"Texas". That's really the only part of that sentence you need. I would be surprised if the people attending and local homes weren't about as well armed as the police in the article.
Very cute trick you used there, going from a study proving women have an advantage in hiring commensurate with their phenomenal institutionalized advantages in education to claiming that said recorded facts don't exist. Very cute indeed.
Then again when your entire worldview and ideology, to say nothing of millions of dollars for massive lobbying efforts, is hinged on the idea that women are oppressed it is of course necessary to do everything possible to ensure that nobody ever admits women are not in fact oppressed and actually doing very well.
By the way going by your own link my study is both newer and more methodologically sound than yours since it's a randomized study with an N of nearly 1000 that actually controls its variables properly.
So basically you admit that you see women as inherently weaker than men and believe you need to coddle and protect them... which inevitably means controlling them.
The computer room isn't a sausagefest because people inside try to keep women out, it's a sausagefest because it's the ghetto that people outside shove unattractive or non-conforming men into. You want to change the sausagefest stop demonizing the men in it. You can't keep screaming "sausagefest! neckbeards! fuckbois!" and act like you're not the origin of that stereotype.
and can even be unsafe for her, depending on the particular young men who happen to be in the class.
No, no it fucking won't and the fact you're even saying that is testimony to how astoundingly sexist our society has become. The rate of sexual assault in the general population is 7.6 in 1000 and even less in academic settings, and when you don't specifically redefine the term "rape" to exclude female perpetrators the stats prove women commit nearly half of all rapes in the US.
It's astronomically more likely that any man in that class will be violently attacked or die just trying to earn a paycheck than any woman will be attacked.
Women currently have a 2:1 advantage in STEM fields, are nearly 2/3rds of college graduates and even more than that in some STEM disciplines, utterly dominate virtually every measure of academic success and achievement we have at pretty much every level, and are on average only a third or less of the homeless, and are virtually none of workplace fatalities.
If we live in a "male dominated world" men are doing a really shitty job of oppressing women.
Look up the phrase "paternalistic". What you're saying is that women are so weak, so feckless, so lacking in agency and personal strength, that they can't handle their own media/em made by women, marketed to women, and consumed by women.
And that business model is clearly not even part of their problems. Clearly. The government should give them our money because we aren't giving enough of it to them.
First off not only is there actual evidence, it's objectively a fact that she perjured herself.
Second what happened to "listen and believe" with victims of abuse? The "reviews" thing is a semantic straw man invented by people defending her. It's been repeatedly proven that she did in fact receive positive coverage from Grayson, preferential treatment from Arnott, and that's not even counting the obscene double standard of everyone leaping to defend a domestic abuser.
The only person throwing around false allegations is Zoe Quinn herself, as per the evidence provided by Nasrallah, the wizardchan hate campaign, and her working with the GNAA to pay people to astroturf.
You're citing david futrelle REALLY? A man so despicable that he's publicly said he doesn't believe it's rape when a woman rapes a man, so disgusting in his views that feminists have publicly sided with MRAs against him before? A liar so pathological he took a quote and attributed it to the person using the quote to say anyone repeating similar things would be banned?
By the way about your supposedly damning IRC logs. As you can see your arguments fall apart even before considering you're making claims based on edited copies.
"Never provide evidence"... It's amazing how often you, poperatzo, serviscope, and whatever hangers on show up make that claim despite the fact that you are constantly inundated with proof. I know I've personally posted at least a good 20 direct links to primary sources before talking with you about this subject.
Meanwhile all those things you keep accusing gamergate of? Guess who's literally paying people to do them. The irony of the sheer amount of puppetry and false-flagging anti-gamergate is doing as you try to accuse tens to hundreds of thousands of people of being "sockpuppets" is astounding.
That's exactly who I'm talking about. People who use twitter's report function as a weapon against anyone they dislike while openly committing outright doxing and screaming racial slurs and death threats themselves.
Slashdot Mirror
You would think even people stupid and fanatic enough to do this would know that Texas is the wrong place to try and pull a Charlie Hebdo.
"Texas". That's really the only part of that sentence you need. I would be surprised if the people attending and local homes weren't about as well armed as the police in the article.
Very cute trick you used there, going from a study proving women have an advantage in hiring commensurate with their phenomenal institutionalized advantages in education to claiming that said recorded facts don't exist. Very cute indeed.
Then again when your entire worldview and ideology, to say nothing of millions of dollars for massive lobbying efforts, is hinged on the idea that women are oppressed it is of course necessary to do everything possible to ensure that nobody ever admits women are not in fact oppressed and actually doing very well.
By the way going by your own link my study is both newer and more methodologically sound than yours since it's a randomized study with an N of nearly 1000 that actually controls its variables properly.
Try Again. Also CompSci is somewhere around 10% of conferred degrees and shrinking.
So basically you admit that you see women as inherently weaker than men and believe you need to coddle and protect them... which inevitably means controlling them.
Funny how feminism has come full circle.
The computer room isn't a sausagefest because people inside try to keep women out, it's a sausagefest because it's the ghetto that people outside shove unattractive or non-conforming men into. You want to change the sausagefest stop demonizing the men in it. You can't keep screaming "sausagefest! neckbeards! fuckbois!" and act like you're not the origin of that stereotype.
Wait until you see what images they show teenage girls in art class. My god... sometimes... they even see penises!
and can even be unsafe for her, depending on the particular young men who happen to be in the class.
No, no it fucking won't and the fact you're even saying that is testimony to how astoundingly sexist our society has become. The rate of sexual assault in the general population is 7.6 in 1000 and even less in academic settings, and when you don't specifically redefine the term "rape" to exclude female perpetrators the stats prove women commit nearly half of all rapes in the US.
It's astronomically more likely that any man in that class will be violently attacked or die just trying to earn a paycheck than any woman will be attacked.
Women currently have a 2:1 advantage in STEM fields, are nearly 2/3rds of college graduates and even more than that in some STEM disciplines, utterly dominate virtually every measure of academic success and achievement we have at pretty much every level, and are on average only a third or less of the homeless, and are virtually none of workplace fatalities.
If we live in a "male dominated world" men are doing a really shitty job of oppressing women.
Teenage girls are not pure and fragile spun glass vestal virgins, they're just as filthy and often far more abusive and toxic than teenage boys.
Look up the phrase "paternalistic". What you're saying is that women are so weak, so feckless, so lacking in agency and personal strength, that they can't handle their own media/em made by women, marketed to women, and consumed by women.
And that business model is clearly not even part of their problems. Clearly. The government should give them our money because we aren't giving enough of it to them.
This is what I was going to say. "Is there some sign that says 'good guys only' that stops bad guys from using it too?"
You're thinking of the Associated Press that's doing all the work in that situation.
It's enough to make one question whether someone in Turkey wishes to ride a national persecution complex to power.
Why not it's working fuckin great for Hamas...
thermorectal cryptanalysis
God dammit so much now I'm going to have to use that somewhere wildly inappropriate and see who figures it out...
A brave new world indeed.
So by your own standards you must throw out virtually every claim of harassment and victimhood.
First off not only is there actual evidence, it's objectively a fact that she perjured herself.
Second what happened to "listen and believe" with victims of abuse? The "reviews" thing is a semantic straw man invented by people defending her. It's been repeatedly proven that she did in fact receive positive coverage from Grayson, preferential treatment from Arnott, and that's not even counting the obscene double standard of everyone leaping to defend a domestic abuser.
The only person throwing around false allegations is Zoe Quinn herself, as per the evidence provided by Nasrallah, the wizardchan hate campaign, and her working with the GNAA to pay people to astroturf.
You mean aside from the fact she's a perjuring pathologically lying domestic abuser who works with racist GNAA trolls?
See my reply to AniMojo, and some of the other replies to them.
You're citing david futrelle REALLY? A man so despicable that he's publicly said he doesn't believe it's rape when a woman rapes a man, so disgusting in his views that feminists have publicly sided with MRAs against him before? A liar so pathological he took a quote and attributed it to the person using the quote to say anyone repeating similar things would be banned?
By the way about your supposedly damning IRC logs. As you can see your arguments fall apart even before considering you're making claims based on edited copies.
See my reply to Animojo.
"Never provide evidence"... It's amazing how often you, poperatzo, serviscope, and whatever hangers on show up make that claim despite the fact that you are constantly inundated with proof. I know I've personally posted at least a good 20 direct links to primary sources before talking with you about this subject.
The entire point is that despite reporting people like Randi Harper doxing, or running hate campaigns that actually DO literally drive women off the internet, they keep getting away with it. Hell anti-gamergate doxers even go on to claim they're starting organizations fighting against doxing... the very tool they employ to terrorize their enemies.
Meanwhile all those things you keep accusing gamergate of? Guess who's literally paying people to do them. The irony of the sheer amount of puppetry and false-flagging anti-gamergate is doing as you try to accuse tens to hundreds of thousands of people of being "sockpuppets" is astounding.
Or rather it would be if that accusaion of "sockpuppet" wasn't overwhelmingly used as a tool to harass non-whites:
https://twitter.com/tratowzolo...
http://i.imgur.com/u8835lH.png
https://twitter.com/BooneGroow...
http://i.picpar.com/mOcb.jpg http://i.picpar.com/lbdb.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/xeSqkdL.jpg
You're not calling anyone's bluff. You're just screaming "You have no proof" despite the fact I've already personally given you proof repeatedly.
That's exactly who I'm talking about. People who use twitter's report function as a weapon against anyone they dislike while openly committing outright doxing and screaming racial slurs and death threats themselves.