Pigeon
coo coo
No bio...
User ID: 237
Pigeon
coo coo
3mo ago
Speaking of children's cartoons, Dennou Coil is probably another one that might actually fit.
Pigeon
coo coo
2mo ago
Or if the circle is/stays very small? Then you can have two bisexual + one straight person.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Now, someone might say "but Stalin and Mao...". Yes, they are popular with tankies but very few wokists go around trying to defend Stalin and Mao. When it comes to the far right and Hitler, on the other hand...
I’m not sure that’s true. Barely anyone even on the far-right defends Hitler.
On the other hand, it’s fairly common to find who excuse, or are apologetics for, the USSR and pre-Deng China — more often for Mao and Lenin, perhaps less often for Stalin, but surely still more than for Hitler!
Pigeon
coo coo
2mo ago
the rude and awkward behaviour I've seen in Western online gaming communities towards even those merely suspected of being girls
Curiously I’ve observed enough of women I know playing games like LoL and Guild Wars (etc.) on international servers, and have had a ?feminine enough username in some games and been taken for a woman in games (???), to have had an experience of this around 2000s-2010s.
Most people were actually supportive, some to the point of white-knighting. I thought the proportion of men who were actually foul to women was probably well under 10%. But most of the games where communication are usually team games (and so you have (1-x)^9 chances of not rolling a shithead for a solo queue 5v5 game, which is going to be significantly higher than 1-x), and these people could be so foul (or wildly inappropriate, or just plain weird), that it does mar the experience a bit.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Every WWII casualty is his fault on top of the holocaust
Well, there is the Pacific theatre…
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Don't manga readers skew female?
Is this true? I would have thought it was more male-skewed.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
＞You take that back!
I can understand pixie cuts, but I will admit to finding the haphazardly-shaven or buzz-cut-esque haircuts common in queer circles to be bizarre and unattractive.
Also the…jewelry. Why nose rings?
I‘d say it’s extremely easy to argue, given that Japan started the second Sino-Japanese war (and started committing atrocities, like the Nanjing massacre) two years before Nazi Germany invaded Poland, and Germany had pretty warm relations with the Chinese at the time; while the Anti-Comintern Pact predates the start of war in Asia, it took until 1938 for Hitler to end the alliance with China (and align Germany with Japan) and recognise Japanese holdings, and 1940 for the Tripartite Pact.
My understanding of the historical consensus on this is that the Pacific theatre and the European theatre largely didn’t affect each other that much; neither Germany nor Japan were exactly dependents on the other, and if one fell, the other would still struggle as per history. In fact, if anything, Hitler was rather hoping for a Japanese invasion of the USSR that didn‘t materialise in the end (but also never told the Japanese that he would invade the USSR - Axis coordination was pretty shit, and trust was pretty low).
(It is true that Japan benefitted from technology transfers during the war, but it‘s difficult to argue that Japan couldn’t have done what she did without German backing when, in history, she was literally doing that without German backing for years.)
Pigeon
coo coo
1yr ago
Or we could posit that there is an infinite, even if we cannot know it; or even that causality and time make no sense outside of our contingent environment, and that speaking of “what caused the universe” or “what came before the universe” is a category error in and of itself.
Even if we accept that there needs to be an explanation for existence — and any argument for this has been terribly, terribly far from convincing — it doesn’t explain why it needs a god; nor does it explain why a “changeless, fully actual thing” would be able to cause the universe to exist beyond “trust me bro”.
Better at learning foreign languages. This should be obvious to anyone who has ever taken a language class.
I'm not sure how true this is, and how much of it is a reflection of interest rather than aptitude. At least even if there's a skew, I don't think it's blatantly obvious.
Better at multi-tasking/task-switching. This one is well known.
I'm pretty sure this is false; pretty much everyone other than rare savants suck hard at multi-tasking/task-switching almost equally.
Better fine motor control. Women are faster typists and have neater handwriting.
Are women faster typists? I think I type faster than every single woman I know.
In any case, I suspect that this stereotype has two components, and the advantage might disappear as soon as these are controlled for:
- For skills that are learned during formative years, differences in earlier development of girls might lead to e.g. better handwriting; boys that learn handwriting a little later IIRC also have relatively neat writing (I am not entirely certain that this "disproves" superior female fine motor control -- if the boys took longer rather than simply later to be able to learn these properly it would be still be indicative of a difference. Likewise I think girls are quicker to learn to hold chopsticks than boys do very early on in life)
- For skills involving small components e.g. sewing and knitting, women are smaller generally and have smaller hands and thinner fingers in particular; I think more recent studies have generally shown the increase in motor control in these tasks to be more related to the size of the hands/fingers, with differences disappearing when controlled for (hand/finger) size, implying that this isn't really a difference in neurological control. Though this does still lead to a practical advantage with regards to motor control in daily tasks that matter.
Pigeon
coo coo
1yr ago
Great show.
In terms of the writer’s political views, the show seems rather unusual. While seeking more women and less Oxford classicists in the bureaucracy, the writers also seem fairly keen on conscription and the build-up of Britain’s conventional forces, vaguely Euroskeptic. Meanwhile they seem to favour school choice, joke about the excesses of political correctness. The abiding theme is a distrust in the competence of politicians and the alignment of the bureaucracy with British interests.
That the show’s politics are a bit eclectic and ultimately converge on some vague anti-establishmentarianism shouldn’t be too much of a surprise, given that it was co-written by a right-winger and a left-winger.
Pigeon
coo coo
1yr ago
somebody could suggest them to look into the history of Japan? I think there are a lot of similarities there, with regard to being colonized
Japan was colonized? That’s news to me. Perry’s gunboats didn’t lead to concessions or annexations. Unless you count being forced to open ports and restrict tariffs as colonization…? That’s markedly different from South Africa.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
I'm not a big believer in changing minds via debate anyway. It's more effective to change them via friendship and familiarity and positive experiences.
Well, as long as you know that’s what you’re doing, and what everyone else sees you’re doing.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
That’s fair.
Conversely, my anecdotal experience is that something like a quarter to a third of the actual far-leftists I know will be like “Lenin/Stalin/Mao had the right idea, just went too far/did some things wrong”, “Great Leap Forward is capitalist propaganda”, “Communists would have succeeded and created utopia on Earth if it was not for evil capitalists sabotaging them”, etc. Usually not “everything they did was right”, but absolutely bending over backwards to excuse any “mistake” they made. I’ve heard someone claim that the Great Leap Forward was actually the US’s fault!
I have never seen anyone in real life defend Hitler, like, ever. Not even outside of the West where it’s less of a taboo.
I am not sure I would call it complete indifference, but isn't it well known enough that there is a marked difference between the empathy we give men vs women? IIRC it's common for FTM transgender people to comment on how much more hostile the world is. To writ:
A couple of years after my transition, I had a grad student I’d been mentoring. She started coming on to me, stalking me, sending me emails and texts. My adviser and the dean — both women — laughed it off...I had experienced harassment as a female person at another university and they had reacted immediately, sending a police escort with me to and from campus. I felt like if I had still been in my old body I would have gotten a lot more support.
What continues to strike me is the significant reduction in friendliness and kindness now extended to me in public spaces. It now feels as though I am on my own: No one, outside of family and close friends, is paying any attention to my well-being.
(And isn't the quote below revealing?)
My ability to empathize has grown exponentially [after transitioning], because I now factor men into my thinking and feeling about situations. Prior to my transition, I rarely considered how men experienced life or what they thought, wanted or liked about their lives.
(There were other anecdotes I recall, e.g. a trans man quipping about how he learned that people were much more lenient to women talking shit than men, and that he quickly got called aside to talk about how he was acting inappropriately once he started passing - even though nothing had actually changed in behaviour; but the WaPo article was the first one I found and it seems good enough to illustrate my point.)
Not to mention the actual litany of things that we do privilege women over men for, from prison sentencing to divorce and custody to education, the complete etc etc. Even most of the examples used in the trans rights fight is one group trying to gatekeep womanhood vs another group of self-described women wanting privileges available for women.
My personal experience is that when I try to destress with people (e.g. venting about an 80 hour workweek, or a crappy boss) off work is that - yes, there will be friends and family to empathise, but you get a much higher incidence of "dude not our problem" and "stop whining", as well as a general presumption that I'll be fine and it's not serious, compared to women - who people feel more obliged to reassure and to take action on behalf of.
On the more absurd side, there are things like that youtube video "experiment" (yes, n=1, but you get the point) on public violence where the male-on-female violence got bystanders to stop the altercation/call the police immediately, but reversing the roles lead to people cheering for the woman beating the man and sometimes joining in!
It's an effect strong enough that we call it the "women-are-wonderful effect" (or part of it) and discuss how it's benevolent sexism; but we don't call the perception of competence or increased expectations (e.g. with regards to life success) put on men "benevolent sexism", do we? And isn't that itself a bit suggestive of how we're more receptive towards Women's Issues? (I don't claim to be immune from this either!)
If I started crying on a park bench I suspect no one would stop to ask me what was wrong, and maybe they would for a woman (not a sure thing though, I wouldn't stop for a stranger crying in public, regardless of sex). But that's a marginal kind of scenario and I don't think that's what most people are getting at when they say no one cares about you if you're a man.
Is that really a "marginal scenario" (with the implication that it's not part of a larger trend of scenarios that would impact men)?
(wow didn't realise I didn't actually post the link)
Pigeon
coo coo
2mo ago
I mean, straight women fucking love seeing hot men railing each other, so this doesn’t seem like that much of a problem to me.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Not very differently. Which is to say, both back then and today the jury would have been quite fair and just, unlike the ridiculous civil rights fantasy the movie portrays.
Like, this isn’t Alabama, and this is just one case, but I dunno, man.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
As a further piece of evidence:
…
[the white people in my life don’t realize I am, if not white, then about as close to it as one can get.]
(It is telling that the author of that piece reveals to being of mixed East Asian/white heritage but is still handwringing about all this.)
The entire issue was ostensibly about “Asian-Americans”, but my East Asian girlfriend got was not very happy about the coverage (she said outright that she thinks it is discriminatory from the progressive writers, that if it were South Asians or black or any other race/ethnicity, they wouldn’t have done such a dreadful job and had such awful art). While I am agnostic to those particular claims, I am inclined to agree that it represents ; most of the pieces don’t deserve to be taken seriously. Nevertheless it is evidence of attempting to equate “Asian” (esp. East Asian) with being white-adjacent, whatever that means.
I recall at my job hearing a Sri Lankan colleague remark casually about how “we three ethnic people” (in a group) have culture and whatnot, while white people didn’t; I remarked that the rest of the group there were not white, but East Asian; she replied kind of dismissively that “you know what I mean, you know, brown people”. I think that is as clear a sort of equivocation of East Asian with white as I can find, and that it can be said casually to other people in a work environment tells me much.
Or take this piece of ridiculousness, such that it is.
Interest is a prerequisite to being good at something, at least if that something requires you to put in the hours, as is the case for language learning. But it actually does look like there are differences in how men and women's brains process language, not just a difference in interest.
I agree with this, I just am unsure about how it translates to learning foreign languages in particular -- at least to the extent that the effect size is huge.
See my other comment. This has been shown empirically.
A brief perusal of pubmed gives me much more mixed results. I'm not convinced.
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Is there a good AI substitute for clinical examinations at present, or are we going to rely on patients self-examining?
I can honestly buy that in the short-medium term AI would take a better history and get differentials and suggest treatment plans better than the modal doctor. I could even buy that within that timeframe you could train AI to do the inspection parts/things like asterixis, but I don’t know how you’d get an AI to…palpate. Movement and sensation etc. are quite difficult for computers, I am to understand.
Alternatively maybe they’d just get so fucking good at the rest of it that professional examinations aren’t needed anymore, or that some examination findings can be deduced through other visual/etc means…
Pigeon
coo coo
2yr ago
Also curious what's the point of including the subject and object forms (e.g. he and him), seems redundant to me, unless someone is combining he/her or she/him?
I’ve seen he/her twice. But I think the more common case is she/their. Makes it rather a pain.
Pigeon
coo coo
1yr ago
Pending a detailed read of Nufher et al. and Gignac & Zajenkowski, this appears as one of three -- either the blogpost is simply wrong; or I have a misundertanding of the Dunning-Kruger effect; or the author has done a really shit job at explaining himself. Either way, I'm not convinced so far.
It means that we can throw random numbers into x and y — numbers which could not possibly contain the Dunning-Kruger effect — and yet out the other end, the effect will still emerge.
My understanding of the DKE is that self-assessment is poorly correlated with objective ability in such a way that poor performers overrate their performance and good performers underate theirs. In this case, the lack of correlation in Fig. 7 from y being a variable with a uniform distribution uncorrelated with x already shows the effect! I'm not sure how the author is so sure that plotting uncorrelated variables and "showing" the DKE disproves it, as the entire point is that they're poorly-to-uncorrelated!
If my understanding of the Dunning-Kruger effect is right, I suspect the author may be right to some degree (just based on personal experience, I think DKE is extremely oversold, and even if true is unlikely to be very important), but his working is definitely wrong.
I was curious about the Wonderlic test after seeing it referenced in a comment sometime this week, so I took a look. Is this practice website actually accurate to the content of the test? I found it really quite easy, some trouble with not being familiar with Imperial units and American coinage aside.
More options
Context Copy link