In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Anjuli Pandavar has another piece up, this time about the difference between criticizing islam and criticizing muslims. She points out rather sensibly that muslims should not entirely be free from criticism. The last few articles have gotten no comments- it looks like her critics have given up on trying to educate her on the error of her islamophobic ways.
http://archive.is/pfCTd
http://archive.is/pfCTd
-
- .
- Posts: 5429
- Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 10:32 am
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
You're talking about that lady's nose, right?rayshul wrote:I thought that was Australia then I realised I'm fucking retarded
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Apropos of the "Google Manifesto", interesting post up at Quora by an evolutionary biologist who thinks the "document is, overall, despicable trash" - as Daffy Duck might have said. The TL;DR, particularly for those with serious time constraints:
Still looks like the author, one "Suzanne Sadedin, Ph.D.(Evolutionary biology); BA(Psych); BSc(Hons; Zoology)", has her thumb on the scales but a closer reading would be required to see if that holds water or not. Somewhat apropos of which, a fairly comprehensive summary over at Heterodox Academy by Stevens & Haidt which comes to a rather different conclusion, although they seem to agree on a core element of the "Manifesto":This is an interesting document, one that has taken a lot of energy from a lot of people I know over the last few days. When I first read it, some parts seemed very reasonable. And some parts still do, like this conclusion:To an evolutionary biologist, the idea that sex differences are purely socially constructed is simply implausible. And the necessity of facing up to this is something I’ve talked about as well.Once we acknowledge that not all differences are socially constructed or due to discrimination, we open our eyes to a more accurate view of the human condition which is necessary if we actually want to solve problems.
That said, the argument in the document is, overall, despicable trash.
TL;DR: Yes, men and women are biologically different — which doesn’t mean what the author thinks it does. The article perniciously misrepresents the nature and significance of known sex differences to advance what appears to be a covert alt-right agenda. ....
However, somewhat offhand, while I agree that too many try to make too much unwarranted hay out of the claim "women are less qualified" - a somewhat reasonable conclusion based on a superficial understanding of population distributions, I kind of think that Stevens & Haidt are trying to impose too much of a disconnect "between ability and interest". Seems rather clear that having an interest in a topic is generally a necessary precursor to developing an extensive ability in applying the associated tools and concepts. Apropos of which, a quote from the chapter on gender in Pinker's Blank Slate:The research findings are complicated, as you can see from the many abstracts containing both red and green text, and from the presence on both sides of the debate of some of the top researchers in psychology. Nonetheless, we think that the situation can be greatly clarified by distinguishing abilities from interests. ....
Our verdict on Damore’s memo: Damore is correct that there are “population level differences in distributions” of traits that are likely to be relevant for understanding gender gaps at Google. Even if we set aside all questions about the origins of these differences, the fact remains that there are gender differences in a variety of traits, and especially in interest/enjoyment (rather than ability) in the adult population from which Google and all other tech firms recruit.
This distinction between ability and interest is extremely important because it may lay to rest one of the main fears raised by Damore’s critics: that the memo itself will cause Google employees to assume that women are less qualified, or less “suited” for tech jobs, and will therefore lead to more bias against women in tech jobs. But the empirical evidence we have reviewed should have the opposite effect. Population differences in interest may be part of the explanation for why there are fewer women in the applicant pool, but the women who choose to enter the pool are just as capable as the larger number of men in the pool. This conclusion does not deny that various forms of bias, harassment, and discouragement exist and contribute to outcome disparities, nor does it imply that the differences in interest are biologically fixed and cannot be changed in future generations. ....
Indeed. Not at all implausible that even small differences in interest, through the magic of feedback, can have a significant impact on abilities, and on the population sizes, by sex, of individuals in the pool of prospective employees.But there is something odd in these stories about negative messages, hidden barriers, and gender prejudices. The way ofscience is to layout every hypothesis that could account for a phenomenon and to eliminate all but the
correct one. Scientists prize the ability to think up alternative explanations, and proponents of a hypothesis are expected to refute even the unlikely ones. Nonetheless, discussions of the leaky pipeline in science rarely even mention an alternative to the theory ofbarriers and bias. One ofthe rare exceptions was a sidebar to a 2000 story in Science, which quoted from a presentation at the National Academy of Engineering by the social scientist Patti Hausman:An eminent woman engineer in the audience immediately denounced her analysis as "pseudoscience." But Linda Gottfredson, an expert in the literature on vocational preferences, pointed out that Hausman had the data on her side: "On average, women are more interested in dealing with people and men with things:' Vocational tests also show that boys are more interested in "realistic:' "theoretical:' and "investigative" pursuits, and girls more interested in "artistic" and "social" pursuits.The question of why more women don't choose careers in engineering has a rather obvious answer: Because they don't want to. "Wherever you go, you will find females far less likely than males to see what is so fascinating about ohms, carburetors, or quarks. Reinventing the .curriculum will not make me more interested in learning how my dishwasher works.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
She definitely has a point about Islam not being just an ideology but a system of social, cultural and family institutions in muslim-majority countries and Muslim ghettos in the "west".free thoughtpolice wrote:Anjuli Pandavar has another piece up, this time about the difference between criticizing islam and criticizing muslims. She points out rather sensibly that muslims should not entirely be free from criticism. The last few articles have gotten no comments- it looks like her critics have given up on trying to educate her on the error of her islamophobic ways.
http://archive.is/pfCTd
This is one of the reasons why ghettoization is something you strongly discourage, not encourage. Muslim identity politics are more often than not instruments of power for pious or simply average Muslims in their ghettos against the "deviants".
Leftists who support honour brigade hijabis or people "proud to be Muslims" are actually throwing more modern and liberal people living in muslim communities under the bus.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Is this case well known?
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
I was an intersex child who had surgery. Don't put other kids through this.
Kimberly Mascott Zieselman, Opinion contributor
Doctors and parents are doing irreversible harm solely due to discomfort with difference. We are erased before we can even tell them who we are.
I was born with typically “male” XY chromosomes and internal testes instead of ovaries and a uterus, but my body developed to appear typically female.
My intersex condition was invisible until I reached puberty and failed to menstruate like other girls. On the advice of doctors at a major hospital, my parents agreed that I should have surgery to remove my healthy gonads, without my knowledge or consent.
My natural hormone production ceased, and I was forced onto hormone replacement therapy for the rest of my life. I was just 15. Doctors also recommended to my parents that I receive invasive surgery to create a more “typically” sized vagina — thankfully, my parents refused. I didn’t find out about any of this until I was 41 years old.
Intersex people like me — up to 1.7% of the population — are born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical definitions of male or female. I have androgen insensitivity syndrome. Because my body was resistant to androgens, including testosterone, in the womb, my natural hormones automatically converted into estrogen through a process called aromatization.
Intersex people have been the last bastion of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” with doctors commonly telling parents for many years that the best thing they could do for their children was to have surgery done, even when they are infants, so they can grow up “normal.”
These and other surgeries have been commonly performed on intersex children in the USA since the 1960s. But in the 1990s, intersex adults began speaking out against these non-consensual and medically unnecessary procedures because of their lifelong physical and psychological consequences.
Despite decades of controversy over the procedures, doctors continue to operate on children’s gonads, internal sex organs and genitals when the kids are too young to participate in the decision — even though the surgeries are dangerous and could be safely deferred. It’s rare that urgent health considerations require immediate surgical intervention. The results of these cosmetic surgeries are often catastrophic and the supposed benefits largely unproven.
As executive director of interACT, the nation’s only organization dedicated exclusively to protecting the legal and human rights of intersex youth, I am thrilled that since interACT’s founding in 2006, we have seen progress from medical associations — but not enough, and not nearly quickly enough.
It’s not time for more data collection or dialogue; it’s time for these surgeries to stop.
I know firsthand the devastating impact they can have, not just on our bodies but on our souls. We are erased before we can even tell our doctors who we are. Every human rights organization that has considered this practice has condemned it, some even to the point of recognizing it as akin to torture.
We know that most physicians want to do the right thing for their patients, just as parents want to do the right thing for their children. The right thing, unequivocally, is to wait until an intersex person can participate in these life-altering decisions. The right thing is to afford them the same dignity and autonomy that is due to everyone — and refrain from inflicting irreversible harm solely because of a discomfort with difference.
...
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
She's also right that islam inhibits integration, slows down education and promotes attitudes which are antitethical to social, economical and cultural progress, especially within muslim ghettos. The Hirsi Ali quote is enlightening in this respect, especially in this part:Kirbmarc wrote:She definitely has a point about Islam not being just an ideology but a system of social, cultural and family institutions in muslim-majority countries and Muslim ghettos in the "west".free thoughtpolice wrote:Anjuli Pandavar has another piece up, this time about the difference between criticizing islam and criticizing muslims. She points out rather sensibly that muslims should not entirely be free from criticism. The last few articles have gotten no comments- it looks like her critics have given up on trying to educate her on the error of her islamophobic ways.
http://archive.is/pfCTd
This is one of the reasons why ghettoization is something you strongly discourage, not encourage. Muslim identity politics are more often than not instruments of power for pious or simply average Muslims in their ghettos against the "deviants".
Leftists who support honour brigade hijabis or people "proud to be Muslims" are actually throwing more modern and liberal people living in muslim communities under the bus.
This effect is reinforced and made worse by "community leaders" who are the only authority figures within those tiny bubbles.Many Muslims never learned Dutch and rejected Dutch values of tolerance and personal liberty. They married relatives from their home villages and stayed, inside Holland, in their tiny bubble of Morocco or Mogadishu.
The distinction between muslims who flee bad situations and muslims who flee islam itself is also enlightening. I think that many muslim immigrants to the US are cultural and intellectual elites who are, to an extent, fleeing from islam itself. This is especially true for those who highly educated and have fled from theocracies (like many Iranians in the US and their families).
There's a self-selecting effect in those who legally immigrate to the US from the Middle East: they tend to be relatively rich, urban and well educated.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I hadn't heard of this one, but David Reimer is the case study most people point to and has the same moral. His penis was destroyed in a botched circumcision as a child and the decision was made to raise him as a girl, including treatments like HRT. The psychologist behind the case reported it as a success and this contributed to prevailing wisdom that sex differences were malleable. Of course it wasn't a success. Reimer couldn't stand being a female and eventually transitioned back to male. He continued to suffer from depression until committing suicide later in life.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I didn’t find out about any of this until I was 41 years old.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
http://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/ ... 539853001/
Taking hormones all that time and didn't find out about it until 41? I don't buy that specific detail for a second.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Went to Dunkirk last night.
Meh. Probs spoilers.
I guess it worked showing the experiences of 3-4 people we don't really care about; very "muh feelz emo on the beach".
But this approach loses a lot of the relevance of having such an epic backdrop. Because it didn't really engage with the big picture context, it could have worked just as well in an anonymous setting. I would have liked to have seen more of the improv planning, seen inside a Stuka's cockpit as it dived, gotten a feel for the quantity of men taken off the beach, had more than a passing wave at the pressure to make this work to offset any drift to negoatiated peace, seen the rear guard hit the beach then devoid of ships, got a feeling for the air war beyond three spitfires vs single bombers. But I guess all this is what made Bridge too Far the slog it was.
I enjoyed the sound, I enjoyed the snowballing narrative devices, in fact I probably would be very happy if it had been called something other than Dunkirk. It can't hope to have its cake too as a historical and a human story.
Nice that the Navy never broke into:
Meh. Probs spoilers.
I guess it worked showing the experiences of 3-4 people we don't really care about; very "muh feelz emo on the beach".
But this approach loses a lot of the relevance of having such an epic backdrop. Because it didn't really engage with the big picture context, it could have worked just as well in an anonymous setting. I would have liked to have seen more of the improv planning, seen inside a Stuka's cockpit as it dived, gotten a feel for the quantity of men taken off the beach, had more than a passing wave at the pressure to make this work to offset any drift to negoatiated peace, seen the rear guard hit the beach then devoid of ships, got a feeling for the air war beyond three spitfires vs single bombers. But I guess all this is what made Bridge too Far the slog it was.
I enjoyed the sound, I enjoyed the snowballing narrative devices, in fact I probably would be very happy if it had been called something other than Dunkirk. It can't hope to have its cake too as a historical and a human story.
Nice that the Navy never broke into:
And the RAF needed to learn how to bale out and why closing your canopy just before you ditch is poor SOP.One way or another I’m gonna find ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
One way or another I’m gonna win ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Yeah, that does seem odd.
To be really really generous....
To be really really generous....
I can see "any of this" referring solely to the invasive surgery, but it seems odd and poorly edited if that's the case.Doctors also recommended to my parents that I receive invasive surgery to create a more “typically” sized vagina — thankfully, my parents refused. I didn’t find out about any of this until I was 41 years old.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Imagine a 15 year old being told they are intersex and have male gonads and will never be "normal." Stressful time of life. That could be a suicide just waiting to happen. This person's body wasn't reacting to the testosterone that was being produced.jet_lagg wrote:I hadn't heard of this one, but David Reimer is the case study most people point to and has the same moral. His penis was destroyed in a botched circumcision as a child and the decision was made to raise him as a girl, including treatments like HRT. The psychologist behind the case reported it as a success and this contributed to prevailing wisdom that sex differences were malleable. Of course it wasn't a success. Reimer couldn't stand being a female and eventually transitioned back to male. He continued to suffer from depression until committing suicide later in life.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
http://usatoday.com/story/opinion/2017/ ... 539853001/
I guess the big question is if there have been any studies on the directions people go with this to see how it impacts them? A 41 year old wistfully thinking wishing she had more of a choice in the matter.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
But it's perfectly OK to cause irreversible changes in a non-intersex child's body with hormones, probably because a parent didn't get the boy or girl they were hoping for, and certainly no need to wait for those children to reach an age at which they can give 'participate in these life-altering decisions' in a mature fashion.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
I was an intersex child who had surgery. Don't put other kids through this.
Kimberly Mascott Zieselman, Opinion contributor
Doctors and parents are doing irreversible harm solely due to discomfort with difference. We are erased before we can even tell them who we are.
I was born with typically “male” XY chromosomes and internal testes instead of ovaries and a uterus, but my body developed to appear typically female.
My intersex condition was invisible until I reached puberty and failed to menstruate like other girls. On the advice of doctors at a major hospital, my parents agreed that I should have surgery to remove my healthy gonads, without my knowledge or consent.
My natural hormone production ceased, and I was forced onto hormone replacement therapy for the rest of my life. I was just 15. Doctors also recommended to my parents that I receive invasive surgery to create a more “typically” sized vagina — thankfully, my parents refused. I didn’t find out about any of this until I was 41 years old.
Intersex people like me — up to 1.7% of the population — are born with sex characteristics that do not fit typical definitions of male or female. I have androgen insensitivity syndrome. Because my body was resistant to androgens, including testosterone, in the womb, my natural hormones automatically converted into estrogen through a process called aromatization.
Intersex people have been the last bastion of “don’t ask, don’t tell,” with doctors commonly telling parents for many years that the best thing they could do for their children was to have surgery done, even when they are infants, so they can grow up “normal.”
These and other surgeries have been commonly performed on intersex children in the USA since the 1960s. But in the 1990s, intersex adults began speaking out against these non-consensual and medically unnecessary procedures because of their lifelong physical and psychological consequences.
Despite decades of controversy over the procedures, doctors continue to operate on children’s gonads, internal sex organs and genitals when the kids are too young to participate in the decision — even though the surgeries are dangerous and could be safely deferred. It’s rare that urgent health considerations require immediate surgical intervention. The results of these cosmetic surgeries are often catastrophic and the supposed benefits largely unproven.
As executive director of interACT, the nation’s only organization dedicated exclusively to protecting the legal and human rights of intersex youth, I am thrilled that since interACT’s founding in 2006, we have seen progress from medical associations — but not enough, and not nearly quickly enough.
It’s not time for more data collection or dialogue; it’s time for these surgeries to stop.
I know firsthand the devastating impact they can have, not just on our bodies but on our souls. We are erased before we can even tell our doctors who we are. Every human rights organization that has considered this practice has condemned it, some even to the point of recognizing it as akin to torture.
We know that most physicians want to do the right thing for their patients, just as parents want to do the right thing for their children. The right thing, unequivocally, is to wait until an intersex person can participate in these life-altering decisions. The right thing is to afford them the same dignity and autonomy that is due to everyone — and refrain from inflicting irreversible harm solely because of a discomfort with difference.
...
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Another nice comment at Jerry's. I read it as being a bit tongue in cheek:
How would any ad campaign to attract more women than men into tech work, bearing in mind that there are no differences between men and women which could be used to target one group rather than another?
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I was fairly sure they removed healthy gonads from children with AIS because they had a high chance of getting cancerous and fucking them up later. Sort of like lopping off the titties of ladies with the BRCA shit gene.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Reading the new Gamergate book, it has a reference to our own dear, departed Godfrey Elfwick. Goodnight, Sweet Prince!!
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Surely he will return in the latter days. (an Ape+lust rare Godfrey)Lsuoma wrote:Reading the new Gamergate book, it has a reference to our own dear, departed Godfrey Elfwick. Goodnight, Sweet Prince!!
http://imgur.com/Oaw2dBS.jpg
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
This is beautiful
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I was going to say it needed more Oafie, but then I saw the backdrop. It almost gave me PTSD.
Truly, Ape+Lust is a true, true genius.
Truly, Ape+Lust is a true, true genius.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Ape+Lust is a god.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
And as an Atheist, doesn't believe in himself. :(
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Thanks, guys :D
That was a request from Parsehole. Knowing it was going to be Elfwick's Twitter banner made it a sacred task :lol:
That was a request from Parsehole. Knowing it was going to be Elfwick's Twitter banner made it a sacred task :lol:
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Lol, I'll say! Andrew Dice Clay, the humane comedian?Sulman wrote:What i found most interesting about that pile of shit masquerading as writing, was the author's age. She didn't get Wall Street because she wasn't around then. It wasn't celebrated in that sense at all. She has no understanding of what she's writing about...
Comedians immediately pre-dating South Park in the ’70s and ’80s, like Bill Hicks, Andrew “Dice” Clay, and Eddie Murphy, occasionally punched down, but were never 100% offensive for the sake of being offensive.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I thought it gave a unique perspective of the events. It was quite refreshing in a WWII film to see little to no involvement of the Germans. (It almost reminded me of the end of 'The Adventures of Baron Munchasen' )Brive1987 wrote:Went to Dunkirk last night.
Meh. Probs spoilers.
I guess it worked showing the experiences of 3-4 people we don't really care about; very "muh feelz emo on the beach".
But this approach loses a lot of the relevance of having such an epic backdrop. Because it didn't really engage with the big picture context, it could have worked just as well in an anonymous setting. I would have liked to have seen more of the improv planning, seen inside a Stuka's cockpit as it dived, gotten a feel for the quantity of men taken off the beach, had more than a passing wave at the pressure to make this work to offset any drift to negoatiated peace, seen the rear guard hit the beach then devoid of ships, got a feeling for the air war beyond three spitfires vs single bombers. But I guess all this is what made Bridge too Far the slog it was.
I enjoyed the sound, I enjoyed the snowballing narrative devices, in fact I probably would be very happy if it had been called something other than Dunkirk. It can't hope to have its cake too as a historical and a human story.
Nice that the Navy never broke into:
And the RAF needed to learn how to bale out and why closing your canopy just before you ditch is poor SOP.One way or another I’m gonna find ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
One way or another I’m gonna win ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
Boats were good though - I remember going down to Canary Wharf in 2015 (I think) for the 75th anniversary. Every 5 years the current boat owners organise a trip to Dunkirk to commemorate the event.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
For any fellow Hovind fans:
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Lol. Classic Ape.fuzzy wrote:Surely he will return in the latter days. (an Ape+lust rare Godfrey)Lsuoma wrote:Reading the new Gamergate book, it has a reference to our own dear, departed Godfrey Elfwick. Goodnight, Sweet Prince!!
http://imgur.com/Oaw2dBS.jpg
Look at skeezy PZ getting in close on the Manatee, trying to inhale her musty smell to get him erect. Oh, and are those Ofies in the background. Ha ha ha!
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
What the hell does it know? It's just trying to stop parents from giving their three-year-old tomboys the hormones they need to survive. When a three-year-old AFAB person wants to play trucks with their three older brothers, there's only one conclusion: he's a transman.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
I was an intersex child who had surgery. Don't put other kids through this.
snip
...
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I don't know about you, but I remember Mrs. Feltschinger holding my tiny five-year-old hand and telling me I was destined to crush the puss, and I've been obeying her ever since.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
When people say that rejecting biological explanations for human behavior a priori isn't such a big deal I'll ask them to comment on this article. It's a good way to know whether they simply have doubts about the degree of the role played by biology in human behavior (which is a reasonable position to have) or are actually fan of the SocJus Black Slate (not so much).
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Blank Slate, even.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
:nin: :-) Just in the process of reading it, but yeah, the article makes some very good points:Guest_936d3dec wrote: +1 Insightful
Though others would seem to suggest that SJWs are being sadly misinterpreted: https://twitter.com/ShutUpAndrosky/stat ... 2419700736 ;)However, this blogpost isn't really about the memo. It's about the reaction that has done so much to confirm Mr Damore's accusations, a reaction by media and online individuals that has been dishonest, short-sighted and utterly self interested. I'm not going to say it was 'well meaning' as so many have, because frankly I don't think it was. This reaction illustrates what the modern left has become: a rich person's weapon dedicated to destroying the social framework of rights that people struggled generations to put in place. 'Social Justice' is a lie, as anyone who has been paying attention will see that it's always justice for the few, and never for you. For people who actually care about a fair society for all, it's time to walk away. The left is the enemy of the people now. ....
The gist of Mr Damore's memo is not, as others may have told you, that women are no good at tech, or that they are inferior, or whatever. If you read the memo you will see these are lies intended to discredit Mr Damore. His argument is that women are under-represented in computer science because, essentially, most of them don't like it. They prefer to do other things. Men, he argues, are more 'thing' oriented and like to tinker with stuff. Women are more 'people' oriented, and like to be involved in careers that allow them to indulge that interest. Thus, he argues, we should not expect to see a 50/50 split of men and women in tech, and we're not helping the situation by blaming men for 'keeping' women out of tech. ....
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
https://i.imgflip.com/1tz2d8.jpgPhil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Anyone capable of pulling out such a Shakespearean marvel as Orgazmo...Sunder wrote:Fixed.jet_lagg wrote:They're just angry that Trey Parker and Matt Stone skewer liberals as well as conservatives
Not that I give South Park a totally free pass (it was almost a meme for years that they took an aggressively middle of the road position on issue after issue) but I don't get buttpained when they mock my side because I know the mock other sides too. However SJW orthodoxy can tolerate no dissent.
should be bereft of criticism.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
How on earth can one give such surgery to a pubescent teenager without their consent- or even knowledge? Had my parents tried to let me go through any type of surgery, I'd bloody well inquired as to the reasons and projected outcomes.Guest_936d3dec wrote:Is this case well known?
usatoday com/story/opinion/2017/08/09/intersex-children-no-surgery-without-consent-zieselman-column/539853001/
...
My intersex condition was invisible until I reached puberty and failed to menstruate like other girls. On the advice of doctors at a major hospital, my parents agreed that I should have surgery to remove my healthy gonads, without my knowledge or consent.
My natural hormone production ceased, and I was forced onto hormone replacement therapy for the rest of my life. I was just 15. Doctors also recommended to my parents that I receive invasive surgery to create a more “typically” sized vagina — thankfully, my parents refused. I didn’t find out about any of this until I was 41 years old.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
My bold:
Or are you? :shock:
Some way, somehow, I'm glad you're not the doctor having to tell them ;)rayshul wrote:I was fairly sure they removed healthy gonads from children with AIS because they had a high chance of getting cancerous and fucking them up later. Sort of like lopping off the titties of ladies with the BRCA shit gene.
Or are you? :shock:
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
To distinguish this first incarnation from their successor, we could call them "Godfrey I Elfwick of Slymepitte", or perhaps bestow the honour "Godfrey Freiherr von Elfwick".Lsuoma wrote:Reading the new Gamergate book, it has a reference to our own dear, departed Godfrey Elfwick. Goodnight, Sweet Prince!!
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
"What are we having for supper?"fuzzy wrote:http://imgur.com/Oaw2dBS.jpg
"Why, it's Thursday, pigeon and turd of course."
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
There was only one Godfrey Elfwick, the real Godfrey Elfwick, everyone else was just imitating.feathers wrote:To distinguish this first incarnation from their successor, we could call them "Godfrey I Elfwick of Slymepitte", or perhaps bestow the honour "Godfrey Freiherr von Elfwick".Lsuoma wrote:Reading the new Gamergate book, it has a reference to our own dear, departed Godfrey Elfwick. Goodnight, Sweet Prince!!
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
This is a complaint that's always been used throughout time. My parents compared 80s comedians against those from the sixties. The youth nowadays!Ape+lust wrote:Comedians immediately pre-dating South Park in the ’70s and ’80s, like Bill Hicks, Andrew “Dice” Clay, and Eddie Murphy, occasionally punched down, but were never 100% offensive for the sake of being offensive.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Nowadays, I'm more into Canned Ham.Easy J wrote:For any fellow Hovind fans:
[.youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TqEeXDPXiyk[/youtube]
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I don't know, it's hard to put my finger on it but there was definitely something odd about it.MarcusAu wrote:I thought it gave a unique perspective of the events. It was quite refreshing in a WWII film to see little to no involvement of the Germans. (It almost reminded me of the end of 'The Adventures of Baron Munchasen' )Brive1987 wrote:Went to Dunkirk last night.
Meh. Probs spoilers.
I guess it worked showing the experiences of 3-4 people we don't really care about; very "muh feelz emo on the beach".
But this approach loses a lot of the relevance of having such an epic backdrop. Because it didn't really engage with the big picture context, it could have worked just as well in an anonymous setting. I would have liked to have seen more of the improv planning, seen inside a Stuka's cockpit as it dived, gotten a feel for the quantity of men taken off the beach, had more than a passing wave at the pressure to make this work to offset any drift to negoatiated peace, seen the rear guard hit the beach then devoid of ships, got a feeling for the air war beyond three spitfires vs single bombers. But I guess all this is what made Bridge too Far the slog it was.
I enjoyed the sound, I enjoyed the snowballing narrative devices, in fact I probably would be very happy if it had been called something other than Dunkirk. It can't hope to have its cake too as a historical and a human story.
Nice that the Navy never broke into:
And the RAF needed to learn how to bale out and why closing your canopy just before you ditch is poor SOP.One way or another I’m gonna find ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
One way or another I’m gonna win ya
I’m gonna getcha getcha getcha getcha
Boats were good though - I remember going down to Canary Wharf in 2015 (I think) for the 75th anniversary. Every 5 years the current boat owners organise a trip to Dunkirk to commemorate the event.
The funeral like silence at times, the pristine beach, the non linear timeline, the almost claustrophobic intimacy set within the epic, the period colourisation, the modern music, the lack of connection to apparent (structured) military action.
Don't get me wrong.
It was good. As a scensory ride devoid of characters, significant plot and with incidents clearly signalled in advance ("someone stick their head out and see if the wars approaching". [no movement] bang bang).
But odd. :think:
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Good, original thinking. But it doesn't attempt to explain why tech is 80/20 male/female (not that it has to). Slate Star Codex has also noted that the disparity begins by the end of schooling, and therefore couldn't be explained by sexist working conditions. But so, then, what is the answer?Guest_936d3dec wrote: +1 Insightful
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Complaints like this make me want to write something offensive for the sake of being offensive. Like Mohammed fucking a pig in the ass before he gets drunk and roasts the same pig alive to eat it.feathers wrote:This is a complaint that's always been used throughout time. My parents compared 80s comedians against those from the sixties. The youth nowadays!Ape+lust wrote:Comedians immediately pre-dating South Park in the ’70s and ’80s, like Bill Hicks, Andrew “Dice” Clay, and Eddie Murphy, occasionally punched down, but were never 100% offensive for the sake of being offensive.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I'm in good company though:
PeeZie in 2010 wrote:I can’t draw. The only thing I could think of was to sketch out this picture of a hybrid cow-pig.
http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/wp-c ... am-ed.jpeg
It’s Moo-ham-ed. Get it? OK, you’re allowed to groan and close the page.
Would it add to the verisimilitude if I said he was mooing/squealing excitedly at the prospect of raping a 9 year old girl (not shown)? Sharp-eyed observers will also note that Moo-ham-ed is a hermaphrodite, since he also has udders. I just thought that would make it a little more offensive.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I don't know who this person is (yet) but the triggering is profound.
"Where the fuck were you?"
"Where the fuck were you?"
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
"Mr. President, we must not allow a mineshaft gap!"Hunt wrote:Good, original thinking. But it doesn't attempt to explain why tech is 80/20 male/female (not that it has to). Slate Star Codex has also noted that the disparity begins by the end of schooling, and therefore couldn't be explained by sexist working conditions. But so, then, what is the answer?Guest_936d3dec wrote: +1 Insightful
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ybSzoLCCX-Y
Not sure that it's really necessary to do anything. If most women aren't much interested in computer science then it seems a bit bass-ackwards to kind of trick them into pursuing a career in the field.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Sadly no.feathers wrote:My bold:
Some way, somehow, I'm glad you're not the doctor having to tell them ;)rayshul wrote:I was fairly sure they removed healthy gonads from children with AIS because they had a high chance of getting cancerous and fucking them up later. Sort of like lopping off the titties of ladies with the BRCA shit gene.
Or are you? :shock:
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Did you check at Starbucks?Brive1987 wrote:I don't know who this person is (yet) but the triggering is profound.
"Where the fuck were you?"
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Hilarious. Here is a fuller 2 minute cut of her rant. But I have to say I think there is something wrong with those marchers when their unified chant is "You will not replace us."Brive1987 wrote:I don't know who this person is (yet) but the triggering is profound.
"Where the fuck were you?"
I sure as hell don't want the SJWs replaced with A(lt)R(ight)JWs. F' either end of that horseshoe.
-Soylent
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I agree, but it would be interesting to know why? Do women simply find engineering a less attractive career? If that is so, I don't see the need to continue the investigation to ever greater depth, but how do you go about proving something like that?Steersman wrote: Not sure that it's really necessary to do anything. If most women aren't much interested in computer science then it seems a bit bass-ackwards to kind of trick them into pursuing a career in the field.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
The guys with the torches who chant "blood and soil" are the actual Nazis that the Regressive Left was looking for. Now they have them.Guest_84d94f98 wrote:But I have to say I think there is something wrong with those marchers when their unified chant is "You will not replace us."
I sure as hell don't want the SJWs replaced with A(lt)R(ight)JWs. F' either end of that horseshoe.
-Soylent
There's really a need for a reasonable alternative to both sources of craziness.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I agree with Damore from personal experience of IT careerin'. I think there are some pretty basic differences between how men and women work while being aware there are some pretty srs exceptions to the rule as well. I also think that IT roles are so varied these days that men and women will find a lot there to suit them and their personal styles of working!
Interestingly (here comes an anecdote) I had some roles I hired for a while ago which were essentially the same, but because of the way the roles were written or conceived of one had a technical sounding title and the other had a more softer sounding title. Only men and foreign ladies went for the techie role. The other title got mainly female applicants but the only ones who were truly qualified were ladies (with one exception) - the men were largely waaaay off base with what I wanted. I spent a lot of time going HOW THE FUCK DID THIS HAPPEN.
So. I definitely think that you can probably skew who applies for a job depending on how you word it, and I think they read things differently. But I think the onus is on those men and women to learn about what they want to do and understand how it could be phrased.
Interestingly (here comes an anecdote) I had some roles I hired for a while ago which were essentially the same, but because of the way the roles were written or conceived of one had a technical sounding title and the other had a more softer sounding title. Only men and foreign ladies went for the techie role. The other title got mainly female applicants but the only ones who were truly qualified were ladies (with one exception) - the men were largely waaaay off base with what I wanted. I spent a lot of time going HOW THE FUCK DID THIS HAPPEN.
So. I definitely think that you can probably skew who applies for a job depending on how you word it, and I think they read things differently. But I think the onus is on those men and women to learn about what they want to do and understand how it could be phrased.
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Science Break:
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Thinking about those two job adverts, one talked about systems and tools, the other about concepts and people-interactions.
-
- .
- Posts: 3744
- Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I can't remember if this guy has been highlighted here already, but there is a British police officer who is attracting some ridicule because of his crusading SocJus activities. His latest tweet......
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
Anyone know how to get a copy of the "Why I was fired by Google" article?
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
It's cool I got it
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
I love Look Around You. What are birds? We just don't know.
-
- .
- Posts: 820
- Joined: Sat Jan 30, 2016 4:39 pm
Re: In 2017 Idiocracy is a Documentary
This interview with Damore has probably been shown up-thread but I'm too rushed to check. The funniest thing about this is how the interviewer is so visibly puzzled that her usual armory of kafkatraps is glancing off the armor of his innocent, bloody-minded sperginess. (You can almost see the wheels turning in her mind, "Why is this not working? This usually gets them to bend the knee!")