I think it's a form of hypnotism really. The government has a vested interest in keeping the masses hypnotized that polygraphs are magical lie detectors. Therefore, anyone who knows how to defeat the righteous magic must be some kind of evil super-genius. For some reason, this works in the USA. Maybe it's just yet another sign of a failed public education system and anti-intellectual sentiment that demonizes critical thinking.
We see the same kind of woo and bullshit when it comes to "cyber" security. Big companies are our angels and gods. Therefore, they must have good control over this magic called computer networking. Furthermore, if somebody comes along and accesses information they're not supposed to be able to, well, we see trivial things such as changing a get parameter in a URL hysterically painted as some evil supergenius technique all the time.
Again, keep in mind that there's nothing magical about hypnotism, either. It's just that it's easier to hypnotize somebody who places more value on "fitting in" and being seen as "normal" or "not special" than it is to hypnotize somebody who places value on being objectively correct. Somebody who is easily hypnotized, as the people in the USA seem to be on a number of issues, is merely somebody who would rather consent and do what's expected, i.e. do what the hypnotist is suggesting, so that they don't stand out as somebody with scary superpowers that could resist a hypnotist.
Of course, the hypnotist, the hacker, and the polygraph administrator are all modern versions of the witch doctor or wizard. The witch doctor and wizard draw their power, naturally, from superstition and a culture that has a deep seated need for wizards and witch doctors to exist.
Sure, confidence about their profession and the subject matter that entails.
Confidence that because they're MDs and therefore every other subject matter must be trivial compared to their social status... that's just disgusting when up against it.
I had a conversation with an MD once when I used to work taking calls at a call center that went something like this. Now, this was at a separate company from the hospital and the MD's practice that had no access to the hospital or doctor's schedule.
MD: "Are you illiterate? Why are you paging me when I'm in surgery? Are you too stupid to read what's in front of your face?"
Me: "There's no information like that here. How can we find out when you're in surgery?"
MD: "I don't need to tell you that because the problem is your lack of reading comprehension, Velex."
Me: "Can somebody call us before you go into surgery so we can put a note here that says to hold your..."
MD: "I don't need to put up with your attitude. Don't worry about coming into work tomorrow, Velex, because you don't have a job anymore."
Somehow, that doctor was unable to fire me, and I came in the next day just fine.
An MD who can't even figure out that he needs to get the practice manager to fax over his schedule or have an RN call in when he's going into surgery if he doesn't want to be paged while in surgery is a shitty problem-solver. That's not somebody I'd want giving me advice about something as important as my health. I'd sure as hell never want to be under that guy's knife.
Of course, as others have pointed out, it all boils down to how the AMA keeps MDs artificially scarce so that their wages are inflated way beyond what they need to be. Org chem is that difficult because it's a weed-out course. We need to drop our collective attitude that MDs are something special. Open up more residency positions, let MD wages plummet from $400k down to around $100k where they ought to be, end hazing practices in residency programs, regulate their hours worked just the same as we regulate truck drivers' hours and for the same reasons too, and a lot of these problems will solve themselves.
It's bad when one attempts to construct a dichotomy and power struggle with the intention of assigning moral virtue and stigma to an individual on account of gender. None of the languages I've studied that have grammatical gender presume that the els are raping the las or that the dies are made of sugar, spice, and everything nice and the dases are morally abhorrent for not just being ders like god meant.
a rise in the dominance visual images (which he sees as signifying feminine preeminence) over the written word (signifying masculine hierarchical systems of power)
Huh?
Erm... what?
News anchor voice from Starship Troopers: Would you like to know more?
Yes?
Shlain contrasts the feminine right-brained oral teachings of Socrates, Buddha, and Jesus with the masculine creeds that evolved when their spoken words were committed to writing. The first book written in an alphabet was the Old Testament and its most important passage was the Ten Commandments. The first two reject of any goddess influence and ban any form of representative art. (www.alphabetvsgoddess.com)
Uhh.. huh. So what you've done there is you took 3 male teachers, presumed their teachings to be somehow feminine, and then completely and utterly misunderstood the evolution of the Abrahamaic religions and their conquest of "pagan" and "heathen" traditions.
Furthermore, you've decided to ascribe gender two complimentary media and create some male vs. female, testosterone vs. estrogen, rapist vs. rape victim conflict where none need exist.
Agh. Is it just me or do folks who aren't trans have a very tenuous (at best) grasp of gender? At any rate, this tells us more about the way cisgendered folks (folks who aren't transgendered) identify with the phenomenon of gender than it tells us about gender itself, and that is the startling point here. Apparently, if one is cisgendered, the matching gender of one's mind and reproductive system conspires to weld the idea of gender so inextricibly to the experience of existing or being that one then neurotically seeks to paint every last thing in the world with gender!
Well, now it all makes sense. This is how mathematics can be rape. Even written language itself is rape! Sad news for our feminists who want more womyn-born-womyn in computer careers!
What on earth is even the basis for this idea that written language is somehow masculine and artistic rendering is somehow feminine beyond some historical coincidences? This idea is just such an utter jumble now that I think about it more, I can't decide whether the case being made here is that all progress that separates human beings from every other animal on the face of the planet is not something that women have participated in and is the antithesis of an entire gender!
How confusing. In our attempts to preserve the stereotypical innocence of womyn-born-womyn, we seem to have unintentionally written off femininity as irrelevant and unable to handle the rigors of continuing to evolve to something other than mere talking animals, no differently than the old misogynists we're supposed to revile!
Anybody who buys into this crap should spend a year or two working in a nearly all female environment like a call center. The idea that the female nature is this essence of placid innocence is just... so utterly naive as to cease being cute and become insidious now that we've decided that careers are for both genders. At least when boys grow up and become men, they learn that they need to put aside their pettiness and work together. Nobody seems to be interested in teaching this skill to womyn-born-womyn, presuming them not individuals capable of greed, jealousy, vexation, and destruction, but somehow "better" or more "pure" than anyone without the status of being a womyn-born-womyn.
Did anyone ever think that the problem with the kids is that the older generation has infested academia with these kinds of superficial philosophies of anti-individualism and collectivism?
Maybe that's why the kids are retreating to their iApps. Day after day we drill it into their heads that all men are evil rapists and all women are helpless victims, a notion as old as the hills but treble reinforced by feminism and worthless gender philosophies and handed do
Which genes are related to female bisexuality? Can we start a selective breeding campaign?
Fine, I troll, I troll! I see the point you're making. I wish more people would think this stuff through more thoroughly. There has to be a reason why pessimism and homosexuality don't breed themselves out.
They say it's easier to destroy than create. Well, sure, of course it is. That's not what's going on here and I think you're getting at something else.
These are absolutely brilliant machines. Frightening, too! But the engineering, the algorithms, the mathematics, everything that has to go into these instruments of death... it's all just so fucking clever!
Yet, I think what the case may be is that it's easier to understand destruction than creation.
I sure hope we hairless apes that can build these things because we understand destruction find a way to see value in understanding creation.
I think a good part of this problem is the stupid stereotyping that goes on here. Why think (I'm being generous here, I admit) that alleged "affordable health care" or "Obama is black/Democrat" are the only possible reasons for opposing such a law?How about you shut up for a moment and listen a bit to an opponent of this law
Yes, somebody mod this person up! The only problem are the idiots in government.
There are ways to oppose a law that don't involve throwing a temper tantrum and refusing to fund the government that we all, one way or another, voted in. Medicare, medicaid, food stamps, welfare, free abortions, it doesn't matter whether you support or are against those things, you can't just decide to defund them out of the blue and expect there not to be consequences.
Things are already changing because of Romney^H^H^H^H^H^HObama-care. Certain people are becoming in-eligible for certain programs, because funding was, was at least!, being shifting to other programs, and now this crap.
I have employer provided health care. I want a single payer system after a very long time thinking about it. Yes, there's going to have to be a constitutional amendment to authorize congress to do so. (And I don't think really, that there's a problem with me calling myself a libertarian *and* a proponent of single-payer health care)... but... THERE ARE CORRECT WAYS TO DO THESE THINGS. THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT THE INCHANGEABLE WORD OF GOD, JUST SMART PEOPLE WHO REALIZED THAT THE ONLY CONSTANT IS CHANGE. I have been wasting so much of my fucking time this October because nobody can think rationally about health care. There are scary things that can kill you, like breast cancer (and October is the month folks picked out for breast cancer awarenes, well I get it! It fucking exists! I'm at a 10x risk to any cis woman so SHUT UP, I WILL PAY FOR MY OWN MAMMOGRAM WHEN I'M 40 WITH MY OWN FUCKING MONEY I EARNED [presuming they'll even let me throw money at them to get my boobs squished instead of going omg evil commie trans person I'm more libertarian god damn it than you can imagine just transgendered *REGEAN SMASH*, but that's another issue entirely]). There are many, many things wrong with Romney^H^H^H^H^H^HObama care.
Frankly, the partisanship over this issue is utterly revolting. It doesn't help to lose our damned minds.
The USA is an obese person who doesn't see they have a problem, except that folks who care about that person think the best way to solve that obese problem is by refusing to feed it AT ALL. IT'S NOT. YOU DON'T FIX OBESITY WITH STARVATION.
Hell, sidenote. When both feminists and me agree that a movie is a piece of shit and degrading to women, hold on, it might have been a really horrible excuse for a generic summer action movie. I can't believe I'm with feminism on something. Gah!
Decent writing? lol. I liked Star Trek. Into Darkness was pure shit. Not because I'm going to say but canon this canon that. Into Darkness/was/ canon. It failed all on its own as a shallow shit story with 1d characters. Sorry. I don't like boobs and I didn't realize that the only appealing part of that move would be drooling over boobs and laughing at Checkov.
So, I take it you'll be finding me a mate?
No, no, you idiot. I don't care that you probably had kids because you were a lemming trying to fit in and now you regret it. There are lots of other reasons to be "infertile" that aren't lgbtqfaomgwtfbbq. What about straight folks who choose not to reproduce? Where's the anger and moral outrage for them?
You are nothing more than a bigot and a busybody.
For the record, Barilla pasta is subpar and gets soggy instead cooking properly, so IT don't see why anyone would buy it anyway.
Quite right. The number one thing they never explain is why premiums are going up.
I read a story about something like this once. I think it was called either Chicken Little or The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Exactly. I'm sick and tired of things people do on computers that they can't be bothered to think all the way through because computers are supposed to be these magical boxes being called "hacking."
Yeah, that gets weird real quick. Personally I prefer the holographic universe theory. Then everything can stay with three spatial dimensions and it can still be turtles all the way down... or in....
Oh I'm not worried about myself. I'll be relevant in the workforce long after all the agents, accountants, salespeople, and customer service at the call center I work at have been replaced by speech recognition and AI.
The problem is that not everybody can be a robot designer or tester. Really, not everybody can.
The story I linked to has some glaring flaws, but I like to link to it because it's short, somewhat plausible by suggesting that middle management and HR will be the first to go, and it highlights the problem humanity will face in the next 200-300 years.
The way I see it, there are four options:
Let individuals who are not capable of obtaining the skills required for the new jobs in the capitalist world presented by Manna just starve to death and die, thus culling them from the genome.
House those individuals in dorm-like tenements, and provide them with 3 basic yet complete meals per day. (For the benefit of the reader who didn't read that story, this is the option the capitalist society chooses in Manna.)
Create a faux economy for those individuals to participate in. In my view, this is about to start or perhaps already has started to happen. The HR drones and middle managers will still come into work every day in the morning, dressed and ready for business, but their jobs will be little more than rubber-stamping whatever decision their computer comes to and pressing the Ok button. That way, those individuals who lack the ability to cultivate the creativity and technical skill required to be a part of the real economy will still be ostensibly "employed" and warming seats in an office.
Finally, there's the communist solution represented by Project Australia and a good deal of wishful thinking where "everybody wins."
Really, the contrast between the capitalist-welfare society and Project Australia in Manna is striking in its simplicity. In either solution, everybody lives and is fed. However, because the welfare class is unable to obtain basic resources to pursue creative interests, it doesn't happen. Instead, the ownership class becomes obscenely wealthy and stagnates. On the other hand, Project Australia gives everyone (along with some wishful thinking about creepy devices that can disconnect one's mind from one's body as a way to control crime) access to enough resources to pursue creative interests. By sharing the wealth of the post-scarcity society equally among the member/owners of Project Australia, creativity becomes abundant rather than stagnating and putrifying as it does in the hands of only the elite few owners of the capitalist society.
The problem is what to do with people who really are unable to become robot technicians or whatever jobs there will be when accounting, middle management, HR, and various other middle class jobs and perhaps even medicine, law, and primary education jobs no longer exist.
The brilliance of Manna as a story is that the automation of vast parts of the economy doesn't happen because of groundbreaking advances in strong AI or machine vision, and it's not the meneal jobs such as fast food or retail that go first. Sure, humanity started on its way toward a post-scarcity society by replacing dangerous, repetitve, and physically demanding jobs with robots. However, perhaps it's correct that it will be the paper-pushers who become replaced by software in the next leg of the journey towards post-scarcity.
I'm a bit late to the party, but I came here to say that the word objectification has even been raped of all meaning by feminism.
Does adult entertainment for lesbians count as objectication or sexism in feminism? Nope. In fact, Dworkin iirc, in her fervor to get adult entertainment banned in Canada, suddenly had a change in heart when she realized that lesbians would be impacted. That was a while ago.
Does sexual depictions of men count as objectification or sexism in feminism? Nope, nope, nope.
But even show a drawing of a fictional woman that somebody who is attracted to women might find appealing, and *boom* sexism and objectification!
I have yet to meet a feminist that didn't display an inherently sexist and chauvenist worldview on some level.
And, yes, GP is correct. This isn't sexism. Nobody was discriminated against. This is only sexism in the context of feminism where sexism merely means an act done by a man, and sexist is a synonym for a man just the same as male.
This is lewd, profane, irresponsible, tasteless, immature, crude, and many more things. It did not, however, discriminate against any individuals on the basis of their sex.
Step away from the feminist brainwashing. There is no metaphysical "womanhood" that has been disadvantaged here. Declaring this sexist is the same chauvenist, bigoted thinking that led Janice Raymond to conclude that trans women are rapists of some metaphysical "womanhood."
Sex is not dehumanizing. The vast majority of humans are sexual beings. It's only feminism that perverts healthy human sexuality into acts of rape and objectification and blames an entire gender caste (assigned gender at birth) for the acts of individuals. I won't suggest that what individual feminists need a "real man" or a "real woman" in their lives, but I will suggest that their attitudes about sexuality are not only unhealthy but deeply bigoted.
Feminism is a deeply sexist philosophy and a deeply dehumanizing philosophy. Feminism reduces men and trans women to sexual objects. Feminism presumes that all those assigned the male gender at birth---the male gender caste from which even complete gender transition cannot extricate one---are not only attracted to womyn-born-womyn but cannot think of anything else other than having sex with womyn-born-womyn against their will. The homosexual man and the trans woman who is attracted to men, according to feminism, are merely putting on an act that they are not attracted to women for the sole reason of springing on a woman at the least likely moment and raping her like a camoflauged predator.
If that's not objectifying, sexist (for the reason of presuming that homosexual men and trans women who are not attracted to other women must be liars), and dehumanizing, I don't know what is.
Funny how kids of holier-than-thous usually tend to end up being lonely alcoholics. If only the holier-than-thous would actually do what's best for the children, like, oh I don't know, I can't have children myself because of what my ex-parents did to me, but maybe we could start from the premise that in 18 short years, your innocent child is going to be all growed up no matter whether you shelter him or not. And if you had a female child, god help you, because sheltering her about sex is going to get her pregnant at 17. But maybe that's what holier-than-thous want. A future generation of middle age alcoholics and pregnant teenagers. Won't somebody think of our children's children's children?
I don't think the ability to communicate to other customers or the general public is "under attack" per se, but the way that wronged customers can effectively vent their frustration is changing.
Before, if you were wronged, nobody could possibly know about it until some critical mass of others were wronged to where it could go through the grapevine and materialize as a picket. The picket was one way the way wronged individuals could communicate to the public at large what had happened to them and that the problem might just be more systemic than a few malcontents and unfortunate circumstances.
Other relevant traditional methods going by the wayside include investigative journalism.
Both of those things---picketing and investigative journalism---are being replaced by reputation websites such as Yelp and Angie's List and even/. right here. Now, Yelp and Angie's List use very different models, and certainly Slashdot is a completely different galaxy. There's probably plenty of room for innovation.
The bottom line, though, is that the idea of reputation is not going away. The way reputation is communicated and learned about is changing, though. There's Yelp and its shady reputation its gained itself. There's Angie's List, a service that people are willing to pay for. And, well, there's Slashdot. The comments section says it all, especially when certain notorious businesses come up such as Paypal.
So, I guess, shady businesses can hide behind parking lots and in malls, but the internet is the thing from which they truly cannot hide.
Because "identity theft" sounds a lot more criminal than "read the guy's password off the Post-it on the underside of his keyboard."
And a WHOLE lot more criminal than sysadmin typed "cd/directory/i/have/access/to/because/i/am/root," which is a command he types all the time in the course of his duties.
I mean, srsly. It takes a "brilliant" person to type "sudo bob" or "runas/user:bob"? WTF
IT'S ON A COMPUTER. IT'S MAGIC! BEHOLD MY COMPOSE KEY POWERS AND BOW BEFORE MY LEVEL 84 MINIONS OF THE PLANE OF ASTAROTH: £
(please don't eat it/. please don't eat it/.)
(well, i hit preview and I got a circumflex A before my pound [money] sign, so good enough *sigh*)
1.) Ok, I'll use the term cis woman instead. I had figured that since feminist cis women came up with the term, it would be ok to use that term when referring to cis women.
2.)
Throwing a fit because you assume that anyone talking about sexism in tech fields must be blaming men puts up unnecessary barriers. You make it them against you or from their perspective "you against them". There is no reason for this.
I have yet to have had it presented to me by a cis woman in any other way.
3.)
This sounds extremely belittling. If you take this into your interactions with all women then you are most definitely sexist.
Why does her lack of knowledge in maths make me sexist?
You seem to be unable to understand that the individuals I'm referring to truly do not have a basic middle school grasp of mathematics. That tells me that you're the one who's biased.
4.)
Anytime I'm on the receiving end of sexism, it seems that expecting myself to be judged as an individual is asking too much. I am sick of being held responsible for the actions of others. I will re-evaluate my attitude if I ever meet one of those mystical women who view men as individuals instead of sex objects and objects of their misguided rage.
Of course I'm being prejudiced.
You know what, though? This is going to make you hate me. It absolutely will.
The cis women I work with absolutely love me. They love the work I do for them. They love me for assisting them for the billionth time with the same issue and not expecting them to learn anything about anything on a computer. I figured out that if I treat them like children and view them as children, things just go so much smoother and they LOVE it.
Sure, call me a lair. But I'm telling the truth and there's no damned feminist or cis woman who can convince me otherwise.
I have had a "bad time" with more than a few women. Jfyi, I am not attracted to women and have never met a woman I've even wanted to date in the slightest.
I agree it is child abuse. And had you noticed that the leaders and elders of the religions involved are exclusively male? So why do you blame women specificly for this? They may be complicit but they are not running the show.
Firstly, who is more likely to nag the other into going to church every Sunday? The husband or the wife? Who is more likely to buy into religious superstition?
Of course, we know this has nothing to do with religion, because the USA is only of the only countries in the world that routinely mutilates its infant boys.
I came to my tipping point about womyn-born-womyn last summer in 2012. If you remember, there was a whole lot of hoopla about "my body, my choice." Understandable. Up until last summer, I had used the statement "What if I woke up tomorrow and my wish somehow came magically true and I was completely biologically unquestionably female" as a guide to figure out where, if anywhere, I stood on certain issues. So, I figured, all research shows that giving women more access to abortion and birth control lets us all have nice things, so sure, they've got a point. My body, my choice. Sure, it was terrible what my ex-parents had forced me to suffer through without even telling me what they'd done, but that was in the past.
HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, was also in the news because of controversy over the CDC's recommendation that teenagers should be vaccinated. The problem, according to our usual wingnuts like Palin and Bachman, was that it was wrong to sexualize teenage girls by vaccinated them against a sexually transmitted disease, and this viewpoint resounded with an astounding number of people.
So, we can't vaccinate girls against a sexually transmitted disease, because the act of poking her arm with a needle constitutes sexualizing her and probably rape, who knows.
Then, in the middle of all that stuff going on, the American Academy of Pediatrics opens their gob and flip-flops their position on circumcision from recommending against to recommending for! With cervical cancer being the main concern! Right in the middle of all these womyn-born-womyn going on about "my body, my choice!" Right after the CDC recommended a plan of action that might, I don't know, actually prevent HPV infection!
These are the names of the people on the AAP's Task Force on Circumcision:
Susan Blank, MD, MPH, Chairperson
Michael Brady, MD, Representing the AAP Committee on Pediatrics AIDS
Ellen Buerk, MD, Representing the AAP Board of Directors
Waldemar Carlo, MD, Representing the AAP Committee on Fetus and Newborn
Douglas Diekema, MD, MPH, Representing the AAP Committee on Bioethics
Andrew Freedman, MD, Representing the AAP Section on Urology
Lynne Maxwell, MD, Representing the AAP Section on Anesthesiology
Steven Wegner, MD, JD, Representing the AAP Committee on Child Health Financing
Notice anything interesting? It seems that females can get MDs and speculate about matters of men's health, but they can't program a fucking computer.
So, I think I have all the right I need to blame womyn-born-womyn collectively and severally for the physical pain I endured without even knowing that something had been done to me. I don't know if the AAP's 2012 flip-flop was supposed to be a political stunt or not, but I got the message loud and clear. Men have no "my body, my choice" in the USA, and there are at least 3 females who could have said something about it but instead choose to back the practice.
I had a body part violently torn from me without my consent, and I endured 19 years of completely unnecessary pain because I didn't even know it had been done to me, and now this is a women's health issue because America thinks mutilating boys is the b
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's a form of hypnotism really. The government has a vested interest in keeping the masses hypnotized that polygraphs are magical lie detectors. Therefore, anyone who knows how to defeat the righteous magic must be some kind of evil super-genius. For some reason, this works in the USA. Maybe it's just yet another sign of a failed public education system and anti-intellectual sentiment that demonizes critical thinking.
We see the same kind of woo and bullshit when it comes to "cyber" security. Big companies are our angels and gods. Therefore, they must have good control over this magic called computer networking. Furthermore, if somebody comes along and accesses information they're not supposed to be able to, well, we see trivial things such as changing a get parameter in a URL hysterically painted as some evil supergenius technique all the time.
Again, keep in mind that there's nothing magical about hypnotism, either. It's just that it's easier to hypnotize somebody who places more value on "fitting in" and being seen as "normal" or "not special" than it is to hypnotize somebody who places value on being objectively correct. Somebody who is easily hypnotized, as the people in the USA seem to be on a number of issues, is merely somebody who would rather consent and do what's expected, i.e. do what the hypnotist is suggesting, so that they don't stand out as somebody with scary superpowers that could resist a hypnotist.
Of course, the hypnotist, the hacker, and the polygraph administrator are all modern versions of the witch doctor or wizard. The witch doctor and wizard draw their power, naturally, from superstition and a culture that has a deep seated need for wizards and witch doctors to exist.
Sure, confidence about their profession and the subject matter that entails.
Confidence that because they're MDs and therefore every other subject matter must be trivial compared to their social status... that's just disgusting when up against it.
I had a conversation with an MD once when I used to work taking calls at a call center that went something like this. Now, this was at a separate company from the hospital and the MD's practice that had no access to the hospital or doctor's schedule.
MD: "Are you illiterate? Why are you paging me when I'm in surgery? Are you too stupid to read what's in front of your face?"
Me: "There's no information like that here. How can we find out when you're in surgery?"
MD: "I don't need to tell you that because the problem is your lack of reading comprehension, Velex."
Me: "Can somebody call us before you go into surgery so we can put a note here that says to hold your..."
MD: "I don't need to put up with your attitude. Don't worry about coming into work tomorrow, Velex, because you don't have a job anymore."
Somehow, that doctor was unable to fire me, and I came in the next day just fine.
An MD who can't even figure out that he needs to get the practice manager to fax over his schedule or have an RN call in when he's going into surgery if he doesn't want to be paged while in surgery is a shitty problem-solver. That's not somebody I'd want giving me advice about something as important as my health. I'd sure as hell never want to be under that guy's knife.
Of course, as others have pointed out, it all boils down to how the AMA keeps MDs artificially scarce so that their wages are inflated way beyond what they need to be. Org chem is that difficult because it's a weed-out course. We need to drop our collective attitude that MDs are something special. Open up more residency positions, let MD wages plummet from $400k down to around $100k where they ought to be, end hazing practices in residency programs, regulate their hours worked just the same as we regulate truck drivers' hours and for the same reasons too, and a lot of these problems will solve themselves.
It's bad when one attempts to construct a dichotomy and power struggle with the intention of assigning moral virtue and stigma to an individual on account of gender. None of the languages I've studied that have grammatical gender presume that the els are raping the las or that the dies are made of sugar, spice, and everything nice and the dases are morally abhorrent for not just being ders like god meant.
a rise in the dominance visual images (which he sees as signifying feminine preeminence) over the written word (signifying masculine hierarchical systems of power)
Huh?
Erm... what?
News anchor voice from Starship Troopers: Would you like to know more?
Yes?
Shlain contrasts the feminine right-brained oral teachings of Socrates, Buddha, and Jesus with the masculine creeds that evolved when their spoken words were committed to writing. The first book written in an alphabet was the Old Testament and its most important passage was the Ten Commandments. The first two reject of any goddess influence and ban any form of representative art. (www.alphabetvsgoddess.com)
Uhh.. huh. So what you've done there is you took 3 male teachers, presumed their teachings to be somehow feminine, and then completely and utterly misunderstood the evolution of the Abrahamaic religions and their conquest of "pagan" and "heathen" traditions.
Furthermore, you've decided to ascribe gender two complimentary media and create some male vs. female, testosterone vs. estrogen, rapist vs. rape victim conflict where none need exist.
Agh. Is it just me or do folks who aren't trans have a very tenuous (at best) grasp of gender? At any rate, this tells us more about the way cisgendered folks (folks who aren't transgendered) identify with the phenomenon of gender than it tells us about gender itself, and that is the startling point here. Apparently, if one is cisgendered, the matching gender of one's mind and reproductive system conspires to weld the idea of gender so inextricibly to the experience of existing or being that one then neurotically seeks to paint every last thing in the world with gender!
Well, now it all makes sense. This is how mathematics can be rape. Even written language itself is rape! Sad news for our feminists who want more womyn-born-womyn in computer careers!
What on earth is even the basis for this idea that written language is somehow masculine and artistic rendering is somehow feminine beyond some historical coincidences? This idea is just such an utter jumble now that I think about it more, I can't decide whether the case being made here is that all progress that separates human beings from every other animal on the face of the planet is not something that women have participated in and is the antithesis of an entire gender!
How confusing. In our attempts to preserve the stereotypical innocence of womyn-born-womyn, we seem to have unintentionally written off femininity as irrelevant and unable to handle the rigors of continuing to evolve to something other than mere talking animals, no differently than the old misogynists we're supposed to revile!
Anybody who buys into this crap should spend a year or two working in a nearly all female environment like a call center. The idea that the female nature is this essence of placid innocence is just... so utterly naive as to cease being cute and become insidious now that we've decided that careers are for both genders. At least when boys grow up and become men, they learn that they need to put aside their pettiness and work together. Nobody seems to be interested in teaching this skill to womyn-born-womyn, presuming them not individuals capable of greed, jealousy, vexation, and destruction, but somehow "better" or more "pure" than anyone without the status of being a womyn-born-womyn.
Did anyone ever think that the problem with the kids is that the older generation has infested academia with these kinds of superficial philosophies of anti-individualism and collectivism?
Maybe that's why the kids are retreating to their iApps. Day after day we drill it into their heads that all men are evil rapists and all women are helpless victims, a notion as old as the hills but treble reinforced by feminism and worthless gender philosophies and handed do
(That being said, Romney^H^H^H^H^H^HObamacare is pretty much crap. We just need single payer already.)
Yeah I know man! I hate paying for roads I never use! Communist bastards!
Which genes are related to female bisexuality? Can we start a selective breeding campaign?
Fine, I troll, I troll! I see the point you're making. I wish more people would think this stuff through more thoroughly. There has to be a reason why pessimism and homosexuality don't breed themselves out.
They say it's easier to destroy than create. Well, sure, of course it is. That's not what's going on here and I think you're getting at something else.
These are absolutely brilliant machines. Frightening, too! But the engineering, the algorithms, the mathematics, everything that has to go into these instruments of death... it's all just so fucking clever!
Yet, I think what the case may be is that it's easier to understand destruction than creation.
I sure hope we hairless apes that can build these things because we understand destruction find a way to see value in understanding creation.
I think a good part of this problem is the stupid stereotyping that goes on here. Why think (I'm being generous here, I admit) that alleged "affordable health care" or "Obama is black/Democrat" are the only possible reasons for opposing such a law?How about you shut up for a moment and listen a bit to an opponent of this law
Yes, somebody mod this person up! The only problem are the idiots in government.
There are ways to oppose a law that don't involve throwing a temper tantrum and refusing to fund the government that we all, one way or another, voted in. Medicare, medicaid, food stamps, welfare, free abortions, it doesn't matter whether you support or are against those things, you can't just decide to defund them out of the blue and expect there not to be consequences.
Things are already changing because of Romney^H^H^H^H^H^HObama-care. Certain people are becoming in-eligible for certain programs, because funding was, was at least!, being shifting to other programs, and now this crap.
I have employer provided health care. I want a single payer system after a very long time thinking about it. Yes, there's going to have to be a constitutional amendment to authorize congress to do so. (And I don't think really, that there's a problem with me calling myself a libertarian *and* a proponent of single-payer health care)... but... THERE ARE CORRECT WAYS TO DO THESE THINGS. THE CONSTITUTION IS NOT THE INCHANGEABLE WORD OF GOD, JUST SMART PEOPLE WHO REALIZED THAT THE ONLY CONSTANT IS CHANGE. I have been wasting so much of my fucking time this October because nobody can think rationally about health care. There are scary things that can kill you, like breast cancer (and October is the month folks picked out for breast cancer awarenes, well I get it! It fucking exists! I'm at a 10x risk to any cis woman so SHUT UP, I WILL PAY FOR MY OWN MAMMOGRAM WHEN I'M 40 WITH MY OWN FUCKING MONEY I EARNED [presuming they'll even let me throw money at them to get my boobs squished instead of going omg evil commie trans person I'm more libertarian god damn it than you can imagine just transgendered *REGEAN SMASH*, but that's another issue entirely]). There are many, many things wrong with Romney^H^H^H^H^H^HObama care.
Frankly, the partisanship over this issue is utterly revolting. It doesn't help to lose our damned minds.
The USA is an obese person who doesn't see they have a problem, except that folks who care about that person think the best way to solve that obese problem is by refusing to feed it AT ALL. IT'S NOT. YOU DON'T FIX OBESITY WITH STARVATION.
JUST STOP IT. ALL OF YOU. STOP IT.
(and mod khallow up)
Hell, sidenote. When both feminists and me agree that a movie is a piece of shit and degrading to women, hold on, it might have been a really horrible excuse for a generic summer action movie. I can't believe I'm with feminism on something. Gah!
Decent writing? lol. I liked Star Trek. Into Darkness was pure shit. Not because I'm going to say but canon this canon that. Into Darkness /was/ canon. It failed all on its own as a shallow shit story with 1d characters. Sorry. I don't like boobs and I didn't realize that the only appealing part of that move would be drooling over boobs and laughing at Checkov.
So, I take it you'll be finding me a mate? No, no, you idiot. I don't care that you probably had kids because you were a lemming trying to fit in and now you regret it. There are lots of other reasons to be "infertile" that aren't lgbtqfaomgwtfbbq. What about straight folks who choose not to reproduce? Where's the anger and moral outrage for them? You are nothing more than a bigot and a busybody. For the record, Barilla pasta is subpar and gets soggy instead cooking properly, so IT don't see why anyone would buy it anyway.
Quite right. The number one thing they never explain is why premiums are going up. I read a story about something like this once. I think it was called either Chicken Little or The Boy Who Cried Wolf.
Exactly. I'm sick and tired of things people do on computers that they can't be bothered to think all the way through because computers are supposed to be these magical boxes being called "hacking."
Yeah, that gets weird real quick. Personally I prefer the holographic universe theory. Then everything can stay with three spatial dimensions and it can still be turtles all the way down... or in....
Neat game.
Oh I'm not worried about myself. I'll be relevant in the workforce long after all the agents, accountants, salespeople, and customer service at the call center I work at have been replaced by speech recognition and AI.
The problem is that not everybody can be a robot designer or tester. Really, not everybody can.
The story I linked to has some glaring flaws, but I like to link to it because it's short, somewhat plausible by suggesting that middle management and HR will be the first to go, and it highlights the problem humanity will face in the next 200-300 years.
The way I see it, there are four options:
Really, the contrast between the capitalist-welfare society and Project Australia in Manna is striking in its simplicity. In either solution, everybody lives and is fed. However, because the welfare class is unable to obtain basic resources to pursue creative interests, it doesn't happen. Instead, the ownership class becomes obscenely wealthy and stagnates. On the other hand, Project Australia gives everyone (along with some wishful thinking about creepy devices that can disconnect one's mind from one's body as a way to control crime) access to enough resources to pursue creative interests. By sharing the wealth of the post-scarcity society equally among the member/owners of Project Australia, creativity becomes abundant rather than stagnating and putrifying as it does in the hands of only the elite few owners of the capitalist society.
The problem is what to do with people who really are unable to become robot technicians or whatever jobs there will be when accounting, middle management, HR, and various other middle class jobs and perhaps even medicine, law, and primary education jobs no longer exist.
The brilliance of Manna as a story is that the automation of vast parts of the economy doesn't happen because of groundbreaking advances in strong AI or machine vision, and it's not the meneal jobs such as fast food or retail that go first. Sure, humanity started on its way toward a post-scarcity society by replacing dangerous, repetitve, and physically demanding jobs with robots. However, perhaps it's correct that it will be the paper-pushers who become replaced by software in the next leg of the journey towards post-scarcity.
http://www.marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm
and the choices you make in the game will have side effects and the computer players will remember them â" and treat you differently because of them.
Oh great, yet another rep grinding system.
Also telling how people who want you to believe in ghosts and sky wizards are similarily unable to present coherent evidence.
I'm a bit late to the party, but I came here to say that the word objectification has even been raped of all meaning by feminism.
Does adult entertainment for lesbians count as objectication or sexism in feminism? Nope. In fact, Dworkin iirc, in her fervor to get adult entertainment banned in Canada, suddenly had a change in heart when she realized that lesbians would be impacted. That was a while ago.
Does sexual depictions of men count as objectification or sexism in feminism? Nope, nope, nope.
But even show a drawing of a fictional woman that somebody who is attracted to women might find appealing, and *boom* sexism and objectification!
I have yet to meet a feminist that didn't display an inherently sexist and chauvenist worldview on some level.
And, yes, GP is correct. This isn't sexism. Nobody was discriminated against. This is only sexism in the context of feminism where sexism merely means an act done by a man, and sexist is a synonym for a man just the same as male.
This is lewd, profane, irresponsible, tasteless, immature, crude, and many more things. It did not, however, discriminate against any individuals on the basis of their sex.
Step away from the feminist brainwashing. There is no metaphysical "womanhood" that has been disadvantaged here. Declaring this sexist is the same chauvenist, bigoted thinking that led Janice Raymond to conclude that trans women are rapists of some metaphysical "womanhood."
Sex is not dehumanizing. The vast majority of humans are sexual beings. It's only feminism that perverts healthy human sexuality into acts of rape and objectification and blames an entire gender caste (assigned gender at birth) for the acts of individuals. I won't suggest that what individual feminists need a "real man" or a "real woman" in their lives, but I will suggest that their attitudes about sexuality are not only unhealthy but deeply bigoted.
Feminism is a deeply sexist philosophy and a deeply dehumanizing philosophy. Feminism reduces men and trans women to sexual objects. Feminism presumes that all those assigned the male gender at birth---the male gender caste from which even complete gender transition cannot extricate one---are not only attracted to womyn-born-womyn but cannot think of anything else other than having sex with womyn-born-womyn against their will. The homosexual man and the trans woman who is attracted to men, according to feminism, are merely putting on an act that they are not attracted to women for the sole reason of springing on a woman at the least likely moment and raping her like a camoflauged predator.
If that's not objectifying, sexist (for the reason of presuming that homosexual men and trans women who are not attracted to other women must be liars), and dehumanizing, I don't know what is.
Funny how kids of holier-than-thous usually tend to end up being lonely alcoholics. If only the holier-than-thous would actually do what's best for the children, like, oh I don't know, I can't have children myself because of what my ex-parents did to me, but maybe we could start from the premise that in 18 short years, your innocent child is going to be all growed up no matter whether you shelter him or not. And if you had a female child, god help you, because sheltering her about sex is going to get her pregnant at 17. But maybe that's what holier-than-thous want. A future generation of middle age alcoholics and pregnant teenagers. Won't somebody think of our children's children's children?
I don't think the ability to communicate to other customers or the general public is "under attack" per se, but the way that wronged customers can effectively vent their frustration is changing.
Before, if you were wronged, nobody could possibly know about it until some critical mass of others were wronged to where it could go through the grapevine and materialize as a picket. The picket was one way the way wronged individuals could communicate to the public at large what had happened to them and that the problem might just be more systemic than a few malcontents and unfortunate circumstances.
Other relevant traditional methods going by the wayside include investigative journalism.
Both of those things---picketing and investigative journalism---are being replaced by reputation websites such as Yelp and Angie's List and even /. right here. Now, Yelp and Angie's List use very different models, and certainly Slashdot is a completely different galaxy. There's probably plenty of room for innovation.
The bottom line, though, is that the idea of reputation is not going away. The way reputation is communicated and learned about is changing, though. There's Yelp and its shady reputation its gained itself. There's Angie's List, a service that people are willing to pay for. And, well, there's Slashdot. The comments section says it all, especially when certain notorious businesses come up such as Paypal.
So, I guess, shady businesses can hide behind parking lots and in malls, but the internet is the thing from which they truly cannot hide.
Because "identity theft" sounds a lot more criminal than "read the guy's password off the Post-it on the underside of his keyboard."
And a WHOLE lot more criminal than sysadmin typed "cd /directory/i/have/access/to/because/i/am/root," which is a command he types all the time in the course of his duties.
I mean, srsly. It takes a "brilliant" person to type "sudo bob" or "runas /user:bob"? WTF
IT'S ON A COMPUTER. IT'S MAGIC! BEHOLD MY COMPOSE KEY POWERS AND BOW BEFORE MY LEVEL 84 MINIONS OF THE PLANE OF ASTAROTH: £
(please don't eat it /. please don't eat it /.)
(well, i hit preview and I got a circumflex A before my pound [money] sign, so good enough *sigh*)
1.) Ok, I'll use the term cis woman instead. I had figured that since feminist cis women came up with the term, it would be ok to use that term when referring to cis women.
2.)
Throwing a fit because you assume that anyone talking about sexism in tech fields must be blaming men puts up unnecessary barriers. You make it them against you or from their perspective "you against them". There is no reason for this.
I have yet to have had it presented to me by a cis woman in any other way.
3.)
This sounds extremely belittling. If you take this into your interactions with all women then you are most definitely sexist.
Why does her lack of knowledge in maths make me sexist?
You seem to be unable to understand that the individuals I'm referring to truly do not have a basic middle school grasp of mathematics. That tells me that you're the one who's biased.
4.)
Anytime I'm on the receiving end of sexism, it seems that expecting myself to be judged as an individual is asking too much. I am sick of being held responsible for the actions of others. I will re-evaluate my attitude if I ever meet one of those mystical women who view men as individuals instead of sex objects and objects of their misguided rage.
Of course I'm being prejudiced.
You know what, though? This is going to make you hate me. It absolutely will.
The cis women I work with absolutely love me. They love the work I do for them. They love me for assisting them for the billionth time with the same issue and not expecting them to learn anything about anything on a computer. I figured out that if I treat them like children and view them as children, things just go so much smoother and they LOVE it.
Sure, call me a lair. But I'm telling the truth and there's no damned feminist or cis woman who can convince me otherwise.
I have had a "bad time" with more than a few women. Jfyi, I am not attracted to women and have never met a woman I've even wanted to date in the slightest.
I agree it is child abuse. And had you noticed that the leaders and elders of the religions involved are exclusively male? So why do you blame women specificly for this? They may be complicit but they are not running the show.
Firstly, who is more likely to nag the other into going to church every Sunday? The husband or the wife? Who is more likely to buy into religious superstition?
Of course, we know this has nothing to do with religion, because the USA is only of the only countries in the world that routinely mutilates its infant boys.
I came to my tipping point about womyn-born-womyn last summer in 2012. If you remember, there was a whole lot of hoopla about "my body, my choice." Understandable. Up until last summer, I had used the statement "What if I woke up tomorrow and my wish somehow came magically true and I was completely biologically unquestionably female" as a guide to figure out where, if anywhere, I stood on certain issues. So, I figured, all research shows that giving women more access to abortion and birth control lets us all have nice things, so sure, they've got a point. My body, my choice. Sure, it was terrible what my ex-parents had forced me to suffer through without even telling me what they'd done, but that was in the past.
HPV, the virus that causes cervical cancer, was also in the news because of controversy over the CDC's recommendation that teenagers should be vaccinated. The problem, according to our usual wingnuts like Palin and Bachman, was that it was wrong to sexualize teenage girls by vaccinated them against a sexually transmitted disease, and this viewpoint resounded with an astounding number of people.
So, we can't vaccinate girls against a sexually transmitted disease, because the act of poking her arm with a needle constitutes sexualizing her and probably rape, who knows.
Then, in the middle of all that stuff going on, the American Academy of Pediatrics opens their gob and flip-flops their position on circumcision from recommending against to recommending for! With cervical cancer being the main concern! Right in the middle of all these womyn-born-womyn going on about "my body, my choice!" Right after the CDC recommended a plan of action that might, I don't know, actually prevent HPV infection!
These are the names of the people on the AAP's Task Force on Circumcision:
Notice anything interesting? It seems that females can get MDs and speculate about matters of men's health, but they can't program a fucking computer.
So, I think I have all the right I need to blame womyn-born-womyn collectively and severally for the physical pain I endured without even knowing that something had been done to me. I don't know if the AAP's 2012 flip-flop was supposed to be a political stunt or not, but I got the message loud and clear. Men have no "my body, my choice" in the USA, and there are at least 3 females who could have said something about it but instead choose to back the practice.
I had a body part violently torn from me without my consent, and I endured 19 years of completely unnecessary pain because I didn't even know it had been done to me, and now this is a women's health issue because America thinks mutilating boys is the b