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.
@Monsieur sans Nom, I actually agree that Evolutionary Psychology is a useful model, but you are torturing it to death.
You will notice that the current field of scientists studying this field (like Steven Pinker, Leda Cosmides, Robert Wright, Nancy Etcoff and to some extent Richard Dawkins) are not misanthropes or sexist. Maybe it is because they understand the field better than you do?..and that you cannot reduce behavior ad nauseum.
Yes, in archaic hunter-gatherer societies, there were basically 2 jobs available and they were heavily segregated by sex. It simply wasn’t practicle nor safe for women to take young children on long hunting trips. Women also couldn’t leave nursing children at home with dad, as he had no means of feeding them. Birth control was not an option, so any heterosexual woman who liked sex or any woman who was unlucky enough to attract aggressive men was probably bound to end up pregnant. An active desire for children was not necessary. Neither men nor women had much choice and life was largely nasty, brutish and short.
It does not follow from this that Women are natural housewives and that Men are better at everything else. What we do in current society is so radically different from what people did in hunter gatherer society that making the kind of obtuse generalizations that MRA’s do is just evidence of the Dunning Kreuger effect.
Also, it may be ‘natural’ for some men to resort to rape in certain circumstances as it can raise a person’s chance of procreating. It also may be ‘natural’ for some women to exploit men for resources. This does not make either behavior morally okay. IS =/= SHOULD BE. In fact, I use this information to take the possibly unpopular stance that I should take every measure necessary to make sure that I don’t carry a rapist’s baby. The behavior should not be rewarded genetically.
Ahh creep blaming. Sorry but even falsely accused (!!) creeps are not victims to any degree that we need social awareness. You appear to be confused.
Tulgey: ha. He probably will have a hissy. Tough beans.
@ Hellkell
He doesn’t seem to love the word “vile” quite so much as Steele does. Well, he hasn’t started using it multiple times in the same sentence yet, at any rate.
Om Nom Nom does seem to have Steele’s whininess down pat, though.
If he starts using “Excuse me?” all bets are off.
@MSN
I didn’t say that people were correct in finding you creepy because of your disability or any inherent characteristic. I said it because you have said you hate all women, the world, and think that the human race would be better off dead. That IS creepy. That IS threatening.
To summarize:
1. You hate women.
2. When you talk to women, they pick up on the fact that you hate them.
3. You go on the internet to whine about how you have no privilege because women correctly identify you as acreepy, threatening, hateful dude.
@Shaenon “Before becoming an astronaut, Ride got a doctorate in physics, beat out 8,000 other candidates for the first astronaut program opened to civilians, worked on NASA’s ground control crew, and helped develop the robot arm for the space shuttle. She was damn qualified.”
Straight out of wikipedia. Although it was, “she answered an ad in the newspaper for which 8000 people answered that ad.” And it was an ad to work in the space program in any capacity, not specifically to be an astronaut. She was the face of women as astronauts. A promotional advert.
“
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.
This may be how you use the term, and that’s great; unfortunately, it is not common parlance. Insults like “cr**py” and “n*ckb**rd”, while they may sometimes have a basis in actual bad behavior, are more commonly employed as groundless pejoratives.
This strikes home for me because a few hours ago, Ella and I went out for dinner with two of our mutual friends. Conversation came around to someone in our extended circle who I’m pretty sure is mildly autistic- great guy, real smart, near the top of the class I believe- but very awkward socially. According to our friend, he’s “creepy”. He’s never , he’s barely even talked to her; but she doesn’t like “the sound of his voice”, “the way he walks”, and other such nonsense.
I disapproved, and I believe Ella did too, but we said nothing. After all, it’s the culture we live in that teaches that such misandrous behavior is acceptable.
I see no research by him on evopsych.
The dude doesn’t seem to have published any research in more than a decade…
Yes, prove to me how all people everywhere function using the Danes. I assume that the results will involve drunkenness, horniness, and xenophobia. *Eyeroll*
Google scholar asks “who?”
Google scholar asks “who?”
FYI no part of this is true. We’ve found no evidence for this segregation; it is not present in ancient sites, nor is it present in the hunter-gatherer societies that still exist more or less absent western intervention. There was also a shit ton more work to be done than just ‘hunt’ and ‘gather’, unless you think tools crafted themselves.
@Steele
It’s possible. However, in the case of MSN, who has actually stated he wants to replace all human beings with robots, and has actually stated that he hates all women, women who find him creepy are correct.
Also, if you’re more upset about women being safe and avoiding people who make them feel uncomfortable than you are about actual rapists, then congrats! You’re a giant tool.
Excuse me. “He’s never violated any sort of boundaries“.
ahahaha
Wouldn’t want to trigger some guy who still has trauma over tragically not getting laid.
Our great activist Varpole witnesses what he identifies as oppression of men, ignores it, and then goes online to complain about it?
Dude, try saying something to the people doing it?
…oh, right, dude isn’t an all purpose informal greeting…um…thoughts on “hey, you there?”
Would it make more sense if we said “he makes me afraid” instead of “creepy”?
You can be afraid of people for good or bad reasons, but that doesn’t mean that ever voicing fear of a person is a terrible slur. Sometimes people are dangerous and you can sense that.
Re hunter-gatherers
The gender division of hunter gatherers is actually only something that can be believed by people with zero common sense. The paleolithic was one long period of starvation. Everyone spent all available time with the short-term goal of food acquisition in mind. The only social organization that makes any sense is “when the hunting/fishing is good, everyone hunts or fishes. When the gathering is good, everyone gathers.” If you were to suggest a scheme where men relaxed in spring when the herds are thin, and women relaxed in the fall/winter when plants were dormant, early humans would have laughed their asses off at you.
Hmhmhmhm! Pretending Neckbeard and Creep deserve the same treatment as the n-word is fucking hilarious Steeley XD
Leave it to steele to take ableism and try to turn it into MISANDRY!!!!!111oneoneonetwo.
It’s almost as if ‘Misandry’ ain’t real.
So, discrimination against non neurotypical people is “misandry” now? “Misandry” basically means “Any form of oppression Steele wishes to appropriate.”, doesn’t it?
So what?
Also, you said nothing? How hard is it to say, well I think he’s mildly autistic. Great guy if you ask me. And move on. What kind of coward are you? “our culture” my ass, that was all you bud.
Yes, yes it does.
Shorter Om Nom: Rather than deal productively with my personal sense of inadequacy, I’m going to advocate the eradication of my entire species. What? It’s your species too? No; I’m pretty sure it’s all about me.
Shorter Steele: I do have friends! I do! Really!
False. Most modern hunter-gatherer societies use the rhythym method, and did so well before contact with industrial societies. Withdrawal as well. Abortions were noted among North American hunter-gatherers, as was infanticide. None of this adds up to 100% effectiveness, but no there are no actual hunter gatherer societies where women are fulltime baby machines.
Charmeleon! WARTORTLE! Mewtwo tentacruel aerodactyl! Omanyte, slooooooowbrooooooo, pegeot, arbok, that’s all folks!
Hey man, if I want to call someone croppy or a nockboard, that’s my right.
Free peaches 4 lyf!
creep discussion is not about disability or race. If you care that people are racist, ok that’s a much more important issue, also how people get treated with disabilities ok, fine, but to wrap it in this “creep” blanket is so fucking ridiculous, I don’t even.
Steele is just a creepy neckbeard dude prick asshole.
Ok so going back to transhumanism, what does it make me if I believe that the technology to enhance the human race should be available, but I don’t believe in eugenics or libertarianism. Am I just like a futurist or something? Cause I really would like to live in a world where I can download my mind into a computer, but I don’t want to force people to do that either.