As to hyper rationality and your first hand knowledge... how does the latter refute the former?
As to choice being the only option... there are other options. Sexism simply isn't one of them. That was logically ruled out rather clearly.
I thought choice was a good alternative hypothesis that has a basis in economic data and neurology. But if you have a superior argument, I am open to it. You can even attempt to argue sexism but you're going to have to deal with the logic and evidence against that argument or I'm going to just assume you're a robot repeating the same garbage over and over.
As to your first study, then why are so many women in STEM fields in India and Iran but not in the US? What you are ultimately arguing is that Americans are more sexist then Iranians. This is despite the US going through the Sexual Revolution, and now three waves of feminism.
What you are ultimately arguing is that the work of feminism has made Americans MORE sexist instead of less. This is despite us passing many laws protecting and promoting women's rights.
We are in this eternal damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. You say women should be equal but if you want equality that means equality of opportunity. When you demand equality of out come that is not equality at all. You are asking for special treatment. You are asking for things to be handed to be people unearned. And that won't make women equal. They'll be jokes. No one will trust a female professional if everyone knows that many women get the position simply for being women. It is the same problem that same mistake some activists for racial minorities make. They demand to have certain people admitted to things despite not passing tests and then get upset when no one respects them.
I'm sorry. But if you want the respect it has to be earned.
We can make every female a doctor at birth. Just hand the infant a diploma. We can make it a law that everyone calls them doctor etc. But no one is going to trust them to do an operation.
If you want the respect then you have to earn it. And that means stop complaining about OUTCOME statistics and instead focus on OPPORTUNITY statistics. Women can take these courses in college. And should they pass, the jobs that require those degrees are open to them.
Will they take those courses? Will they pass them? Will they do well in the job once they get hired?
That is on them.
If women want the respect men have then they need to start taking responsibility for themselves like men. I am not asking the to act in all ways like men. Merely take responsibility for yourself. Stop crying for the big strong men to take care of you if you want to be taken seriously.
And that is all these stupid campaigns are about. The whole thing is a big long scree about how some women want to be taken more seriously but don't want to actually earn any of it. They just want to be handed the respect... and then they magically want that respect to mean something when everyone knows it wasn't earned.
It will NEVER happen.
Women can either earn these titles and make gains in these industries on their own merits... and many women do... or they can accept their failures the same way everyone else accepts their failures... with dignity.
Here you'll attempt to label me some flavor of bigot for not goosestepping into your interpretation of the world.
I don't have to think like you to be a good person. I don't have to agree with you about everything to be a good person. I can think you're a fucking retard AND be a good person at the same time. I don't need your approval or your permission to have my own opinions. And I damn well don't give a fuck what you think if you're going to start saying that any statistical difference between the careers men and women choose is entirely due to sexism. That is complete fucking horseshit.
whatever the reason, javascript and other active code that runs client side is a fucking pain in the ass. I'm making a point of disabling most of it unless absolutely required. It has the added benefit of acting like an adblock in most cases as well.
I use a combination of adblock (only on sites I've never visited before or do not want to patronize), NoScript (because javascript should only be used when it is ACTUALLY needed.), and an Adobe Flash blocker that simply prevents Flash animations from running unless individually enabled.
The AdBlock protects me from getting bombarded with porn ads, NoScript kills the popups and other annoying shit, and the flash blocker stops those fucking flash movies from running on some of the news sites. It is even great for youtube. I like to open five or six youtube windows at once and then play the movies one at a time. If you do it without a flash blocker they all start whenever the windows load rendering the activity counter productive.
I won't be baited into wasting my time providing evidence simply so you can touch yourself every time I invest a lot of time and you do nothing.
If we were having a formal debate that was recorded and recognized, then I'd provide the citations simply to prove you wrong and so that everyone else knew you were wrong.
But if you lose here what will that mean? Nothing. What we have here is a disagreement between two people on the internet. I don't know you. You could be a troll. I'm not going to invest a lot of time proving something when you can turn around at any time say "ha ha, you wasted hours of your time proving something! SUCKER!!!" and you run away.
Quid pro quo or go fuck yourself sideways with a chainsaw.;-)
largely the point of my post... If I'm promised jet packs... I want to see jet packs on the market within 10 years. If I don't... then I'm assuming the first prediction of jetpacks was crap. And what is more, every subsequent promise of jetpacks is ignored until such time as I actually see the fucking things for sale and they preform to a reasonable approximation of spec.
As to indians, I am not an indian nor was I talking about india.
As to a specific person going through the system, we are talking about statistics and averages.
What is more, your point about India having a problem with sexism actually helps my point. I was saying that the issue in the US is not sexism and India actually has more women in STEM fields then the US does.
If India is more sexist and it probably is then the US has fewer women in STEM fields DESPITE having LESS sexism.
And what is left at that point to blame it on? Choice.
In the US, women have more economic opportunities then in India so they choose not to be in STEM fields because they don't need to be in them to make a good living.
As to the attempt to guilt trip me, I am hyper rational, sir. Your attempt at pathos offends me. Make a rational argument based on logic and reason or do not attempt to move me. We are not children and I am not a member of your family. Between adults that do not know each other, you must make an argument... not attempt to sway me with pathos.
No it isn't a false characterization. It is a logical evaluation of a fallacious argument.
If sexism is the only reason for any gap in these statistics, then the US is more sexist then Iran or India as regards women in those fields.
Is that the argument you want to make? Because it is quite clearly an unsupportable position. If you wish to hold it, that is fine... instantly losing is a choice.
The US is not without its flaws but being more sexist then Iran is not one of them.
As to the laugh test, how many female stamp collectors are there?
How many female fly fishers are there?
How many female model train enthusiasts are there?
I could go through a lot of things women do alone that men do not, but you get my point.
You can't say women don't fly fish because of sexism. It is a largely solitary pursuit. The same can be said of model train enthusiasts. Are you seriously going to say that men receive permission to sit in basements collecting trains and women do not? It is on its face moronic. You want to talk about the laugh test? Please show why men do such things and women do not?
Clearly there are differences between male and female interests. This is obvious to human beings that live on planet earth.
The only people that do not know this are either aliens from other worlds or people that have jammed their heads so far up their own asses that they've ripped a hole in reality and climbed stinking into another dimension accessible only through their own asses.
To which you reply "laugh test"... you have got to be mother fucking kidding me.
I have a quid pro quo policy on offering citations. I've met too many people on the internet that merely ask for those to burn out the opposition. So I don't play.
As to sexism being a non-credible answer... because it doesn't make any sense. Logically.
You'd need pressure at every level of society holding women down. What is more, especially in programming and game development a lot of people are self taught meaning that they did it all by themselves. And the barrier to entry into indy games etc is extremely low. What is more, if anything our society ENCOURAGES women to join these fields because idiots look at statistics and get upset when everything isn't equaled out.
The sexism argument is about as silly as the stupid conspiracy theories you hear from people off their meds. It doesn't wash.
Systematic sexism did exist once and it was a part of the law. However, it was retired decades ago and the society has been socialized to accept women in all positions with the possible exception of front line combat troops.
As to what I find to be a more likely cause of the statistical gap...
Two things.
1. Statistical neurological differences. 1a. For one thing women tend to have more generalized talents. A women with a talent for math is probably good at a lot of other things. In men, we tend to have more specialized talents where in if we are good at one thing we might not be nearly as good outside that generalized field. 1b. For another you have a different distribution of IQ in men then in women. Women statistically cluster around the "average" portion of the bell curve with very few outright idiots and very few outright geniuses. Men in contrast have more outliers. Statistically most men are in the middle of that bell curve however we have more outright idiots and more outright geniuses. As regards STEM fields especially those on the bleeding edge, the geniuses are required to really move the ball forward. Those geniuses are statistically prone to be men in the general population.
2. Choice. 2a. Given point "1a" women have more choices then men in mental fields. Men are prone to have specialized mentalities that are applicable in certain tasks and subjects. Where as women are more prone to have more options. A genius woman that is gifted in mathematics is as likely to be gifted in literature as well. Given the choices they opt out of the solitary often thankless jobs in the STEM fields. Men in STEM fields by contrast would have to accept far lower paying jobs with far less status if they left their area of specialization. What is more, men are less inclined mind social isolation then are women.
Here you'll ask for citations. I'll need a quid pro quo on your part to bother. I must have you work as hard to validate your position as I must work to validate mine. This is not traditional rules. However, this is the internet, and I find this shuts down trolls that simply ask for citations to burn me out. I am not saying you are a troll. I am saying that I will not make an effort to find citations unless I know you will be putting in equal effort.
Price is not the only variable.If it is better at ANYTHING then someone will use it because there are situations where being better at a specific thing makes it better indifferent to price differences.
Additional limitations are not a problem and nor is a lower cost. We have many products on the market that have pros and cons as well as high relative costs.
Take batteries. Every battery chemistry has pros and cons. Lead Acid batteries are still superior for many applications and are by far the cheapest. They are also more easily maintained and generally last a lot longer if they're deep cycle batteries.
The Lithium ion batteries have pros and cons as well... they have higher energy density then their peers making them superior for mobile applications but they are quite a bit more expensive.
In regards to capacitors, simply put your product on the market. Unless it is inferior in all ways to all other products on the market then it will have a use where that pro outweighs the cons. However, it is inferior in all ways then what precisely is the point.
Which is why girls dominate the game industry.... oh wait, it turns out your point is irrelevant because what you're talking about is a temporary advantage girls have over boys that is quickly over and then boys have some of their own advantages that push them.
We are dimorphic. It is a complex relationship beyond the ken of the simplistic.
You say this like there aren't hundreds of companies that would throw money at these people as well as loan them their armies of lawyers if there was money to be made.
No, there is something else going on here. It isn't the funding or the law. There has to be a problem with the product.
Every day I'm seeing something about how they can pump the stuff out of a damn DVD burner and how it is great at being a capacitor and all this other stuff.
And yet nothing that contains this technology.
WHY?
It is really fucking annoying to be told all these things are happening and then have no way to access any of it.
Slashdot Mirror
As to hyper rationality and your first hand knowledge... how does the latter refute the former?
As to choice being the only option... there are other options. Sexism simply isn't one of them. That was logically ruled out rather clearly.
I thought choice was a good alternative hypothesis that has a basis in economic data and neurology. But if you have a superior argument, I am open to it. You can even attempt to argue sexism but you're going to have to deal with the logic and evidence against that argument or I'm going to just assume you're a robot repeating the same garbage over and over.
As to your first study, then why are so many women in STEM fields in India and Iran but not in the US? What you are ultimately arguing is that Americans are more sexist then Iranians. This is despite the US going through the Sexual Revolution, and now three waves of feminism.
What you are ultimately arguing is that the work of feminism has made Americans MORE sexist instead of less. This is despite us passing many laws protecting and promoting women's rights.
We are in this eternal damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. You say women should be equal but if you want equality that means equality of opportunity. When you demand equality of out come that is not equality at all. You are asking for special treatment. You are asking for things to be handed to be people unearned. And that won't make women equal. They'll be jokes. No one will trust a female professional if everyone knows that many women get the position simply for being women. It is the same problem that same mistake some activists for racial minorities make. They demand to have certain people admitted to things despite not passing tests and then get upset when no one respects them.
I'm sorry. But if you want the respect it has to be earned.
We can make every female a doctor at birth. Just hand the infant a diploma. We can make it a law that everyone calls them doctor etc. But no one is going to trust them to do an operation.
If you want the respect then you have to earn it. And that means stop complaining about OUTCOME statistics and instead focus on OPPORTUNITY statistics. Women can take these courses in college. And should they pass, the jobs that require those degrees are open to them.
Will they take those courses? Will they pass them? Will they do well in the job once they get hired?
That is on them.
If women want the respect men have then they need to start taking responsibility for themselves like men. I am not asking the to act in all ways like men. Merely take responsibility for yourself. Stop crying for the big strong men to take care of you if you want to be taken seriously.
And that is all these stupid campaigns are about. The whole thing is a big long scree about how some women want to be taken more seriously but don't want to actually earn any of it. They just want to be handed the respect... and then they magically want that respect to mean something when everyone knows it wasn't earned.
It will NEVER happen.
Women can either earn these titles and make gains in these industries on their own merits... and many women do... or they can accept their failures the same way everyone else accepts their failures... with dignity.
Here you'll attempt to label me some flavor of bigot for not goosestepping into your interpretation of the world.
I don't have to think like you to be a good person. I don't have to agree with you about everything to be a good person. I can think you're a fucking retard AND be a good person at the same time. I don't need your approval or your permission to have my own opinions. And I damn well don't give a fuck what you think if you're going to start saying that any statistical difference between the careers men and women choose is entirely due to sexism. That is complete fucking horseshit.
Good day, sir.
whatever the reason, javascript and other active code that runs client side is a fucking pain in the ass. I'm making a point of disabling most of it unless absolutely required. It has the added benefit of acting like an adblock in most cases as well.
I use a combination of adblock (only on sites I've never visited before or do not want to patronize), NoScript (because javascript should only be used when it is ACTUALLY needed.), and an Adobe Flash blocker that simply prevents Flash animations from running unless individually enabled.
The AdBlock protects me from getting bombarded with porn ads, NoScript kills the popups and other annoying shit, and the flash blocker stops those fucking flash movies from running on some of the news sites. It is even great for youtube. I like to open five or six youtube windows at once and then play the movies one at a time. If you do it without a flash blocker they all start whenever the windows load rendering the activity counter productive.
I won't be baited into wasting my time providing evidence simply so you can touch yourself every time I invest a lot of time and you do nothing.
If we were having a formal debate that was recorded and recognized, then I'd provide the citations simply to prove you wrong and so that everyone else knew you were wrong.
But if you lose here what will that mean? Nothing. What we have here is a disagreement between two people on the internet. I don't know you. You could be a troll. I'm not going to invest a lot of time proving something when you can turn around at any time say "ha ha, you wasted hours of your time proving something! SUCKER!!!" and you run away.
Quid pro quo or go fuck yourself sideways with a chainsaw. ;-)
largely the point of my post... If I'm promised jet packs... I want to see jet packs on the market within 10 years. If I don't... then I'm assuming the first prediction of jetpacks was crap. And what is more, every subsequent promise of jetpacks is ignored until such time as I actually see the fucking things for sale and they preform to a reasonable approximation of spec.
As to indians, I am not an indian nor was I talking about india.
As to a specific person going through the system, we are talking about statistics and averages.
What is more, your point about India having a problem with sexism actually helps my point. I was saying that the issue in the US is not sexism and India actually has more women in STEM fields then the US does.
If India is more sexist and it probably is then the US has fewer women in STEM fields DESPITE having LESS sexism.
And what is left at that point to blame it on? Choice.
In the US, women have more economic opportunities then in India so they choose not to be in STEM fields because they don't need to be in them to make a good living.
As to the attempt to guilt trip me, I am hyper rational, sir. Your attempt at pathos offends me. Make a rational argument based on logic and reason or do not attempt to move me. We are not children and I am not a member of your family. Between adults that do not know each other, you must make an argument... not attempt to sway me with pathos.
More of the coding needs to be server side or not exist at all.
The worst is the ads. I turned on NoScript and so many pages just fly now because the stupid javascript isn't allowed to run.
No it isn't a false characterization. It is a logical evaluation of a fallacious argument.
If sexism is the only reason for any gap in these statistics, then the US is more sexist then Iran or India as regards women in those fields.
Is that the argument you want to make? Because it is quite clearly an unsupportable position. If you wish to hold it, that is fine... instantly losing is a choice.
The US is not without its flaws but being more sexist then Iran is not one of them.
As to the laugh test, how many female stamp collectors are there?
How many female fly fishers are there?
How many female model train enthusiasts are there?
I could go through a lot of things women do alone that men do not, but you get my point.
You can't say women don't fly fish because of sexism. It is a largely solitary pursuit. The same can be said of model train enthusiasts. Are you seriously going to say that men receive permission to sit in basements collecting trains and women do not? It is on its face moronic. You want to talk about the laugh test? Please show why men do such things and women do not?
Clearly there are differences between male and female interests. This is obvious to human beings that live on planet earth.
The only people that do not know this are either aliens from other worlds or people that have jammed their heads so far up their own asses that they've ripped a hole in reality and climbed stinking into another dimension accessible only through their own asses.
To which you reply "laugh test"... you have got to be mother fucking kidding me.
Yes, when they were associated with typists. They were seen as secretaries with extra qualifications.
Do you want to go back to that or do you want to walk that line of ignorance back a step?
I have a quid pro quo policy on offering citations. I've met too many people on the internet that merely ask for those to burn out the opposition. So I don't play.
As to sexism being a non-credible answer... because it doesn't make any sense. Logically.
You'd need pressure at every level of society holding women down. What is more, especially in programming and game development a lot of people are self taught meaning that they did it all by themselves. And the barrier to entry into indy games etc is extremely low. What is more, if anything our society ENCOURAGES women to join these fields because idiots look at statistics and get upset when everything isn't equaled out.
The sexism argument is about as silly as the stupid conspiracy theories you hear from people off their meds. It doesn't wash.
Systematic sexism did exist once and it was a part of the law. However, it was retired decades ago and the society has been socialized to accept women in all positions with the possible exception of front line combat troops.
As to what I find to be a more likely cause of the statistical gap...
Two things.
1. Statistical neurological differences.
1a. For one thing women tend to have more generalized talents. A women with a talent for math is probably good at a lot of other things. In men, we tend to have more specialized talents where in if we are good at one thing we might not be nearly as good outside that generalized field.
1b. For another you have a different distribution of IQ in men then in women. Women statistically cluster around the "average" portion of the bell curve with very few outright idiots and very few outright geniuses. Men in contrast have more outliers. Statistically most men are in the middle of that bell curve however we have more outright idiots and more outright geniuses. As regards STEM fields especially those on the bleeding edge, the geniuses are required to really move the ball forward. Those geniuses are statistically prone to be men in the general population.
2. Choice.
2a. Given point "1a" women have more choices then men in mental fields. Men are prone to have specialized mentalities that are applicable in certain tasks and subjects. Where as women are more prone to have more options. A genius woman that is gifted in mathematics is as likely to be gifted in literature as well. Given the choices they opt out of the solitary often thankless jobs in the STEM fields. Men in STEM fields by contrast would have to accept far lower paying jobs with far less status if they left their area of specialization. What is more, men are less inclined mind social isolation then are women.
Here you'll ask for citations. I'll need a quid pro quo on your part to bother. I must have you work as hard to validate your position as I must work to validate mine. This is not traditional rules. However, this is the internet, and I find this shuts down trolls that simply ask for citations to burn me out. I am not saying you are a troll. I am saying that I will not make an effort to find citations unless I know you will be putting in equal effort.
How many things are on the market that are hand made? Buy a nice sports car and you might get a hand woven interior.
If you need human labor to work with this stuff then it exists.
we should have seen something... we've seen nothing.
Price is not the only variable.If it is better at ANYTHING then someone will use it because there are situations where being better at a specific thing makes it better indifferent to price differences.
The wright brothers did invent the first powered flight airplane.
A new drug going through the FDA takes less time then this...
Additional limitations are not a problem and nor is a lower cost. We have many products on the market that have pros and cons as well as high relative costs.
Take batteries. Every battery chemistry has pros and cons. Lead Acid batteries are still superior for many applications and are by far the cheapest. They are also more easily maintained and generally last a lot longer if they're deep cycle batteries.
The Lithium ion batteries have pros and cons as well... they have higher energy density then their peers making them superior for mobile applications but they are quite a bit more expensive.
In regards to capacitors, simply put your product on the market. Unless it is inferior in all ways to all other products on the market then it will have a use where that pro outweighs the cons. However, it is inferior in all ways then what precisely is the point.
they made graphine in a DVD burner... so... how hard can it be.
Which is why girls dominate the game industry.... oh wait, it turns out your point is irrelevant because what you're talking about is a temporary advantage girls have over boys that is quickly over and then boys have some of their own advantages that push them.
We are dimorphic. It is a complex relationship beyond the ken of the simplistic.
This is the 21st century, forgive me for not waiting as long as people in the Bronze age.
You have to be fucking kidding me. We develop lots of technologies all the time that go from the lab and into the open market in less time then this.
Doesn't matter... it's been ten years. We should have seen a product by now.
The point being that the tech is hyped and isn't giving the full story.
Which is what I'm implying in the first place.
You say this like there aren't hundreds of companies that would throw money at these people as well as loan them their armies of lawyers if there was money to be made.
No, there is something else going on here. It isn't the funding or the law. There has to be a problem with the product.
So they can't have graphine capacitors because they're afraid I'll break them open and snort them?
the Wright brothers went out of their way to put on displays for people. They went on tours and everything.
It doesn't take this long to bring something into production. It has been over 10 years.
Every day I'm seeing something about how they can pump the stuff out of a damn DVD burner and how it is great at being a capacitor and all this other stuff.
And yet nothing that contains this technology.
WHY?
It is really fucking annoying to be told all these things are happening and then have no way to access any of it.
I played those games and river run especially was good fun.
That said, those games were not about writing and this article was about how women are better writers.
Do you have examples pertinent to the study?