Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Engineering a Better Future for Girls | Grammarly

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by Angelica View Post
    My understanding is that it's a "non-profit government and community service" and raises funds thru charity and government grants.
    They aim to assist disadvantaged communities, but it reminds me of the report I once read where they were saying how much it was needed to help Hispanic girls. then hidden down on the third page in a foot note was the fact that the only demographic more disadvantaged was ... Hispanic boys... ?!
    So why just focus on the girls, don' the disadvantaged boys need equal opportunities?
    No, not according to feminism; although, to be fair, they usually say "not yet".
    By their politics, men's problems are a result of women's problems, which are a result of men's bad behaviour.
    So, you fix men's problems by fixing women's problems - and that means: all of them - before you start on men's problems.
    Which is their way of saying that men's problems will and should always be the last and least of priorities. Making sure men stay at the back of the line.
    Oh, and it also makes men's problems men's own fault, of course. Women never do anything wrong, because women never do anything.

    I don't think anybody ever claimed the field belonged to men, it's just that in general men seem to apply in greater numbers.
    Is the presence of boys in tech that scary to aspiring female stem-ologists, or is there some other reason why women don't choose it as often?
    This is where the last item above comes in handy.
    Since women are never to blame, they can't have been doing wrong. Ergo, someone else must have been doing wrong.
    Since it's not women, it must be men. So ... yes, they make women "feel unwelcome", i.e. no one makes sure there's fresh flowers at their desk every day.

    M

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by dubs View Post
      You miss the forest for the trees.
      You think your shtick is a forest.

      From my post I think you gather that "men are like this, women are like that, westerners good, muzzies bad, etc etc." in other words you think I'm just rattling off alot of stereotypes and cultural assumptions, jumping from conclusion to conclusion.
      Bravo. Exactly. Very well put.

      And you're saying that, "You know I kind of agree with you but you should back this up with data so we can discuss how to tweak and make it better."
      Yeah...no... No.
      I don't kinda agree with you, although I sometimes find ome of your criticisms well formulated.
      Yes, I think you should back this up with data, because, to quote a famous social thinker whose name shall not be spoken, if things were as they appeared on the surface, there would be no need for science.
      But not to engage enyone in tweaking and bettering. This is, after all, a mere forum, a gathering pool for armchair activists, nothing more.

      When what I'm really doing is criticising the underlying systems.
      Oh, I know, but this criticism is built on your particular worldview, and it is this which is the sum and resting place of that "lot of stereotypes and cultural assumptions" which you mention.
      That's precisely my point. Your conclusions aren't nearly as interesting as the thinking. The conclusions other people get to agree or disagree with. The thinking, the data, the process
      is that which allows other people top make up their own minds. Conclusions is just preaching, missionary work, conversion. Good luck with that.

      The two-income economy that presumes we must monetize women. Materialism and "individualism" which constrain greatness, beauty and exceptionalism and turn everybody into a twitter-posting "individualist" who all look and act exactly the same, posting photos of their shitty vacations, their shitty pets, their shitty selfies, "this is a photo of my boobs/cock from work" ad nauseum.

      It's all garbage, all of it, "we're all unique snowflakes just like everybody else" and all we need to do is tweak some stat, diddle some bits, and this will supposedly make life "better." Crime will go down by %0.00012 but it will all be the same depressing boring shit, the commodification of the human spirit into an economic equation, a carbon footprint, a tax statistic, that if we just turn a few mothers into computer programmers, the economy will gain an extra billion dollars split between Nancy Pelosi and that bug-eyed fuck from Amazon.
      All true, and has been since, say, "Das Kapital" wrt. economy, and Heidegger's "Sein und Zeit" (esp. the chapter on "Das Man"); i.e. you are 150/100 years late to that party which is the Western Cultural Canon, if you share in it.

      "I'm not here to advise social engineers on how to improve child-custody outcomes.
      I'm here to advocate shooting social engineers and burning their shit to the ground."
      "Philosophers have only tried to explain the world. What is required is to change it." Congrats, that's even earlier than "Kapital".

      M


      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Angelica View Post
        when we say "they" who do "we" mean?
        Feminists? The "elected" government? World banking cartel? Multi-national corporations?

        We could question their motives, but the real question is whether it's a desirable development in society.
        Please define "desirable development in society" from the standpoint of multinational corporations.

        This is a disingenupus misrepresentation of STEM.
        The good news is, to be that naïve, you really must be a woman.
        This is not a documentary, this is advertising.
        Advertising is per definition disingenuous misrepresentation.
        Welcome to the 20th Century, and see you soon.

        Why does it even need gendered promotion?
        Some people think so. If they do, would you ban it?

        Let people choose what we feel naturally attracted to and if on average women are more feminine than men, then that's just human nature
        Many people have a problem with the meaning of words like "nature" and "natural", and how we would find out what these are.

        what we don't need is enticing or forcing people into roles they don't actually aspire to
        Most prison inmates would readily agree.

        if U don't like being the "jack ass" then simply stop pulling the cart.
        Nothing is impossible for those who do not have to do it.

        M

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by simpleman View Post

          Yoast SEO plugin for WordPress is free.. and it does measure and recommend how to optimize your documents to score better with google and the so... I think that is a very useful tool...
          Probably, but Google score =/= style. What score do you think Google would give James Joyce?

          I guess they should create a tool that also correct the errors on the videos...


          You know, don't you, about the "human touch" button from .... was it Yamaha? - on their electric piano?

          M

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Mifune View Post

            I really don't understand why so many women just eat up flattery that from my position looks condescending.
            Come to think of it, that's very true. They're capable of spinning entire novellas when analysing innocuous remarks like "Pass the salt, dear", but that faculty seems incapacitated by compliments.
            Perhaps narcissism works that way, everything that feeds it must be true.

            I think I posted about a International Women's Day email that my company sent out once, and I just can't understand why women who fight for equality think that getting something (in this case recognition / validation) that nobody else gets is a sign of equality.
            Perhaps narcissism works that way, everything that feeds it must be true.

            M

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Mifune View Post
              I really don't understand why so many women just eat up flattery that from my position looks condescending.
              Because that's the natural polarity of their gender.

              They're not about being equal, they're about "feeeeeling" equal, "being made equaaaal," "beeeeing included."

              "Real" men defer to women socially and give them advantages.

              And in doing so they demonstrate what a complete badass they are.

              That "look at me, I am a man who is so powerful that I can afford to give away my power to women."

              And that is male polarity. Abundance. Confidence. Aptitude.

              All of the above is the heteronormative mating dance.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                You think your shtick is a forest.
                Well no, my schtick is the universe.

                I'm just refering you to the forest at this time.

                Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                Oh, I know, but this criticism is built on your particular worldview, and it is this which is the sum and resting place of that "lot of stereotypes and cultural assumptions" which you mention.
                That's precisely my point. Your conclusions aren't nearly as interesting as the thinking. The conclusions other people get to agree or disagree with. The thinking, the data, the process
                is that which allows other people top make up their own minds. Conclusions is just preaching, missionary work, conversion. Good luck with that.
                I'm alot less politically egalitarian than you think I am.

                Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                All true, and has been since, say, "Das Kapital" wrt. economy, and Heidegger's "Sein und Zeit" (esp. the chapter on "Das Man"); i.e. you are 150/100 years late to that party which is the Western Cultural Canon, if you share in it.
                You marxists are so cuuuuute I could pinch your chubby cheeks.

                "It's all about money and power, who gets it and how it's distributed."

                Fair and Good Enough are dialectic enemies.

                Fair is for dreamers and fuckups, almost like a cult or religion. "Make it faaaaair." "Classless society."

                Good Enough is for people who smelt the piss in the alleyway and realize that gigabit ethernet and KFC is as good as it's gonna get.

                People have a tendency to overturn Good Enough to "make it more fair" and it drags everybody straight to hell.

                Revolutionary Marxism says, "Let's take over the country by force comrades! Then vee vill make it more fair!"

                Cultural Marxism says, "Vee don't have to do that, comrades. Let us slowly change the culture from inside to make it more fair!"

                But the "higher consciousness of proletarian solidarity" that they're banking on never occurs, so it turns into a shitshow of gulags, murder and looting.

                And then it's back to "Good Enough" for a while.

                This then is the life cycle of nations and empires.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                  Please define "desirable development in society" from the standpoint of multinational corporations.
                  ...
                  Corporations don't have feelings or desires. They are emotionless machines with mechanical goals and objectives based on profit... not the kind of entity we should accept as presiding over human society.

                  IMO it is false advertising through misrepresentation.

                  I see parallels with things like whiteribbon, that only care about gendered violence against women.
                  It's like charities that collect for breast cancer while ignoring prostate cancer
                  It's like female-only short lists and "diversity" quotas, that override merit .
                  If it's sexual discrmination.
                  So yes, I would say ban it, or in any case, I definitely won't support it.

                  Janice Fiammengo made an excellent video on the topic of "equality" in STEM just the other day.
                  One that I wholeheartedly agree with, (I don't side with the alleged pro-trans lobby).

                  ~~~ PEr aRDUa ad asTrA ~~~
                  (through adversity to the stars)

                  Comment


                  • #24

                    Multiculturalism results in mental retardation.

                    Step 1. Put a bunch of diverse people together into one society
                    Step 2. Watch them battle for primacy as to the social and cultural context of that society.
                    Step 3. When that doesn't work, or when one side gets too strong, they start invading "science" and "medicine" to try to redefine reality according to its respective host culture.

                    This is not only interracial, it is also intra-racial.

                    For example "Western Civ" is a conglomeration of social and cultural assumptions that evolved to become acceptable to the people of Europe after much infighting and bickering (similar to what SJW/Progs do today.)

                    SJW/Prog is a non-European (primarily Asiatic) conglomorate of social and cultural assumptions competing for primacy in an increasingly divserse "Western Civ."

                    For example when you look at Russia, China, Iran, Israel/Judea, Muslims etc etc that's all in Asia.

                    Asiatic = SJW/Prog
                    European = "Western Civ" ----> evolving into -----> "Globalist Civ" (struggling to incorporate the SJW/Prog dialectic into its paradigm for universal acceptance.)

                    I admit that the left side of the spectrum has some valid points that are not, technically, wrong.

                    For example yeah sex/gender is more of a sliding scale than an either/or, that makes sense to me just as a layman. People have varying levels of hormones that control their social behaviors. Some guys are more "manly" and some women are more bitchy and hystrionic.

                    But does that break the harmony of society? Yes it does.

                    Is it unncessarily and splitting hairs? Yes it is.

                    Very broadly people can be categorized as male or female at birth.

                    Can they be cateogrized at birth within a scintilla of their socio-sexual "happy place" no.

                    Someone with a penis might be happy to live as a woman.

                    That is a socio-sexual reality, not a biological, medical or scientific reality, very broadly he was born male and also very broadly his blood and his bones will have a marked tendency towards male dimorphism.

                    The only reason people are even splitting hairs about it is because most people in the Western Civ global culture are not HAPPY with their role, they are not HAPPY with the net result of a globalist multicultural society.

                    Humans were meant to live in small groups, small tribes, small villages and only gradually evolve.

                    In the last 200 years there have been MAJOR changes to the way humans have to live and almost none of them are happy about it.

                    200,000 years of semi-static very glacial changes, and then 200 years of going from cowboys on horseback striding thru empty plains, to a sort of cyberpunk dystopian society, where the women are men, the men are women, and the children are FBI agents.

                    It's a shock to the system.

                    It's like WW3 on a social level. Cultural warfare. Gender dark ages.

                    Because now we have to reconcile the entire planet and all of its myriad cultures and civilizations into a single, universally acceptable paradigm.

                    I think eventually, once the shock wears off, things will become semi-normal for a long time, society will be pretty progressive, and then gradually, gradually, a sort of universally-accepted Tradcon culture will blanket the whole thing and clamp down on the monkey business.

                    According to the alt-right, globalism is bad.

                    According to me, globalism is bad but inevitable.

                    It's going to happen one way or another, and it does suck and it is going to suck. Alot.

                    Our challenge as humans is to simply try to be patient with one another, to try to be forgiving with one another.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by dubs View Post

                      Well no, my schtick is the universe.
                      Yes, yes, we get that your shtick is your universe. That's exactly the problem.

                      I'm alot less politically egalitarian than you think I am.
                      It's not about that, it's about your writing style.



                      You marxists
                      Marxists? Where?


                      M

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Angelica View Post
                        Corporations don't have feelings or desires.
                        No, but their CEOs have them. Perhaps not very humane feelings and desires, but feelings and desires nonetheless.


                        ... emotionless machines with mechanical goals and objectives based on profit... not the kind of entity we should accept as presiding over human society
                        On that we can agree.


                        IMO it is false advertising through misrepresentation.
                        ... So yes, I would say ban it, or in any case, I definitely won't support it. ]
                        Aye, there's the rub.
                        You want to ban activism for people who are activists on behalf of ideals and values you do not share, or even disagree with?
                        To me, that's one of the things I don't like about feminists and the regressive part of the left (which, regrettably, now seems to be the majority, at least in the US).

                        If people want to be activists for girls in STEM, let them, I say; as long as everyone gets to be activists for their own causes, and the legislators keep off activism.

                        M

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by dubs View Post
                          According to me, globalism is bad but inevitable.

                          It's going to happen one way or another, and it does suck and it is going to suck. Alot.

                          Our challenge as humans is to simply try to be patient with one another, to try to be forgiving with one another.
                          Althoug I totally agree with EVERYTHING you say, I disagree with the conclusion.
                          Balkanization and diversification will transcend any attempt to super impose homogeneity.
                          People have an innate need to belong and just being cattle on the globalist animal farm isn't going to satisfy anyone, but the farmers.
                          Don't be defeatist dubs ... mother Nature (God if U wish) won't allow it.
                          How else could U explain "the origin of species"?
                          Last edited by Angelica; 02-08-2019, 06:24 AM.
                          ~~~ PEr aRDUa ad asTrA ~~~
                          (through adversity to the stars)

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Manalysis View Post
                            Aye, there's the rub.
                            You want to ban activism for people who are activists on behalf of ideals and values you do not share, or even disagree with?
                            To me, that's one of the things I don't like about feminists and the regressive part of the left (which, regrettably, now seems to be the majority, at least in the US).

                            If people want to be activists for girls in STEM, let them, I say; as long as everyone gets to be activists for their own causes, and the legislators keep off activism.
                            Activism is a sign of a greater ill.

                            It says, "These two people should not be living in the same country/society."

                            You only get "activism" when you have to shoehorn pigs and horses into the same farm, then the pigs become corn activists and the horses become oat activists.

                            "Female egalitarian" societies are WASP cultures.

                            Very individualistic, not family oriented, everyone is on their own, so they have to make women "equal."

                            They also do "chivalry" and pearl-clutching fainting damsels.

                            Feminism = WASP culture

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by dubs View Post
                              Activism is a sign of a greater ill.
                              Right, the so-called democracy.

                              You only get "activism" when you have to shoehorn pigs and horses into the same farm, then the pigs become corn activists and the horses become oat activists.
                              Right, so-called "politics".
                              Which you get whenever government has to be negotiated as a compromise between two or more groups of varying interests and preferences, no matter the issue.
                              PoliSci 101.

                              "Female egalitarian" societies are WASP cultures
                              Right, inasmuch as it is something a society can afford when it has a huge surplus, so much that people escape the limitations imposed by nature.
                              The Age of Affluence, and all that.
                              Econ 101.

                              And those would typically be Western nations; like, there's plenty of feminist equality in e.g. Spain, a land of White Hispanic Catholics.
                              History 101.

                              Elevating the elementary to profundity.
                              Rhetoric 101.

                              M

                              Comment


                              • #30

                                Well Democracy is a shitshow in and of itself.

                                In a normal country, democracy is about "should we fund schools or the fire brigade."

                                In a retarded country like the US, democracy is about "should we have borders or not."

                                In other words the "two groups" aren't even members of the same country but competing ethno-tribal coalitions.

                                US is kinda like Israel except the white people don't have the same tribal solidarity as Jews to defend themselves as a people.

                                Non-whites are trying to escape their shithole countries so they're viscious, it's a matter of life and death.

                                Most white countries aren't prepared for that kind of onslaught.

                                And then you have Jews who act white, pretend to be white, but most of them are playing for the other team.

                                TL;DR - Most of the planet is collaborating to make white people extinct, and after they do so they will turn on each other and there won't be quiet white guys to pay the taxes, it'll just descend into barbarism for everybody that's left.

                                I don't think any of that is preventable, I think it's only a matter of time.

                                White people were too kind and too dumb to make war while they had the upper hand.

                                The other peoples of the Earth will not be as kind or as dumb, they will go for the jugular and always have been.

                                In this world there are wolves and there are sheep.
                                Last edited by dubs; 02-08-2019, 04:09 PM.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X