Guys,
So the fellows over at MGTOWforums were pondering just why it is that there are so few women engineers. There were a number of theories advanced to explain this gender imbalance – women are “crap at math,” “their [sic] just too stupid,”“you can’t build a bridge with ‘feelings.’” (Snap!)
But it was shade47 who offered the most convincing theory. It all has to do with incentives:
Im an engineer myself and in my opinion women could be good engineers if they wanted to be but its a hard sell since they can make money by lieing on their backs and shitting out bastards. …
i dont think women above a five in looks would have the patients [sic] to deal with the hardship of actually studying when she knows that shell end up getting knocked up or married and stop working in approximately 5 years after graduation.
Ladies, focus on your womb turds and leave engineering to the geniuses who don’t know the difference between “patience” and “patients.”
Well I silently agree that there should be no more Marc on this planet. He can go to Mars or Venus or Pluto for all I care.
And no, I do not want him dead. He can have all of the bottles of water and oxygen he can carry. I will even give him a plant to help regenerate the oxygen he needs.
“- Brain and Cognitive Sciences (uh, oh, these people like evo-psych, you don’t consider a science at all)”
Now, I’m not a student at MIT. But I am a student. And if MIT is like other schools, the field of Brain and Cognitive Sciences tends to be really hard science. I’m assuming that “Brain and Cognitive Sciences” is considered to be a separate field from Psychology at MIT (they’re separate at my school); the name implies that the focus of the study is Cognitive Neuroscience rather than straight-up psych, so I apologize if I’m wrong about that, and if I am, you might as well stop reading.
If I’m not, then Cognitive Neuroscience is no “soft” science. Among other things, it focuses on learning the anatomy of the brain, learning about the various imaging techniques that we currently have for studying the brain, learning about what we theorize that every little area of the brain does (which is basically innumerable, from what we can tell), and…anything else under the sun that you can think of that involves, you guessed it, the brain.
Granted, some classes in the subject are easier than others. But if it’s a person’s major, then they are probably in for the long haul (i.e., they intend to pursue a career in neuroscience or neurosurgery). The human brain is unbelievably complex (we don’t even come close to having a lot of things totally figured out with it), so….I wouldn’t scoff at someone who has made the decision to devote their life to studying the brain, possibly some day performing surgery on it, or developing new technology to better view/study it, researching neurological disorders and how to some day treat/cure them….and so on.
I’m just sayin’.
That is some heavy duty justification going on there Marc. *donates another dollar to the Make Marc Go Off Planet fund*
Well, I for one look forward to the day when my entire sex is eradicated.
I wonder if chemistry is still cooking when men do it.
…or does that make them “chefs”?
Speak for yourself, Marc.
Please be quiet, redlocker, men can’t be feminists anyway.
All I say is that I don’t like hypocrisy… I don’t like crypto-sexism, exactly as vaguelyhumanoid doesn’t like crypto-racism.
Mind you, nobody is more honest than me, so give me a clansman every day but not one of these crypto-racist white nationalists! Give me one of these blacks everyday, but please spare me those “because I’m black, because I’m black!”-blacks!
That’s all I wanted to say.
“I wonder if chemistry is still cooking when men do it.
…or does that make them “chefs”?”
HAHAHAHAHA!
Chemistry is not much different from cooking, that’s the reason many women feel familiar with it and feel comfortable studying it.
Lol. That’s true. I studied chemistry and I’m a damn good cook. Pharmacists are good cooks, too. The best cook I know is a pharmacist.
the name implies that the focus of the study is Cognitive Neuroscience rather than straight-up psych, so I apologize if I’m wrong about that, and if I am, you might as well stop reading.
Cognitive Science is a bunch of materialists of the functionalism variety trying to disprove the Chinese Room argument by John Searle.
My stepgrandmother had the “patients” to be the first person in many years to graduate magna cum laude from the University of Detroit in Architecture. There were a hundred students in her first year and only twelve, herself included, graduated. She once stayed awake for 72 hours straight. She has a Ph.D and remains an architect and ardent feminist to this day. She is also the former president of the art gallery, assistant provost in the University’s administration, a professor in a program she invented called VABE (Visual Art and the Built Environment), and she’s involved with the symphony in our city. That’s not even to mention her work in the garden at home. Her average night consists of five to six hours of sleep. And the newest building she’s working on? A new engineering building. I hope some of these MRA types end up attending, just so I can visualize the looks on their faces when they realize they’re benefiting from a building designed by a woman.
Also, her mother started one of the first farmers’ unions, used to drive a racecar, is a retired professor, and was the primary caregiver of her two children.
Oh, and my Nana was a full-time high school teacher at the same as being single and raising her daughter, her four stepchildren, and her two grandchildren.
Yup. No “patients” at all, these women.
“Cognitive Science is a bunch of materialists of the functionalism variety trying to disprove the Chinese Room argument by John Searle.”
At my school, it refers to straight-up studying the brain. I’m a Psych major, but I’ve taken classes in Cognitive Neuroscience just out of sheer interest, and it’s very technical, dry stuff.
It sounds like you haven’t found enough material here to fill your persecution comple. So you’re reduced to imagining what we’re supposedly thinking in order to justify to yourself the bile you spew forth.
Please define crypto-sexism and explain how it applies to the people who comment here, Marc. I have a large vodka orange and nothing much to do and my Twitter feed is slow, so I’d be grateful for the entertainment.
Marc, just what do you think a university-level chemistry education consists of? I suspect you might be confusing it with high school chemistry class.
This is probably one of those topics that’s going to get dropped in a hurry, or end with an indignant declaration that people here have no sense of humour, isn’t it?
@mind control beams: Marc is an oh so brilliant man. So brilliant he doesn’t even need to back up his points, he just drops bombs and moves to another spot.
Wait, wait, wait.
All women more conventionally attractive than average don’t work? WHAT?
Has this dude met a human being?
My sources say no.
This is probably one of those topics that’s going to get dropped in a hurry, or end with an indignant declaration that people here have no sense of humour, isn’t it?
Because they argue so bad and after they made a fool of themselves they try to convince others that it never was meant seriously?
Oh, yes, I know these types of people. But I’m different, I would never do that… I stand by my words!
Because they argue so bad and after they made a fool of themselves they try to convince others that it never was meant seriously?
Uh, I seriously believe chemistry is a hard science, and that women in chemistry are women in the sciences and not “cooks.” I’m standing by that.
How bout you?
Actually, is this a persecution complex, or a fetish? The slaveman liked to be insulted by women he imagined were wearing silky dresses and had perfect pedicures. Maybe imagining a world where penises are slowly hunted out of existence, and then writing about it for an audience, is Marc’s “thing.” It’s okay if it is, Marc. Fetishes are perfectly natural.
Also: I am like 90% convinced that Marc is Scott Adams. It’s okay if you are, Marc. Scott Adamses are perfectly natural.
The idea that women do not have the mental capacity to excel at math and science is the worst type of misogyny for me. I am a female physics major and I am better at math than all those fools, WHAT NOW BITCH?
But I’d like to say that so far all the men I have worked with (students, teachers) have been wonderful and seem to enjoy women in science. It’s funny that men that actually are in science usually do not think this way.
Bee, I love you.
@Marc: I hate to disappoint you, but Marie Curie got two Nobel Prizes: one in chemistry, and one in physics.
Marc – Which is physics more like:
A) Applying makeup
B) Knitting
C) Shoe shopping
I eagerly await your learned response.
Well, come on, people, sharculese or how her name was is even afraid to answer the simple question “Are men biologically predisposed to be sex offenders?” with a simple “No”.
How would you interpret that? I understand it so, that she’s on my side.
We have proven now more than once that men are a problem and that this is not cultural but biological.
Sex offenses, increased criminality and aggression, with strong evidence that this partially caused by biological reasons.
So could you please give me a sane reason, why it wouldn’t be better if men would just vanish from the earth?
We have compiled these reasons:
1. Artificial sperm is still an experimental technology.
2. Men are stronger, that’s still a bit of an advantage even with all the technological progress. Well suited for hard labor like in mines, forestry workers etc.
3. If you are a strictly heterosexual woman (do those even exist?) they are good for sex and can’t be replaced with women.
Point 1 and 2 will become void in the near future, so that leaves us just with point 3.
Maybe imagining a world where penises are slowly hunted out of existence, and then writing about it for an audience, is Marc’s “thing.” It’s okay if it is, Marc. Fetishes are perfectly natural.
Again we’re only talking about abortions, not about killings.
Also: I am like 90% convinced that Marc is Scott Adams. It’s okay if you are, Marc.
I don’t get the joke. I looked on Wikipedia who this guy is (yes I admit it, I didn’t know him)… I don’t recognize any similarities with me.
Scott Adamses are perfectly natural.
Now there are even multiple of those Scott Adamses around? I’m confused…