Women's Fight to Vote Tied to Declining SMV

Off Topic
321

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]debraD wrote:
You guy waste waaaay too much energy trying to find limitations for people.

That’s all this fucking innate shit is.

Years ago when I was studying AI I was focusing on neural networks. I had a project where I built a bunch of simple robots who basically acted as a node in a neural network to demonstrate. But I fucked up the programming at first and they were getting the negative and positive feedback reversed and were banging themselves against the wall repeatedly instead of going into formation like I was hoping they would. I had to manually bump the sensors of a few of them to get it to propagate and it took a few times for it to overcome the bad input they were getting but eventually the ‘good’ input dominated. Anyways, to make a long story short I had an epiphany that if that is an abstract of my mind then I can make it do whatever the fuck I want it to. And so I do. Nature shmature.
[/quote]

Soooo…

How many sensors you would like us to knock out of how many women?

Assuming that I do not necessarily want to control them, just not up to pay for their little power trip?[/quote]

I don’t have the slightest idea what you’re talking about but I suspect it doesn’t matter–whatever I ought to be convincing you of smacks of too much effort.[/quote]

Yeah, that sounds about right to me.

Please, for the love of God, do not waste any energy trying to understand what a man might be talking about, you little Eloi…

Enjoy your time in the sun.[/quote]

Why would I bother trying to understand someone who only has contempt for me? Doesn’t make sense. Makes more sense to punch a brick wall.
[/quote]

I hold no contempt for you.

Women as a whole, honestly, yes.

Women individually, no.

You specifically, surely not!

I have known women worthy of respect and if I had not, I would not despair because the troglodytes of your sex have taken over your official narrative.

Plus, just as an aside, you do live off of us. That is not contempt, that is a verifiable fact, whether you like that or not.

As far as I remember not you personally, but your sisterhood as a whole sure does.

If your reality (as a gender) is worthy of contempt, please dont blame me, because I would rather keep the fruits of my own labor instead of forking it over, thank you.

322

[quote]orion wrote:

I hold no contempt for you.

Women as a whole, honestly, yes.

Women individually, no.

[/quote]

Dude, there is no distinction between those two statements. If you draw a circle around women as a whole I am right fucking in the middle of it, not one foot in, one foot out. Not touching it from the outside. Right inside.

Would you expect a black man to let you off the hook for complaining about the Negroes of the world sucking off the system, but he’s the exception? Would you expect him to hear a single word of what you’re saying after that?

[quote]

You specifically, surely not!

I have known women worthy of respect and if I had not, I would not despair because the troglodytes of your sex have taken over your official narrative.

Plus, just as an aside, you do live off of us. That is not contempt, that is a verifiable fact, whether you like that or not.

As far as I remember not you personally, but your sisterhood as a whole sure does.

If your reality (as a gender) is worthy of contempt, please dont blame me, because I would rather keep the fruits of my own labor instead of forking it over, thank you. [/quote]

323

[quote]debraD wrote:

Would you expect a black man to let you off the hook for complaining about the Negroes of the world sucking off the system, but he’s the exception? Would you expect him to hear a single word of what you’re saying after that?

[/quote]

I dont care, how far a black man is willing to accept reality.

I would wager that his course in life will be heavily influenced by how far he is willing to digest and accept the reality of his situation, whatever that may be.

I would also be utterly unimpressed how much huffing and puffing and other forms of emoting he brings to the table, because if all he has is some fake form of being indignant, screw him, neh?

325

I don’t particularly care if a woman on average can lead as well as man, I think it’s a pretty irrelevant question.

I do think based on what I posted earlier, you are doing women a huge disservice by pushing them into these roles as it’s clearly killing their happiness.

Can a woman lead? Irrelevant . Should a woman lead? Not if she wants to be happy, statistically speaking.

326

[quote]debraD wrote:

That’s all this fucking innate shit is.

[/quote]

Biology wins out. Every. Single. Time.

327

Also debraD google fat feminism.

328

[quote]debraD wrote:
You guy waste waaaay too much energy trying to find limitations for people.

That’s all this fucking innate shit is.

Years ago when I was studying AI I was focusing on neural networks. I had a project where I built a bunch of simple robots who basically acted as a node in a neural network to demonstrate. But I fucked up the programming at first and they were getting the negative and positive feedback reversed and were banging themselves against the wall repeatedly instead of going into formation like I was hoping they would. I had to manually bump the sensors of a few of them to get it to propagate and it took a few times for it to overcome the bad input they were getting but eventually the ‘good’ input dominated. Anyways, to make a long story short I had an epiphany that if that is an abstract of my mind then I can make it do whatever the fuck I want it to. And so I do. Nature shmature.
[/quote]

Ask yourself this: Why is your comparison flawed? And it is flawed.

329

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

To the regret of many on this board I’m sure, women are viewed as being much more equal to men in all respects far more than they have in the last several hundred years. [/quote]

These kinds of comments, O’ White Knight, indicate an insecurity with your position.

On top of the weak “You hate girls!” there is also the fact that, if anyone were in a position to actually make this claim, you’d think Emily would have made it by now so that you wouldn’t have to. But she, unlike you, has not chosen to see things that do not exist or read words into our side that were never written.

330

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

To the regret of many on this board I’m sure, women are viewed as being much more equal to men in all respects far more than they have in the last several hundred years. [/quote]

These kinds of comments, O’ White Knight, indicate an insecurity with your position.

On top of the weak “You hate girls!” there is also the fact that, if anyone were in a position to actually make this claim, you’d think Emily would have made it by now so that you wouldn’t have to. But she, unlike you, has not chosen to see things that do not exist or read words into our side that were never written.[/quote]

Oh. come off it dude. This is just a thinly-veiled attempt on your part to try and divorce yourself from the issue in a manner that allows you to take whatever high road you think you’re traveling down without having to actually confront the veracity of my position. A total copout, in other words.

The fact is that YOUR comments reveal an insecurity. You only chose to respond because you’ve been worried that people might think you fit into the category I identified, and once you saw it in front of you, you assumed you were being targeted specifically by me with that statement. I guess perhaps it hit a little too close to home for your comfort.

If I was insecure with my position I would have left well enough alone back when I initially said I was done with this thread. But I’m back because I have conviction in my opinion to the point where it was easy for me to be lured back into the fray.

331

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

To the regret of many on this board I’m sure, women are viewed as being much more equal to men in all respects far more than they have in the last several hundred years. [/quote]

These kinds of comments, O’ White Knight, indicate an insecurity with your position.

On top of the weak “You hate girls!” there is also the fact that, if anyone were in a position to actually make this claim, you’d think Emily would have made it by now so that you wouldn’t have to. But she, unlike you, has not chosen to see things that do not exist or read words into our side that were never written.[/quote]

What makes this post of yours even funnier is that it comes on the heels of Orion proudly declaring that he has contempt for women as a whole.

332

This isn’t really relevant to the discussion at all, but I couldn’t think of anywhere else to post this and I figured this was as appropriate a place as any to.

335

[quote]Cortes wrote:

Of course I’m not saying that. No where have I implied as much. This entire thread has been about certain innate traits that, speaking generally, lead one sex to act in a certain way, and another to act differently. Which, again, is a GOOD thing.
[/quote]

eh, nothing is either good or bad but thinking makes it so. You are, if I’m understanding you, arguing that “many” or “most” fit a mold. I’d say you are probably right in that so long as we take history and outliers into account.

[quote]
NETFLIX…Heheh. Yes, I can, my friend. Perfectly legally, with perfect quality HD streaming. If you are back, PM or Facebook message me and I’ll tell you what to do. My son is LOVING him some Apple TV (which he calls ringo terebi to his mom, and POWER RANGERS SAMURAI!!![/quote]

A friend of mine just moved back with a young child. That info will be very helpful for him… pm coming.

edit…I can’t do quotes this morning.

336

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]Gambit_Lost wrote:
Thanks for the thread guys. It was an interesting read. Overall, I actually find myself on DBs side on this one. While there are rather obvious differences between the sexes, I don’t think that “leadership” is inherently male or masculine.

I remember talking with an older female family member* about education. She was a brilliant woman who managed the finances in her household. She brought up many kids, put a good number of them through college, and adequately put money away for “the bad years” (strokes, illnesses, needing a new house, etc) as well. Despite her obvious-to-anyone-who-met-her intellect, she was a janitor. I asked her why she didn’t get a college degree.

“College?!? Hell, I had to fight my father just to get him to let me attend High School.” She went on to tell me of her fight with her father.

Many of her children got college degrees. Many of her grandchildren are now in positions of authority. I would guess that some of them will have some serious money and power before I die. Yes, some of them are female. Obviously this is just anecdotal. But with headwinds like “you shouldn’t even be attending High School,” there is little doubt in my mind as to why fewer females are in leadership positions today.

I see no correlation between attractiveness and education/occupation. “Causation” has got to be one of the silliest arguments I’ve heard on here outside of PWI.

*Edit to remove personal information. [/quote]

If what you were insinuating was actually true, it would mean that men have always been borderline evil; actively working to oppress and keep down anyone who was not basically white and male. But this isn’t a trait exclusive to man. This is a human trait. Men have done it to other men throughout most of history, as well. I can provide MANY examples. Think of Moses for the direction I would go if I were to do so.

What you are saying doesn’t add up. We see countless examples over time of people rising through unfavorable social structures , breaking through social barriers, and overcoming incredible odds to rise to the top. As a matter of fact, I would posit that many of the greatest leaders of all time have almost exclusively had to deal with extreme levels of oppression, conflict, backstabbing, and have had to face nearly insurmountable odds in order to become the leaders that they did. Since women have had so much more of this so-called oppression to deal with, if they were really equal to men, we should see many many more of them rise up despite it, or even because of it, to become great leaders. We should at least see a larger percentage than we do now.

Why is that?
[/quote]

I guess I see it as a product of history + male physical strength. You’d probably argue “culture” as to why certain countries/groups historically didn’t “rise up”… I guess I’m thinking of this in the same way.

What do you mean by “really equal to men”?

I’m not sure we see “evil” in the same way based on this post. I really don’t understand how what I wrote would imply that at all.
[/quote]

“Equal to men in this respect.”

I think if it was purely a product of history + male physical strength, and I’m not so limited as to not understand the effect that does have, there are still enough cultures have have just done things differently or been forced to deal with different situations, that things would not be this way. However, even in primitive tribal groups where all able bodied were off at war, in any account I have read of, it was not the women who were left in charge, but he male village elders. And before you say they were already the leaders, remember that they had been leaders at war. The women knew better how to take care of the domestic front, and might have been better suited to lead in that respect. That is, if leadership were some simple, zero-sum equation.

Back to the history + male physical strength point. This is not the reason for 10,000 plus years of male leadership and dominance. It is a single aspect of the bigger picture, that picture showing a landscape filled with men and women who are first biologically inclined toward certain preferences, personalities, inclinations and behaviors, and then act accordingly. [/quote]

Fair enough. I’m not sure that we are all that far off in our thoughts. I think I just place less “good” on history/tradition and more on our place in history.

337

[quote]orion wrote:

I hold no contempt for you.

Women as a whole, honestly, yes.

Women individually, no.

You specifically, surely not!

I have known women worthy of respect and if I had not, I would not despair because the troglodytes of your sex have taken over your official narrative.

Plus, just as an aside, you do live off of us. That is not contempt, that is a verifiable fact, whether you like that or not.

As far as I remember not you personally, but your sisterhood as a whole sure does.

If your reality (as a gender) is worthy of contempt, please dont blame me, because I would rather keep the fruits of my own labor instead of forking it over, thank you. [/quote]

This is some classic Orion right here.

338

[quote]Chushin wrote:

[quote]orion wrote:
…because if all he has is some fake form of being indignant, screw him, neh?[/quote]

Wow, who knew you speak Japanese?

Or did you once read Shogun?[/quote]

Shogun, Tai Pan, all of them.

339

DB, I posted a single study based on African women.

You still haven’t explained why female happiness has been on a steady decline and why working moms aspire to put their careers on the back burner and become full time moms. Not African women but American women

340

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

[quote]Cortes wrote:

[quote]DBCooper wrote:

To the regret of many on this board I’m sure, women are viewed as being much more equal to men in all respects far more than they have in the last several hundred years. [/quote]

These kinds of comments, O’ White Knight, indicate an insecurity with your position.

On top of the weak “You hate girls!” there is also the fact that, if anyone were in a position to actually make this claim, you’d think Emily would have made it by now so that you wouldn’t have to. But she, unlike you, has not chosen to see things that do not exist or read words into our side that were never written.[/quote]

Oh. come off it dude. This is just a thinly-veiled attempt on your part to try and divorce yourself from the issue in a manner that allows you to take whatever high road you think you’re traveling down without having to actually confront the veracity of my position. A total copout, in other words.

The fact is that YOUR comments reveal an insecurity. You only chose to respond because you’ve been worried that people might think you fit into the category I identified, and once you saw it in front of you, you assumed you were being targeted specifically by me with that statement. I guess perhaps it hit a little too close to home for your comfort.

If I was insecure with my position I would have left well enough alone back when I initially said I was done with this thread. But I’m back because I have conviction in my opinion to the point where it was easy for me to be lured back into the fray.

[/quote]

I think it’s quite obvious this has become a personal matter for you. You mentioned that both your girlfriend and sister are attractive AND successful women.

The idea that career women are unhappy, butch and terrible at leading completely spits in the face of your claim.