ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 12th April 2019, 10:27 PM   #361
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by pharphis View Post
I wouldn't refer to terrorism as quite awesome. Or was that regarding jiu-jitsu?
The later
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 12:15 AM   #362
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,125
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
The claim being made is that everyone who wanted votes for women was called a feminist; your quote doesn't demonstrate that.

The usual cop out! And that wasn't the claim made Dr. Keith: "Feminist was used to describe those fighting for women's suffrage, for example."
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 12:37 AM   #363
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by dann View Post
The usual cop out! And that wasn't the claim made Dr. Keith: "Feminist was used to describe those fighting for women's suffrage, for example."
https://books.google.com/books?hl=en...minism&f=false
Attached Images
File Type: jpg Screenshot 2019-04-13 at 2.43.20 AM.jpg (32.9 KB, 2 views)
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 12:43 AM   #364
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
https://www.rte.ie/centuryireland/im...m_May_1913.pdf
Quote:
Suffragists have, of course, assured us that the vote was a symbol, but their conduct
proved that it was in reality an end.
In spite of the failure of men to achieve any real
independence by the extension of the franchise, and the growing disinclination of
the more intelligent to exercise their vote, or at least to attach any importance to it,
women have continued to concentrate their efforts in this direction. The result has
been the rise and growth of "militancy" as apparently the only means of achieving an
end which had heretofore passed as a means, of some importance certainly, but not
of such paramount importance as women at present believe. Had the energies of the
movement been merely wasted in pursuit of a shadow, delay would have been the
worst result. Unfortunately the amateur outrages, and general hysteria of militancy,
have had a more serious effect. Apart from the initial mistake of aiming at externals
rather than essentials, the militant policy bids fair to alienate, not the sympathy of a
general public disturbed in its golf and correspondence, but of a certain class of "
intellectuals" whose support was at one time a foregone conclusion. Signs have not
been wanting of late to show that a large number of feminists are engaged in
revising their ideas of the position of women. Disgusted with the militants they have,
by an inevitable reaction, been led to query even the fundamental principles of
feminism.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 01:37 AM   #365
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
You're missing a step, there. See below.
No, I really am not.

Quote:

It's absolutely not true that suggesting a lack of action means you're not caring. In fact, sometimes if you care the best thing you can do is not act. What you just said certainly supports my "virtue signaling" interpretation. You need to show that you care, everything else be damned.
It's nothing to do with virtue signaling it's a basic acceptance that the only way to change things is to actually do something about it.

And you know it's OK not to care about something, there are loads of issues in the world that are probably meritorious that I don't really care about. But I don't complain about the people who do and who are trying to do something about it.

Quote:
Would you cut it out with the strawmen? No one's saying that we shouldn't study the issue. In fact that's precisely what I'm arguing for. What I'm arguing against is taking actions to change things when we haven't even made this study to find out the causes of the imbalance.
So you are OK with people investing time, money and resources in academic research to study the issue but not in actually doing something about it? That seems odd again.

Has it occurred to you that one way to learn more about the causes and solutions of the imbalance is to attempt changes and see what works and what doesn't?

Quote:
Wouldn't you rather know before you start making laws and stuff? For all you know, whatever actions you have in mind would just make things worse. To use your pharma analogy, even before the double-blind tests you'd want to know if your pill is poison before giving it to a test group.
To a degree I would like to know, but I am also OK with trying sensible things to see if they work. Consider all the current actions as part of that test group. Things that don't work shouldn't be continued. The things have already been shown to be effective should continue, you agree with that right? And then there are other things we can try which will either work or not work.

I'm afraid this is just how social issues work. You can't study them in a lab particularly effectively.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 01:53 AM   #366
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 88,450
We seem to be drifting into a discussion based around feminism rather MRA. Seen that happen quite a lot in these discussions.
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 02:41 AM   #367
cullennz
Embarrasingly illiterate
 
cullennz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,476
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We seem to be drifting into a discussion based around feminism rather MRA. Seen that happen quite a lot in these discussions.
Not unusual though


Feminists like every other group get defensive when the topic shifts from a sex not their own

Same with genders and the whole TERF blow back
__________________
I generally oppose gun control, but I support the ban on assault weapons and I support a slightly longer waiting period to purchase a gun. With today’s Internet technology we should be able to tell within 72-hours if a potential gun owner has a record.

Source: The America We Deserve, by Donald Trump, p.102 , Jul 2, 2000
cullennz is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 02:47 AM   #368
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,028
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
No, I really am not.
Oh, so you don't need to establish that a problem exists before trying to solve it? That's a great way to spend time, money and energy!

Quote:
And you know it's OK not to care about something
Is it possible to express care in a different way than you do? And could you stop making the issue about me? I know you really, really want to call me a meanie, but it's completely irrelevant.

Quote:
So you are OK with people investing time, money and resources in academic research to study the issue but not in actually doing something about it?
I hate to channel TBD, but rule of so.

Quote:
Has it occurred to you that one way to learn more about the causes and solutions of the imbalance is to attempt changes and see what works and what doesn't?
Yes.

Quote:
To a degree I would like to know, but I am also OK with trying sensible things to see if they work.
Well you're still yet to answer the question: when do you stop, and consider you've done what you can?

This is the issue that I was talking about: you can never find other possibles causes for disparity if you just assume that any disparity must be compensated for. As I said, you consider disparity to be a problem, which circles right back to what I said earlier: what you want is parity, not equality. Deny it all you want, but that's what you're advocating, so if it's not what you want, change your advocacy.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 03:17 AM   #369
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post

And here's my problem with that argument: for how long? When does one say "well, we've largely solved the underlying problems; any remaining disparity is probably due to other, mostly harmless differences." (a simplification)? If you never do, then you're really going to drive towards a 50-50 distribution and in doing so you risk causing real harm to the group that would otherwise have a larger distribution.
I have literally answered this question at least 3 times and you haven't really engaged with the answer I gave.

But you have introduced a new concept here of harming the other group and lets be clear that promoting equality does not harm anyone.

Quote:
For instance, should we make a perpetual effort to make sure men make up 50% of all hairdressers? That field is dominated by women, and always has been. Is that discrimination, or social pressure, or some other thing that we could work on improving, or is it at least in part due to simple inherent differences between men and women? If the latter is true, then once you've solved the other problems, further action might cause harm to women in the industry by favouring either a smaller number of men or by driving up the number of men through other means.

Not sure I'm explaining myself clearly there.
And yet, most TOP hairdressers are men. So you could make an argument that by not having more men hairdressing as a whole is missing out.

But nobody bothers trying to promote men into hairdressing because as a rule as I said earlier that group are horrendous at trying to give others a helping hand. And because its seen as a low status, low pay profession. And because overall there aren't really a shortage of hairdressers.

This is something you miss when we are talking about STEM and other professions. There is a real shortage of skills in these areas so shutting them off to entire sections of the population is actually damaging the employers. It is in the employers interests to increase the talent pool and one way they can do that is to promote it to demographics who have traditionally eschewed it.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 03:31 AM   #370
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,028
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I have literally answered this question at least 3 times and you haven't really engaged with the answer I gave.
Try me again, because so far you don't seem to want to stop until you reach that 50-50 ratio, which once again shows that equality isn't what you're looking for. Or, to put it in a way you can understand, you don't care about equality. It's ok to admit it, I hear.

Quote:
But you have introduced a new concept here of harming the other group and lets be clear that promoting equality does not harm anyone.
And how would you know? You keep saying these things with conviction but you never really support them.

Quote:
And yet, most TOP hairdressers are men.
What's a top hairdresser? How do you determine who's part of that group?

Quote:
But nobody bothers trying to promote men into hairdressing because as a rule as I said earlier that group are horrendous at trying to give others a helping hand.
...what? I have no idea what you're saying here. And how is that a reason to give up on equality for this group?

Quote:
And because its seen as a low status, low pay profession.
So?

Quote:
And because overall there aren't really a shortage of hairdressers.
What does that have to do with anything?

If you have a shortage of people in a profession, the solution is not more women. It's more people. If that happens to be more women than men, great. If it's the reverse, great. If it's equal, great. But when you have a shortage, you can't afford to be picky. And shortage has nothing to do with equality.

It's starting to feel like you're throwing a bunch of stuff at the wall and hoping that some of it sticks. You're all over the place.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 03:39 AM   #371
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
You are muddying the clear waters here. A trend in education to get more women into STEM has been on since the early 1980s. There have been some really bad results for everyone. First, boys have been left behind from the earliest grades. Second, the focus is now on those areas that women show little to no interest in. More valuable resources are being poured in with no return on investment.
What are your sources to back all these assertions?

Quote:
The trouble here is that you want equality of outcomes which is impossible. The correct course of action is to ensure equality of opportunity. For example, were the people who achieved a certain standard on an entrance exam, all given a space regardless of gender/race/sexual orientation/etc.? That's equality. Equality of outcome is impossible because it fails to address individual choice. We know why women aren't in certain areas of STEM and it is the work environment they tend not to like but males tend to thrive in. It is an environment that leads to the highest return on investment because it is so competitive. If you can figure out how to get rid of the competitive aspect without negatively affecting the return on investment, more women will join in. The issue is how when you are competing against other companies for millions, or billions, of dollars?
Again, are these assertions proven?

And I don't want equality of outcome, I want GREATER equality of outcome. And you don't overcome decades of entrenched inequality by simply removing the obvious barriers. You need to go further than that.

And where is the evidence that males 'tend to thrive' in toxicly competitive work environments? Stress, depression, suicide etc are at record levels.

Quote:
Outside of that, the only possible equality measurement is "Is everyone doing this job getting the same pay?"
********

Quote:
We talked about hair dressers/barbers but let's talk about something more relevant. Most GPs graduating today are female. Why isn't anyone discussing the need to address why males aren't going into that field at an equal rate? The only reason is that we aren't interested in equality, we are interested in furthering a particular agenda.
This is completely disingenuous. To try to compare the two issues is a nonsense. The reality is that in GPs we have a tiny imbalance in favour of women which has happened in the past 5 years or so. Its a recent phenomenon. The problems in STEM date back as long as STEM has existed so of course they have been identified and addressed. The balance in medicine has only just been starting to get attention and no doubt will be looked at more in future.

And of course women are still underrepresented in senior medical positions and in specialties like surgery.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 03:52 AM   #372
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,028
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
And I don't want equality of outcome, I want GREATER equality of outcome.
This might sound silly to you but humour me, please:

Why?

(Keeping in mind that 'equality of outcome' is generally called 'parity' and 'equality' usually refers rather to 'equality of opportunity')
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:01 AM   #373
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Try me again, because so far you don't seem to want to stop until you reach that 50-50 ratio, which once again shows that equality isn't what you're looking for. Or, to put it in a way you can understand, you don't care about equality. It's ok to admit it, I hear.
I have literally never mentioned not stopping until you reach 50/50. I have repeatedly said that while there are practical and reasonable efforts that can be made to move towards 50/50 they should be tried. And if they work they should continue. If they don't work they should stop.

We don't know where those efforts will run out and what final balance we can achieve. But it certainly isn't yet.

Quote:
And how would you know? You keep saying these things with conviction but you never really support them.
Because helping person A doesn't harm person B. Pretty much by definition.

Quote:
What's a top hairdresser? How do you determine who's part of that group?
The highest paid, most prestigious, most highly regarded. For example here's a list. 2/10 are women.

https://www.therichest.com/expensive...-in-the-world/

Quote:
...what? I have no idea what you're saying here. And how is that a reason to give up on equality for this group?
It's a not reason to give up. But you can't sit around and wait for other people to do it. All these top men hairdressers could be taking steps to promote more men into the world of hairdressing, but generally they don't.

Quote:
So?

What does that have to do with anything?
There is no real push for the industry to do anything if there isn't a need for more people to enter. That's what it has to do with anything.

Quote:
If you have a shortage of people in a profession, the solution is not more women. It's more people. If that happens to be more women than men, great. If it's the reverse, great. If it's equal, great. But when you have a shortage, you can't afford to be picky. And shortage has nothing to do with equality.
You are right. But one good way to get more people is to encourage underrepresented demographics to participate. And from an industry point of view shortage has a lot to do with equality because that's why they see it as a problem they need to address, and that's why they are willing to throw resources at it. The fast food industry, or sewage working industry not so much.

Quote:
It's starting to feel like you're throwing a bunch of stuff at the wall and hoping that some of it sticks. You're all over the place.
It's called context. The real world has a lot of it.

You ask why we should care about inequality and when given a reason - that it shrinks the available talent pool in STEM and causes skill shortages - you dismiss them as not having anything to do with inequality. You seem to want a philosophical justification for why we should force a precise 50/50 outcome on every single profession (or worse on some and not others) but you aren't going to get that because 1) I am not interested in a philosophical discussion, I am talking about real world pragmatic solutions to real world problems and 2) Literally no-one is suggesting what you seem to want a justification for!
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:05 AM   #374
Cavemonster
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 5,792
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We seem to be drifting into a discussion based around feminism rather MRA. Seen that happen quite a lot in these discussions.
It seems that one of the central tenets of MRA is opposition to feminism, so that's fairly on topic. Just like a discussion of what communists really believe would probably have a good deal of discussion of capitalism.
__________________
The weakness of all Utopias is this, ... They first assume that no man will want more than his share, and then are very ingenious in explaining whether his share will be delivered by motorcar or balloon.
-G.K. CHESTERTON
Cavemonster is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:10 AM   #375
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
This might sound silly to you but humour me, please:

Why?

(Keeping in mind that 'equality of outcome' is generally called 'parity' and 'equality' usually refers rather to 'equality of opportunity')
Because when I see large inequality of outcomes it is strongly indicative of a systemic problem in opportunity (whether obvious or hidden), because I believe more equal representation in professions is beneficial to those industries in terms of diversity of ideas, approaches and styles, because I would like to see more people in STEM overall and because I would hate to think that my daughter or other women important to me are being denied the chance to participate in something that they would enjoy because of direct or indirect discrimination, cultural factors, social conditioning or whatever.

Because I am unwilling to just accept the status quo in absolutely anything without some good reasons.

And because having worked in STEM I can see that discrimination exists, that the working environments are often not ideal, and that many men would benefit from the same efforts that will help women if the work environments are improved.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:21 AM   #376
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
We seem to be drifting into a discussion based around feminism rather MRA. Seen that happen quite a lot in these discussions.
Anti-feminism is usually one of their core beliefs, so I'm not sure how that's avoidable.

A few of us are finding common ground, so I think this is the good sort of thread drift, personally.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:23 AM   #377
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Belz... View Post
Oh, so you don't need to establish that a problem exists before trying to solve it? That's a great way to spend time, money and energy!
We can navel gaze analyzing the problem all we want. Its a better use of time money and energy to take action and see if it works. And if they do work we will have shown hey there was a problem after all!

Quote:

Is it possible to express care in a different way than you do? And could you stop making the issue about me? I know you really, really want to call me a meanie, but it's completely irrelevant.
It's nothing to do with being a meanie. It's simply human nature that we don't care about everything equally. If you don't find the gender imbalance in STEM problematic that's fine. Other people do. I mean I can find good causes that I personally don't really care about - but that doesn't mean they aren't a problem for other people.

Quote:
I hate to channel TBD, but rule of so.
Well if you don't mind people doing things to find out if they work (which is what I have been advocating) I wonder what you do object to?

Quote:

Well you're still yet to answer the question: when do you stop, and consider you've done what you can?
Literally answered it 4 times now

Quote:
This is the issue that I was talking about: you can never find other possibles causes for disparity if you just assume that any disparity must be compensated for. As I said, you consider disparity to be a problem, which circles right back to what I said earlier: what you want is parity, not equality. Deny it all you want, but that's what you're advocating, so if it's not what you want, change your advocacy.
I really don't understand what you are getting at. If you can compensate for a disparity with some simple changes then it obviously isn't being caused by some fundamental biological disparity.

We are not talking about locking women up and forcing them to code. We are talking about getting them interested in coding (for example) at a young age to see if they like it.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:35 AM   #378
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
We are not talking about locking women up and forcing them to code. We are talking about getting them interested in coding (for example) at a young age to see if they like it.
Coding used to be "women's work."

https://www.history.com/news/coding-...nd-undervalued

Quote:
The First 1940s Coders Were Women–So How Did Tech Bros Take Over?
Computer programming used to be a ‘pink ghetto’—so it was underpaid and undervalued.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...s-work-718061/

Quote:
As late as the 1960s many people perceived computer programming as a natural career choice for savvy young women. Even the trend-spotters at Cosmopolitan Magazine urged their fashionable female readership to consider careers in programming. In an article titled “The Computer Girls,” the magazine described the field as offering better job opportunities for women than many other professional careers. As computer scientist Dr. Grace Hopper told a reporter, programming was “just like planning a dinner. You have to plan ahead and schedule everything so that it’s ready when you need it…. Women are ‘naturals’ at computer programming.” James Adams, the director of education for the Association for Computing Machinery, agreed: “I don’t know of any other field, outside of teaching, where there’s as much opportunity for a woman.”
https://www.npr.org/sections/alltech...ed-modern-tech

Quote:
It wasn't always this way. Decades ago, it was women who pioneered computer programming — but too often, that's a part of history that even the smartest people don't know.

I took a trip to ground zero for today's computer revolution, Stanford University, and randomly asked over a dozen students if they knew who were the first computer programmers. Almost none knew.

"I'm in computer science," says a slightly embarrassed Stephanie Pham. "This is so sad."
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

Last edited by kellyb; 13th April 2019 at 04:38 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 04:50 AM   #379
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,028
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I have literally never mentioned not stopping until you reach 50/50. I have repeatedly said that while there are practical and reasonable efforts that can be made to move towards 50/50 they should be tried. And if they work they should continue. If they don't work they should stop.
Archie, let's cut the discussion down in size a bit, shall we?

When you say, above, that if they don't work they should stop, how would they know that they work if not that they drive the needle towards the middle? That's the exact same thing as saying you don't stop until you reach 50-50. If you have a different set of criteria for it, then by all means name them.

Quote:
Because helping person A doesn't harm person B. Pretty much by definition.
Well, unless you rip an organ from person B to give to person A. That's essentially my point. It's possible to cause harm while trying to help.

Quote:
But one good way to get more people is to encourage underrepresented demographics to participate.
I agree. I don't think we're merely talking about encouraging people though, are we?

Quote:
If you don't find the gender imbalance in STEM problematic that's fine.
Even assuming that's true, that doesn't mean I don't care, however.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 06:13 AM   #380
Delvo
الشيطان الأبيض
 
Delvo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Harrisburg, PA
Posts: 8,155
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
There is a real shortage of skills in these areas so shutting them off to entire sections of the population is actually damaging the employers.
Even if we accept the premise of a shortage (which I don't, based on how few positions there are out there and how much competition there already is to get in), what is being done that counts as "shutting them off to entire sections of the population"?

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I have literally never mentioned not stopping until you reach 50/50.
Of course not... you just keep talking about constantly trying to push in the direction of 50/50 as long as we're not there yet, explicitly because we're not there yet. Totally different!

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I have repeatedly said that while there are practical and reasonable efforts that can be made to move towards 50/50 they should be tried. And if they work they should continue. If they don't work they should stop.
So far, we've tried eliminating bans and biases in application processes, and adding a big cultural push toward the target professions aimed at girls & women. It's been this way my whole life. What else would you add to it? Implementing an opposite bias/quota in application processes?

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
You ask why we should care about inequality and when given a reason - that it shrinks the available talent pool in STEM and causes skill shortages - you dismiss them as not having anything to do with inequality.
Because they don't. Most people who try to get in to such a profession, no matter how good they are, are already not making it in because there's just not enough room for them. Adding more who try would only add more who don't make it. And that's even if whatever you propose would actually increase the raw number at all, which it might not, if your method (whatever it might be) ends up with a side effect discouraging boys from the same field.

Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
I am not interested in a philosophical discussion, I am talking about real world pragmatic solutions to real world problems
You have yet to show that a ratio other than 50/50 in any particular profession is a "real world problem".
Delvo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 06:20 AM   #381
Stout
Illuminator
 
Stout's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Canada
Posts: 3,975
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Anti-feminism is usually one of their core beliefs, so I'm not sure how that's avoidable.

A few of us are finding common ground, so I think this is the good sort of thread drift, personally.
What passes as anti-feminism though. Would being critical of a woman who trots out that tired old trope all men are rapists and labeling it as hate speech be considered anti-feminism ?

Imagine a bowl of M&Ms.....

That's the sort of "anti-feminism" I saw over at the MRA Reddit.
Stout is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 06:31 AM   #382
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
What passes as anti-feminism though. Would being critical of a woman who trots out that tired old trope all men are rapists and labeling it as hate speech be considered anti-feminism ?

Imagine a bowl of M&Ms.....

That's the sort of "anti-feminism" I saw over at the MRA Reddit.
No, that's not anti-feminism. That's anti-crazycakes batcrap insane lies. Not even my most extremist feminist acquaintances say stuff like that, and some of them are out there.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 07:50 AM   #383
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
[quote=Belz...;12663555]

When you say, above, that if they don't work they should stop, how would they know that they work if not that they drive the needle towards the middle? That's the exact same thing as saying you don't stop until you reach 50-50. If you have a different set of criteria for it, then by all means name them.

[quote]

No, that's exactly it. If for example, the imbalance is contributed to by poor childcare options, or by the lack of female science teachers or by the lack of female faces in recruitment literature or whatever other idea you can come up with and you change it.... and it drives the needle towards 50/50 then guess what? It turns out it wasn't some immutable fact of human nature but just a fairly easily resolvable glitch in the system. Success!

Now do you object to that? Because I am struggling to see where your complaint lies now. The alternative to this is not to do anything and you have said that's not what you are advocating.

Quote:
Well, unless you rip an organ from person B to give to person A. That's essentially my point. It's possible to cause harm while trying to help.
Only if you design the system to cause harm to B. Which is not what promoting equality does.

Quote:
I agree. I don't think we're merely talking about encouraging people though, are we?
Of course we are. What on earth did you think we were talking about? Locking women up in foundries and forcing them to work metal?

Quote:
Even assuming that's true, that doesn't mean I don't care, however.
Then I think we are using the word differently.
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 07:55 AM   #384
Archie Gemmill Goal
Philosopher
 
Archie Gemmill Goal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Posts: 6,940
Originally Posted by Delvo View Post
Even if we accept the premise of a shortage (which I don't, based on how few positions there are out there and how much competition there already is to get in), what is being done that counts as "shutting them off to entire sections of the population"?

Of course not... you just keep talking about constantly trying to push in the direction of 50/50 as long as we're not there yet, explicitly because we're not there yet. Totally different!

So far, we've tried eliminating bans and biases in application processes, and adding a big cultural push toward the target professions aimed at girls & women. It's been this way my whole life. What else would you add to it? Implementing an opposite bias/quota in application processes?

Because they don't. Most people who try to get in to such a profession, no matter how good they are, are already not making it in because there's just not enough room for them. Adding more who try would only add more who don't make it. And that's even if whatever you propose would actually increase the raw number at all, which it might not, if your method (whatever it might be) ends up with a side effect discouraging boys from the same field.

You have yet to show that a ratio other than 50/50 in any particular profession is a "real world problem".
Sorry you don't agree that there are STEM skills shortages? You are at odds with ... well pretty much everyone then.

https://www.stem.org.uk/news-and-vie...em-sector-15bn
__________________
"I love sex and drugs and sausage rolls
But nothing compares to Archie Gemmill's goal"
Archie Gemmill Goal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:03 AM   #385
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,562
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
And I don't want equality of outcome, I want GREATER equality of outcome. And you don't overcome decades of entrenched inequality by simply removing the obvious barriers. You need to go further than that.
https://www.nbcnews.com/health/healt...-finds-n912891

You could always force women to go into those fields, stop them from having kids, and not allow them to change out of those fields later. I think that was tried in the U.S. for a couple hundred years and worked quite well if the only goal is to keep up numbers.

Women tend to prefer working with people and animals and those are the parts of STEM that their numbers have risen in. In other areas they haven't. That is not undesirable. That is women making their own choices.

There is a big drop in the numbers of women when they reach child bearing years. In Canada they are allowed to transfer their maternity leave to the father if he is going to be the primary care giver of children. Before the baby many say they are going to do that, after the baby is born few actually do it. That is also a choice women make.

The only answer to your perceived issue is to move to a system that forces women to do things they would not choose to do.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:14 AM   #386
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
There is a big drop in the numbers of women when they reach child bearing years. In Canada they are allowed to transfer their maternity leave to the father if he is going to be the primary care giver of children. Before the baby many say they are going to do that, after the baby is born few actually do it. That is also a choice women make.

The only answer to your perceived issue is to move to a system that forces women to do things they would not choose to do.
Germany has this one figured out:
https://blogs.dlapiper.com/employmen...l-leave-act-2/

Quote:
German law allows employees to go on paid parental leave in addition to mandatory paid maternity leave after childbirth. Until now, the German Parental Allowance and Parental Leave Act (Bundeselterngeld- und Elternzeitgesetz, BEEG) provided for a parental allowance for a maximum duration of 12 months of paid parental leave (14 months if the other parent decides to go on parental leave as well). The allowance is paid by the state and ranges from EUR 300.00 to up to EUR 1,800.00 a month depending on the employee’s prior income.

Following reforms, an additional option dubbed “Parental Allowance Plus” will be available for parents of children born on and after 1 July 2015. Under the new rules, employees will have a right to request up to 24 months of paid parental leave (instead of 12 months) or, if both parents decide to go on parental leave, they will be entitled to 28 months of paid parental leave (instead of 14 months) to be shared between the parents. While the duration of paid parental leave doubles, the amounts paid will remain the same, ie payments will merely be stretched out over a longer period of time.

The reforms also intend to provide incentives for shared childcare responsibilities. If both parents only work between 25 and 30 hours a week, they will be entitled to an additional four months of paid parental leave
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

Last edited by kellyb; 13th April 2019 at 08:18 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:15 AM   #387
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,562
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
Because when I see large inequality of outcomes it is strongly indicative of a systemic problem in opportunity (whether obvious or hidden) . . .
No, it's not. It is an indicator of individual choice. Males and females are different and have different wants and likes. Therefore a population will be divided along gender lines as males and females make their choices.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:16 AM   #388
Belz...
Fiend God
 
Belz...'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the details
Posts: 87,028
Originally Posted by Archie Gemmill Goal View Post
No, that's exactly it.
Then you're saying exactly what I said you were saying and that you denied: you are definitely driving for a 50-50 spread and will not stop until you get it.

Quote:
Only if you design the system to cause harm to B. Which is not what promoting equality does.
Again, you don't know that, since you're only interested in getting to that 50-50 distribution. You have no idea whether it causes harm of another sort along the way, nor do you care.

Quote:
Of course we are.
I don't believe you.
__________________
Master of the Shining Darkness

"My views are nonsense. So what?" - BobTheCoward


Belz... is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:16 AM   #389
dann
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 9,125
Originally Posted by Stout View Post
What passes as anti-feminism though. Would being critical of a woman who trots out that tired old trope all men are rapists and labeling it as hate speech be considered anti-feminism ?

She doesn't 'trot out that tired old trope' that you claim she does! (And your link is not exactly to a reliable news site: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-europe/ )
1) But the English subtitles of the speech are correct. (As a Dane, I understand Swedish.)
2) So notice what she actually says: She doesn't say that all men are rapists, which is what you claim. What she does say is that since women can't tell the difference from the mere appearance of a man, they have to assume that all men are rapists. I would have preferred if she'd said that she had to assume that any man may be a rapist. That would have been closer to the meaning that she intends.
3) She then goes on to say that all men must accept their collective responsibility. Not for rape, but for putting a stop to rape.
Quote:
"Because I refuse to be afraid, I also refuse that my fellow sisters are afraid. That is why the struggle of feminism is everyone's struggle. The violence of men must be stopped", the Left Party MP explained.
Swedish Feminist MP Ripped for Assuming 'All Men Are Rapists' (Sputnik News)
More of the speech is available on this site, which probably belongs to her opponents, the extreme-right party Sverigedemokraterna. Unfortunately, it's in Swedish.
It isn't really a surprise that Sputnik takes the racist approach to this question.
__________________
/dann
"Stupidity renders itself invisible by assuming very large proportions. Completely unreasonable claims are irrefutable. Ni-en-leh pointed out that a philosopher might get into trouble by claiming that two times two makes five, but he does not risk much by claiming that two times two makes shoe polish." B. Brecht
"The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions." K. Marx
dann is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:18 AM   #390
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,562
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Germany has this one figured out:
https://blogs.dlapiper.com/employmen...l-leave-act-2/
Have they: What has been the result. Canada thought they had it figured out to until they didn't.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:21 AM   #391
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
No, that's not anti-feminism. That's anti-crazycakes batcrap insane lies.
Six of one...

Quote:
Not even my most extremist feminist acquaintances say stuff like that, and some of them are out there.
^^ Quick, dann! Make sure you 'No True Scotsman' kellyb as well! Dann? Dann!? Where are you going?
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:22 AM   #392
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by dann View Post
She doesn't 'trot out that tired old trope' that you claim she does! (And your link is not exactly to a reliable news site: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-europe/ )
1) But the English subtitles of the speech are correct. (As a Dane, I understand Swedish.)
2) So notice what she actually says: She doesn't say that all men are rapists, which is what you claim. What she does say is that since women can't tell the difference from the mere appearance of a man, they have to assume that all men are rapists. I would have preferred if she'd said that she had to assume that any man may be a rapist. That would have been closer to the meaning that she intends.
3) She then goes on to say that all men must accept their collective responsibility. Not for rape, but for putting a stop to rape.


More of the speech is available on this site, which probably belongs to her opponents, the extreme-right party Sverigedemokraterna. Unfortunately, it's in Swedish.
It isn't really a surprise that Sputnik takes the racist approach to this question.
I did't click the link till after I posted, and yeah. You're right. If a strange man knocks on my door when I'm here alone, I'm glad I have 3 dogs, 2 of which are pits to show a potential predator that this is not the best or easiest target in the city. We have to operate with a certain degree of paranoia.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:23 AM   #393
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 13,562
Originally Posted by dann View Post
She doesn't 'trot out that tired old trope' that you claim she does! (And your link is not exactly to a reliable news site: https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/voice-of-europe/ )
1) But the English subtitles of the speech are correct. (As a Dane, I understand Swedish.)
2) So notice what she actually says: She doesn't say that all men are rapists, which is what you claim. What she does say is that since women can't tell the difference from the mere appearance of a man, they have to assume that all men are rapists. I would have preferred if she'd said that she had to assume that any man may be a rapist. That would have been closer to the meaning that she intends.
3) She then goes on to say that all men must accept their collective responsibility. Not for rape, but for putting a stop to rape.
Men and women steal. You can't tell thieves from non-thieves by looking at them. Therefore, you must assume that all people are thieves and it is all peoples' collective responsibility to put a stop to stealing.

Well, that just sounds silly.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:23 AM   #394
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post

^^ Quick, dann! Make sure you 'No True Scotsman' kellyb as well! Dann? Dann!? Where are you going?
No, he's right. See my above post. Any strange man knocking on my door could, in theory, be a rapist or robber or both. Men deal with the same thing to a lesser extent. She did not say "all men are rapists" at all.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan

Last edited by kellyb; 13th April 2019 at 08:38 AM.
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:25 AM   #395
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
Men and women steal. You can't tell thieves from non-thieves by looking at them. Therefore, you must assume that all people are thieves and it is all peoples' collective responsibility to put a stop to stealing.

Well, that just sounds silly.
I think...sigh...the responsibility for ending rape more falls upon mothers to raise their sons to not be rapists.

The looney tunes feminists would kill me if they heard me say that. LOL
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:26 AM   #396
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 18,465
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
I did't click the link till after I posted, and yeah. You're right. If a strange man knocks on my door when I'm here alone, I'm glad I have 3 dogs, 2 of which are pits to show a potential predator that this is not the best or easiest target in the city. We have to operate with a certain degree of paranoia.
And it is important to listen to women in this regard. If women are saying "We have to treat each man as a potential rapist," men saying "Not Me" or "you're wrong" doesn't actually address the issue.
__________________
"As your friend, I have to be honest with you: I don't care about you or your problems" - Chloe, Secret Life of Pets
pgwenthold is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:26 AM   #397
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
Have they: What has been the result. Canada thought they had it figured out to until they didn't.
I'd assume it was at least partially effective. You look it up.
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:28 AM   #398
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
No, he's right. See my above post. Any strange man knocking on my door could, in theory, be a rapist or robber or either. Men deal with the same thing to a lesser extent. She did not say "all me are rapists" at all.
Sorry, wasn't referring to that. It was a bit of a childish dig at dann because he has accused me of doing the 'No True Scotsman' because I talk about the fact that no MRA I know thinks x, y, z and was rhetorically wondering if he would do the same thing to you since you identify as a feminist and just did the same thing.

I'll try and resist such childish posts now; this thread is really, really good quality and now dann has turned up he seems to be doing his best to make it into the usual polarizing, 'With Us Or Against Us' tribal slanging match and it's up to everyone else who doesn't want that (including myself) not to encourage it.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:36 AM   #399
Georgio
Muse
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 634
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
And it is important to listen to women in this regard. If women are saying "We have to treat each man as a potential rapist," men saying "Not Me" or "you're wrong" doesn't actually address the issue.
There are two meanings to 'potential', however; one is that you don't know what anyone who is a total stranger may do (valid, but not just for men), and the other is the implied notion that given complete freedom all men will rape because that is the nature of all men, just as all tigers will eat you if given complete freedom to do so.

The latter is the meaning of 'potential' that feminist theory advocates.
__________________
Violence is a weakness, not a strength. - Sylvester McCoy
Georgio is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th April 2019, 08:41 AM   #400
kellyb
Penultimate Amazing
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 12,631
Originally Posted by Georgio View Post
There are two meanings to 'potential', however; one is that you don't know what anyone who is a total stranger may do (valid, but not just for men), and the other is the implied notion that given complete freedom all men will rape because that is the nature of all men, just as all tigers will eat you if given complete freedom to do so.

The latter is the meaning of 'potential' that feminist theory advocates.
That latter thing wasn't what that MP was saying. And like I said, even my most out-there extremist feminist acquaintance have never said anything like "given complete freedom all men will rape because that is the nature of all men".
__________________
"We are enjoined, no matter how uncomfortable it might be, to consider ourselves and our cultural institutions scientifically — not to accept uncritically whatever we’re told; to surmount as best we can our hopes, conceits, and unexamined beliefs; to view ourselves as we really are." - Carl Sagan
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:10 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.