideology?
Ultimately, talent is more important than diversity. And…
Talent is too expensive to waste.
Quick Question – Do you mean too precious to waste, because how much are we spending on wasted talent per year?
Dev Guy/Developers! Developers! Developers! is back XD And with his same old same old “what about the traditional women” thing xD
Remember Zhinxy, he says you don’t count as a feminist who’s also a mother and a good wife because it’s impossible to prove your abuse, you could be lying! xD
Developers to the third power comes to us from 1965. We need all the BEST minds in science, because we gotta beat them Russkys. The cost to collectivist BUT NOT COMMUNIZED IN ANY WAY society will be great if we don’t get everybody working up to speed, fitted into the new economy. This is no time for silly quotas. . And get realistic about the BOMB. We’ll make it through okay. Dang right we will.
Yeah, like Zhinxy is wondering…
you keep saying “Talent is too expensive to waste”
What do you mean by that? xD What talent is being “wasted”? Where is it going? What’s replacing it?
How do you know hiring practices that give mostly white male hires are not biased? (outside of the circular reasoning where clearly they must not be because white guys are being hired and therefore white guys are the most qualified, and since they’re the most qualified, them being hired shows pure objectivity) xD
But srsly, you keep repeating it. What specifically do you mean by it? Can you illustrate it, not in generalities or theoreticals where you control all the variables… in real life proof :3 Talent is being wasted and it’s expensive… show us? :]
“Remember Zhinxy, he says you don’t count as a feminist who’s also a mother and a good wife because it’s impossible to prove your abuse, you could be lying! xD”
That’s right! Ah, the memories.
Also devxdevxdev – Where is there serious talk of science QUOTAS? Are you arguing that science is now a pure meritocracy? Extra Credit – Does science serve “a duty to society”(tread carefully with me here, for there are shark infested libertarian waters) that we need “our best minds on” for the collective good, hence expensive?
PPS. How exactly do we know that the current crop of mostly white guys are there by merit, and more talented than people coming in, who could only get there by affirmative action?
Also, the theory behind AA is that equally qualified or MORE qualified individuals are being passed over because of being disabled, being a PoC, being female, etc… it isn’t “touchy feely awww we just want to be faaairrr” like MRAs and others keep strawing (and assuming) it is xD And I love how that WITHOUT knowing the qualifications, they always just assume this MUST mean that white guys who are more qualified are being passed over for people who are less, just cuz… well it MUST be right? Because hiring was wholly merit based before and therefore any outside manipulation can only mean that people are being chosen outside of merit, rather than making sure people aren’t being passed up despite their merits. >_>
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rooney_Rule
Sports should be the ultimate example of hiring by merit right? After all everybody wants to win at all costs. So… why is it that they had to make sure that teams have to just INTERVIEW black candidates? No black coaching candidates that even are worthy of an interview and need to be forced up? Or is there a bias that the NFL felt needed to be corrected? It turns out by the way, after being forced to interview black coaches, some teams realized, hay, he might actually be a good fit! xD
Exactly. Before affirmative action, things just WORKED OUT THAT WAY! The rare “exception” got in! And you know, was treated totally fairly, up to their potential as an exception! Except that, you know, even the brilliant successes they had, were often hampered by sexism. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sophie_Germain
Louis Bucciarelli and Nancy Dworsky, Germain’s biographers, summarize as follows: “All the evidence argues that Sophie Germain had a mathematical brilliance that never reached fruition due to a lack of rigorous training available only to men.”[69]
Was she simply not qualified for the training? Would her being “ordered” into the ecole polytechnique to train her talents, which were wasted even as she contributed great things to mathematics, especially in the areas of proofs and elasticity?
Whatever you think of Monarchy, would an order by Napoleon, for example, to allow Sophie Germain in, have been a terrible time period specific act of affirmative action? Yes or no?
EDIT – Would her being “ordered” into the ecole polytechnique to train her talents, ( which were wasted even as she contributed great things to mathematics, especially in the areas of proofs and elasticity)? Have been a terrible act? If it takes action to get a person of tremendous talent into training, talent like Germains, is that an unalloyed bad, if social forces combine to keep them out?
What is Dev Guy trying to convince us of btw? o_O Better to leave it to white guys and a few “exceptions” or talent (i.e. abled white guys) will be wasted and the CommieRussianChineseNaziMuslims will take us over? o_O
NWO and Meller would have created a sustainable source of infinite energy at this point if not for AA! XD
Hmm… actually that last part is true… since AA can also stand for Ami Angelwings
Or Alex Anthopoulous xD Who is prolly also ruining their day… somehow… (if Darvish is signed with the Jays and not the Rangers, maybe that would affect NWO or Meller or whatever MRAs live in Texas xD)
Yup! But don’t worry, and build the shelters and remain calm, stop worrying and love the bomb!
The infinite energy will power us to the MRA STARS!
THIS x100000
and it just exposes their biases too, because who could be MORE deserving than a white guy?!? and how DARE a woman of equal or more qualification usurp his rightful position in that field!
Lol. Citation absolutely needed.
You know, if men are actually in average better suited biologically to do math, I don’t mind if the day where all sexism is dead we end up with 40 women for 60 men. In the mean time, there is a huge need of fighting sexism.
“who could be MORE deserving than a white guy”
Probably a younger thiner more masculine white guy.
”
You know, if men are actually in average better suited biologically to do math, I don’t mind if the day where all sexism is dead we end up with 40 women for 60 men. In the mean time, there is a huge need of fighting sexism.”
That’s exactly how I feel. If it sorts out that way, fine. But let it sort out, don’t just scream that it already has.
Men are not better suited biologically for math though. This has been debunked over and over again. I’m so sick of people perpetuating this stereotype, it’s why many girls don’t even bother with math. Not saying you are perpetuating this Kyrie, just overall.
http://io9.com/5867401/there-really-is-no-difference-between-men-and-womens-math-abilities
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100105112303.htm
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/06/090601182655.htm
oh and another about spatial abilities:
Nurture affects gender differences in spatial abilities http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2011/08/19/1015182108
unfortunately you need to create an account to read it, but sociological images covered it as well http://thesocietypages.org/socimages/2011/10/25/sex-society-and-spatial-ability/
I once took a spatial test as part of an assessment and according to the tester who did them as a matter of regularity got the fastest time they’d ever seen. I am, therefore, a unicorn or something. Although I suspect people looking to explain it away will go right to my autism for extra punch. IRRELEVANT! LADY HAS ONE OF THOSE “EXTREME MALE BRAINS”
>>>Radiophobia and opposition to nuclear technology are far problematic than feminism and women’s liberation.
Nuclear energy is an inefficient method of energy production that has never been commercially viable. It only serves as a mean for a few corporations to syphon off taxpayer money in subsidies from the government (which is the only thing keeping those power plants profitable). The entire policy of the United States government towards nuclear energy is the result of a PR push by the DoD to stamp out anti-nuclear sentiments. The only useful purpose of nuclear energy is warfare, and while it’s not something the experts from the federal government will admit publicly (as it would be detrimental to their PR efforts), they are clearly aware of that fact given their reactions to Iran’s own nuclear ambitions.
that’s awesome zhinxy…getting the fastest time that is, not their sexist surprise at your result ._.
Quackers – Well, its an interesting thing, too. Until I was told I had what apparently are freakishly exceptional spatial skills, I would have just assumed mine were average, and to tell you the truth, probably would have, without thinking about it, assumed mine were average “FOR A WOMAN” – Whereas if I was a guy with actual average or below average spatial reasoning, I might have assumed mine was average FOR A MAN, and therefore better than women I encountered. These things are important in your measure of your own talents and abilities.
Of course Quackers, I completely agree. It was just “if I’m very wrong and every credible study I’ve read of heard of is wrong or lying”
Which reminds me of a study a while ago, about the performing of boys and girls in the classroom depending of the way the subject is presented.
Let’s see I can find it back…
Ok, here it is (older than I thought, 2001): “Geometry Versus Drawing: Changing the Meaning of the Task as a Means to Change Performance ”
http://www.springerlink.com/content/xg58062qw2933m18/
Basically, when they told the class it was math, specifically geometry, the boys performed better; when they said it was a drawing exercise (while being the same as the above) boys and girls had the same average results.
When confirmation bias meet sexism – and what it’s like to do science as a female, in 10 words -
http://xkcd.com/385/
Ah… Thanks for reminding me why I love… and hate… arguing around here. There are a lot of very smart people here who are good at reasoning. But, then they simply turn around and start mocking people and presenting one ad-hominem after another. It gets very frustrating when you are attempting to have a discussion. Protip: Manipulating another person’s emotions is not an argument.
Tell me, was this the same thread that you and your friends said that a Drupal hacker who claims that she has never experienced sexism in technology was being unreasonable in saying that?
Um… Are you even trying to understand my argument? This is such a strawman.
Plus, we all know that the real villains are the NinjaPirateCommieLawierNaziZombieRobots from the Marians Trench.
. There are a lot of very smart people here who are good at reasoning. But, then they simply turn around and start mocking people and presenting one ad-hominem after another. It gets very frustrating when you are attempting to have a discussion. Protip: Manipulating another person’s emotions is not an argument.
Well, this is more a mocking site than a serious debate site, dude. People just barging in with a list of arguments, and then acting like everybody is suddenly involved in formal debate with them, and needs to act like it, is a special kind of trolling. It’s basically, Now! I declare you must answer my points to my satisfaction now! With the tone of my choosing! Dance for me! Dance!
Oh, sorry, I mean, WHY ARE YOU NOT DEBATING ME FAIRLY AND LOGICALLY?!!!!
Shorter zhinxy…
Pro-tip – please note the manboobz.com tagline.
“Misogyny. I mock it.”
There are a lot of very smart people here who are good at reasoning. But, then they simply turn around and start mocking people and presenting one ad-hominem after another. It gets very frustrating when you are attempting to have a discussion. Protip: Manipulating another person’s emotions is not an argument.
He sounds so CONCERNED doesn’t he? xD And ttlly not trying to guilt, manipulate or nething XD “There are a lot of smart people who are good at reasoning, you can DO BETTER” is ttlly not manipulating emotions xD
Neways, so to clarify… Dev guy is upset because this is a debate? o_O What are we debating? He should let us at least know the point he’s debating and provide his evidence then. :3
We should at least know when we’re doing a random debate encounter. FIGHTITEMRUN!
Also Zhinxy, he’s ttlly ignoring your “what about x people in history that didn’t get the training despite obvious brilliance?” Thing I notice too XD So much for debate.
I’m sure he considered that an ad-hominem too. xD
There’s actually A LOT of good faith debating by the MBZers here… o_o The trolls always have this narrative of “I COME HERE LOOKING FOR DEBATE AND YOU GUYS ARE SO SMART BUT WHEN I START WINNING YOU ALWAYS END UP WITH THE AD HOMS” thing tho XD Actually usually it goes that MBZers debate, and show evidence and ask for evidence, and the troll slips and slides and dodges and evades and talks in generalities but refuses to address questions to clarify, or points or nething… and then when ppl laugh at that and point it out, then it’s YOU DON’T WANT A SERIOUS DEBATE! XD
Kinda like what’s going on now!
So okay… Dev Guy vs Zhinxy round one?
I’ll ref. :] What’s the debate topic and what are the rules? :3
I’ve always been interested in why trolls show up, if they’re trying to convince us of something, like affect us and change our minds. Cuz if they do, they certainly never seem to really try. They don’t have evidence, they have vague claims, and they’re very dodgy when asked what specifically they want us to believe, and to elaborate. o_O
Honestly, as I’ve said before. I’m pretty sure the trolls just come here because they want a fight. Like not a debate, a fight. No troll is here to debate honestly, or affect our opinions, or change minds, or convince us to fight on their side and become allies to the MRA cause. They’re here because they don’t like that we’re mocking them, and they want to make us mad, angry, confused and upset XD Or just to frustrate us… they’re party crashers, and while many of them might believe some of the stuff they say, they aren’t here to debate that, and usually they haven’t really come to any of their conclusions through evidence, but it’s stuff they know they can derail and fight about. They know this is a mockery site, and they want to dampen the fun and turn the tables (or at least in their fantasy scenarios xD ) and thus we get the people we do, who say things, and claim things and etc etc but don’t want to hash it out XD
So, how are you folks better than the “feministz are destroying the western civilizationz” crowd that you mock again? Or, for that matter, better than trolls?
Damnit, got ninjed.
You aren’t sure of anything I’m thinking or feeling. How on earth would you know?
I’ll go ahead and answer that specific case right now. You are talking about a case from the 18th century. Are you telling me that modern society is no different? That everything from industrialization to woman’s liberation have had no effect? I fail to see how this is an example of sexism in the industry or academia today.
Nice bit of profiling here… So, remind me how you are reading my mind again?
Dev: You keep saying that women are inferior. You say it can be, “trained around” but even that language says the women in question need extra help/to be worked around, to get them to even equivalant ability.
Re Title IX, the issue isn’t (and never has been) “quotas”, and that article doesn’t say quotas. It says a compliance study is being authorised, perhaps even mandated, to make sure the disparities aren’t the result of discrimination.
Athletics are, by the way, a red herring in the issue. Schools are not prohibited from having male athletics. Nor are they required to let women into any sport. What they are required to do is spend an equal amount of money. This means that schools with footbal programs have a problem, because football is hideously expensive.
So, because they want to keep football they cut other sports (which, like tennis, or fencing, or even baseball, allow far more students to participate), and blame it on Title IX, when in fact they have made monetary decisions (1: to accept federal funding, which has known requirements, 2: to spend tens/hundreds of millions of dollars on one sport, which has only a small number of students taking part).
And you aren’t being honest in your debate. You accuse people of engaging in ad hominem, and engage in it.
When Ami talked about trolls in general you 1: pretended it was specifically about you, and 2: didn’t address the points but said, “Nice bit of profiling here… So, remind me how you are reading my mind again?, as if that invaldidated the argument put forth.
Which is the definition of ad hominem.
AU CONTRAIRE! It is extremely efficient. Thanks to eco/media-hype inducing anti-nuclear hysteria, the US government has put a moratorium on the nuclear industry so no more nuclear power plants can be built. Why do computer scientists pretend to know anything about physics?
In fact, nuclear energy could be made even more efficient, along with much safer and controllable, with gas core reactors that use a *magnetic bottle* to contain the resulting plasma(much like the Tokamak rings used for fusion research).
It is wind power is what is truly inefficient and so much so that it isn’t economically viable on its own and requires massive government subsidies.