Telling it like you believe it is--if what you believe is misogynistic--is misogynistic.
And it isn't if it isn't.
I like the claim that men aren't also gullible led by marketing and never buy things for looks rather than utility. No man ever bought an expensive, macho truck for his daily commute to the office. None at all. And no marketing ever influences purchases by persuading men they are more manly because they have some vehicle, aftershave or running shoe. And those campaigns never worked ever.
Lots of them do those things. Lots of them don't. Like women, they have the option not to do them. I'm not sure if you've noticed it but they still get criticized for making those decisions, even in the US. Hell, the rest of the world makes jokes about American car choices in general. It's just that the topic of the submission is pockets, not trucks this time. Whataboutism doesn't cut it.
What malice? It's a fact of life that women, accounting for the majority of spending in the US, are the primary target for most marketing efforts. So is the fact that they will continue to be influenced by marketing efforts until they consciously decide not to be.
You mean, off the top of my hat? I have no idea. Is the number comparable to other countries? In absolute terms or relative to development levels? Is the number getting worse or getting better?
there are many of us who have to answer far more difficult questions on the spot on a daily basis
Well, good for you. If fixing the US education system can be easily done by asking questions to random teenage girls on a time limit, why hasn't it been already done? And while you're at it answering far more difficult questions, could you please go and fix it?
but do you for some reason think that particular program selects for education or intelligence?
Why are they asking them such questions, then? It just doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds like a completely random thing thrown in for fun.
That page could mean any number of things, such as US article authors facing tighter scrutiny, or the US having a larger absolute number of article authors. It is hardly a replacement for a proper study of these incidents.
...when faced with inappropriate trick questions in highly stressful situations. Setting aside the comedic value of this answer, I don't think many people would be able to yield a usably better one in that girl's place.
Or replace all vehicles in cities with autonomous ones. You could save hundreds of kilograms of moving mass per passenger if you replaced passive safety with active control. At city speeds at least (we're limited to 50 km/h around here, for example), this should be feasible.
Slashdot Mirror
Telling it like you believe it is--if what you believe is misogynistic--is misogynistic.
And it isn't if it isn't.
I like the claim that men aren't also gullible led by marketing and never buy things for looks rather than utility. No man ever bought an expensive, macho truck for his daily commute to the office. None at all. And no marketing ever influences purchases by persuading men they are more manly because they have some vehicle, aftershave or running shoe. And those campaigns never worked ever.
Lots of them do those things. Lots of them don't. Like women, they have the option not to do them. I'm not sure if you've noticed it but they still get criticized for making those decisions, even in the US. Hell, the rest of the world makes jokes about American car choices in general. It's just that the topic of the submission is pockets, not trucks this time. Whataboutism doesn't cut it.
What malice? It's a fact of life that women, accounting for the majority of spending in the US, are the primary target for most marketing efforts. So is the fact that they will continue to be influenced by marketing efforts until they consciously decide not to be.
Fortunately pockets on women's pants seem to be more socially acceptable than skirts on men... Or should I say "unfortunately"?
Not more than once, anyway. ;)
and low tread count resulting in sheer
Is that of any interest in landlocked countries like mine?
What doesn't metabolize into glucose?
Any suicidal landing you can't walk away from is a good one.
So, a platitude was expected. That doesn't exactly improve the image of the whole affair in my eyes.
I bet a significant number of Americans could have answered it far better.
Possibly, but you'll always find people like this in many populations. They're hardly representative of anything meaningful.
were being held up as icons, champions, and role models for the American people.
Well she wasn't, as was obvious from media reactions. Trump, on the other hand...
You mean, off the top of my hat? I have no idea. Is the number comparable to other countries? In absolute terms or relative to development levels? Is the number getting worse or getting better?
there are many of us who have to answer far more difficult questions on the spot on a daily basis
Well, good for you. If fixing the US education system can be easily done by asking questions to random teenage girls on a time limit, why hasn't it been already done? And while you're at it answering far more difficult questions, could you please go and fix it?
but do you for some reason think that particular program selects for education or intelligence?
Why are they asking them such questions, then? It just doesn't make any sense to me. It sounds like a completely random thing thrown in for fun.
Seriously, "high level competition"? "Prepared"? Are we talking about Jeopardy here?
A coherent sentence is a necessary but not a sufficient condition for a more useful reply in this case.
That page could mean any number of things, such as US article authors facing tighter scrutiny, or the US having a larger absolute number of article authors. It is hardly a replacement for a proper study of these incidents.
showcasing how stupid Americans can be
...when faced with inappropriate trick questions in highly stressful situations. Setting aside the comedic value of this answer, I don't think many people would be able to yield a usably better one in that girl's place.
That would make him British, wouldn't it?
Or replace all vehicles in cities with autonomous ones. You could save hundreds of kilograms of moving mass per passenger if you replaced passive safety with active control. At city speeds at least (we're limited to 50 km/h around here, for example), this should be feasible.
So you replace corruption with unregulated whimsy of private individuals and companies? Out of the frying pan, into the fire.
Pedobearobot.
Just hang it above your bed and you'll never forget it. You can even keep the "now" since it will never be wrong!
In what way? Do you *also* need to be a board member to become a banker?
If you say you're a woman, you're a woman. Duh.
and provide inside access to the resources that board member is associated: eg. inventment banker
In other words the notion of "most qualified" is laughable.
Didn't you just contradict yourself? That definitely seems like a qualification to me right there.
It happened to i5 before. It went from 2 hyper threaded cores to 4 single threaded.
Didn't it do the exact opposite when Westmere replaced Nehalem?
Why this probe has not solar panels?
I don't know why, because it *does* have them. I mean, it's kind of obvious to use them.