Tiaexz does a girly job and why Kadagar prefers to be grappled by burly fireMEN

[Montmorency]

As a male in a field that's over 95% women due to the same sorts of stupid assumptions you carry: your point is .

[Kadagar_AV]

As a male in a field that's over 95% women due to the same sorts of stupid assumptions you carry: your point is .

What assumption is stupid and flowery? That equality is good? Or what was your point?

[Husar]

When my house burns down and I am about to die, I sure hope the fireMAN who carries me out have the muscles to do so.

What a diva...

Also, unless you weigh 150+ kg, which seems unlikely for a ski instructor, I think pretty much all firepersons can carry you out. Sometimes it is also about technique, not all firemen are bodybuilders either and neither do they usually go into a burning house alone.

Noone is advocating that we fire-men or nurses, but when women are simply overlooked or ignored during promotions even if they do in fact have the same or better qualifications than the men who do get these promotions, then your ideal, equal society is obviously not what we currently have. And waiting for it to become better by itself eventually in 1000 years is not the American spirit, or that of any other modern nation.

[Rhyfelwyr]

As a male in a field that's over 95% women due to the same sorts of stupid assumptions you carry: your point is .

What field are you in, if I may ask?

[Montmorency]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speech-language_pathology

[Kadagar_AV]

I will try to put this as easy as I can.

Men and women are different.

If we try to create a 50/50 society, some women and some men will not be allowed to have the job they want.

Also, we would have to lower the demands on quite some jobs, to make the 50/50 dream feasible.

I prefer a world where the best candidate gets the job, regardless of gender.

[Montmorency]

How are they different? That's the point. Identify the ways in which they are different, without just making up stuff on the spot or resorting to vague stereotypes you learned in childhood.

And quit spouting that 50/50 trollop - it's such a red herring.

[Kadagar_AV]

How are they different? That's the point. Identify the ways in which they are different, without just making up stuff on the spot or resorting to vague stereotypes you learned in childhood.

And quit spouting that 50/50 trollop - it's such a red herring.

50/50 is what modern feminists aim for. It's not a red herring, it's the actual politics in, say, places as my country.

How men are different from women?

Geez, that's a large question. Why don't you read up? To begin with, men generally have a penis. Also more physical strength... Also our brains are not wired or made in the same way, so that of course also lead to differences.


Empirical evidence also shows that men tend to do better than women, at pretty much everything.

Take cooking as an example... Whereas this is a traditional female role, men still outperform women by huge margins, and the best chefs in the world are almost always men.

Women are by no means stupid or unable to do things, but as a group they definitely get out performed by men at the vast of situations in where we judge individual skill.

[Montmorency]

50/50 is what modern feminists aim for. It's not a red herring, it's the actual politics in, say, places as my country.

Equal representation is a target for things like professional employment and government, not lumberjacking or whatever you seem to be imagining. It's not a target for literally everything everywhere.

Also our brains are not wired or made in the same way, so that of course also lead to differences.

Yes, but we don't know what these are concretely, yet. That's why we should actually investigate the issue, rather than just fabricating drivel.

Women are by no means stupid or unable to do things, but as a group they definitely get out performed by men at the vast of situations in where we judge individual skill.

Your metrics are grotesquely invalid. This is consistently your worst point.

[Kadagar_AV]

Equal representation is a target for things like professional employment and government, not lumberjacking or whatever you seem to be imagining. It's not a target for literally everything everywhere.

Oh, I think teaching, police, firefighting, politics, yadda yadda yadda is important enough questions to fight for.

You don't?

Yes, but we don't know what these are concretely, yet. That's why we should actually investigate the issue, rather than just fabricating drivel.

We know quite some of it. Stop being ignorant and read up on the issue. You come off as just blatantly stupid. Difefrences between men and women exist. That's just how it is. You might not LIKE IT, but facts are facts.

Your metrics are grotesquely invalid. This is consistently your worst point.

My metrics says that 10 dm is a meter... And that in turn 10 cm is a decimeter. See, SCIENCE!!

If you argue that women in no way perform less well than men in most fields... Would you be so kind as to show me the fields, physical and mental, where they excel at?

I of course agree that those fields EXIST, my point is that men outperform women in way more fields, and thus it's quite fair that men also get paid more.

Sports is a easy way to reach at least some conclusions.. And before you all grab your guns or panties or whatever, NO, I don't mean pure physical sports.

But do note, that many jobs require physical skills, so mens dominance in physical sports kind of defends mens advantage on the physical work market.

REGARDLESS, look at sports like curling or shooting... Men still outperform the women, although physical strenght has little to nothing to do with the sport.

Women, imho, just tend to be less ready to go all-in in an area of expertise. They don't focus their energies 110% in the same way men do. This is a GOOD thing if you want a good mother, less of a good trait if you want a good worker.

And companies pays people to be good workers.

The 10-15% difference I see in salary in Sweden today can easily be explained with different life choices between the genders. All politics trying to prevent this is thus limiting peoples right to choose their own life.

[Montmorency]

We know quite some of it. Stop being ignorant and read up on the issue. You come off as just blatantly stupid. Difefrences between men and women exist. That's just how it is. You might not LIKE IT, but facts are facts.

Citation still needed.

Women, imho, just tend to be less ready to go all-in in an area of expertise. They don't focus their energies 110% in the same way men do. This is a GOOD thing if you want a good mother, less of a good trait if you want a good worker.

And companies pays people to be good workers.

I of course agree that those fields EXIST, my point is that men outperform women in way more fields, and thus it's quite fair that men also get paid more.

So now you're just blatantly inventing nonsense. It's like you live in a fantasy world or something.

But I'll bite - fields such as?

REGARDLESS, look at sports like curling or shooting

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

The 10-15% difference I see in salary in Sweden today can easily be explained with different life choices between the genders. All politics trying to prevent this is thus limiting peoples right to choose their own life.

Do you have any legitimate support for such claims besides personal experience with being a pig-headed misogynist?

[Kadagar_AV]

I think I have made myself clear, you just come with nonsense.

Men on top is the current order of things, it's the one who wants a change who should merit why, no? That's a rule we followed since day 1 here in the backroom.

So, merit why women should be of equal number as men in our professions, and why they should have an equal amount of the monetary gains gained by said professions.

Current social, mental and physical mechanics clearly show women AND men to be less suited in certain areas, and also show that they seem inequal when it comes to how well they perform in shared areas.

Also, the way you argue, you kind of come off as an ****.

[Montmorency]

Men on top is the current order of things, it's the one who wants a change who should merit why, no? That's a rule we followed since day 1 here in the backroom.

So, merit why women should be of equal number as men in our professions, and why they should have an equal amount of the monetary gains gained by said professions.

Economic productivity is reduced by marginalizing half the population and pushing them out of careers in which they would otherwise do well.

Also, the way you argue, you kind of come off as an ****.

The intellectual degeneracy of the way you argue might have something to do with it.

Current social, mental and physical mechanics clearly show women AND men to be less suited in certain areas, and also show that they seem inequal when it comes to how well they perform in shared areas.

You have not been able to demonstrate that this is so. You have not even tried, in fact.

But I'll help you out.

One recent finding is that the two cerebral hemispheres of female humans are more extensively interconnected than they are in male brains. In other words, the CCA of female humans is marginally-larger than the CCA in male brains when overall brain volume is taken into account. What this could mean is that females will have superior sensory integration of bilateral visual content.

[Kadagar_AV]

That's just stupid.

Economic productivity will be hampered if we start to give people equal money even though some perform less well. It will also be hampered if we force professions to have an equal gender balance, regardless of individual ability of the applicants.

I have already demonstrated that men are better than women in most tasks in which we measure capacity.

Heck, women don't even do well when it comes to interior design

Hairstylists?

Have a look at the worlds best chefs?

You have to be an imbecille not to clearly see that women tend to do less well than men, even in professions they are historically held as being the proficient gender at.

Also, there is the physical side, where men are just more able. And a lot of jobs require physical ability.

So CCA levels are marginally larger in women than men. So what? You cherry-picked ONE thing out of a long list.

It seems like you are thinking that I mean that women have no place in society, that's just stupid. Like, really stupid. Moronic even.

I do however think we should have a completely even playing field, where the best candidate not only get the job, but gets best paid. Women should in no way be helped "just because they are women". If anything, THAT is belittling the ability of the women who actually do well compared to men.

[Kadagar_AV]

I miss this show!!

[Montmorency]

I have already demonstrated that men are better than women in most tasks in which we measure capacity.

No, you have not.

Heck, women don't even do well when it comes to interior design

Hairstylists?

Have a look at the worlds best chefs?

This is not a legitimate metric - not in a single way.

So CCS levels are marginally larger in women than men.

"CCS levels"? Did you even read what I wrote?

So what? You cherry-picked ONE thing out of a long list.

What list? You mean the one you haven't provided?

I do however think we should have a completely even playing field, where the best candidate not only get the job, but gets best paid. Women should in no way be helped "just because they are women". If anything, THAT is belittling the ability of the women who actually do well compared to men.

What you endorse is the arbitrary repression of women "just because they are women".

[Kadagar_AV]

Meh, this is getting stupid.

Could someone else jump in please?

Monty, I have provided you with plenty of examples as to men doing better.

Where are your examples as to women being equal, or doing better?

I grant you everything concerning children, but then what?

You expect me to show example after example, but you don't have a single thought that YOU might actually have to bring some to the game?

Where are your examples of women out-performing men in their field? And, mind you, I don't talk about individual women, I talk about general trends.

Also, my students have a better grasp of what metrics are than you

[Fragony]

Women are better at being absolutily ruthless, call it a quality if you insist that's a quality.

[Montmorency]

Kad, the examples you have shown are all invalid, as I have repeatedly explained. Obviously, I will not provide similar examples.

I grant you everything concerning children, but then what?

Kad, you have not provided evidence that women are inherently "better" with children. That's one of the major points we've been trying to get across.

You might want to start here for appropriate metrics of various types of performance between men and women. As you can see in the link's Table 1, men and women are not rated differently in terms of any measure, including job performance and ability.

[Kadagar_AV]

Kad, the examples you have shown are all invalid, as I have repeatedly explained. Obviously, I will not provide similar examples.



Kad, you have not provided evidence that women are inherently "better" with children. That's one of the major points we've been trying to get across.

You might want to start here for appropriate metrics of various types of performance between men and women. As you can see in the link's Table 1, men and women are not rated differently in terms of any measure, including job performance and ability.

Are you on drugs? You think I will read a 18 page report just to get your effin point, when I could most likely whiff it away with other facts if you just summarize it?

The examples I have shown are perfectly valid.

You want chefs to be paid equal by gender, I have shown you a list of the worlds best chefs, and they are pretty much all men.

That's just one example, sure. But it goes on.

Step off of your high horse, start to debate like someone who didn't go into linguistics in the vain hope of getting laid, and make a damn case for your point.

[Montmorency]

You think I will read a 18 page report just to get your effin point, when I could most likely whiff it away with other facts if you just summarize it?

More evidence that you do not read my posts closely. I referred you to Table 1 of the report. That is not too much for you, is it?

You want chefs to be paid equal by gender, I have shown you a list of the worlds best chefs, and they are pretty much all men.

The highest-paid chefs, you mean. Do you have any analyses of, you know, actual chefs or cooks in actual eateries, of which there are millions in the world? Perhaps you could look for a correlation between gender-ratios in kitchen staffs and quality-of-meal as reported by customers?

Or will you next claim that, because almost-all kings in world history have been men, men are therefore destined to rule over women?

Step off of your high horse, start to debate like someone who didn't go into linguistics in the vain hope of getting laid, and make a damn case for your point.

Debate like someone who doesn't view women as accessories to his dick.

[Kadagar_AV]

More evidence that you do not read my posts closely. I referred you to Table 1 of the report. That is not too much for you, is it?



The highest-paid chefs, you mean. Do you have any analyses of, you know, actual chefs or cooks in actual eateries, of which there are millions in the world? Perhaps you could look for a correlation between gender-ratios in kitchen staffs and quality-of-meal as reported by customers?

Or will you next claim that, because almost-all kings in world history have been men, men are therefore destined to rule over women?



Debate like someone who doesn't view women as accessories to his dick.

If I am to read a report, I will read the whole report to understand how they came up with the figures. Are you to stupid to summarize your own sources?

The highest paid chefs?

I presented you with a list of the best chefs, the Guide Michelin... And see, this is how we 2014 rate chefs in the world. It's also been for quite a while...

You can make any excuses that you want for women, but fact is they seem to perform rather ill on this list, as well as most other lists ranking professions.

You might want to fight the "metric", but this is the stuff that people GO TO RESTAURANTS AND PAY FOR... How's that metric?

That you accuse me of of seeing women as accessories to my dick is just rude. I admit I opened up for it, but let's try and stay civil here, shall we.

I believe in equality, that women should be judged by their individual worth. I have said that again and again, now that I said it once more, maybe you get it?

[Fragony]

Montmorecy doesn't understand women very well. He has an idea on them. Hey monty, find one.

[Montmorency]

If I am to read a report, I will read the whole report to understand how they came up with the figures. Are you to stupid to summarize your own sources?

As a matter of fact, I did - see the sentence after the linky one.

I presented you with a list of the best chefs, the Guide Michelin... And see, this is how we 2014 rate chefs in the world. It's also been for quite a while...

It's invalid firstly because you take a few-dozen head-chefs as representative of literally the entire world. That's shockingly stupid.

Second of all, you do not take into account non-meathead explanations for why women might be under-represented in the most prestigious and public* posts in an industry.

Third of all, it's categorically-invalid, unless you think women are somehow better-suited to being gynaecologists, optometrists, internal-med specialists, geriatricians, etc.

*High-ranked head chefs have much more skill with networking, presentation, and marketability than with actual cooking, which is mostly done by their subordinates

I believe in equality, that women should be judged by their individual worth. I have said that again and again, now that I said it once more, maybe you get it?

So why do you endorse the direct opposite of that?

[Tuuvi]

Meh, this is getting stupid.

Could someone else jump in please?

Sure I'll jump in.

We know quite some of it. Stop being ignorant and read up on the issue. You come off as just blatantly stupid. Difefrences between men and women exist. That's just how it is. You might not LIKE IT, but facts are facts.

Like Monty said, citation needed. If we really have a concrete, scientific idea of what the differences are between men and women (besides physical, as I would agree that there are obvious differences there), then prove it with credible sources. Otherwise we have no reason to believe you.

I have already demonstrated that men are better than women in most tasks in which we measure capacity.

Heck, women don't even do well when it comes to interior design

Hairstylists?

Have a look at the worlds best chefs?

Forgive me if there is a post of yours I've forgotten about, but from what I remember all you've done is point out that all chess grandmasters are men. This doesn't demonstrate anything. Neither do your lists of the top interior designers, hairstylists, and chefs. These are all fields in which capacity is hard to measure because the quality of work is largely subjective.

When I was 15 I went to go visit my gay uncle in Chicago. He decided I was due for a makeover so he forced my stubborn, teenage self to get a haircut from a french hairstylist that was worth $80. I hated it. I think the $10 haircuts I get from my barber are just as good if not better. But someone who is into fashion might like the $80 haircut better. Or they would think the French haircut was better just because they paid $80 for it.

Also, as Montmorency mentioned, there is more than just skill that goes into making it onto one of those lists.

If you were to show us a comparison of the performance reviews of hundreds of men and women in a variety of different fields and professions and those reviews showed that the majority of men performed better than the majority of women then you will have demonstrated your point.

[Sarmatian]

If I am to read a report, I will read the whole report to understand how they came up with the figures. Are you to stupid to summarize your own sources?

The highest paid chefs?

Best chefs in the world are more like managers than cooks - they rarely cook themselves, they organize the kitchen.

Number one reason why most top chefs are men is because the gender imbalance in the field itself. There's about 4 men for every women in the business. 25 years ago (the time when most of todays top chefs were learning the trade), the ratio was 9 men for every woman. Add to that the fact that, just like in almost all businesses, it's easier for men to reach top position than women, and the explanation is self-evident.

You're using anecdotal evidence to explain a very broad conclusion and you're wondering why you're failing.

[Husar]

Are you on drugs? You think I will read a 18 page report just to get your effin point, when I could most likely whiff it away with other facts if you just summarize it?

That's science, from the guy who tells others to read up on things so he doesn't have to provide any proof...

[Fragony]

That's science, from the guy who tells others to read up on things so he doesn't have to provide any proof...

Staccato barage tactics when it comes to intellectual integrity. Give the man the points he has to point out will ya, instead of burdening him with a 18 page read and declare victory because he simply can't be bothered with all that.

[HoreTore]

The world is in a dark place indeed when reading 18 pages is a burden.

[Fragony]

The world is in a dark place indeed when reading 18 pages is a burden.

A good point needs nothing more than a single sentence.