Men’s Rights Redditors find “ebonics” hilarious

Pecunium, I see your (quite lovely) booby with lizard and raise you my blue footed booby with a baby and red footed booby draining salt water from its nostrils.

As for Ruby, I am standing by my argument that she is some kind of computer algorithm. No human being could be that consistently obtuse. Right?

Making up stupid limerics doesn’t change the fact that scientists at reputable universities did studies that proved me right.

Then where are the studies? If the studies are not published through the peer review process in a reputable scientific journal, then it isn’t science. Also, I’m a scientist at a reputable university, therefore what I say is true. 😛

Hey, I’ve got an idea, how about showing me scientific studies that prove me wrong?

No, the burden of proof is on the person trying to prove a theory. I don’t have to disprove you if you have no proof.

Academic peer reviewed research articles are the actual standard for science. It is entirely possible for real scientists to say things that are not science. In fact, we do it ALL the time. Because science is not “everything a scientist says”. If Enrico Fermi had said, “eggs are delicious”, that doesn’t make it science! For something to be science, it requires published, reproducible experimental evidence.

You can’t just say, “oh yeah, well Linus Pauling (2 nobel prizes: 1 in chemistry, 1 in peace) ( says vitamin C cures cancer, therefor it’s science!”. No. Science is statements backed up by reproducible experimental evidence. You have to have published experimental evidence before I will believe what you say has any merit as “science”. Right now, it is just an assertion.

@Holly: Hahah! Awesome “limeric”
LOL!

Fucking blockquotes.

Ruby: You want papers.

Here’s one.

Education, Hypergamy and the “Success Gap” : Elaina Rose
Department of Economics, University of Washington, 2006

It’s by an economist, so it’s at least as relevant as yours. It’s more recent too, so it must be better.

Have a quotation. The most important part is in bold

The success gap for women age 40-44 declined significantly in the 1980’s and 1990’s. In fact, according to some measures, the gap has disappeared. Hypergamy has declined as well.

Got it… A SCIENTIST, says your theory is full of shit.

For follow up I’ll quote a second study she did.

Education and Hypergamy in Marriage Markets: Elaina Rose, March 2004

In fact, there was a significant decline in the “success gap” – the difference in the marriage rates of highly educated women relative to those at the peak of the inverted-U-shaped education-marriage profile. A contemporaneous decline in hypergamy allowed the marriage market to absorb the increased number of educated women.

However, at the bottom of the education distribution, the imbalance was not resolved by a change in marriage matching patterns. The likelihood of marriage for men with less than a high school education declined precipitously. Women’s marriage propensities declined as well, but not nearly as much as men’s. In this range, there was an increase in hypergamy, as less educated women reached higher into the education distribution for their husbands in 2000 than in prior cohorts.

So the conclusion she is drawing is that hpergamy is a function of economic disadvantage.

Not genetics.

So far that’s two papers saying your thesis is bullshit.

But those are both the same researcher. Perhaps she has an ax to grind.

The reversal of the gender gap in education and its impact on union formation: the end of hypergamy: Albert Esteve, Joan Garcia, Iñaki Permanyer,Centre d’Estudis Demogràfics (work in progress)

We use newly integrated
IPUMS census micro-data from 103 samples and taken in 38 countries. Results from multilevel linear regression models show that female educational hypergamy is lower in societies with a lower gender gap in education and that where the gender gap reverses female hypogamy becomes the norm. Thus, if current trends in education are to continue, the pervasiveness of hypergamy will tend to disappear.

Three strikes.

You’re out.

Cloudiah: Did you take those booby-pictures?

The time to collect that was about thirty seconds. What delayed me was reading the papers, and extracting/formatting, the replies.

I could, I suppose, have just done what you did, and said, “Thre is SCIENCE”,and then made you read them, but that’s not what decent people do.

Decent people treat others fairly, and respectfully. They present arguments honestly, and they pay attention to the responses of those with whom they are dealing.

You do none of that.

You are not a decent person.

Which comments are not insults. They are assessments of your person, based on your actions.

The limericks, were the same, though I admit they were insulting in format.

Which was by intent.

and some cute

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pecunium/3016556237/in/set-72157603860044740

http://www.flickr.com/photos/pecunium/2927462197/in/set-72157603860044740

Ruby – A dissertation on your dogged style of discourse, published by a pair of prestigious Pythons:

And why would evolutionary psychology be any different between the races? It seems kinda racist to imply there would be some difference.

Hah, now Ruby has reminded me of an anecdote related to the OP. I once ranted at length to my ex about the attitudes that people hold towards AAE, how they think it’s not proper English, not “grammatical”, evidence of an inability to learn, evidence of stupidity. I talked about how this affects so many aspects of speaker’s lives, and how pointless all the marginalization was. When I ran out of steam, he said: “Yeah okay, i get what you’re saying, but don’t you think it’s a little racist of you to call it African American English? That implies only African American people don’t know how to speak English properly.”

Here’s a hint, Ruby: if pretty much every single ego psych “study” is done on White western people, and you’re saying it would be racist to suggest that maybe other groups of people might have different social structures, you’re implying that having different social structures than White people do would be a bad thing. Which is like saying, White western society is the best kind of society. Which is hugely frickin’ racist.

Molly: Yes. Hypergamy is the use of marriage to improve one’s social position.

It is not, however, a “female” trait. It’s a social function. In societies with a large gap between social classes, members of the disavantaged class find it useful, when they can, to “marry up”.

Since this structual disadvantage is largely borne by women, it tends to be a practice they engage in more often.

But, as the studies show contra Ruby, this isn’t genetic, it’s economic.

BTW, what do you guys use for research? I usually use my uni’s resources, but most of those are behind paywalls.