Forum - View topicTales Of The Industry - Wanna Go To Tokyo In 3 Days?
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
unready
 Posts: 399 Location: Illinois, USA |
|
|||
1924 was the last time. |
||||
|
||||
leafy sea dragon
 Posts: 7163 Location: Another Kingdom |
|
|||
|
Ah, before vegetarianism became popular and widespread.
Strange about that, but I'd guess the goal is to cover as many cities as possible without repeating. |
||||
|
||||
|
Sailor S
|
|
|||
You really didn't fix anything. If Polycell meant to say "woman", he would have. I know what you're trying to do there, but it's pretty obnoxious. Stop it. The world needs a lot less white knights and people who care about social justice. |
||||
|
BadNewsBlues
Posts: 5920 |
|
|||
|
Horrible story and even more horrible segue into people getting offended by use of certain terms used to describe members of the opposite sex.
|
||||
|
||||
Cutiebunny
 Posts: 1747 |
|
|||
|
^ Welcome to the Internet.
I agree with Sailor S. I'm a woman as well, and I find the constant gender corrections annoying. I also occasionally use the term 'male' and 'female' when talking about people. Seriously, if the issue over the derogatory usage of "girl" in lieu of "woman" and other such nonsense is the most pressing issue you have to deal with today, I'd love to be in your shoes. |
||||
|
||||
Hiroki not Takuya
 Posts: 2514 |
|
|||
Oh, before I go, Polycell was quite accurately correct in her (?) statements related to assumptions about beautiful women and knowlege and hiring prejudice. I appreciate the article's author comment about beautiful women attempting to head off readers assuming such were not or could not be very knowlegable about games. As a physicist who tried to tutor some female friends, I think gaming may be like the sciences where there are almost no knowledgable women, not because of the action of male prejudice or oppressive conspiracy but because of general disinterest or finding the subject matter difficult to understand or "relate to". Most of the time, such women aren't "stupid" and it would be incorrect to assume they couldn't be genuine savants in other subjects. I also get tired of liberals bashing anyone who doesn't seem to fit thier ideal of correct thinking. |
||||
|
||||
|
Zac
ANN Executive Editor
 Posts: 7912 Location: Anime News Network Technodrome |
|
|||
It's amazing to me that y'all can say this stuff and at no point does it ever sound even remotely sexist to you. Sexism: prejudice, stereotyping, or discrimination, typically against women, on the basis of sex. Harboring a stereotype or a prejudice and then applying it to an entire group, and then calling that "pattern recognition" instead of what it is - which is straight-up sexism - is I guess how this stuff pervades. "There are almost no knowledgeable women in gaming or the sciences because it's too difficult to understand the material, or they just don't relate to it." That is a sexist statement. It's build on prejudice and assumption, comes to incorrect and insulting conclusions. If you used this as your reasoning for discriminatory hiring practices you would rightly be sued and the prosecution would win before it even went to trial. I would argue that if the way you think about women had to be specifically singled out by the law and made illegal due to so many people using it as justification to discriminate against women, perhaps there is a flaw in your thinking. Everyone knows there are pretty faces that are hired for PR purposes and they don't know dick about games or whatever your nerdy thing is. Their job is not to impress you with their gaming skills and knowledge, it's to get you to pay attention to whatever the company is trying to sell you. Saying "well every time I see a pretty girl who's in or around gaming I assume they don't know anything" is prejudiced, straight up. That is sexism. It is unfair to every woman you encounter who you perceive as attractive. I get it - you think you're too logical and rational to ever subscribe to a sexist line of thought. You're too smart for that. But you just described baseline sexism - not only do you incorrectly say that there "are almost no knowledgeable women in gaming or science" - demonstrably untrue - but that you think it's because inherently the material is too difficult for them. That is sexist. You may not be a sexist person, but if that's what you think, you harbor some very sexist attitudes. |
||||
|
||||
|
xBTAx
Posts: 189 |
|
|||
Zac already responded to the rest of your post much better than I could, but I wanted to reply to this bit. I haven't seen the show, but it's most likely (and going by its Wikipedia article, is) a reference to Flowers for Algernon. I know we've all seen out of place uses of English from time to time but it's kinda weird to assume that's always the case. Last edited by xBTAx on Sat Jun 20, 2015 4:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
||||
|
||||
Penguin_Factory
 Posts: 732 Location: Ireland |
|
|||
The fudge are you talking about? I don't know what your female friends were like, but in my Biotech course there were about as many incredibly smart, motivated women as men- possible more. I worked in a proteomics lab that was mostly women, and they all ran intellectual circles around me. You're talking absolute nonsense. |
||||
|
||||
Polycell
 Posts: 4623 |
|
|||
As for women in science, while the study of the inherent differences in the sexes(however relevant they may be) is a bit gimped thanks to attitudes like yours, we already know the setup of academia and the setup of female biology don't mesh the best. There's also the odd fact that more women than men start the courses in many places(matching the scholastic achievement gap), but the gender gap reverses for those who complete the major.
|
||||
|
||||
|
Razor/Edge
Posts: 607 |
|
|||
@bolded part: I guess you aren't smart enough to realize that is the very definition of the mind set of sexism. Good luck ever getting married unless you change your attitude, or suppress it. I'm sure any girl would love a guy who talks about how women fail out of the sciences more than men. I'd be careful if I were you. I got in an argument with Zac over a year ago, and ended up being perma-banned for it. If you disagree and/or piss him off enough, the same fate might befall you. |
||||
|
||||
Agent355
 Posts: 5113 Location: Crackberry in hand, thumbs at the ready... |
|
|||
|
There have been actual scientific studies exploring the question of why so few women in the United States go for advanced degrees or careers in STEM. Generally they find that it's other people's biases against them that hold them back, not any innate differences between women and men.
For example: Many Women Leave Engineering, Blame the Work Culture And: ]Why are there still so Few Women in Science |
||||
|
||||
|
Redbeard 101
Oscar the Grouch
Forums Superstar  Posts: 16935 |
|
|||
So you publicly admit to being perma-banned by Zac but yet are back with a second account circumventing that ban? In a thread where Zac just posted right above you almost? Seriously? 
I think this is a fine point to request we get back on topic folks and avoid having this thread head down the sexism debate route like it's starting to. It inevitably would result in a thread lock, posts being deleted, warnings being given, fun being ruined, tables being flipped over, chairs thrown, and people channeling their inner Macho Man Randy Savage as they started to puff their chests out to fight for the moral high ground ohhh yeaaaa. Nobody wants that. Thanks. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hiroki not Takuya
Posts: 2514 |
|
|||
|
Just to set the record straight, as I doubt this thread will continue, I agree with Psycho 101 that we shouldn't get into rabid sexism land (I didn't start it). I apologize to Penguin_Factory because I was going to say that most women in science I have known have gone into Biology and Chemistry rather than Physics and Engineering (where I have lived for 40 years) but did not add that because I have been bashed by liberals who would have rants like "you mean you believe women can only go into Biology because they are only interested in reproduction and babies or Chemistry because you think they are trying to understand thier raging hormones". I have never said said or thought such things. People should read carefully posts before responding to them as I did not say women were incapable of being in the sciences because it was "too difficult" or that they "couldn't relate", and Zac missed that I had the caveat almost, but I said they found the subjects difficult and hard to relate to. What happens then is as Polycell mentioned, they drop the subject or find another major whereas fewer males have this response. Maybe I should add this is specifically true of Physics and Engineering.
I don't hear sexism in this because there isn't any, I am relating data from observation and not opinion and certainly not pseudo-data from some "scientific studies". With a minor in psychology, I have seen plenty of "studies" which have been constructed and conducted to support a politically motivated or prejudiced position and not science. This goes for "law" too, Congress is a political body and many laws are passed with political bias, thier passage doesn't make those who do not support them "wrong". Polycell is relating a very elementary truth about prejudice, application of prior gathered knowlege is necassary to function, either in action or discourse. It isn't inherently wrong, but could be said to be incorrect or lead to incorrect conclusions when used while disregarding updated data to the contrary. If I meet a random woman, I'm not going to assume she knows how to solve Schrodinger's equation, but that doesn't mean that I'm going to assume she can't. If she starts talking quantum mechanics, then I'll be excitedly happy and eager to find out more about what she knows and finds interesting. |
||||
|
||||
|
Agent355
Posts: 5113 Location: Crackberry in hand, thumbs at the ready... |
|
|||
|
I never said your anecdotal evidence was wrong, just that your supposition behind it was wrong. Study after study has shown that women are less likely to pursue STEM-scratch that, the biosciences are basically equal and chemistry is close-physics and engineering still have huge gaps because women are unconsciously discriminated against at best and actively discouraged at worst. If it weren't a cultural problem, how do you explain that the gender gap in STEM is less pronounced in other countries, and that at least two countries have more women graduating in STEM than men? (Albania and Panama, look it up).
You can deny studies because they are "soft" science, or because they don't fit your personal world view, but they reflect more than the sum of the anecdotal experiences of women in STEM fields, all of whom are more qualified in the subject than a single man would be. To me it seems as ignorant to deny these studies as it is to deny climate change because you are cold. |
||||
|
||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group