>It’s a “maybe going down the rabbit hole was a mistake” episode
How so? Those are exactly the numbers I expected.
Working more hours is a key part to how men make more money than women on average, so not too surprising.
if red pill ideology is all about taking an honest look at human behavioural characteristics driven by evolution and leveraging those drives to achieve happiness then you would expect that by symmetry “red pill women” would be all about how to maximize female reproductive fitness at the expense of men-
haha no it’s focused on how to suppress feminine nature and “minimize negative characteristics like sexual manipulation” in order to be a better wife
The thing you describe as “red pill women” already exists and is called feminism. “Red pill” is most accurately modeled as the inverse of feminism, which reverses feminism’s prescriptions for men and for women, giving us exactly what you observe above.
I just find it hilarious how we’ve circled back to a point where feminism is considered to be the purest expression of the essential nature of womanhood and traditionalism is a strange modern invention to subvert the natural order.
Anonymous asked:
Er, since when is Google 'free' unless your library's easily accessed? The electronics that support Internet access & research (much less proper cross-referencing) don't spring from thin air. Sometimes people are simply not given the time & energy (mental or physical) to keep up. Doesn't mean it's OK to generalize or interrogate any affronted individual, but holy crap does this 'absorb everything by osmosis' approach not work for anyone who can't run the treadmill all day every day.
fierceawakening answered:
…someone who understood what i was trying to say, omfg
and also like… do people know what to Google? I do, but that’s because I’ve already been in SJ circles
I mean, like, I haven’t actually Googled “things that offend POC” (and wouldn’t) but I can easily imagine that it, or queries like it, might return exactly the sorts of result SJ types would not want un-woke-yet wypipo reading.
So it’s… my problem is it seems so much like advice from inside the circle. And… dude, we have a country to save. We need to be talking to people outside the circle, getting them to come in. And that means not setting up barriers like “don’t talk to me unless you are THIS woke”
Yeah, googling can produce some seriously bad results from time to time - like, right now, typing “did holocaust happen” into Google actually gives me a page titled … “Top 10 reasons why the holocaust didn’t happen” as its #1 search result … wtf.
SPLC did some time ago post a piece ( https://www.splcenter.org/20170118/google-and-miseducation-dylann-roof ) arguing that this sort of terrible google results to unfortunately-formulated queries was actually an important part of what got someone like racist mass murderer Dylann Roof drawn into violent white supremacism in the first place.
Which makes it … kinda odd to see that flippant “google it” type responses without any specifics (like, say, search phrases or date ranges or similar) are apparently still a thing.
This!
I wanted to say that too but I didn’t have the evidence ready to hand. Thank you!
I had a discussion with someone who, it turns out, was using “Whiteness” to mean “White supremacy” which last time I checked they maintained should have been understood effortlessly by others to mean that. It’s three pages into the Google results with “Whiteness definition Sociology” before that meaning is mentioned.
A link to eg. that Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates article that explains whatever is WAY more helpful and less likely to send an already irritated and uninformed person into the hands of people who violently disagree with Social Justice.
That, yes.
Honestly I really don’t like these weird… expanded definitions of “white supremacy” much either. I mean, I think it’s worthwhile to mention that white people who fancy ourselves nice and nonoppressive can hold views that are actually grounded in some weird racist shit.
But if whiteness itself is “white supremacy,” how the hell do we accurately describe what happened in Charlottesville, or the ideology those people openly endorsed?
> Everyday Feminism or Ta-Nehisi Coates
Not sure if that’s even productive. Maybe Bannon was right, and the whiteness=white-supremacist identity politics equivocation will make white people vote for white identitarians because there is no escape anyway.
EF feels like a parody of itself.
It’s difficult for me to see that kind of strategic equivocation as *not* bad-faith-motivated.
wait a second isn’t every guy who watches porn basically a cuck
Does your girlfriend sending you nudes count as porn? What about watching a camgirl?
I’m envisioning a cuck spectrum, here.
thirteen-jades said: If you don’t mind my asking, what exactly is “fundamentally awful” about engineering/physics, or even the other, less STEM-y ones?
this is me being somewhat sarcastic, given that “tech” is accused of being awful specifically because of its gender balance, which is actually less bad than all of the other fields listed.
(some of the fields are actually awful for other reasons, and gender balance can make the field significantly worse for the minority gender, although not always)
but the primary issue was that an imbalance in one place must be compensated for with an opposite imbalance elsewhere, and that fixing an imbalance can’t be done in isolation as it ultimately requires balancing the whole system.
“I’m sorry ma'am but we already have the required number of female nurses.”
Just saying, neither Google nor any tech company would be in the spotlite rite now for their gender balance if they dealt with their programmers only as faceless public keys recruited from the darkweb and paid in untraceable cryptocurrency.
I’m sorry but no. Gender activists would not give up that easily, even if it were literally forbidden to admit one’s gender and all transactions took place through text. After all, what’s the gender ratio of the dark web?
no data:no data
That’s just another way of writing dudebro:dudebro, as the thinkpiecers have informed me that tech is male-dominated, and therefore we can safely assume the darkweb is misogynist. Otherwise, why are they hiding?
Just saying, neither Google nor any tech company would be in the spotlite rite now for their gender balance if they dealt with their programmers only as faceless public keys recruited from the darkweb and paid in untraceable cryptocurrency.
I’m sorry but no. Gender activists would not give up that easily, even if it were literally forbidden to admit one’s gender and all transactions took place through text. After all, what’s the gender ratio of the dark web?
Clearly, they haven’t gone far enough. Googlers should use all of their 20% time to read more books written by women until gender parity is reached. Also instead of hiring people with Deep Learning background they should get more education majors.
Also, it should be illegal for Republicans to use Google products, unless they pay.
I’m making a Mars colony consisting entirely of men and people with certain neurotypes in which collective gender-based moral debt is considered constitutionally null and void, and the intellectual property of the shape of the human form is considered open source. You in?
(Now of course it has to all be underground, but we’ll have really cool atriums and 24 hour buffets to make up for that.)