We’ve already heard from the so-called Thinking Housewife on the subject of Sally Ride. Meanwhile, over on The Spearhead, the regulars also have opinions about Ride. Regular commenter Keyster has this to say about Ride’s work in promoting science and technology education for girls:
She was supposed to have inspired a generation of girls to take science and math. While she may have inspired the “Grrl Esteem” movement, very few girls went on to get degrees in math and science as a result of Sally Ride … .
She was frustrated by the fact young girls were very interested in math and science initially, “…but for some reason we lose them around the age of 13.” MMmmm…I wonder why that would be. Because they discovered an interest in boys? Not surprisingly, Sally was able to keep her interest.
That’s right: girls are incapable of thinking about both math and boys. Lesbians are the only women who can sustain an interest in math, because their brains aren’t cluttered with thoughts of Justin Bieber. (Ok, bad example.)
In another comment, Keyster expresses his annoyance at the fact that Ride turned out to be capable of astronautery despite being a woman.
Sally Ride proved that a woman can have “the right stuff”, like Amelia Earheart proved a woman can fly long distances.
OK so now that we know she won’t become hysterical during her period while in outerspace and allow her used tampons to clog the toilet, what do we do with this information? Just because a woman accomplishes something normally associated with men, is this inspiring young girls to spontaneously excel en masse and compete against men in male dominated arenas? Or are women like Sally Ride the exceptions that prove the rule?
You know, “exceptions that prove the rule” aren’t actually a thing. The fact that Ride was a capable astronaut doesn’t actually “prove the rule” that women aren’t capable as astronauts, but instead suggests that this particular rule is not a real rule. You would think that Keyster, as a logical male, would understand this.
@Ugh: If you find an innocent man who has never done anything to you “creepy”, then your feelings of discomfort are your problem and yours to deal with. It’s not his fault for being who and what he is and if it’s a public space, he has as much right to be there as you do.
I don’t have a problem with evolutionary psychology in principle. (After all, we can look at the evolutionary origins of behavior in other animals, so there’s no reason why we shouldn’t be able to do the same with human beings.) In practice though . . .
Yeah. I have a problem with how evo psych works out in practice. In practice, evo psych often makes grand, sweeping claims based on incredibly limited data. The standards of evidence required to show a certain feature of animal behavior is adaptive is lowered to practically nothing in evo pysch — all too often traits are assumed to be adaptive without any good reason. Heck, oftentimes traits are assumed to be genetic without any good reason (and even in the face of evidence to the contrary.) Evo psych all too often ignores what we already know from other disciplines (such as archaeology, history, and sociology), even when that knowledge is highly relevant.
I don’t hate evo psych on principle. I want to like evo psych. I want it to be a valid area of study. But the simple fact is that it’s not. Maybe some day evolutionary psychologists will get their act together and reform their field so that it becomes a valid area of academic study. But until that happens — until evo psych actually treats other academic disciplines with the respect they deserve and starts treating its own claims with the same degree of rigor we see in every other scientific field — I cannot take evo psych seriously.
Yeah, this. If your evopsych theory Explains People, then it has to explain:
-People who don’t have kids
-Gay people
-Celibate people
-People who adopt kids
-People who care for stepchildren like their own
-Non-gender-conforming people
-People who raise children with extended families
-People who raise children in a nuclear family
-People attracted to looks other than “conventional beauty”
-and so on…
And if your answer to any of the above is “well, they’re unnatural,” that settles nothing. You still have to explain why people do “unnatural” things.
Nom, you must be racist if you think YOU = all black guys. But who is surprised? The same people-grouping brain fade would almost have to be present for someone to get MRA junk.
What I’ve noticed about the misogynists that post here is they never talk about the actual post. They seem to never say, I agree with this, I don’t agree with that part. Yes, this is representative of MRA thinking, or NO this is not, but this is, etc. I find it so strange that they just enter mid stream and start posting about whatever. For some reason it creeps me out, maybe because when people don’t engage normally/logically it sends out danger signals.
Not entirely caught up yet, but damnit — “Dr Who was not intended to be scientifically accurate.”
Wtf pillowinhell said — “Nomnom, you need to watch more Doctor Who. The reason humans have evolved the way we did is insatsiable curiousity and a sense of playfulness. We are the only species on this planet that will go and poke the dangerous thing simply because it was there, and so were we.”
That part in italics is an exact quote from the second season (new series) — a quote that BBS recycled, it was originally about Everest —
As for why his name isn’t ringing bells? He died trying — there’s some debate whether he might’ve summitted first, but since he didn’t make it back down, first summit goes to Sir Edmund Hillary (and if that name doesn’t ring bells? Go pick up a book, now)
BBC, BS is what Mr No Name says, not the BBC. Sorry >.<
I do not think that at all. It was an analogy: A man being perceived as “creepy” by women for things about him that he cannot control despite him having done nothing wrong. It’s very naive of you to think that there aren’t white women out there who really do think and feel that way.
By the way, nom about creepy. If people engage with you without giving you signals that you exist as a person in your own right with your own preferences, thoughts or feelings, that is the creep. It’s likely the root of all creep. I don’t know what your definition of “not having done anything to you is” but if someone is insistent on things and erasing you as a person, that is doing something to the person.
Had an incident last night, some guy here going on and on about how I needed to give him a cigarette. I did not know him, had never seen him before and have a hard time believing if my neighbor across the street was outside that he would be as insistent to his entitlement to a cigarette from a complete stranger. And I needed to walk down a flight of stairs and go out to give it to him, I guess. I was standing on the second floor terrace. Also this person was nicely dressed in expensive clothing, groomed and carrying an expensive cell phone. He only acted derelict.
No, this guy had never “done anything to me” but I went in my apartment and leaned against the door a bit because the lock was broken. I’m not a shrinking violet, either. I go out by myself at all times of night and this is a “third world” country. There was something not right about that dude, even if it was just extreme sexism.
Uh, Om Nom Nom, we don’t think people are creeps because they’re the victims of circumstances beyond their control. We think you are a creep because you’re a misogynist. Which is something that you can control. Got it?
indifferentsky: That guy mooching for a cigarette was interacting with you. But I’ve had cases where I’m minding my own damn business and some woman sees me and then reports me to security as a “suspicious person” even though I never said a word to her nor got anywhere near her. They see someone who is in the area they’re in with abnormal behaviors, and they react emotionally because they fear what they don’t understand. So they decide to try to do something to get rid of that person. I guess nobody is willing to admit that they did this or would do this. If they did it IRL they’d probably rationalize it by making up some story about how he said something to her that made her feel scurred.
What about things he can control? Most of the guys I think of as “creepy” are ones who have touched me without my permission, or said inappropriate sexual things to me. They could control that.
Yes, there are racist white women out there. Lots of ’em. It doesn’t follow that therefore it’s wrong for any women to make any judgement about any man ever.
Well nom you’ve changed the subject from creepy to racism. If your concern was how “some white bitch” doesn’t treat a black man well that’s hardly for a “creepy is bad” discussion.
What a cheap red herring.
Who’s talking about black people? Aside from you trying to appropriate racism, anyway. We’re talking about you. You are a creep, personally.
Well guys who do inappropriate things voluntarily towards women ARE creepy.
But it’s wrong to judge people on something that they have no control over.
Oh please tell me how racism works, I could use a good laugh.
You have complete control over your ability to say misogynist and sexist things, dude.
Instead of misogyny, you could get really into trains or Pokemon or ancient mythology.
A guy who can recite all the Pokemon is endearingly nerdy, a guy who thinks all women are worthless is not endearingly anything.
From Om Nom:
Is Om Nom Steele? They are both pretentious little farts, but the “vile” stood out.
That guy was interacting with me? No shit sherlock. What else would you call it?
“even though I never said a word to her nor got anywhere near her. They see someone who is in the area they’re in with abnormal behaviors, and they react emotionally because they fear what they don’t understand.”
So you think only speaking and being near a person is a problem? Your ability to glean reality is lacking.
So even if you had some sort of disability, maybe you were acting suspiciously, it’s just after investigation, whoops, that person is fine, they have a reason for what seems out of place.
SO WHAT?
Weak.
This whole OMG WHAT IF YOU ARE WRONG line is weak.
There is a much bigger problem with women going places with men they shouldn’t after they felt something was wrong for fear of hurting someone’s feelings. When I was in college this guy that I did not know insisted that I get in his car. Every time I think about this I cringe. Because I got in the car eventually. I was thinking well, geez he’s probably ok, I’m over reacting I don’t want to hurt his feelings, etc. And he didn’t take me home he insisted we stop off so he could buy me a burger. No care whatsoever if that was scaring me, I did not know him! No thought whatsoever that I might want to go home. I was erased from the scene, but the center of it. That’s objectifying. You’ve ignored my explanations about erasing others. It goes both ways when I was a huge fan of a rock band when I was a teen and screamed at them, what the fuck was that about? How were they real people to me if I was doing that? I was just dealing with a heavy projection, I guess, but not respecting their space or feelings as people.
And that guy the second time he wanted to give me a ride, I said no, and then I kept saying it and I finally YELLED NO!! At him remembering what I had heard that if someone ignores no there is a big problem. Remembering that made me feel bolder, I was going to make him ignore a yelling no. I had already said it over and over. After that when he saw me around campus he did his best to make me feel bad for hurting his feelings with glaring looks. And it worked, but I was right.
There is no harm in someone thinking another person is creepy. It’s diminished harm actually, in light of the problems caving in causes. Do you have a heart at all for raped and murdered people? If you had half as much heart for that as for poor menz being thought of as creepy, we wouldn’t be having this gaslighting session.
You’ve failed btw.
@Ugh: If you find an innocent man who has never done anything to you “creepy”, then your feelings of discomfort are your problem and yours to deal with. It’s not his fault for being who and what he is and if it’s a public space, he has as much right to be there as you do.
And Ugh has every right to exercise appropriate caution, keep zir distance, etc.
OK, I’ve seen some disturbing shit in my day, and only a couple things that made me want to call security or the cops. So I gotta ask–what they fuck were you doing, or are you Chickie from Sons of Anarchy?
Goddamn typos. “Chuckie” from SOA.
In b4 “Creep blaming.”
Another thing I forgot to point out is, if you expect us to believe that people are constantly bothering security about other people, you have another thing coming.
@Cliff Pervocracy
“Yeah, this. If your evopsych theory Explains People, then it has to explain:”
Do we need to go over the birds and the bees again??????? All sex is a byproduct of the drive to reproduce. If you didn’t need sex to reproduce, there would be no sex.
“