Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[GlyphGryph]

I had only mentioned it originally as evidence that such people exist. I didn't mention the name because I didn't want it to become a conversation about the person.

This was obviously a failure of planning on my part, and I'd like to apologize.

[kaijyuu]

Wheras it's perfectly fine to wink wink nudge nudge about someone as long as you have plausible deniability if they notice?  If he's worth bringing up then he's worth naming.

More like, not interested in coloring other people's views on a person they've never met. That's unfair to Virex.


How'd you like it if you returned someplace only to be greeted by comments along the lines of "oh, you're that asshole we've heard so much about?" Whether deserving the title or not, the past is past. Individual transgressions don't need to be dug back up. That's why the secrecy, winks, and nudges. Not deniability.

[Leafsnail]

If someone genuinely doesn't know who we're talking about they're gonna try and work it out (or ask).  By the time they meet Virex they'll likely have pieced it together, and Virex would too if he returned.  I don't think the secrecy is any better, and it just allows people to do pretty much the same thing while thinking it's ok because they're stopping just short of "naming and shaming" (well, short of naming anyway).

As such, I insist on properly commiting to criticisms of other people.  If you think it would be unfair to name them I think that's an indication that it would be equally unfair to vaguely criticise an anonymous figure who is obviously them.

[Valid_Dark]

I'm just going to leave this here

[penguinofhonor]

I'm just going to leave this here

really

Anyone getting in trouble at all for neglecting child support is pretty unlikely in the first place. Sure, you can get some exceptional anecdotes, but that's all they'll be.

[Cheeetar]

I'm just going to leave this here

really

The video itself is interesting (at least, for the first 3 minutes or so), but everything else in that link completely turns me off of whatever point was being made.

[Sir Finkus]

One thing I think a lot of people fail to acknowledge is that men and women ARE different, and that should be taken into account when citing statistics and such.

I'll point out that the vast majority of differences are either irrelevant for most purposes or statistical correlations and not inherent traits to gender. The latter is irrelevant unless you're doing something like advertising.

An easy to spot statistical correlation would be height. Men are on average taller than women. However, you don't automatically assume every women is short, do you? The same attitude should be applied to other traits, including (perhaps especially) personality ones. Assumptions make you an ass. Don't make them.



Anywho as for our local male misandrist, not sure I've seen him around recently. But yeah, he's got some associative guilt issues and blames the entire male gender for what sexist doucebags do.

Perhaps I was misunderstood.  Here's an example.  My dad is an elementary school teacher.  He's one of only 2 male teachers there.  Men are perfectly capable of teaching children, and getting teaching jobs.  Still, more women than men are drawn to the job.  Same thing the other way around with engineering jobs and such.  I don't assume that every woman wants to be a teacher, or doesn't want to be an engineer, but I really don't think there's some male conspiracy to keep women down.

Of course you can make the nature vs. nurture argument there, but given how universal these trends tend to be, is it such a stretch to think that men and women are "wired" differently to have different interests?

[kaijyuu]

It's a stretch to say any sort of "wiring" is intrinsic to gender.

You can say people tend to gravitate toward certain things based on their gender (like your examples*), which is fine. That's a lot different than saying "men are wired to be engineers" though. These differences are correlations, not rules. And when it comes to using inductive arguments concerning people, keep them where they belong: stuff like advertising.


I think we're agreeing here, with just some semantic silliness.



*I don't think your examples are good ones, though. I'd argue cultural silliness is the main cause of those gender divides. For teaching young kids specifically, I remember reading an article ~6 months back about how male teachers are quickly shoved upstairs, becoming principals or whatever. That certainly happened in my experience; only once had a female principal (for about 1 year) in elementary school, despite only knowing of one male teacher in both of the elementary schools I attended. I really don't think any of that has anything to do with gender itself, but rather, arbitrary gender roles: teaching young kids is seen as a woman's job, so it becomes a women's job.

[Phmcw]

Misandry, just like anti-white racism, is an annoying issue but not too serious right now, on average.
Biggot hates anything and everything they can hate. The problem with pro white racism and misogyny is that they are widespread and powerful, with lots of way to harm theirs targets, which anti white racism and misandry are not. I suspect anti white racism may become a problem later, with misandrist a smaller threat.
Misandry is quite troublesome because anti misandry organization are filled with a bunch of misogynists, just like anti racist organization are, in my experience, pretty anti white.

Other than that yeah, that's a problem when mothers are favored against father, when male rape is something we laugh about and other possibly life crushing things.
Nothing like the problem misogyny was, and is in certain area.

[GlyphGryph]

Finkus, the teaching thing... doesn't really hold up. Traditionally, teachers are male. At all levels. This has really only changed relatively recently.

So it being "wired" seems exceptionally unlikely.

[Frumple]

Perhaps I was misunderstood.  Here's an example.  My dad is an elementary school teacher.  He's one of only 2 male teachers there.  Men are perfectly capable of teaching children, and getting teaching jobs.  Still, more women than men are drawn to the job.  Same thing the other way around with engineering jobs and such.  I don't assume that every woman wants to be a teacher, or doesn't want to be an engineer, but I really don't think there's some male conspiracy to keep women down.

Of course you can make the nature vs. nurture argument there, but given how universal these trends tend to be, is it such a stretch to think that men and women are "wired" differently to have different interests?

Teaching... teaching specifically is a terrible example. There's very strong social pressure pushing men away from education positions, especially in grade school. It starts with the salary and just kind of works its way up. It's the same way with nursing, if you're going to try putting that forth. The chances of there being a strong physiological component going on there is pretty slim.

And then there's gryph's point.

[Leafsnail]

I'm just going to leave this here

A very interesting documentary about an injustice committed under a poorly thought out law interspersed with unnecessary analysis from a boring sexist.

[Vattic]

*I don't think your examples are good ones, though. I'd argue cultural silliness is the main cause of those gender divides. For teaching young kids specifically, I remember reading an article ~6 months back about how male teachers are quickly shoved upstairs, becoming principals or whatever. That certainly happened in my experience; only once had a female principal (for about 1 year) in elementary school, despite only knowing of one male teacher in both of the elementary schools I attended. I really don't think any of that has anything to do with gender itself, but rather, arbitrary gender roles: teaching young kids is seen as a woman's job, so it becomes a women's job.

Where as I never had a male principal.

I'm just going to leave this here

A very interesting documentary about an injustice committed under a poorly thought out law interspersed with unnecessary analysis from a boring sexist.

< my face when he started complaining that it was two women sent to advise and judge whether he was fit to get his licence back.

[kaijyuu]

Honestly the title alone kept me from watching that video

[Leafsnail]

I was initially confused at the fairly well made and balanced documentary (the original could've told the wife's side of the story, it felt like bits had been cut out) posted under that title.  Then the guy started speaking and it all made sense.  I guess I shouldn't allow my views on "men's rights activists" to be swayed by guys like this and the likes of MGTOW but goddamn is it difficult.