In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary

#3781

Shatterface wrote:Something makes me think that Muscato will always fall foul of 'tardy policies.

Ladies and gentlemen, welcome the .......weaponised apostrophe!

#3782

Apostrophes are literally killing transpeople.

#3783

This response to Danielle's hilariously tone-deaf tweet about periods brings up an interesting angle. Teachers shouldn't be allowed to rouse penis-possessing students from their desks for any reason, just in case.

#3784

feathers wrote:Apostrophes are literally killing transpeople.

'l'e't's'h'o'p'e's'o'('e'x'c'e'p't'f'o'r'B'l'a'i'r'eW'h'i't'e')'

#3785

Ape+lust wrote:"People with periods."

What we're expected to say so we don't hurt this doof's feelings by implying only women menstruate.

http://imgur.com/RyvQSpz.png

Here's a twist - Muscato is getting dogpiled for this tweet. Liberals, conservatives, SJWs, TERFs, shitlords... they're all unhappy with him. Go figure.

https://twitter.com/DanielleMuscato/sta ... 0247293952

That is a pretty epic dogpile. Yet will Danny boy learn? I doubt it. He's dumber than a sack of hammers.

#3786

This is absolutely hilarious. As I understand it, this Sarahah is a new messaging system that is completely anonymous. You send the recipient your message and they have no way of knowing who you are. They have no way to reply to you.

If you were thinking that this is the perfect social media app for perpetual victim Danielle Muscato, you would be right.

#3787

The Google doc criticizing Google's diversity initiatives have really hit the mainstream press. The articles are as biased and one-sided as one might expect.

http://www.businessinsider.com/google-e ... oar-2017-8

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ul/536052/

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/08/06/ ... execs.html

#3788

WMDKitty-survivor is a dingbat.

Avatar
abear • 2 days ago
Nowadays feminists love to see women wearing burqas and conservative bigots don't like it. I guess the next cool feminist thing will be rejoicing over women being kept prisoner in their own home only being allowed out with a male relative escorting them. By the way, chances are pretty good that burqa wearing women and their male owners think that western women show too much flesh and have too much freedom, that they look and act like like impure prostitutes.
2
•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 2 days ago
What the actual fuck are you even talking about?
1
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • 2 days ago
So you are pro burqa WMDK? I always thought you were somewhat eccentric but didn't think you were unaware of toxic patriarchy in Islam.
Maybe I was wrong to think you were a genuine feminist. :-(

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
rubaxter abear • a day ago
Wow, what a bigot.

People only behave as YOU think they should, like they're all peg figures in your personal PlaySkool Bus?
1
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear rubaxter • a day ago
I have a right to not like seeing women treated like cattle or worse. When you see women wearing burqas it pretty much always is involuntary and means the woman wearing it is a third class human that is property of males and also signals there are people among us that think that it is a woman's duty to not get raped by covering her naughty bits, like arms, legs, hair, everything. You know, real rape culture.
Of course I am a bigot for not thinking the values of the Taliban are swell like open minded progressives rubaxter and WMDKitty.
Why do you hate women?
1
•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 19 hours ago
You're obviously a troll.

Once again, I'm pro-wear-what-you-want. If someone wants to wear a burqa, it's no skin off my nose.

You, on the other hand, are trying to dictate what women are allowed to wear.

•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • 18 hours ago
I am the one that is in favor of having women wear what they want and not have them pressured into wearing tents. I and others have been making the point that these women are being pressured or forced to wear these oppressive demeaning garments. You are falsely accusing me of trying to dictate what women wear when I am doing the opposite meanwhile falsely stating that by submitting to this oppressive custom they are "choosing" for themselves what to wear.
I'm guessing you are from a white privileged background where you wouldn't get shunned, beaten, jailed, or worse like your muslima sisters for not wearing a tent.
Ironic that you apparently support their oppression by falsely claiming these women "choose" to wear burqas, then falsely accuse me of being the one trying to dictate to these women.
The only troll here is you it seems. So there.

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 14 hours ago
Checked your posting history -- you're obviously either a troll or a sockpuppet of a known troll. 26 posts, ALL of them calling actual feminists "woman haters".
2
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 14 hours ago
Like I said, WEAR WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.

You're anti-feminist and trying to smear me by playing "who's the real feminist" and imply that I somehow "support" oppression and patriarchy.

It won't work.

PS: Last time I ran into your sorry ass, you were advocating for the enslavement of women to non-sentient blobs of tissue. You're no feminist, you're just a nasty little troll.

•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • an hour ago
That is slanderous. I have always advocated for abortion rights. Where did I ever say what you are accusing me of saying?
For that matter, you have accused me of saying I wanted to dictate what women wear. Show me where I said this. You are either mixing me up with someone else or imagining things.
If you truly believe "wear whatever you want" then we are in agreement. I don't understand then why you are attacking me for saying I don't like seeing women forced to wear burqas.

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 2 days ago
I'm pro "wear whatever the fuck you want as long as you're comfortable".

#3789

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:The Google doc criticizing Google's diversity initiatives have really hit the mainstream press. The articles are as biased and one-sided as one might expect.

http://www.businessinsider.com/google-e ... oar-2017-8

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/ ... ul/536052/

http://www.foxnews.com/tech/2017/08/06/ ... execs.html

Over at the Guardian...

On Twitter, women in the tech industry called for Google to take action. Brianna Wu, a US-based software engineer, asked who was going to be fired over the manifesto,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... s-backlash

#3790

InfraRedBucket wrote:Over at the Guardian...

On Twitter, women in the tech industry called for Google to take action. Brianna Wu, a US-based software engineer, asked who was going to be fired over the manifesto,

Stop-calling-her-a-software-engineer-f-f-s! All we've ever seen from her is one frickin' iOS game which has been under redevelopment for PC platforms since 2014! Jeez. No wonder these people fight the meritocracy tooth and nail; if you have no merits, you must.

#3791

feathers wrote:
InfraRedBucket wrote:Over at the Guardian...

On Twitter, women in the tech industry called for Google to take action. Brianna Wu, a US-based software engineer, asked who was going to be fired over the manifesto,

Stop-calling-her-a-software-engineer-f-f-s! All we've ever seen from her is one frickin' iOS game which has been under redevelopment for PC platforms since 2014! Jeez. No wonder these people fight the meritocracy tooth and nail; if you have no merits, you must.

The reason she hasn't more is because manbaby engineers have been standing in the way because they can't handle a beautiful talented woman make it in "their" world. :ugeek:

#3792

feathers wrote:Apostrophes are literally killing transpeople.

My preferred personal apostrophe is ^

#3793

Matt Cavanaugh wrote:
feathers wrote:Apostrophes are literally killing transpeople.
My preferred personal apostrophe is ^

Don't try circumflecting the issue.

#3794

Careful or you might get your diphthong stuck in an umlaut.

#3795

Won't happen, I'm too busy struggling with transitive verbs who find it imperative to become conjugated.

#3796

Well I went to see Dunkirk today.

I'm no expert on the battle but it seemed to give a good depiction of events from the British point of view - concentrating on the experiences of a few soldiers in particular.

They mentioned 400,000 soldiers as the number needing to be rescued - but the recreation did not give that impression - despite a couple of spitfire-eye view fly overs.

And it almost seemed to need a warning 'No Nazi's were harmed in the events depicted in this film' as the only evidence of any Germans being in the vicinity were the planes, and a shot at the end where there was a group of soldiers out of focus in the background.

Still, I did not expect it to be the last word on the subject - and it was well worth seeing - if only for the authentic small boats and aircraft (some of which were the originals there at the time).

#3797

The most frustrating thing about the google furore, is that whoever wrote the document seems (to me) to genuinely care about both google and the underlying issues. It's a commentary on the implementation of something and not an attack on women.

#3798

The most frustrating thing about the google furore, is that whoever wrote the document seems (to me) to genuinely care about both google and the underlying issues. It's a commentary on the implementation of something and not an attack on women.

#3799

free thoughtpolice wrote:WMDKitty-survivor is a dingbat.

Avatar
abear • 2 days ago
Nowadays feminists love to see women wearing burqas and conservative bigots don't like it. I guess the next cool feminist thing will be rejoicing over women being kept prisoner in their own home only being allowed out with a male relative escorting them. By the way, chances are pretty good that burqa wearing women and their male owners think that western women show too much flesh and have too much freedom, that they look and act like like impure prostitutes.
2
•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 2 days ago
What the actual fuck are you even talking about?
1
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • 2 days ago
So you are pro burqa WMDK? I always thought you were somewhat eccentric but didn't think you were unaware of toxic patriarchy in Islam.
Maybe I was wrong to think you were a genuine feminist. :-(

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
rubaxter abear • a day ago
Wow, what a bigot.

People only behave as YOU think they should, like they're all peg figures in your personal PlaySkool Bus?
1
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear rubaxter • a day ago
I have a right to not like seeing women treated like cattle or worse. When you see women wearing burqas it pretty much always is involuntary and means the woman wearing it is a third class human that is property of males and also signals there are people among us that think that it is a woman's duty to not get raped by covering her naughty bits, like arms, legs, hair, everything. You know, real rape culture.
Of course I am a bigot for not thinking the values of the Taliban are swell like open minded progressives rubaxter and WMDKitty.
Why do you hate women?
1
•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 19 hours ago
You're obviously a troll.

Once again, I'm pro-wear-what-you-want. If someone wants to wear a burqa, it's no skin off my nose.

You, on the other hand, are trying to dictate what women are allowed to wear.

•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • 18 hours ago
I am the one that is in favor of having women wear what they want and not have them pressured into wearing tents. I and others have been making the point that these women are being pressured or forced to wear these oppressive demeaning garments. You are falsely accusing me of trying to dictate what women wear when I am doing the opposite meanwhile falsely stating that by submitting to this oppressive custom they are "choosing" for themselves what to wear.
I'm guessing you are from a white privileged background where you wouldn't get shunned, beaten, jailed, or worse like your muslima sisters for not wearing a tent.
Ironic that you apparently support their oppression by falsely claiming these women "choose" to wear burqas, then falsely accuse me of being the one trying to dictate to these women.
The only troll here is you it seems. So there.

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 14 hours ago
Checked your posting history -- you're obviously either a troll or a sockpuppet of a known troll. 26 posts, ALL of them calling actual feminists "woman haters".
2
•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 14 hours ago
Like I said, WEAR WHATEVER THE FUCK YOU WANT.

You're anti-feminist and trying to smear me by playing "who's the real feminist" and imply that I somehow "support" oppression and patriarchy.

It won't work.

PS: Last time I ran into your sorry ass, you were advocating for the enslavement of women to non-sentient blobs of tissue. You're no feminist, you're just a nasty little troll.

•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
abear WMDKitty -- Survivor • an hour ago
That is slanderous. I have always advocated for abortion rights. Where did I ever say what you are accusing me of saying?
For that matter, you have accused me of saying I wanted to dictate what women wear. Show me where I said this. You are either mixing me up with someone else or imagining things.
If you truly believe "wear whatever you want" then we are in agreement. I don't understand then why you are attacking me for saying I don't like seeing women forced to wear burqas.

•Edit•Reply•Share ›
Avatar
WMDKitty -- Survivor abear • 2 days ago
I'm pro "wear whatever the fuck you want as long as you're comfortable".

I find it hard to conceive of someone who thinks slutwalks are good (ie wear what you want; it's not your fault whatever happens as a result) who also thinks that women must be covered up to prevent their menfolk from being tormented into berserker-rape (you can't show any bare skin or men will go crazy.) There is a logical disconnect between those two stances - unless you assume in a rather racist fashion that middle-eastern men are incapable of the self-control that western men are expected to exercise no matter what they see.
How does this Kitty person manage to believe both at once? Has she overdosed on Charles Lutwidge Dodgson?

#3800

ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
MacGruberKnows wrote:
Quit. Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Friend took a sheet metal course years ago. Top three in the class. A woman and a native indian were picked by the local airline company - Air Canada in Vancouver - and they were near the bottom of the class, the top three in the class - all white males - were not hired. Well, the joke - if you can call airline safety, cause sheet metal repairs on airliners is all about safety - is on the PC company. My friend was hired by a company that does nothing but fix Boeing 737's. And the company only hires the best, which is almost always a white male. A lot of the best talent - white males - left the PC airline company with it's better pay and benefits because they could not stand the PC nonsense and watching hacks being hired and promoted above them and went to the same company my friend works at. Bottom line, the company my friend works at is now the best company in the world for fixing 737's. The PC airline company? LOL! The manager has experienced white guys checking over all of the work done by the PC idiot hires. The place is now so inefficient that said PC company is now sourcing out repairs to place like where my friend works. Where the professional white guys work. White guys are assholes. But they do keep planes from falling out of the sky.

There is a reason why the private company my friend works at can make a profit from fixing those old planes and a nonsensical gov't subsidized PC correct POS shit company like Air Canada cannot.
Jesus, I thought South Africa was flushing itself down the bog. Turns out the ANC were visionaries ahead of their time. Now if you Canadians could just up the level of corruption and crime a bit you'd be just about caught up. You already seem to have the nepotism levels to challenge for the crown. You must be so proud to have a fine leader like Justin representing you on the world stage, but we still have you beat there. Our limpet has ascended to heights of shamelessness which I don't think Justin can hope to emulate.

I got news for you about Canukistan. We here are proud and bask in our moral superiority to the Merricans. That is one of our defining national characteristics.

You might think that we have an inferiority complex. That is because our politicians do. You can tell because they are always babbling about some aspect of Canukistan being "world class".

Like Toronto being a "world class" city. World class this. World class that. While the audience squirms in embarrassment at how gauche said "world classs" political is. But of course no one says it. Because that would not be nice.

So naturally, Merricans think we have an inferiority complex because we like our politicians to be not too smart and aware of it. It makes them easier to manage.

And that is why we have a fine head of hair for our PM whilst you guys have Trump.

BTW another defining characteristic of a normal Canukistan is envy. But that is the topic of another post.

#3801

AndrewV69 wrote:(For those of you who want to know what the problem is with Vox, read this :Charles Murray is once again peddling junk science about race and IQ. Agenda much? OK so the headline has poisoned the well, as well as smearing Murray. Now read the article. Basically they agree with Murray. Yep. Go on and read it. See for yourself. Do not take my word on it.

Vox wrote:The new DNA-based science has also led to an ironic discovery: Virtually none of the complex human qualities that have been shown to be heritable are associated with a single determinative gene! There are no “genes for” IQ in any but the very weakest sense.

Well, yes, if they were determined by a single gene they would probably not be complex traits in the first place :doh:

"DNA-based science" has also discovered that the bacterial flagellum isn't associated with a single determinative gene. Checkmate, evolutiontits!

#3802

AndrewV69 wrote:
ThreeFlangedJavis wrote:
MacGruberKnows wrote:
<snip>

There is a reason why the private company my friend works at can make a profit from fixing those old planes and a nonsensical gov't subsidized PC correct POS shit company like Air Canada cannot.
Jesus, I thought South Africa was flushing itself down the bog. Turns out the ANC were visionaries ahead of their time. ... Our limpet has ascended to heights of shamelessness which I don't think Justin can hope to emulate.
I got news for you about Canukistan. We here are proud and bask in our moral superiority to the Merricans. That is one of our defining national characteristics.
<snip>
BTW another defining characteristic of a normal Canukistan is envy. But that is the topic of another post.

Shhh - don't let the cat out of the bag ;-) But somewhat apropos of which:

Boosterism: During the expansion of the American and Canadian West, boosterism became epidemic as the leaders and owners of small towns made extravagant predictions for their settlement, in the hope of attracting more residents and, not coincidentally, inflating the prices of local real estate.

The 1871 humorous speech The Untold Delights of Duluth, delivered by Democratic U.S. Representative J. Proctor Knott, lampooned boosterism. Boosterism is also a major theme of two novels by Sinclair Lewis—Main Street (published 1920) and Babbitt (1922). As indicated by an editorial that Lewis wrote in 1908 entitled "The Needful Knocker", boosting was the opposite of knocking. The editorial explained:
The booster's enthusiasm is the motive force which builds up our American cities. Granted. But the hated knocker's jibes are the check necessary to guide that force. In summary then, we do not wish to knock the booster, but we certainly do wish to boost the knocker.

Your "jibes" are certainly a necessary corrective, some useful feedback, but do try not to go overboard ... ;-)

#3803

windy wrote:
AndrewV69 wrote:(For those of you who want to know what the problem is with Vox, read this :Charles Murray is once again peddling junk science about race and IQ. Agenda much? OK so the headline has poisoned the well, as well as smearing Murray. Now read the article. Basically they agree with Murray. Yep. Go on and read it. See for yourself. Do not take my word on it.

Vox wrote:The new DNA-based science has also led to an ironic discovery: Virtually none of the complex human qualities that have been shown to be heritable are associated with a single determinative gene! There are no “genes for” IQ in any but the very weakest sense.
Well, yes, if they were determined by a single gene they would probably not be complex traits in the first place :doh:

"DNA-based science" has also discovered that the bacterial flagellum isn't associated with a single determinative gene. Checkmate, evolutiontits!

Blank Slatism is the Creationism of the Left.

#3804

Murray takes the heritability of intelligence as evidence that it is an essential inborn quality...

Umm, that would go with being heritable.

... passed in the genes from parents to children with little modification by environmental factors.

Murray never claimed there was but "little" environmental influence.

Heritability is not a special property of certain traits that have turned out to be genetic; it is a description of the human condition, according to which we are born with certain biological realities that play out in complex ways in concert with environmental factors, and are affected by chance events throughout our lives.

What da fuq???

Merriam-Webster wrote:heritability:
the proportion of observed variation in a particular trait (such as height) that can be attributed to inherited genetic factors in contrast to environmental ones

#3805

Screwtape wrote:

I find it hard to conceive of someone who thinks slutwalks are good (ie wear what you want; it's not your fault whatever happens as a result) who also thinks that women must be covered up to prevent their menfolk from being tormented into berserker-rape (you can't show any bare skin or men will go crazy.) There is a logical disconnect between those two stances - unless you assume in a rather racist fashion that middle-eastern men are incapable of the self-control that western men are expected to exercise no matter what they see.
How does this Kitty person manage to believe both at once? Has she overdosed on Charles Lutwidge Dodgson?

The cognitive dissonance must be terrifying. They have brainwashed themselves into thinking that white cis-het males are the cause of all evil in the universe. When western males condemn the mistreatment of women in islamic culture, it is them that are the baddies. The baboons still recall the monstrous sin Dawkins committed with the "Dear Muslima" letter.
When "abear" criticized the burka WMDKitty and her goofy friend went into full attack mode claiming I was a bigot that wanted to force women to wear the clothes I approved of, the exact opposite of my sentiment, then claimed that I was an antiabortion type. Apparently a hallucination because I have never said anything of the sort, even in my full troll mode.
It's almost as if they are worried that muslimas will steal their victim points and they will have to hang their heads and admit to having :o privilege! Of course, when ex-muslim women like Ayaan Hirsi Ali come forward they accuse them of being islamophobic nazis.
Alice in wonderland indeed.

#3806

Wmdkitty is a fucking regressive shitstain cunt. Oh, and a known liar as well.

#3807

free thoughtpolice wrote:The cognitive dissonance must be terrifying. They have brainwashed themselves into thinking that white cis-het males are the cause of all evil in the universe. When western males condemn the mistreatment of women in islamic culture, it is them that are the baddies. The baboons still recall the monstrous sin Dawkins committed with the "Dear Muslima" letter.
When "abear" criticized the burka WMDKitty and her goofy friend went into full attack mode claiming I was a bigot that wanted to force women to wear the clothes I approved of, the exact opposite of my sentiment, then claimed that I was an antiabortion type. Apparently a hallucination because I have never said anything of the sort, even in my full troll mode.
It's almost as if they are worried that muslimas will steal their victim points and they will have to hang their heads and admit to having :o privilege! Of course, when ex-muslim women like Ayaan Hirsi Ali come forward they accuse them of being islamophobic nazis.
Alice in wonderland indeed.

Recently an article in Al-Jazeera accused the YPG of being imperialistic for defending gay people from ISIS and other Salafi militias, and also accused the Westerners concerned with ISIS of being imperialists, colonialists and bigots who are only using gay rights to bash poor people of color.

#3808

WMDKitty was one of those who supported the anonymous accusation of sexual harassment towards Bill Nye.

#3809

WMDKitty was one of those who supported the anonymous accusation of sexual harassment towards Bill Nye.

#3810

Looks like in his big paper that everyone cites, Turkheimer fudged to hide genetic links to intelligence among blacks:
http://humanvarieties.org/2014/03/24/ab ... mer-et-al/

He also declares as Verboten even contemplating all but the most trivial of genetic racial differences:

Why don’t we accept racial stereotypes as reasonable hypotheses, okay to consider until they have been scientifically proven false? They are offensive precisely because they violate our intuition about the balance between innateness and self-determination of the moral and cultural qualities of human beings.

https://www.cato-unbound.org/2007/11/21 ... er/race-iq

#3811

Kirbmarc wrote:WMDKitty was one of those who supported the anonymous accusation of sexual harassment towards Bill Nye.

Apparently the weapon in WMD is weaponized slander.

#3812

free thoughtpolice wrote:WMDKitty-survivor is a dingbat.

Avatar
abear • 2 days ago
Nowadays feminists love to see women wearing burqas and conservative bigots don't like it. I guess the next cool feminist thing will be rejoicing over women being kept prisoner in their own home only being allowed out with a male relative escorting them. By the way, chances are pretty good that burqa wearing women and their male owners think that western women show too much flesh and have too much freedom, that they look and act like like impure prostitutes. ...

Linky? Don't be shy, man! Let us all attempt to correct the errors of zir ways! SlymePit full court press! ;-)

Probably Patheos, although I couldn't find any of the phrases with Google search, at least several hours ago. But I'm finding Patheos less and less worth the effort, what with all of the adverts.

#3813

InfraRedBucket wrote: <snip>

Over at the Guardian...

On Twitter, women in the tech industry called for Google to take action. Brianna Wu, a US-based software engineer, asked who was going to be fired over the manifesto,

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/ ... s-backlash

Yeah.

https://twitter.com/YeyoZa/status/894120837565091841

#3814

Really? wrote:This is absolutely hilarious. As I understand it, this Sarahah is a new messaging system that is completely anonymous. You send the recipient your message and they have no way of knowing who you are. They have no way to reply to you.

If you were thinking that this is the perfect social media app for perpetual victim Danielle Muscato, you would be right.

Pity Dave hasn't looked up the dictionary definition of 'anonymous'....

https://twitter.com/DanielleMuscato/sta ... 1613961216

:puke-huge:

#3815

Been posting on forums that auto-recognise tweets, forgot to move back to the last century here....

#3816

Here you go Steers. Maybe you could give her some anger management tips.
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyat ... qus_thread

#3817

DrokkIt wrote:The most frustrating thing about the google furore, is that whoever wrote the document seems (to me) to genuinely care about both google and the underlying issues. It's a commentary on the implementation of something and not an attack on women.

You aren't interpreting the document correctly. You need to put on your problematic reading glasses to see what it really says:

#3818

Should we really continue to support Planned Parenthood? They claim to be about women's reproductive health, but...

In new guidelines issued on the official Planned Parenthood website, the federally subsidized corporation explains how parents should talk to their pre-schoolers about gender roles, sexuality, masturbation, and transgenderism, even offering tips on how to tell if your toddler "is transgender or gender nonconforming."

Filling the head of your three-year-old child who thought he was a dinosaur last week with confusing messages about sex and gender?

What could possibly go wrong.

The site also explains that not all boys have penises and not all girls have vulvas. "You can say that most girls have vulvas and most boys have penises/testicles," suggest the guidelines.

"While the most simple answer is that girls have vulvas and boys have penises/testicles, that answer isn’t true for every boy and girl. Boy, girl, man, and woman are words that describe gender identity, and some people with the gender identities 'boy' or 'man' have vulvas, and some with the gender identity 'girl' or 'woman' have penises/testicles. Your genitals don’t make you a boy or a girl," says the site.

http://www.dailywire.com/news/18969/pla ... tigiacomo#

At this point, I'm going to say that if you get pregnant, man or woman, pay for your own abortion or pay for the kid yourself. I'm done.

#3819

KenD wrote:
DrokkIt wrote:The most frustrating thing about the google furore, is that whoever wrote the document seems (to me) to genuinely care about both google and the underlying issues. It's a commentary on the implementation of something and not an attack on women.
You aren't interpreting the document correctly. You need to put on your problematic reading glasses to see what it really says:

The answer is clear: if a person only got a position because of race or gender and didn't qualify on their own merits, then no. They don't belong.

#3820

Steven Pinker mentioned a couple of times that the apprehensions he had before publishing The Blank Slate didn't materialized. They sure showed up for that #GoogleManifesto dude. For many, the fact he is totally or in part scientifically wrong is ipso facto a reasonable argument for his termination. Moreso than just 'reasonable', it comes after all with 'well deserved' outrage that i would expect when someone get away with murder. For others, and too many for my taste, the crime is in the strawman. How could you argue against the strawman? He is horrible, a clear sexist man who openly state that women are inferior to men when it comes to tech and on top of that, he's anti-diversity. One logical conclusion to this anti-diversity rant is that the strawman is most probably a racist too. Its weird seeing people agreeing with each other while having totally different strawmen. One is arguing against George the other against Richard and they both agree that Richard George Heisenberg is horrible.

Im pretty much desensitize to someone on the internet being wrong, but im still sensible to journalistic articles in popular media. They all have been horrible (except one). Several, again too many for my taste, were clearly reporting on Richard George Heisenberg and not the #GoogleManifesto dude himself. How come? It's impossible they didn't read the manifesto, im sure they did, it would be uncharitable to think otherwise and i genuinely believe they did anyway. It's a good thing we still live in a world where being scientifically wrong is rarely a mater of termination. It's not exactly getting better but we still live in this world today, for the time being.

*originally a twitter thread

#3821

Really? wrote:http://www.dailywire.com/news/18969/pla ... tigiacomo#
At this point, I'm going to say that if you get pregnant, man or woman, pay for your own abortion or pay for the kid yourself. I'm done.

Are there any other groups that does the same work/legal battles as Planned Parenthood but won't hound you on the phone endlessly after you make a donation for more, and keeps their focus on pro choice rights?

I want to support the cause. I just can't handle the harassment and their mission creep.

#3822

deLurch wrote:
Really? wrote:http://www.dailywire.com/news/18969/pla ... tigiacomo#
At this point, I'm going to say that if you get pregnant, man or woman, pay for your own abortion or pay for the kid yourself. I'm done.
Are there any other groups that does the same work/legal battles as Planned Parenthood but won't hound you on the phone endlessly after you make a donation for more, and keeps their focus on pro choice rights?

I want to support the cause. I just can't handle the harassment and their mission creep.

Sad to say, the FTB-type shit has taken me away from "the cause." Why should Scott Peterson spend longer in jail because he killed his wife and a fetus if his dead wife could have killed that same fetus with no consequences the day before? Or that morning? Either that clump of cells is a clump of cells or a baby. Can't be both and neither at the same time.

#3823

Really? wrote:Sad to say, the FTB-type shit has taken me away from "the cause." Why should Scott Peterson spend longer in jail because he killed his wife and a fetus if his dead wife could have killed that same fetus with no consequences the day before? Or that morning? Either that clump of cells is a clump of cells or a baby. Can't be both and neither at the same time.

Late term abortions are incredibly rare, and essentially boil down to significant and sever medical issues.

All of the dickering around with rights to late term abortions boils down to either side trying to either make sure the needle on the political rights issue isn't eroded. Kind of the any issue having to do with guns is a bitter fight. That and the medical professionals who are compassionate enough to do that work don't need any more harassment or threats of jail time for making the right medical choice.

Also makes me wonder how many Right-to-Life proponents are also gun rights advocates.

#3824

I was attempting to take a picture of the smoky skies here and inadvertently caught a time space anamoly.

SAM_4922.JPG: (1.53 MiB) Downloaded 157 times

#3825

As a side note, I really do think it is a shame that all of this SJW craziness is pushing people away and burning them out from supporting causes they used to think were important.

#3826

deLurch wrote:As a side note, I really do think it is a shame that all of this SJW craziness is pushing people away and burning them out from supporting causes they used to think were important.

It's nearly come to the point where if you support most "charged" causes, you must be all in. People seem to be either all SJW or all Alt-Right Trumpette, and if you're not, you'll be defined shortly by people who disagree with you to one extreme or the other. Fuck that noise. Hopefully it will die down, or there will be a massive die-off that takes the idiots. The Slymepit is one of the more reasonable places around, and that can't be a good sign. :P

#3827

deLurch wrote:
Really? wrote:Sad to say, the FTB-type shit has taken me away from "the cause." Why should Scott Peterson spend longer in jail because he killed his wife and a fetus if his dead wife could have killed that same fetus with no consequences the day before? Or that morning? Either that clump of cells is a clump of cells or a baby. Can't be both and neither at the same time.
Late term abortions are incredibly rare, and essentially boil down to significant and sever medical issues.

All of the dickering around with rights to late term abortions boils down to either side trying to either make sure the needle on the political rights issue isn't eroded. Kind of the any issue having to do with guns is a bitter fight. That and the medical professionals who are compassionate enough to do that work don't need any more harassment or threats of jail time for making the right medical choice.

Also makes me wonder how many Right-to-Life proponents are also gun rights advocates.

I think the argument is from "viability of the fetus." Laci was eight months pregnant, apparently, but now we're down to viability in the second trimester.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_viability

The infographic on this page features interesting wording: "59% of women obtaining abortion are mothers." It's not 100%? 100% of sperm-producing humans who impregnate uterus-possessing humans are held to account.

As you can expect, the abortion rules are nearly as byzantine as the age of consent rules. (But women are seldom "held to account" for these laws, just as most age of consent hassles are visited upon men.)

https://www.guttmacher.org/state-policy ... -abortions

I am trying to figure out how I feel about the issue. The left is making it difficult.

#3828

pro-boxing-fan wrote:Steven Pinker mentioned a couple of times that the apprehensions he had before publishing The Blank Slate didn't materialized. They sure showed up for that #GoogleManifesto dude. For many, the fact he is totally or in part scientifically wrong is ipso facto a reasonable argument for his termination. Moreso than just 'reasonable', it comes after all with 'well deserved' outrage that i would expect when someone get away with murder. *SNIP*

Any time Meyers and his crew begin calling for termination of employment over some internet bullshit that happened to offend some malicious little cunt like Brianna Wu, I am reminded of to things:

1) Meyers's dream that his University lecture hall be flooded, so that he might do various things with his students while underwater.

2) Meyers's brutally sexist roast of Michelle Bachman, whose crime was to eat a State Fair corndog in a way which excited Meyers's pitiful wiener.

Meyers has somehow had lots of "second chances" to reform his white, old, cis-het, dude opinions, which he and The Herd so strongly deny to others.

http://i.imgur.com/HIzYQR2.png

#3829

DrokkIt wrote:The most frustrating thing about the google furore, is that whoever wrote the document seems (to me) to genuinely care about both google and the underlying issues. It's a commentary on the implementation of something and not an attack on women.

It's identity politics. We aren't individuals, just cogs. An perception of one applies to all.

#3830

Science Break.

Shrinking Bat DNA and Elastic Genomes
https://www.quantamagazine.org/shrinkin ... -20170801/

#3831

Link fail.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/shrinkin ... -20170801/

#3832

I have found an amusing alt-right tradthot account to follow. Their approach to Jews, however, ruins an otherwise exemplary weltanschauung.

#3833

deLurch wrote:Link fail.

https://www.quantamagazine.org/shrinkin ... -20170801/

I'm not sure that PZ can authorize this science.

Take an onion. Slice it very thin. Thinner than paper thin: single-cell thin. Then dip a slice in a succession of chemical baths cooked up to stain DNA. The dyed strands should appear in radiant magenta — the fingerprints of life’s instructions as vivid as rose petals on a marital bed. Now you can count how much DNA there is in each cell. It’s simply a matter of volume and density. A computer can flash the answer in seconds: 17 picograms. That’s about 16 billion base pairs — the molecular links of a DNA chain.

The (((author))) seems to suggest there is some sort connection between DNA and biology...

#3834

I would be interested in hearing from some of our newbies to this den of iniquity, e.g. FormerSJW and Queer-Heathen.

#3835

Really? wrote:This is absolutely hilarious. As I understand it, this Sarahah is a new messaging system that is completely anonymous. You send the recipient your message and they have no way of knowing who you are. They have no way to reply to you.

If you were thinking that this is the perfect social media app for perpetual victim Danielle Muscato, you would be right.

That is hilarious, except I think it might be the bottle of Scope for Danielle. The bottle of Scope refers to a George Carlin routine about an unstable person receiving a free sample bottle of Scope in the mail when the guy needed just one more thing to push him over the edge to insanity.

#3836

How long before the EU Panzer divisions roll east?

#3837

Hubby has house in Alaska that he rents out. I took a good look at if a few days ago and the lot is huge. He could easily build another house on it. I'm thinking a duplex and get three times the rent. I brought up the idea and he's for it, but only if I build it. I'm okay as a home handyman, but can I build a house? A duplex? Any suggestions?

#3838

pro-boxing-fan wrote:Steven Pinker mentioned a couple of times that the apprehensions he had before publishing The Blank Slate didn't materialized. They sure showed up for that #GoogleManifesto dude. For many, the fact he is totally or in part scientifically wrong is ipso facto a reasonable argument for his termination. Moreso than just 'reasonable', it comes after all with 'well deserved' outrage that i would expect when someone get away with murder. For others, and too many for my taste, the crime is in the strawman. How could you argue against the strawman? He is horrible, a clear sexist man who openly state that women are inferior to men when it comes to tech and on top of that, he's anti-diversity. One logical conclusion to this anti-diversity rant is that the strawman is most probably a racist too. Its weird seeing people agreeing with each other while having totally different strawmen. One is arguing against George the other against Richard and they both agree that Richard George Heisenberg is horrible.

Im pretty much desensitize to someone on the internet being wrong, but im still sensible to journalistic articles in popular media. They all have been horrible (except one). Several, again too many for my taste, were clearly reporting on Richard George Heisenberg and not the #GoogleManifesto dude himself. How come? It's impossible they didn't read the manifesto, im sure they did, it would be uncharitable to think otherwise and i genuinely believe they did anyway. It's a good thing we still live in a world where being scientifically wrong is rarely a mater of termination. It's not exactly getting better but we still live in this world today, for the time being.

*originally a twitter thread

It's even worse than that. The "manifesto" isn't against evidence-based diversity, or arguing that discrimination doesn't exist. It's simply arguing against the system of quotas and initiatives that Google uses, which he says is counterproductive to the company and to a healthy approach to diversity based on individual abilities and preferences rather than on identity politics:

Note, I’m not saying that all men differ from women in the following ways or that these differences are “just.” I’m simply stating that the distribution of preferences and abilities of men and women differ in part due to biological causes and that these differences may explain why we don’t see equal representation of women in tech and leadership. Many of these differences are small and there’s significant overlap between men and women, so you can’t say anything about an individual given these population level distributions.

In other words: plenty of women are excellent programmers, but maybe the reason why there aren't as many women who go into programming as men isn't just discrimination, but due to some AVERAGE biological differences.

To make a non-controversial example: women are, ON AVERAGE, shorter than men. This is simply a fact of nature. However this doesn't mean that tall women don't exist, or "aren't real women", or that short men don't exist, or "aren't real men".

If you select people for passing a height threshold you're going to end up with more men than woman, and the higher the threshold is the lower the percentage of women among those that you have chosen will be.

Note that contrary to what a social constructionist would argue, research suggests that “greater nation-level gender equality leads to psychological dissimilarity in men’s and women’s personality traits.” Because as “society becomes more prosperous and more egalitarian, innate dispositional differences between men and women have more space to develop and the gap that exists between men and women in their personality becomes wider.” We need to stop assuming that gender gaps imply sexism.

This is actually TRUE. It's called "the paradox of gender equality". In Scandinavian countries, where gender discrimination is severely punished and gender equality is strictly enforced women TEND to prefer subjects that have more to do with people skills, aesthetics, more room for higher agree-ability and lower requirements of assertiveness and of stress. Again, this is a matter of AVERAGES.

However it's interesting to know that in countries where gender equality is much lower, like Iran or Azerbaigian, more women study STEM subjects than in the gender-equal Scandinavian countries. There are many possible reasons for this: less non-STEM subjects available, more pressure on finding degrees that lead to a better-paying job in a poorer society, more desire for economic independence from women in countries where their social perspectives are limited, etc.

It's not entirely clear why the paradox happens, but it's real, and it does suggest that some AVERAGE preferences might be a matter of sexual dimorphism rather than of social construction.

But wait, there's more! The author of the "manifesto" goes on to recommend some Non-Discriminatory Measures to reduce the gender gap:

-Women on average show a higher interest in people and men in things

-We can make software engineering more people-oriented with pair programming and more collaboration. Unfortunately, there may be limits to how people-oriented certain roles and Google can be and we shouldn’t deceive ourselves or students into thinking otherwise (some of our programs to get female students into coding might be doing this).

-Women on average are more cooperative

-Allow those exhibiting cooperative behavior to thrive. Recent updates to Perf may be doing this to an extent, but maybe there’s more we can do. This doesn’t mean that we should remove all competitiveness from Google. Competitiveness and self reliance can be valuable traits and we shouldn’t necessarily disadvantage those that have them, like what’s been done in education. Women on average are more prone to anxiety. Make tech and leadership less stressful. Google already partly does this with its many stress reduction courses and benefits.

-Women on average look for more work-life balance while men have a higher drive for status on average

-Unfortunately, as long as tech and leadership remain high status, lucrative careers, men may disproportionately want to be in them. Allowing and truly endorsing (as part of our culture) part time work though can keep more women in tech.

-The male gender role is currently inflexible

-Feminism has made great progress in freeing women from the female gender role, but men are still very much tied to the male gender role. If we, as a society, allow men to be more “feminine,” then the gender gap will shrink, although probably because men will leave tech and leadership for traditionally feminine roles.

Truly this is the work of rampant misogynist :bjarte:

And look at those recommendations. Nazism! Nazism, I tell you!

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DGiUpVmXoAAn-aW.jpg:large

I've yet to find any serious, not Po-Mo/narrative based research that suggests that the author of the "manifesto" was FACTUALLY wrong. And there's nothing MORALLY wrong in his "screed". Hell, he even recommends ways to REDUCE the gender gap and PRAISES feminism.

I'm starting to suspect that the reason for the hysterical reaction from the media and the CTRL-left in general is that the "manifesto" is actually more right than wrong, and that it undermines their most cherished dogmas, like the idea that ALL differences between genders are "a social construct" and that all you need are quotas and indoctrination to "dismantle the Patriarchy".

Lastly, Google is run by a bunch of hypocrites:

Note how while they whine about "promoting diversity as one of our values", 69% of their entire workforce (which includes tech and non-tech jobs) is made up by men. It's also interesting to note that only 4% of their workforce is black, but a whopping 35% is Asian. That's very "unrepresentative" when compared to the US average population of 12% Non-Hispanic Black and only 4,7% of Non-Hispanic Asians.

It's almost as if deep down companies care more about being efficient in order to make money than about "diversity", but are careful never to say this out loud, or even whisper it, or just suggest that the current "diversity" policies are flawed, in order to avoid the social media shitstorm to follow.

#3839

In 2017 saying that women and men are on average biologically different is blasphemy. Sexual dimorphism is the work of ~~Satan~~ the Patriarchy.

#3840

Kirbmarc wrote:In 2017 saying that women and men are on average biologically different is blasphemy. Sexual dimorphism is the work of ~~Satan~~ the Patriarchy.

And pointing any of this out is ~~the temptation of the Devil~~ gaslighting.