TitaniumButterfly
No bio...
User ID: 2854
I'm in favor of the move, all things considered.
Star Trek is not a human future. It's a fictional scenario constructed to serve as the vehicle for the political assertions of people laboring under any number of ridiculous misapprehensions about human nature. Humans would have to be substantially modified in all sorts of ways to make that work, and I think we'd lose much of what I value about humans in the process.
Dune looks like a human future full of people living human lives. Most of the 'bad' things in the books are straightforwardly contrived for plot purposes. I think Dune would be a good future. Caladan seems nice. And I don't think most of the Landsraad would actually put up with the Harkonnens except for, again, contrived Imperial support.
But, in such cases, the question one ought to ask is what ruler one is even using to measure 'good' and 'bad'. And if it turns out one's answer is 'the social consensus prevalent when I was young' one is due to have a bad time in short order.
What actually matters to you in the future? What patterns are worthy of preservation and propagation?
Yeah, but she nowhere gives a solution to the problem. How to prevent a feminised society?
Yes she does, right here:
"Feminization is not an organic result of women outcompeting men. It is an artificial result of social engineering, and if we take our thumb off the scale it will collapse within a generation."
She then goes into some specifics such as getting rid of anti-discrimination laws.
TBH I don't think you read the article; or if you did it was apparently with so much bias that you may as well not have. This is the straightforward answer to the question which your entire blustering performance has revolved around her not answering, thus allowing you to fill in your own preferred boogeyman and cantilever your eye-rolling dismissals out to infinity.
The worst part, to me, is that this would work for you, too, almost anywhere else. But not here, in one of the last remaining places where male modes of discourse are allowed exercise. Hence the downvotes.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
What is JB?
As the GMC itself noted 7 of the 9 doctors convicted of gross negligence manslaughter since 2004 were BAME. BAME doctors are referred for misconduct at more than double the rate of white doctors. International medical graduates are referred at more than 2.5 times the rate. (The GMC’s solution, in true current year fashion, was to try to fix the disproportionality, which could only be due to racism, not to investigate the cause).
In a comparable situation in another industry, it was once pointed out to me that such disproportionality was after everyone in question had already bent over backwards to avoid coming down on the non-whites.
It wasn't that they were ~2.5 times more likely to cause major problems; it was that they were so much more likely to cause problems so bad that they couldn't be swept under the rug.
I came to this same conclusion and it was a real doompill for me.
Really? I felt a tremendous amount of relief. To me it seemed like everything was just getting worse and worse with no end in sight and I had no idea why. When I realized that, oh, we're just insane when it comes to women and race and fixing that will fix pretty much everything else, it was like the horizon began to lighten in the East.
To doompill about this would require me to think that egalitarianism had triumphed in ridding the world of people who can perceive the truth. But it hasn't! Racism and sexism are both alive and well, thank God, and will soon be coming to the rescue of benighted Western Civilization.
The problem in the meantime is that so many positions of consequence are held by people who can't or won't notice what's happened.
This new generation is so strangely split. Young men radical reactionaries; young women radical... uh, I don't even know what to call them. Hateful, shrewish, self-defacing cat-ladies? No idea how this is going to play out politically but it's going to be fascinating, and in the long run I think women will ultimately buckle and follow the lead of men back to a social model which actually works.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
it's hypocrisy if you say "the important professions, including journalism, have been taken over by women and this is bad for society" while holding senior positions in journalism as a woman. It's the alcoholic surgeon: "drinking is bad for you, you should give it up" "but you show up for work drunk every day!" "yeah well do as I say, not as I do".
Your "if" is doing all the work here and deserves no credit. That's not what the author's saying.
Let me break this down for you:
According to her there are (most) women, who do not fit into such organizations naturally and will disrupt and subvert them if too many join. There are also other (few) women who fit naturally into such organizations and create little to no 'gender-drag' regardless of how many join.
She's in favor of repealing the massively-pro-female regulations, which she thinks will allow many of the latter sort to join, which is good, and almost none of the former sort, which is also good, resulting in healthier organizations staffed by both the men and the women who belong there.
She wants more of the second type of woman in the institutions, not fewer. So her being part of such an institution is in keeping with her ethos.
What would your argument be for why meritocratic hiring would be likely to prevent feminisation? Is it that the high-merit candidates are low on feminine traits, regardless of their gender?
Generally yes if we consider part of 'merit' to be 'psychological compatibility with a competitive work environment.' I.e. able to participate in direct debate rather than shy away and seek consensus.
It seems meritocratic university entrance is leading to more women than men in many subjects
University is a bad joke at this point and partly for this reason. The rough IQ required to 'graduate university' now is lower than the rough IQ required to graduate high school a few decades ago; in that sense, at least, a university degree means less than a high school diploma did fairly recently.
Absurd feminized departments abound. I've seen published 'mathematics' papers that were substantially just the author talking about their feelings re: how hard they perceive being female (or black, etc.) in Math. History, psychology, genetics, pretty much anything outside of hard science has become infantilized, feminized, sanitized of female-triggering content. Why would men want to go into that? Why would we expect to do well in it? How could we respect ourselves while playing along?
I had no end of fighting with my professors over their ridiculous feminized/marxist positions when I was in college, and that was decades ago. At this point it's a massive humiliation ritual for men and especially white men. It's a tremendously-hostile environment and while some men are willing to put up with it a lot of others are not. Personally I dropped out and started a business after the sheer wall of feminine condescension became more than I cared to submit myself to.
For straight while males, starting our own companies is one of the last best ways to live a life mostly-free of feminized nonsense. Until they start to get too successful, at which point the (wo)Man steps in and tells us the party's over and it's time to make everything a dysfunctional daycare again.
Really would have preferred not to be a serial entrepreneur but here we are.
If she is the mother of sons fearful for them in a feminised world, then she has to give the example of stepping down to be replaced by a man. And if she doesn't do that, then her argument is the old problem that feminism has dealt with before: pulling the ladder up behind you. She's okay, she's One Of The Boys, she values all the male values so it's okay for her to get that senior position, but other women just aren't the right fit, not trustworthy, too... female.
Madame -- I'm assuming based on what occurs to me as cattiness and barely-disguised passive-aggressive hysteria but lmk if I'm wrong -- this is a strawman.
Her argument is that if we just took the thumb off the scale and left things to meritocracy the system would balance itself out naturally. She's not positing an optimal number of women. She's saying that the women who belong would fit in and the ones who don't would fall out as a matter of course because Men and Women Who Get Things Done wouldn't be forced to put up with them.
More to the point, she's talking about the ones who behave the way you're behaving right now.
There is no hypocrisy here, only what occurs to me as an unfortunate lack of self-awareness on your part.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
I'd agree (and do in spirit) but in this case I think our civilization is so sick that it requires such as this. A man isn't allowed to say what she's saying.
The woman is complaining the system is broken; expecting her to keep functioning according to the old system's rules isn't catching her in hypocrisy.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
But at the same time, there's been a groundswell of interest and support and tolerance of ideas like Great Replacement Theory and authoritarianism in the Red Tribe mainstream that's been slowly gaining steam for the last decade. And, while I know everything wrong with the Red Tribe is actually the Blue Tribe's fault, what word would you like us to use to describe that? Not nazism, not racism, not fascism, so...what?
Nationalism, I'd say.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Precisely what a p-zombie would say...
In the far past, emotions didn't exist, life competed in a purely material sense. Emotions (or more generally, qualia) came into existence because they out-competed agents without emotion.
This is a tremendous claim. I don't object, exactly, but I wonder if you can substantiate it without what amounts to post-hoc reasoning. How exactly does consciousness arise. More importantly, why would it outcompete an equivalent setup with the same output for the same input, i.e. p-zombies?
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Love, love this comment.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
I suppose it wouldn't be in YouTube's interest to add an AI auto summary to videos but it'd be nice because I'm not watching that to find out what your point might be.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
You're clearly grappling with the way his (uninhibited by resource scarcity) gayness makes you feel. I don't disagree, but if that's how it is we should probably be more willing to generalize.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Plenty of people can't produce anything, so how does that math work out?
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Personally I've just never understood what that word is supposed to signify. Irritates me when I see it because I think, there has to be a better way to express whatever it is that you're trying to tell me.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
That said there are some (dubious) estimates that the average Anglo IQ in the Victorian era may have been as high as 108
Wild. Where can I find out more?
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
The killing themselves really gives me the spooks. No matter how I try I just can't imagine myself in that person's skull. Or at least it's a looooooooooooong reach. It feels so weird to me that my mind starts looking for alternative explanations. Could these be catspaws of some agency with off-market brainwashing tech? That has got to be the gold-standard assassin on at least some significant level, and if they're cheap enough maybe it doesn't matter so much whether they're good shots. The ones without that aptitude end up in one of these instead of going for the President.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
We should get a drink sometime. And that's mine, by the way.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
I'm just sitting here asking myself if OP's usage of "embarrassed" in the opening paragraphs was even wrong. It's been bothering me for like two days now and I want to figure it out on my own.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Whale cancer.
TitaniumButterfly
1mo ago
Not so common anymore.
Could pregnant women getting to dosage wrong be the cause?
We'd have to establish that there is actually a problem before looking for a cause, right? Which as I understand it we have not done. Autism is not becoming more prevalent afaict. Diagnostic criteria have repeatedly been broadened and public attention has been drawn to the issue, but that's not the same as things getting worse.
She thinks they're highly-correlated in practice, in traditionally-male fields.
No, because part of 'merit' here is 'not acting in typically-feminine ways which ruin the workplace.'
No, not the same thing, but in that case you wouldn't actually need to vet them very carefully. It would simply become the de facto understanding that the workplaces will operate along masculine lines, as they used to when women started entering the workforce. Women would understand this and either self-select out or at least understand that they are to comply with such standards of behavior or face disciplinary action.
No. Implicit in her take is that male workplace culture is itself more meritorious and will naturally outcompete female workplace culture.
So that's her take as I understand it.
Personally I'm not convinced. I don't think it's so easy to just 'treat women like men'. We're biologically hardwired to treat women differently and it's upsetting to almost everyone when women are held to male standards.
As a business owner myself, I prefer to assign female employees to accounts that I expect will go poorly. This is because if I send a man and things go poorly we're fired. If I send a woman and things go poorly "We love her, she's great" and "She works so hard" and "Yeah she's making steady progress, we'll get you more funding." Great stuff as a business owner. You can be sure that even if the regulations were dropped I'd keep hiring women!
It does cause me to reflect upon my own hiring standards. From my perspective the only way for a business, such as the one I describe taking advantage of above, to protect itself would be to demand that I send a man instead of a woman in the first place. Admitting a woman to the position at all is implicitly admitting several potential time-bombs. Presumably this works back around to implying that the value of female labor is inherently somewhat lower even with most else being equal. Interesting.
Anyway the author makes a great moderate case and I'd be happy to see us moving toward her policy proposals.
More options
Context Copy link