What's vulgar about a tea bag?!

Anyhow, I have strong beliefs, but that doesn't mean I lost my sense of humour.

It figures that I can't even post anything funny in here without someone using it to spawn an argument. <sigh> Time to stay away from here for a while I guess. Not in the mood to debate my beliefs. I think everyone knows them quite well by now. Nobody in here is changing me, and I certainly won't change anyone's mind in here, so it is pointless.

God hates Democrats.

But so does everyone else.

I think there's a nipple joke involving the Golden Girls that could be conjured up, but I never really watched that show and have no particular affinity for them.

Chris' video makes excellent points. It's definitely worth the time to watch it.

It's more about how "social justice" when aiming for equal outcome is actually corrupt and counter-productive, and how. And why a university must choose between social justice or truth. And a basic dialogue of how universities should operate, versus how they have been, and the consequences of it. It's very interesting. It should be especially interesting to you being that you're in a university now, are you not?

It even touches on why papers tend to be less useful than they used to be because instead of people doing the honest thing, seeking to do unbiased work, and their peers holding them to it, social justice has been creating an environment in which you cannot do that properly, which has been undermining the entire process.

I'm sure he will as soon as NiteHackr proves that God does exist...

Equality of opportunity is good. That means there's no discrimination. Candidates are chosen based on merit, and ideally the best person for the job gets it.

But equality of outcome requires discrimination to account for individual choices. If most women are not interested in a career in STEM, but we insist on their being a 50/50 ratio of men and women in STEM, then you will necessarily have to have fewer men in STEM to even out. Say, for example, 98 men wanted to be in STEM, but only 2 women wanted to. The only way to get 50/50 without forcing women into STEM is to restrict men to only 2. That's not good. That's bad. It hurts men, and it hurts STEM. And it doesn't help any women.

Most people assume that there remains discrimination against women, but when experiments are conducted the opposite is seen: due to affirmative action companies are going out of their way to give women every opportunity, at the expense of men. There is discrimination, but it's in favor of women, not in favor of men. What this means is that the discrepancies aren't due to systemic discrimination, but due to personal choices and differences.

The problem is that proper research isn't being done to come to the conclusion that there's discrimination. People are looking at the numbers, seeing a discrepancy, and concluding that the reason for it is systemic discrimination. It's dishonest, and it's not helpful. It's harmful. It's discrimination! And it doesn't even benefit the groups that you're trying to help. It might help the odd woman that goes against the grain and chooses a different path than others, but most of them have no interest in doing it so you're not doing them any favors making it easier for them to get in. They won't take advantage of it because they don't want it. And in the process, you're hurting men that do want the opportunity, and would have done a good job. Which also means you're hurting STEM by keeping the men that would have done good jobs out. Which hurts society overall.

And perhaps, even worse, all of the pressure to get more women into STEM might convince girls that they should pursue STEM only to find after investing years of their life and perhaps thousands of dollars in tuition that it's not actually what they wanted...

I have proven God exists to my own personal satisfaction. It is impossible for me to prove that He exists to you or anyone else who does not believe in Him and refuses to accept that He exists. I won't waste both of our time trying.

We've been down this road too many times in these forums to count and it only leads to frustration and anger.

It often reminds me of Star Wars, each side is firing off shots at the other like crazy and nobody is hitting anything.

Affirmative action is like providing crutches to somebody who was born with a hobble. Hiring quotas are like putting shackles on people who would out perform the people with crutches, in order to equalize their performance.

Please elaborate on what kind of things you have in mind that would unfairly prevent a woman from entering STEM, and how these things don't also affect straight white men the same way. I don't see how it is relevant.

But we're not strengthening women by giving them special treatment. We're keeping them weak. And by holding men back we're making them weaker too. The net result is that the chain is weaker.

And the worst part is that women are not weak. They don't need this special treatment in the first place. They're different, but where they have weaknesses as compared to men, they also have strengths over men in other areas. We should be embracing our differences instead of trying to erase them.

The only way to make men and women equal is to get rid of all of our strengths and level the playing field at the lowest bar. That's bad for everyone.

It has been shown that the more rights and equal opportunity women have the less likely they are to work in STEM.

Typically, people do (and like to do) what they are best at. So while women do not need to be less capable of programming than men, they might typically be better at something else individually.

Also, the logical choice for a gender-neutral pronoun appears to be "it" from my perspective (as a non native speaker). Demanding to be addressed in the plural strikes me as rather arrogant (pluralis maiestatis)? Shouldn't the plural be reserved to denote that ... more than one individual is involved?

https://www.thejournal.ie/gender-equality-countries-stem-girls-3848156-Feb2018/

Feminists have been preaching the idea that there are no differences between men and women, but the differences are obvious to anybody with an open mind. It's not science that suggested that men and women are the same. It was political activists. It's laughable to suggest that men and women are the same. Sure, women are capable of doing most of the same work that men are. Obviously though they cannot do certain jobs as well on average.

For example, if the job requires a lot of heavy lifting then men would generally be better qualified for it. That's not to say that women cannot do heavy lifting, or that no men would struggle with it, but fewer women can do heavy lifting, and fewer of them would want to. They're not as physically strong as men. They'd be more likely to hurt themselves.

Also, men tend to be more heavily represented at the top (and bottom) of the IQ spectrum. On average, men and women's IQ isn't that much different, but at the extremes men are over-represented whereas women's IQ is more average. Which means the people at the top end of the IQ spectrum are more likely to be men, and they're probably more likely to be attracted to the most mentally demanding work, which probably means STEM fields. The people at the bottom end are also likely to be men which probably attracts those men to menial jobs that don't require a lot of thinking.

There are other ways that women are different from men too. And when you factor these things in then the roles that women traditionally held start to make a bit more sense. And the jobs that women are doing today also make better sense.

If women were equal to men then you have to explain how things ever came to be "uneven" in the first place. You would instead expect women to be equal with men throughout history. What's that, "men forced them into their role?" No, no, no, they're just as capable as men, remember? Men couldn't force them into a role they didn't want to do. They would just fight back. "All the men ganged up on individual women," you say? No, no, women would just gang back up on the men. In a universe where men and women are truly equal there would be no differences. The differences we see in outcome are actually related to the differences between men and women.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_female_scientists_before_the_20th_century

I feel bad for my transgressions. So now I exclusively eat RESIST brand ice cream from Ben and Jerry's.

Finally, the patriarchy will be defeated, with the power of pecans.

Goddamn it, liberals. You make it physically exhausting to support POLICIES I ALREADY SUPPORT because of your non-stop stupidity and commercialism.

{"name":"ap_ravens_steelers_football_76404960.jpg","src":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/c\/6\/c67f9c98bcecb2aeb5b225e393a54a7a.jpg","w":1000,"h":667,"tn":"\/\/djungxnpq2nug.cloudfront.net\/image\/cache\/c\/6\/c67f9c98bcecb2aeb5b225e393a54a7a"}

I cannot cite a single person whose life was saved by forcing NFL players to run around in pink dresses to end breast cancer. I'm pretty sure the doctors are the people ending breast cancer. But when was the last time you saw one of them thanked on TV? Nah, better sell people some pink hats and headphones because that'll... end... cancer or something (while we make some sweet -ss pity money!)

I actually care about the environment. I actually care about cancer. I actually care about immigrants.

But literally everything the liberal establishment (media + politicians) do, is an affront to actually solving problems.

They want solar and wind power, but they don't care how many birds die as they're literally burnt out of the air by solar panels, and smashed into pieces by wind farms:

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-solar-bird-deaths-20160831-snap-story.html

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/science/wind-energy-takes-toll-birds-now-there-s-help-ncna866336

"Up to 300,000 birds a year killed by turbines" and of course, that will only increase as they build more.

And nobody cares how much extremely toxic rare earth minerals are used in the construction of solar and wind power plants.

It's like nobody on the planet actually cares about saving the damn planet.