Slashdot Mirror
Why Young Males Are No Longer the Most Important Tech Demographic
An anonymous reader writes "The Atlantic has an article discussing how 18- to 35-year-old males are losing their place as the most important demographic for tech adoption. 'Let me break out the categories where women are leading tech adoption: internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS. Also, because women still are the primary caretakers of children in many places, guess who controls which gadgets the young male and female members of the family get to purchase or even use?' The article points out that most of the tech industry hasn't figured this out yet — perhaps in part to a dearth of women running these companies."
"Transponders - more than meets the eye".
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
The old adage remains. It's all about eating and mating, and that means pleasing the women, directly or indirectly.
Enjoy your evolution.
"Internet usage, mobile phone voice usage, mobile phone location-based services, text messaging, Skype, every social networking site aside from LinkedIn, all Internet-enabled devices, e-readers, health-care devices, and GPS." --- Most of these things all revolve around communicating with others. Daughters used to spend all their time talking on the phone (watch an old episode of Gidget for an example). Now it's texting on internet devices.
Healthcare makes sense, since it's usually the mom that deals with sick kids. Ditto GPS/location services since they are driving the kids around. And e-readers are handy to use while waiting for the kids to finish with their doctor appointments or soccer games.
I draw the line at buying some minivan or SUV though.
I like my car.
My AC stalker: " I personally agree with your posts most of the time, but that won't keep me from modding you troll"
NEWSFLASH! No one can multi-task. Only switch between single tasks. Don't know of any evidence women do that better. There is evidence the more people do it the worse they become at it (which is a bit unusual, one expects practice to help on a task).
The young male demographic has already adopted tech, so adoption will be low. New technology will be targeted at people who haven't adopted tech yet, because those markets aren't as saturated and competetive. It was bound to happen in a maturing industry. Young males still use more tech then females though.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
This is most evident on places like Slashdot, which are dominated by young males 18-35. From OSX to iOS to Windows 8 to Office 2010 and the Ribbon to the iPad to the iPhone to locked bootloaders on Android to custom Android skins (Sense etc.), almost every decision in mainstream tech is cast as "boneheaded" or "backwards" here. Yet almost everything Slashdot has a problem with, the general population eats it up.
Great. Now women rule the internet too. This is clearly a much better situation, closer to the way the great feminist god intended it.
Done. Good.
Now leave me alone and let me tend to my garden.
It's easier to control a herd of stupid cattle than it is to try and wrangle up cats. Young males are usually somewhat educated, curious, and skeptical about technology where there is almost a social stigma against smart women in ANY field of science. It's sad, and I don't like it, but the primary enforcing factor for this seems to be women themselves, so I don't feel so bad for pointing it out.
http://www.collegehumor.com/video/6778520/the-fall-of-pinterest
When the foot seeks the place of the head, the line is crossed. Know your place. Keep your place. Be a shoe.
Whoever you are, I sincerely hope you are dead soon, and that before you die
you suffer the tortures of the damned.
The most popular color was pink?
So you can't pat you head, rub your stomach, and hold a conservation at the same time?
So all the things I really don't care much about. They can have them. I'd dispute the internet thing (by bandwidth I suspect guys win what with gaming and porn). But otherwise: location based apps? I see it more as a privacy risk for little benefit, FB and other narcissistic tools: no use and I really don't care what my cousin's friend found funny so can't be bothered with other people's personal BS.
Also of tech demographic means relatively simple to use "chatty" services than girls might win. How about hard (for mainstream user) tech adoption? Setting up a home server, remote backup, dual booting systems etc.?
Slackers all! With no draft, manual labor out of fashion, Ritalin, and most physical activities in decline, young men have turned into slackers. I've seen it coming ever since 1985. For those of you who don't know -- http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=slacker and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ndJNXCkNxg . Hell, most are not even getting laid! Women are taking over. When they do, they will have to deal with a nation half-full of slackers. Be careful what you wish for.
Does anybody really think that Apple doesn't know their market? Does anybody think Google and Amazon and Facebook don't know what users want? Just because the heads of these companies are male doesn't mean they don't know how to women.
Well, the newer models of humans come with dual core, so they can truly multitask. The rest of us just have to wait for the proper timeslices. :P
I read TFA and all I got was this lousy cookie
*points at the subject* Why yes. As often as possible. Hoping to have as many orgasms (women win with the multiple orgasm thing) as possible too.
It's a proven scientific fact that men who drive minivans spontaneously grow a vagina.
I have never met a member of the general population that liked the office ribbon. It confuses the hell out of my wife - which is a giant pain since it also confuses the hell out of me, who is usually her tech support. This results in routine 5-10 minute "find the option" sessions where we search for what used to be obvious. I predict a very similar reaction to Windows 8, just like Windows 7 confused the heck out of my wife and mom.
The whole problem with these UX designers is they forget that it is 2012 and EVERYONE ALREADY KNOWS HOW TO USE COMPUTERS, starting from 8 years old on!
It doesn't matter if something is "easy to use for a novice" to computers when there are no novices remaining on the planet. It is much more important to KEEP CHANGE TO A MINIMUM. People in general do not deal well with change in something they are used to. Anyone who has assisted in an office-wide rollout of a new software program will attest to this.
Women are currently leading adoption only because the men have already adopted said technology and the women are catching up.
I know better than to feed a troll, and I'm sure you somehow think you are being funny, but your post reeks of serious psychological problems suggesting that you have a very unhealthy outlook toward women, with rage issues. I hope for the sake of the females in your life, you work on yourself and your outlook. Maybe you've been abused, but you can stop the cycle of abuse by not being abusive.
perhaps its because no one thinks like this anymore???..........
This article and your post are both yet more examples of misandric garbage being passed off as science... the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course, and who knows what your interest is, but I doubt it's as altruistic as you want the reader to believe. How many people here would believe an article written by a male saying that men are the be-all end all?
It's not about offense.. it's about these ignorant people demanding that us geeks dumb things down to their level even when it's not really possible to do without sacrificing functionality that we need. There's nothing wrong with ignorance btw, because it implies that one could still want to learn. WILLFUL ignorance however, is THE issue of this society's problems today.
Being part of a dominant consumer group is NOT the same thing as being tech-relevant, or even important in terms of trending new innovations. See, in order to innovate, there needs to be a group of people who are willing to take on early adoption. This is key... most of this is done by men. As to why, I could only guess that, but my limited understanding of psychology tells me that men are the ones who are more willing to take risks to differentiate and gain advantage. Read the list in the article.. all of those things had been used by men long before they were mainstream...ie when they were initially adopted for use. This piece is just an attempt at proving some sort of gynocentric ego.
On top of that, women tend to more productive, even if they play Farmville during work time. Men do the same - they just play some other games, watch porn or talk about sports with their colleagues. On IT field it has been discovered that women's ability to multitask is a significant bonus. Men can only concentrate on one thing at a time. If something else happens, they get distracted. This is why you sometimes see people complaining about instant messages and emails during work - they cannot multitask.
unbiased citation needed, from a study not run by people with huge political conflicts of interest. This is one of those memes that is a load of rubbish. It needs to die. BOTH genders have trouble 'multitasking'.. just ask anyone who's seen a woman driving an SUV while chatting on the cellphone.
NEWSFLASH - Man walks and chews gum!
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
So you can't pat you head, rub your stomach, and hold a conservation at the same time?
That is not multitasking. That is a serialized activity. Setting up a repeating event and then engaging in a conversation. In mid conversation try changing the event. For example go from pat head and rub stomach to rub ... uh ... cranium and pat stomach in the middle of the conversation.
news at 12
>Especially in Asia where students and women actually really want to work in IT and are good at it.
Thank you for acknowledging that much of the problem isn't discrimination, but peoples' choices. It has always troubled me to hear people talk about how important it is to secure womens' rights, then in the next breath talk about all the ways society needs to impose different thinking on women and girls in order to make them do what we think is best for them. The reality is that there are not very many qualified female IT workers in the US because American women generally do not want to work in IT.
Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.
This makes sense to me. Women are social butterflies. Tools that allow them to be social anytime anywhere are bound to be widely adopted.
For men, texting *GRUNT* back and forth is has diminishing returns.
NEWSFLASH - Man walks and chews gum!
While that's true for trivial tasks, Man can't read (and understand) a book and write a software program at the same time without timeslicing between them. For tasks that require little thought, more seamless, continuous multitasking is possible.
Walking and chewing gum are trivial tasks that don't require the full coordination of the cognitive part of your brain, so the ability to walk and chew gum is more akin to an operating system offloading the TCP stack handling to its NIC and using a hardware RAID controller so it just needs to do some minimal filesystem processing, but basically just passes off blocks of data to the RAID controller and lets it take care of parity calculations, decide where to physically place the data, etc.
So the computer can read a TCP stream and write it to disk with barely using any of the main CPU at all, the CPU just needs to coordinate the data transfer. Just like you can walk and chew gum at the same time with very minimal use of your brain, though your brain is still active keeping an eye out for obstacles, keeping your tongue away from your teeth, savoring the artificial grape flavor, etc.
This is basic diffusion model of business. Innovators, Early Adopters, Early Majority, Late Majority, Laggards.
Here's what I recall with the adoption trend of mobile device consumption.
It started with the geeks, and then the guys.
Then teenagers adopted it. Holy buckets, text messaging went through the roof.
Smart devices came out. Mostly geeks, guys and the group of teenagers. Parents were still playing catch up to why their child sent 2000 text messages and now they owed $1k to the cell phone company.
Social media explodes onto the seen. The teenagers are growing up. They are consuming and in turn demanding more enhancements. Companies are responding because they need to keep adding adopters.
Social media became a status symbol. Note: I did not say cool. Cool is attitude, not imaginary friends, followers, tweets, etc. Cool is measured in binary, yes or no. There is no magical calculation that establishes cool. No amount of bling makes someone cool. You are either Fonzy or Richie. Analogy stolen from Dennis Miller.
Now there are apps, web and mobile, for all social sharing for everyone. It is going from saturation to supersatured as the industry tries to secure all the late adopters.
The next innovation is coming.
Rinse repeat recycle.
There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
This suggests that men are nothing more than potted plants in the household. Just because women may be the primary caregivers doesn't mean men have no say in what goes on, perhaps to the dismay of feminazis everywhere.
These are, for the most part, single predefined use devices. Women use them more because they tend to do those single things more. Men prefer open ended devices that they can use to extend and make other things. This isn't really "adoption" so much as purchasing something like you would a toaster.
There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.
Good thing you remembered this nameless study, otherwise you'd have lost this argument! Phew!
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
YHBT
HTH
HAND
<xml><I><am><so><damn>Web 2.0</damn></so></am></I></xml>
For every 10 women who buy a GPS, or a phone, or a Kindle - there is a trusted geek they asked for advice before they bought it.
And those geeks are usually male.
Just because the overall market penetration skews toward women doesn't make them the influencers.
That's just unfair. The cell phone obviously has nothing to do with the ability to drive a car. Women just suck at driving, period.
made the same point in his book Micro Trends.
How can we fix this massive problem of men getting77 gadgets on the 100 compared to women?
I can understand women leading in Facebook adoption. But G+? I was under the impression that G+ was still a more tech-oriented social networking site (If at all, I see the G+ button more often on tech sites like Slashdot than more mainstream sites like the BBC or E Online). BTW I'm sure that Slashdot is still a predominantly male networking site.
I don't know if I really agree with calling any one segment of the population the "most important demographic" in any industry.
Rather, it might be more accurate to say that technology has expanded beyond the hobbyist level to near ubiquity.
Just look at the number of people today who call their mp3 players iPods or smart phones iPhones, and I'll tell you about my mother who said I played too much Nintendo as kid - despite the fact that I didn't own a Nintendo system until I was in my 20's.
My score on Multitask 2 disagrees with you. Practice also improves my play significantly. After not having played for months I only stayed alive for 85 seconds and I fell apart with 5 tasks. My record is 105 seconds with 6 things at once. After a while it's hard for me to gather enough visual information to play each game, and they all use keyboard input which overloads that part of my brain. Towards the end I can "think" what needs to be done, but not cause my fingers to do so quickly enough.
I usually multitask when playing the piano. I...
* Get fingers positioned right (both hands of course)
* Decide on little touches like dynamics, stoccato, pedaling, rubato, what emotional content I want to convey, if any; I often make these up anew each time
* Decide on changes to the piece, like different rhythms, extra grace notes, changed chords, etc.
* Evaluate my playing--"missed note", "incorrect dynamics", "this emotional arc sucks", "I really like that passage at that speed", etc.
* Perhaps read music
* Let my mind wander, thinking about the day or interactions I had with someone or sometimes a math problem (to calibrate difficulty, I was fiddling with pointwise approximations of complex measurable functions by polynomials almost everywhere a while ago, and the non-null-homotopicness of a particular curve yesterday)
* Listen to people if they're talking around me or listen to TV if it's on; I can tune these out if I wish
Interestingly I can't respond verbally to someone while playing the piano. I can understand someone perfectly and think of a response (nodding if yes/no, for instance), but the verbal part of my brain seems to be engaged with the music. As a rule I can multitask somewhat on simple similar tasks and I can multitask to a large extent on unrelated tasks. Oh, I often juggle or otherwise occupy my hands while doing other things (eg. reading, thinking about math). I vary the patterns somewhat to keep that part of me from getting bored so it's not just tossing and catching in the same basic pattern forever.
If none of this is multitasking to you, you'll have to clarify your use of the term.
No surprise.
Skype, voice, social networks: This is just a continuation of the millennia-old girl network, now happening over the electronic network. As a heterosexual male, I want to be talked *about* on that network (whether it be on or offline), but not actually be there.
Health: I'm a guy! I go for years without seeing a doctor.
E-reader: Most paperback pulp at the supermarket is aimed at women; now it's on devices. Inevitable.
GPS: Ask for directions? No way, I know where we are. I'm a guy! Furthermore, I don't care that it's a creepy area and it's getting dark.
the article written by a corporate 'empowered' woman of course
Sorry, what? The author is Alexis Madrigal, who is a man.
I'd planned a long-winded reply to this, but screw it. I'm just going to say that if you came in and made an Asian joke, another group of people stereotyped as bad drivers, people would look down on you for it. If you ever uttered the n-word, people would look down on you for it. But men will always have the allowances, excuses and bullcrap reasons to make as many jokes bashing women as they want, and it will never change. They'll always laugh when faced with criticism, painting the woman calling them on it as a "humorless bitch" as if it doesn't hurt to see it happen in a forum I enjoy and want to feel a part of, but is always faced with the fact that she doesn't have a bulge between her legs.
And it does... hurt, meaning. Say you're joking if you want and that I'm just a humorless bitch. I'm just tired of hearing this asinine crap, and decided to say something about it. I almost didn't, because I know the reception this might get, but I don't really care.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
E-reader: Has large quantities of ALL types of books. I've read tons of sci-fi/fantasy on my e-reader. I've also got a library that includes about 5-10 different classical books loaded on it at any given time. I've seen plenty of tech books in the marketplace as well. And we all know that the primary market for Tolkien, Asimov, Homer (Greek), and anything related to CS/IT is primarily women.
Now someone will bring up social messaging and cultural attitudes towards gender roles, and blame society for the way most American women feel. Because that is totally respectful of women and not patronizing towards them at all.
Hyperbole much?
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Cool, but what kind of guy reads on an ereader?
most of those technologies are old/established and a great deal of money is being made selling those to the mass-market - and I'm quite willing to admit whilst as a "dink-y" 35-year old male I'm important to, but not the sole focus of the vendors. My ilk will not decide the market success of particular 'products'.
Damned if I'm not going to fight the imputation that I'm not responsible for the success of the underlying 'tech' though.
GPS - I was wearing the Casio GPS watch, I was dangling a GPS MMC out of my PocketPC (plus external magnetic aerial) when the luddites thought mobiles had to have buttons. Now I'm quite prepared to admit there was a lot of swearing, wasted money and bluntly it wasn't due to necessity but rather it clearly being the cool-as-fuck-future - and that's ignoring the pile of dead-end tech that was accumulated in parallel - but I really resent this slur.
I'll restrain myself from listing everything else - but there is absolutely no piece of 'tech' that hasn't been launched on the sci-fi-tinged dreams of a 20-something-year old male with slightly too much disposable income.
I perhaps do consider in these later years, that it wasn't 'me' but the age/ideal - I still steadfastly hold to the opinion that twitter is pointless - despite the bleatings of the youth below me and the easily-lead marketing execs above.
Men, especially nerds, tend to find technology cool. In that case technology as such. An iPhone, however, is no longer technology as such. It is a gadget. You do not need to understand or want to understand the technology to use it. So in the end the text is comparing apples with pears.
Social media and devices used to access social aren't the only "tech"s that exist. Maybe it meant more women use consumer electronics for social media more often than men do? I don't see the point of this article, as it doesn't contain any real information. It does come off as a "You go, girl! Geek is hot!" piece, though.
If a woman does something there must be a demeaning word for it: http://schroedingerstabby.blogspot.com/2009/04/how-to-tell-male-from-female.html
You take things much too seriously, so yes you are what would be called humorless. I wouldn't call you a bitch, but whatevs, no?
Thank you, Cazekiel. Except it will change when enough people understand that misogyny is bad business.
of course..... NOT. the author of the article is, in fact, male...
There's a picture and bio right at the top if you'd have taken the time to, I dunno.. actually click through to the article before making an ass of yourself......
I can imagine that some female commenters here might wish to appear safely ungendered. At Slashdot, the discussion is ordinarily sane, intelligent, mutually respectful and clever, but as soon as the existence of the female sex gets mentioned, a certain proportion of the self-identified males start to grunt contempt at women and girls in general, and the whole sense of an inclusive, honorable community slumps into crud.
because we're broke. Seriously. 40 years of no wage increases kinda does that to a guy.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
When I see it everywhere, yes, I start to take it a bit seriously. And I'm actually a very goofy person in day-to-day life. We're talking either get odd looks or make people guffaw goofy. But when you've dealt with sexism, yourself being the target at times in your daily life, you don't really care if someone thinks you're humorless when you point it out.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Of course there are other cores for critical system services such as chewing gum, walking, ect, as you say they don't require much (if any) help from the two main consious cores.
Man can't read (and understand) a book and write a software program at the same time without timeslicing between them.
Yes, both activities normally make heavy use of the inner voice core.
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
You're right, she was his principle source though: "The body of evidence amassed by Intel researcher Genevieve Bell indisputably shows that men's role in technology adoption continues to be overstated."
I've lived in many different places, and I have to say, you take this way too hard. Where I'm from, women are nearly-universally much worse drivers than men due to an over-nervousness behind the wheel that causes its own distractions, in particular when it exists but the woman is simply ignoring it.
While this could be partly cultural, and could be partly genetic, I haven't noticed the same statement holding true in other places.
I have in my time seen a woman on a cell phone take a left turn through a red light in busy traffic. The worst I can say about a male driver is I've seen one back into a very obvious fence at about 10km/h and that men tend to drive a bit too fast.
So while you may think it an asinine comment, I actually have seen accident numbers where I live that back up my statements. Now, insurance rates were higher for men because when a man did get into an accident he was far more likely to be speeding and write off one or two cars. The actual accident rates were much higher for women.
And in other cases, you should actually consider the possibility that you may be an overly-sensitive overly-literal individual. Which someone else may call a "humorless bitch".
I had someone like that report me at a job site previously for chatting with a buddy of mine and it offended her that I liked her ass. This was a conversation that she overheard, and was not a part of, nor did I even realize she was nearby. Apparently it was something to do with the objectifying of women etc etc and I should appreciate her hard work more than her physical attributes etc etc. All complete bullshit, all totally unnecessary. I've had women comment that I have a nice ass before, the difference is I take the compliment for what it is and don't get my panties in a knot over it. By the by, thats been a saying for a very long time, and for a very good reason.
I get the feeling you and her might get along quite well.
Sigh, that'll teach me not to preview my posts. I missed a sentence in which I stated that while it holds true for my particular "home" it doesn't hold true for all, or even most, areas. However, because it holds true in SOME areas, it continues to be a comment that gets thrown around a fair bit.
Just brawny guys
I'm going to miss the good ole days.
Concerning female multi-tasking, I agree; however, I know a woman who blew me away by multi-tasking. I walked in to my mom's room one time and she was chatting on the phone and had a nintendo controller in her hand. She was having an in-depth conversation requiring some thought and was playing Tetris. I forget which level she was on but the blocks were dropping at the fastest speed on the game. I stood there with my jaw on the floor and my mother started talking me too... while not missing a block. Batshit crazy amazing.
She obviously beat the game.
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
I hate marketing:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDW_Hj2K0wo
Hey, there's nothing wrong with bashing jokes.. In fact, it's a healthy way of getting the truth out there. Women do it to men all the time.. Just watch 5 minutes of TV, commercials or content, or listen to one of the many pop diva tunes made in the last 30 years. There's plenty of man bashing out there. There's also plenty of it in the law and education, which is where it really hurts men. I have a problem that men are being told to hush while women run around saying/doing whatever/whoever they want and then blaming men and holding them responsible for their own choices. If I was to do what feminists want and take their mindset as the mindset of all women, I would have to assume that women just don't understand what empowerment is truly about.. They get the benefit part, but not the responsibility, like children...and yes, part of this includes being able to take what one dishes out when dirty jokes are being handed around.
As far as I can tell from various studies, let alone real life, let alone computer languages, it all boils down to time slicing. Until someone demonstrates true programming examples or demonstratable neural behaviour, there ain't no thing such as multi-tasking in the sense we like to think it means.
It has always troubled me to hear people talk about how important it is to secure womens' rights
I will repeat this again: There is no such thing as womens' rights.
Let that sink in for a minute...
How did you react? Think about that.
Now, think about this: There are rights that all Americans have. There are no special right for women, blacks, or any other group. If women are not being treated like people, then that needs to be addressed but it does NOT give them any special rights.
Let me make that clear: All Americans have the same rights. If any Americans are having these rights being denied, then that needs to be addressed. Giving and "special" rights to any one sub-group takes away from the rights of everyone else.
Clear?
"Someone needs to talk to the tree of liberty about its ghoulish drinking problem." by ohnocitizen
See, in order to innovate, there needs to be a group of people who are willing to take on early adoption. This is key... most of this is done by men.
unbiased citation needed, from a study not run by people with huge political conflicts of interest. This is one of those memes that is a load of rubbish. It needs to die. BOTH genders have trouble 'multitasking'.. just ask anyone who's seen a woman driving an SUV while chatting on the cellphone.
... and where is your ubiased citation for the first part of your post that I've quoted???
No, actually, I wouldn't. In my workplace, we all routinely sexually-harass each other. If I WAS the type of person you're talking about, my boss would be enjoying two hots and a cot for a long, long time by now. I can very easily distinguish relatively innocent humor from actual misogyny. You can't judge everything I do or interpret in life from a comment I made. You're taking an extreme and placing it on me, someone who's just tired of flippant sexism.
And as you say in your next comment, added to this, that's in your area. There was a case on Judge Judy years and years ago, involving a woman who tried getting out of a ticket; one of the factors she cited was that she'd seen him pull over "just women" and he was discriminating against her and women in general. As it turned out, they reviewed his pull-over record an found the opposite. Not by a wide margin, but it definitely made her look like an idiot. That applies to your argument; you see a woman on a phone make a driving-blunder, and another guy being responsible, and that means the stereotype is true? A tiny sample, not subject to test conditions is suddenly fact? I've seen the exact reverse--men plowing through a red, women being responsible. Many, many times. Each time I see this behavior, whether it's a man or woman, I say "idiot fuckin' drivers!" not "MEN!"
My problem is the proliferation of sexist commentary, everywhere you look. It's growing exponentially. To me, the flippant nature of it is almost more dangerous, as it simply becomes customary and acceptable. I've got a tough enough skin to roll my eyes in most cases and just let it go, especially on the internet, but it's still annoying. In the end, does it need to be said? Why is it "You're too sensitive, get off the internet!"/"Grow some balls!" instead of "Why do people have to act like douches and insult other people?" I hear this argument so many, TOO many times. I suppose it's more acceptable to be snide, snarky and generally mean than trying to be a good person, even if it means you're a little sensitive and taking things seriously sometimes.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
OT, I always forgot TO submit, altogether. I'll go looking for a comment I made and say "Wuuuuh, where'd it go?" then realize... "Aw dang, never ACTUALLY hit 'submit'..."
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
men and women do that a lot. It's not difficult because they exercise different parts of the brain, where one task is theoretical and abstract while the other is immediate and tactically predictable. tetris doesn't require much theoretical or abstract thought, while yacking about relationships is not. It's like listening to music while driving vs having a conversation while driving..
'is not' should be 'does'
I don't agree with man-bashing, either. General joking's not going to kill anyone, I DO bitch about guys at times (that's so totally natural, on both sides), but when it comes to actual harm or cruelty? Nay. Just so you know. I hate hearing about good dads getting screwed in court when they should have custody over the idiot mothers, I hate women who'll smack a guy around and if he shoves her away starts screaming, "DON'T HIT A GIRL!"... all of that. I had a friend who confessed to hitting her husband and thought it was okay; I told her it wasn't, flat-out.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
yes, but it merited a serious reply..
Not just that...these days, the overwhelming percentage of stumbling, buffoons in any commercial or ad or comedy these days...is the prototypical, overweight (likely deserved), stupid white guy.
You never see a bumbling, butt of the joke, ad for a idiot woman, or stupid, bumbling black or hispanic guy. Nope, I can't name one, and please link me to examples where I'm wrong...but it is now always politically ok to make fun of the Caucasian male, at least in the US.
I understand diversity on the media, no problem...but there ARE stupid people or those that make mistakes of all races and both sexes (if you only count 2...but according to many databases...> 2 are officially recognized).
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Everyone is supposed to listen to me!
Most linux users don't know this, but the man pages were named after Chuck Norris. Chuck Norris fsck'ing hates noobs!
We're all dual-core.
TV is full of idiotic women, or at least dumb blondes. (Phoebe "Friends", Kelly "Married ... with children") . But they're fun-loving, good-looking sluts, so we respect and protect them anyway.
now always politically OK to make fun of the Caucasian male
I agree. In Australia, we had government-funded adverts for road-safety that insulted penis-size. That's a great way for people with vaginas to excuse whatever they do while driving.
He's actually right, women do suck at driving.
You know why women are such bad drivers?
Because they're human.
Same formula works if you replace "women" with any other category of people and "driving" with any other activity.
E.g. Why do gays have such bad taste in music?
That stereotype...even is almost nonexistent.
Kelly Bundy...early 90's. Phoebe...well, how long as 'Friends' been off the air?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
Oh, look! It's this article again...
Sure, tell me about how men are failing at everything again and how women everywhere are coming to fix things for us useless cretins who only invented it all...
Tell me again about how worthless men are and how perfect and truly in control of everything women are...
Have a Virgin Mobile USA smartphone? Give VMRoms.com a try!
Why Young Males Are No Longer the Most Important Tech Demographic? I think young males are the most important tech demographic all the time.
I really love club dresses ,
Let me break out the categories where women are leading tech adoption: mobile phone location-based services
So we still beat them at map-reading ? nice ;-)
Man can concentrate better on one thing.when woman does 4 things, man does 1 and does it 4x times better. I worked in many different companies over the Europe. Very a few girls could compete with guys. Even in places where girls were supposed to dominate.(tech support)
The term "tech" has become so generalized that it no longer has any meaning. Almost everything you buy these days is "tech" in some way. We need a new term to differentiate between things like high-end computers and computerized nick-knacks.
It just means that after the odd 30 years it took, the current technological revolution i.e. in the field of electronics has come to a mature level and it becomes part of boring everyday live. It als means that it is time for a new generation of young tech savvy males to bring on the next technological revolution in perhaps another possibly related field.
Reading while pooping. A much more concise example, in my opinion.
Women can perform N+1 tasks simultaneously, as long as at least N involve talking
Women are neurotic, and have to be in constant contact and control of everything and everyone around them in order to feel "safe."
Kids are on a short leash, husband is on an even shorter leash, assuming he has put up with her bullshit. Instant messaging phones, and now the two-way video phones, are their favorite tools for control and monitoring. It's not out of malice - it's out of anxiety and fear.
Women are also flaming hypochondriacs, so they'll buy any and every medical device that comes along to make sure their little snowflakes are properly diagnosed. They then bring them into my office proclaiming that their kid has the imagined illness of the day. They know because their latest magazine or medical gadget told them so.
As a physician, I refer 20 times as many women as I do men for behavioral health treatment (therapists, psychologists, and psychiatrists); and about as many children who have been permanently damaged by their neurotic mothers.
Women are all about feeling "safe." That's the #1 most important thing to them. Nearly all of my female patients present with anxiety over some perceived threat to their physical, or more often financial wellbeing. Certainly the fact that we market almost everything on a platform of FUD doesn't help.
TV is constantly telling women about something they need to be afraid of, and of course a product they can buy to help guard against it. Fear is a powerful motivator.
E.g. Why do gays have such bad taste in music?
Because they play only Madonna at the meetings. It's indoctrination. I'm an ex-gay; I would know.
You see, two weeks after a young gay guy comes out, he gets a welcome package in the mail. It includes some educational material*, "necessaries"**, a copy of the gay agenda, and an invitation to the next monthly meeting. If he doesn't go, his gay license is taken away (so nobody will have sex with him; well, girls might, but who cares?). They all end up at the meetings eventually. It's like a Nazi dance party--glitter and leather everywhere. Anyway, at those parties all they play is Madonna. The leaders say it "encourages unity". The truth is, Madonna bought the gay industry years ago for cheap, before she became 90% plastic. She supports her career now almost exclusively with young gay guys who don't know any better. It's tragic really; I mean why would gay guys pick a female artist when there's so many hot guys to choose from nowadays with their YouTube videos and amazing pecs and delicious arms and... I mean, there are better artists than Madonna.
Anyway, I got out of that senseless life and am living clean. No gay for me, thanks; I like girls now. I tore up my license last week. My roommate tried to stop me, but in his tears all I saw was the glittery taint of corporate greed. I let him kiss me one last time, just a little--we can't all be perfect!--but I'm done. I like girls now. Oh, I said that already.
But yeah, that's why gays have such bad taste in music. So now you know.
* Includes: several pamphlets on jargon, at basic (top, bottom), intermediate (39, chibi), and advanced (chicken-of-the-sea, curry queen) levels; HIV/AIDS and other STD prevention information; a list of common hookup methods (Grindr, Manhunt, Craig's List local m4m section); a book on developing a lisp; several quick-start fashion and decorating guides; and of course Dr. Niederwieser's magnum opus, Bend Over!: The Complete Guide to Anal Sex for Men! .
** Includes: condoms, lube, poppers, a dildo, your gay license, tickets to a Lady Gaga concert near you, a gym membership, and new jeans that make your ass look great.
Interestingly I can't respond verbally to someone while playing the piano. I can understand someone perfectly and think of a response (nodding if yes/no, for instance), but the verbal part of my brain seems to be engaged with the music.
I have also noticed this, and it has been frustrating since I would like to be able to accompany my own singing. In the past, I could only sing while playing if I only used the left hand (which is often enough, being bass and chords, but it looks a little dumb on stage). I also recall experiencing tension in my throat while learning difficult passages (not singing at the time). However, after some practice I can sing while playing fairly well, and as a bonus, the tension in my throat is mostly gone. Nevertheless, for best results I still prefer doing one thing at a time.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
Using different part of the brain for different stuff is what I would call low multitasking. That game is an example of it. In fact once you supress the *obnoxious* music, it is rather not "too" hard to do, and frankly piano as described is one of those. OTOH there is what I call hard multitasking : calling the same part of your brain to do various stuff. In office context , it is like working on an accounting sheet, and speak to a colleague at the same time about numbers and projection. Try it : it is very hard and it is the type of multitasking which people say people do badly. Want to try something ? Try use one of the minigame (not mixed with the other) , say for example the arrow one, *AND* pay attention to a film on TV. NOW that is a true test of multitasking because it both force you to pay attention to different area, whereas the game multitask 2 only ask you to pay attention to similar task on a very small screen estate.
Also, the left hand issue makes a lot of sense if I think about playing the guitar, which for me has little effect on singing, and the hard parts are again done with the left hand. This also reminds me of left-handed people who developed a stammer as a result of being forced to be right-handed.
Escher was the first MC and Giger invented the HR department.
See, women in general from my experience seem to think that "being a good person" means being overly sensitive etc. as a sort of "well, I don't mind, but someone else might!". There are men like this too of course but most of them are gay men and the remainder are relatively speaking rare. Except in certain professions, such as psychologists, councilors, and politicians looking for votes et al.
It really doesn't mean that however. Being a good person means being there to help someone through a rough time, or to help someone that IS overly sensitive to understand a situation that may have occurred and help them through it. Going through life with such a thin skin as to be offended by this sort of stuff is not a good thing. I understand if it gets to physical harassment or someone gets singled out etc, but the rest of it is just sort of, you know, guys complaining about their wives/women in general etc. Guys don't have the same sort of crazy databasing of "everything he's done wrong" that most women seem to have, so we tend to generalize more. We complain about women, and women complain about men, they're just more specific about it.
Besides that, a LOT of men, best friends for years even, tend to insult and generally carry on with each other on a very regular basis. A lot of over-sensitive people can't even tell the difference, and I've had the comment said by many many women about some of my relationships as well as relationships they see around them, generally between men, of "You'd think they were mortal enemies".
A lot of this comes from men and women internalizing things differently etc... however most of the actual harmful behavior towards women ended upwards of 20 years ago. Right now a LOT of men are pushing back against conforming to some of this bullshit. Whereas the minority, the real idiots and misogynists were the ones doing it before.
Unfortunately this form of pushback causes some guys to just pick up some of the older, harmful ways of sexism, even though they don't really believe half of what they're saying.
We as men, in general, and not as an absolute rule, internalized things a LOT differently. I had the unfortunate situation of growing up in a family where the women are all understanding and have a great sense of humor, and all thought it was great that I generally tend to say the first thing that comes to my mind. We're also a family that appreciates honesty, even to the point of brutality, which also doesn't help.
This caused a lot of awkward situations as you might imagine. I sent several girls whose mothers I guess actually WERE like the woman I mentioned before off crying, without even knowing what the fuck I had done.
Basically what I'm saying here is that there has to be some give and take. We as men should learn to control our mouths around you women a bit as we grow up, but you as women need to grow thicker skins as you grow up. It will never work as long as one group or the other demands absolute adaptation from the other. Previously we had the women being the ones forced to adapt and now we're getting to where more and more onus is being put on the men to adapt, when we're already doing what we can for the most part.
I should also mention that men throw off the adaptation around other men, and for a long time the internet was 95%+ men in most of its dark corners. Some guys will push back because they're losing one of their few remaining bastions of sanity where they can say what they like.
Whether women like to be treated as possessions or objects or not, men are genetically geared to be hunters and warriors. Hunters and warriors that got us to the very top of the food chain. That sort of gearing is closer to grizzly bear than bunny rabbit, and grizzlies view everything in the world around them as objects to be possessed. At least 99% of us understand that women are not, but you've got to cut us some slack for discussing them as such, especially in an environment where we may not think any women are around to hear. Women for the most part ARE completely foreign, but beautiful, to many of us. Thats not a dig at the slashdot community etc, I'm married and women are STILL completely foreign to me.
I'm not a singer, though I can actually sing while playing without difficulty, at least so long as my right hand's melody is the same (or nearly the same) as the vocal part. As I play I have a copy of the song running in my head with the melody, usually the right hand part, running through my normal speech bits (just as if I were humming it). I think my problem with talking while playing is that two different tasks are trying to go through my vocal center at once--the "humming" and regular speech. Changing the "humming" to words and actually vocalizing externally instead of internally is apparently not an issue for me.
I might have difficulty singing harmony while playing, but I'm not certain; I just sang while playing for the first time in months a few minutes ago, to test things out.
I hadn't heard of people developing a stammer with forced handedness--that's really interesting, consistent with my mental model of multitasking, and sad.
The phrase for this is "stereotype threat." It's real, there's nothing funny about it; serious and humorless is the better approach. I recently caught myself making a sexual distinction even while pointing out the false generalization of a particular nationality distinction. Stereotypes are insidious; if you're laughing it off, you're a bigot.
First they ignore you, then they laugh at you...
I had a friend who confessed to hitting her husband and thought it was okay; I told her it wasn't, flat-out.
You talk the talk, but do you really transcend gender (to infinity and beyond!)? If your friend's husband hit her you would get her to call the police, help her apply for a retraining order, let her stay at your place or find her a shelter, find her a divorce lawyer, work with her to destroy him legally, etc. You would accept nothing less. When she hits her husband you say "that's no OK" and order her another margarita.
But I see no action. Please, please, send more women to my office.
There are plugins for this problem. Check out Lazarus for Firefox.
Don't be too quick to dismiss notions of mental differences as sexism. From what I've read, both sexes are about equally good drivers. Insurers certainly considered young males more accident prone than young females. The blame was placed on young men being more aggressive, hotheaded, and reckless. Turned out the women had fewer accidents because they didn't drive as much. Then young women started driving about as much, and the accident rate equalized. But the ways women go wrong with driving do seem a little different than men. Of course, it is sexist to notice only those differences that put men in a better light, and conclude that women are worse drivers.
But back to the topic. Figures that if the leading demographic wasn't young men, it had to be young women. Why'd they bother with the "young" part? Older people couldn't be it. And what about race? Wealth? Education? Women also now lead in college degrees, maybe that correlates with adoption of tech? The list of tech areas where women lead fit the stereotypes all too well: communications and health. And GPS. Men never get lost!
Intellectual Property is a monopolistic, selfish, and defective concept. It is "tyranny over the mind of man"
In other news human can offload basic muscle movement to the Cerebellum. The real question is if you can hold two intellectual conversations at the same time, both in subjects you are not well versed.
Or rather we have an extremely large number of highly specialised cores.
You can often manage to do two or more things at once if you're not using the same hardware for both tasks. One example from my recent life would be walking, folding some origami (a crane which is a pattern I've done enough that I don't have to think about it at all), holding a conversation, and looking something interesting.
Those last two can hinder each other a bit (both use the focus on something consciously bit), but the others are orthogonal as far as I can tell.
I would imagine that someone who texts for 8 hours a day whilst spending a large portion of their time not looking at their phone and drives for the other 8 (for a period of a few years on the same model phone/car) could safely combine the two activities -- at least providing that the conversation was dull and didn't cause them to have to think about something too hard. I'm certainly not going to try it (I won't even use hands free, I pull over), and I doubt that the vast majority of people could, either (and could judge when to suspend the conversation if it took too much attention).
Penny from Big Bang Theory. Jenna from 30 Rock. Laurie from Cougar Town. Brittany from Glee. Harmony from Buffy. Claire from Heroes. Lana from Smallville. Amanda from Ugly Betty. Jessica Simpson from herself. Lindsay from Arrested Development. Quendra from Community.
Shall I go on?
Really, each one of these deserves at least a good paragraph of exposition but that's more than anyone will read or comprehend. I'm inclined to believe that your post is in earnest and that you didn't even notice writing these things and still may not even see what's wrong with them. That's the true nature of sexism: it's incredibly insidious and it pervades every single aspect of our society. As men, we have been taught since we were little boys about how men and women are different and the myriad ways women are inferior. Not directly, mind you. At least in my own experience, no guardian or role model has come out and said things like "women talk too much" or "they're terrible drivers." No one needed to however, because if you tell a lie enough it becomes the perceived truth and these little lies fly freely and masquerade as "jokes."
So you're right, in a sense, about internalization: what men and women have internalized is quite different. See common "sense" like men are strong, hunters/warriors, dominant and natural leaders. Common "sense" about women is that they're weak/uncoordinated ("you throw like a girl!"), (overly) sensitive, and better at domestic activities. If you stray from these boundaries you are mercilessly attacked by your peers. Men who are sensitive are either gay or not real men. Women who are active or dominant are tomboys, dykes, or just plain bitches. So let me ask you: do you think any of this crap about women is actually true or just "the way it has always been so it must be true?"
Regardless, if you continue to treat and expect women to be completely foreign to you, they will remain so.
You must be old school, Madonna is in decline - it's all Lady Gaga now.
Singularity: a belief in the "God" idea with the "demiurge" relation inverted.
Madonna is in decline
That's because of our "Homo NoMo" telethon. Every day I'm surrounded by dedicated young men working their phones, sweating for hours on end under hot stage lights--they're so good with their jobs, so giving. Lady Gaga's concerts are mostly supported by the ticket in the gay welcome basket I mentioned before (the "fruit basket", if you will). I'm sure her popularity will be plummeting any day now too.
Ever try to develop ambidexterity?
It's been my experience that my right hand responds well to rational thought, but my left hand is useless when I attempt to control it with rational thought. My left hand responds well to "feel"... the approach that is effective is to concieve the outcome and allow the hand to do what feels right.
Developing the ability to stickfight with both hands simultaneously required being able to think about what one hand was doing while explicitly not thinking about what the other one was doing.
No "inner voice" involved. Now, the left hand reacts to need in the heat of the moment, the right hand implements my tactics, and I can still focus yet another part of my mind on analyzing patterns in the external world and devising strategy on the fly.
I could probably do all this and sing a song at the same time, but I'd look awfully silly, so I've never tried.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Exactly so. I saw this in the U.S. and see it in Europe too. Whereas young males like and prefer to research and decide on their own, women almost universally seek out the advice of ...those same young males who have done the research.
It's almost to an annoying extent. My GF should be quite capable of deciding what e-reader, if any, to buy. But noooo.... she has to get my advice on what to buy. And inevitably her final purchase is based on whatever I say, however flippant.
Quite wisely, tech companies get this and target the deciders (young men).
Certainly it's true that young males aren't significant market players in these technologies. The entire typical nerdy "early adopter" markets are largely irrelevant now but not for the reasons given. Actually it's because the technology adoption curves of most of the major technologies are all coming to an end-of-life (mass adoption) at exactly the same time. This includes computers, internet and most of the technologies listed or implied in the article. Most everything that is mainstreamed as "high tech".
Young males *could* become a major demographic if a new disruptive technology appears - young males usually dominate early adoption and especially long-cycle disruptive technologies. It simply won't be these technologies ever again: they've achieved the status of the wheel, paper and books, and electricity in terms of population adoption. THAT'S WHY WOMEN ARE LARGE PLAYERS: because ALL people are players in late adoption phases of any technology. What will come and become the new disruptive technology will necessarily be something different.
I suppose you're right, seeing as you know me so well. Oh, wait.
She DID divorce him, and didn't take him for everything he had. She DID realize it was wrong and jumped ship before it got worse.
I HAVE had a friend who's boyfriend was abusive. I DIDN'T plot and scheme to destroy him. I supported her and was glad when she left him.
Why I feel the need to explain myself, who knows. Maybe it's because I get annoyed and defensive when someone who doesn't even know what colors my eyes are starts claiming that I'd do this or that, or that I'm a hypocrite based on absolutely no evidence.
To add, she told me at work. We don't drink margaritas at work, and I rarely, if ever, go to bars with "the girls" to talk about how all men suck and our periods like you think I (and women in general) do. If you want to classify me, stereotype me, I can't stop you, and it's actually not my problem. It's yours. How this got 'insightful' when insightful implies that you're well-learned in the subject you speak of (in this case, me) and have constructed an analysis of something observable, I mean... wow.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Well said. I don't think that it's sexist to point out differences, because there are loads. But like you said, to simply determine that someone's better than another because you'd LIKE it that way, or once saw an accident in East Cupcake, Iowa that involved a woman who ran a stop sign and base every single opinion on that... well, anyway. Kinda sick of talking about it, but your response is refreshing. :)
There are a lot of factors, one of which imho, has to do with women getting more encouragement to "go for it" from teachers, parents, etc. in their early years. I know a lot of college aged girls, and so many of them are taking on great degrees in science and math, while dabbling into things like astronomy as electives. Things have changed since I was a little girl, someone not encouraged to sign up for challenging courses while the boys plowed ahead top-speed. As some have said here, it's about choice; both men and women should go for it, not being held back for superfluous, asinine reasons.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Hah, you're welcome. Sometimes I worry that I'm a blabbermouth... and I AM sometimes, but hey, it's a forum. A forum's meant for discussion, so... :)
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
For some reason, I swear I have a better peripheral vision than most, or else this timeslicing is ninjalike in me to the point I am not even focused on it. It's embarrassing to admit this, but I can go for minutes to hours driving (freeway or city) while busy on my phone. I drive a lot for work, up to 5 hours a day, for 6 years. I have never been close to an accident and I'm over 30. But there are times when I've looked up and realized I haven't been focusing on the road for 15-20 minutes but somehow I can stay in my lane and always notice if traffic is slowing or merging. Maybe it has to do with where I hold the phone/tablet so I can see everything else going on. I am sure people driving by in trucks and whatnot are probably cursing at me and shaking their heads most of the time.
Recently a commenter suggested that I post about how I became a female misogynist. I've been thinking about what to post.
I could summarize my life story, which has been an object lesson - though far from the worst one I know of - in the disastrous effects of allowing women power in society, but then, whose hasn't? Most people of my generation and younger had mothers who were happy to be told that being a mother was something you could do in your spare time, between more important, "fulfilling" pursuits.
No one has been able to remain unaware that our schools, which are run almost entirely by women, have become hotbeds of violence and sexual assault in which little if any "learning" takes place, so I don't need to recount my personal saga of spending my childhood being beaten up and groped by boys while the teachers watched happily, giggling girlishly when one of the boys glanced her way. Just last night I came across this: Girls Accepting Sexual Assault At School As Fact Of Life. Consider this carefully: this is a realm where the authority figures are almost all female, and girls are completely unsafe from boys in it. This is precisely the opposite of what feminists keep claiming will happen if they're in charge. (Also take into account that many of these boys who terrorized me were denied a male authority figure at home by divorce. The overwhelming majority of violent criminals, welfare recipients, and substance abusers come from fatherless homes.)
Then there's the many female friends who turned on me for the most incredibly superficial reasons. No amount of generosity on my part could forestall this: gifts, shelter, financial support, a sympathetic ear, favors, hopping on a plane at a moment's notice (in October of 2001, no less) because I was needed, everything I could give did me no good when I had served my purpose and the female in question was bored with me. This is why divorce is so hard to get in civilized countries; women, by nature, will drop people when they're no longer amusing or useful. When they're in a chimpanzee troop or a primitive tribe, this is only sensible for keeping the species going, but for a civilization, it pretty much sucks. Women with a sense of loyalty exist, but they are very rare. But everyone who has entrusted a woman with affection has experienced this.
And of course, there's the women I've dated. Being a female misogynist is an uncomfortable position for a lesbian, but it's also damn near inescapable. When I first came out of the closet, I rented a movie called Bar Girls, about a bunch of constantly shifting, insanely neurotic lesbian romantic relationships. I thought it was impossibly over the top. Of course, at that point I'd only had one date. One year later, I had been in several relationships every bit as insane. I spent two years in the lesbian dating game, experiencing firsthand what the Sexual Revolution has done to people's ability to commit. The straight women who write Cosmo are always complaining that they can't get men to commit to marriage. The women I've dated couldn't handle commitments along the lines of "I'll meet you at eight". I dated one woman for two weeks. Not only was she unable to stay faithful for an entire fortnight, I also caught her in four separate lies - which means there must be more I didn't stick around long enough to find out about. Then there was the one who was sleeping with several other people and using drugs, both of which she lied about right up until the end. And the one who whined and whined about how her ex-girlfriend had battered her and cheated on her, and then dumped me when that same ex asked her to come back. The only lesbians I know who don't have a supply of similar horror stories are the ones who haven't dated yet. And I know that straight men get put through the exact same wringers.
I had dreamed of meeting Miss Right and settling down with her and raising a family, a proper loving family to compensate for the one I didn't have growing up. (This, by the way, is one of the most damaging effects of fe
I know a woman who blew me
Come on, you're on slashdot! There's no way I'm believing that!
captcha: "vomiting", lol.
To take a cue from you, where did the parent say that they thought you sat around to talk about how all men suck and your periods? Its pretty hypocritical of you to assume that just because the parent made what you took (way too literally) to be a sexist and uninformed comment, that the parent thought you and "the girls" sit around and talk about such rubbish simply because they mentioned drinking margaritas.
Seriously, you are way too wound up, trying to make mountains out of the tiniest of molehills. Why don't you go do something fun, by yourself. Get away from people for a while. Maybe when you come back your skin will be a little thicker...
Soon, all computers will come with a free dildo and THAT'S JUST FINE!
Don't they already? Or are you saying that you can get a refund on the MS Windows license?!
You'll find women making jokes of men, and men doing the same. The only difference men don't care but women will want to enter men locker rooms if they could.
There was a study that there are about 4% of the population that are true multi-taskers. The tests were done regarding cell phone talking and driving. I do believe that a small group can do more than one task at a time, such as typing this message and holding a conversation.
Good thing you remembered this nameless study, otherwise you'd have lost this argument! Phew!
Good thing I can apparently google cell phone driving multitasking in less than 5s and note the 3rd entry
I may have been lazy or in a hurry with the last post. You, however, should please turn in your geek card to the next real geek you meet.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Harm and cruelty? Go on make jokes as you want, most guys won't give a toss what women say among themselves.
The fact remains that society on a whole does not accept the fact that women abusing men happens and so when it does we do tend to look the other way but still make a monster out of the guy that does it. The reality is that regardless of your gender if you abuse your counterpart you are the monster and should change. Simply leaving the situation does not cure or change you. Your friend is no angel because she left. She is still as messed up as she was before she left. To think otherwise is not only rediculous but nieve. Instead of getting defensive about the differences between the sexes or picking on each other, if more people just accepted the fact that yes there is a difference in what each gender is good at and celebrate those differences instead of thinking that the differences are weaknesses people would get along so much better. I have never understood why a woman would want to be treated like a man, when men are truthful they will tell you they adore and look up to the women in their lives. Why would you want to change that? Guys do not adore other guys ( in general ). Personally I recognize the differences that exist between myself and my wife. We each are better at some things than the other but together we are pretty awesome at most everything. Does it mean we don't dissagree? No but you find compromises. Society on a whole ignores this.
This whole comment sounds like Tommy Wiseau wrote it.
It's funny that with every comment made about women being abused, it becomes a tit-for-tat session, wherein men jump up and yell, "MEN are abused TOO!" Yes, they are. There are plenty of abusive women out there. There, does that validate anything? And have I denied anything, saying that men AREN'T abused anywhere in this thread? No, I haven't. I'm sick and tired of having to validate this crap, and the fact that men are starting this movement as if they're suddenly second-class citizens is so absurd to me.
Whether or not men get treated badly for being men in general, it is most definitely not a given, and most certainly not at the degree that women are subjected to in being women. You don't have to carry mace or other weaponry when going down a dark street because women pose a threat to you, generally-speaking. You get paid more than the woman next to you doing the same work in many cases. You all but get a parade if you stick around to be a father, as if that shouldn't be a given, while a professional woman working outside the home has to deal with people saying, "But don't you want to be home with your kids?" to her at a constant, painting her as a bad mother for not wanting to leave a high-paying career and become a housewife.
The fact that you perceive a woman wanting change and respect, whether in a professional field, not reproducing and being their own person as "being treated like a man" says a lot. Your comment, I have never understood why a woman would want to be treated like a man, when men are truthful they will tell you they adore and look up to the women in their lives. = Giving up admiration if they don't want kids, want to work a professional job, etc., the things women SHOULD be doing, amirite?
We don't want to be men. We just want the men who say "what's she doing outta the kitchen?? HAR HAR!" to stfu. We want the general, flippant disrespect to stop. That's not women's rights, it's common decency between evolved humans.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
Women are overly sensitive, from the perspective of a man. From the perspective of another woman, most women are perfectly fine.
Most of the rest of that list is a bit of a stretch of the imagination to pull out of my post, however the biggest point I'm trying to make is that the sexes are DIFFERENT. Rather than being combative about it, I think for the most part we've gotten rid of the harmful bits and the rest people should just learn to deal with, on both sides.
Perhaps you should take your own advise and not think that you know someone and how they are when you post and people would not do it to you. My wife is a professional. She does get paid what her male counterparts get paid. Not every man is as you think. By you continuing to yap on and on without listening to yourself makes you come off exactly as you desire not to. Just take a pause. That is all I am saying.
Never said she wasn't, did I? And I also never said every man is against women, did I? Gave as generic statements as I could, never once claiming to "know you".
Dropping it, cos' I am sick of it.
You want to know how to help your kids? LEAVE THEM THE F*&K ALONE. --George Carlin
It isn't hyperbole! It's the default explanation supplied in virtually every news story about why most girls don't become interested in math and science at a young age, or why young women don't seek college degrees or careers in science, engineering, and technology.
You turned it into hyperbole by simplifying it into black and white, throwing out all nuance and complexity. You only undermine your own position by characterizing those who disagree as having a grade-school attitude. Anyone with a reasonable level of critical thinking ability will read what you wrote and think to themselves, "If that's the level of his understanding of the opposition, then it's probably the level of his understanding of the entire debate."
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Women don't dominate these fields because men make them feel unwelcome. Who says the men feel welcome in these fields? The garage innovation that remains the source of much of this talent and change has nothing to do with a culture of acceptance and everything to do with people going off on their own investing their time in these things. Women don't do it. No one stopped them. They could have founded apple or microsoft or google or facebook... they didn't because this doesn't interest them.
And it's also rather silly to say that only women can make products for women. The perfume industry is dominated by men. They make most of it. Men also tend to dominate the fashion industry. On and on. Look at all the products that are mostly consumed by women and you'll find that there are a lot of men not just running it but designing it and providing the creative energy for it.
I don't know why that is... it just is... and before you say it's all about male oppression of women... in the fashion industry we're talking about mostly openly gay men. If you think gay men have an easier chance of it then women... you're high.
I've decided to stop wasting my time responding to AC trolls/sockpuppets... so if you want a response from me... login.
Thats hilarious. I just did the same damn thing in response to someone else in this thread. I had a relatively long post, but not as long as the other two, written out in response to that ridiculous list someone else posted.
*poof* Gone.
So he/she got the short answer instead.
>You turned it into hyperbole by simplifying it into black and white, throwing out all nuance and complexity.
Now that would be a good example of "hyperbole". I predicted that someone else would throw out all nuance and complexity, because that happens quite frequently in the mainstream dialog on this issue as exampled by the press. If you'd like an explicit acknowledgement from me that personal preferences can be influenced by social messaging, then you have it.
Ever try to develop ambidexterity?
Yeah, but my stick is called a "pool cue", I try and avoid fighting with them. :)
And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
I studied celtic stickfighting for a bit, I still try to keep my hand in it from time to time.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
If none of this is multitasking to you, you'll have to clarify your use of the term.
I'm not sure you understand the difference between "multitasking" and just doing a more complicated task. Running in place while clapping your hands is not multitasking. It may take some practice to coordinate various parts of your body (like the "walking and chewing gum" thing that some people seem to worry about), but pattern-based activities can be learned and "replayed" (generally with significant variation).
I usually multitask when playing the piano. I...
* Get fingers positioned right (both hands of course)
* Decide on little touches like dynamics, stoccato, pedaling, rubato, what emotional content I want to convey, if any; I often make these up anew each time
* Decide on changes to the piece, like different rhythms, extra grace notes, changed chords, etc.
* Evaluate my playing--"missed note", "incorrect dynamics", "this emotional arc sucks", "I really like that passage at that speed", etc.
As someone who has been a professional freelance keyboardist and, more importantly, a professional accompanist, I call all of these tasks simply "playing the piano." This is not multitasking. They are all constituent tasks which require coordination, but they do not split your attention -- if they do, you can't really play the piano.
* Perhaps read music
Yeah, as someone who used to sight-read as an accompanist for vocalist auditions and such, again, this is an essential task of being a good pianist.
According to your criteria, anyone who could read a newspaper aloud would be a tremendous "multitasker" -- after all, he is not only moving his eyes along the page, parsing words, punctuation, grammar, etc., silently, but he is also causing his mouth to articulate complex patterns of open and closed sounds, varying speed, inflection, articulation, dynamics, etc. to make the meaning of the text and its emotional content clear to a listener... etc, etc.
I'm not saying it's easy for everyone to read aloud in a fluent and effective manner. It takes practice. But I'd hardly call that "multitasking." Would you? If not, why is playing an instrument any different?
* Let my mind wander, thinking about the day or interactions I had with someone or sometimes a math problem (to calibrate difficulty, I was fiddling with pointwise approximations of complex measurable functions by polynomials almost everywhere a while ago, and the non-null-homotopicness of a particular curve yesterday)
Doing a repetitive physical skill along with more active "thinking" is again not multitasking. People run on the treadmill while watching TV. Are they multitasking? Playing piano is slightly more complicated, but I would bet lots of money that your ability to actively engage with your musical interpretation goes way down when you are deeply involved in some unrelated thoughts. You essentially let your hands go on "autopilot" while you think about something else, just like the runner watching TV. Yes, you might still vary your musical performance somewhat, just as you might slow down or speed up your running, but anything more generally requires "taking turns" with your attention.
* Listen to people if they're talking around me or listen to TV if it's on; I can tune these out if I wish
Yep, just like running on the treadmill while doing these things. I dare you to come up with an innovative performance including complex changes to all the musical aspects you discussed while actively paying attention to these other things.
Interestingly I can't respond verbally to someone while playing the piano. I can understand someone perfectly and think of a response (nodding if yes/no, for instance), but the verbal part of my brain seems to be engaged with the music.
This takes practice. As someo
Your threshold for what constitutes multitasking seems unnecessarily high. Decreased skill at individual tasks is irrelevant to what qualifies as multitasking for me, so long as it doesn't decrease to zero. I am indeed worse in some ways at thinking about complex math problems while playing the piano, but so what? It often helps me see an approach I was missing because I was focusing too much on the line of reasoning I had been pursuing. Many times I've been playing, gotten new insight into a problem, and then stopped playing to pursue the math completely. In any case, I never said multitasking was efficient or inefficient, just that it exists (the context of my post was someone saying, "No one can multi-task. Only switch between single tasks.").
You seem to arbitrarily group related tasks into meta-tasks and I'm not sure why. I define tasks as things that can be done independently and use different parts of my brain (the second half is unfortunately hard to make explicit). A person can play the piano without evaluating their performance (for instance, by wearing ear plugs) or the reverse (eg. by listening to a recording of themselves). A person playing while evaluating is doing more things at once. The tasks are related, but I don't care. The two actions use different parts of my brain and can be done independently of each other so they're different tasks to me.
You seem to want multitasking to be difficult. Walking and talking at the same time without running into things is indeed multitasking by any definition I can think of that doesn't have arbitrary difficulty or complexity requirements. Your version may more accurately be termed something like "efficient, complex multitasking".
Finally, please don't project yourself on me so much. Our experiences are somewhat different, and I suspect I'm significantly better at "efficient, complex multitasking" (which I'll leave implicitly defined). As I mentioned with juggling while doing other activities, I vary the pattern. That's not "autopilot"; there's a small amount of independent thought required--the muscle movements themselves probably do qualify as being on "autopilot", for what that's worth. As an example, while revising this post, I just found myself doing an odd low amplitude, high speed pattern, which was momentarily surprising since I found out about it from the particularly loud sound the balls made while slapping against my hands. The revising part and the juggling part of my conscious mind had briefly diverged, though both were doing independent, creative things, not just regurgitating past actions by rote.
Radical feminist detected on American soil. Probability of mission hindrance....................ZERO PERCENT!!! We will not fear the pink menace.
It's really not though. I pulled all those just by skimming down your comment.
Look my intention here is not be combative or to try to make you look like a misogynist or something. As I said, I believe you made your post with the best of intentions which (unfortunately, for you) made it the perfect target of what I'm trying to say. The point I'm trying to make is that all of this is so completely baked into our culture that it's difficult for men (and many women, even!) to see the problems. The goal is to get you--get anyone!--to look at this and say "hmm, what if he's right?"
I know first hand how hard it is to accept this stuff. It feels like you have to give up fun and harmless jokes and lose out of the feeling of camaraderie with other men joking about taking an us-vs-them approach to women. The first knock on the door of understanding for me was a Sociology 101 course I took in college to (easily, I thought) fill a humanities req. One day the professor said something to the effect of "gender is not intrinsically linked to sex." As you might imagine, I was horrified and nearly left because I thought this must be some sort of psychotic feminist propaganda.
It seeded that "what if" though. What if we realized that little girls tease and play in the dirt, just like boys, at least until we beat it out of them by telling
Sorry, I was busy frantically trying to verify all the other wholly unsubstantiated claims on the Internet to get to yours. My bad, dog.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
Sorry, I was busy frantically trying to verify all the other wholly unsubstantiated claims on the Internet to get to yours. My bad, dog.
And yet you found the 10s to post an insulting reply.
The cesspool just got a check and balance.
Yeah, just one of the cores is a DSP and the other one a traditional CPU.
Yep, dummy.
by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.